Members Kramerguy Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 With good reason. If you cannot control distribution of your product, you have no business. That goes not for just the major labels, but for anyone. It may not be a big deal for those who sell little product compared to what they earn performing, but for those who rely in selling product to get to the next level, or to put food on their tables in support roles (studios, engineers, producers, PR and ad people, distributors, retailers) it is a huge deal. ^^ Worth repeating ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Toto99 Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Um ... no I don't intend to derail this thread so I'll say no more. Um... yeah. But I'm not going to justify it, for the same reason as you stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dancebass Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Funny how people who were famous before piracy are lecturing us on how much it affects us.... You see this a lot lately. It makes perfect sense from a PR perspective though. These guys really aren't "free" to speak the truth anyway, asking their opinion on it is ridiculous and I think most of the time the press knows they're boxed in anyway. They ask the question in order to get the desired answer. Think about it for a second, what is lost if they profess solidarity with the thieves? Nothing! They get portrayed as thoughtful, enlightened, on the cutting edge of thought regarding the future of the music industry. There will be ZERO backlash from folks like me that are too busy working towards something to spend my time flinging {censored} at these monkeys. Now, take the other position. The Lars Ulrich position. The "I deserve to be paid for my work" position and see what happens? You would get skewered! You would get every form of hatred and vile lies thrown at you nonstop until they're able to brand you a "corporate shill" multi-millionaire greedy bastard! This is the way people behave when they truly believe they are justified in the taking of the property of others. Especially "THE RICH"!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members caeman Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 radiohead are douchebags.. they did nothing but hurt the independent artist when they gave away their music. Question: If the music belonged to them, and they had full control over it...don't they have the right to give it away for free if they wanted to do so? Are you implying that they shouldn't have the right to choose to distribute their music for free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AwayEam Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Question: If the music belonged to them, and they had full control over it...don't they have the right to give it away for free if they wanted to do so?Are you implying that they shouldn't have the right to choose to distribute their music for free? HEY BRO Not at all. He's just implying that they're douchebags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members caeman Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Okay, that makes things clearer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Matximus Posted January 26, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 All you haters on O'Brien are just a bunch of backwards dinosaurs that can't cope with reality. In fact, your crusty worldview lines up perfectly with the old guards of the music industry that let everything go to hell in the first place. Nobody wants to buy your record anymore, even if it's good. Especially if it's good. That sucks. Too bad. Try and figure out something new. O'Brien hit the nail on the head. And he certainly knows what he's talking about. Radiohead is one of the five most popular bands on the planet. That didn't happen by accident. Those guys are smart as {censored}. And they're music rocks too. This article prompted me to go redownload some of their best stuff (for free, of course). They're amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kramerguy Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Question: If the music belonged to them, and they had full control over it...don't they have the right to give it away for free if they wanted to do so?Are you implying that they shouldn't have the right to choose to distribute their music for free? Nope. I'm sayin' that they are douchebags because they are giving away their music and telling the world how great the "new model" works, when in fact if they weren't already famous by using the OLD MODEL, they would have failed miserably. Bad enough that they can't do that simple math; but to come out and lecture me on how I should follow their example and be expected to grovel over them when what they did actually HURT new/unknown artists?? No {censored}ing way. they can claim they revolutionized the biz all they want, all they did was exploit their own fame to profit from it and pretend that the big bowl of fail they left in their wake is {censored}ing lucky charms.. {censored} them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kramerguy Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 O'Brien hit the nail on the head. And he certainly knows what he's talking about. Radiohead is one of the five most popular bands on the planet. That didn't happen by accident. Yeah, a RECORD COMPANY promoted them, and PRESSED AND SOLD THEIR CD's, and then SOLD THE CD's FOR $$$$$, then sent radiohead on TOUR to make even more $$. How exactly does that make them the new poster-children of the "new model"?? They made it old school. I don't remember them giving away their {censored} when nobody knew who they were... why not? Because NOBODY got famous by giving their {censored} away back then. And the chance of it happening now? About 100x LESS likely than a record contract was 20 years ago. Stop acting like it's easier with the 'new model'... it's bunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dancebass Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Stop acting like it's easier with the 'new model'... it's bunk. Actually, Radiohead stopped their "new model" game and went back to the "old model" about 3 months after the release. They have about 25 employees. They have mouths to feed. Playing PR games didn't work too well when the money went in the {censored}ter. The guy that drives the bus was like "that's nice and all fellas but, I got to pay for daycare". Like I said up thread though, these big guys aren't really at liberty to speak freely about this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Matximus Posted January 26, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Uhm, KG, I think Radiohead are pretty much universally hailed as breaking the music business mold by becoming first major act to go independent. Christ, they gave their last record away for free. No it was pay as you go. And their marketing campaign for Kid A during the last gasp of the CD-era wildly innovative. Those 30-second video blips for each song. Streaming the entire record on MTV, or VH1. I can't remember which. We've heard it all before: they wouldn't be famous without the old model... Blah Blah Blah. No, they wouldn't (STILL) be famous if they didn't write kick-ass songs and peddle them in an innovative way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators daddymack Posted January 26, 2010 Moderators Share Posted January 26, 2010 Uhm, KG, I think Radiohead are pretty much universally hailed as breaking the music business mold by becoming first major act to go independent. Christ, they gave their last record away for free. No it was pay as you go.And their marketing campaign for Kid A during the last gasp of the CD-era wildly innovative. Those 30-second video blips for each song. Streaming the entire record on MTV, or VH1. I can't remember which. We've heard it all before: they wouldn't be famous without the old model... Blah Blah Blah. No, they wouldn't (STILL) be famous if they didn't write kick-ass songs and peddle them in an innovative way. Hmmm...but isn't that kind of the point? That they got to experiment with variations of marketing BECAUSE the old method did work and did get them to that level? The real question is, do they continue to embrace this 'pay as you go' model of marketing? And the answer is apparently 'NO'.So what do we take away from this experiment?That one cannot draw really useful data from their experience since they were uniquely placed. It is not going to work for anyone else unless they are as famous.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Poker99 Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 All you haters on O'Brien are just a bunch of backwards dinosaurs that can't cope with reality. In fact, your crusty worldview lines up perfectly with the old guards of the music industry that let everything go to hell in the first place. Nobody wants to buy your record anymore, even if it's good. Especially if it's good. That sucks. Too bad. Try and figure out something new. O'Brien hit the nail on the head. And he certainly knows what he's talking about. Radiohead is one of the five most popular bands on the planet. That didn't happen by accident. Those guys are smart as {censored}. And they're music rocks too. This article prompted me to go redownload some of their best stuff (for free, of course). They're amazing. I have 3 Radiohead albums in my house. Millions of people like me made them what they are by buying their music. If Radiohead where to start in 2010, with no label, you would never hear about them. Their first 2 albums, while great, where nothing that special or groundbreaking. Especially Pablo Honey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Matximus Posted January 26, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Who said anything about Radiohead going back to the old model? Where are you people getting this? Have they signed to a label? Did I miss something? They released their last record online and made an ass-load of money. Then they released it through traditional retailers through a one-off deal with an independent label- after giving it away for free - and made an ass-load of more money. They haven't said what they are going to do next, although they released a new track FOR FREE online about a month ago called "Those are my Twisted Words." Is giving away more stuff for free still part of this"old model" you claim still works? And that statement is simply madness by the way. Yeah, it may be creaking along. But the old models days are clearly numbered. My new justification for stealing music: I feel a responsibility to hasten the death of this old model to make way for the new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Surrealistic Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 If you ask me (and I know you didn't ), I don't think Radiohead are "douchebags", but nor do I think that people criticising O'Brien are "just a bunch of backwards dinosaurs that can't cope with reality". It's possible to hold positions between douchebag and dinosaur don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members paulz Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 'new' model, 'old' model - copyright allows an artist to choose or even make up new models. Know why CC functions? it's empowered by - yup - copyright law. No copyright law is the older dinosaur model Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Matximus Posted January 26, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 If you ask me (and I know you didn't ), I don't think Radiohead are "douchebags", but nor do I think that people criticising O'Brien are "just a bunch of backwards dinosaurs that can't cope with reality". It's possible to hold positions between douchebag and dinosaur don't you think? Well that's perfectly reasonable now isn't. Let's make flower hats and bake cookies and all just get along? Screw that. I deal in absolutes.....There is no middle ground. Now, can you be a douchebag AND a dinosaur? I will ask you... And Cerebral Paulz I have no idea what you are talking about again as usual. Seriously. That post didn't make any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Surrealistic Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 Well that's perfectly reasonable now isn't. Let's make flower hats and bake cookies and all just get along? Screw that. I deal in absolutes.....There is no middle ground. Now, can you be a douchebag AND a dinosaur? I will ask you...Sorry but in my book there is plenty of middle ground and there are (almost) no absolutes. I like Radiohead. I have most of their albums. I have no problem with whatever method they choose to distribute their music. I don't think those who take a contrary position to Ed O'Brien are, simply by virtue of that contrary position, dinosaurs. If you think I'm not allowed to make both of the above statements, well ... tough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members paulz Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 And Cerebral Paulz I have no idea what you are talking about again as usual. Seriously. That's not too hard to believe -it's not like you've shown a ton of cognitive ability. copyright law allows the artist to choose because they can reserve, waive, even sell rights. CC is just a license that works under copyright law. no copyright law is an old dinosaur system. I deal in absolutes..... Like that you are a criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Poker99 Posted January 26, 2010 Members Share Posted January 26, 2010 I wonder where Radiohead would be if everyone of their fans was like Matximus... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Matximus Posted January 27, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 27, 2010 Sorry but in my book there is plenty of middle ground and there are (almost) no absolutes. I like Radiohead. I have most of their albums. I have no problem with whatever method they choose to distribute their music. I don't think those who take a contrary position to Ed O'Brien are, simply by virtue of that contrary position, dinosaurs. If you think I'm not allowed to make both of the above statements, well ... tough! Surrealistic - you're a class act. I like you. I can't drag you down into the mud. I cede the middle ground. Stay classy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Matximus Posted January 27, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 27, 2010 I wonder where Radiohead would be if everyone of their fans was like Matximus... Great Question. An even better one? Where would the music industry be if most music fans were like Matximus? Answer: Exactly where it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators daddymack Posted January 27, 2010 Moderators Share Posted January 27, 2010 Who said anything about Radiohead going back to the old model? Where are you people getting this? Have they signed to a label? Did I miss something? They released their last record online and made an ass-load of money. Then they released it through traditional retailers through a one-off deal with an independent label- after giving it away for free - and made an ass-load of more money. They haven't said what they are going to do next, although they released a new track FOR FREE online about a month ago called "Those are my Twisted Words." Is giving away more stuff for free still part of this"old model" you claim still works? And that statement is simply madness by the way. Yeah, it may be creaking along. But the old models days are clearly numbered. My new justification for stealing music: I feel a responsibility to hasten the death of this old model to make way for the new. I did not say they were going back to the old model, and I agree the old model is fading; what I pointed out was that they got to where they could try new things out because the old model got them there. I hope they can afford to continue to experiment. But the success (or failure) of that experimentation does not in anyway mean it will work for anyone else. This still is overall a very weak argument for you to assume that illegal downloading is acceptable. It is still taking income away from the creators...and eventually this will become self-defeating. If no one can make a living creating music, then no one will create QUALITY music worth stealing...I think we all see that this is already happening... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members richardmac Posted January 27, 2010 Members Share Posted January 27, 2010 Great Question. An even better one? Where would the music industry be if most music fans were like Matximus? Answer: Exactly where it is. With practically no one making any money. Yeah, I'd agree. You can't sell music when it's so easy to steal AND there are so many other things competing for your dollars. And a huge back catalog of music available illegally for free. The biggest names in the business with the biggest marketing dollars behind them are struggling to compete against that. How can the unsigned artist? They can't. One thing I will agree about is this - the old industry is crumbling and dying and it does not matter how people feel about it. The new music industry is about recording music as cheaply as possible and trying to get enough people to pay attention to you so that you might be able to scrape together a small tour where you will maybe break even. The alternative is to write music for the people who will still pay - TV, movies, video games, and so on. And a huge number of musicians are now attempting to do just that, so the competition is going to be insane. Worse, songwriters will be pandering to the tastes (or lack thereof) of those paying customers and we're going to end up with a constant stream of brain dead crap. Oh wait, we're already there. If anyone would like to see the future without labels, go spend some time on CDBaby.com. I'm sorry, but it's a lot like watching Arena Football compared to the NFL. There are some talented people, yes, but you're not getting the cream of the crop, no. The future could end up being a kabillion so-so bands and a bunch of highly calculated TV Jingle-type bands. When the song for "free credit report dot com" makes the Billboard charts, you'll know that we have finally arrived in the "glorious" future of no record companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Poker99 Posted January 27, 2010 Members Share Posted January 27, 2010 Great Question. An even better one? Where would the music industry be if most music fans were like Matximus? Answer: Exactly where it is. If it is the case, then forget about a new Radiohead coming up in 5 or 10 years. I hope you're happy with your local bands and Lady Gaga's. But guess what, some people (in fact, quite a lot) are still BUYING music in a legal manner. You try to make like they don't exist but they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.