|
|
Post by Flashy Ross on Mar 18, 2008 9:27:39 GMT -5
First Radiohead released their album digitally and you could pay whatever you wanted. Then they released a physical copy along with a beautiful collector's package (I know, because I own it). Radiohead never released specific sales figures, but they did say they earned more from the release of In Rainbows than all of their other albums grossed digitally in total. Then Nine Inch Nails released an album on the web that you could get for free, pay for (no DRM, PDF liner artwork, and high quality audio), a DVD version, or pay for a deluxe collectors edition. Not to mention, Trent Reznor himself "leaked" the album to thepiratebay. Reznor stated that the one week earnings of Ghosts I-IV was $1.6 million! Next in line... Jack White's (White Stripes) side project the Raconteurs are releasing a new album next week (March 25th) in an unusual way. The album was officially announced today for the first time. the album will be released in almost every current format imaginable at the same time -- CD, digitally (320kbs), and vinyl. What makes the release of the sophomore album so interesting is that they're bypassing the usual promotional period of sending records to magazines, radio stations, etc... Instead, they're releasing it so that the fans can have a chance to hear it first for a change. While this isn't that big of a step compared to what Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails recently did, it's still a sign of change and it's kind of warming that before we know it the entire record industry could be completely different. I'm not really a huge fan of the Raconteurs, but I'll still check the record out. If you want to read more about this release there's more info here: www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/49335-surprise-new-raconteurs-album-out-next-weekI liked this quote" |
|
Urban
Pizza Party Master
Beyond The Scorpion Gate
Posts: 637
|
Post by Urban on Mar 18, 2008 9:30:26 GMT -5
With more and more artists getting access to their own recording shit, I wish to see more control by them. But unless they're huge like Trent or Jack White etc, I don't see companies rolling over on this for a long time.
That being said, I'm still happy to see this. Oh and don't forget Saul Williams did it too (with the help of Trent)
|
|
ross
Pizza Party Master
he sounds aggressive
Posts: 668
|
Post by ross on Mar 18, 2008 9:32:32 GMT -5
and i might be the only person left that cares about this, but pennywise is giving away their newest album as well.
|
|
clint
Pizza Party Master
They don't all bring ya lasagna at work, most of em' just cheat on ya.
Posts: 796
|
Post by clint on Mar 18, 2008 12:01:28 GMT -5
yeah, you probably are, cause pennywise sucks balls.
But too each their own, I like lots of shitty music too, so I can't really hate.
This is pretty cool though, with all this giving away. It makes us poor kids happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by overdrivethree on Mar 18, 2008 12:06:00 GMT -5
i dig the Raconteurs' idea.
i just can't listen to a band when too much hype precedes them. not because i think all hyped bands suck, but it definitely colors my perception of the music before i hear a note. same thing with movies, and it's why i'm gonna wait a long time before i sit down to watch "No Country For Old Men."
|
|
clint
Pizza Party Master
They don't all bring ya lasagna at work, most of em' just cheat on ya.
Posts: 796
|
Post by clint on Mar 18, 2008 12:11:47 GMT -5
No Country for Old Men was very good though. I know that really doesn't do much to stir away the hype, but it's worth a watch soon, no matter what.
Now, is it ground breaking and Oscar worthy? Not in my opinion. Movies today are mostly the same, with slight twists in the story. I miss original movies. But I guess there are so many movies being made today, that it's hard to be very original.
|
|
|
|
Post by human39 on Mar 18, 2008 13:16:39 GMT -5
To me and I'm sure its arguable, labels are obsolete. I can see things as generally managing, publication contacts and even show contacts as still being valid.
Everything between digitally and physically distributing an album can be done by a band with a little money and common business sense. CD's are dirt cheap to be produced. Even short run CD's can be sold for WAY under store prices and still make the band close to 100% profit on each CD. Vinyl requires more overhead, minimum runs and a lot more prep work. Although, if your fans dig vinyl, they'll sell quick and a great profit on each.
The above paragraph was not meant to sound money hungry. I just believe that people should make some return for their efforts and more motivated to make more good music. This also allows a band to tour and release more often. I think this is a way to keep a band honest and humble. Basically, focus on what you should be doing.. writing, playing shows, selling records.
I think what Radiohead did was great, but from my understanding.. they never left the label umbrella. The MP3's were offered at a lower quality (although most people can't tell the difference) and now the album is in stores with a label's imprint on it. So, I'm sure there is a lot to consider and not enough public information.
I think Trent was critical on Radiohead's move but I didn't really read why.
Either way I think its great and hopefully a wake up call to bands. Somebody I know commented on the fact "if anybody can do it, you'll have to sift through all the crap because you buy records". How is that different than what you do now? A lot of crap has major label support and you still sift through it :-)
Anyhow, end rant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flashy Ross on Mar 18, 2008 14:45:59 GMT -5
To me and I'm sure its arguable, labels are obsolete. I can see things as generally managing, publication contacts and even show contacts as still being valid. Everything between digitally and physically distributing an album can be done by a band with a little money and common business sense. CD's are dirt cheap to be produced. Even short run CD's can be sold for WAY under store prices and still make the band close to 100% profit on each CD. Vinyl requires more overhead, minimum runs and a lot more prep work. Although, if your fans dig vinyl, they'll sell quick and a great profit on each. The above paragraph was not meant to sound money hungry. I just believe that people should make some return for their efforts and more motivated to make more good music. This also allows a band to tour and release more often. I think this is a way to keep a band honest and humble. Basically, focus on what you should be doing.. writing, playing shows, selling records. I think what Radiohead did was great, but from my understanding.. they never left the label umbrella. The MP3's were offered at a lower quality (although most people can't tell the difference) and now the album is in stores with a label's imprint on it. So, I'm sure there is a lot to consider and not enough public information. I think Trent was critical on Radiohead's move but I didn't really read why. Either way I think its great and hopefully a wake up call to bands. Somebody I know commented on the fact "if anybody can do it, you'll have to sift through all the crap because you buy records". How is that different than what you do now? A lot of crap has major label support and you still sift through it :-) Anyhow, end rant. The only thing is that the artists that attempted this are all very highly regarded in the music spectrum. Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails are mammoth beasts in the recording industry. Not too many folks reported on Saul Williams release, because he's not as popular. ...and who remembers a year or two ago when Harvey Danger (yes, that one hit wonder group) released their latest album for free via their website? Labels serve a purpose of getting your band's music on the radio and on the shelves of Wal-Mart / Best Buy. There will be a time when no one needs labels and I'm sure it will happen soon. However, they will still define the mainstream medium. I do however think it's possible for an indie band to transfer from obscurity and into popularity with a label. Especially in the Myspace / Facebook generation where with a few clicks your music can be heard by everyone. It's only a matter of time for this to happen. Trent initially praised Radiohead, infact, I believe he was quoted as saying he paid nearly $1,000 for a download. However, he was critical because they didn't release it at a higher bitrate or something like that. |
|
Urban
Pizza Party Master
Beyond The Scorpion Gate
Posts: 637
|
Post by Urban on Mar 18, 2008 14:56:02 GMT -5
He said he actually paid 5 grand, so I don't think he was being too critical yeah haha
|
|
|
|
Post by human39 on Mar 18, 2008 16:32:25 GMT -5
Initially, I'm unsure of Trents stance on the Radiohead, but there is this, which I just heard some talk about over the last few days. www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9894376-7.html?%5E$I also agree that both RadioHead and Trent are huge that that helped them. I don't expect a band that is currently undergound make over 1.5 million in a week. .5% of that would be 7500, what would be the level to make even that? Who knows. I remember when Harvey Danger did that and its still available on their website. I'm not sure if it was a huge success at the time.. and I have reasons to say "I don't think so". Which is unfortunate. They are releasing on Kill Rock Stars, which was a little weird to me. |
|
|
|
Post by samuraidan on Mar 18, 2008 16:39:02 GMT -5
...and who remembers a year or two ago when Harvey Danger (yes, that one hit wonder group) released their latest album for free via their website? yeah, i was going to point out when i first opened this thread that of all the bands out there, Harvey Danger was the one that seemingly started this trend. |
|
|
|
Post by Flashy Ross on Mar 18, 2008 17:21:59 GMT -5
That Harvey Danger record isn't half bad either.
|
|
