Girl Talk has become the next artist to release an album on a "Pay whatever you want" schedule. The album is fantastic. I just paid $5.00 for the thing. Was this too much or too little?
Home | Atlantic FAQ | Masthead | Site Guide | Subscribe | Subscriber Help
Atlantic Store | Educational Program | Jobs/Internships | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | Advertise
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.






$5.00 is exactly the right amount. It's the cheapest amount possible to buy the seamless version, which is clearly a valuable product for an album like this. $5.01 would have been too much. Plus, $5.00 is enough money that you can feel like you paid real value for the album, allowing you to feel like you've set yourself apart from the pirates and traders who will acquire it for free.
Well, unless you got $5 of value by paying $5 rather than nothing, then you paid too much. Some are not bothered by taking it for free, some are- I take it that you are in the latter camp.
The album is fantastic, it's a bargain at whatever price you pay!
Well, technically you get something different if you pay $5 than if you pay less than $5. Paying $5 (or just saying you'll pay $5) gets you access to the FLAC files, which are exact copies of the audio that will be on the physical CD. MP3 is lossy, so it's like a (high quality, in this case) photocopy of the album.
I actually preordered the album along with three others from Illegal Art back in October, so I'm eagerly awaiting the physical copy. It is a great album, though. Much more technically sound than Night Ripper, and I think more interesting, too.
Oh, and the way you get $5 of value by paying $5, is that it gives Philo (of Illegal Art) and Greg Gillis (Girl Talk) some money to seriously defend against the surely inevitable copyright lawsuits.
No samples were cleared, after all.
Yancey Ward seems to take a consumer-centric view of the matter: "Some are not bothered by taking it for free, some are..." OTOH, some might take a more holistic view, realizing that it was not free to create (and the so-called 'free market' isn't quite yet at the point of supporting all artists who want to produce art full-time) and thus provide some value _to the artist_ as well as capture some value by paying less than retail. Empathy economics, perhaps.
yes you did. You should have paid nothing. These people want to busk online for free? Let 'em. I don't do charity to pop musicians with meaningless music.
You want money? Demand it in return for a service. Freakin' hippies....