digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Trent Reznor: Singlehandedly Fixing the Music Industry?

thecampusword.com — Will new marketing techniques, a la Radiohead's In Rainbows, be able to fix the music industry? Trent Reznor is the latest example that they certainly have a chance.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • moat211, on 03/24/2008, -28/+3tcw ftw!
    • scottja35, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2The Crane Wife? It might be the Colin Meloy fan in me, but that's all that can possibly mean to me at the moment. I'm just going to blindly assume that I am right.
    • AmnioticEntity, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1no no no, its tasty coma wife. the reference is taken from an episode of scrubs (second season)
  • ninedead, on 03/24/2008, -19/+11believe it.
    • damien6669, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2I want to believe...
    • CitizenSimplex, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0...and i am trying to believe....
    • Affect, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2Comparing Radiohead's efforts to Reznor's is a joke. It's obvious Trent has a plan. Radiohead did this as a ploy to keep their slowly dying music alive in the media.
  • clearside, on 03/24/2008, -40/+12He cant do it by himself. With that being said its undoubtedly a step in the right direction. A great way to say ***** you to the record company's who have been ***** him in the ass for years. Its not just him though, its every artist. I my self am an artist but i don't have a record deal nor do i feel like i need one. What the biggest mistake for young and aspiring musicians these days is there first goal is to get a record deal. I dont get it why do they need one? CD's are outdated and are on way of the VHS tape (Christmas 08 will be the last ho-rah!) The Internet is great for distribution and why go out on tour and do all of those endless hours and all of the hard work just to send your the little money that you do earn back to some fat cat at the record company. The manager will be the most important link in a band's success in the future i promise you that. Trent has been on the cutting edge his whole career. Its an amazing time to be a fan of NIN, but then again it has always been. We need something bigger to seal the tomb of the greedy record company's. Its hard to believe that publications and record company trades such as billboard dont even give him the time of day for a ***** cover story which is the least that they can do. The walls are starting to come down and there is no doubt about it and us as NIN fans are apart of it!
    -Clearside

    if you want to check out some NIN type rock check out my band www.myspace.com/downtoacrawl thanks!
    • usrlocalbin, on 03/24/2008, -5/+17Don't bash NIN, and then try to get people to listen to your music that 'sounds like NIN'.

      You fail. Bured
      • jayaresea, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2Where did he bash NIN?
      • clearside, on 03/25/2008, -3/+1Hey dude, I never bashed NIN once in my comment learn how to read. Simply put i was leaving a comment because i am a fan speaking his mind otherwise i would not have waisted my time. But please be my guest to point out where in the ***** you saw me bashing NIN????? Please tell me. I was making an educated observation. ***** off! P.S. sorry i signed my comment. did not mean to offend anybody.
    • Niightwitch, on 03/24/2008, -1/+8Please stop signing your comments.
    • lamiaconfitor, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1F you!
  • dragoonz, on 03/24/2008, -28/+6http://quoteunquoterecords.com/

    Been doing it longer.
    • usrlocalbin, on 03/24/2008, -3/+11Buried. Those bands look like a bunch of emo/indie pansy ass'.
      Trent kicks ass and he's a huge star, unlike the bands on that page.

    • krisscofield, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4It's not exactly diggworthy/newsworthy if some backwater indie band has "been doing it". That's to be expected. It's of interest and generates a lot of important buzz when someone of Trent and Radiohead's caliber do so--because the waves they make generally affect the record industry a great deal.
    • sasquatchcrotch, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2http://defianceohio.terrorware.com/audio.php
      There are plenty of good bands that do this. That is pretty irrelevant though, it's important when mainstream bands do.
      • Patori, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1I used to live in Defiance, Ohio! I was born there!

        Yeah, major bands doing this is a major development.

        Minor bands do little to change things.

        And NIN rules.
    • sasquatchcrotch, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Not to mention the donation for loss-less goes to charity.
  • minestrone11, on 03/24/2008, -66/+12I know a lot of people will disagree with me, but I must say it. ***** TRENT REZNOR.
    • oblique63, on 03/24/2008, -3/+14a reason why might be nice...
    • krisscofield, on 03/24/2008, -2/+10Obvious troll is obvious.
    • ZeroSumDivide, on 03/24/2008, -2/+1Troll harder, wannabe.
    • alex199, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Oh better yet, ***** you!
    • CitizenSimplex, on 03/25/2008, -0/+3no, wait, I think he left out his first part: 'I desperately want to-'. That should clear it up.
    • lamiaconfitor, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2I'm sorry he didn't have sex with you.
  • Christbait, on 03/24/2008, -37/+55Don't fill this guy's ego. Labels on the underground have been doing this ***** for years.
    • D14BL0, on 03/24/2008, -0/+24You're missing the point. Nine Inch Nails isn't what you would consider "underground". In fact, NIN is pretty mainstream, so for a mainstream band to do something like this is actually pretty impressive.
      • HOTM, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3So NIN is fixing the mainstream, how do people get into the mainstream then?
        • seventoes, on 03/25/2008, -2/+6By being good.
        • Stiles05s, on 03/25/2008, -2/+0amen
        • Cerebral, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2I agree with you. The problem still exists that in order to really become mainstream in today's society you need radio play and TV play of some sort. Everyone has internet play so it's a standstill but Radio is still owned by the big corporations. Lets see how many NIN songs get played on the radio now.
          If radio could change and/or more independent radio stations start popping up (I would love to do it in the Tampa, FL area but lack knowledge/funding/equipment for this) then there is really no hope for a good 5 years or so until the next generation of kids starts NOT listening to the radio etc.
    • GunOfTheMartyr, on 03/24/2008, -0/+9Thing about it is, the labels on the underground don't really matter if they aren't bringing what they offer to the mainstream. Reznor can do that, considering his fanbase is already huge.
    • Sp4rker, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2This guy can not be praised too much for setting the standard for wildly popular artists.

      That is, if they pick up the phone. 2008 calling here!!1!
    • projjalc, on 03/25/2008, -0/+4Have any underground artists who became mainstream ever continued "doing this *****"?
    • lamiaconfitor, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1I agree, but; Reznor could be saving underground music by making this popular, instead of burring underground labels like the record companies.
  • noots, on 03/24/2008, -17/+68no, he isn't.
    • jhuebel, on 03/24/2008, -6/+8Have to agree with you. While Trent Reznor is providing a means, the consumer is sounding the charge. Consumers are changing/fixing the music industry.
    • noots, on 03/24/2008, -1/+5not really. His model isn't going to work for a lot of artists.

      People have got used to the fact music and films can be aquired for free/cheaply. The situation is a lot more complicated than people like to think, most importantly though - their conceptions need to change, and yes so does the model.
      • Lyph5, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4The solution is to offer your music easily and cheaply online, sell albums, shirts, hats, stickers, and so on at your concerts (and on your website), hell, signed bands make most of their money that way ANYWAY, all we're doing is taking out the label middle-man.
        • noots, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2yes i agree. But you're forgetting about the people who think "why pay ANYTHING when i can get it for free, ***** the artist, they have enough money" we all know them, the friends that use Limewire religiously and don't actually give a *****, those are the people that are potentially going to ***** things up.
        • Cerebral, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1I agree but I think that the logic is still flawed. I think that we've gotten to the point in society that our music will need to be free, as in AIR. I don't understand why this cannot be done now. You want to give your music away on your website, advertise on the site. You want to give away CDs, "Buy this shirt for $6 and get this EP free". I don't see what the big deal is. As far as stickers, shirts etc. at a concert... that is the way it should be done.
          I think one thing that will change forever is that the days of the "Rock Star" are over. Just as I think that eventually the "Movie Star" career will be over, the Rock Star will slowly fade away. Not that the actual people will go away but I don't think we will ever be back at a point where they make as much money as they do. Not unless the music industry changes to be more like the NFL or MLB where artists get traded and sign smaller contracts etc. It just won't happen.
    • CitizenSimplex, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2screw you negative nancies. Reznor responding to consumer demands and his is an example of the change needed. You can't ask for a better development at this time. An artist that matters, doing something that matters. How can you still complain? Whiners.
  • HedwigDies, on 03/24/2008, -12/+68It would be amazing if Digg could generate some music articles that DIDN'T deal with Radiohead or Trent Reznor.
    • fleischkopf, on 03/24/2008, -4/+17that's a good point. hopefully there will be an xkcd comic about it soon.
      • smacksaw, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Wow, that's like treating a gunshot wound with more gunshots. If only Zaibatsu and MrBabyMan could submit whatever comic xkcd might make, Digg would explode in a lather of redundant suck.
    • nonconformist, on 03/24/2008, -3/+11Yeah. Digg needs more 10 year old funny videos and cat pics. Oh and maybe some news about Kevin Rose or Steve Jobs.
    • D14BL0, on 03/24/2008, -1/+9Then start submitting them, yourself?
    • dwilljo, on 03/25/2008, -2/+3check my profile - i have some cool ones
    • mardraum, on 03/25/2008, -0/+4come on now, Yahtzee bookends his reviews with plenty of different songs.
  • ZephyrNinety, on 03/24/2008, -3/+15He's helping but it's gonna take help from even more people. I wish legends like Clapton would get involved with this.
    • banmaster, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Nah. They're too entrenched in the whole music industry's ways to ever change.
  • Brick86, on 03/24/2008, -12/+58No he is not. I agree with what he is doing and his business model seems great but how did he become popular? Record labels.
    • mnemy, on 03/24/2008, -1/+6Beat me to the punch. New artists w/ no name for themselves are still screwed. Hopefully Trent and the rest will force the record industry to change their practices tho, and who knows, it might just be beneficial to the little guy.
      • D14BL0, on 03/25/2008, -0/+5"New artists w/ no name for themselves are still screwed. "

        You're kidding, right? Do you have any idea how many bands have gotten their popularity without labels? While MySpace is a horrible blasphemy in the face of the great gods of the internet, its music section has really helped small-time, "underground" bands really take off.

        Put it this way. A good band doesn't even need a label. Which is why so many great bands these days are ditching theirs and starting their own. Why let somebody else get 98% of what you earn? If you're good enough in the first place, you don't need those money-hungry jackasses.
        • ZeroNeo, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1like with everything else in this life, it's not good enough to be good, you have to be at the right place at the right time
          • ZeroNeo, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1ok, something weird happened and digg didn't let me finish my comment.

            like with everything else in this life, it's not good enough to be good, you have to be at the right place at the right time with the right amount of money.
            Even if you dont like it, record labels help you out with that and in most cases a good band cannot pull it off without them.
    • fourcorners, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2Lollapalooza is what brought him into the mainstream but he had a big following before that happened anyway. It was mainly due to all the word of mouth and articles written about him being a one man band of sorts.
  • mbs348, on 03/24/2008, -6/+13this is the exception not the rule. same goes for Radiohead. You need money to make money. thats how it worked before, and thats how it works now. get off it and move along
    • Niightwitch, on 03/24/2008, -2/+6Right...the only reason that they're having any success at this is because they're a well-known band and benefit from their popularity. If they were an unknown band they'd have no chance of making any money this way.
    • randomstupid, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2yeah you're right - or in their case, you need popularity to make (more) popularity
    • CitizenSimplex, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Yay for the status quo! Yay for not asking if how Reznor got to where he is should be how the next 'reznor' gets hish/her chance! Lets not fight for reform! Lets pay $25 for two singles and ten filler tracks on a cd from Best Buy! YAY!!!!!!!
      • Shabaka, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Be real...when was the last time anyone paid $25 for a CD?
  • ZephyrNinety, on 03/24/2008, -2/+21What has to happen is the destruction of the RIAA.
    • CitizenSimplex, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0That it is a valid point. Though I would say more movements like Trent's will help bring about said destruction.
  • Tufriast, on 03/24/2008, -4/+770 Diggs and its down? Mirror pls.
  • geneticlone, on 03/24/2008, -10/+3I'm sorry to all you radiohead fans but this is just enough, I am so sick of this popping up on digg. I don't care for their music nor their advertisement for their album! Just stop, it's over.
  • fydo, on 03/24/2008, -3/+28Digg: Singlehandedly taking down websites?
    • noseeme, on 03/24/2008, -5/+5Diggers: Singlehandedly applying magical growth powder to their egos?
    • smacksaw, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4It's interesting. It seems like MrBabyMan, Zaibatsu, msaleem are getting better at gaming the new system, but as some sort of bizarre punishment to them, the only articles they submit that make it are ones that go down as they hit the front page.

      Almost like the Gods of Digg Karma are saying "Ok, fine. You beat the new algorithm. So whatever you submit that I have to push to the front will be the thing I know will die."

      And regular Diggers sit back and wonder where the mirror is, but aren't too pissed because of who submitted it.
    • etx313, on 03/25/2008, -2/+2No, It requires many nerds and much clicking.
  • skyshock1, on 03/24/2008, -3/+11So how is a new band that no one has heard of supposed to get any exposure using this model? I think this works well for already established bands (that record companies dumped TONS of advertising money into), but not so much for the little guys.

    Congrats, this changes nothing.
    • cadmiumpaint, on 03/24/2008, -4/+2haven't you been reading? True artists will make all their money by touring and accepting 'donations' from their true fans. If you believe that would actually work, i'd like to sell you property in Iraq.
      • Pake, on 03/25/2008, -0/+3Most artist make majority of their money from concerts already.
        • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -0/+3i think clear channel, ticket master and the venues make all the real money from artists who tour.
    • copypasterepeat, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1As much as I echo many people's thoughts and ideas on this whole thing, (most I won't repeat), I do consider this into the equation and I honesty don't think we're seeing a brilliant new business model for all. Like you imply, what do new (genuinely good/talent) bands/artists do to get to this point. And the live performance and merchandise money is hardly big bucks.... right?

      I think we'll be seeing bands and artists doing the music thing, but also having to run a "real" job along side it, (music-based or otherwise). Plus, with all this in mind I think we can say goodbye to world tours and stadium shows.
      • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1yeah i'd agree with that. music will become smaller and localized. as a result people in chicago will never hear or see a band from Atlanta. Thats progress...
    • CitizenSimplex, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2So disgusting. YES, Reznor's position is not common. NO, that does not denigrate the significance of his departure from traditional models. This move is indicative of a new, better outlook/philosophy when it comes to marketing and making music. His solutions to HIS unique problems are applicable in principle, not by carbon copying the technique for a less popular act. Did anyone ever consider that maybe decent acts starting out can't get heard because the majors are dropping millions on promoting synthetic pop acts? The ***** drowns the decent acts in noise. SOMETHING needs to change.
      • skyshock1, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2Yes, the problem is the REASON labels drop that much into synthetic pop acts is because they have mass-appeal. Not the other way around. Esoteric music may be fine and good to seek out, but it's not going to have the same mass appeal that traditional pop songs do, so that's what get's the push from the investors.

        Now the reasons for this are numerous, and I blame mostly lack of music-schooling in our public schools... but I digress.
      • Nillerus, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1Exactly. BTW, anyone else get the feeling the comments are being trolled by RIAA hangers-on, or am I just overly paranoid?
  • Ecuno, on 03/24/2008, -2/+9What I don't like is the fact that everyone was all struck with Radiohead and the way they released their album, and no one said anything when they turned around and released it through a record label after the news had died down. Either you do or do not like your label, don't deceive us.
    • wreckage21, on 03/24/2008, -4/+0They released it independently through their own label TBD
      • jordanfrank, on 03/25/2008, -0/+3yes, and ATO owns TBD, RCA owns ATO, and guess who owns RCA? SONY.
        Do your homework before shooting your mouth off.
        • wreckage21, on 03/25/2008, -1/+0Right, but at least they didn't release it through Sony, EMI, Capitol, or whatever; they made their own label which is a pretty noble act imo. Also, it was pretty clear when In Rainbows was released that a CD and Box Set would come soon. I agree that this model wouldn't work well for new or upcoming artists, but for an established band like Radiohead or NIN i think it's pretty brilliant.
    • Cdiddy69, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Agreed. Its almost as if they just did this for publicity.
    • terminal157, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2It was an "indie" label, though, not their old label which they left. The significance of that choice (they could've gone with a major, of course) was lost given the earlier release via internet.

      There was no deception, it was fairly obvious from the start that there would be a physical CD release, no one said otherwise.
  • xgambetx, on 03/24/2008, -7/+30***** the RIAA
  • Bricks, on 03/24/2008, -1/+16His moves are not revolutionary, but they are crucially evolutionary.

    As said, this stuff has been done by smaller acts for ages. But hes one of the first significant/large/commercial acts to shake things up. Its telling just how much press Trent's moves have seen! The industry really is so slow and out of touch, that relatively old ideas/models are absolutely shocking to the public! Trent isn't some kind of industry messiah - hes just an intelligent musician with his finger on the pulse, and helping to expedite trajectory of a long overdue asteroid to the slow dino label scene. Evolve, or die; grow, or die.
    • jordanfrank, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1he's an intelligent musician in that he realizes he's made enough of a name for himself that he can get by without a major label. unfortunately, what he's also doing is being greedy and taking away from the profits of the labels that made him who he is. some of that money, whether you like to admit it or you've bought your ticket on the the anti-industry bandwagon, actually goes to develop new talent, and build the careers of the Reznor's of tomorrow. but now that money just goes into Reznor's pocket.
      so how is this a better model? how does this help anyone except an already successful artist?
      • ratzmoose, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Really all goes in Reznors pockets? I believe his pockets were pretty open when helping Saul Williams out last year. Also not to mention in the past he is the guy responsible for making Marylin Manson who he is, and working with other more unknown artists when he ran Nothing records. So don't say Reznor doesn't do anything to develop other artists because clearly he does. Artists today can help promote other artists, the major label thing can be slowly phased out or it has evolve out of its current state.

        Overall for the most part it does help an already successful artist for now but there clearly most be change in the way the industry does business and if major acts like NIN and Radiohead continue to leave labels they will notice it in their pocket book and will realize they have to change in order to survive.
  • noseeme, on 03/24/2008, -7/+2His ideology has hardly turned into something tangible as of yet.
  • basotl, on 03/24/2008, -2/+5Mirror:
    http://www.duggmirror.com/music/Trent_Reznor_Singl ...
  • RunawayElf, on 03/24/2008, -9/+20Trent Reznor is the new Ron Paul.
    • noseeme, on 03/24/2008, -7/+3Except Trent doesn't have a problem with the government telling him to stop at a stop sign, and taxing him because it requires money to run a local fire department.
    • ElChapusero, on 03/24/2008, -2/+5comment dugg for reading my mind
  • Griffinmg, on 03/24/2008, -5/+0Im pretty sure he uses 2 hands to make music and type etc
  • cadmiumpaint, on 03/24/2008, -13/+9Trent Reznor is a hypocrite. From a May 2007 interview...

    "Basically it's because we know you've got a core audience that's gonna buy whatever we put out, so we can charge more for that. It's the pop stuff we have to discount to get people to buy it. True fans will pay whatever". And I just said "That's the most insulting thing I've heard. I've garnered a core audience that you feel it's OK to rip off? F--- you"

    so basically its ok to rip off your fans when you're the one doing it. what selfish prick. There is hardly a record label would have EVER DREAMED of charging $75 for a double disc cd or $300 for a box set. And all the nin sheep line up to suck trent off as they give him more than they've ever paid before for music.


    • jordan2k, on 03/24/2008, -2/+2You seem to be missiing something; the record labels put up the prices of his standard releases because the fans would pay it. There was no cheaper option.

      Trent charged a good price for the normal release, and cruicially, he provided people the OPTION of buying a "deluxe" collectors edition for a higher price, it was not forced onto the consumer like it was when he was complaining in May 2007.

      Think please, if you would.
      • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -3/+2yeah but at least before he actually gave a complete album instead of unfinished background tracks. I really think trent used this as an opportunity to see how much he could gouge his die hard fans for.
      • bingobongony, on 03/25/2008, -2/+1So..in your mind, the music industry should not be allowed to set prices the same way that any other industry does? It should be what YOU want to pay?

        I want to pay $50 for a Nano. Ain't gonna happen. Is that wrong? If the majority of people wanted it at $49, and was not willing to pay a hundred bucks more for it, then the price would come down.

        Same thing. If people stopped buying CDs at $16, then the price would come down.
        • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2the music industry has been setting its own prices. I have issue is with an artist who criticizes his bosses (the label) for charging his die hard fans huge amounts of money because they know they'll pay it, and then turn around and do the exact same thing. Yes he gave them a "choice" but he knew that his real fans, the ones that actually care about him , the ones that have given him his cushy lifestyle, would most all pay at least $75.
          • bingobongony, on 03/25/2008, -2/+1Apple "sets their own prices" on Nanos too. If they didn't sell well enough to profit, the price would go down.

            EVERY company sets their own prices.
    • MarrowMan, on 03/24/2008, -2/+9the $300 set was limited to like 2500, was signed, came with a DVD/Blu-Ray disc, and art and *****, to a true fan, a bargain. Don't be a douche bag.
      • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -5/+1right...because the sharpie that he used to sign those pics cost him $100 and the extra printing cost him another $200. From the interview he seemed to believe that fans should get music for as close to cost as possible.
        • hillkiwi, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1You're missing the point. People sell fake versions of this stuff on eBay all the time. For the hardcore fans at least now they know it's legit.
      • bingobongony, on 03/25/2008, -4/+2Anyone who considers that a bargain is the douche bag. I mean really..what high school kid has $300 lying around. And what person out of high school isn't thoroughly embarrassed to have EVER listened to NIN?
        • sgtpppr, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2Please go to reddit or something. All you do is come here and troll.
          • hillkiwi, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2Some people are just like that. My guess would be that bingobongony was one of those kids who was neglected as a child and learned that bad attention was better than no attention. Most grow out of this phase but not all.

            The most you can do is correct his ramblings so others don't take what he says as credible and move on.
        • hillkiwi, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2NIN has a HUGE older audience - he's been around since the 80's. You don't have a ***** clue what you're talking about.

          Why don't you name some of your favorite bands?

          PS: Those 2500 $300 records sold in no time - so point and case that you're indeed an absolute moron.
          • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -0/+3i am one of those people. i've been there since the beginning. i bought pretty hate machine when it first came out...on tape.

            i don't owe you any explanation and I don't care if you or anyone else approves of what i listen to. I have an opinion on this matter and i have the right to express it. Sorry that it doesn't fall in line with the sheep mentality.

            the $300 price point was designed to ensure that even if he just sold those and nothing else (which he knew he would), he would have still made 3/4 of a million bucks off the backs of 300 die hard fans. It would have paid for everything else and he would have suffered no losses. he's a pretty decent businessman.....he learned something.
          • hillkiwi, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2@cadmiumpaint My comment was directed towards bingobongony's comment of "what person out of high school isn't thoroughly embarrassed to have EVER listened to NIN?".

            As for the $300 record - to each their own. If that was the only format then I would complain, but there was a demand and he produced the supply.
    • esbern1, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4wow you are a ***** idiot that just misrepresented that quote. I can't stand Trent Reznor but even I'm smart enough to know this was somehow wrong.

      Turns out what he was talking about was a discussion he had with his AUSTRALIAN LABEL REPRESENTATIVES who want to ***** his fans over. You need to pay attention before being a goddamn retard.
      • cadmiumpaint, on 03/25/2008, -5/+2i read the complete article. He's doing the exact thing that his label did in my opinion, seeing as how he knew his real fans would go for the expensive options.
        • sgtpppr, on 03/25/2008, -2/+2You need to immediately get yourself enrolled in a reading program.
    • SittinSidewayz, on 03/25/2008, -1/+3Nobody put a gun to the heads' of the people that shelled out $300. I thought long and hard regarding that, it wasn't in my budget so I settled on the $10 investment. And yes that is a bargain for a nin head and will top off any serious collectors' collection. Just because you don't like the band, you don't justify spending $300 for some stuff. I like the band and see it as a ridiculous bargain.

      To top it off, you misquoted so heavily, that it is funny. Maybe you should read what you copy and pasted and analyze what is actually said.
    • sgtpppr, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2You read that out of context. He was pissed at the label for saying [insert that quote]. He asked why the record was so pricey in certain areas and that is what they responded with.
  • Woecip, on 03/24/2008, -14/+8***** radiohead.
  • redsoxmb545, on 03/24/2008, -5/+2I need a device in which I can see my reflection plz.
  • gravityPersists, on 03/24/2008, -1/+12How can you say Trent Reznor is singlehandedly doing something while saying "a la Radiohead" in your description?
    • moat211, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0i didn't write the part in italics. thank my editors for that one.
    • D14BL0, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2I don't think you understand what the term "a la" means.
    • method3, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2It would have been wittier to say "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." a la Princess Bride.

      The main point of the article is that Trent Reznor is apparently doing it better than Radiohead, and more than once (i.e. not a random promotional stunt). Therefore arguably Trent Reznor is creating a business for doing this within the established industry singlehandedly.
  • krisscofield, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Babysteps, people! RTFA--"singlehandedly" isn't exactly an egoboost. They've gotten a lot of legal ***** for it. Not to mention all of the "indie" fanboys harping about who did it first. Trent and the Radiohead camp are simply spearheading the mainstream* (keyword here, so don't bother with the "underground bla bla bla" argument) effort to create awareness and availability to the CONSUMER.
  • tketch, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Since this site is down, there is a similar article about how the basic marketing concept of "give users what they want" actually made for a big payday for Reznor, even in the world of music recording. At lot of that has to do with his great producing skill set.
    Check it out:
    http://www.tekbite.com/2008/03/free-legal-download ...
  • MarrowMan, on 03/24/2008, -3/+6Yep Reznor rules. Now we need another Magnum Opus like The Downward Spiral and we'll be all set!
  • jjmdirector, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Its the end for record labels. As soon as you get a huge name, all you need is a studio to record, a publicist, and ITUNES and Napster. people who are starting need record labels.
  • willsani, on 03/24/2008, -6/+2"This site is temporarily unavailable. Please notify the System Administrator"... now what?
    • D14BL0, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2I'm no expert, but I think you should notify the System Administrator. Might be important.
    • etx313, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Call Trent.
  • Synthesize, on 03/24/2008, -2/+5cadmiumpaint,

    Trent Reznor offered a $5 charge for the Ghosts album digitally and $10 for the physical copy. This is a great deal IMHO. I don't understand how he is being a hypocrite, he knows a lot of hardcore fans want more than that and he offered that as well. How can you go wrong with that? If you don't want all that extra ***** then don't buy it or don't buy anything at all, download Ghost I for free.
  • jjcyber, on 03/24/2008, -4/+1While the idea of the article is interesting (I.E. recognizing Reznor's efforts) the article itself is highly lacking. Two paragraphs by some English major wannabe on what kind of music he likes to listen to while on acid. All the details in that article can be found in any other recent article on Reznor. Post = fail.
  • bobsbones, on 03/25/2008, -6/+2Good on Trent, a great move in a positive direction. But the thing is, without the marketing and publicity he's recieved through the years through the efforts of the record industry, who would give a ***** that he is giving away music.

    There are loads of groups out there, unsigned, giving away tracks and albums. The majority of them are, lets be honest, mediocre at best but there is some gold out there. You never hear about them because you've never heard about them. Trent has singlehandedly broken his own mold, but he already has a large fanbase and wide recognition. This is not a viable solution for bands just starting up. Like it or not, there are aspects of the record industy that any new act will require, like marketing, studio time and production, that many groups would not be able to afford, just to make a 'polished' album that is competitive in todays high-compression-loudness arena, and then to get the recognition to sell it.

    That said, ***** the RIAA.
  • jordanfrank, on 03/25/2008, -2/+7Finally, the magical step 2 to making money as a musician is revealed.
    1) Steal underpants.
    2) Become really, really famous (15 years ago) due to millions of dollars in marketing and promotion put up by a major record label.
    3) Profit
    Quick! Everyone tell the little indie bands that all they have to do is follow the Reznor model, and they too can be successful.
    What's wrong with you people? Critical thinking skills just taking some time off?
    • bingobongony, on 03/25/2008, -3/+4this is digg. critical thinking skills have taken a permanent vacation for most.
    • terminal157, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1It's true that bands using this model are not going to have the same massive success with it as Radiohead or NIN, but that doesn't invalidate the wisdom of the model. There's a sea change taking place, this is simply an important part of it.
      • jordanfrank, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Wisdom of the model? The title of this article implies that this kind of behaviour is going to fix the industry. How on earth is pulling profits out of the industry and putting them directly into the pockets of a few huge, established artists going to have any impact on the industry? Other than hurting it.

        The industry is, in fact, broken. But what is ironic is that the only artists that the industry is good for, in it's current state, are artists like Radiohead and NiN. These are the artists that can throw their weight around and negotiate incredible deals. Do you know what might actually change the industry? Someone like NiN going to Sony, or some big label, and saying "hey, I'll sign with you on my terms, and one of those terms is that I get to choose the opening acts on my tour, and not only that, but if you choose to sign any of these acts, then you offer them the exact same deal that you're offering me." Force the labels to actually develop new talent, redistribute the money. But pulling away from the industry just so that you can hoard more money is not helping.
        These artists have the ability to help to change the music industry for the better, and they are certainly not doing anything like that.
    • emildorbell, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1As opposed to indie bands making money from CD sales through record labels?
  • TheMeatball, on 03/25/2008, -0/+6The article mentioned that you can get 320kbps DRM-free mp3s, but failed to mention the flac option, which is a big plus for a lot of people(me excluded).
  • Gnoll, on 03/25/2008, -3/+0Well obviously now that he's gotten rid of that Volvo he has the chance to stop crying and get to work on things.
  • bingobongony, on 03/25/2008, -4/+2Wake me up when a non-established band is able to do this. People did this to PROVE A POINT. (And because NIN fans are not exactly in their right minds to begin with.)
  • stonewaljacksn, on 03/25/2008, -7/+5is trent reznor the douchebag or are the people who make him into some kind of god the douchebags?
  • billbugger, on 03/25/2008, -2/+1what about pennywise's new album? Its free. Artist make most of their money from concerts then albums.
    • downneck, on 03/25/2008, -0/+2pennywise sucks ***** through a straw
  • yggdrasil255, on 03/25/2008, -2/+1I like NIN, but I don't think trent is doing anything single handedly. In fact, the blurb mentions one other band doing something similar. So how can it be single handed. Not so much digging this article.

    Also, someone else made a good point about having already been promoted by a large record label. Now, I would say what he did to promote saul was A++. The future of music promotion without large corporations doing your dirty work for you may be recommendations from other big musical acts. Not easy or doable by everyone. But then again, when has a musical career EVER been possible for just anyone?
  • harvested, on 03/25/2008, -1/+3Reznor rocks, but can't digg this article, it contains nothing we didn't already know.
  • Vanor, on 03/25/2008, -3/+0"She breathes death inside
    as we keep trying to nurture her with lies
    now scorched her eyes are blind
    but given time she can recover if we try
    but now they build another wall again

    come with me and you will see
    our future in debris
    first the sun and now the stars are fading
    in a rogue world we are free we have found the colored keys
    but I know that we are still waiting, waiting for her"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXxSWjhUGhA

    ***** music that isn't about being Emo, or doing drugs, or sex or any of that stupid boring ***** that permates most music these days. Music that lets your mind soar into the heavens. Music that empowers you and uplifts you. So you can keep your smartass remarks and I'll never take for granted being around to enjoy their music since its inception--on the internet mother *****.
  • thesoze, on 03/25/2008, -6/+1with that ***** ass music from Renzor...he single handedly screwed the music industry...awful and irreverent! ***** him!
    • smokingpurse, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0Irreverent? Trent made a funny? I don't think so....
  • gerbintosh, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0This model would make sense if you had as much publicity as NIN does. I don't think it will work for everyone however I still believe that Record companies and yes even artists, made too much money off of music CDs. I can understand the pricing of concerts, but not cd's. Especially when you can spend a few months making a CD and then mass produce it for pennies on the dollar. Also do not forget the way artists would regurgitate out 12 to 15 songs on a CD and only 3 would be great/good. Man that used to piss me off. Thats why buying one song at a time is genius.
    • downneck, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1do you think that housing, food, living expenses, studio time, and equipment are all ***** free for the months it takes to write and record a CD? you have absolutely no idea how much it really costs to create a CD.
  • njs1970, on 03/25/2008, -1/+2While it's true that Trent and NIN did gain their popularity thanks to the record labels investing large amounts of money into them, I think it's fair to say that they got their money back and a lot more otherwise they would have been dropped from their label quicker than quick.

    In that respect, NIN/Trent doesn't owe them jack.

    Radiohead's free release was purely a gimmick - Trent is actively trying to find a new business model where he can be fairly recompensed for his work and pull the rug from under the music pirates at the same time.

    There may also be a pinch of "psychology" built into this model - specifically the Law of Reciprocation (check out the work of Dr Robert Caldini)

    Even if Trent doesn't get anywhere close to "fixing" the music industry, he should be given props for having the balls to do this.
  • DIGITALUPSTART, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1This kind of thing is not fixing anything. If a guy robs banks and you say, hey you don't have to rob us anymore, you just come in every Tuesday and we'll hand you the money, that does not fix it.

    Trent Reznor and Radiohead are well established and well off financially and can afford to give away music. If they were just starting out, they would not be able to do this. It was marketing and record sales that got them were they are.

    Yes music should be affordable but not free. It takes time and money to make music and it takes money to tour. If these bands give it away then it will be expected. Then when up and coming band s try to sale their music, they will be seen as the bad guys or "un-cool". So how are they supposed to get to where they can make a living off music. I am certain Radiohead or Trent Reznor would not work a day job and give their music away. In fact when he worked at the recording studio in Cleavland did he make Pretty Hate Machine and say, hey I'll just let people have it for free, or just for $5 and keep working here and use my own money for gas to get to shows. No it was record company money and music sales money that got him his musical and financial success.

    Oh and that bit torrent site run by the two so called down with the man anarchist's has corporate sponsors who pay big bucks to advertise on their site. So while people are musicians are having their music stolen and shared for free they are making big bucks. So much for sticking it to the man.

    There is a value in everything that people do, weather it is making music, painting, flipping burgers, running and office or digging a ditch. Rather than encourage this generation of I want it, I am entitled and I should not have to pay for it or work for it, we should be teaching that there is a value to things and everything you do does affect someone somewhere.

    Remember it was record company
  • surfingkid, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1what a breath of fresh 'music' air...I had almost forgotten what music was about:

    http://www.jamsbio.com
  • year0, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0Because Trent puts the rest to SHAME!!!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.