miseryXchord ♫

Trent Reznor: 'No wonder people steal music'
From Zero Paid

The NIN frontman rails against overpriced music in his band's latest blog posting.

You know I think a band really shows its true character when it comes down to a battle over either profits or creativity. It's when a band's back is up against that the wall that their heart and soul really comes out.

Sure Metallica, for instance, was a great band but, as soon as Lars started griping that his band was unable to get every penny that it deserved, that his million-dollar billfold was a bit light, it really made you see them for who they were. Rather than propose an alternative or show at least some kind of empathy for teenage kids unable to otherwise afford to buy all their albums, they railed against file-sharers and never seemed to miss an opportunity to reiterate RIAA talking points. As a fan of Metallica it was very painful to watch.

It's easy for a band to say that they're rebels, or try to say to their audience that they're free wheeling, creative souls but, as always the proof is in deeds not words.

We saw it with Eddie Vedder and Pearl Jam when they took Ticketmaster's high ticket price monopoly to task and worked for years to try and change it.

The Dave Matthews Band allows fans to post and share live concert recordings and footage on their Ants Marching site in the spirit of the Greatful Dead and other artists whose main focus was on the music itself and not what the music puts into their pockets. Sure they have to make a buck but, at what point does reaching your audience supersede profits? There has to be a healthy balance between the two otherwise one risks alienating the very fanbase that forms the foundation upon which an artist is able to find the safety and security necessary to practice his art and talents, and more importantly, to express himself in a way that was hopefully his intention from the very start. Music does not exist in a vacuum.

NIN is a band that seems to be in tune with its listeners and what the future holds for music distribution and its ability to stay relevant. It has posted tracks from Year Zero on The Pirate Bay, and even made some tracks, clips, and snippets of material available for download on its band's site.

Now, I think Trent Reznor, NIN's lead singer, has made an even more startling revelation than any previous, observing the high price of physical CDs and realizing why it is that people steal music.

He writes:

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.

To be fair "Year Zero" is being sold for $9.99 on Amazon.com but, it has a list price of $17.99 and heavens knows how much it retails for elsewhere. If it really is $30 bucks in Australia I don't know why anybody in that country would buy a CD ever again. Can you imagine shelling out $30 bucks for an album that has maybe 2 or 3 good tracks? It's insane, and it's nice to finally see a music artist say as much. When was the last time you heard J-Lo or any of the other "top" acts like Usher or Justin Timberlake complain about high-priced CDs? It's the high price of physical CDs that has made people to turn to free methods like P2P and file-sharing programs like BitTorrent, KaZaA Lite, etc..

Anyways, it's always refreshing to hear an artist acknowledge the plight of his fans and the insanity of trying to bleed them dry for $30 bucks an album.
**To note, I've been a fan since 89' when a buddy of mine turned me onto "Pretty Hate Machine," and I've been "down in it," ever since, having my mom even send me the album "Broken" when I was in Boot Camp. --- right on Trent! **

Source

---

Trent Reznor: "I steal music too"
from Zero Paid

Wants to offer $4 dollar album downloads at a bitrate of your choice, and blames the record industry for its own problems by having ripped off customers for so many years.

NIN seems to be leading the way for how the music industry of the future should be, taking on high priced CD albums and mindless record label execs bent on getting every nickel and dime it can get no matter what the cost to its music artists and image.

Last week I wrote about one of NIN's blog postings in which Trent Reznor, the band's outspoken frontman, railed against overpriced CDs and lamented that "No wonder people steal music." Apparently while on a sojourn in Australia he browsed the racks of a brick and mortar CD store (guess at least one country still has them) and was angered by the fact that his new "Year Zero" album was retailing for $29 USD. Yes $29 USD!! As an artist I'd be angry too.

Well, a few days later it seems he was interviewed by Australia's Herald Sun newspaper [Interview below] and they asked him about file-sharing and his thoughts on the state of physical CD prices.

The most interesting response he gave was to the question of illegally downloading music, to which he answered "...I steal music too, I'm not gonna say I don't." Is Trent hardcore or what?

He goes on to say that sure he resents people getting his stuff for free but, unlike most other artists it seems he knows who's actually to blame for the whole file-sharing mess -- record labels. He says that "... you got record labels that are doing everything they can to piss people off and rip them off." That's right, Mr. Reznor has been blessed with a clarity of thought and mind that's been sadly lacking from the music industry for some time now.

I mean, what was the music industry thinking way back in 1999 with Napster, that the digital music and portable music players would just somehow disappear? That there would be some mass Third Reich iPod-burnings or something? Digital music IS the future and to watch them be constantly slapped like a hysterical child every year grows not only tiresome but, downright shameful.

For an industry that prides itself on enough numbers, sales, figures, trends, and statistical reports to have turned music sales into a downright science, how is that they keep failing to see that people no longer want to buy CDs, and especially at $30 bucks a pop!

Reznor also describes his CD shopping experience in more detail than he did in his blog.

He writes:

"I walk into HMV, the week the record's out, and I see it on the rack with a bunch of other releases. And every release I see: $21.99, $22.99, $24.99. And ours doesn't have a sticker on it. I look close and 'Oh, it's $34.99'. So I walk over to see our live DVD Beside You in Time, and I see that it's also priced six, seven, eight dollars more than every other disc on there. And I can't figure out why that would be."

Reznor, never one to refrain from speaking his mind, ends up confronting one of the record label "sales guys" at a meet and greet during his stay in Brisbane. He asks them why his CDs and DVDs cost 6,7, and even 8 more dollars then everybody elses.

The sales guy says it's "Because your packaging is a lot more expensive." But, apparently Reznor pays for this out of his cut form the CD, so this is a moot argument. "I know how much the packaging costs -- it costs me, not them, it costs me 83 cents more to have a CD with the colour-changing ink on it. I'm taking the hit on that, not them."

The sales guy then basically says that it's okay to charge more because he has a "...core audience that's gonna buy whatever we put out, so we can charge more for that."

That's when Reznor gets really pissed off and takes the guy to task, saying it's messed up that they feel they can rip off his audience just because they're more loyal fans. That's when the conversation gets really good, and man I wish I was there to hear it.

He noted:

"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'. That's also why you don't see any label people here, 'cos I said 'F--- you people. Stay out of my f---ing show. If you wanna come, pay the ticket like anyone else. F--- you guys". They're thieves. I don't blame people for stealing music if this is the kind of s--- that they pull off."

You gotta love it.

It gets even better when he observes that "...these guys who have f---ed themselves out of a job essentially, that now take it out on ripping off the public." You have to feel for the guy because he here is trying to make a living and these idiot record label execs are making a tough situation even worse by making it even more painful for people just wanting to support to band by buying their albums. It's tragic really.

"I've got a battle where I'm trying to put out quality material that matters and I've got fans that feel it's their right to steal it and I've got a company that's so bureaucratic and clumsy and ignorant and behind the times they don't know what to do, so they rip the people off."

He said that he use to take it personally when album sales would stink that "Well, not that many people are into it. OK, that kinda sucks. Yeah I could point fingers but the blame would be with me, maybe I'm not relevant." But, now he sees that that is perhaps no longer the case, that album sales are sinking because people just aren't buying albums like they used to, instead buying digital singles, and also that they're simply tired of getting ripped off.

"...on this record, I know people have it and I know it's on everybody's iPods, but the climate is such that people don't buy it because it's easier to steal it," he comments.

But, he does have a plan for the future in which after the next album he owes the record label is completed he will turn to releasing the albums on his own. "You could download it from my site at as high a bit-rate as you want, pay $4 through PayPal. Come see the show and buy a T-shirt if you like it. I would put out a nicely packaged merchandise piece, if you want to own a physical thing. And it would come out the day that it's done in the studio, not this "Let's wait three months" bulls---."

Now $4 bucks is a price that I certainly would pay, especially that not only is it cheap and would it go directly to the artist themselves but, it would also provide another alternative to the idiot record label sales guys out there who are bent on ripping off music customers just because they happen to be loyal fans.

Source

---

From The Herald Sun
May 17, 2007 12:00am

Q & A with Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails


Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails lets rip at ignorant record companies to NEALA JOHNSON

ON stage at the Metro on Monday night, it seemed you're enjoying being a rock star again. True?

It's funny you'd say that 'cos that was not one of my favourite shows.

It went downhill at one point.

Yeah. I enjoy playing these days. I try to make the most of it and sometimes it's great fun and sometimes, like Monday night when it was crippled with technical problems, it made it not fun. I couldn't hear what was going on, s--- was breaking . . .

Fools in the crowd were yelling . . .

Yeah, mixed feelings about that.

I mean, if you want me to go off on a tangent . . . I'm kind of in a weird space right now. I'm not real centred. We've been touring for a long time. I went from the record right into the tour, nine weeks in Europe in winter, which I don't recommend in any circumstance for anybody. I'm moving. There's some stuff in my personal life that's up.

It must be an odd time then to have a new album, Year Zero, out?

It's a very odd time to be a musician on a major label, because there's so much resentment towards the record industry that it's hard to position yourself in a place with the fans where you don't look like a greedy asshole. But at the same time, when our record came out I was disappointed at the number of people that actually bought it. If this had been 10 years ago

I would think "Well, not that many people are into it. OK, that kinda sucks. Yeah I could point fingers but the blame would be with me, maybe I'm not relevant". But on this record, I know people have it and I know it's on everybody's iPods, but the climate is such that people don't buy it because it's easier to steal it.

You're a bit of a computer geek. You must have been there, too?

Oh, I understand that -- I steal music too, I'm not gonna say I don't. But it's tough not to resent people for doing it when you're the guy making the music, that would like to reap a benefit from that. On the other hand, you got record labels that are doing everything they can to piss people off and rip them off. I created a little issue down here because the first thing I did when I got to Sydney is I walk into HMV, the week the record's out, and I see it on the rack with a bunch of other releases. And every release I see: $21.99, $22.99, $24.99. And ours doesn't have a sticker on it. I look close and 'Oh, it's $34.99'. So I walk over to see our live DVD Beside You in Time, and I see that it's also priced six, seven, eight dollars more than every other disc on there. And I can't figure out why that would be.

Did you have a word to anyone?

Well, in Brisbane I end up meeting and greeting some record label people, who are pleasant enough, and one of them is a sales guy, so I say "Why is this the case?" He goes "Because your packaging is a lot more expensive". I know how much the packaging costs -- it costs me, not them, it costs me 83 cents more to have a CD with the colour-changing ink on it. I'm taking the hit on that, not them. So I said "Well, it doesn't cost $10 more". "Ah, well, you're right, it doesn't. 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'. That's also why you don't see any label people here, 'cos I said 'F--- you people. Stay out of my f---ing show. If you wanna come, pay the ticket like anyone else. F--- you guys". They're thieves. I don't blame people for stealing music if this is the kind of s--- that they pull off.

Where does that extra $10 on your album go?

That money's not going into my pocket, I can promise you that. It's just these guys who have f---ed themselves out of a job essentially, that now take it out on ripping off the public. I've got a battle where I'm trying to put out quality material that matters and I've got fans that feel it's their right to steal it and I've got a company that's so bureaucratic and clumsy and ignorant and behind the times they don't know what to do, so they rip the people off.

Given all that, do you have any idea how to approach the release of your next album?

I've have one record left that I owe a major label, then I will never be seen in a situation like this again. If I could do what I want right now, I would put out my next album, you could download it from my site at as high a bit-rate as you want, pay $4 through PayPal. Come see the show and buy a T-shirt if you like it. I would put out a nicely packaged merchandise piece, if you want to own a physical thing. And it would come out the day that it's done in the studio, not this "Let's wait three months" bulls---.

When your US label, Interscope, discovered the web-based alternate reality game (ARG) you'd built around Year Zero, were they happy for the free marketing or angry you hadn't let them in on it?

I chose to do this on my own, at great financial expense to myself, because I knew they wouldn't understand what it is, for one. And secondly, I didn't want it coming from a place of marketing, I wanted it coming from a place that was pure to the project. It's a way to present the story and the backdrop, something I would be excited to find as a fan. I knew the minute I talked to someone at the record label about it, they would be looking at it in terms of "How can we tie this in with a mobile provider?" That's what they do. If something lent itself to that, OK, I'm not opposed to the idea of not losing a lot of money (laughs). But it would only be if it made sense. I've had to position myself as the irrational, stubborn, crazy artist. At the end of the day, I'm not out to sabotage my career, but quality matters, and integrity matters. Jumping through any hoop or taking advantage of any desperate situation that comes up just to sell a product is harmful. It is.

Is the Year Zero ARG something labels will copy now?

Well, their response, when they saw that it did catch on like wildfire, was "Look how smart we are the way we marketed this record". That's the feedback I've gotten -- other artists who've met with that label ask 'em about it: "Yeah, you like what we did for Trent? Look what we did for Trent". They've then gone on to try to buy the company that did it to apply it to all their other acts. So, glad I could help them out. I'm sure they still don't understand what it is that we did or why it worked. But I will look forward to the Black Eyed Peas ARG, that should be amazing.

Source

Source
ars technica

Apple hides account info in DRM-free music, too

By Ken Fisher | Published: May 30, 2007 - 01:39PM CT

With great power comes great responsibility, and apparently with DRM-free music comes files embedded with identifying information. Such is the situation with Apple's new DRM-free music: songs sold without DRM still have a user's full name and account e-mail embedded in them, which means that dropping that new DRM-free song on your favorite P2P network could come back to bite you.

We started examining the files this morning and noticed our names and e-mail addresses in the files, and we've found corroboration of the find at TUAW, as well. But there's more to the story: Apple embeds your account information in all songs sold on the store, not just DRM-free songs. Previously it wasn't much of a big deal, since no one could imagine users sharing encrypted, DRMed content. But now that DRM-free music from Apple is on the loose, the hidden data is more significant since it could theoretically be used to trace shared tunes back to the original owner. It must also be kept in mind that this kind of information could be spoofed.

Concerned users could convert selections to MP3, but there will be a generational loss in quality resulting from the transcoding. We also have to wonder: who is buying DRM-free music with the plans of slapping it up on a P2P share, anyway? It's not like there aren't dozens of other ways to get access to music without paying for it.

What would Apple do with the info?

The big question, of course, is what might Apple do with this information? Because it can be spoofed, it's not exactly the best way to determine who is sharing music, and in any case, tracing a link back such as this would leave a copyright holder in a gray area. Embedded data or not, the mere presence of the data in a file found on a share is not an unassailable indicator of copyright infringement.

That said, it would be trivial for iTunes to report back to Apple, indicating that "Joe User" has M4As on this hard drive belonging to "Jane Userette," or even "two other users." This is not to say that Apple is going to get into the copyright enforcement business. What Apple and indeed the record labels want to watch closely is: will one user buy music for his five close friends?  The entertainment industry is obsessed with the idea of "casual piracy," or the occasional sharing of content between friends. I wouldn't be surprised if some data was being analyzed in aggregate, although Apple's current privacy policy does not appear to allow for this. As with the dust-up over the mini-store, Apple should clarify what this embedded data is used for. 

We've contacted Apple for a response but have not heard back from the company.

Recently, broadcast news stations have been running "informative" segments alerting parents and others to the dangers of Emo-ism.

Fox 11 Undercover



The Dangers of Emo (Emo concern in Utah)


In response to a discussion about "What is Emo?" prompted by the video clips above, I wrote

miseryxchord: 05/28/2007 12:49 AM
Okay, I feel old when I do this, but... "Emo" did really come about in the 80's in the Washington D.C. Hardcore Punk scene to describe songs that dealt more with personal experiences and feelings than politics and dissent. "Emotive Hardcore". It did really refer to a type of music, and that's why you'll hear people complaining from a musical viewpoint that bands like MCR, Fallout Boy etc aren't REAL Emo.

It's evolved, or devolved, depending on your point of view, to eventually be applied to music significantly different from the hardcore roots, as the original bands gained popularity and got mainstream listeners, and new bands started emulating the mainstream sound that got airplay without having or knowing the background or basis of that sound. The progression can be traced from the original bands in several waves eventually going from a local hardcore phenomena all the way to being applied to mainly Indie rock bands (I just wrote something about this in response to one of panasonicyouth's posts a week or two ago and am trying to find it, but Wikipedia and (crud I forgot the url) are actually pretty good sources that the news media constantly misquote) At this point, "Emo" has become so nebulous and been so misused by every idiot who wants to trash a band, sensationalize some lame article they wrote, or is just too ignorant to write a real review that it means pretty much nothing...hence you'll hear comments that "Emo is dead"...because it's applied to everything and everyone except what it really was.

At some point it went from describing the music played by the band, to the bands playing the music, to classifying the people who listened to them (because human nature seems to like labeling things to either drag them down ("them") or glorify them ("us")), and a whole subculture of fashion and lifestyle started growing in it's own direction from there, influenced by the music but eventually influencing new music. 10 years ago, people who would derisively refer to "Emo's" and "Emo Scene Kids" were making fun of EXACTLY the same things and people by calling them "Goths" and later "Mall Goths" (depending on if you were an elitist Goth or not ;). When I was in high School (before the 2nd great Goth age ;) they called us "punks"..and if you want to go all the way back another decade or so "beatniks" wore all black, ironed their hair straight, and focused on dark moody music and emotion. 10 years from now, the media will have bogarted yet another label to apply to young people stepping outside the average trying to find their way in the world and the next great punk-goth-emo-slacker-whatever rage will get all sorts of sensationalist press.

Davey Havok, frontman for AFI (from his lips your ears (okay, eyes ;)

"I've actually been meaning to point something out for a while now but it keeps slipping my mind. Just in case someone has misled you to believe otherwise, crowd surfing sucks. I would leave it plain and simple like that but, for fear of someone confusing the statement to be only a commentary against aggressive behavior at shows, I shall further clarify. Not to be confused with crowd crawling to sing along, the dying art of stylistic stage diving or the evermore rare head walking, crowd surfing is a passive, non emotive, 'Hey mom look at me and how wild I think I am.' behavior. While kick boxing, slamming, singing along and the like are all visceral and emotional responses to music, crowd surfing is, simply, weak. Always has been. There is really no better way to cheapen a live performance than to float like a happy little cloud atop the hands of discomforted showgoers. For all those aghast, having been misinformed and tricked into thinking it was cool, or far out, or what ever you crazy kids might call it today, FEAR NOT for you are not too far gone! We at the church of HolylChristCrowdSurfingSucks welcome you with loving arms. Now you know...and you know what GI Joe says about knowing. That is my public service announcement for today."

Adam Carson, drummer for AFI

"Crowd surfing is just ridiculous because you're on top of everybody's hands, and I know that's part of being at a show, but people choose to do it during really mellow songs, really slow songs, or even when we're not playing music."


Kevin Lyman, founder of Vans Warped Tour & Taste of Chaos

"In regards to crowd surfing, it is really about the dumbest thing you can do at a show. In my 25 years of working on big shows, I have seen most injuries caused by people crowd surfing -- either hurting themselves or other people."

May 23 2007 8:03 AM EDT

According to MTV's A.M. Surf Report :

"Forget Britney. The big surprise act set to play tonight's "Idol" finale is ... Green Day? So says Star magazine, which also reports that former "Idol" winners Kelly, Carrie and Taylor will perform."

Green Day frontman Billie Joe Armstrong, when asked who he'd pick as tonight's winner, mused:

"I don't know, but I had an idea. I think how America votes on 'American Idol,' the next presidential election they should vote in the same way and have a massive TV show that's once a week that keeps you updated. ... The new way of voting. Screw singers. Let's go for the politicians this time."
Drummer Tre Cool: "That's a good idea, Billie. And for 50 cents a pop, all those calls could pay for all the campaigning."






Best-Selling Trio Covers John Lennon's "Working Class Hero"

Green Day contributed a cover of John Lennon's 'Working Class Hero' to the forthcoming CD Instant Karma: The Amnesty International Campaign to Save Darfur, proceeds from which help support Amnesty International's campaign to focus attention on the conflict in Darfur, Sudan.

The track, which blends vocals from John Lennon with those of Armstrong, was released as a single through iTunes on May 1, 2007 and will have an accompanying video by director Samuel Bayer that premiers on MTV on May 30th.

"We wanted to do 'Working Class Hero' because its themes of alienation, class, and social status really resonated with us," says Green Day singer-guitarist Billie Joe Armstrong. "It's such a raw, aggressive song -- just that line: 'you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see' -- we felt we could really sink our teeth into it. I hope we've done him justice."

A brief FYI, since I have a ton of AFI photos up on my site and more to come... all photo comments refering to the band's girl/boyfriends, ex-girl/boyfriends, future girl/boyfriends or rumored or speculative girl/boyfriends that get left in my galleries get deleted.

Ditto for really overt sexual remarks and Javey-ness... there are other more appropriate places to express those feelings (... for the record, describing sex scenes between you, them, or each other on a complete stranger's public webpage is just creepy!   ...that's what YOUR page is for (jk!))

If you have to ask yourself or anyone else if something is "really overt", you probably have your answer right there...

So, if your comment disappeared, there were no hard feelings or criticism... Drool over them if you must :-) (they're beautiful men), but I respect their private lives and those of their friends and family (and spare my poor violated eyes) by keeping that drama out of here

xoxox
~Misery

PS ... if you like a photo a lot, most of the time I have a link to the photographer's personal website in the description. Pay a visit and show them love! <333

As reported on Punknews.org:

Break-ups: The Explosion (1998-2007)

Long running and oft-troubled Brooklyn by way of Boston act The Explosion have called it a day. In a MySpace blog posted today, the band offered no explanation, simply saying thank you to their fans.

The band had recently seen ups and downs after joining Virgin a few years ago and parting ways with them in February. The band is still hoping for a release of Bury Me Standing on "some label or another." They expect to do some farewell shows this summer. Recently Chris and Dave have been filling in with the Loved Ones on tour.

The band released their self titled debut EP in 2000 on Jade Tree along with their Flash Flash Flash LP. In 2003, they returned with the Sick Of Modern Art EP, followed by their Red Tape EP in 2005 and Black Tape LP in 2004.

---

From : The Explosion (Myspace Blog)
Monday, April 30, 2007

Thanks for the memories!

After nearly nine years of rocking and rolling with you all, we The Explosion have decided to disband. We would like to thank each and every one of our fans who have supported us through this time. We made some great friends along the way, a few mistakes, but all and all we had one hell of a great time doing it. Thanks again!

Your friends, The Explosion

PS Look forward to a last show or two this summer. Also look out for the release of our final studio recording,  Bury Me Standing on some label or another.

---

 "Here I Am" from Black Tape