Are Prince and Radiohead the future of music? (not to mention Paul McCartney)

[Dorian Gray]

Prince: Gives away 3 million albums free with purchase of the Daily Mail in the UK. Makes more money than he did on his last album (Daily Mail paid him for distribution rights), plus sells out 21 concerts in the UK at slightly inflated prices.

Radiohead: Sells album on special website. Allows the purchaser to choose how much they pay for the album. Make more money on this deal than they would if they had sold it on a CD.

Both: Still have the option to sell a CD.

I think Prince's way is a little bit better than Radiohead's way, but is this the future of the industry?

Paul McCartney: Signs with Starbucks. Albums distributed through ~10,000 Starbucks stores in addition to other stores. Increased sales? Sure,

However, rather than take the opportunity to break talented new bands of multiple genres, Starbucks has chosen to use its huge potential to promote possibly the most widely known artist in the entire world. If this is the future of music - yikes. Bye-bye, unknown talented garage teens. Hello Britney Aguilinkin Doll 182.

[LawnOven]

Plus there's this: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1571737/20071011/radiohead.jhtml

The lesson being, always borrow your music from someone who already owns the album. Because those who produce electronic media seem to always have it in for their biggest, paying, fans.

It probably is the future of music, for the time being, if all you do is listen to the radio. Major Record companies will be less and less likely to take financial risks, and will stick with the bread and butter.

[Tokenconservative]

Geez, I hope so.

I dunno 'bout anyone else, but I sure din't get enough really, truly, amazingly crappy music between the mid-70s and late 80s.

We need more!

I sure hope Air Supply can ride this trend to a big comeback!

Tokie

[slingblade]

I do too. I like them.

[Dorian Gray]

Wow, it's like I posted one thing, but everyone read something else.

[Matthew Best]

Prince: Gives away 3 million albums free with purchase of the Daily Mail in the UK. Makes more money than he did on his last album (Daily Mail paid him for distribution rights), plus sells out 21 concerts in the UK at slightly inflated prices.



One thing - Prince's ticket prices were not even slightly inflated. Exactly the opposite in fact.

[Tailgater]

Prince: Gives away 3 million albums free with purchase of the Daily Mail in the UK. Makes more money than he did on his last album (Daily Mail paid him for distribution rights), plus sells out 21 concerts in the UK at slightly inflated prices.

Radiohead: Sells album on special website. Allows the purchaser to choose how much they pay for the album. Make more money on this deal than they would if they had sold it on a CD.

Both: Still have the option to sell a CD.

I think Prince's way is a little bit better than Radiohead's way, but is this the future of the industry?

Paul McCartney: Signs with Starbucks. Albums distributed through ~10,000 Starbucks stores in addition to other stores. Increased sales? Sure,

However, rather than take the opportunity to break talented new bands of multiple genres, Starbucks has chosen to use its huge potential to promote possibly the most widely known artist in the entire world. If this is the future of music - yikes. Bye-bye, unknown talented garage teens. Hello Britney Aguilinkin Doll 182.

I think with the use of the internet, it is easier to get into smaller bands. In the past, you had to get a record deal to get your music to the masses. Now you can start a website. I can see a band play at a club that is struggling for an audience and they will pass out sample cds they made at home or business cards with website info. I can take it home with me and listen to more music from them, show some friends (who then like the music) and so on. Alot of these bands posts tour info to catch the next show or even contact info to hire them to a private event (that's great). I've found a couple bands that I like this way. I don't go to starbucks or buy the daily mail, but Radiohead has the right idea and I think it the end result will be the opposite of what you are thinking. The days of the big record companies are going away.

[Buckaroo]

I certainly hope so. It could ultimately mean the end of big labels (or at least, give me the option of not dealing with them). I have a big problem forking over for a hugely inflated, over-priced CD and having the lion's share of the price diverted to line the pockets of a corporate CEO, while (if you're a smaller act, anyway) the artist only sees pennies of it. It's why I rarely pay for music from the big labels, unless I'm buying used.

On the other hand, I happily shell out for acts on artist-run labels, outlets like CD Baby, or (to get back to the subject of the post) direct artist-to-listener downloads, where the artist has some control of distribution and promotion and actually gets a sizable chunk of the profits. I'll support these acts as much as I can. Typically, all these cases end up being less expensive anyway.

As long as the downloads are available at a high-bitrate, I LOVE it.