Gepostet vor 9 Jahren, 2 Monaten in
Die New York Times hat einen fantastischen Artikel über Nine Inch Nails-Frontmann Trent Reznor, in dem er schließlich sagt, wie es eben ist und er überdenkt in dem Artikel seine Haltung zum Saul Williams-Album, das er ebenfalls zum Download und variablen Preis online gestellt hat, was er zunächst als Fehlschlag einschätzte. Mittlerweile hat er seine Meinung dann doch sehr revidiert.
“It’s all out there,” he added. “I don’t agree that it should be free, but it is free, and you can either accept it or you can put your head in the sand.”
Last year Mr. Reznor produced and bankrolled an album for the socially conscious hip-hop poet Saul Williams, “The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of Niggy Tardust.” When record labels didn’t want it, Mr. Reznor put it online: free to the first 100,000 downloaders as good-quality MP3 files or $5 for more high-fidelity files. He had thought that fans would willingly pay the price of a latte to support musicians directly. But fewer than 20 percent did so. “I think I was just naïve.”
At the time he called the project a failure, but he has reconsidered. “The numbers of the people that paid for that record, versus the people that paid for his last record, were greater,” he said. “He made infinitely more money from that record than he did from his other one. It increased his name value probably tenfold. At the end of the day, counting free downloads, it was probably five or six or seven times higher than the amount sold on his last record. I don’t know how you could look at that as a failure.”