Riding roughshod over our news pages for the third time today, Radiohead have drawn a line under one digital pursuit, announcing that In Rainbows’ online gallivant will end on the 10th of December.
The band will shut off the name-your-price option on their latest longplayer in advance of its physical release through XL on New Year’s Eve.
The boxsets, too, will be in short supply soon, production ceasing as the remaining stock is sold off through the band’s online store, w.a.s.t.e.
We linked to this earlier, but now we’ve got the embed link. Thank god for the internet’s endless column inches. So while you’re here…
Video: ‘Jigsaw Falling Into Place’
Fucking hell.
You absolute bunch of cunts. Congratulations on completely undermining and contradicting all the amazing stuff you've done in the past couple of months, Radiohead.
Who is this band... Radiohead?
Are they any good? I've never noticed any articles about them before...
Im glad I didnt pay for it
.
.
(though it's reeley good like...)
who hasn't
downloaded it yet?
Clearly anyone who actually wanted to listen to it has already downloaded it by now. So why keep it open. Its not as if it won't be available free once the cd comes out...
I haven't
because they never sent me the link, and I wasn't sure how to go about downloading it again. Think I'll do it tonight. Although I'm not really that bothered to be fair.
bf
I haven't downloaded it, cos I think they suck
sorry,
whats the problem here exactly?
Not really...
If you wanted it legally for nowt, you've had over two months to do so. They'd actually look moronic physically releasing the album with the legal download still up.
Ticket prices are a bit obscene, but I'm sure the show will be worth it, and we don't even know the support yet.
The ebay thing I agree with you on though. What the hell are they thinking?
Besides, the album's fucking great stuff too.
^
that was in reply to Yes_
Of course it's great
but I thought the point of having the option of paying however much you wanted for a download version was under the premise that people could download it for free anyway, and it should be up to them to pay what they believed was right for a download album (i.e statement against itunes etc)
now they've taken it off that and gone "oh yeah, if you want to hear it you can just download it illegaly, or BUY BUY BUY a copy on cd like every else has had to for the past ages"
It's just stupid
Except
the band never made any mention of doing the free download thing for the reasons you've mentioned, that was just what people who wanted to believe Radiohead are staunchly anti-capitalist assumed.
Didn't they say they only did it, pretty much, to prevent the inevitability of it being leaked before release and being there for free anyway. In fact, if that's why they did it, they probably made more than they ever would have done. How many people who downloaded Kid A for free before release day paid to get In Rainbows?
Besides, it's always going to be floating around on bittorrent now it's out there - you will still be able to get it for free if you want - just the band wont look daft for selling a CD you can get for free off them.
Having said that, £50 is stupid for a gig before announcing lots of support, whether other big bands do it or not.
Well it was pretty heavily implied that was the point
not having any songs except the charity single on itunes, saying they quit their record label because they couldnt give them what they wanted etc etc
Saying that they didnt want it to be leaked is silly. They wouldnt have cared, really, i'm sured. It was a pretty big statement, and whether it was intended or not, definitly a "protest", which they must have been conscious of. I've not really got any problem with them releasing it on cd (apart from not saying thats what they were going to do when they put up the download), but to take off the pay-as-you-want option is silly, now.
Didn't they term it as "an experiment"...
...all along though? And now the experiment seems to have run it's course. For now anyway.
^^yes
it what way? I has been common knowledge that it was going to be available on CD, and no record label would release it while it was still allowed to download it for free. You are a bit hasty call them cunts, you dumb cunt.
no, they are cunts.
Not just because they're massive hypocrits either. Mostly because of Thom's eye. Or lack of.
that's a bit low isn't it?
.
oh it's not like he can read it.
^^
Fucking idiot.
I thought that
was pretty funny.
Yawn boring yes_ with another diatribe at "The Man"
nothing wrong here
i think the main issue many have (maybe without realising it) is that many people wante dto believe that Radiohead are some sort of visionary spearheader, when in fact it was nothing but a well-oiled PR machine in full swing.
And personally I can't see any thing wrong with this.
Radiohead are part of a bunch of artists who want to take a side, speak out and make their point - but in no way are they looney enough to give away the result ('in Rainbows') they have sweat for while working on this for the past couple of months/year.
I find it rather obscene when music fans think that music can be public property.
fair do - Radiohead are rich but where to draw the line, when are you rich enough to qualify to give all you work on, spend all your hours, days, weeks and months for free to some greedy fans.
If you like something, pay for it. If you are interested in something and have the chance to grab it then smell the flower while you can - don't complain that they take off their "free download" - you can't be that interested if you haven't made a move yet.
Next people complaint about overpriced concert ticket prices ... guys, have you ever considered that if you give away your record (little or) free and have no revenue from that product that you might have to to get the money from elsewhere?
It has been speculated that Raddiohead didn't make much cash from 'In Rainbows' ("hands up, who paid more than 5p? ... Right, thought,so! Nobody on here.").
If you ever get that shit thing that is called "a job" you will find that it's a simple exercise in how the free western market works. Nobody gives anything away for free - if one does, be certain that this person will get money from elswhere.
Maybe I miss something but for me it was very clear right from the outset that Radiohead would release 'In Rainbows' after a short period in a physical format through a tradionally structured and established record label.
As great as the whole free-MP3 era is, even an artist wants to pay bills and most of the radical MP3-rebellion is hot air anyway. A band the size of radiohead can't satisfy all the demand by selling their music privately through indiestore.com and blog themselves to #1 on MySpace. If anyone thought that's what radiohead would going to do then I hope you stay asleep - reality is not as sweet.
x
oh no he
di'nt
But the tout thing...
By all means campaign to stop the reselling of tickets for profit. But don't say you want a cut of the touts' money. That's like saying you abhor prostitution but while it exists you want to take a cut from the pimps.
Check the stats
Radiohead did pretty well out of letting people opt to pay. IIRC they got £4-6 on average for each person who downloaded it. That average includes the people who paid nothing at all. So by offering it as a "free" download, they made more money on it than they would have done through the traditional label/distro/store route.
I paid £1
I was pretty skint at the time. Plus I want a boxset.
radiohead:money grabbing scumbags
get a little bit of money out of people who wouldn't have paid for it anyway - check
fleece hardcore fans with disc box- check
fleece fans with ticket prices - check
although there is nothing wrong with wanting to make money from music the way they have disguised it something principled and revolutionary is just wrong
what?
get a little bit of money out of people who wouldn't have paid for it anyway - check
??????????
you could download it for free?
minimum forty five pence wasn't it?
nope.
if you put in 0.00 it never asked you for CC details (I did - got the box later - hasn't arrived yet. :-( ). that 45p minimum thing was a bit of a myth.
I say
Fairplay Radiohead for pioneering the way we buy music. Now we can pay a reasonable amount for the music we want to hear. And they still get more out of it than they would had they tied themselves up with a label.
you can almost hear the labels trembling :D
yeah I know
im just saying they did get a lot of people who wouldnt have paid for it to cough up a little bit