711307
story
Comments: 176 +- Apple: Radiohead Changes Tack, Joins iTunes on Monday June 09 2008, @06:00AM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicmusic.gif); width:60px; height:49px;
music
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicmediaall.gif); width:73px; height:59px;
media
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicapmedia.gif); width:50px; height:61px;
applemedia
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicentertainment.gif); width:62px; height:44px;
entertainment
Joe Jay Bee writes "The British rock band Radiohead, who previously stated that they wouldn't want to have their music on Apple's iTunes Music Store (and, indeed, were unhappy when their Kid A album was released via the store) have performed something of an about-face; virtually their entire catalog, including singles and their B-Sides, has appeared on the store. The band previously said they only wanted their work sold as complete albums, which Apple refused to go along with; however their tack has apparently changed, and all their songs are available to mix and match, including their most recent work, In Rainbows. The albums are all available in DRM-free AAC format."
Related Stories
It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice versa.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
DRM - Free (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:DRM - Free (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:DRM - Free (Score:5, Informative)
Nope. They made their statement about refusing to sell on Tunes 5 months after Apple had started offering DRM-free downloads for EMI, Radiohead's label. Their spokesman said they objected not to DRM, but to Apple refusing to require customers to buy the whole album at once, whereas Apple requires each song to be available for sale individually as well. The quote from their spokesman was:
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Bollocks. I've seen quite a few songs on iTMS that are only available as an album bundle. There's a couple on the U218 album, "The Saints Are Coming" is an example.
Re:DRM - Free (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, you are right. However most are just certain songs you can only get if you buy the whole album. Usuallly all but one of the songs is available as singles, with one or two requiring that you buy the album. What RadioHead wanted was for the whole album to only be available, and no singles at all. It's a different case. Although I would argue for RadioHead. If that's how they want to sell their music, iTunes should let them do it. Apple's head is getting way too big lately.
Heaven forbid Apple do something for their customers! I prefer to buy what I want, not a whole album. And it has nothing to do with artistic integrity, but pure greed. Take the Napoleon Dynamite soundtrack. There is a song there only available if you get the whole album. It's not like it is the original artist saying "we want these works together as a whole", it must be that no one else wants the crap on that soundtrack and it is the only way to make any money. So kudos to Apple for standing up for thei
Re:DRM - Free (Score:4, Interesting)
I get both sides in this. On the one hand you are right that many people would just like to buy a few songs that are on the radio and leave it at that.
On the artist side though, its like selling the bottom right corner of a painting. Admitedly the Album is a dying artform these days (mostly due to MP3 players and shuffle) but there are still some artists who develop entire albums rather than just a few songs and some filler. These are the sort of thing thats meant to be listened to from start to finish. I can understand not wanting your album chopped up and sold piece by piece if you put that kind of effort into a whole album.
Still, I see this transition as fairly inevitable. The album has been dying for quite some time and the rise of the MP3 player is going to pretty much end it.
Parent
Re:DRM - Free (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, Apple's clout is the only thing standing between you and the record labels at this point. Even if you do nothing but buy from Amazon's MP3 store, you're benefiting from Apple iTunes, since the labels would never have given Amazon such a sweet deal if they weren't trying to break Apple's position in the market.
Parent
Re:DRM - Free (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
And really, Amnesiac and Kid A are albums greater than the sum of their parts. I'll admit
We have a winner! (Score:4, Interesting)
Read about the ongoing feud between Radiohead and their former big label here.
I'd bet that the summary article is incorrect and the band itself did not directly approve of the iTunes move.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
"Soundtracks" are more likely to be random collections of
songs from wherever. They're like those albums that are
meant to be collections of "hits" from a particular
genre or year.
Besides the fact that a particular director likes them,
they have no real connection to each other.
If it's a genuine "Score" then there's no less reason to
want to rip out the title theme than there would be to
extract that hit single from some pop group's album.
They make compilation/hits
Re: (Score:2)
Their app shouldn't be necessary in order to make a sale and their NIH format is not supported by other devices out there. That's why there's the idea of bolting ipods onto devices that really should have no need.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? DRM-free AAC (this is what the Radiohead tracks were released in) is support by nearly every device you can buy today. For the size and bit-rate it's also mostly superior to MP3.
Re:DRM - Free (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:DRM - Free (Score:5, Insightful)
Um so your basically saying that simply by selling their albums on iTunes they have no integrity. After all they did release them in DRM Free format and have never gone after filesharing. Heck radiohead doesn't even have a Music Label and don't have to listen to the RIAA or anyone about P2P.
If they want to give people th option to buy their music over iTunes...why not. It's not like they can put them on iTunes for free even if they wanted to....So what you want them to stop selling CDs also because you don't think they have integrity simply for selling something.
Obviously they give people the option of getting it for free on P2P or buying it. If you want to support them buy it if not don't. They aren't saying don't download our music TPB they just turn a blind eye to it. So cmon why must selling something be considered a lack of integrity?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
reason why they only want to sell albums (Score:4, Funny)
Re:reason why they only want to sell albums (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What I don't understand is this: there are already things on iTunes which are listed as "Album Only", so you can't buy just one song but have to get the whole set.
It seems strange that Apple has that in place and then refuses to let somebody like Radiohead use it. How do they decide?
Break From EMI (Score:2, Insightful)
Pick and choose (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason why (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember clearly that when the downloads became available, I decided to wait for the CD (because I'm old fashioned and like things I can touch) -- so they must have made it clear that there would be one. I did buy the CD and I was very pleased with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Mind you after the crap rip-quality of the In Rainbows interweb release and the volte face of the cd release following, I have less sympathy than I once would have done despite the quality of the work.
I think you were perhaps misinformed. It was always clear that an eventual CD release was to come, even if the precise when and how were initially uncertain. For example, see this Pitchfork news item from Oct 1 [pitchforkmedia.com], 9 full days before the online release. But I do agree with your other point, they really should have provided a better quality rip for those who took the plunge.
Radiohead is customer-savvy (Score:5, Insightful)
Perception is all-important in Marketing and Radiohead is taking Apple lessons.
By direct-download of their albums (free and paid) they proved DownloadMusic!=crime.
Second once they realized people mix and match their music (just like i mod my computer table and computer), they allowed it instead of sending RIAA goons after them. After all, Alienware does not raid my home, if i chose to decorate my PC with Yuletide spirit. Apple does not care if i laser-engrave my iPod. So should music be: If i mix-and-match their tunes with mine, i should be free.
RIAA believes otherwise. Paying customers think otherwise.
Who pays for Radiohead's food? Customers and not RIAA. So Radiohead did the sensible thing and listened to customers.
By releasing their tunes DRM-Free in iTunes they hit the likeness factor a lot: iPod users now have direct-download to iPod; which is 90% market share of MP3 players (Zune; you Turd, you really have no chance). The DRM-free enables users to mix and match.
Its a pity that Radiohead's music is not country/hip-hop
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
> Its a pity that Radiohead's music is not country/hip-hop
At this point, the reader builds a mental image of Radiohead performing a country/hip-hop fusion. The Elder Gods claim another victim.
c.
Re: (Score:2)
This is EMI's decision, not Radiohead (Score:2, Insightful)
Please do not take this as Radiohead's decision, when it's clearly that of their (former) label.
Re: (Score:2)
If what you say were the case, Britney would be soccer-mom with 3 kids, and Ashlee simpson would be a waitress in a Del Hugos bar.
Radiohead/artist decides to move to a distribution medium. The label had CD rights: Not digital. Which is why labels are trying to shoot for 360 degree contracts; and why artists avoid it.
EMI has vinyl, cassette, CD and DVD rights. Radiohead owns live and all other rights not gifted to EMI.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not correct as this deal includes the new album "In Rainbows" which was released post-EMI
Nothing to do with EMI (Score:2, Informative)
No full discography though (Score:2)
I don't see the added value in this. For almost the same cost I can just buy whatever albums I do not already have on CD (thanks to the ridiculously cheap dollar), and rip in a far higher quality than ITMS offers.
Itunes is only worth it when there are extras,
Not everyone is a completist.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Not everyone is a completist. If I find a song I like, I'll buy it on iTunes. If I like an artist enough after a while to go ahead and buy an album, I'll buy it on CD. Sometimes I'll buy an album on iTunes if there's enough tracks that the $10 album price makes sense, but usually I just buy a couple of songs.
Parent
Nude Garageband stem sales (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nude Garageband stem sales (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.vimeo.com/1109226?pg=embed&sec=1109226 [vimeo.com]
It's possibly one of the most awesome covers I've ever seen.
Parent
Have some sympathy. (Score:4, Funny)
Do you have any idea how much it costs to fill up the tank on a Ferrari?
How to split music (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyhow, for the same reasons that providing music in these smaller parts is a good thing (which I believe it is), one could easily argue that even smaller parts of the music sho
Radiohead Already Free On Imeem (Score:2)
Album Artwork (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I say... I have my principles! (Score:5, Funny)
I will never buy a single Apple product in my life. Ever. Just out of principle.
ps, Apple, please contact me via email.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A whole book shelf can hold at least 400 DVDs and as many music Albums.
The problem with "files" is that you never own anything physical that
serves as some sort of confirmation that you own anything. If someone
disputes you it's pretty much your word against theirs.
A media server (which will take up more than a book shelf's worth of
space) is certainly the bee's kness but it's still not a substitute
for having some way of confirming legal posession.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)