More artists’ opinions on the ‘In Rainbows’ method

[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]

Whatever. I downloaded music before In Rainbows and I still do. At least I do buy when the music is good. So make good music, guys. Good music makes money.

I still don’t get the thing lily allen said. How does radiohead’s move make it “unfair” to other bands? Obviously, there’s more to music than having some catchy song that’s bound to get old after a few months. Instead of living from chart hits to chart hits, why not just make good music that people will WANT to buy?

Hahahaa, Goddard went in que… Therefore he didn’t pay!

maynard james keenan isn’t doing a fucking thing to help us small musicians either, so he can get over himself. because, i mean… doesn’t tool have their own imprint? and what are they even doing with it?

and yes… i agree with hpgirl. i still think lily allen is a dumbass twat, too.

[...] ”Nobody’s paying for my music. Thanks, Radiohead.”

what does radiohead have to do with you… people downloaded your music before ‘in rainbows’ was even in mind…

What most of the people forget when they comment upon Radiohead’s decision to “give away” In Rainbows is that the album is not complete, though Ed and Thom said they wanted the album to be concise. Songs like “Bangers and Mash” or “Down is the new up” were crowd favourites during their last tour, and I guess it was a weird surprise for the fans not to find them on the album. Anyway, that was my first reaction. To me, they only gave away part of the album, just like they’re not giving the eighteen songs to the shops, but only with the discbox and by their own means. It’s obvious that nowadays, about a half of the people (probably more)who get or listen to an album didn’t pay for it. I guess Radiohead think they can get more money with the discboxes assuming the real hardcore fans would like the 18 songs…And I think it’s fair paying for Stanley’s work, that he’s part of the ambiance now. But i’m only doing this for Radiohead.

I don’t understand why those people are judging radiohead, it’s their own music, they do what they want with it, who the fuck is anyone to judge anyone else, or is it just jealousy? stupid lili allen will put the blame of illegal download on radiohead’s head because of that move? everybody who download files illegally did not wait for radiohead to act this way, plus one-single band are not there because of radiohead or any other band, the industry is now just educating the people with their one single band, lili allen, who used a sample of an old ska song for her radio single, is famous since when? one year? and now you other major label promoting their new artist like “the new lili allen” so the problem is somewhere else, its so easy to blame free people when you are realising you’re just locked in a system where you have to sacrifice yourself to be famous for a minute, come on people don’t be such hypocrite when you all making good money and you just fear that your music won’t be good enough to be bought by people, what have you done for your fans? a ringtone? a wallpaper? just shut up and work on your music, respect can’t be gain by criticizing other, just stop doing soup music with stupid lyrics and fucked up videos, you’re not musician you’re just business people.
Peace

I thought I cared about what Radiohead did with this release, but I’ve come to realise it doesn’t matter, none of it matters.
Should we care what other musicians think, especially the ones who have had moderate success? No we shouldn’t.
Another thing, it’s all being well saying ‘Why don’t you go and make good music’ or whatever, but to some people it is good music. Who are we to judge other peoples tastes?

Alan, I think what Karl Hynde meant is that it’s a given people will download- the same thing Radiohead recognized- but for Underworld the fact that it’s already a given, especially means it shouldn’t be admitted out loud because that sanctions it. I remember Mego talking about something like this- how the culture in techno is extremely anti-downloading, probably because it’s so easy to ruin DJs’ livelihoods through that. Techno can’t necessarily sell personalities the same way when it comes to records, it’s about the sound of the music.

Also Alex, this is THE album. It has 10 songs. The other songs are outtakes- doesn’t mean they’re better or worse, but they’re not THE album that everyone will remember. And I don’t remember Down is the New Up being much of a fan favorite unless by fans you mean Thom Yorke. But thank god, he realized it didn’t fit.

Paul - well that certainly helps to clear it a bit, thanks.
but it still seems like sticking your head in the sand about it. i understand and somewhat agree that selling it the way they did wouldn’t revolutionize anything, and this is just the act of a band cashing in on what was going to happen, and isn’t such a huge deal. but instead of sanctioning it, they seem to try and address it, albeit in classic surly radiohead fashion.
on the other hand the thing about electronic musicians being left out of this scheme because it wouldnt be about the people behind it is valid, because downloading for the more underground movements works for exposure but not when you ask for money. it’s really only the big names that could do this and get solid results. when some no-one company on download.com makes software that’s actually useful to you, don’t we still ignore the occasional pop-up that says “donate to keep us making better versions!”
we tend to trust more that they’ll just keep going because they’ve been doing it for free anyway.
doing this for music might work now because it would be following the best-case scenario that radiohead have set up, and people are pumped about going around the record industry, but it’s a really risky move for bands who aren’t huge to pull this sort of thing still and i dont think enough people appreciate that.
but underworld have done quite nicely about this issue with releasing internet-only mini-albums, so the fact that they’re working in a similar way (though not nearly as audacious) makes even less sense to take it *personally*.

Radiohead probably made far more per copy than they would have using a traditional release anyway.

Through normal distribution nearly 90% of the income goes to the record label, so Radiohead have done the right thing in my opinion.

Lily Allen doesn’t even write her own songs, who is she to comment on what people do with their own music? The only reason she’s made it to her current level is because her parents are rich and connected. So she can sod off. As for Gene Simmons, well, I’m not sure where to begin other than with the fact that Kiss is probably one of the worst bands of all time. He doesn’t have a shred of talent or taste. His songs have never passed the maturity level of those written by 11 to 12-year olds and neither, in fact, has his personal maturity. Him commenting on any facet of music is like Stevie Wonder critiquing Picasso’s work. The only reason Gene Simmons is rich and famous is his genius for being mediocre and therefore appealing to the rather large amount of mediocre people with mediocre taste in music. God he’s awful! One last note, Tool hasn’t written a new song since Aenima, their genre of music hasn’t been relevant for 10 years, and Tool is only hurting the current music scene by continuously releasing irrelevant material and tricking people into thinking that their music is 1, good, and 2, relevant in the face of this new and far more interesting music that is helping in the evolution of music, not the devolution of music. In closing, Lily shut it, Tool, please quit, and Gene Simmons, please kill yourself or move to a desert island and take your music with you either way. doG Bless.

these articles are stupid. who cares.

Bill is on the right path. No offense to ateasers and with the understanding that I feel radiohead is a great topic for discussion, seriously entertaining these comments can be considered a waste of time. Most of these artists commenting are really not what we will consider artists, they are simply puppets, bar some ( Jay Z, for example or Trent Reznor, whose respective music I don’t really listen to) who take no issue with how the industry machine is based on recipe, back-door airtime deals and degradation of natural musical progress(i.e., influencing artistic decision, merchandising interests and contractual obligations) If anything they are benefitting via publicity. Radiohead issued an album and we have access to it, free or not free. That us what matters

can you all just shut up.
im sure the band never wanted this to happen.
they made good music. we listen to good music. who cares what the rest of them think.

now go listen to reckoner

can you all just shut up.
im sure the band never wanted this to happen.
they made good music. we listen to good music. who cares what the rest of them think.

Yeah, wow… wouldn’t want to accidentally end up in a critical discussion about how things work, instead of just being good li’l blind consumers, would we? Thanks Bianca, for re-focusing us on what’s important: instant gratification without thought for consequence. I’m sure Radiohead would approve.

Sign o’ the times, what RH have done, and some, feeling green at being so slothful, are bitching. Who the fuck is Gene Simmons, anyway, go get your tongue sewn back on, ballsac. And Lilly Allen? The Mockney one-hitter? Please.
RH are pioneers, always have been, always will be, those who choke on the dust, must just put up or deliver the goods.