Radiohead charges fans for nude remixkits

Radiohead CDs on eBay USA | eBay UK | eBay GER

08 Apr, 2008

Radiohead charges fans for remixkits
"Shame on you, Radiohead!", says our UK correspondent, Joyce Lafonte... After putting low quality downloads of their latest album "In Rainbows" up for sale, a not so clever 'pay what you want'-strategy (which was not all that successful as the bands wants everyone to believe) and expensive concert tickets, Radiohead now had the 'smart' idea to sell the remix kit of their new single "Nude". That's right, whereas most bands deliver free remix kits for their songs, Radiohead wants you to pay for the separate components or 'stems' (bass, voice, guitar, strings/FX and drums) for the track "Nude" in order to make your own version of the song. You are charged € 0,99 / US$ 0,99 per stem, a rip-off say even the most loyal fans of the band.

EMI in the meantime keeps on poking the Radiohead camp, this time by releasing a Best Of on June 2nd 2008. "Radiohead: The Best Of" is the first ever Radiohead career retrospective spanning their 12 year career on Parlophone Records. The collection is available as a double CD package and 4 x vinyl LP set. CD 1 will also be available as a stand alone CD.

Feel free adding your comments!

Content Continues Below

Get your Radiohead CDs at the following eBay sites:
	eBay USA	eBay België/Belgique
	eBay UK	eBay France
	eBay DE	eBay Nederland

Radiohead CDs on eBay USA | eBay UK | eBay GER

59230

Posted by: BABYLAND on Apr 10, 08 | 1:10 pm

I don't recall Radiohead ever claiming their experiments in recording and business are revolutionary.

Radiohead are simply providing elements for fans to remix and experiment if they choose to do so. Most acts of their stature don't even bother. And the fact that they are charging for them? Get over it. If you don't want to buy them, then don't. You are still free to remix their stuff without paying a cent...if you're creative enough. Mochipet did a great pirate remix of "Everything in its Right Place" back in 2001 that got tons of airplay in Los Angeles on KCRW.

Posted by: djbarista on Apr 09, 08 | 11:27 pm

Charging other artist to do their work for them. Revolutionary.

Posted by: Ruben on Apr 09, 08 | 3:48 pm

And why shouldn't they? I'm not a Radiohead fan, in fact I don't like their stuff at all, but its their career and they get to pick and choose how they conduct business. People need to learn that now with this revolution in the music industry, bands are going to start developing their own personalities to relate to fans with, the fakers will fuck off in anger and the faithful will stick around for better or worse. Its a Brave New Music World, deal with it or go and watch TV.

Posted by: IH8ToRegister on Apr 08, 08 | 9:08 pm

No sir, no editorial in that news post at all... No siree, Bob, just one un-biased news posting.

Posted by: BABYLAND on Apr 08, 08 | 8:08 pm

Charging for remix kits. Actually a great idea...

Everyone always asks, "...but how on earth are artists going to survive with low CD sales, rampant downloading and the death of proper record labels?!"

YES! Radiohead are thriving in this environment.

They produce quality music, take chances on innovative production and distribution of their music AND put on an incredible live show.

So, why are you so bitter?

Posted by: Catgirl on Apr 08, 08 | 3:14 pm

I'm not suggesting Radiohead is perfect and their stance on single song sales is sad, but I do think that your original "news item" is a cheap shot. Sour grapes and all that.

But honestly, I do like 95% of what you guys write. I just wish there wasn't such unseemly disdain for bands and labels that try to move away from conventional Music Industry marketing plans.

That's all. I guess I'm also a little pissed that I have to buy a $40 comp for one damn song.

*sigh*

=^.^=

Posted by: structurefall hoinh to be forza XP8!@# on Apr 08, 08 | 1:58 pm

hey, i'm not saying don't report on it, i just wish the reports were more balanced and less actively hostile. it bugs me when your front page news reads like a vitriolic editorial, because then it's not news anymore. side-line remains the best option for music news that i've found, and i want it to maintain the same standards of journalistic integrity that i expect from a newspaper, magazine, or anything else i get news from.

i personally don't consider 160kbps "low quality," and i'm an active and relatively accomplished (at least i consider myself so) musician, so calling radiohead scammers for offering tracks with a "pay what you like" model at that rate seems a bit ridiculous, although that was a different article.

and i fail to see what opposing the single song download model has to do with any of this. single song downloads severely eschew the traditional album model, and since radiohead makes what could be considered "concept albums," that clearly sucks and makes no sense for them. i don't think they were opposed to it because it's a micropayment. what sane person would oppose micropayments??

i should add, by the way, that i don't even -like- radiohead. i don't own anything by them, and while i think they're reasonably talented, their music doesn't do anything for me. so don't think this is just me defending a band i like or something.

Posted by: Side-Line on Apr 08, 08 | 1:29 pm

Just for the record Catgirl and Structurefall: Radiohead has been anti-iTunes since day one, Radiohead has been anti single track purchasing since day one... so who is fooling who here?

Posted by: Catgirl on Apr 08, 08 | 12:58 pm

Yeah, but structurefall is right in some ways: this seems like "sour grapes" for Side-Line and some in the Music Industry.

RadioHead didn't play by the Industry's rules, giving the old Music Industry cartel the finger and so they're an easy target. This type of demonization happens in the waning days of an oligopolistic industry ... usually, the vitriol is best expressed by the bitter middle management (in this case, small labels and bias industry journalist) who are left holding the seaming bag of poo as the broken system collapses on them the worse.

Radiohead saw this. Side-Line hates them for that I'm sure, so Side-Line isn't going to cut them any slack. I'm sure they wish everything would return to as it was before the Internet put the balance of leverage in the consumers corner.

For once.

Posted by: redzone on Apr 08, 08 | 12:32 pm

Hey, don't shoot the messenger.
This is a news-worthy item, regardless of how you feel about it.

Posted by: Catgirl on Apr 08, 08 | 6:22 am

Hrm. Interesting. So much competing propaganda in the media these days.

Posted by: Side-Line on Apr 08, 08 | 5:21 am

We aren't anti-Radiohead, but it just isn't all that lovely as mainstrem press is presenting things.

If collaborators such as Joyce have valid points even used by Trent Reznor when talking about Radiohead then why not publishing it.

And for your info, most people visiting Side-Line are musicians used to listening to good quality music files, not low bitrated nes :))).

Posted by: structurefall hoinh to be forza XP8!@# on Apr 08, 08 | 5:16 am

oh, and furthermore, i fail to see how their payment scheme for the last album failed. if some 40% of downloaders paid half as much as a CD would have cost, the band still would have made more than the same number buying CDs on a major label contract would have netted them. the only possible argument against this is that they're losing marketing force, which nobody has even mentioned in the course of this dialog. just because they're doing business in an unusual way doesn't mean they're wrong.

the habit of constant picking at meaningless details about this is seriously undermining your journalistic integrity. stop.

Posted by: structurefall hoinh to be forza XP8!@# on Apr 08, 08 | 5:12 am

your anti-radiohead vendetta is ridiculous and should really stop. i don't really understand why you're covering them to begin with, but seriously, for 99.9% of consumers, 160 is not low quality, and unless they're soliciting remixes for some release that they're planning on making money off of, i don't really see what's so horrific about charging a micropayment sum for this. hosting an entire remix kit's worth of files probably costs at least what they're charging.

get off it already.

Posted by: ..LeRenard! on Apr 08, 08 | 2:42 am

Charging for remix kits?
Lol :)

More related news :

2008 tour Radiohead too expensive say critics + Radiohead denies large amounts as mentioned in the press
EMI adds 90 minute live concert to upcoming Radiohead 7CD box set
Radiohead boxed
Radiohead fools fans with crappy quality (paid) downloads

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY NEWSLETTER

Order your Side-Line merchandise

ORDER NOW:
- T-shirts
- Jackets
- Caps
- Bags
- ...

Worldwide shipping
(within 2 days after payment)

MORE INFO

Advertisers

Radiohead charges fans for nude remixkits

More headlines

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY NEWSLETTER

RECOMMENDED MONEY MAKERS

THANKS TO

SHORTCUTS