5 ms·

Am I the only one who loves this? The arguments here all seem to portray this as if Wu-Tang, or anybody really, plans on using this as a new business model that

Am I the only one who loves this? The arguments here all seem to portray this as if Wu-Tang, or anybody really, plans on using this as a new business model that is sustainable and repeatable. In that light it is seen as "regressive" and "anti-innovative", or it won't work because it'll get leaked, history trends toward open etc. In reality it's a very smart marketing tactic (they're selling another album with regular distribution btw), and is a piece of performance art in its own right. It raises questions and encourages discussion about the value of art & music in the digital age. This is particularly noteworthy coming from the rap genre which is typically not given enough credit for its role in shaping music trends and pop culture generally. The "art" in question isn't really about the music, it's about framing music as art. [Edited for grammar/spelling]

btrautsc 13y ago
this was my opinion. this is art/ marketing... brilliant, brilliant 'artketing'
- Metapony 13y ago
  If you look at their history, RZA is brilliant at marketing.
  - jeffool 13y ago
    Agreed. The guy really seems to "get" things, which is always great to hear about an artist whose work you enjoy. In addition to being a great album Wu-Tang Clan's album Forever was the first CD to offer multimedia when inserted into a PC! Not to say "enhanced CDs" are the pinnacle of technology, but it's an example of them being forward looking, so their willingness to try new things doesn't surprise me.
gtaylor 13y ago
I don't even listen to Wu-Tang, but I think this is awesome. This is creative and interesting. People like myself who would otherwise never read or think about Wu-Tang are pondering how this will work and what the implications (if any) will be. That's awesome. > and is a piece of performance art in its own right Very much so. Excellent point.
- Consultant32452 13y ago
  If you're unfamiliar with Wu-Tang you may enjoy this video which is GZA rhyming about the big bang. Wu-Tang is pretty much the opposite of what the stereotype about rap culture is. They are intelligent and try to spread positivity in the world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajs48XRlOqc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajs48XRlOqc
  - MarkTee 13y ago
    "Wu Tang is for the children."
    - industrialwaste 13y ago
      Also, aint nuthing ta fuck wit
  - xmonkee 13y ago
    >Wu-Tang is pretty much the opposite of what the stereotype about rap culture is As a die hard rap and Wu fan I would just like to say that very few artists actually fall into that stereotype. There's no "rap culture". Rap is about expression, and it happens to express different things when made by different people.
    - sgdesign 13y ago
      As a die hard rap fan as well, I would say the vast majority of artists fall into that stereotype. I love rap, but even I have to admit that a lot of rap lyrics are dumb and offensive, and definitely play into the hands of those who talk about "rap culture" (I think Boondocks does a pretty good job of showing this by the way).
      - blumkvist 13y ago
        IMO the majority of artists that are positioning themselves as "rappers" are actually pop artists, coming straight from the assembly line of the big music publishers. (also truhead speaking here)
001sky 13y ago
Absolutely highlights "record label" adds no value. Here they are being outsourced. The promo work is being turned on its head (buy promo to sell record vs give away record and get the promo). If it works it seems brilliant.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  One instance of a popular band with a single non-label success does not demonstrate adequately that labels add no value.
  - 001sky 13y ago
    This actually isn't original, its a copycat tactic (Jay-Z did it first)#. The "record" in record lable being short for "recording". Here, they are giving away the reproduction rights under the expectation that the owner will (trivially) reproduce and distribute the "records" for token economics. The new "middleman" will be happy to do this <on their own dime> and basically give the recordings away. This will make sense because the promotional value of the giveaways will exceed the trivial reproduction costs. That is a pretty effective demonstration. Lastly, lets say they get 5 million dollars. That would be the equivalent of doing a 5x (million) platinum record sales, but with still better economics (less rip offs) on the production costs. So in this model, 1 sale to an "art market" is better than 5 million sales through a record label for the artist. And the consumers get basically free product (as swag). That seems like a win/win. That was the model upon which this structure was originally premised. [For the downvoters: Read the Forbes article from 6 days ago, below] # http://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2014/03/26/why-wu-tang-will-release-just-one-copy-of-its-secret-album/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2014/03/26/...]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
pizza234 13y ago
The problem with this is that there is not only one framing, "music as art" but also another, "art as collectible good", which is the most banal meaning one can attribute to art. Reproducibility has never detracted anything from important pieces of art, and has nothing to do with their artistical value; everyone has painting reproductions in their home, and that doesn't make the painting* less valuable. For this reason, while there are certainly valuable discussions on generic terms, this remains a pure marketing stunt (or, a banal pseudo-intellectual statement). *=of course, here there could be a debate about the value of the concept related to the original physical copy and its reproductions.
sizzle 13y ago
I have some personal info on this exact issue from a good friend I trust that works with their label/is good friends with the members. Take it as you wish, but I can't help but share because it would be great if someone else confirmed it. basically my friend told me that they were coerced into making a "last" album (this was before it was formally announced by them fyi), to pay off a group of club-bouncer thugs that follow them to all their events and threaten them for payment--I'll explain below. When wu-tang was getting popular and played at inner city clubs, the manager would pick out 5-10 of the meanest looking guys in the crowd and tell them to essentially act as bouncers in the venue if things too got out of control. He couldn't pay then, but these guys would do this at every venue and over time, bonded over this newfound relationship with wu-tang clan. They got wu-tang tattoos on their arms and felt proud of the affiliation (almost to the tune of resembling a gang). Once wu-tang started playing gigs at bigger, mainstream venues these bouncer men were no longer needed. These wu-tang tatoo'd bouncers felt wronged, and attributes wu-tang's success now with the protection they provided at dangerous inner-city clubs. They felt like they were employees in a sense and demanded a percentage of all the revenue the group was now making. They threaten the group and manager frequently and my friend said, wu-tang desperately needed to pay them off because they are all older now and fear for the safety of their families. This album was then announced publicly and I can't help but put two and two together. Was this album created to get a quick sum of money to pay off the club bouncers once and for all? I can't stop thinking about it now. I promise I'm not making this up, just wondering if anyone can confirm any of these assertions that are knowledgeable with wu-tang/hip hop.
- loso 13y ago
  I used to work club security for 6 years and have done at least 12 wu tang or wu affiliate shows. I've also done radio interviews with several of them when I was a DJ in the late 90s. I never saw anything that would be considered intimidation in this manner at any of their shows. The closest problem I can remember is some random guy in the crowd picking a fight with UGod while he was walking from the stage. But this happened with a lot of artist. Not saying a story like this isn't true but it sounds highly unlikely.
  - 13y ago
jacquesm 13y ago
Jean Michel Jarre did this in 1983, I highly doubt that they were not aware of that when doing this. Musique Pour Supermarche is definitely not he best he made but the mechanism was exactly identical.
timdiggerm 13y ago
I love it for the challenge it will offer to those would find a way to release it online ahead of schedule.

btrautsc 13y ago

this was my opinion. this is art/ marketing... brilliant, brilliant 'artketing'

Metapony 13y ago
If you look at their history, RZA is brilliant at marketing.
- jeffool 13y ago
  Agreed. The guy really seems to "get" things, which is always great to hear about an artist whose work you enjoy. In addition to being a great album Wu-Tang Clan's album Forever was the first CD to offer multimedia when inserted into a PC! Not to say "enhanced CDs" are the pinnacle of technology, but it's an example of them being forward looking, so their willingness to try new things doesn't surprise me.

gtaylor 13y ago

I don't even listen to Wu-Tang, but I think this is awesome. This is creative and interesting. People like myself who would otherwise never read or think about Wu-Tang are pondering how this will work and what the implications (if any) will be. That's awesome. > and is a piece of performance art in its own right Very much so. Excellent point.

Consultant32452 13y ago
If you're unfamiliar with Wu-Tang you may enjoy this video which is GZA rhyming about the big bang. Wu-Tang is pretty much the opposite of what the stereotype about rap culture is. They are intelligent and try to spread positivity in the world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajs48XRlOqc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajs48XRlOqc
- MarkTee 13y ago
  "Wu Tang is for the children."
  - industrialwaste 13y ago
    Also, aint nuthing ta fuck wit
- xmonkee 13y ago
  >Wu-Tang is pretty much the opposite of what the stereotype about rap culture is As a die hard rap and Wu fan I would just like to say that very few artists actually fall into that stereotype. There's no "rap culture". Rap is about expression, and it happens to express different things when made by different people.
  - sgdesign 13y ago
    As a die hard rap fan as well, I would say the vast majority of artists fall into that stereotype. I love rap, but even I have to admit that a lot of rap lyrics are dumb and offensive, and definitely play into the hands of those who talk about "rap culture" (I think Boondocks does a pretty good job of showing this by the way).
    - blumkvist 13y ago
      IMO the majority of artists that are positioning themselves as "rappers" are actually pop artists, coming straight from the assembly line of the big music publishers. (also truhead speaking here)

001sky 13y ago

Absolutely highlights "record label" adds no value. Here they are being outsourced. The promo work is being turned on its head (buy promo to sell record vs give away record and get the promo). If it works it seems brilliant.

jamesaguilar 13y ago
One instance of a popular band with a single non-label success does not demonstrate adequately that labels add no value.
- 001sky 13y ago
  This actually isn't original, its a copycat tactic (Jay-Z did it first)#. The "record" in record lable being short for "recording". Here, they are giving away the reproduction rights under the expectation that the owner will (trivially) reproduce and distribute the "records" for token economics. The new "middleman" will be happy to do this <on their own dime> and basically give the recordings away. This will make sense because the promotional value of the giveaways will exceed the trivial reproduction costs. That is a pretty effective demonstration. Lastly, lets say they get 5 million dollars. That would be the equivalent of doing a 5x (million) platinum record sales, but with still better economics (less rip offs) on the production costs. So in this model, 1 sale to an "art market" is better than 5 million sales through a record label for the artist. And the consumers get basically free product (as swag). That seems like a win/win. That was the model upon which this structure was originally premised. [For the downvoters: Read the Forbes article from 6 days ago, below] # http://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2014/03/26/why-wu-tang-will-release-just-one-copy-of-its-secret-album/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2014/03/26/...]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

pizza234 13y ago

The problem with this is that there is not only one framing, "music as art" but also another, "art as collectible good", which is the most banal meaning one can attribute to art. Reproducibility has never detracted anything from important pieces of art, and has nothing to do with their artistical value; everyone has painting reproductions in their home, and that doesn't make the painting* less valuable. For this reason, while there are certainly valuable discussions on generic terms, this remains a pure marketing stunt (or, a banal pseudo-intellectual statement). *=of course, here there could be a debate about the value of the concept related to the original physical copy and its reproductions.

sizzle 13y ago

I have some personal info on this exact issue from a good friend I trust that works with their label/is good friends with the members. Take it as you wish, but I can't help but share because it would be great if someone else confirmed it. basically my friend told me that they were coerced into making a "last" album (this was before it was formally announced by them fyi), to pay off a group of club-bouncer thugs that follow them to all their events and threaten them for payment--I'll explain below. When wu-tang was getting popular and played at inner city clubs, the manager would pick out 5-10 of the meanest looking guys in the crowd and tell them to essentially act as bouncers in the venue if things too got out of control. He couldn't pay then, but these guys would do this at every venue and over time, bonded over this newfound relationship with wu-tang clan. They got wu-tang tattoos on their arms and felt proud of the affiliation (almost to the tune of resembling a gang). Once wu-tang started playing gigs at bigger, mainstream venues these bouncer men were no longer needed. These wu-tang tatoo'd bouncers felt wronged, and attributes wu-tang's success now with the protection they provided at dangerous inner-city clubs. They felt like they were employees in a sense and demanded a percentage of all the revenue the group was now making. They threaten the group and manager frequently and my friend said, wu-tang desperately needed to pay them off because they are all older now and fear for the safety of their families. This album was then announced publicly and I can't help but put two and two together. Was this album created to get a quick sum of money to pay off the club bouncers once and for all? I can't stop thinking about it now. I promise I'm not making this up, just wondering if anyone can confirm any of these assertions that are knowledgeable with wu-tang/hip hop.

loso 13y ago
I used to work club security for 6 years and have done at least 12 wu tang or wu affiliate shows. I've also done radio interviews with several of them when I was a DJ in the late 90s. I never saw anything that would be considered intimidation in this manner at any of their shows. The closest problem I can remember is some random guy in the crowd picking a fight with UGod while he was walking from the stage. But this happened with a lot of artist. Not saying a story like this isn't true but it sounds highly unlikely.
- 13y ago

jacquesm 13y ago

Jean Michel Jarre did this in 1983, I highly doubt that they were not aware of that when doing this. Musique Pour Supermarche is definitely not he best he made but the mechanism was exactly identical.

timdiggerm 13y ago

I love it for the challenge it will offer to those would find a way to release it online ahead of schedule.