hate to add to the million new threads created in the past 24hrs but i found this article on the BBC website.

 

If 2007’s Neon Bible was supposed to be Arcade Fire’s difficult second album, it didn’t show. Top marks from a cavalcade of critical tomes saw the Montreal septet’s sequel to their breakthrough debut long-player of 2004, Funeral, received with just as much reverence as its predecessor. So what of The Suburbs, arriving after another three-year period which saw its makers record in both their hometown and New York?

 

Even on a cursory listen, a water-testing foray into its 16 tracks, it’s immediately apparent that this is an album unlike either that came before it. While Funeral and Neon Bible were great sets, their strengths laid primarily in a handful of stand-out selections – Wake Up and Power Out on the former, No Cars Go and Black Wave among the highs on the latter. The Suburbs appears to have been conceived as a whole in a manner considerably more studied than the band’s previous attempts. Its sequencing is perfect, the contrast between fiery punk number Month of May and the following acoustic strum of Wasted Hours the most prominent instance of how unlikely tracks are segued with uncommon skill. It’s a convergent collection, too, the opening title-track reprised come the record’s quiet climax, comprising an intro to its earlier, fuller version. Put The Suburbs on repeat and days could pass before the urge to change the record takes hold.

 

If that sounds like excessive hyperbole, well, you’re probably yet to hear The Suburbs in full. Its stand-alone tracks, as played on radio stations the world over in anticipation of this release, far from tell the whole tale. Month of May, as implied above, is the album’s frenetic fulcrum, but stylistically it’s detached from the majority. Its opener sets a tone of sorts, but it’s one the band has some fun with, filtering influences ranging from Springsteen to Depeche Mode into songs that operate on a level of subconscious infiltration that surpasses the earworm qualities of Funeral’s most immediate cuts. Case in point: the propulsive Ready to Start, which somehow balances an air of anguish with triumphant exclamation; City With No Children takes lyrical cues from dark places but allows instrumental light enough to seep into the mix, creating an end product that’s like the finest Hold Steady song never written.

 

A brace of two-part pieces, Half Light and Sprawl, is indicative of Arcade Fire’s successful progression to a new dominion of creativity. The former’s string-soaked flourishes are surely set to replace The Cinematic Orchestra’s To Build a Home as the soundtrack to a few thousand television trailers; Sprawl, meanwhile, confirms this album’s conceptual direction atop shimmering synth lines. Alienation and abandonment, social stereotypes and fractured fantasies – all tropes present and correct, the encapsulating title alluding to an outsider status manifested both physically and, more pertinently, emotionally.

 

“I need the darkness / can you please cut the lights?” Lines like this might seem trite, or at least insincere, coming from a band that’s enjoyed worldwide commercial success, that’s been on general public display for some five years plus. But it’s important to remember that Arcade Fire’s journey from underground obscurity to chart-topping acclaim has been at a trajectory decidedly different to many a music industry heavyweight, more happy accident than orchestrated intent. Emerging from a previously unexplored beyond, their story has always been theirs alone to tell. And The Suburbs is their most thrillingly engrossing chapter yet; a complex, captivating work that, several cycles down the line, retains the magic and mystery of that first tentative encounter. You could call it their OK Computer. But it’s arguably better than that.

 

- - -

 

Funeral + Neon Bible + The Suburbs

 

vs

 

Pablo Honey + The Bends + OK Computer

also i should add that this is not a poll because i want this to be a discussion and comparison rather than a competition between the two bands.

Arcade Fire so much better than early Radiohead. But what they said about OK Computer is bullshit...The Suburbs isn't even Arcade Fire's best album.

^^

 

wow eddie i wouldve thought you out of all people wouldve favoured radiohead. but you make a good point.

Eh. I love The Bends and OK Computer but Funeral and Neon Bible are just...so much better than those albums.

(Pablo Honey doesn't count)

(Pablo Honey doesn't count)

 

Spoken like a true radiohead fan.

 

But on topic, Funeral is the only album I can really think of that is comparable to OK computer. Even then though, I still see OK Computer winning it.

^^

 

but as a whole. the 3 arcade fire works against the first 3 radiohead albums, its a pretty close call. i know ok computer trumps all of them. but you can argue that all 3 arcade fire albums beat the bends and forget about pablo honey.

OK Computer isn't in my top 3 Radiohead albums.

So going to go with Arcade Fire on this one. Interesting to think about though.

 

If I were to rank the 6 albums it would go:

 

1. Funeral

2. The Bends

3. OK Computer

4. The Suburbs

5. Neon Bible

6. Pablo Honey

Thinking about it this is a tough choice. As much as I love Radiohead honestly I don't think that their first 3 albums were as great overall as the Arcade Fire's first 3. The Arcade Fire were lucky to have one of the best debut albums ever yet still didn't falter after Funeral. Unfortunately Radiohead did release Pablo Honey which I (as well as many others) don't like. But regardless I can't deny the importance of PH to get the band to where they went.

 

So I guess I'll have to go with the Arcade Fire on this one.

 

My ranking:

1. OK Computer

2. Funeral

3. The Suburbs

4. The Bends

5. Neon Bible

6. Pablo Honey

I have to say, after recently listening to everything Arcade Fire before I got the leak of the suburbs, I want to say they do an amazing job. yes, their first three albums can be compared to Radiohead's first three, but the style of music is much different between the two.

 

So yes, you can compare, but they are so different in their own regards.

 

I would agree to the_gloaming09's list though :)

I'm more of a post OKC supporter, so yeah, AF is better.

AF is better, because Funeral is amazing, Pablo Honey is shit, Neon Bible is amazing, The Bends is pretty okay, and The Suburbs is blah, and OK Computer is really good. Two amazings and one blah > One really good, one okay, and one blah. Elementary mathz.

there is no way we can compare the Arcade Fire to Radiohead, in my opinion.

 

We can based on the three albums, but saying AF is better than Radiohead is inaccurate because Radiohead have been around longer and have made more albums, such as Kid A, In Rainbows and Hail To The Thief, once AF get to that many records, then I think we can compare...

I know absolutely nothing of Arcade Fire, I'm probably missing out so much tbh, but I never bother to listen to them. I haven't even heard one single song of theirs actually! :o

radiohead!!!!!!!!

Pablo Honey is underated

radiohead!!!!!!!!

thanks for that pearl of wisdom and wecome to coldplaying. Any particular reason for your musing?

although I am a fan of both, I'm going with Radiohead. Just because. :P no seriously.... they are a band that changes with every record. No other band has been so evolved... Thom is a poet... and Johnny... really? Need I go into detail the innovative genius that he is???

although I am a fan of both, I'm going with Radiohead. Just because. :P no seriously.... they are a band that changes with every record. No other band has been so evolved... Thom is a poet... and Johnny... really? Need I go into detail the innovative genius that he is???

 

THANK YOU BERRYWOMAN! :)

 

as great as the AF are, they cannot compare, i mean, there is greatness on many levels, but look at the evolution of radiohead, say, from Paolo Honey to OK Computer to Kid A to In Rainbows, it's astounding!

there is no way we can compare the Arcade Fire to Radiohead, in my opinion.

 

We can based on the three albums, but saying AF is better than Radiohead is inaccurate because Radiohead have been around longer and have made more albums, such as Kid A, In Rainbows and Hail To The Thief, once AF get to that many records, then I think we can compare...

 

yeah that was the one qualm i had about making this comparison. radiohead have developed a reputation based on what theyve done since OK computer so its hard to compare the two bands without even thinking about their other works.

 

but nevertheless at the moment arcade fire is the only band i can see from this current crop of "young" artists who might one day reach the heights of radiohead. if i have forgotten someone i would love to be enlightened.

1. Neon Bible

2. OK Computer

3. The Bends

4. Funeral

5. The Suburbs

6. Pablo Honey

I completely agree - the way Arcade Fire has made the Alternative music scene look with NEW bands, I would say they are the best one out there - but the are no Coldplay, Depeche Mode, Cure and Radiohead...all of those bands hold so much to their careers, with the songs, albums and followings they have created.

 

I do feel that Interpol are an underrated group since 2000 that have made 3 amazing albums and continue to make amazing music. Another band that changes their sound is Editors, but yet again - the lack of attention in North America is frustrating since they cannot hit such a huge market.

 

it's the same deal with Muse - they are the world's biggest rock band that America doesn't know about, i mean, people know about them...but they aren't as big as they could be.

Muse're pretty big here tbh.

meh, i think they are, but 5 albums in, they haven't really broken in as much as Coldplay for example, and Muse has been around much longer