I can’t say anything this song doesn’t say brilliantly. Comedian Adam Buxton takes on the Radiohead remix contest with his own entry, which cuts through the hype brings a bit of wit to TV incidental music and remixing alike. And, really, how often do you get to say "Radiohead" and "rap" in the same sentence? Take my mechanical rights, please!

See, there, I said something. It wasn’t very good. Just so listen to the song and thank me later, okay?

See also Adam Buxton’s sketch for BBC3’s Rush Hour which cleans up NWA to "Help Da Police." Thanks, Jaymis!

Via Monome virtuoso Matthew Davidson (aka Stretta, the man who has built a lot of the patches that give the Monome its unique personality), here’s a video that really demonstrates how the Monome turns a set of buttons into a way of arranging and performing music. Adam, aka makingthenoise, covers Tom Yorke’s “The Eraser” using a Monome 40h, Ableton Live, and the SevenUp Live software setup.

(You may remember makingthenoise from the East Coast Monome Jam, a Princeton convergence of Monomes and the musicians who love them.)

The killer ingredient here is Adam’s SevenUpLive, a Java application that combines 8 different Monome apps in one and integrates more tightly with Ableton Live.

SevenUpLive

On the software page, you’ll find a full file pack to recreate The Eraser as in the video.

It’s AES this week in California; I won’t be there, because I have a family engagement. But what I find interesting is that this homespun way of controlling music is very different from the typical studio/mixer paradigm you’re likely to see at a trade show. It may be a better model of the actual music.

Monome on CDM

• In many circles, Metallica is no longer cool or never was cool.
• Lawyer make people MAD. Angry. Smash. (Apparently in addition to going after 60,000 pages of fans on Napster, Metallica doesn’t even like fan-made buttons.)
• Metallica is not Radiohead or Trent Reznor. (Stop the presses!)
• Even if you’re not Radiohead or Trent Reznor, you probably want your fans on your side. Pitchforks and torches tend to be a bad sign.

Of course, some might see the doomsday scenario of Internet music releases, in which fans determine that all music should be free and you can’t make money on releases any more. Big bands give away their stuff for free, the independent artist dies, music isn’t made any more, etc., etc. But given glowing fans proclaiming that they’re “glad I could shell out 40 pounds for the discbox” of In Rainbows, that seems unlikely.

And that’s the fundamental nature of fans. They’re looking for ways to give you their money so you can give them something back. Lesson learned by Metallica: don’t piss them off.

Fans Rip Metallica a New One [Wired.com Listening Post; enjoy the Napster-era parody video]

Photo: massdistraction, via Flickr.

In case you haven’t seen this, James Houston has produced a short film in which an assortment of old computer gear “plays” Radiohead’s “Nude.” We’ve seen various bicycle parts and such performing music around here, but not the actual components of computers in this way. James features:

Sinclair ZX Spectrum – Guitars (rhythm & lead)
Epson LX-81 Dot Matrix Printer – Drums
HP Scanjet 3c – Bass Guitar
Hard Drive array – Act as a collection of bad speakers – Vocals & FX

He explains:

I grouped together a collection of old redundant hardware, and placed them in a situation where they’re trying their best to do something that they’re not exactly designed to do, and not quite getting there.

It doesn’t sound great, as it’s not supposed to.

Sorry, James. You’ve failed thoroughly. It sounds fantastic.

Not only that, but I think it’s quite a nice reminder that even in regards to technology, sometimes sounding bad or primitive is wonderful. Yorke’s songwriting prowess comes out even as the music is translated to an entirely different arrangement. It’s humbling to hear — it means that, technology or no, being able to write great ideas sure helps. And it strips away some of the justification for having the latest and greatest soft synths, erm, not that it’ll stop us any time soon.

By the way, I hadn’t heard that Thom Yorke thought it was impossible to do remixes in 6/8. Come on, really? Okay, maybe for people whose heart beats four on the floor…

Time to dig into my equipment closet and see what will make sound. Peace out.

Plenty of bands have jumped on the "remix generation" bandwagon, releasing music to be remixed and sampled and visualized as a publicity stunt. But, then, plenty of bands aren’t Radiohead. Readers here may have been disappointed that our favorite superband didn’t embrace Creative Commons sharing when announcing their iTunes-only stems. But a number of the artists we follow came up with some brilliant work.

In Visuals: Robert Hodgin, aka Flight404, has the enviable job of exploring new visual expressions as his day gig of sorts. Working primarily in code developed in the open-source, Java-powered Processing, he develops a technique and then iterates and iterates on it until it goes from computer gimmick to refined artistry. He blogs that process, as well, pushing forward the rest of the Processing community. His video above uses abstract, generative processes to visualize Radiohead’s "Weird Fishes", but is developed enough to become organic. It’s a voyage under the sea. Via our sister site, Create Digital Motion.

In Music: A number of readers tackled the Radiohead remix contest. Here’s my favorite: our friend Alan Molina created a sparse string accompaniment that spotlights Tom Yorke’s vocal part. He explains:

Thanks for listening!  I actually recorded and mixed all the strings.  

They are all a violin (just lots of layers of me).  My profession is an orchestral violinist–this remix was an outlet to do something different!

I used Ableton Live 7 for the effects, and used  the kind of mic that clips on behind the bridge of a violin.  Done on my couch in front of my computer!

Of course, the other direction to go is stretching the tune past the point of recognizability, with strange bizarro-universe remixes pulling the tune to experimental glitch and faux-punk. Here are a few of the more unusual takes on their music:

But I have to say, I’m delighted by these results. They really do give me a new sense of the music. And to people who complained that it’s a publicity stunt … well, hey, at this point, I think you all know who Radiohead is, so I don’t particularly feel like I’m shilling for them. (Hey! You’ve got to listen to this new band!)

What’s wonderful about this is getting to hear the songs differently — and, whatever Radiohead’s celebrity, you’ve got to admit Thom Yorke’s voice got to where it did for a reason.

But if you are looking to discover some new music, definitely check out the comment thread on the previous story with other artists offering remixes and stems.

And if you’ve got a favorite Nude remix you want to share, let us know in comments.

No, not photos of you remixing in Ableton in the nude! Sheesh. Wish I hadn’t opened my inbox. ;)

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. (Unless I’m mistaken, that’s also the ideal way to get uncompressed audio for use in other tools.)

If you happen to prefer another tool for remixing (say, one that rhymes with Mabledon Dive and is often seen running on computers from Apple), these are just DRM-free audio files, so the choice is yours. Upload the finished results to the Web, and the band will review submissions and open them to votes. There are already a number of remixes up at the moment.

NUDE RE/MIX on iTunes

Radiohead Remix Site

Hmmm, nude remixing? Brings new meaning to “bedroom producer.” Sorry, couldn’t resist.

Radiohead does specify that you can’t use these for commercial purposes; it’s too bad they didn’t choose to apply a Creative Commons non-commercial license, which would formalize essentially what they’re saying. But this is otherwise done quite nicely, nonetheless, and I hope we see more of this.

Like remixable music? Nine Inch Nails has a whole remix site, and indie label Magnatune lets you remix all their artists’ work via a Creative Commons license (though they typically don’t offer stems). Online music outlet Dance Tracks Digital goes beyond stems with full Ableton Live-ready projects, suitable for DJs. That’s just for starters; if you have other favorite remix resources, let us know.

As this is not the Beatles, you don’t get to watch Thom and Jonny arguing about the arrangements. Sorry.

This certainly gives more insight into the music. Sure, In Rainbows’ pay-what-you-will pricing may have overshadowed the actual music, and the “top album of 2007″ moniker from the music press almost seems too easy. But that doesn’t mean this isn’t great music. In fact, on repeated listenings I think I found what it was about the album that didn’t win over some fans initially: the narrative of the album itself isn’t quite as strong as the songs on it. As those songs sink in, for me at least, the writing stands up to some of Radiohead’s best — and having themselves as competition is hardly a blessing. While the media argues, again, about the future of music, it’s great to know great bands survive.

SHORTLY after Radiohead released its album “In Rainbows” online in October, the band misplaced its password for Max/MSP, a geek-oriented music software package that the guitarist Jonny Greenwood uses constantly. It wasn’t the first time it had happened, Mr. Greenwood said over a cup of tea at the venerable Randolph Hotel here. As usual Radiohead contacted Max/MSP’s developers, Cycling ’74, for another password. “They wrote back,” Mr. Greenwood said, “‘Why don’t you pay us what you think it’s worth?’”

It’s a joke, folks, no need to write Cycling ‘74 suggesting you buy Jitter for $5; somehow, don’t think they’ll bite.

The article itself, though, offers a good overview of the issues surrounding Radiohead’s pay-what-you-will album and how it’s been received.

Via The Phoenix; thanks to ggg for the tip!

It was inevitable. With the likes of Radiohead doing “donationware”, DRM-free MP3 downloads, someone was bound to follow. (And, in fairness, Radiohead were by no means the first — this is something various artists have been talking about or doing for years. Updated: for some examples of other free albums through music history, see comments below. And as the trend grows, expect a lot more artist-to-listener downloads, or even small label-to-listener or small online store-to-listener, soon.)

The latest is Saul Williams, with the album “The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of NiggyTardust!” So, what has he got that Radiohead hasn’t got?

• Trent Reznor producing.


• PDF of liner notes (something missing from Radiohead)
• Simpler options — either free or US$5, and none of this “pounds” or “pay what you want” nonsense. (Wow, you Brits still use that currency? Kidding. And yeah, I know our dollar is presently worthless.)
• Higher-quality download options — 320kbps MP3 or lossless FLAC — for those paying the five bucks
• Embeddable player for the Web
• The backing of the label started by The Fader

And aside from the technological argument, I’ll be interested to hear what poet/musician has to say about race, particularly at this time in America; that’s promised to be a big emphasis of this album as the name implies.

Note that the PDF liner notes and lossless/higher-quality downloads were something people specifically said they wanted following the Radiohead release. Saul and Reznor both single out the Radiohead decision as inspiration, meaning you could see new developments from Reznor and Nine Inch Nails soon.

All of this is academic because I haven’t heard the album. But it’s interesting to watch artists try to out-cool each other on online distribution. I’m guessing we’ll eventually see a norm start to evolve. The other clear message: no one really cares about stopping piracy with crackdowns or DRM, because they’d rather build fan relationships and find the people who want to pay. (Imagine that.)

Niggy Tardust Pre-orders

• Online-only sales, direct from the artists.
• International: charged in GBP, but you can buy from anywhere in the world and the store will convert currency via credit card. (This detail is usually left out of the discussions; one problem with standard label distribution is that it’s often limited to certain countries.)
• DRM-free download sales as donationware: choose what you think is the right amount to charge, the download equivalent of passing the hat.
• Or spend a bunch of cash on physical media: GBP40 gets you a box set with CD and vinyl.

inrainbows.com (“Preorders” still seem to be available for both the download and forthcoming box set, in case you missed the boat)

Early buzz is that the superfans are going for the physical media (which also includes the downloads free), and that the download / pay-what-you-will has encouraged some serious goodwill. Of course, it helps that this is Radiohead. After all, an entire label has been doing this sort of thing for several years — if you don’t know them, check out Magnatune.

There are various broader interpretations, usually along the “labels are dead” lines. On the contrary, I think this demonstrates the range of choice for artists and labels alike when it comes to distribution. And if DRM for music just keeps getting deader and deader. (Music DRM: “‘Tis but a scratch.” A scratch? Your arm’s off!)

I did get my downloads last night, and here’s a bit of bad news. The MP3s are fixed-rate 160kbps, so audio is a little mediocre. Why not OGG, FLAC, AAC, or higher-bitrate MP3? (You can now buy Radiohead albums from Amazon encoded as VBR 260kbps MP3.) There’s also no digital album art. That’s not to take away from how huge this is coming from a band of Radiohead’s stature, but I do think there’s still some room for improvement. (If you’re the next Radiohead, for instance, you can one-up them by including PDF art and FLAC.)

Oh, yeah, and what about the music? I want to give it a couple more listens before I say too much about that … it’s lovely, it’s not OK Computer, but you knew that.

Thoughts on the new album? How much did you pay? Got a brilliant self-distribution scheme of your own?