Origin of Similarity: Why Muse Is Not Radiohead
Published on January 30th, 2009 in: Issues, Music, Over the Gadfly's Nest |By Christian Lipski
Son House’s style was ripped off by Robert Johnson.
David Bowie is an Elton John clone.
Queen are just imitating Sparks.
Pearl Jam is a cheap copy of Stone Temple Pilots.
Can you claim that two contemporary artists with similar influences and styles could not possibly have developed these techniques separately? You can if you’re a music writer:
Photo © Christian Lipski
“If you’re going to pillage someone else’s ideas, then go for broke. Because even if you find yourself crammed between the barriers of creative space, utterly at a loss for ideas, expression, or thought, you’d still have a self-respect buzzing in your ear like a mad angelic insect, putting down the newspaper and taking out a cigar to remind you that, hell, if you want to sound like Radiohead when even Thom Yorke doesn’t want to sound like Radiohead, you might as well take it to preposterous, bombastic, over-the-top levels. Add church organs, mental electronics, riffs bouncing off each other like the monolithic screams in 2001: A Space Odyssey, and you’ll finally be in position to crack skulls like coconuts and make the world’s speakers ooze gooey blood.” (emphasis mine)
Dean Carlson, amg.com
This is the review for Muse’s second album Origin of Symmetry (2001) on AllMusic, a popular music database. Ignoring the irony of a review scolding idea-stealing written in imitation of Lester Bangs, the claims made don’t add up. The same paragraph accusing of theft also describes the stolen version as being different—more—than the original is, or was. For comparison, read the review for Radiohead’s second album, The Bends, where building on a perceived similarity is now artful:
“Building from the sweeping, three-guitar attack that punctuated the best moments of Pablo Honey, Radiohead create a grand and forceful sound that nevertheless resonates with anguish and despair — it’s cerebral anthemic rock. Occasionally, the album displays its influences, whether it’s U2, Pink Floyd, R.E.M., or the Pixies, but Radiohead turn clichés inside out, making each song sound bracingly fresh.” (emphasis mine)
Stephen Thomas Erlewine, amg.com
The dichotomy between these two reviews is a prime example of the popular legend that has circulated through the music world since the release of Muse’s first CD, Showbiz: Muse sounds like Radiohead, and this is because Muse was influenced by, and then appropriated, Radiohead’s style. It’s not an inconceivable situation for two bands to be in. The only problem is that actually listening and making the comparison is not necessarily required:
“Several months ago, a co-worker handed me an album and said ‘I hear that they sound like Radiohead, maybe you’ll like it.’ I totally wasn’t expecting what I heard.”
Review of Showbiz, Spin.com, 1999
Pages: 1 2
12 Responses to “Origin of Similarity: Why Muse Is Not Radiohead”
January 31st, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Hear hear! It irks me a great deal when people claim that Muse are a Radiohead rip-off; I love both bands and concur with this article.
January 31st, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Exactly – You can like both bands, or one or the other, and see that they’re different.
February 2nd, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Radiohead WISHES they could rock as hard & coherently as Muse.
March 18th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
i couldnt help but compare the two bands. Though largely different, you can hear the influence. The Bends plays an influence. “Just” and the “The Bends” are excellent examples.
April 19th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
PJ is a STP ripoff? Get your facts straight. PJ came out with an album first. These two bands don’t sound alike anyways. Muse wouldn’t be a band if it wasn’t for Radiohead. (I don’t even like Radiohead, but I always hear Muse songs on the radio and am not sure which band it is.)
April 19th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Sigh. If you’d read objectively instead of reacting, you’d see that the common element in those statements at the beginning of the article is that they are all obviously ridiculous. Although your rational and measured argument has convinced me that Muse owes its popularity to Radiohead. I retract this whole article.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am
A fantastic article. I have fairly recently developed a deep love for Radiohead, having been a fan of Muse for a lot longer. I obviously knew about Radiohead and had ‘The Bends’, which was my Dad’s. When you listen to the two bands in this order, you see that Muse have a different set of influences altogether. Since when have Radiohead done anything remotely as heavy as ‘Absolution’?
August 5th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
i’m not quite sure why, but i do find this debate (tiresome) and infuriating, and am so glad that SOMEONE is finnaly broadcasting sense! i love muse and radiohead, and when someone said omg they’re the same! i was like ummmm…no..i never even thought of that, and just because thom and matt both sing in the same vocal range does not make them the same, they’re lyrics are different and they also have different guitar styles! thumbs up x1000 to this article, glad to see that not everyone has lost their minds 🙂
August 5th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
pinkegobox: Thanks! I have lost my mind, but I think I can keep these two bands separate. 🙂
November 1st, 2009 at 11:19 pm
As “Me” says earlier… please don’t compare STP to PJ. PJ happened in the early nineties when grunge was in it’s infancy. STP is more of a post-grunge thing…STP’s first album came out in the shadow of PJ’s first and definitive album. With “Plush”, STP’s lead singer (Scott Wieland) kind of sounded like PJ’s Eddie Vedder and thus got a bad rap. With each successive album, STP created a distinct sound. Now classic.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:03 pm
And as I replied to “Me” earlier… Sigh. If you’d read objectively instead of reacting, you’d see that the common element in those statements at the beginning of the article is that they are all obviously ridiculous. But apparently not obvious enough to some.
March 29th, 2010 at 11:24 am
[…] Happily, I was well mistaken here. The DVD is filled to the brim with clips from videos and live performances, behind-the-scenes photos, and interviews with music journalists and key participants in the band’s rise. It’s two hours of in-depth study which should make the band’s fans glow with satisfaction. Starting from the band’s assemblage as Gothic Plague and then Rocket Baby Doll, the documentary traces the decisions and obstacles along the way to the top. The band’s first manager Safta Jaffrey explains how he was introduced to the band and immediately noticed their potential. He is also the one who brings up the initial comparison to Radiohead, which was noted by “a couple” of reviewers and then adopted by many others in what he terms “lazy journalism.” (See my article about this comparison here.). […]
Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.