Radiohead "Stems"

[Fliko]

I've almost had enough of Radiohead and their whole idea with the music industry.

The era of artists regularly releasing stems for remixing seems imminent. In the meantime, we see occasional examples of artists who get it. Radiohead have a new feature on their tune Nude, promoted with Apple. Purchase stems of a song (that’s by stem, so you pay US$0.99 * 5 stems + 1 full song if you want everything), and you get audio via iTunes Plus. Purchase the full set, and you can also download a GarageBand / Logic Pro-compatible project with all loop, tempo, and key information embedded, as pictured at top.

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2008/...contest-full-stems-via-itunes-and-garageband/

 

[Dinkleberry]

I was literally just about to post about this! Anyone thinking of doing the remix?
Got this email earlier (I think because I downloaded In Rainbows):

To celebrate this week's single release (we still have those in England) Radiohead have broken up the song 'Nude' into pieces for you to remix.

For those of you who enjoy this sort of thing, you can buy the separate components or 'stems' (bass, voice, guitar, strings/FX and drums) and remix your own version of the song. You can do this by adding your own beats and instrumentation or just remixing the original parts. More information here: http://www.radioheadremix.com/information/

You can buy the stems here: http://www.radioheadremix.com/buy/

You can upload your finished mixes here http://www.radioheadremix.com and be judged and even voted on by 'the public'.
You can also create a widget allowing votes from your own website, Facebook or MySpace page to be sent through too.

Hope you enjoy it

For those of you who aren't that way inclined, Nude is also available in its entirety on CD and 7 inch (UK release) at the usual retail outlets.

 

[Ennui]

What is it you've had enough of?

 

[Fliko]

What is it you've had enough of?

I'm used to Trent's model of giving the music (read Remixes) to the people for free.
First they pulled off the internet distrubution to a quick switch to the old model, and now this.

Here's a post from TransceiverHead on the site I posted

http://www.radioheadremix.com/terms/
This is pretty interesting stuff. Especially number 3. This in itself would probably be the reason for not releasing it under Creative Commons license. Under CC you can take credit for your remix (but not sell of course), you would just have to credit the original makers of the ’samples’ or whatnot. Here Radiohead not only owns what you submit, but takes credit for it outright.

Although its not a contest (see terms again), it sort of reminds me of the American Idol way of thinking: Water it all down until it is even more pop-fantastic than before. Include your audience and make them think they are part of the group, decision making, scene, etc. Then sell the ‘experience’ to them.

It would be interesting if, say, Radiohead would voice an opinion on which remix they ‘like’ the best. It may, after all, provide some sort of point to this gratuitous remixing, other than that sexy feeling you get while ‘bedroom producing’ Nude.

Again see the terms page and look for a point to all of this - if you find it please post a reply. And for all you Casey Kasems out there please don’t say its to get popular on the top ten list on the remix website (see American Idol point above).

It seems to me the point of all of this is not to empower, or enable the ‘remixer’ to do anything interesting at all. It seems more like a way for Radiohead to sell this track again at a premium.

 

[99.vikram]

All ur musical skillz are belong to Radiohead.

I wasn't particularly fond of their music to begin with, but after the over hyped Internet distribution!!1 turned out to be a short lived stunt I think I've started disliking them.

 

[CrazyHarij]

Haha, this made my day. ****ing ridiculous.

 

[repiV]

Radiohead used to be my absolute most favourite band ever. However, they seem to have run out of steam (or stems). They went from making great music (the Bends), to making amazing, unique music (OK Computer), to making weird as hell, acquired-taste but still awesome music (Kid A/Amnesiac) to just being different for the sake of it (everything thereafter).
I wasn't remotely impressed by In Rainbows, and Hail to the Thief, while still good, was just a poor echo of their earlier work. Now they use their position to churn out shit and call it ice cream, not to mention as a platform for pushing radical leftist politics (why do so many artists do this?).
Some rolling of the eyes may have occured when Thom Yorke said that he was considering no longer going on tour because he was concerned about the carbon footprint it creates and the ethical dilemma it poses. Just because people listen to your music doesn't mean they want to listen to your nonsense too.

 

[CptStern]

Radiohead used to be my absolute most favourite band ever. However, they seem to have run out of steam (or stems). They went from making great music (the Bends), to making amazing, unique music (OK Computer), to making weird as hell, acquired-taste but still awesome music (Kid A/Amnesiac) to just being different for the sake of it (everything thereafter).
I wasn't remotely impressed by In Rainbows, and Hail to the Thief, while still good, was just a poor echo of their earlier work. Now they use their position to churn out shit and call it ice cream, not to mention as a platform for pushing radical leftist politics (why do so many artists do this?).
Some rolling of the eyes may have occured when Thom Yorke said that he was considering no longer going on tour because he was concerned about the carbon footprint it creates and the ethical dilemma it poses. Just because people listen to your music doesn't mean they want to listen to your nonsense too.

dont read it ..he has a soapbox and other people are interested so why should he limit himself to being a musician? besides the spoken word there is no other medium that has as much impact as music, both political and societal..methinks had you been around at the time you would have been one of those complaining the beatles' hair was too long or that Lennon wasnt bigger than jesus ..give it a rest, we know you're a anti-everything we dont need to hear it in every single post ..dont complain, it's what you're accusing Yorke of doing

 

[repiV]

dont read it ..he has a soapbox and other people are interested so why should he limit himself to being a musician? besides the spoken word there is no other medium that has as much impact as music, both political and societal..methinks had you been around at the time you would have been one of those complaining the beatles' hair was too long or that Lennon wasnt bigger than jesus ..give it a rest, we know you're a anti-everything we dont need to hear it in every single post ..dont complain, it's what you're accusing Yorke of doing

Anti-everything? Interesting...I think actually "pro-everything" would be far more accurate. Just because I think hippies are ignorant idiots doesn't mean I have to fall into some kind of 1960s pro-establishment stereotype, nothing could be further from the truth.
In any case, if someone uses their position to peddle inane views then I reserve the right to criticise them for it. Especially when it's so hypocritical - millionaire socialists? Hardly a credible position.

 

[CptStern]

whoa re these hippies? what does that even mean anymore? unless they're in their late 50's still wearing tye dye and listening to the dead they're not hippies ..and I love how you make a sweeping generalisations on everything from socialism to hippies

it's almost as if people have to fit into this narrowly defined box (according to your criteria) without any leeway whatsoever ..you'll find real people are rarely black and white anything

and yes you have to right to criticise them for it, you also have a right to ignore their message and attack them instead

 

[repiV]

whoa re these hippies? what does that even mean anymore? unless they're in their late 50's still wearing tye dye and listening to the dead they're not hippies ..and I love how you make a sweeping generalisations on everything from socialism to hippies

it's almost as if people have to fit into this narrowly defined box (according to your criteria) without any leeway whatsoever ..you'll find real people are rarely black and white anything

You make exactly the same sweeping generalisations, if not worse. I daresay you're trying to fit ME into a box by saying that I must be "anti-everything" because I despise radical leftist lunacy, when that doesn't even make sense because a) that very same radicalism is today manifested as being "anti-everything" itself and b) I despise all government and authority.

and yes you have to right to criticise them for it, you also have a right to ignore their message and attack them instead

Point being?

 

[Sulkdodds]

Frankly prefer artists who say something to those who continually retreat from saying anything. Even if what they are saying is batshit insane (see also: Gerard Manley Hopkins, DH Lawrence). Even if I didn't believe it I'd find all the doom and gloom we are not scaremongering / this is really happening / it's happening pretty scintillating.

I like to imagine that most artists are leftists because they are smart, but it probably has something to do with the economics of their situation.

O hey, I thought you'd be well into all the while you make pretty speeches anti-government bias. Isn't the extent of the music's politics "the world is going to end, you're all a bunch of twats"?

 

[VirusType2]

Tell us how you really feel RepiV.


You want them to go back to the style of the early stuff.

It's too late though. Pandora is out of the box. Super Stardom has a huge effect on what seems every music group that reaches that pinnacle.

They don't have to make any music ever again. They just do it because they love it, I'm sure of it. They do it for themselves, they do it for the fans. They do it because they are good and they want to show it. What else are they going to do. Retire? You don't make it to the big leagues, play a couple years and retire. This is the life they wanted. To be massively famous.

They been there, done that, and they are on something new and exciting for them. I can't see anyone wanting to make music if they don't like it. That doesn't matter if you are poor or rich. So maybe they became bored with their older stuff.


What I suggest is that you grab some Live stuff of their earlier albums and/or bring a pair of hippie bootleg pants with a mic down your leg, to one of their concerts.. (that's what they were for)


I'm just rambling here:

I just want to say that nearly every band's first album is probably stuff they did maybe 10 years before their first album became popular, and it is usually stuff that had been working on for a LONG time. That is the best of them, and everything else comes easier, with less time involved, and is less incredible creatively, but their musical skill gets better. This is because a record deal is a deal where they have to create a certain number of albums within a certain time frame.



One thing really disappointing to me is when the lead singer just doesn't have the same feeling anymore. This is especially noticeable with bands that play for 15 years more or less. It becomes mechanical. There are so many bands where I love their first album, and thats it. I don't like hardly any of the rest of their music. It sucks, but ...


Finally, I know how you feel when you stop liking a band because of what they say. I think maybe half of being a fan is agreeing with what the band is all about.

 

[repiV]

Frankly prefer artists who say something to those who continually retreat from saying anything. Even if what they are saying is batshit insane (see also: Gerard Manley Hopkins, DH Lawrence). Even if I didn't believe it I'd find all the doom and gloom we are not scaremongering / this is really happening / it's happening pretty scintillating.

I like to imagine that most artists are leftists because they are smart, but it probably has something to do with the economics of their situation.

I'm guessing it has something to do with empathy and possibly envy. They are, IMO, the driving factors behind socialist politics and I would suggest that musicians tend to be those kinds of people. Businessmen and military/law enforcement types and so on I would say equally tend to lean to the right.
I don't see what socialism has to do with intelligence though.

O hey, I thought you'd be well into all the while you make pretty speeches anti-government bias. Isn't the extent of the music's politics "the world is going to end, you're all a bunch of twats"?

I don't have a problem with the political content of Radiohead's music, I was talking about the views he airs publically. And honestly I've never heard anything so ridiculous as his "ethical crisis" about continuing to tour for fear of his carbon footprint. Total hysteria. Reminds me of an emo kid sitting in a darkened room doing the whole "woe is me" thing.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I'm guessing it has something to do with empathy and possibly envy. They are, IMO, the driving factors behind socialist politics and I would suggest that musicians tend to be those kinds of people. Businessmen and military/law enforcement types and so on I would say equally tend to lean to the right.
I don't see what socialism has to do with intelligence though.

Well, if I am fairly a leftist - or at least a libertarian who has arrived at conclusions similar to those of leftists - and if I have become so through what I believe is rational enquiry - I am clearly going to believe that I am right. Therefore, the exercise of intelligence does not inevitably but often generally leads to conclusions like the ones I've reached. If I didn't believe (even provisionally) that I wouldn't believe in those conclusions. Most people who have arrived at their beliefs through consideration will, broadly, think the same - even though thinking such doesn't preclude being able to understand or even appreciate other points of view.

I'd say you're somewhat correct on the reasons. I don't know who said it but someone said that the artist is marked out by a capacity for empathy, whereas business and military affairs often tend to require the suprression of compassion.

I don't have a problem with the political content of Radiohead's music, I was talking about the views he airs publically. And honestly I've never heard anything so ridiculous as his "ethical crisis" about continuing to tour for fear of his carbon footprint. Total hysteria. Reminds me of an emo kid sitting in a darkened room doing the whole "woe is me" thing.

Oh, I see. Well, I just don't pay attention to what artists say outside of their art. It's usually for the best.

 

[repiV]

Tell us how you really feel RepiV.

You want them to go back to the style of the early stuff.

It's too late though. Pandora is out of the box. Super Stardom has a huge effect on what seems every music group that reaches that pinnacle.

They don't have to make any music ever again. They just do it because they love it, I'm sure of it. They do it for themselves, they do it for the fans. They do it because they are good and they want to show it. What else are they going to do. Retire? You don't make it to the big leagues, play a couple years and retire. This is the life they wanted. To be massively famous.

They been there, done that, and they are on something new and exciting for them. I can't see anyone wanting to make music if they don't like it. That doesn't matter if you are poor or rich. So maybe they became bored with their older stuff.

Aye. It seems like a lot of bands get wrapped up in their own self-importance and sink slowly into the unchecked insanity of their own minds. A bit like George Lucas and the Star Wars prequels...
I like Muse, they capture the old-school Radiohead sound pretty well. Although I'm not at all familiar with how long they've been around or their albums or anything, just random songs.

What I suggest is that you grab some Live stuff of their earlier albums and/or bring a pair of hippie bootleg pants with a mic down your leg, to one of their concerts.. (that's what they were for)

Haha. I went to see them live a couple of years ago, I was very disappointed that they didn't play either Black Star or Pyramid Song, my favourite songs. And the sound just didn't "flow" like you expect it to, it was quite stilted. Lacked the edge.

I'm just rambling here:

I just want to say that nearly every band's first album is probably stuff they did maybe 10 years before their first album became popular, and it is usually stuff that had been working on for a LONG time. That is the best of them, and everything else comes easier, with less time involved, and is less incredible creatively, but their musical skill gets better. This is because a record deal is a deal where they have to create a certain number of albums within a certain time frame.

One thing really disappointing to me is when the lead singer just doesn't have the same feeling anymore. This is especially noticeable with bands that play for 15 years more or less. It becomes mechanical. There are so many bands where I love their first album, and thats it. I don't like hardly any of the rest of their music. It sucks, but ...

Apart from the Scandinavian metal bands - they seem to get better with time. Perhaps because commercial success isn't such a given for them.

Finally, I know how you feel when you stop liking a band because of what they say. I think maybe half of being a fan is agreeing with what the band is all about.

I wouldn't go quite that far, but it is irritating.
Seems that most aggressive music has a radical leftist message behind it. I particularly like Rise Against, but I swear they walked out of the loony bin and into the music business. You really can't get away from the "way the hell out there" politics in their music.
Listening to Serj Tankian at the moment and it's the same deal, but to a lesser extent. The only exception I can think of is Godsmack, who are just dumbass Bush fans instead.

 

[repiV]

Well, if I am fairly a leftist - or at least a libertarian who has arrived at conclusions similar to those of leftists - and if I have become so through what I believe is rational enquiry - I am clearly going to believe that I am right. Therefore, the exercise of intelligence does not inevitably but often generally leads to conclusions like the ones I've reached. If I didn't believe (even provisionally) that I wouldn't believe in those conclusions. Most people who have arrived at their beliefs through consideration will, broadly, think the same - even though thinking such doesn't preclude being able to understand or even appreciate other points of view.

I think intelligence in the traditional sense is overrated. More often than not, I find that people of above average intelligence have much more of a clue than people with 130+ IQs. High intelligence is a potent force only when tempered with a pragmatic and realistic outlook, unfortunately these are often conflicting demands.

I'd say you're somewhat correct on the reasons. I don't know who said it but someone said that the artist is marked out by a capacity for empathy, whereas business and military affairs often tend to require the suprression of compassion.

I have to admit I changed when I was working as a recruitment consultant. The company had a very old-school kind of sales ethos that you would associate with estate agents or the City. Nothing else matters but closing the deal.
Instead of compromising on where to go out I'd try and convince my friends to do things my way to the point of being rude, that kinda thing. I left that attitude behind but it taught me a lot about business ettiquette and the value of my own time and services. It's about striking a balance, really - it's fine to be caring and generous but if you just give all the time and don't expect the same treatment in return then noone will ever respect you. Hence why nice guys don't get girls.

A few years ago I had political views broadly similar to No Limit or theotherguy. Coming into contact with the real world resulted in a 180 degree flip. It happens.

Oh, I see. Well, I just don't pay attention to what artists say outside of their art. It's usually for the best.

I wish someone would invent some earplugs that solely filter out the sound of Bono's voice.