fuck the majors, generation indie rock is upon us.

Some artists, our website host included, have truly reached the threshold of fan loyalty when they could release a CD with 12 versions of “Happy Birthday” on it and there’d still be people outside the record store, on the release date, waiting for an employee to unlock the doors.

I’m seriously interested in watching how this plays out. I’ll watch while I happily listen to my downloaded version of “In Rainbows” on the day before I get to see Matt Good hide nothing with his guitar at the Marquee in Halifax.

The end of next week is going to be very, very good for me.

P.S. The music of Radiohead introduced me to the brilliance of Stanley Donwood, who does the artwork for most of Radiohead’s CD’s. His brain is made of some very strange wiring and his writing is disturbingly ridiculous. Check him out…

http://www.slowlydownward.com

I sincerely hope that people don’t abuse this- although I have a suspicion that in the case of Radiohead’s fan base, that people will pretty much either pay actual market price ($15) or some reflection of what they THINK should be market price (say $10). And since they’re not on a label- they’ll also probably make more money even if people pay less, since there will be less middlemen.

It’s a worthwhile experiment. Even if it fails, it’s worth trying- and in the individual case of Radiohead, they probably don’t need the money at this point anyway.

He’s simply classic… who didn’t melt to “fake plastic trees”???? one of my faves!!!
oxoxoxox

For one, I think that if a song catches my fancy on the radio, Much Music, etc, than the artist deserves a bit of money for the effort. Not to mention, half the stuff I end up buying anymore is Canadian (Barenaked Ladies, Joel Plaskett Emergancy, Sloan, some guy named Matthew Good, etc), and we all know how well off Canadian musicians are.

Not to mention, if I was to go strictly to downloads, than I would be cutting out a whole social activity from my life. At least once a week, during one of my breaks, I make the hike across the street to Cheeky Monkey to see what fun music/Brit mags they have to offer. In the process I end up chatting it up with Mary Anne and Rolland (the store owners) about whatever I just bought, etc. I’d miss that way too much.

But you know what, this such a healthy concept for the music industry that I may just support it regardless. And who knows? The album might actually feature a guitar or two.

I would agree with you for a certain kind of buyer. But I would not agree that every music purchase made by every person is viewed as purchasing “art”. At least I hope not, for anyone buying a Britney Spears CD. I guess that would be like buying a limited print of “Dogs Playing Poker” - for the beauty of the piece and how it moved you. Some people do buy music like they buy clothes - to match their “look”. I can see no other reason for the popularity of some bands.

Notice I did not say that I disagreed completely with listening before making a purchase. If you check my other posts about this topic, you’ll see I consider it a benefit of the new electronic frontier… my argument was aimed specifically at the downloaders who try but never buy. As I pointed out, we’ve been able to listen before we purchase for over a decade now at any record store, and perhaps longer - I don’t remember well enough to say. The difference now is that you can keep your trial at no cost and no one will remind you that you should pay up or delete it.

I like the electronic options for music. I just don’t understand the attitudes those options create in some people.

I’m looking forward to seeing the reaction to this. I’m a little worried that people will simply take advantage and download it for free, resulting in this release being nothing more than an example of how artists can’t make it without a label. But I sincerely hope they pull it off and show that it really can be done.

I told my parents about this, and they really couldn’t seem to grasp the concept of being able to pay anything you want - even nothing. I tried to explain that this was kind of an experiment, more of a statement than an actual business model, but they couldn’t get past the idea that people will just choose to get it for free. I wouldn’t be surprised if most people took the same position, at least initially. That’s why I hope this works out: people will take notice and realize that there’s room for change and growth in the music industry.[/quote]

There’s a couple ways of looking at this… and to make my position clear: I think that this is a great move.
For one, it’s a total shot at capitalism. BANG!
Secondly, it’s a direct support of good music. Who here is going to pay money to download Three Days Grace? Who here is going to spend money to download Dave Matthews Band? I just think the music that comes out will be more directly what we want, under this new system. Those flashy pop stars can still have their stages, but I’m tired of seeing them taking the front page - I think people are only going to spend money on supporting artists that have more than a couple shakers. That’s just a theory… but it’s what I think.
Third, of course, the record companies get given the finger, and now it’s easier for GOOD artists who are living out of their homes to support themselves.

I wouldn’t worry about losing music artists. If Matthew Good told people he had to start selling his recording equipment to eat, I think he’d get some dough pretty fast from all of us… and that way, he gets to keep doing what he loves to do. Face it - the real artists are not out there to get rich, so the “I break even every month” artist should be popularized, and I think that this system will do it.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I prefer when I’m just told “in stores at such-and-such date.”[/quote]

It will be released in regular form, but not till next year. No specifics yet.

It actually does make sense. If you popped your head in a little deeper than you normally would (as in, other than this site), you’d see that a lot of albums these days are leaked, usually in an even more inferior form. Even The Arcade Fire’s big release this year got leaked two weeks before release. Now, you might think of this as nothing, but look at it this way: What if someone was raving or ranting about such and such an album that you wanted to buy at a brick-and-mortar store a few weeks before release because he got the leak? Would you be pleased? I think not. Hell, if Hospital Music was leaked, I’m sure Matt (or at least his fans) would be very, very angry about it, especially since unlike Radiohead, his sales numbers aren’t as great.

Thus, this is an anti-leak measure: Release when the album’s done, as opposed to when the hyping’s done. The use of digital format, the same thing that causes these leaks, can be used to prevent them. Broken Social Scene-compatriots Stars did it for their new album (releasing the digital download three months before CD release), so it’s not a new practice. But it benefits the band, in that everyone gets it at the same time. Honestly, with that short of a window for release, nobody will be actively pursuing a leak. In the end, the only losers are warez-kiddies who are unable to use credit cards…and traditionalists such as yourself.

I hope it’ll be easy to get the physical copy in Canada.

Wonder if they’d pay me for their new album :)[/quote]

That would be a funny experiment to spin off their experiment. Go ahead, alanrob. Put a negative amount in the price field, see what happens! :P

And they’re releasing their 7th album, On my 17th birthday… Except I have satellite internet, with a bandwidth limit, therefore cannot download it…

I do like the ‘pay what you think it’s worth’ thing. I’ll probably be paying $10 for it, whenever I do get it, As I think that balances out the $27 I shelled out for Hail To The Thief (Was worth it though), And I no longer have a job, so it’s all I should spend on it.

Man, that’s gonna be a good week… Radiohead releasing a new album and the possibility to see Matthew Good, My birthday…

If my memory is correct, Radiohead originally signed a 6 album deal with EMI when they made Pablo Honey. After Hail to the Thief there was some discussion as to the future of Radiohead - they were no longer bound to make records together so no one was sure what would even happen to the band. I don’t know if they resigned with EMI or if they are now their own independent band. This could explain why they can release an album this way. I sometimes wonder if that’s why Kid A and Amnesiac got released as 2 albums - helped with the album count because if you took the 8 best songs off of those albums you’d have a pretty solid “popular album”.

I’m a huge Radiohead fan. I actually have something Radiohead that would be cool to have from Matt Good. I have a CD of just the rhythm sections of some of their songs with a tab book that teaches you the guitar parts. I can play along like I’m actually Jonny Greenwood with Phil Selway playing behind me.

Joe