Jump to content


- - - - -

Trent Reznor on the retail price of his (and all) CD's


#1 _scott   CAG Veteran CAG Veteran   34 Posts   Joined 15.2 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 05:16 PM

...Has anyone seen the price come down? Okay, well, you know what that means - STEAL IT. Steal away. Steal and steal and steal some more and give it to all your friends and keep on stealin'. Because one way or another these motherfuckers will get it through their head that they're ripping people off and that that's not right.


Goto Digg.com to read comments and watch the video (NSFW - Language)

I don't condone stealing media at all. But when an artist is now saying it, almost commanding his audience to do it, it shows there is a problem. There are few things I wish Reznor would do other than talking...

1) Follow Pearl Jam's lead and release some material under a Creative Commons license.
2) Issue a formal letter to the Internet Archive that allows; live show taping (both video and audio) and live show photographing.

He has already gone the right direction by giving fans access to some of his source material for non-commercial remix purposes... But if you ask me, if your mad enough about something ~ you can do more. I'm not asking Reznor to give his music away for free, artists have to make a living, but cut the middle man out. Follow-up what you started on "With Teeth" (virtual liner notes and posters for download that fans could print after purchasing the lossless audio). He always seemed to have a problem with downloads (both legal and illegal) because he felt the fans lost out on the whole experience, or what the artist intended for them to have (cd, booklets, etc...), he should create a new experience that goes beyond that...

The funny thing is, he already did in a way, with "Year Zero".

This is just my thought.

#2 sblymnlcrymnl   married ... with children CAGiversary!   30091 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

sblymnlcrymnl

Posted 17 September 2007 - 05:29 PM

:applause:

#3 mykevermin   Queen of Scotland CAGiversary!   37011 Posts   Joined 18.3 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 05:31 PM

Why is he concerned about the price of CDs now, when they're the same price (or cheaper) than they were before?

#4 Sporadic   done with this site CAGiversary!   9499 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 05:34 PM

Why is he concerned about the price of CDs now, when they're the same price (or cheaper) than they were before?


Here's what he posted on his website awhile ago.

As the climate grows more and more desperate for record labels, their answer to their mostly self-inflicted wounds seems to be to screw the consumer over even more. A couple of examples that quickly come to mind:

* The ABSURD retail pricing of Year Zero in Australia. Shame on you, UMG. Year Zero is selling for $34.99 Australian dollars ($29.10 US). No wonder people steal music. Avril Lavigne's record in the same store was $21.99 ($18.21 US).
By the way, when I asked a label rep about this his response was: "It's because we know you have a real core audience that will pay whatever it costs when you put something out - you know, true fans. It's the pop stuff we have to discount to get people to buy."
So... I guess as a reward for being a "true fan" you get ripped off.

* The dreaded EURO Maxi-single. Nothing but a consumer rip-off that I've been talked into my whole career. No more.

The point is, I am trying my best to make sure the music and items NIN puts in the marketplace have value, substance and are worth you considering purchasing. I am not allowing Capital G to be repackaged into several configurations that result in you getting ripped off.

We are planning a full-length remix collection of substance that will be announced soon.


----------------

Goto Digg.com to read comments and watch the video (NSFW - Language)

I don't condone stealing media at all. But when an artist is now saying it, almost commanding his audience to do it, it shows there is a problem. There are few things I wish Reznor would do other than talking...

1) Follow Pearl Jam's lead and release some material under a Creative Commons license.
2) Issue a formal letter to the Internet Archive that allows; live show taping (both video and audio) and live show photographing.

He has already gone the right direction by giving fans access to some of his source material for non-commercial remix purposes... But if you ask me, if your mad enough about something ~ you can do more. I'm not asking Reznor to give his music away for free, artists have to make a living, but cut the middle man out. Follow-up what you started on "With Teeth" (virtual liner notes and posters for download that fans could print after purchasing the lossless audio). He always seemed to have a problem with downloads (both legal and illegal) because he felt the fans lost out on the whole experience, or what the artist intended for them to have (cd, booklets, etc...), he should create a new experience that goes beyond that...

The funny thing is, he already did in a way, with "Year Zero".

This is just my thought.


He talking about the Australian market, not here in America.

Well, Year Zero 2 is going to be his last CD with Interscope and then he's (supposedly) going independent.

He posted on his website that he wish he could just put it up the day after it's done in the studio for 6 dollars a pop and call it a day. Who knows, maybe that's what he's going to do after he leaves Interscope.

#5 mykevermin   Queen of Scotland CAGiversary!   37011 Posts   Joined 18.3 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 06:01 PM

He talking about the Australian market, not here in America.


Kinda renders the OP's rant moot, then, doesn't it?

Year Zero is currently $7.99 on Amazon, so as far as I'm concerned, this is just going to be used as further justification by those folks who don't pay for the music they own (even though it's not aimed at them at all).

#6 evanft   Wombat needs Nutrisystem. CAGiversary!   7012 Posts   Joined 17.6 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 06:36 PM

I got Year Zero for $5.99 from BestBuy.com with free shipping.

#7 _scott   CAG Veteran CAG Veteran   34 Posts   Joined 15.2 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 06:54 PM

Kinda renders the OP's rant moot, then, doesn't it?

Year Zero is currently $7.99 on Amazon, so as far as I'm concerned, this is just going to be used as further justification by those folks who don't pay for the music they own (even though it's not aimed at them at all).


In the video he says, he angered his label globally because he called them out. He also says things like this in the US as well (I saw NIN twice in 2006). I don't see how what I stated is nullified because he was in Australia. I was just pointing out the fact that there are global channels available for artist who have become disenfranchised with large record companies that don't put the consumer at legal risk, mainly creative commons and the practice of allowing taping.

Don't get me wrong, I've loved Nine Inch Nails since Pretty Hate Machine and have collected almost all of his CD/LP releases.

I just like more action behind talk, as it could be construed as a ploy to gain respect without the intention of changing anything. A majority of people these days (sans myself) illegally download music and they can connect with the statement and think, "wow he thinks downloading unauthorized music is okay, just like me, and this how he makes his living!"

Just like an electoral candidate who swears to fix health care, they say it, people rally behind the person and when the candidate gets what he wants (elected)... Nothing changes.

I would hate to see him being viewed this way.

#8 camoor   Jams on foot fires CAGiversary!   15322 Posts   Joined 18.8 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 06:55 PM

Reznor is cool, I'd buy his music if I still liked NIN.

#9 Javery   Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer CAGiversary!   22426 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 06:59 PM

\m/ pearl jam \m/

#10 benjamouth   Thanks Larry Davis for the sig !! CAGiversary!   7564 Posts   Joined 16.9 Years Ago  

benjamouth

Posted 17 September 2007 - 07:19 PM

Seems to me like it's all very well for Trent Reznor to say this, he's made his money, but what about less well known bands. If everyone stops buying their CD's and starts illegally downloading they won't be able to survive.

I buy all my music legally and on CD because (a) the artist get something, might not be much but it's better than nothing (b) with a CD I don't have to deal with all this DRM crap.

I'll agree with him on one point though, with every new security measure or DRM system the corporations come up with, the legal customer seems to suffer while the pirates seem unaffected.

#11 Sporadic   done with this site CAGiversary!   9499 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 07:26 PM

Seems to me like it's all very well for Trent Reznor to say this, he's made his money, but what about less well known bands. If everyone stops buying their CD's and starts illegally downloading they won't be able to survive.


They survive by touring not album sales.

So if you go to the show, buy some merchandise and have a good time, that's better for the band (strictly financially who know if they would be dropped from the label due to shitty album sales or something like that) than going to Best Buy and buying the album at full price.

#12 benjamouth   Thanks Larry Davis for the sig !! CAGiversary!   7564 Posts   Joined 16.9 Years Ago  

benjamouth

Posted 17 September 2007 - 07:28 PM

They survive by touring not album sales.

So if you go to the show, buy some merchandise and have a good time, that's better for the band (strictly financially who know if they would be dropped from the label due to shitty album sales or something like that) than going to Best Buy and buy an album at full price.


Yeah I've heard that before actually, well I used to go to shows and always bought a CD or shirt at the merch stand, bit old for gigs now though :)

#13 fart_bubble   A fart that says "Ni" CAGiversary!   9803 Posts   Joined 18.3 Years Ago  

fart_bubble

Posted 17 September 2007 - 07:30 PM

They survive by touring not album sales.

So if you go to the show, buy some merchandise and have a good time, that's better for the band (strictly financially who know if they would be dropped from the label due to shitty album sales or something like that) than going to Best Buy and buying the album at full price.


also don't forget to buy drinks at shows. The venues use that info to see if they want them back or not.

#14 Sporadic   done with this site CAGiversary!   9499 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 07:30 PM

Yeah I've heard that before actually, well I used to go to shows and always bought a CD or shirt at the merch stand, bit old for gigs now though :)


Bah, you're never to old for a rock show. I took my Dad (50) along to a Nine Inch Nails show and he had a blast.

Just buy seats instead of general admission and you should be fine :)

#15 Javery   Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer CAGiversary!   22426 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 07:49 PM

Seems to me like it's all very well for Trent Reznor to say this, he's made his money, but what about less well known bands. If everyone stops buying their CD's and starts illegally downloading they won't be able to survive.

I buy all my music legally and on CD because (a) the artist get something, might not be much but it's better than nothing (b) with a CD I don't have to deal with all this DRM crap.

I'll agree with him on one point though, with every new security measure or DRM system the corporations come up with, the legal customer seems to suffer while the pirates seem unaffected.


I completely disagree. Artists don't make that much on CD sales - they make money from touring and selling t-shirts and crap. If they become big enough they might sign a huge multi-album recording deal but even the biggest ones still aren't worth much (relatively speaking, of course)

When REM signed their 5 album deal in the mid 90s they were the biggest band on the planet and the deal was for only $80M so that's $20M each (4 members) over likely a 10 year period (assuming a release every 2 years which is about average) so it's like $2M per year per person for the biggest band in the world - that's total crap compared to what they made over the same period in touring and merchandise.

I'm not saying stealing doesn't hurt (there's more people involved in recording than just the band) but CLEARLY the industry needs to completely rethink and overhaul its business model. Downloads are here to stay - they just need to adapt.

#16 benjamouth   Thanks Larry Davis for the sig !! CAGiversary!   7564 Posts   Joined 16.9 Years Ago  

benjamouth

Posted 17 September 2007 - 08:06 PM

I completely disagree. Artists don't make that much on CD sales - they make money from touring and selling t-shirts and crap. If they become big enough they might sign a huge multi-album recording deal but even the biggest ones still aren't worth much (relatively speaking, of course)

When REM signed their 5 album deal in the mid 90s they were the biggest band on the planet and the deal was for only $80M so that's $20M each (4 members) over likely a 10 year period (assuming a release every 2 years which is about average) so it's like $2M per year per person for the biggest band in the world - that's total crap compared to what they made over the same period in touring and merchandise.

I'm not saying stealing doesn't hurt (there's more people involved in recording than just the band) but CLEARLY the industry needs to completely rethink and overhaul its business model. Downloads are here to stay - they just need to adapt.


Well I did actually say "the artist get something, might not be much but it's better than nothing " but I take your point.

#17 _scott   CAG Veteran CAG Veteran   34 Posts   Joined 15.2 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 10:08 PM

He talking about the Australian market, not here in America.

Well, Year Zero 2 is going to be his last CD with Interscope and then he's (supposedly) going independent.

He posted on his website that he wish he could just put it up the day after it's done in the studio for 6 dollars a pop and call it a day. Who knows, maybe that's what he's going to do after he leaves Interscope.


You're correct when you say in that instance he is talking about the Australian market. I just think that Record Companies are maladjusted everywhere. Nice to see another Fan around.

#18 tcrash247   ghosts.nin.com CAGiversary!   3669 Posts   Joined 19.0 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 10:17 PM

He makes a good point, but no matter what, I'll still buy every one of his cds. I love NIN, I like to have the artwork (and NIN always has great artwork/packaging, same with Tool) and I prefer to own an original, hard copy of my music. Plus, my stereo doesn't like to play burned cds.

#19 evanft   Wombat needs Nutrisystem. CAGiversary!   7012 Posts   Joined 17.6 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 11:18 PM

I never got why people would rather buy an album off iTunes or another download site than just getting the actual cd.


Because MP3s sound worse and owning a physical, DRM-free copy of a piece of music is soooo 1997.

#20 VanillaGorilla   Shark Barber CAGiversary!   5521 Posts   Joined 18.8 Years Ago  

VanillaGorilla

Posted 17 September 2007 - 11:27 PM

That's nice of Trent to wait until AFTER he becomes rich to speak out on the high price of CD's.

#21 Sporadic   done with this site CAGiversary!   9499 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 17 September 2007 - 11:46 PM

That's nice of Trent to wait until AFTER he becomes rich to speak out on the high price of CD's.


YEAH Fuck WHY DIDN'T THAT DOUCHEBAG SPEAK OUT ABOUT CD PRICES IN 1992

#22 Zenithian Legend   Banned Banned   13122 Posts   Joined 18.4 Years Ago  

Zenithian Legend

Posted 18 September 2007 - 12:40 AM

Why is he concerned about the price of CDs now, when they're the same price (or cheaper) than they were before?


Because he knows his band is past its prime, his music has gone to shit and he desparately wants attention. Well looks like he got it. He's so full of shit though, if he was serious about this he'd release free material like Pearl Jam (as mentioned above) or like the Pumpkins did with Machina II.

#23 projecteightysix   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   1660 Posts   Joined 18.1 Years Ago  

projecteightysix

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:08 AM

Are you guys not paying attention to the fact that this speech was for Australia???

#24 Admiral Ackbar   It's a trap! CAGiversary!   15849 Posts   Joined 18.5 Years Ago  

Admiral Ackbar

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:09 AM

Like I need Trent Reznor to tell me something I figured out over a decade ago.

#25 Sporadic   done with this site CAGiversary!   9499 Posts   Joined 18.9 Years Ago  

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:09 AM

Because he knows his band is past its prime, his music has gone to shit and he desparately wants attention. Well looks like he got it. He's so full of shit though, if he was serious about this he'd release free material like Pearl Jam (as mentioned above) or like the Pumpkins did with Machina II.


Yup, what a full of shit attention whore.

It's not like he payed for the ARG out of his own pocket or leaked tracks from the album early along with the ARG against the record label's permission or put the whole album up for free on his website weeks in advance or put up the money for the weird color changing thing with Year Zero or released the multi-tracks to most of Year Zero or paid to bring along a light wall of death for the tour so the overseas fans could have the best experience.

Let's wait until he's out of his record contract before we condemn him. There is only so much he can do right now.

#26

Guest_Apossum_*

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:20 AM

Because MP3s sound worse and owning a physical, DRM-free copy of a piece of music is soooo 1997.



don't forget laziness!

but really, I haven't had an mp3 sound noticeably worse than a CD in the past few years. higher speeds = higher quality MP3s, as they are on p2p. Itunes mp3s have never sounded bad to me.

#27 PlumeNoir   Ch'p is still a badass CAGiversary!   7191 Posts   Joined 17.4 Years Ago  

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:30 AM

Even if he is talking about AUS, I think it applies to the US market, as well. Does anyone remember a couple years ago the class action lawsuit over CDs being over priced?

I agree with Trent. I know my CD buying as severely declined over the past couple years. The recording industry was too afraid of going digital for piracy reasons because it would hurt their bottom line. I'm not condoning piracy or stealing, but the recording industry was making a HELL of a lot of money. (Again, see the class action lawsuit...)

I switched to iTunes, because I don't mind paying $1 for a song I really like instead of paying for the whole CD. Any CD I buy, I rip immediately to my computer so I can listen to it on my iPod. Personally, I would much rather have the physical media, packaging, etc - but it is not usually worth it for bands some suggest I check out.

Which brings us to the "up and coming/ lesser known" bands. They're the ones that get hurt because of CD pricing - that is why you see bands promoting their music on MySpace, etc.

I don't think there is a simple answer, because the record industry wants to go back to 1996 when they were raking money hand over fist without the threat of downloading.

#28 senorwoohoo   Radio CAGiversary!   14533 Posts   Joined 18.8 Years Ago  

senorwoohoo

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:33 AM

Even if he is talking about AUS, I think it applies to the US market, as well. Does anyone remember a couple years ago the class action lawsuit over CDs being over priced?

I agree with Trent. I know my CD buying as severely declined over the past couple years. The recording industry was too afraid of going digital for piracy reasons because it would hurt their bottom line. I'm not condoning piracy or stealing, but the recording industry was making a HELL of a lot of money. (Again, see the class action lawsuit...)

I switched to iTunes, because I don't mind paying $1 for a song I really like instead of paying for the whole CD. Any CD I buy, I rip immediately to my computer so I can listen to it on my iPod. Personally, I would much rather have the physical media, packaging, etc - but it is not usually worth it for bands some suggest I check out.

Which brings us to the "up and coming/ lesser known" bands. They're the ones that get hurt because of CD pricing - that is why you see bands promoting their music on MySpace, etc.

I don't think there is a simple answer, because the record industry wants to go back to 1996 when they were raking money hand over fist without the threat of downloading.


Word.

It also sucks when bands/artists promote their stuff more overseas in Europe and Japan because they can't find an audience here.

#29 karmapolice   Resistance is useless CAGiversary!   3279 Posts   Joined 18.6 Years Ago  

karmapolice

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:34 AM

don't forget laziness!

but really, I haven't had an mp3 sound noticeably worse than a CD in the past few years. higher speeds = higher quality MP3s, as they are on p2p. Itunes mp3s have never sounded bad to me.


Mp3s are the same bit rate they have always been and have always sounded crappy. If youre an audiophile then mp3s are out of the question. Ill stick with CD's, but its nice to see musicians finally stand up to the money hungry music industry.

#30 Zenithian Legend   Banned Banned   13122 Posts   Joined 18.4 Years Ago  

Zenithian Legend

Posted 18 September 2007 - 01:38 AM

Are you guys not paying attention to the fact that this speech was for Australia???


Which only adds to his cowardice... why not say something like that in America?