Progressive Boink

[Captain Hot Stuff]

It's really growing on me. There isn't a single song on the album I don't love, which is unusual.

[DGMacphee]

Final thoughts: It's good. It takes a couple of listens to really appreciate it, but I've found this with most of Radiohead's stuff. The first listen of any Radiohead album is always difficult because what they do is pretty unconventional. You're listening to a song and expecting it to go in a certain direction and they go in a completely different direction. It's in no way a bad thing, it's just... different.

Reckoner, for example, starts with a cymbal beat that you expect will build into something harder, but it's stays a pretty mellow song. And the end result sounds pretty funky.

I agree with Daniel that there are some good drums on here. Especially Videotape.

I also somehwat agree that it is like an OK Computer b-sides, in that it sounds like an album they released between The Bends and OK Computer.

I enjoyed House of Cards very much. I think it rates among their best work. All I Need is good too, especially the way it builds.

I payed nothing for the album but I think it's good enough for them to deserve some cash. So I'm going to reregister and send them AUS$30.

[Daniel]

why don't you just wait till they release the actual CD. ain't no use in paying that much money for an album at 160kbps.

[DGMacphee]

I did consider that, but when they release the CD, what percentage of the profits go to the band? I know they haven't signed with a label for this album but when it comes to distribution, will they be seeking a label? Or will they seek an independent company? And how much goes to manufacturing the CD? Plus, with shipping to Australia, there's another chunk of the money not going to the band.

I'm also paying the $30 to support their online venture, which is what impressed me initially.

[webber]

or you could just pay the $30 and then download a vbr version off a torrent site or something

edit: unless they do the distribution themselves or something, the cd will be manufactured in australia, so transport costs wouldn't be that much. most of the overhead would be retailer's profit + marketing

[DGMacphee]

Which is still my point. Despite manufacturing, marketing and retail profit, I might as well just cut out all the middle men. In fact, I already have because I've got the tracks. Now it's just a case of paying for it, because I think it's worth paying for it. I said I'd pay the same cost as a CD so that's how much I'm paying. It's perhaps a little more generous than the price of 10 MP3, but I said I'd pay that much at minimum. I'm not obligated too, but that's what I initially decided. It's one of those dumb promises you keep to yourself.

[Captain Hot Stuff]

I'm now loving this album enough that I'm considering the discbox. What does 40 pounds work out to in AUD?

[Casey]

40 British pounds = 90.1309075 Australian dollars

[Captain Hot Stuff]

Oh.

Fuck that.

[Dollo]

Reports are suggesting that Radiohead - within the first two days of this being released - has made about $10,000,000. That's to pocket. No record company to pay, none of that shit. Good for them.

[Folby]

Which reports, and how are they suggesting it? Links/details?

[DGMacphee]

Here's one

US$10 million sounds a reasonable estimate. They've reported the average price is 4 pounds, wich is around US$8.12. They've sold about 1.2million, which equals just under US$10million (US$8.12 x 1.2 million = US$9,744,00).

I've read some other news stories that say fans feel cheated at the bitrate quality of the MP3s. One fan said that the MP3s should have been at 192kbps, which he says should be the minimum.

Is there really that much difference between 160kbps and 192kbps?

EDIT: I found this retarded quote from an MTV news story:

"I paid zero, nothing, nada for the album," one fan wrote on an epic Stereogum thread about the album. "Sounds like Radiohead. But 160 kbps, that's not good enough. They are actually forcing us to buy the CD when it comes out."

How are they forcing you to buy the album? It's not like you downloaded Thom Yorke holding a rifle to your head saying "BUY OUR FUCKING ALBUM!"

[Casey]

if you have decent headphones/speakers, yes.

[webber]

Is there really that much difference between 160kbps and 192kbps?

Less compression is always better assuming you don't care about file size, but really who gives a shit, the difference is so small and most of the bitrate nazis would be buying the CD so they can rip it to FLAC anyway.

[Casey]

I'm not normally a bitrate nazi but Bodysnatchers kind of sounds like crap on my headphones at work. I am glad they are putting out a regular CD, but it just seems like they made a conscious decision to encode at 160kbps when VBR would have worked just as well (it may have even ended up smaller, given some of the songs on here-- I guess we will see when the CD comes out)

[Captain Hot Stuff]

I've been listening to it on my ipod and haven't noticed the difference. In fact, it seems to be of better sound quality than Hail to the Thief.

Although know that I think of it, I downloaded Hail to the Thief, so never mind.

[Illinois Smith]

Two other British bands - Oasis and Jamiroquai - were said to be considering a similar idea, while Nine Inch Nails' front man Trent Reznor announced on his website last week that he had quit his record label and was looking forward to developing a "direct relationship" with his fans.

Am I the only one who's kinda excited about this? Because a bunch of big bands going "wait a minute ... i don't think we actually need to give you jerks all this money" might just be the kick in the pants that the music industry as a whole is in dire need of.

[blacktoothgrin]

If only Oasis and Jamiroquai weren't a load of balls.

[Maynard,]

I think most talk of record companies is unfairly disparaging. They supposedly are "greedy" and "don't care about the music." People act like record companies have done nothing for artists or fans which is laughably false. Yes, a lot of bland music gets pushed because of the music industry. Yes, companies want to capitalize on whatever is popular. It's easy to point this out, but no one wants to examine how record companies have helped music in general.

[Bismark]

Record companies want to run an art like a business, so that's where the bitterness comes from. They're also the ones that were trying to stop the sale of blank cassette tapes back in the 80s as well as all of the Napster/downloading fallout since, which can be easily argued for in terms of doing positive things for artists in the industry. They are greedy and they don't really care about the music beyond how marketable it is, but that's because that's what they are and that's what they do. Businesses that care about anything else other than the bottom line end up at the bottom of a competing business's boot.