RA D IOHE_AD IN/RAINBOWS" continuing discussion thread part V - Page 23 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-12-2007, 11:39 AM   #331
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,005
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Good morning.

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

__________________
lazarus is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 11:47 AM   #332
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
djerdap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,423
Local Time: 11:48 PM
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:

__________________

__________________
djerdap is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 11:48 AM   #333
The Fly
 
Copy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 190
Local Time: 10:48 PM
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.
__________________
Copy is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 11:48 AM   #334
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Fanatic4ever

"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.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 11:56 AM   #335
The Fly
 
Copy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 190
Local Time: 10:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl

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.
__________________
Copy is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 12:04 PM   #336
Blue Crack Supplier
 
elevated_u2_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I'm here 'cus I don't want to go home
Posts: 31,694
Local Time: 05:48 PM
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...
__________________
elevated_u2_fan is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 12:15 PM   #337
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2Fanatic4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: nowhere..........man
Posts: 20,254
Local Time: 06:48 PM
apparently these are the cover shots... per green plastic..


front


back
__________________
U2Fanatic4ever is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 12:36 PM   #338
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Copy


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...
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 12:51 PM   #339
Blue Crack Addict
 
Irishteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 29,624
Local Time: 11:48 PM
Radiohead have gone up 2 millions plays in 2 days on last.fm Radiohead own last.fm
__________________
Irishteen is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 01:01 PM   #340
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,812
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Fanatic4ever
Radiohead Fans Feel Duped By In Rainbows' Poor Sound Quality, Possible Ulterior Motives
Woah iz m3.

Quote:
The sentiment among many fans
Approximately 14...

Quote:
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.

Quote:
(though still not nearing the quality of a compact disc)
Duhhhhhhhhhh.....

Quote:
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...

Quote:
"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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
"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.

Quote:
To many, those comments sounded strangely, well, capitalistic
Communistic would have gone over far better.

Quote:
Is this entire backlash really just glorified nitpicking
Yes.

Quote:
or do members of Radiohead Nation have a legitimate reason to think they were duped?
Not really.

Quote:
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?

Quote:
"I paid zero, nothing, nada for the album,"
............and?

Quote:
They are actually forcing us to buy the CD when it comes out.
Wah wah wee wah.

Quote:
"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.


Quote:
what are your thoughts on this...?
It made me want to kick them all in the balls, but theirs were already long gone.
__________________
LemonMelon is online now  
Old 10-12-2007, 01:19 PM   #341
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 06:48 PM
I hate that cover art. Is that really what they are going to use?
__________________
Dalton is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 01:21 PM   #342
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,812
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dalton
I hate that cover art. Is that really what they are going to use?
I hope not. It looks awful.
__________________
LemonMelon is online now  
Old 10-12-2007, 01:39 PM   #343
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
xaviMF22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In haunted attics
Posts: 7,091
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Guys this is the artwork



__________________
xaviMF22 is offline  
Old 10-12-2007, 01:40 PM   #344
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,812
Local Time: 02:48 PM
If the front cover still looks like garbage, such nice photos won't really make me feel better.
__________________
LemonMelon is online now  
Old 10-12-2007, 01:45 PM   #345
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Yeah, that does look a lot better.
__________________

__________________
Dalton is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com