DS Forums

 
 

Clueless Thom Yorke at it again


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-10-2013, 11:50
TheTruth1983
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Crapville
Posts: 13,162

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...e-dying-corpse

Dying corpse? Really? How can a corpse die?

And comparing Spotify to what Radiohead did in 2007? The two things are not remotely similar.

Times have changed. Music is accessible to more people than ever before. Earning millions for making mediocre music isn’t justified anymore.

Frankly, Thom Yorke can shove his overrated pretentious crap where the mice can't get at it.
TheTruth1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 07-10-2013, 11:54
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
i have to say i find much of radioheads music depressing, im all for serious lyrics and songs with meaning, i just find it melancholic in a bad way
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 11:58
sootysoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: España
Posts: 6,848
I always found Radiohead mind numbingly dull and tedious to the point where I would rather listen to Whigfield's "Saturday night" on repeat for the next 15 years than listen to a single Radiohead song drone on for 3 torturous minutes.
sootysoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:00
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
this is better than radiohead, agree ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVzUFNWIYM0
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:05
sootysoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: España
Posts: 6,848
Yeah 100% better, but then again so is this: http://youtu.be/vyIAfEqA220
sootysoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:09
TheTruth1983
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Crapville
Posts: 13,162
TheTruth1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:12
sootysoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: España
Posts: 6,848
At least these songs make a person feel something. All Radiohead makes you want to do is crawl under a duvet and die. :yawn:
sootysoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:16
afcbfan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,288
You know, I spend hours compiling a weekly Spotify playlist of all the best new releases around at the moment: www.spoti.fi/OQ15nN

I've discovered *so* many bands on there; bands which I'd never get to hear on the Radio. And combine that with the built-in Songkick app, where you can find who's playing when at what venue, and my spending on the music industry has rocketed. And is it any coincidence that music industry revenue rose last year for the first time since 1999? http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...91P0F320130226 But Thom Yorke's advice to new bands is to pull their music from the service? Very good, but I won't hear them, and I won't see them, and I won't buy any of their stuff. I'm not sure that's going to help anybody.

Surely it's better to encourage subscriptions. As Dave Stewart said last week : "It's a volume business. If they had 100 million subscribers, which is possible, the payment [for the Eurythmics catalogue] would be equal to the band's income back at the peak of selling."
afcbfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:22
Chandelier
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 275
You know, I spend hours compiling a weekly Spotify playlist of all the best new releases around at the moment: www.spoti.fi/OQ15nN

I've discovered *so* many bands on there; bands which I'd never get to hear on the Radio. And combine that with the built-in Songkick app, where you can find who's playing when at what venue, and my spending on the music industry has rocketed. And is it any coincidence that music industry revenue rose last year for the first time since 1999? http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...91P0F320130226 But Thom Yorke's advice to new bands is to pull their music from the service? Very good, but I won't hear them, and I won't see them, and I won't buy any of their stuff. I'm not sure that's going to help anybody.

Surely it's better to encourage subscriptions. As Dave Stewart said last week : "It's a volume business. If they had 100 million subscribers, which is possible, the payment [for the Eurythmics catalogue] would be equal to the band's income back at the peak of selling."
Exactly. Artist need to innovate to monetise their wares. Moaning about it not being like the old days is rubbish.
Chandelier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:26
trevgo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Leafy London
Posts: 20,390
He/They made one incredible, mind numbing, jaw dropping album. The Bends.

The rest is shite and Yorke is a pretentious prick.
trevgo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:30
Justicar
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,522
He's actually making a very good point:

"When we did the In Rainbows thing what was most exciting was the idea you could have a direct connection between you as a musician and your audience. You cut all of it out, it's just that and that. And then all these ****ers get in a way, like Spotify suddenly trying to become the gatekeepers to the whole process," said Yorke.

"We don't need you to do it. No artists needs you to do it. We can build the shit ourselves, so **** off. But because they're using old music, because they're using the majors… the majors are all over it because they see a way of re-selling all their old stuff for free, make a fortune, and not die."
What he's saying is services like Spotify are trying to become the new middle men. They pay artists a pittance (please don't even try and pretend they don't). Nowadays artists can sell their music directly to the public, they don't need people like Spotify, and he's right.

Forget Spotify, try other sites like Bandcamp. Although it's a middle man of sorts, just like record shops are, artists get much more money from sales.
Justicar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:39
TheTruth1983
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Crapville
Posts: 13,162
He's actually making a very good point:



What he's saying is services like Spotify are trying to become the new middle men. They pay artists a pittance (please don't even try and pretend they don't). Nowadays artists can sell their music directly to the public, they don't need people like Spotify, and he's right.

Forget Spotify, try other sites like Bandcamp. Although it's a middle man of sorts, just like record shops are, artists get much more money from sales.
Spotify pays rights holders who are most often record labels and licensing companies. They pay these rights holders the lion's share of their overall revenue (£500million in 2012 from the article). Perhaps if musicians are not being paid enough the blame lays with record labels and licensing companies and not Spotify?

Also, I don't buy that Spotify are the new middle men. Spotify are a distribution channel, just like Amazon, Bandcamp, Itunes or even the traditional record store. They do not control the music on their service and they do not pay artists directly. That is the job of record labels.
TheTruth1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:57
Justicar
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,522
I wouldn't put streaming services in the same category as direct download services. They're more 'content access' than distribution. It's music in the cloud. Personally I'm opposed to cloud based services, not just for music but for software too. With downloads you actually get something to keep, and depending on the site the artist will get a fair chunk of the sale. Streaming services are a way for companies to control music, to take control out of the hands of musicians.
Justicar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:07
Justmadeit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bury, Lancashire. uP NORTH !
Posts: 5,553
this is also better than radio head, they are on a world tour now i believe

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZQ4HJPVoTw
Justmadeit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:15
Ginger Nut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,441
I remember desperately rushing for the tv remote because radiohead were on a show. The noise was actually painful to me. Awful band.
Ginger Nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:21
JasonWatkins
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,676
Yorke comes across as a petulant child with his rant. He claims Spotify is "dying" when it appears to be doing the exact opposite and going from strength to strength.
JasonWatkins is online now Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:23
Hogzilla
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 22,696
I think he is right. If they can do it themselves, then the process doesn't need 'gatekeepers'. Anything to give creative people more control, and a more direct interface with the people who enjoy what they do, has to be good.
Hogzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:24
Justicar
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,522
Looks like some people didn't read the article.
Justicar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:28
TheTruth1983
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Crapville
Posts: 13,162
Yorke comes across as a petulant child with his rant. He claims Spotify is "dying" when it appears to be doing the exact opposite and going from strength to strength.
Thom Yorke lacks a basic understanding of what Spotify is. Spotify has to go to the record labels and make a deal in order to have a business. The record labels control the vast majority of musicians and Spotify is not allowed to go directly to the musician, so it has to deal with intermediaries such as record labels. If he has such a problem with Spotify, perhaps he should take it up with the record labels instead of ranting like a spoiled brat about a service that provides exposure for artists.

That, or start up a service of his own that does what he wants but I guess it is just easier to rant nonsensically to the media while failing to offer alternatives.
TheTruth1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:30
Hogzilla
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 22,696
Not sure what his Next Big Thing is, but I think he is right - there will be something along that will make the current technologies redundant.

Not sure why he needs to 'offer alternatives' - he's just expressing an opinion.
Hogzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:32
Justicar
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,522
That, or start up a service of his own that does what he wants but I guess it is just easier to rant nonsensically to the media while failing to offer alternatives.
You mean like offering direct downloads, which he did with their album In Rainbows?

You just want to rant, like you did with your other thread on a similar subject.
Justicar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:33
TheTruth1983
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Crapville
Posts: 13,162
I think he is right. If they can do it themselves, then the process doesn't need 'gatekeepers'. Anything to give creative people more control, and a more direct interface with the people who enjoy what they do, has to be good.
Spotify are not gatekeepers. A gatekeeper decides what music people should have access to but Spotify allows the user to control what they listen to from their catalog and record labels decide what Spotify are allowed to make available. The record labels are the gatekeepers, not Spotify.
TheTruth1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 14:00
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,462
This seems to be the maths of it. Before reading, bear in mind that the numbers reflect sales for a solo artist to earn minimum wage, not fund some fancy gangster rap bling bling life style

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/how-much-do-music-artists-earn-online/
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 14:01
dee123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 22,461
I always found Radiohead mind numbingly dull and tedious to the point where I would rather listen to Whigfield's "Saturday night" on repeat for the next 15 years than listen to a single Radiohead song drone on for 3 torturous minutes.
While i do find Radiohead a tad overrated, Whigfield?
dee123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 14:05
Hogzilla
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 22,696
Spotify are not gatekeepers. A gatekeeper decides what music people should have access to but Spotify allows the user to control what they listen to from their catalog and record labels decide what Spotify are allowed to make available. The record labels are the gatekeepers, not Spotify.
I'm aware what Spotify is. My son had it from the start, years back.
Hogzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:49.