We are ash and we are books, coffee-stained and overlooked

[venta]

Every so often I enthuse wildly at people to try and get them to listen to The Indelicates, who really are bloody marvellous. And they've got a new album out now. So really, you should pop along and have a look. The album is very varied in style, so I'd say listen to the lot, but if you want a couple of recommended tracks, I'd try Sympathy for the Devil (which isn't a cover) and Ill.

You can listen to the tracks I linked above in their "audio preview" section - full quality, full length preview. In fact, you can listen to all the tracks on the album. And, if you want to download the album, you can choose what to pay for it. Including nothing.

While many bands have been complaining bitterly about the state of the music industry, and making pathetic whimpering noises which could only be pacified with a parliamentary Act of very dubious nature, The Indelicates decided that the world was changing and they'd just have to change with it.

So they've set up their own label, and released their second album on an In Rainbows-a-like business model. Anyone who wants can put themselves on the label, and upload stuff to be made available to the public in the same way.

I downloaded the album the day it came out, and I paid for it because I'm a big fan of their music. It's very possible that I'm unrepresentative, and this venture of theirs is hopelessly ideological and ultimately doomed. However, I admire them for trying. They are people who Do Something instead of complaining that Something Must Be Done, and I think that's worth supporting.

Warning: I know there's a least one person on my friends list who will have issues with the album cover. It's called Songs for Swinging Lovers, and features the band's frontpersons swinging from a gallows. Not very realistically, but: approach with caution if such things bother you.

Comments

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

A lot of good work has been done in the indie videogames scene concerning alternative business models. The data so far suggest that asking for donations or pulling in-Rainbows style stunts doesn't work as well as just fixing a sensible price. (Assuming that by "work" we mean "generate income for the creators".)

[venta.livejournal.com]

Yes - I suspect the pay-what-you-like may work for people like Radiohead (who actually, IIRC, got a sensible average price for In Rainbows, due in part to a small number of very high prices). Less so for little unknowns, though.

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Indeed. Likewise 2D Boy, who had already made a small fortune from World of Goo managed to re-release it (!) using this business model and make another small fortune.

However, it's not the average price that matters - and I think this is quite important - because the main motivation for using this model is to allow people who are less able to pay to offer what they can afford. So a $1 sale isn't necessarily just a 90% discount from the $10 you would have charged, it might well represent a child or a person from a developing country paying what to them is a decent price.

[venta.livejournal.com]

the main motivation...

Is it really?

I'm not disagreeing, I've just never heard that argument cited before. Admittedly I'm talking about music not video games, but in general I've heard people talking about being able to pay what you think it's worth, not what you can necessarily afford.

Presumably if I'm trying to live in developed country, the moral validity of lots of people on the other side of the world paying $1 a sale, which they can just afford, doesn't alter the fact than I can't eat :)

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

doesn't alter the fact than I can't eat :)

The gaming field seems generally more grown up about this than musicians are. It's widely accepted that you cannot start with the premise "this must pay my bills". You sell what you make and if it turns out to pay your bills that's great. If it doesn't, you need other work too.

Admittedly I'm talking about music not video games

And yes, there is a difference here.

The trouble with the "pay what you think it's worth" argument is that the concept of "worth" here is really badly defined. Economists tell us that a thing is worth what you're willing to pay. But sometimes we do indeed buy things and resent the price (for example, drinks from vending machines at railway stations) so clearly if given a choice to re-price these items ourselves we will not pay what they are "worth".

[ulfilias.livejournal.com]

This is the case of something being worth more on how desperate we are.

Those vending machines cost maintinance and the price of the machine for low volume sales so as to get a hot chocolate at 3am in the morning on a cold station platform.

[venta.livejournal.com]

Also, I suspect economists run into problems in that people will mis-estimate what something is "worth".

If I ask you - now - what you'd be willing to pay for a paper cup of hot chocolate on a station platform you might say (I dunno) £1.50.

But when it's bloody freezing and 3am and the machine says £3, I bet you cough up :)

[venta.livejournal.com]

This is, of course, a generic 'you' - I have no idea what you personally might pay for your 3am choccie.

[ulfilias.livejournal.com]

£1.50 your such a londoner....the internal Yorkshireman in me would be screaming if it was more than 50p.

At 3am prices i'd probably be crying, but then there would be no one arround to see it drip into the hot chocolate =;-)

[venta.livejournal.com]

Am so not a Londoner.

My hot chocolate was just going to be three times bigger and better than yours :)

[(Anonymous)]

And of course, the song correctly goes..."Maybe its because I'm a Londoner, That I loathe London Town!"

Will (born Clapham, too lomg ago for almost any of you to remember.)

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

This is the case of something being worth more on how desperate we are.

Sure, I understand the economic arguments, but the fact remains that our perception of value doesn't actually change. The more circumstances conspire to make us "overpay" for something, the more resentful we feel about it. Pay-what-you-like schemes give people a way to pay what they think something is worth to them, not what it's actually worth.

[ulfilias.livejournal.com]

Worth....Yeah. Its an odd concept and often something you don't realise for a long time. I have a pair of steel toe cap boots that have great proportions, fit well and i can do a 5 day festival in them. I paid £30 for them as they seemed good value. They are slowly dieing and thier worth to me would be huge if i could only find another pair !

Also how many CDs do you just listen to a few times, one or two tracks maybe are good that make it to your ipod. Other albums are complete gold and you wore them out in your walkman. Are they worth the same ?

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Indeed, good examples.

[sesquipedality.livejournal.com]

All I can tell you is that they got a fiver from me that they would not have otherwise seen.

Also, I really like "Flesh".

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

Mm, I agree that is the important point. It is how you convert people from would-be-customers into actual customers. The average price is probably pretty irrelevant really; the distribution of prices will be much more interesting and useful.

[ulfilias.livejournal.com]

Well just downloaded it for free to have a listen to. Again if i like it i'll buy it. However i would not want to pay for an MP3 version as i'm a bit of a music geek, so may bug them for a higher quality download.

Interesting to note that a few other friends stuff is up there too !

[venta.livejournal.com]

I believe there is a plan to release a real, phsyical CD version in the summer - but if you think the mp3 versions aren't adequate, I'd definitely let them know.

I can't comment sensibly on quality at present as my headphones are slightly busted :(

[lnr]

I'm waiting for the physical release, because I like having actual stuff, and I have their first album - having seen them live first. I think they're the sort of band who definitely benefit from live performances.

[venta.livejournal.com]

I'd prefer to wait for the physical release, because I also like actual stuff, but was fearing that poor download sales might lead to lack of finance for CDs :)

[lnr]

I notice they have a donate button at the top of their webpage, so have sent them 50p and a note saying I'm looking forward to the physical album :)

[venta.livejournal.com]

Ooh, not a bad idea!

[sea-of-flame.livejournal.com]

Wah, not on spotify! (yet?)

[ulfilias.livejournal.com]

Download it for free....just put 0 in. You can pay later if you want to !

[sea-of-flame.livejournal.com]

Not sure I can d/load direct to phone - and work tend to be unhappy about downloads over the network, even when they're legit (and since I work or a music co, arguably work related) - shall have a nose from home.

[venta.livejournal.com]

Corporate Records is a pretty new venture, and they say that if you think stuff is seriously missing you should let them know. I'm not really familiar with Spotify, so don't know why you'd want to get it from there instead of downloading it, but if there's a good reason, tell 'em!

[sea-of-flame.livejournal.com]

It works on a broadcast, rather than purchase, licensing model - so if you play a track lots, the artist gets more money, like radio - not sure how it tallies out for the artist, but I would imagine if they're potentially ending up with people downloading for free, per-play trickle of royalties are still worthwhile.

More practically, like I said, I can have instant gratification via spotify app, whereas trying to download mp3s from places other than iTunes tends to provoke Appley Wrath ;)

[ulfilias.livejournal.com]

Ooooh....Ill has an interesting start up....Can see the influences of a few bands there. *like it*

album cover

[exspelunca.livejournal.com]

Songs for Swinging Lovers - surely not the first of that title, which was long enough ago to be parodied by Songs for Swinging Sellers (as in Peter). OK, OK, so I'm older than Will (see above).