As expected, the news of Radiohead's new album release and the "pay what you want" pricing scheme behind it precipitated a fervor on the Web. According to Nielsen Buzz Metrics, 91 blogs were bantering about the band on September 29, the day before the album release announcement. Yesterday, the count jumped to 1104.

Below, excerpts from around the Web weighing-in on Radiohead's move.

Chris Anderson, the Long Tail blog
"Regardless of what the average consumer decides to pay, this is another example of a business model enabled by FREE. They only way Radiohead can enter into this with no idea of what people will pay is because they have a product whose marginal cost of manufacturing and distribution is close to zero."

Jupiter Research Analyst David Card
"Even if this scheme makes them some money, it's not an easily replicable recipe."

Gizmondo
"What Radiohead is essentially doing is making piracy useless for their album. It won't leak, so you can't get it early by pirating. And, assuming they'll be selling high-quality MP3s as they do with all their other albums, there's no reason to avoid DRM by pirating."

Hypebot
"Critics will point out that the band is able to make this leap only because of years of expensive promotion from EMI. But the groups still deserves points for the bold move and with luck someday they will share the average price fans saw fit to pay, so that this experiment can serve to guide and enbolden others."

The Lefsetz Letter
"This is the industry's worst nightmare. Superstar band, THE superstar band, forging ahead by its own wits. Proving that others can too. And they will."

Popmatters
"What's also interesting about this experiment is the leeway time for it. News broke about this yesterday and now the album is coming out in 10 days later."

Wired
"In doing this, Radiohead has become the near-exact opposite of the Metallica of yesteryear. Rather than suing their fans, they're offering them what they want digitally, letting them pick the price, while giving their hardcore following the opportunity to buy something far more substantial than a CD."

Bob Mould (ex-Husker Du guitarist/vocalist)
"My quick take: it's great that everyone hears the music at the same time...The skeptic in me says the next big band to try something like this will be silently, and invisibly, financed and marketed by a major label."

Mould goes on to ask his fans "If I were to abandon the traditional model, would you support my work?" He follows by offering the following pricing options: individual songs $1 - 2, album length release $10 - 20, and annual fee, $20 - 40. Idolator and Coolfer take a closer look:

Idolator
"Right now, the "$40 annual fee" option is in first; it actually doesn't sound all that dissimilar from the fan club model that a lot of larger artists have in place in addition to their current record deals, albeit with fewer middlemen involved...But like David Card at Jupiter noted, nontraditional models (particularly those like the "subsidy" models outlined by Mould) work a lot better for artists who already have some sort of fanbase already in place..."

Coolfer
"Look at Mould's survey results and you'll see the market is open to many different schemes at different price points. By offering single downloads, albums and subscriptions, an artist could maximize his revenue across a broader product line. By segmenting the market, one can soak up that unrealized revenue."