Trent Reznor Thanks For Helping To Screw The Industry That Made Your Dream A Reality

[dissolva]

Originally Posted by biggator6

Umm.. Trent recorded Pretty Hate Machine pretty much by himself - there was no band, just him - at night, on his own dime. He was an assistant at a studio at the time and recorded it in the off hours. Nobody gave him squat to record..

Then he signed and was distributed by TVT (yes, Tee Vee Toons) records - not exactly a big-dollar major with big marketing budgets. That may be why nobody except a handful of people heard 'head like a hole' or 'down in it' until it had been out for damn near 3 years and MTV (when they still played music) and some radio stations started picking it up.

Not only that. Pretty Hate Machine sold almost nothing the week it was released. TVT declared the album DEAD. It didn't start to break until 13 months later due only to word-of-mouth because it was kick ass innovative music. Then after having one of the first independent platinum albums, TVT wouldn't renegotiate Reznor's NOTORIOUSLY shitty deal so basically he was going to wait out his contract until he gave up some of his publishing to move to Interscope.

Reznor knows everyone is downloading his shit on bittorrent anyway, why not stick it up there himself? It will buy him press as being the "first" to do it, even though indie musicians have been doing it since bittorrent was released in 2001.

[soupking]

[dylansmale]

Originally Posted by GILFOIL

bitch got pwnd! the unrated version of this film actually show him walking around like a headless chicken after this event. and aniken...well i won't go into that part because the admins here are strict and tough on my ass.

[biggator6]

Lets not forget that Trent also put up some live DVDs on bit torrent himself.. nobody seemed to make a big deal about that.

[lordmiguel]

The article starts with:

"Since being released from its major-label recording contract last year"

Uhh, sorry but i'm with the other people who are lost wondering what is wrong.

Sorry, who do they owe and why?

They can do whatever they want, its still a free country last time i checked.

No wonder why the country is so divided.

How come your vote counts as much as mine? Now that's not quite fair....

[Sui_City]

Originally Posted by minipoodle

Right, and what most people have ignored in their excitement over the "Radiohead model" and now the "NIN model" is that these bands had literally millions of dollars and fans already. These are NOT meant to be models for the record industry in general (i think both Reznor and Yorke would agree) but the mainstream press and regular observers act as though they are.

Minipoodle,

how long have you been in this business?

(not meant as sarcasm, i really want to know.)

[Sui_City]

The one other thing I want to mention is that we must not forget that being a performing musician means a combination of recorded material and touring.

I see it as:

Recorded Material = Promotional Material

Touring or Performing = The Job

I think that is the way that Trent and Thom/RH treat it. Sell or give away an album of great songs. Make sure your tour is sold out.

I am sure many won't agree with me, and i know that some of those arguments will be valid. But my personal opinion is that musicians, like everybody else, should have to get out of bed and go somewhere to make money.

It's not all about sitting in your bedroom and recording an mp3, putting it on a web and selling hundreds of thousands, and getting rich.

I think sometimes, in this day and age of an over-abundance of product, we forget that all music is good. And what i mean to say is, even some of us here are working questionable material or productions of our own. But we will each think in our own minds that it is the shit.

[minipoodle]

10 years.

Originally Posted by Sui_City

Minipoodle,

how long have you been in this business?

(not meant as sarcasm, i really want to know.)

[minipoodle]

First off, Trent was disappointed with the results of his experiment with Saul Williams. Unsurprisingly, given the option most people choose free.

Trent and Thom/Radiohead are in a unique position in that they are multi-millionaires with fan bases numbering in the millions. They achieved this through a combination of talent, hustle, and luck, with the help of the label system.

For the rest, bombarding them with free recorded music or "promotional material" as you call it will not turn people on. This material will become no different than any of the other ad material which we've all learned to ignore.

Oh, and all music is not good music.

Originally Posted by Sui_City

The one other thing I want to mention is that we must not forget that being a performing musician means a combination of recorded material and touring.

I think that is the way that Trent and Thom/RH treat it. Sell or give away an album of great songs. Make sure your tour is sold out.

It's not all about sitting in your bedroom and recording an mp3, putting it on a web and selling hundreds of thousands, and getting rich.

I think sometimes, in this day and age of an over-abundance of product, we forget that all music is good.

[1/2 Normal]

if they did not renew his contract then its the record labels mistake!
you cant get on his ass because he doesn't need the money and still LOVES MAKING MUSIC! I'm sure the record label has exploited the crap outa everything Trent did while UNDER CONTRACT!

Let it go, I hope more artists do this then maybe we can get through this crappy musical era and get back to making real music with soul, hart, and creativity!

Good Day

Rob

[Sui_City]

Originally Posted by minipoodle

First off, Trent was disappointed with the results of his experiment with Saul Williams. Unsurprisingly, given the option most people choose free.

Trent and Thom/Radiohead are in a unique position in that they are multi-millionaires with fan bases numbering in the millions. They achieved this through a combination of talent, hustle, and luck, with the help of the label system.

For the rest, bombarding them with free recorded music or "promotional material" as you call it will not turn people on. This material will become no different than any of the other ad material which we've all learned to ignore.

Oh, and all music is not good music.

You see MP, this is where i think you are missing the key point. And it is the reason i asked you how long you have been in the industry.

Trent founded NIN in 1988. So that's close on 20 years.

And the guys from Radiohead go back to 1986. So close on 22 years.

Those guys worked for years to get where they are. And they worked hard. And the label system at the time was pretty much all that existed.

Your argument is like Neanderthals getting angry at homosapiens for growing bigger because they developed agriculture. "Not Fair!!!"

But you see, i think this is where Trent got his expectations wrong too. He worked on and released an album for an artist he believed in. Many people did not know who Saul Williams was. And he assumed that his fans would feel the same way about Saul's material as he does. And he developed an opinion after conducting the experiment once. I would be keen to hear how he feels in 2 months time about the "Ghosts" experiment.

I'm also pretty sure that had they put out 2,500 copies of a $300 limited edition autographed-by-Saul "Niggy Tardust", that they wouldn't have sold them all. And that is simply because Saul doesn't have the fanbase. Maybe he will at a point. Maybe Trent's music resonates with more people than Saul's does.

And that is what is happening now: So Many Maybe's.

None of us are sure where this will take us. But you are clinging to a business model that is not working well in the new world.

And who know's, maybe you will be rich, famous and touring in 8 years time, after you've embraced a new way of working.

Or you might be like me and the many friends i have who have been doing this for 20-40 years: just not lucky, talented or hustling enough to make it.

Lastly, cheaper music does not necessarily mean that it will end up in an elevator.

Just ask Ian, Guy, Brendan and Joe of Fugazi.

[lordmiguel]

Originally Posted by minipoodle

Different than the tactics of The MUSIC INDUSTRY? Doesn't he mean EVERY INDUSTRY?

not really. industries rise, fall and change all the time. the reason ours has imploded is because of several reasons, most of which pretty much contributed to losing control of distribution. PLENTY of examples of this. not very many with good outcomes.

interestingly, for those who still control their distribution and pricing (ringtones?) times have been good.... but not for long, thanks to jobs' iphone and google's open access efforts.

you can't blame these bands for doing what they need to do. they aren't screwing anybody. steve jobs and itunes was an "experiment that countered the music industry’s typical sales and marketing tactics". worked out pretty good for him.

its obviously time to experiment in the industry or get left behind.

[kelldammit]

reznor himself said point blank that it was NOT a probable solution to the newly signed or unsigned artists out there.
ironically enough, most of the unsigned bands i've seen are persuing the same tactics, and have been doing so for a LONG time.
i've seen a lot of cd's given away at shows, in hopes that they'll be shared, which will help generate a much bigger audience for the shows. at some point, you can even start selling cds instead of giving them away. ditto online presence, and "giveaway" single downloads. noone's screaming bloody murder that unsigned unknown bands all over the country, who are giving their music away in hopes of exposure, have been steadily devaluing music for the last decade or more.

times are changing. of course we'll change with them, we have no choice. but for now, the hysterical subtexts i'm reading here are these:
1. what happens to the audio pros if/when the titanic goes down? there may not be enough lifeboats for everyone. we've seen 2 fairly major releases over the last couple of months, both done outside "the system". everyone seems to be declaring the industry as DOA. wtf do WE do?!?
or alternatively,
2. if music is indeed completely devalued, how does one make $ at it, aside from getting boobs and kneepads and trying to become the next britney press-mess?

(personally, i don't see either happening in totality. i think there will always be people who value music enough to pay for it, and people getting paid to create it.)

pleasant dreams.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by Sui_City

Nobody, and i mean nobody, could've predicted that we would be where we are today. I have said this before and i'll say it again:
.

you're kidding right? We've ALL known this is where it was going even since the irst days of CDR burners and the FTP protocols of the internet. I saw this whole thing back in 1993 - i'm just surprised that we're five years behind where i thought we;d be AND that the biggest of the sales were in 2000 !!

What's amazing is that soooo many people (myself included) were warning and giving talks about internet downloads of music over 12 years ago. In fact back in 1997 i was part of a consortium to put together an web shop based around music internet downloads with the early Rio player, which i presented at several music conventions around the world.

Even took it to all the majors - "we dont think there is a significant future in music downloading" - this was their opportunity to get it on with the online music community BEFORE there was any significant piracy. They could have lobbied (and won) against the startup of organisations like Napster or Kazaa and got people like the MCPS to license any online shenanigans - putting in place a fee, for example, to even HAVE an online connection since it has LONG been predicted as a delivery mechanism for digital product.

Did anyone listen even though it was the majority of us (the lower hard working echelons of the music/muzak industry) saying so?

[imaverysoundman]

Originally Posted by u b k

so do air & water quality, intimate personal relationships, tax laws, and who will be the next president of the states, but that doesn't mean those issues belong in the gear forum either.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

according to the 3rd piece of the zeitgeist movie there is no actuall law in america that says you must pay tax....seriously!!!check it out boys...
sorry for the hijack....

[Sui_City]

Originally Posted by narcoman

you're kidding right? We've ALL known this is where it was going even since the irst days of CDR burners and the FTP protocols of the internet. I saw this whole thing back in 1993 - i'm just surprised that we're five years behind where i thought we;d be AND that the biggest of the sales were in 2000 !!

What's amazing is that soooo many people (myself included) were warning and giving talks about internet downloads of music over 12 years ago. In fact back in 1997 i was part of a consortium to put together an web shop based around music internet downloads with the early Rio player, which i presented at several music conventions around the world.

Even took it to all the majors - "we dont think there is a significant future in music downloading" - this was their opportunity to get it on with the online music community BEFORE there was any significant piracy. They could have lobbied (and won) against the startup of organisations like Napster or Kazaa and got people like the MCPS to license any online shenanigans - putting in place a fee, for example, to even HAVE an online connection since it has LONG been predicted as a delivery mechanism for digital product.

Did anyone listen even though it was the majority of us (the lower hard working echelons of the music/muzak industry) saying so?

Narco,

I understand that you may have been able to make an "educated guess" at some point, even if that point was 12-15 years ago. But you could not have known where we would be. If you could have known, well then how many lotteries have you won? Boy, seeing into the future is a skill i would love to have.

Shitty sarcasm aside, what i am saying is that there was a time when nobody would've have had a shred of an idea that we would be where we are now. There was a period where the Majors, with their way of doing business ruled. And that time has not entirely ended. But even so, there have been these developments, both technological and societal, that were happening underground, in the background even while these kings ruled.

This cross-over period of old business model to new business model has been going on for some time, and will maybe go on for a while longer. We have all at different points seen that "the times, they are a-changin".

But people who claim to have absolute premonition or foresight of the events are talking BS.

Anyway, some people are listening now. Others, like Minipoddle, not yet.

[minipoodle]

Obviously I'm listening and paying attention...I started this thread. Perhaps the title i gave the thread was somewhat inflammatory but here we are discussing this. I am all for innovation. What frustrates me is that in the panic/excitement of it all, the mainstream press and the public do not stop to think critically about the various experiments happening. Both Radiohead and Trent Reznor have stated specifically that their moves are not meant as/would not work for the general industry and especially new artists. Reznor learned this first hand with Saul Williams. When the world is flooded with yet to be successful artists giving away millions of mp3's then in the public's mind it becomes an honor for the artist just to have them listened to at all, never mind paid for.

At root though you and I fundamentally disagree on a number of issues as as I believe that:
1) An artist should be able to sell recorded work.
2) Not all music is equal
3) Access to high quality recording is important, though not most important

just a few things- i'm sure there are more.

Originally Posted by Sui_City

Anyway, some people are listening now. Others, like Minipoddle, not yet.

[INDISTR]

As we've all witnessed, yes Trent was upset at Saul's sales. The crazy part though, is that just through the means of the "collectible" edition that Trent was selling for $300, he just made $750,000, basically overnight. Let's say he has 1/3 overhead on the album, he's still pocketing $500,000. That's insane! I don't know of any "majors" that can walk away with those types of sales in the current "physical distribution" model.

Realize this, if a major artist releases an album and sells 300,000 copies (which is an absolute shitload in todays market), that artist will probably be making anywhere from $.40 to a dollar per album.

Do the math, Trent Reznor is NO fool, he's grinding away at innovation, and really he's just a step ahead of everyone else in the biz who hasn't had the balls to drop their major label deal and try to get creative.

On another note, the "Name Your Own Pricing" model that Radiohead released, is now available for artists to use themselves at INDISTR

[Pfraser]

Maybe Trent just "used" major labels to get to where he is today and achieve his dream. If so good for him, I would use them to.

[minipoodle]

I agree completely with you. The important thing for him was that there was a viable system in place (albeit very imperfect) for him to the use...

Originally Posted by Pfraser

Maybe Trent just "used" major labels to get to where he is today and achieve his dream. If so good for him, I would use them to.

[Sui_City]

Originally Posted by minipoodle

Obviously I'm listening and paying attention...I started this thread. Perhaps the title i gave the thread was somewhat inflammatory but here we are discussing this. I am all for innovation.

MP, my apologies for the implication. Was not meant personally. I understand your frustration, but yes, i did find the title inflammatory. And i have found your approach to be counter-productive.

Both Radiohead and Trent Reznor have stated specifically that their moves are not meant as/would not work for the general industry and especially new artists.

Whether they meant it to be a new model or not is not the issue. They have tried something new that has garnered the attentions of many, because it may have some viability. If not viability, it at the very least has some relevance.

When the world is flooded with yet to be successful artists giving away millions of mp3's then in the public's mind it becomes an honor for the artist just to have them listened to at all, never mind paid for.

see my response to No.1 below.

At root though you and I fundamentally disagree on a number of issues as as I believe that:

we happen to agree on all three points. I just have an extended spin on them.

1) An artist should be able to sell recorded work.

Yes, an artist should be able to sell recorded work.

This does not however automatically guarantee them the right to be paid for it. If you put something up for sale in any other industry, if your customers don't feel it has value, they won't pay you for it.

The obvious uniqueness to our industry is the fact that, due to technology, the product can still be copied. Which would be difficult to do with, say, a Ferrari 599.

2) Not all music is equal

Absolutely True!

3) Access to high quality recording is important, though not most important

True

[Sui_City]

Originally Posted by minipoodle

I agree completely with you. The important thing for him was that there was a viable system in place (albeit very imperfect) for him to the use...

At the time of his beginning, that was pretty much the only system that was around.

We are simply in the midst of finding a new system that is viable.

[narco]

why has no one said anythin about "biting the hand that feeds you"?

I totally think trent is doing the right thing.

I saw some stats on another artist that trent works with that is a relative unknown, but still using this (or a similar) business model with much success

narco

[edan everly]

Originally Posted by minipoodle

A writer for the NY Times wrote that the NIN move "is the latest in a running series of experiments that counter the music industry’s typical sales and marketing tactics."

Different than the tactics of The MUSIC INDUSTRY? Doesn't he mean EVERY INDUSTRY?

Trent Reznor would never be in his current position without first having had TENS OF MILLIONS of dollars invested in him and his band. I mean this is a guy who spent thousands of dollars to rent out Sharon Tate's house for a recording just for the ambiance of the place.

This is too ridiculous.

I went to Trent's recording studio in the Sharon Tate's house. It was amazing! not so much the ambiance... but the gear was killer!

[u b k]

i'm fairly certain trent's response to the above would be "you're welcome."

i also believe it was trent that made trent's dream a reality, and the industry helped only insofar as it furthered their own agenda. the instant it stopped doing so, they would have dropped him in a heartbeat no matter the consequences to him or his dream or his fans.

"all's fair" is what they'd say... and, as it turns out, they appear to be right.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[minipoodle]

If you had read my previous posts you would have noticed that:

a) the title was just something to catch people's attention.
b) i don't have a problem with what trent did, rather i am disappointed and baffled by the public and press adoption of it as a possible model for the general industry/bands.

also, just because the labels are self-serving doesn't mean they aren't important and useful.

Originally Posted by u b k

i'm fairly certain trent's response to the above would be "you're welcome."

i also believe it was trent that made trent's dream a reality, and the industry helped only insofar as it furthered their own agenda. the instant it stopped doing so, they would have dropped him in a heartbeat no matter the consequences to him or his dream or his fans.

"all's fair" is what they'd say... and, as it turns out, they appear to be right.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[zak7]

Originally Posted by Clayphish

When did the music industry ever invest while keeping the best interest of the artist in mind? Look, its all about making money.. period. The record companies know it and so does Trent. Its not some kind of "pat on the back", "you're my best friend" situation. The moment you don't generate revenues, you're dropped like dirt.

Yeah is like who F****k each other first!

[b05q]

Stockholm syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[INDISTR]

Apparently it's working for Trent, making over 1.6 million up to this point. The man's a genius. I'm not even a NIN fan, but what else can I say, he's brilliantly utilizing his band as a brand.