MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
Axver said:
Yes. Fans buy from the band.
That's brilliant. And I support that 100%.
Music for free, which is what RH are doing, and what I'm ranting about, is BS.
Release Methods - Radiohead v. U2
- Thread starter ahittle
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Yes. Fans buy from the band.
That's brilliant. And I support that 100%.
Music for free, which is what RH are doing, and what I'm ranting about, is BS.
MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
Axver said:
"Why hello sir! I'm the clerk at this fine minimart. I see you've brought a 6 pack of beer to the counter. Well, here is our current offer. You can have that beer for free. Free I say! no strings attached. Nada. Ziltch. Zippo. That 6 pack of fine lager is yours, for not a dime.
But, if you wish, you can make a donation for that 6 pack, of any amount you'd like. $1. $7. $18. $129."
U2DMfan
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Agree or not, Brau is welcome on these F'ing board any day of the week. Welcome back.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Axver said:
Because he assumes that anyone with two brain cells to rub together (EG: not a "sucker") would choose to have it for free every time. However, that would rule out the human conscience; that thing that tells me to throw Thom Yorke a fiver if I see him busking on the side of the road.
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
U2DMfan said:
well thats one opinion
lets make a poll
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
xaviMF22 said:
well thats one opinion
lets make a poll
Yes, let's. Then we can join puppyboy in interference limbo!
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
LemonMelon said:
Yes, let's. Then we can join puppyboy in interference limbo!
puppyboy sent me a message
he wans an In Rainbows listening party
U2DMfan said:
On the topic: do you think there is a correlation between Radiohead not having a label and saying "don't pay anything * if you don't want" ? I'm guessing a major label wouldn't allow it.
*credit card provision, also, how many will really pay, given the option of getting it for free ?
Mr Brau, there is still the megapack a few weeks later (two vinyl LPs and bonus CD, plus the new album on CD) and the official CD early in 2008. Fear not for their financial existence.
Last edited:
LemonMelon said:
Really, if I (and everyone else) just took the beer for free, the store will shut down and my only options are to steal beer or to pay an exorbitant, higher price elsewhere. Who is the sucker then?
I payed an "appreciation tax". I like the music they make, so paying a modest sum is a way of showing my appreciation for their efforts, and to help convince future artists to do this. If I pay $5 to Radiohead which convinces two other bands to embrace open pricing, I would pay $15 for all three CDs. If I pay $0 so it doesn't look financially feasible and no one else changes, I pay $30 for the other two....Or $20+ at iTunes. PLUS, the money goes right to the band. No middleman corporation squeezing pennies.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
U2DMfan said:
MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
Axver said:
Well, it would appear that listeners feel the music is worth nothing. Napster, Kazza, Limewire, torrents, etc.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
mobvok said:
I agree totally. I'm sure most of us would love Radiohead to do this again sometime, and you would want to encourage their efforts. I definitely would have thrown out a couple of bucks if I had my own credit card, but I don't. I still intend on buying the album when it reaches stores.
MrBrau1 said:
No, it says that given the binary choice between a certain price and free, more people choose free. Apples to oranges when considering an open pricing scheme like Radiohead's.
Maybe you're right and Radiohead will earn little or nothing from this idea. We'll find out soon enough.
MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
mobvok said:
semantics. Free is free.
Earnie Shavers
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
MrBrau1 said:
It's not. An album leaking on the net for free a month or two before it's formal release is - to state the fucking obvious - nothing new. A band like Radiohead, or U2 or whoever, have three choices. (a) Try their darndest to keep it away from the net, (b) not give a fuck, or (c) take control of it, 'leak' it yourself on your terms and maybe make a couple of bucks along the way. Maybe. Then in a couple of months it is released traditionally, and chances are that for a band like Radiohead with the fanbase they have, and the casual listener they may attract, the release suffers no less or more than had it all just leaked by other 'illegal' means, which it surely would have anyway.
I don't think it's that big a deal really. Forget the 'free' hype. A new Radiohead album is due to drop in November - what is the likelihood you would have been listening to it for free sometime in October anyway? It's not a middle finger to the music industry or to record companies or to capitalism or whatever. It's not some great service to fans or whatever, it's just a smart way to take back a bit of control.
As for it being about them being a millionaire band now versus them in 1991 - loads of bands find their place now almost entirely due to the ability to push their music around on the net, for free. Radiohead, if they were new in 2007, would surely be doing the same. Admittedly though, on this scale, this is something few bands could 'afford' to do, but not in a way that is just about bank accounts, more to do with the exact positioning Radiohead have. Not singles reliant for hype or extra income, a huge non-fickle hardcore fanbase (ie they don't rely that much on attracting large amounts of new fans with each release), large scale and very successful touring business etc etc.
doctorwho
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Re: Re: Interesting
While true that U2 makes most of their money through touring, it's only because they are the second biggest touring artist in the world (behind the Stones). That said, U2's last two new studio albums sold over 22 million copies worldwide - so U2 make plenty of $$ from album sales too.
In other words, for U2, tours still do promote the CD. U2's last two studio albums were able to enjoy long shelf lives (two strong holiday season sales) because of the tour (and, of course, strong songs). And early on, of course, U2 toured to promote their new material all the time.
But a strong CD will give people a reason to see a band live. If U2 had crappy albums, they could have toured all they wanted and no one would have cared. So I do feel that the two work together (i.e., a tour supports the CD sales, a good CD supports the tour). It's just that U2, like the Stones (and artists like Springsteen, Elton John, Bon Jovi, etc.) are far enough in their careers that they can sell out shows without necessarily having a top selling CD (i.e., "Pop" - sold well, but not well by U2's standards).
As for this Radiohead "experiment", the novelty is that fans can pay as much - or as little - as they want for the music. Downloading clearly isn't unique - U2 showed that several years ago. But the pricing is. If this proves successful, I could see U2 doing something similar. I'm not sure if they would release their entire album, but they may release the first single and a b-side. In the past, they had snippets of their songs available for free online, so I can see U2 doing that again (in conjunction with the download of the first single/b-side).
ahittle said:
While true that U2 makes most of their money through touring, it's only because they are the second biggest touring artist in the world (behind the Stones). That said, U2's last two new studio albums sold over 22 million copies worldwide - so U2 make plenty of $$ from album sales too.
In other words, for U2, tours still do promote the CD. U2's last two studio albums were able to enjoy long shelf lives (two strong holiday season sales) because of the tour (and, of course, strong songs). And early on, of course, U2 toured to promote their new material all the time.
But a strong CD will give people a reason to see a band live. If U2 had crappy albums, they could have toured all they wanted and no one would have cared. So I do feel that the two work together (i.e., a tour supports the CD sales, a good CD supports the tour). It's just that U2, like the Stones (and artists like Springsteen, Elton John, Bon Jovi, etc.) are far enough in their careers that they can sell out shows without necessarily having a top selling CD (i.e., "Pop" - sold well, but not well by U2's standards).
As for this Radiohead "experiment", the novelty is that fans can pay as much - or as little - as they want for the music. Downloading clearly isn't unique - U2 showed that several years ago. But the pricing is. If this proves successful, I could see U2 doing something similar. I'm not sure if they would release their entire album, but they may release the first single and a b-side. In the past, they had snippets of their songs available for free online, so I can see U2 doing that again (in conjunction with the download of the first single/b-side).
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
intedomine said:
haha
releasing your music potentially for free on the internet for anyone is PRETENTIOUS?
oh yes.
that's rich.
wow. i never thought i'd read THAT.
brilliant, and well played.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
something else that i'm not sure has really been said enough...
i'm not sure this would work for many other bands.
if another bigger band were to do this, they wouldn't get the publicity radiohead have received as a result of this.
it wouldn't be quite so "shocking", as it had already been done before.
and if more and more bands went about their business this way it would soon become the norm. and then...
well
it could really come back to haunt the artist, couldn't it?
radiohead are benefiting mostly from the advertising they've received from every possible media outlet as a result of being one of the very first bands to release their music in this fashion.
i hope that makes sense to someone. it's merely an opinion.
i'm not sure this would work for many other bands.
if another bigger band were to do this, they wouldn't get the publicity radiohead have received as a result of this.
it wouldn't be quite so "shocking", as it had already been done before.
and if more and more bands went about their business this way it would soon become the norm. and then...
well
it could really come back to haunt the artist, couldn't it?
radiohead are benefiting mostly from the advertising they've received from every possible media outlet as a result of being one of the very first bands to release their music in this fashion.
i hope that makes sense to someone. it's merely an opinion.
intedomine
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Zoomerang96 said:
Radiohead know that most hardcore fans will fork out the $80 for the diskboxx thing. Think about it, there's 8 brand spanking new Radiohead tracks that will go begging to the human ear if they weren't to fork out the 80 bucks.
It's like you only get a half-arsed copy of the album for free, if you want the real deal, it's gonna cost you. IN some respects, the digital download that is happening today represents the first single release from the album, with the diskboxx serving as the album proper.
There's nothing to "free" about that. Cause I don't own a credit card, I'm putting all my eggs in the basket that HOPEFULLY, these 8 tracks will be released physically sometime next year
intedomine said:
I'm too lazy to read through a million previous pages, so I'm going to say what I'm sure has been said somewhere else:
The quote above is the kicker----in the end, it's the diehards who get screwed. I'd love to have the boxset. But $80? For two cds and vinyl? Bullshit. Yeah right.
If U2 did that, this forum would tear them a new asshole.
People went nuts when the band wanted $18 for a 10-song concert dvd and two new tracks, saying that the biggest fans got screwed the most because the biggest fans buy everything. With In Rainbows, thousands of people get the music for free. The people who love the band and buy everything have to fork over eighty dollars for two ten-cent cds and five-cent vinyl records.
But it's Radiohead, so it's cool.
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Utoo said:
I'm too lazy to read through a million previous pages, so I'm going to say what I'm sure has been said somewhere else:
The quote above is the kicker----in the end, it's the diehards who get screwed. I'd love to have the boxset. But $80? For two cds and vinyl? Bullshit. Yeah right.
If U2 did that, this forum would tear them a new asshole.
People went nuts when the band wanted $18 for a 10-song concert dvd and two new tracks, saying that the biggest fans got screwed the most because the biggest fans buy everything. With In Rainbows, thousands of people get the music for free. The people who love the band and buy everything have to fork over eighty dollars for two ten-cent cds and five-cent vinyl records.
But it's Radiohead, so it's cool.
radiohead >>>you
IN rainbows today
xaviMF22 said:
radiohead >>>you
Come on....radiohead could offer a cd for free and also wipe their asses and sell the paper for $50, and diehards would pay fifty bucks and think it's innovative.
As a new Radiohead fan, I'm discovering how great they are. And yet, 20% of their greatness is the hype around them.
MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
Utoo said:
Good God, they used to be brilliant. I'm really hoping this new album is a return to form.
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Utoo said:
Come on....radiohead could offer a cd for free and also wipe their asses and sell the paper for $50, and diehards would pay fifty bucks and think it's innovative.
As a new Radiohead fan, I'm discovering how great they are. And yet, 20% of their greatness is the hype around them.
they deserve all the hype they get
they are that amazing
and diehard U2 fans would do the same I think...I mean they would get any bone U2 throw at them
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
MrBrau1 said:
you hope wrong
MrBrau1
ONE love, blood, life
xaviMF22 said:
you hope wrong
It doesn't look promising. I mean, they're giving it away for free.
That should tell you something.
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
MrBrau1 said:
I know...it sucks for that reason alone
so please don't even bother listening to ot
let me listen to videotape
Similar threads
- Sticky
