They will sometimes re-encode the music, add more stuff (bonus tracks, new artist page) etc after a couple of weeks. I've seen this a few times before.
I think something is busted. Looking for Sarah McLachlan on the UK store showed only two albums but spread over the page like others were there but invisible, and those were missing any actual tracks.
They only had Ok Computer on in the earlier phases on iTunes, but that got pulled. Supposedly, Radiohead is against selling music online. I've read they view their work of art as a whole album, and are against people just buying individual songs. There are quite a few bands who refuse to sell their work online. Those who have any say with their record companies, anyway.
In a way I kind of agree with them. Radiohead are one of the few bands that work really hard to make a good "album" rather than a couple of good songs and everything else being filler crap. I also really enjoy the art work they have on their CD's and especially the special editions. I'll gladly pay a little more for that.
I don't know. I mean, you can still easily by the whole album.
Is Radiohead really of the impression that people only listen to their albums as a whole, and never make mix CD's?
The "we don't want people buying individual tracks" reason (if that is in fact the reason) seems a bit high and mighty to me. Who are they to dictate how we should listen to their music?
Couldn't they just put an "Album only" restriction on their work if they so desired?
Apple wants to strongly encourage near-total participation in single-track sales. If Apple cut a special deal with Radiohead then everyone else would start demanding the same treatment, and the whole deal would fall apart.
The only reason there are any album-only tracks is that Apple has given everyone, without special treatment, the option of selling certain tracks as album-only if those tracks exceed a certain length (something like 7-8 minutes, I think).
The "we don't want people buying individual tracks" reason (if that is in fact the reason) seems a bit high and mighty to me. Who are they to dictate how we should listen to their music?
Well, this is Radiohead we're talking about here. I love 'em, but they can be a trifle pompous. And I don't see them refusing to let radio play single songs.
Apple wants to strongly encourage near-total participation in single-track sales. If Apple cut a special deal with Radiohead then everyone else would start demanding the same treatment, and the whole deal would fall apart.
The only reason there are any album-only tracks is that Apple has given everyone, without special treatment, the option of selling certain tracks as album-only if those tracks exceed a certain length (something like 7-8 minutes, I think).
incorrect. John Mayer's live releases are entirely album only.
Never will there be any whole CD's only at the ITMS.
Here is the fact. If they did it that way I would start downloading free tracks again.
EITHER MOST MUSIC ARTISTS ARE NOT AS TALENTED AS THEY THINK THEY ARE, OR THEY ARE TRUELY JUST RIP-OFF ARTISTS.
There is no way in h3ll I would buy a whole CD from radio (crack) head. They suck (soccer) balls.
Back to what I was going to say.
The fact is that people were just fed up of the years of donations made to music companies, and bands for whole CD's that you only like 1 song on to begin with.
I call it donations, because if your made to buy 9, to 15 songs you should like all of them. How many artists were actually that good? I can come up with a handful, but I made this list in my had a while back when thinking about this another time. Madonna, Van Halen, Boston, The Beetles, the Beach Boys, Early Metallica (1st 2, or 3 CD's), RUN DMC - King of Rock, Beastie Boys - License to ill. Black sabbath (everything with Ozzy) There are not many, but there are others.
The list of those who have 1, or 2 good songs on a CD is much easier to compile. I'll Put RadioHead at #1 on that list, and thousands upon thousands fall right into place behind them.
When I downloaded freely I never really felt that bad about what I was taking because: A) I had probably already bought it, and was just backing it up. ( <- 99% of my downloads) or Those record companies, and musicians already scammed me on few thousand CD's, Tapes, and Vinyl so grabbing a couple singles that had no other good songs on that CD didn't phase me a bit.
Radio Head is one of the bands that is partly talentless, and will never release a full CD without a bunch of filler songs. Therefore they believe that selling a $12 CD instead of letting people pull the one, or two tracks they like for 99¢ is their way telling you that they are not really that great, and will never achieve a level of true greatness.
U2 on the other hand should have been on my list, so consider them there now.
Radio Head is one of the bands that is partly talentless, and will never release a full CD without a bunch of filler songs. Therefore they believe that selling a $12 CD instead of letting people pull the one, or two tracks they like for 99¢ is their way telling you that they are not really that great, and will never achieve a level of true greatness.
Yeah, sure.
It's funny, because in interviews, Thom Yorke has always supported iTunes.
They only had Ok Computer on in the earlier phases on iTunes, but that got pulled.
you couldn't even buy the entire OK Computer! but this is a band that survived and flourished w/ really only one single, their first - Creep - so iTunes sales won't make or break them. Believe it or not they've earned their rep w/ incredible live shows.
speaking of iTunes - is there a band that has taken advantage of it as smartly as U2?? exclusives from the start, first single a commercial,digital box set and U2 iPod! amazing...
Comments
Originally posted by Flounder
Still waiting for the return of Radiohead......
Radiohead has been on iTMS?
Oooops!
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
Radiohead has been on iTMS?
Yup, for something like the first three days of its existence. Then it got pulled. They use powerbooks on-stage for crying out loud!
In a way I kind of agree with them. Radiohead are one of the few bands that work really hard to make a good "album" rather than a couple of good songs and everything else being filler crap. I also really enjoy the art work they have on their CD's and especially the special editions. I'll gladly pay a little more for that.
Originally posted by Flounder
Yup, for something like the first three days of its existence. Then it got pulled. They use powerbooks on-stage for crying out loud!
I read they disagree with the buying by the track concept, and that they don't want their recordings listened to away from the whole conception.
Is Radiohead really of the impression that people only listen to their albums as a whole, and never make mix CD's?
The "we don't want people buying individual tracks" reason (if that is in fact the reason) seems a bit high and mighty to me. Who are they to dictate how we should listen to their music?
Originally posted by Dogcow
Couldn't they just put an "Album only" restriction on their work if they so desired?
Apple wants to strongly encourage near-total participation in single-track sales. If Apple cut a special deal with Radiohead then everyone else would start demanding the same treatment, and the whole deal would fall apart.
The only reason there are any album-only tracks is that Apple has given everyone, without special treatment, the option of selling certain tracks as album-only if those tracks exceed a certain length (something like 7-8 minutes, I think).
Originally posted by Flounder
The "we don't want people buying individual tracks" reason (if that is in fact the reason) seems a bit high and mighty to me. Who are they to dictate how we should listen to their music?
Well, this is Radiohead we're talking about here. I love 'em, but they can be a trifle pompous. And I don't see them refusing to let radio play single songs.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
Velvet Revolver has been removed from iTMS. WTF??
You just have to uncheck the good taste filter option!
Originally posted by shetline
Apple wants to strongly encourage near-total participation in single-track sales. If Apple cut a special deal with Radiohead then everyone else would start demanding the same treatment, and the whole deal would fall apart.
The only reason there are any album-only tracks is that Apple has given everyone, without special treatment, the option of selling certain tracks as album-only if those tracks exceed a certain length (something like 7-8 minutes, I think).
incorrect. John Mayer's live releases are entirely album only.
Here is the fact. If they did it that way I would start downloading free tracks again.
EITHER MOST MUSIC ARTISTS ARE NOT AS TALENTED AS THEY THINK THEY ARE, OR THEY ARE TRUELY JUST RIP-OFF ARTISTS.
There is no way in h3ll I would buy a whole CD from radio (crack) head. They suck (soccer) balls.
Back to what I was going to say.
The fact is that people were just fed up of the years of donations made to music companies, and bands for whole CD's that you only like 1 song on to begin with.
I call it donations, because if your made to buy 9, to 15 songs you should like all of them. How many artists were actually that good? I can come up with a handful, but I made this list in my had a while back when thinking about this another time. Madonna, Van Halen, Boston, The Beetles, the Beach Boys, Early Metallica (1st 2, or 3 CD's), RUN DMC - King of Rock, Beastie Boys - License to ill. Black sabbath (everything with Ozzy) There are not many, but there are others.
The list of those who have 1, or 2 good songs on a CD is much easier to compile. I'll Put RadioHead at #1 on that list, and thousands upon thousands fall right into place behind them.
When I downloaded freely I never really felt that bad about what I was taking because: A) I had probably already bought it, and was just backing it up. ( <- 99% of my downloads) or Those record companies, and musicians already scammed me on few thousand CD's, Tapes, and Vinyl so grabbing a couple singles that had no other good songs on that CD didn't phase me a bit.
Radio Head is one of the bands that is partly talentless, and will never release a full CD without a bunch of filler songs. Therefore they believe that selling a $12 CD instead of letting people pull the one, or two tracks they like for 99¢ is their way telling you that they are not really that great, and will never achieve a level of true greatness.
U2 on the other hand should have been on my list, so consider them there now.
my 2¢
Originally posted by onlooker
Radio Head is one of the bands that is partly talentless, and will never release a full CD without a bunch of filler songs. Therefore they believe that selling a $12 CD instead of letting people pull the one, or two tracks they like for 99¢ is their way telling you that they are not really that great, and will never achieve a level of true greatness.
Yeah, sure.
It's funny, because in interviews, Thom Yorke has always supported iTunes.
Originally posted by trowa
They only had Ok Computer on in the earlier phases on iTunes, but that got pulled.
you couldn't even buy the entire OK Computer! but this is a band that survived and flourished w/ really only one single, their first - Creep - so iTunes sales won't make or break them. Believe it or not they've earned their rep w/ incredible live shows.
speaking of iTunes - is there a band that has taken advantage of it as smartly as U2?? exclusives from the start, first single a commercial,digital box set and U2 iPod! amazing...
they recently added stuff from saddlecreek records too which makes up for everthing else they still miss.