RA D IOHE_AD IN/RAINBOWS" continuing discussion thread part V

[lazarus]

Good morning.

Yep, the tunes are all still running through my head too.

 

[djerdap]

After listening to it a couple of more times, I love it. Some beautiful songs in there. I never was a fan of Nude in all those live versions, but the studio version is stunning. Thom's vocals are among his best work ever. I still believe that parts of it suffer from overproduction. Videotape is still a huge disappointment. The potential that this song had... It makes me sad.

Listen to the amazing live version of Videotape:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-eRM3_r1TI

 

[Copy]

Very simple:

1) Yes, Radiohead did this on purpose. The knew they were going to release a CD too. The higher the bitrate of the download, the fewer CDs would probably be sold.

2) The people who donated didn't know the bitrate at the time of donation. But if they were clever, or bothered thinking, they would have realized that they knew that too; that the bit rate hadn't been disclosed. Why would Radiohead hide the bit rate, unless it wasnt very impressive?

3) Morale: Nothing is 100% free in this world.

 

[joyfulgirl]

"I paid zero, nothing, nada for the album," one fan wrote on an epic Stereogum thread about the album. "Sounds like Radiohead. But 160 kbps, that's not good enough. They are actually forcing us to buy the CD when it comes out."
[/B]

So this fan wanted to download it for free but have the highest quality so they wouldn't have to ever pay for higher quality?

Sounds like the manager misspoke and in doing so misrepresented Radiohead. I don't doubt Radiohead's integrity. It's an experiment and now its flaws are exposed. Big freaking deal.

 

[Copy]

It's an experiment and now its flaws are exposed. Big freaking deal.

I think it's a fair viewpoint that the bitrate should have been disclosed at the time of donation. While the quality of the music is subjective, the quality of the encoding isn't. It's an objective measure.

I didn't donate anything for the exact same reason. I had no chance of knowing whether this would be released in 4 kbps or 320 kbps.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I can see this argument from both sides but logically given the amount of traffic expected on the site and the amount of free file sharing that I'm sure was anticipated after it was released, I'm actually surprised they didn't release it as 128...

 

[U2Fanatic4ever]

apparently these are the cover shots... per green plastic..


front

back

 

[joyfulgirl]

I think it's a fair viewpoint that the bitrate should have been disclosed at the time of donation. While the quality of the music is subjective, the quality of the encoding isn't. It's an objective measure.

Fair enough. I'm using my iPod so I'm stuck with 128, and I look forward to blasting the CD release from my car and home stereo.

But it's hard for me to believe that there was any kind of deliberate deception on Radiohead's part. Nor do I want to have them on some morally incorruptible pedastal either. So, I don't know...

 

[Irishteen]

Radiohead have gone up 2 millions plays in 2 days on last.fm Radiohead own last.fm

 

[LemonMelon]

Radiohead Fans Feel Duped By In Rainbows' Poor Sound Quality, Possible Ulterior Motives

Woah iz m3.

The sentiment among many fans

Approximately 14...

it was a call to arms

I'm not entirely sure if the average Radiohead fan could fire off a gun without being killed by the recoil.

(though still not nearing the quality of a compact disc)

Duhhhhhhhhhh.....

To be fair, however, the band did give potential customers the power of choosing how much they wanted to pay to download the album.

But logic is boring, so the article continues...

"Most promo MP3s come at a higher bit rate," wrote the author of U.K. blog Kids Pushing Kids. "Worst pound and pence I've ever spent."

I hope a homeless man steals his high-end stereo.

No one seemed to understand why Radiohead decided to release Rainbows at 160 kpbs, though guitarist Jonny Greenwood told Rolling Stone, "We talked about it and we just wanted to make it a bit better than iTunes, which it is, so that's kind of good enough, really. It's never going to be CD-quality, because that's what a CD does."

Oh, Jonny. Why couldn't you have made it just 32 kpbs larger? Then I wouldn't have had to read this garbage.

That explanation didn't fly with some fans, who began speculating that the decision was made to keep the album off P2P sites or as a subtle way of making fans purchase either the discbox or the physical release of the album next year. The thought behind this theory was that if Radiohead fans were willing to split hairs over something as seemingly inconsequential as kilobits per second, then surely they wouldn't mind shelling out cash for the actual CD version of Rainbows.

Fair point, if the entire foundation of their argument (seen above) wasn't so pathetic.

"If we didn't believe that when people hear the music they will want to buy the CD, then we wouldn't do what we are doing," Edge said.

Yep, that's how it tends to work.

To many, those comments sounded strangely, well, capitalistic

Communistic would have gone over far better.

Is this entire backlash really just glorified nitpicking

Yes.

or do members of Radiohead Nation have a legitimate reason to think they were duped?

Not really.

Furthermore, had the band announced the sound quality before people paid for the record — and if its managers had made the download sound like nothing more than a glorified demo a few days earlier

WTF?

"I paid zero, nothing, nada for the album,"

............and?

They are actually forcing us to buy the CD when it comes out.

Wah wah wee wah.

"Do not buy the record then. Was that not the point? Don't go around complaining like they did you a disservice by making an album available," another countered. "As if you wouldn't have downloaded the leak. Would you complain if you got the album for free and actually listened to the music instead of focusing on 160 kbps? Maybe you'd actually remember what music appreciation was and be forced to buy the album based on that notion instead."

Once again...DUHHHHHHHHHH.

what are your thoughts on this...?

It made me want to kick them all in the balls, but theirs were already long gone.

 

[Dalton]

I hate that cover art. Is that really what they are going to use?

 

[LemonMelon]

I hate that cover art. Is that really what they are going to use?

I hope not. It looks awful.

 

[xaviMF22]

Guys this is the artwork

 

[LemonMelon]

If the front cover still looks like garbage, such nice photos won't really make me feel better.

 

[Dalton]

Yeah, that does look a lot better.

 

[LemonMelon]

These make for nice avatars. I'm just having a tough time deciding which one to use.

 

[FitzChivalry]

These bottom 2 look like my t-shirt that I bought at the concert last year.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I’m not sure if this was posted already, IGN review:

http://music.ign.com/articles/826/826608p1.html

They’re not exactly music experts or anything but I found it interesting nonetheless…

 

[xaviMF22]

I’m not sure if this was posted already, IGN review:

http://music.ign.com/articles/826/826608p1.html

They’re not exactly music experts or anything but I found it interesting nonetheless…

posted already

 

[xaviMF22]

I wanna call myself

elevated_radiohead_fan

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

posted already

nice, that's me; paying attention as usual

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I wanna call myself

elevated_radiohead_fan

alter anyone?

 

[Lancemc]

Artwork.

I'm currently using

for my aptly titled Johnny Greenwood - "Ether Festival (Live 2005)" album I've fallen so in love with this past week.

 

[U2DMfan]

Would someone please please email this album to me?
capnbunch@yahoo.com


I would be seriously thankful.

I'm on a fairly slow dial-up, it's easier to download one song at a time, and that is easier by mail in my experience.

I'll be buying the damn thing when it hits a proper store.

 

[Utoo]

Guys , here's the cover:

 

[AtomicBono]

LemonMelon's response to that article is exactly how I feel good job man

I fucking hate audiophile hipster Radiohead fans...you could get the album FOR FREE. it's better than iTunes quality. What the fuck do you have to complain about? weren't most of you assholes going to buy the CD anyway if you're such a fan of the band?

those kinds of people are the reason Radiohead fans have a reputation of being pretentious assholes.

btw I was listening to this album while walking today (it is GORGEOUS outside) and it was like perfecton... I'm so in love with it. Radiohead has made beautiful music in the past, and they've made emotionally affecting music, but they've never made music that makes me so happy to be alive before. Perhaps this will end up being my favourite Radiohead album. Obviously it's too early to say, but I don't think I listened to any of their other albums nonstop like this when I got them.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Isn't it nice that we're having a Radiohead love fest instead of the usual arguments?


I burned a copy for my best friend who doesn't have the capability right now, as a surprise for a roadtrip he started today. He just called from the road and is on his 4th listen and said he realizes all the other CDs he bought for the trip were a waste of time and money.

 

[u2popmofo]

he realizes all the other CDs he bought for the trip were a waste of time and money.

I can relate. I actually bought 6 cds (no, nothing has changed, if anything it's gotten worse) the day before In Rainbows came out. Even though a number of them are brand new releases by a number of bands I quite like, all I seem to want to listen to is the Radiohead album.

 

[LemonMelon]

LemonMelon's response to that article is exactly how I feel good job man

I fucking hate audiophile hipster Radiohead fans...you could get the album FOR FREE. it's better than iTunes quality. What the fuck do you have to complain about? weren't most of you assholes going to buy the CD anyway if you're such a fan of the band?

those kinds of people are the reason Radiohead fans have a reputation of being pretentious assholes.

One day of reading atease is enough to solidify such a poor reputation, but now you don't even have to do that. You can just read an article about it.

btw I was listening to this album while walking today (it is GORGEOUS outside) and it was like perfecton... I'm so in love with it. Radiohead has made beautiful music in the past, and they've made emotionally affecting music, but they've never made music that makes me so happy to be alive before. Perhaps this will end up being my favourite Radiohead album. Obviously it's too early to say, but I don't think I listened to any of their other albums nonstop like this when I got them.

Agreed 100%. While this album doesn't top OK Computer for me (nothing will), it does surpass Kid A for me now, hard as it is to believe.

I think I'll listen to all 7 albums tomorrow and see how IR stands up. I'm sure it will be quite a successful test.

 

[BoMac]

I saw them on their tour last summer and quite liked the new songs. However, I made the concious decision not to listen to the new material before or after that concert.

The result? I really enjoy this album. It's so beautiful, so melodic, so.....emotional. I think there's a correlation between me not hearing the songs beforehand and being moved by the album versions. I've listened to this album multiple times and I love every single song—even Videotape.

Bring on the tour!!