http://www.inrainbows.com/Store/Quickindex.html
My initial vibe is that it is good. I will let you know my thoughts when I get fully through the album.
I'm curious how this approach nets out for them? I understand that 1/3 of people paid nothing. And those that did paid half of what they normally would if buying CD. The PR from this and probably new fans is hard to measure but would be huge.(now they have a gigantic data base of people) Who knows the money they did make might be more when you consider they cut out the middle man and probably increased their fan base? I'm sure that this will be considered a win for them but I don't know that they could get away with making a practice of it. It is a great album.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=071011121649.tivlafw4&show_article=1 Radiohead's experiment divides music industry Oct 11 08:17 AM US/Eastern AP: Reaction Floods in to New Radiohead Disc British rock group Radiohead have drawn a mixed reaction from fans and fellow musicians with an experiment letting listeners decide the price of their latest album, reports said Thursday. Other artists are said to be studying the novel sales strategy -- labelled a publicity stunt by some -- of allowing fans to pay whatever they want for "In Rainbows," which which went on sale online on Wednesday. The hit art-rockers, already authors of six albums, drew widespread publicity when they announced earlier this month that that fans could decide the price themselves, saying "It's up to you" on their website. On Wednesday about a third of fans decided to pay absolutely nothing, according to The Times daily, citing a poll of 3,000 people who bought it from the website. "I chose zero, but maybe if I had a chance to chip in 10 bucks, after I hear it if it's great, then I would," said one identified fan from Australia, shortly after downloading the album. The average price chosen was four pounds -- half the typical album price on online music retailing leader I-Tunes of around eight pounds -- although 67 people paid more than 10 pounds, according to the poll. But the band's managers were upbeat. "We're prepared to take a risk and we might come out looking very foolish. But we believe if your music is great, then people will pay for it," Bryce Edge, one of the band's managers, told the BBC. Another boss, Chris Hufford, added: "There are actually people who are going on websites and saying, 'I don't actually like Radiohead, but I'm going to give them some money because I think it's a brilliant idea'." British singer-songwriter James Blunt warned that the Radiohead approach could be dangerous for artists. "I don't think they should devalue it," he told The Times. "I've got to pay a band and a producer and a mixer. I don't know how I'd necessarily pay them if I sold my albums for 1p." Alex Turner, the singer with Arctic Monkeys, said the experiment was "very interesting" but reserved judgment, the newspaper said. The four-piece band formed in Oxford, central England, in the 1980s and reached global stardom with hit albums OK Computer and Kid A, featuring intense, atmospheric sounds and Yorke's high-pitched voice. A more orthodoxly priced hard copy version of the new album, which includes CD and vinyl versions of the album plus photos and other material, can also be bought online for 40 pounds (57 euros, 81 dollars). The album's release coincides with a new book out October 22 of published and unpublished artwork from Radiohead albums by Stanley Donwood, who also contributed to lead singer Thom Yorke's solo album "The Eraser." "Dr Tchock", who is widely believed to be Yorke himself, also contributes, a spokesman for publishers Verso told AFP.
I just lost all respect for the guy. I paid $5 to see what it's like. I'll go back & give them more money if the music is good. Hell, I'll even give them $200 if I can find some flexibility in my budget... just to send a message that this (cutting out the middle man) is the way to go. I heard artists get less than $1 per conventional CD sale.
Hmm, turns out this may have been a bit of a scheme with the down loadable version only available in poorer quality with the goal of getting you to buy the CD. "Radiohead Fans Feel Duped By In Rainbows' Poor Sound Quality, Possible Ulterior Motives Statements from band's management seem to indicate that downloadable album was just promotional tool for physical CD." http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1571737/20071011/radiohead.jhtml
That article is bull****. The sound quality is equal to or better than any MP3 I've purchased on-line so far. 128 to 160 kbps seem to be the norm. Not saying I wouldn't be happier if it was 320kbps, but nobody ELSE does that. Radiohead is no different. That said... the new album is AWESOME
Good point because the MP3 format is definitely lower quality than lossless. What are people expecting. RMX
Finally, we can get rid of the scalping RECORD COMPANIES. How long before they are all gone??? The record companies made a mistake in their blind attitude towards downloading. Its going to be their demise.
I think it's great. We've been brainstorming all morning about how to use this trend for our current clients. NIN and Oasis have said they're following suit. I read a posting last night that asserted numbers of 1.2 million downloads already at an average $8 per. That's pretty much straight to the band. Through a label on iTunes they'd get maybe $1.25-2.00 an LP (and that's because of their status, less for starting artists). People are also buying up the $80 box sets. I'm pretty sure they're going to make several times what they would than through a label. Madonna is now courting a record deal with Live Nation instead of Warner. Will they give the music away in promo for a huge live tour (like Prince just did successfully)? As for the disc, I love it - I've been through it 3 or 4 times already. Mellow and ambient sounds, beautiful melodies. I'm not a sound quality stickler but I think that issue is a small one - many hits of the pre-90's have less-than-stellar sound quality and still sell in catalog. In fact one attraction to the LP is that they supposedly finished it only a week or two ago and here it is as Radiohead wanted it, and not after 3-12 months of label tinkering and tweaking beyond the artists' intent.
As I stated in the RIAA lawsuit thread, this tactic worked very well for me as an indie and other people I've known as well. Although not exactly the same model, it was close (give away a few tracks, people come and buy the rest of the album and then buy t-shirts, attend shows, cross merchandise at those shows, etc.) The key is giving away fresh, quality music, not filler type junk. People definitely appreciate it and remain very loyal. RMX
If I could order CD quality music direct from the artist's at half the cost I'd do it. It could even open up creativity as the artist's won't feel compelled or controlled by the recording companies. BTW, all the other Radiohead online releases are at 320 kpbs so it does look like they were trying to prevent too many freebie downloads.
Just last week I had a meeting with an artist who said frankly, "I make these CDs to give away with my Tshirts that cost $20-25." I told him that sounded smart to me. As you know Remix, statistically, very few (<20%) of the artists signed to major labels ever break even on their recording advances.
We pressed a lot of vinyl 12" singles from 98-05. Those were practically like business cards for us. Ever read the Courtney Love blog on the subject? Seven years old but still relevant. Totally worth the read. http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html http://digg.com/tech_news/Courtney_Love_does_the_math_or_Why_you_needn_t_shed_any_tears_for_the_RIAA Another similar article: http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp/albini.html RMX
