Madison, Wisconsin, USA
Reznor vs. Radiohead: Innovation Smackdown
Author: samarah on March 27 2008
Viewed 1743 times. 11 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
--> Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails have been taking turns giving the music industry the finger. The British band made headlines last October for releasing In Rainbows without the support (read: control) of a record label, and Trent Reznor's group followed suit with last month's Ghosts I-IV.

Read the rest >>>
link
Read samarah's other blogs.samarah's Recent Blogs
Comments

1 | 2 | 3
yeah, I guess famous, established people who have lots of money, making even more money, is the only way to "give the music industry the finger". I guess what I've been doing by only buying indie releases from major label virgins, only pirating out-of-print releases, and downloading the rest from unheard-ofs (like us!) who give it away from free, oh and only listening to public (and now shortwave) radio, isn't giving the "music" industry the finger.

ah, sorry, I sound like a grump. it's a good thing. society just needs famous faces to speak before they listen, I guess. squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.

license you are not alone! I listen to radio, free internet stuff, netlabels and anything else. I don't buy commercial releases, and do donate money on occasion. I am sure there are a lot of people out there quietly ignoring the industry and getting on with what matters.

yeah, that's exactly it, "quietly" is key. we're happy with how it's working, and has been for probably about 10 years by now (sans paid downloads which are probably a little over 5), that we don't complain - hence no protests, no flashy articles in Wired, etc.

I really think the 'way to go' in the near future, as far as being 'rock stars,' is to practically give your music away, then make a living from your music by touring and selling merchandise.

It's just going to take a while to pry the record companies' dead, fleshless hands off.

well I don't know anyone who's been signed to a major label and I've never been signed myself. but I understand that this was always the way to go, that artists on majors are indentured servants. you won't get rich but you won't have to pretend that you're rich when you're either poorer than a minimum wage worker or floundering in hundreds of thousands in debt.

plz. they both make pop music. how innovative can the be?

maybe you guys have been doing things right for years. but you are also a tiny minority niche of music listeners. these bands will knock this concept of non-traditional release models into joe average consumer's head. in turn, more and more people will consider buying from unsigned artists and perhaps donating a bit of paypal money to indie musicians websites. that's a good thing. getting the masses thinking is a positive in my book. congrats to both artists.

flies said: "plz. they both make pop music. how innovative can the be?"

dismissive and totally beside the point
but I certainly that "innovative" is not what I'd use to describe their release model, as indie artists have been doing it for years
er, certainly agree that is

yeah bbwax, it'd be nice if after joe & joanne consumer realize that the "traditional" corporate model is teh suck, they realize that em doesn't suck.
1. Radiohead & NIN - PROFIT
2. Consumers != ignorant
3. ???
4. You can't ignore my techno
5. PROFIT

"You can't ignore my techno" needs to be a tshirt

Yes, it certainly does.

once again ... didn't Pearl Jam pull this kind of shit with Ticketmaster? It's just the rich getting richer and posing as Robin Hood.

somehow the grim desperation of 40,000 indy acts doing the same thing isn't as sexy

this is the response from the record industry

youtube.com/watch?v=aCyGvGEtOwc

1 | 2 | 3

Register / login
You must be a member to reply or post. signup or login