According to MTV news, the new Radiohead album In Rainbows, released exclusively online yesterday, is being attacked by some fans for the low quality of the MP3 tracks - 160 kbps. These fans are apparently upset because that bit-rate is only slightly better than Apple Inc.'s (NASDAQ: AAPL) iTunes tracks, but well below the available rate of more recently released DRM-free (Digital Rights Technology) tracks with 320 kbps. It is also below the standard rate (192 kbps) that many file sharers apparently "scoff at." Fans are also toting an ulterior motive of marketing the digital release only in preparation for the pending (2008) physical release.

The fans are certainly right that the release was in some way a marketing tool for the physical release. After all, it was not like the announcement was opaque last week, the managers talked about being in negotiations for the CD at the same time!

But is the bit-rate entirely important when you have the music to listen to? That is the question that MTV ends on with the proposition that in the wake of "fans upset because of miscommunication, or if there was some less-than-honest business being done by a band not exactly known for being cold and calculating" could it not be that "Thom Yorke and company tried to do something different with Rainbows, and as is the case with being first, they might not have gotten it right."

That is always the tell of a nice and new marketing ploy, though: the number of complaints. Although in this case you would expect the complaints to be leveled against the method, rather than the finer details of bit-rates. No matter what happens, fan discord or not, In Rainbows is a success because of its innovation - not because its bit rate is low or deters file sharing. As one fan told MTV, if the complainers would not focus on the bit rate "maybe they'd actually remember what music appreciation was and be forced to buy the album based on that notion instead."