Trent Reznor: Radiohead's 'In Rainbows' promotion was 'insincere'
Nine Inch Nails' Ghosts I-IV has so far earned $1.6 million.
(Credit: NIN.com)Radiohead's groundbreaking promotion for the album In Rainbows was "insincere" and smacked of a "bait and switch," according to Trent Reznor, leader of the group Nine Inch Nails.
Reznor made the comments during an interview with the Australia Broadcasting Corporation earlier this week.
"I think the way [Radiohead] parlayed it into a marketing gimmick has certainly been shrewd," Reznor said. "But if you look at what they did, it was very much a bait and switch, to get you to pay for a MySpace quality stream as a way to promote a very traditional record sale."
The In Rainbows promotion was distributed online, without backing from a major record company and allowed fans to pay whatever they thought the digital album was worth. Radiohead was widely praised for breaking from the label system.
But Radiohead's manager has also said that the band likely wouldn't try a similar promotion again. The British super group ended the offer and has begun selling the record through traditional sales channels.
"I don't see that as a big revolution [that] they're kind of getting credit for," Reznor told the Australia Broadcasting Corporation on Monday. "There's nothing wrong with that, but I don't see that as a big revolution [that] they're kind of getting credit for...to me that feels insincere. It relies upon the fact that it was quote-unquote 'first,' and it takes the headlines with it."
Reznor has a point. There's no arguing that Radiohead's music giveaway pioneered new territory, but when it comes to actually plowing ahead with a determined search for a new way to distribute music, Radiohead falls short.
The truth is that Reznor, who at times is volatile--and is always outspoken--is doing more for music fans and fellow musicians than anybody.
Earlier this month, Nine Inch Nails began distributing a digital album, Ghosts I-IV a 36-track instrumental, in a range of ways. The offer included free samples, a $5 digital version and premium packages that came with downloads, discs, and varying merchandise depending on the money one was willing to pay. In a little over a week, Reznor told The Chicago Tribune that he generated 781,917 transactions and earned $1.6 million.
Radiohead may have earned more and likely gathered information valuable to other artists who might be considering self-distribution. We don't know because, unlike Reznor, the band isn't sharing sales numbers.
What is so sad about these promotions by Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead is that, other than Reznor, few artists are tinkering with the Internet or looking for an alternative to the traditional business model in the music industry.
We're talking about rock 'n' roll here. It was once rumored to be the domain of rebels and rogues. How come more performers aren't bucking the status quo?
- Topics:
-
Media
- Tags:
-
Nine Inch Nails,
-
Trent Reznor,
-
Radiohead,
-
download
- Bookmark:
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
--No. We're not. This is a major point all the writers are missing. We're talking about experimental music, experimental fans, and experimental methods of distributing. The model is not only being changed, but the music that it is supporting. This isn't mainstream Mmmbop. This is synthesizers and drum machines.
fans or the Internet that Trent Reznor has. I'm not a really big
fan of most of his music, though some I find quite compelling.
I shelled out the $5 to see what it was like, and I really like it.
And I found it a better deal at five bucks than Radiohead's stuff
at free. Ghosts is very high quality. And there are Apple's iTunes
lossless and even bigger alternatives.
Gotta give credit where credit is due. Reznor is really a pioneer
here. Most musicians can't get that because they've been so dependent on the middle man that they don't dare break from
the labels. For one, they're mostly creations of marketing. Not
really self-made musicians.
he felt the need to dump on Radiohead though.....
genuinely beautiful album that he just, creatively, cannot
compete with, and is therefore lashing out at the business side
of it?
1st of all, my girlfriend downloaded "In Rainbows," one of the
most amazing albums since, I don't know, maybe RH's previous
album- and paid what she wanted- $5- can't beat that for some
amazing music. 2nd of all, RH posts a 52-minute movie of the
new album on youtube, viewable for free. Amazing.
Reznor is nit-picking about what they could have done, blah,
blah...Sure he can speak his mind, but his time would be better
spent toning down his melodrama. He's one of the most over-
rated artists of his age. Pretty Hate Machine was good- even
saw him live for that tour- but his phony angst, continuing to
this day, has grown tiresome. Trent, grow up already. How
does your approach offer anything better? Put your energy into
opening up YOUR creative sincerity, ok?
As for the comments on the quality of the "In Rainbows" download, I challenge anyone to tell the difference between a song encoded at 160Kbps (In rainbows download) vs 192Kbps (standard CD quality). Give me a break...if you want superior quality, buy the vinyl.
Some of the best NIN songs have been instrumentals and most of these songs are in that category.
I just hope the continuation of Year Zero is better that that disappointing album.
- One huge difference between this and In Raindows
-
by The_Decider
March 16, 2008 12:30 PM PDT
- No one has made a big deal of this, but I think that the most important aspect of Ghosts is not the distribution model and pricing, but the license.
-
Reply to this comment
View
reply
-
-
See all 24 Comments >>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/