I steal music.

[xmostynx]

i'm amazed at you guys.

if it wasn't for downloading music i would of never bought any of metallica's older stuff. i could list all the bands i would of never purchased.

modest mouse, muse, kings of leon, cake, dispatch, eddie vedders solo stuff, radio head, norah jones,jack johnson, incubus's earlier stuff,

between those bands downloading music made me spend atleast 1,000 dollars in vinyl and cds.

thats not even including the shows i went to.

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by drBill

Dude, you are a piece of work.

Not only are you arrogant beyond all common sense, you need some serious work on communicating your ideas effectively. Spelling might be a good place to start.

Sleep tight in that 5 star hotel.....

again another one to attack the character.

i've always been a horrible at spelling, thats why i'm in this industry.

i'll sleep tight in this hotel, thanks for a whack at a solution drBill.

btw- we are on the internet communicating ideas is pretty limited without seeing my expressions or asking questions. sorry you are limted to attacking character and unable to open your mind up.

[Coyoteous]

Hi Patrick,

I don't understand where you are coming from. I went back to read your posts and try and figure out your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to. I wasn't trying to defame you... just return some of your digs in kind, which was a mistake on my part.

My bigger point is not just about you. I thought GS had a no tolerance policy about software piracy, which I think should be extended to music or any other kind of piracy. That's it. People try to justify their illegal actions.

We're in a "it's not a crime if I don't get caught" world society. Many people don't want to take responsibility for their actions. I think there should be fines or other punishments for copyright infringement.

In reality, it's up to individual to determine their own right and wrong. Illegal downloading hurts copyright holders, who are now being forced to either give there material away and/or not publish it in the future.

- Barry

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

if it wasn't for downloading music i would of never bought any of metallica's older stuff. i could list all the bands i would of never purchased.

modest mouse, muse, kings of leon, cake, dispatch, eddie vedders solo stuff, radio head, norah jones,jack johnson, incubus's earlier stuff,

That's your personal decision and it doesn't cleanse you of your legal obligation.
FWIW, I've never downloaded illegal music (or software for that matter).
I've discovered bands through the web, MySpace, YouTube, internet radio especially.
I read magazines, forums like this and watch music on television. Recommendations from other musicians and friends.
I'm a professional (as it seems you are) and I see it as a professional thing to do to buy a certain amount of music (unheard if need be) from time to time. Hey it's tax deductible anyway.
I even learn something from albums I dislike.
I learn I don't like them for one, but as a drummer I check out the drumming, the drum production, or the drum programming etc.... I check out the compositions, as I want to keep up to speed on that aspect too.
I'm sorry I don't buy the I'm a baker, so I steal all my competitors cakes from time to time to see what they are baking. If I like their cakes I might buy some once in a while defence.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

again another one to attack the character.

It's just an observation. I haven't gotten into it with you on any of your other posts. One of the most valuable things in life is insight into how others see you. I thought I might help out. If it offends, sorry - but you are the one typing. I was just observing. If you come on GS and take a pro-piracy/theft stance, you'd better be able to take some SERIOUS heat. Just some observations here......

PS - I find many on these threads are so open minded that their brains seem to have fallen out. I tend to guard against that....LOL

[Jamzone]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i'm amazed at you guys.

if it wasn't for downloading music i would of never bought any of metallica's older stuff. i could list all the bands i would of never purchased.

modest mouse, muse, kings of leon, cake, dispatch, eddie vedders solo stuff, radio head, norah jones,jack johnson, incubus's earlier stuff,

between those bands downloading music made me spend atleast 1,000 dollars in vinyl and cds.

thats not even including the shows i went to.

You are really in the 'demographic' group of people. NOT. You're representing maybe 1% of the potential buyers of music. It's a message you're not getting that's struggling to be translated to the world.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i
and yes, musicians should go out on tour. you learn alot about yourself, your band mates and the industry, touring is a MAJOR part of this industry.

sorry if that makes me sound. ignorant. but thats how it is.

Not all great music is created by people who are capable of touring. That's just a simple fact. It makes no sense to force that situation on people, and then expect amazing albums of all different types to be made.
Simple examples - The Nathalie Cole - Nat King Cole duets album was hugely popular amongst the general public. Why should she give the album away, then try to pay for it with a tour missing the most important ingredient, her deceased father?
The Beatles anthology series was a huge hit around the World. Firstly they wouldn't tour anyway, but secondly they had a hit single off the album with 'Free As A Bird' created by overdubbing on a John Lennon (RIP) demo.
Should they not have recorded that song because a few pirates demand they tour instead of selling the recording?

I'm typing this rebuttal of the touring argument for the billionth time, and yet you say you fully understand the music industry.

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by Coyoteous

Hi Patrick,

I don't understand where you are coming from. I went back to read your posts and try and figure out your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to. I wasn't trying to defame you... just return some of your digs in kind, which was a mistake on my part.

My bigger point is not just about you. I thought GS had a no tolerance policy about software piracy, which I think should be extended to music or any other kind of piracy. That's it. People try to justify their illegal actions.

We're in a "it's not a crime if I don't get caught" world society. Many people don't want to take responsibility for their actions. I think there should be fines or other punishments for copyright infringement.

In reality, it's up to individual to determine their own right and wrong. Illegal downloading hurts copyright holders, who are now being forced to either give there material away and/or not publish it in the future.

- Barry

barry, GS does have a strict policy against pirates.

however, we are discussing an event that is going to influence all of us in the future. right now its up in the air in courts, and its starting to lean towards one side, but the idea of downloading music is still open for debate.

i'm sorry you don't understand where i'm coming from, but when i say whats the difference if i listen to shitty myspace streams, or shitty mp3's from my iphone.

is there a difference? i don't believe so.

the problem with mp3s being downloaded, is that i can take them anywhere i want to.

the problem with myspace, is that i need to be at a particular website to listen to them.

either way, i'm listening to free music. end of story. right?

Originally Posted by chrisso

That's your personal decision and it doesn't cleanse you of your legal obligation.
FWIW, I've never downloaded illegal music (or software for that matter).
I've discovered bands through the web, MySpace, YouTube, internet radio especially.
I read magazines, forums like this and watch music on television. Recommendations from other musicians and friends.
I'm a professional (as it seems you are) and I see it as a professional thing to do to buy a certain amount of music (unheard if need be) from time to time. Hey it's tax deductible anyway.
I even learn something from albums I dislike.
I learn I don't like them for one, but as a drummer I check out the drumming, the drum production, or the drum programming etc.... I check out the compositions, as I want to keep up to speed on that aspect too.
I'm sorry I don't buy the I'm a baker, so I steal all my competitors cakes from time to time to see what they are baking. If I like their cakes I might buy some once in a while defence.

yes i also find alot of bands from internet radio.
but before i spend money on an album i do check it out to make sure its something i want to invest in.

would i buy a house without a building inspector looking at it first? absolutely not.
would i marry a woman i've never been with, lived with, or met her parents...

absolutely not.

would i buy music i have no idea about, sorry but absolutely not.
i'm informing myself as a consumer, and thats smart consuming.

we live in a world filled with stupid. family guy, simpsons, stupid shit.
we are transforming into a world where education and thinking is becoming 'not cool'

Originally Posted by drBill

It's just an observation. I haven't gotten into it with you on any of your other posts. One of the most valuable things in life is insight into how others see you. I thought I might help out. If it offends, sorry - but you are the one typing. I was just observing. If you come on GS and take a pro-piracy/theft stance, you'd better be able to take some SERIOUS heat. Just some observations here......

PS - I find many on these threads are so open minded that their brains seem to have fallen out. I tend to guard against that....LOL

i'm here taking serious heat, and i'm okay with it.
i'm not some jackass who steals shit. or promotes theft, or anything that harms humans.

i'm a person, just like you, who first priority is survival.
if i survive better by not wasting money, money that i don't have alot of- how is that a terrible 'unholy' thing? its not. its smart consuming.

again i would not buy an apple that was terribly mushy, like i wouldn't buy a cd that totally sucked.

Originally Posted by Jamzone

You are really in the 'demographic' group of people. NOT. You're representing maybe 1% of the potential buyers of music. It's a message you're not getting that's struggling to be translated to the world.

i think the whole entire world is tainted by capitalism, and the whole lie of 'free markets'

we live in a world where we think we are free, but we are economic slaves.
if you don't believe me, tell me whats an economic slave?

a slave that houses themselves, feeds themselves, and continues to work for their master.

take a look around, we are not free people. the message thats struggling to get through the world is that we as humans are not free, we are controlled by huge corporations, who use regulation to manipulate us.

just ponder this idea.

Originally Posted by chrisso

Not all great music is created by people who are capable of touring. That's just a simple fact. It makes no sense to force that situation on people, and then expect amazing albums of all different types to be made.
Simple examples - The Nathalie Cole - Nat King Cole duets album was hugely popular amongst the general public. Why should she give the album away, then try to pay for it with a tour missing the most important ingredient, her deceased father?
The Beatles anthology series was a huge hit around the World. Firstly they wouldn't tour anyway, but secondly they had a hit single off the album with 'Free As A Bird' created by overdubbing on a John Lennon (RIP) demo.
Should they not have recorded that song because a few pirates demand they tour instead of selling the recording?

I'm typing this rebuttal of the touring argument for the billionth time, and yet you say you fully understand the music industry.

how can you fully understand the music industry chrisso?

this is an industry of art, so its impossible to plan, or have complete confidence.

its an industry of GREAT risk...


all your examples are of regurgitated music. music thats been manipulated again and again to make more and more MONEY. i don't believe anyone should touch john lennons demos because, he's dead, and his art is not to be manipulated by anyone else.

its like if i painted some tats on the angles of the Sistine chapel. and then CHARGED you to walk in. who are YOU ripping off. do you see what i'm saying?
and your shooting at me if i try and look into the windows... tell me does this make sense to you?

touring is a HUGE part in this industry and anyone who fails to see it, i'm sorry, but you are blind. my day job is working with a large live sound system, where many many bands come even NEAR pittsburgh and we are bringing sound to them.

touring brings in over a million dollars in revenue to my company yearly.
thats huge...

i'm not saying that the music industry doesn't make money elsewhere, i'm saying that touring is a big chunk of it. thats why there is 'show season'

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

all your examples are of regurgitated music. music thats been manipulated again and again to make more and more MONEY.

But they were very popular with the public.
Why should you decide what's valid or not.
The market decides. If people think regurgitation is wrong, they wont buy it.
Fact is, I could find many other examples where the touring argument would stifle creativity. We don't want to stifle creativity do we?

Eno and Lanois:
Amazon.com: Apollo: Atmospheres & Soundtracks: Brian Eno: Music
Two busy record producers, no band, small audience potential.

Passengers - U2, Eno, Howie B and Pavarotti:
Amazon.com: Passengers: Original Soundtracks 1: Brian Eno, Adam Clayton, The Edge: Music

Really? You are expecting all those characters to go on the road together to pay for the album? Or is it most likely they'll just shelve the idea because Eno is booked up for other studio projects for the foreseeable future and Pavarotti is doing La Scala.

Buena Vista Social Club.
OK, they did play concerts, but very old and frail guys should not have to hit the road for a year to earn money from their music.
Amazon.com: Buena Vista Social Club: Ry Cooder, Ibrahim Ferrar, Ruben Gonzalez, Compay Segundo, Omara Portuondo: Music

I'm not even sure the argument can be positively made that touring can support recording. I mean how many times can the same band play in Pittsburgh without experiencing audience fatigue?

FWIW, I've done plenty of touring, including one and a half years continuous for one project.

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by chrisso

But they were very popular with the public.
Why should you decide what's valid or not.
The market decides. If people think regurgitation is wrong, they wont buy it.
Fact is, I could find many other examples where the touring argument would stifle creativity. We don't want to stifle creativity do we?

Eno and Lanois:
Amazon.com: Apollo: Atmospheres & Soundtracks: Brian Eno: Music
Two busy record producers, no band, small audience potential.

Passengers - U2, Eno, Howie B and Pavarotti:
Amazon.com: Passengers: Original Soundtracks 1: Brian Eno, Adam Clayton, The Edge: Music

Really? You are expecting all those characters to go on the road together to pay for the album? Or is it most likely they'll just shelve the idea because Eno is booked up for other studio projects for the foreseeable future and Pavarotti is doing La Scala.

Buena Vista Social Club.
OK, they did play concerts, but very old and frail guys should not have to hit the road for a year to earn money from their music.
Amazon.com: Buena Vista Social Club: Ry Cooder, Ibrahim Ferrar, Ruben Gonzalez, Compay Segundo, Omara Portuondo: Music

I'm not even sure the argument can be positively made that touring can support recording. I mean how many times can the same band play in Pittsburgh without experiencing audience fatigue?

FWIW, I've done plenty of touring, including one and a half years continuous for one project.

i think we are disagreeing to agree.

i think its important for studio albums to be released.


i also think its important for bands to tour. all the people you suggest, have already made it big, and touring is a big part of their success...

without touring these guys would not have the following they have now.

i can understand musicians in the later days of their career giving up going on the road. hell they have families too- and they are only human..


but my main point with the touring is, you pay your dues.

just like i had to work my ass off on my free time not getting paid shit for doing studio work to learn how a studio works.

just like i had to roll cables before i was aloud to mix FOH.

you pay your dues, thats also part of this industry.


my point is tho- and i hope i can make this clear.

without touring, a unestablished band, has little hope of a gathering.
myspace, and other sites have helped change this..

but when it comes down to it, most LARGE bands, started out on a club circuit, with a home demo recording passing it around for free.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i'm a person, just like you, who first priority is survival.
if i survive better by not wasting money, money that i don't have alot of- how is that a terrible 'unholy' thing? its not. its smart consuming.

Typical selfish attitude of today's eliltist entitled generation. "Smart" consuming on your part - paid for by the songwriters, producers, studio musicians, arrangers, vocalists, copyists, bands, artists, managers, booking agents, and etc. etc. that USED to be able to make a living - before you and yours decided to start being "smart" consumers. What a crock of shite. Surely you can do better than that.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i

i think its important for studio albums to be released.
i also think its important for bands to tour.

We agree. thumbsup

all the people you suggest, have already made it big, and touring is a big part of their success...

We disagree.
Daniel Lanois is primarily a record producer. Eno was a member of Roxy Music, but that might as well have been in a former life, as his role in both the Apollo and Passengers projects had little to do with his role in Roxy Music.
No one had EVER heard of The Buena Vista Social Club before the album came out.
It was a project created by Ry Cooder to help get some recognition, respect and income to a 'group' of very old and neglected Cuban musicians.
I say 'group' because they came together for the Cooder project, they weren't previously a huge touring band.

I could go on......
There's a huge body of exciting work in the electronic music field and film & television scoring that come out on CD, but should never have to tour. Most of it is boring to watch anyway. Ever seen Orbital or The Chemical Brothers?
John Carpenter wrote fascinating music for his own movies. He's a film director though and shouldn't have to take his music on the road so I can enjoy listening to one of his CD's.
Same goes for Hans Zimmer. He wasn't a major name before he started writing film music. I doubt he's ever considered touring, and yet his music brings pleasure to millions.

but when it comes down to it, most LARGE bands, started out on a club circuit, with a home demo recording passing it around for free.

Like I said, that's fine for 'large bands', but they only represent a fraction of the music that's bought on CD or iTunes.

[joelkanning]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

between those bands downloading music made me spend atleast 1,000 dollars in vinyl and cds.

See, I think the major problem is that MOST people who are downloading music without paying for it, AREN'T buying the CD or vinyl (or paying for their downloads through iTunes, etc.) if they like it, they're just assuming that because they can get it for free they don't need to BUY music ever.

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i'm sorry you don't understand where i'm coming from, but when i say whats the difference if i listen to shitty myspace streams, or shitty mp3's from my iphone.

is there a difference? i don't believe so.

the problem with mp3s being downloaded, is that i can take them anywhere i want to.

the problem with myspace, is that i need to be at a particular website to listen to them.

either way, i'm listening to free music. end of story. right?

This is where you have your logic wrong. Music on Myspace is expressly for promotion, to allow the public to hear an artist's music, just like radio. If you like what you hear on Myspace, you can then purchase the artist's music (in whatever format is offered by the artist) so that you can listen to it at your own convenience, on your playback system of choice. It's not that hard to understand, people. Just because you can listen to music on the radio doesn't entitle you to walk into a CD shop and take the album without paying for it, or download the torrent, or get it off a P2P network. It is EXACTLY the same with what you hear online. Just because you can stream a song in shitty MP3 format doesn't mean you no longer have to pay the artist for it if you want to have it on your iPod.

The internet has made it super easy to find all sorts of great music, but it has also made it ridiculously simple to BUY the music you like. Most artists have their music for sale on numerous sites, and have links right on their websites to BUY their music. That's what they want you to do. THE ARTISTS WANT YOU TO BUY THEIR MUSIC! If you don't like what you hear on their myspace page, or the previews on their website or whatever, then don't buy it. If you like what you hear, then buy it already!!

It's like everyone has reverted back to being three-year-olds in a candy store, stuffing as much candy into their pockets as they can, not even realizing that this shit is for sale and that you're supposed to buy it.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by joelkanning

It's like everyone has reverted back to being three-year-olds in a candy store, stuffing as much candy into their pockets as they can, not even realizing that this shit is for sale and you're supposed to buy it.

And not realizing that the store is going to go out of business or move locations or start selling towels and sheets if the 3 year old's keep stealing candy and robbing them blind.

What are the 3 year olds going to do then???

[Johnkenn]

Dear Original Poster -
I heard some your music on your myspace page. You definitely won't have to worry about anyone stealing it.

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by Johnkenn

Dear Original Poster -
I heard some your music on your myspace page. You definitely won't have to worry about anyone stealing it.

this is a worthless post. why clog this discussion up with your bullshit?

as for everyone who replied to me, i have to be up early, i'm crawling into bed.
i'll reply to the latest posts on sunday when i get back to pittsburgh.

i came here for discussion- i agree many people don't buy music they download.


i do however.

i try to find it on record tho- just because thats the most purest forum of playback we have created. and with a glass of wine a record player is just magic.

i'll be back to this thread to answer everyone. thanks for the discussion hope nobody is going to hunt me down in pittsburgh

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

because i download music doesn't make me a maniac or some car thief, i don't do drugs, i don't steal money.

if corporations where accountable to the people like they used to be, this wouldn't be a problem.
record labels are now powerful enough to be corporations, they sink young artists into massive debt and turn people on each other over something we are supposed to be sharing and enjoying. music.

Good Lord dude, really? Let me get this straight... because you don't do drugs and don't steal cars or money, it's ok to steal music? What else is it ok to do if you don't do drugs, steal cars or money? Sounds like a slippery slope of self rationalization to me.

And the "Corporations Are Evil" argument... So, you get to decide that the "corporations" are "evil" and therefore by your judgement you get to deprive artists of revenue from their works.

So let me recap - Corporations are Evil means Stealing from Artists is OK, especially if I'm not doing drugs, stealing cars or money.

What if people are doing drugs? Is it not OK to download music for free then? What if they are stealing cars and money? Is not ok to download music then either?

Everyone defending the downloading of free music, knows in their bones it's wrong and just doesn't want to take on the karmic responsibility for destroying the thing they claim to love, music and the arts.

When they all kill the goose that laid golden eggs they'll complain that all art is crap.

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by joelkanning

See, I think the major problem is that MOST people who are downloading music without paying for it, AREN'T buying the CD or vinyl (or paying for their downloads through iTunes, etc.) if they like it, they're just assuming that because they can get it for free they don't need to BUY music ever.



This is where you have your logic wrong. Music on Myspace is expressly for promotion, to allow the public to hear an artist's music, just like radio. If you like what you hear on Myspace, you can then purchase the artist's music (in whatever format is offered by the artist) so that you can listen to it at your own convenience, on your playback system of choice. It's not that hard to understand, people. Just because you can listen to music on the radio doesn't entitle you to walk into a CD shop and take the album without paying for it, or download the torrent, or get it off a P2P network. It is EXACTLY the same with what you hear online. Just because you can stream a song in shitty MP3 format doesn't mean you no longer have to pay the artist for it if you want to have it on your iPod.

The internet has made it super easy to find all sorts of great music, but it has also made it ridiculously simple to BUY the music you like. Most artists have their music for sale on numerous sites, and have links right on their websites to BUY their music. That's what they want you to do. THE ARTISTS WANT YOU TO BUY THEIR MUSIC! If you don't like what you hear on their myspace page, or the previews on their website or whatever, then don't buy it. If you like what you hear, then buy it already!!

It's like everyone has reverted back to being three-year-olds in a candy store, stuffing as much candy into their pockets as they can, not even realizing that this shit is for sale and that you're supposed to buy it.

to your statement i put in bold, i would never walk it a cd store and take a cd.
thats a quality product, packaged and made for my purchase...

however, if i'm going to download an mp3, of terrible quality compared to a cd..and mp3 format is absolutely horrible (more robbing of sound quality IMO than me putting it on my ipod and listening to the production of it)

if i'm going to use that as a basis to if i should buy something or not, i don't think i'm wrong in doing that... some of you think i am- but i'm sorry the music industry has put out countless one hit wonders, where i have wasted my money as a kid time and time again listening to one song i heard on the radio and liked, then bought the cd and was like ....what the **** is this..


and drBill... i don't think i'm entitled to anything, i come from a very hard working irish/italian family. my college loans are in my name, and i slave daily to pay them back- i'm entitled to what i work hard for- and this may be the same argument in which people think downloading is bad- and i understand this- this is why i purchase music i like- this is why i spend my hard earned money on shows, and this is why i buy beer at 8 dollars a glass at shows-



what really matters, is we all enjoy the music, lets not let the business of music destroy the actual emotional exchange of music- can we agree on this?

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

Good Lord dude, really? Let me get this straight... because you don't do drugs and don't steal cars or money, it's ok to steal music? What else is it ok to do if you don't do drugs, steal cars or money? Sounds like a slippery slope of self rationalization to me.

And the "Corporations Are Evil" argument... So, you get to decide that the "corporations" are "evil" and therefore by your judgement you get to deprive artists of revenue from their works.

So let me recap - Corporations are Evil means Stealing from Artists is OK, especially if I'm not doing drugs, stealing cars or money.

What if people are doing drugs? Is it not OK to download music for free then? What if they are stealing cars and money? Is not ok to download music then either?

Everyone defending the downloading of free music, knows in their bones it's wrong and just doesn't want to take on the karmic responsibility for destroying the thing they claim to love, music and the arts.

When they all kill the goose that laid golden eggs they'll complain that all art is crap.

you missed the boat buddy. jump on and take a pot shot at another time- how about it?

[Coyoteous]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

barry, GS does have a strict policy against pirates.

however, we are discussing an event that is going to influence all of us in the future. right now its up in the air in courts, and its starting to lean towards one side, but the idea of downloading music is still open for debate.

i'm sorry you don't understand where i'm coming from, but when i say whats the difference if i listen to shitty myspace streams, or shitty mp3's from my iphone.

is there a difference? i don't believe so.

the problem with mp3s being downloaded, is that i can take them anywhere i want to.

the problem with myspace, is that i need to be at a particular website to listen to them.

either way, i'm listening to free music. end of story. right?

- fair enough. The artists that put their albums on FaceSpace, choose to do so. So, if you want to create your own equivalency, you would only d/l records that are available to stream. The distinction for radio, internet or otherwise, is that you can't choose exactly what you hear on demand. These promotional album streams blur the line between illegal downloads and radio.

I do kind of get your point, though I don't agree with it or think that it makes copyright infringement okay. You at least want to show some support for music you like and I see that downloading is a mobile way to demo music on demand. Like it or not, there are laws regarding copyrights. Unfortunately, there are no good methods of enforcement.

Many years ago I did download warez. I had paid around $700 for Passport's Alchemy audio editor. Well, they went out of business and I wanted to get the last version without copy protection since I had so much money invested in it. A good soul named Mark Tinley, who was working for Duran Duran at the time, pointed me to an FTP site that had it.

I really didn't get what warez were. In fact, I thought it was pronounced like Juarez, until someone explained it to me. I had bookmarked the site, and went back to see what else was there. Succumbing to temptation, I decided to d/l cracked copies of everything I owned in case those companies went out of business. Next, it was "well I'll just get this one to try out."

I think you see where I'm going. It was just one small step to justify each level of escalation. This FTP site turned into a tracker/BBS system... forgot what it was called. There were also plenty of warez on Usenet. There probably still are. Anyway, it was easy to use excuses of being poor, not using apps for paid work, just for education, it's buggy and not worth the money, etc.

Most of the time I chunked them after I decided whether or not to buy. I got out of all that completely well before my transition to OS X. It just progressively wasn't worth the effort and I didn't keep up with the latest methods. Now I'm at the mercy of the software developers whose apps and plug-ins I've bought licenses for, but I've always made the money back from work and royalties.

I've always wanted to support the artists and software developers whose work I appreciate or use, and I want to be a law-abiding citizen of the USA and world. I expect others to do the same, though that is probably just as idealistic and improbable as wishing everything were free and that we didn't have to worry about making a living from our efforts.

[xmostynx]

here guys- i really need to go to bed. i have a 7am load in.


here is some myspace music for you guys to enjoy- this guy is good.

CHICAGO RED on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Videos

[Denny McNerney]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

can we also remember how many nasty people are in this industry?
the music industry is a very SHADY industry to begin with...

every industry that has the potential to make large sums of money will attract it's share of nasty people...

that's just human nature, there will always be parasites.

and thieves.

i know a lot of wonderful people in the music industry, and perhaps an equal amount of despicable people.

i don't understand what point you are trying to make.

and... brian eno toured w/ roxy music from about 1972 to 1975, and never again. no wait, he did do a small tour when he released "warm jets" in '75. but that's it.

touring is one way of making money in music, but certainly not the only way.

at least up to now...

why does this idiotic argument about live music always seem to get tossed in here?

consider people who made great contributions to music that aren't necessarily live musicians (or perhaps not even musicians at all):

george martin
roy halee
john hammond

just to name three... and i know they're all old references, but i'm tired.
anyone else feel free to add many more to this list.

these people many incredible contributions to the music world, and they made their living in the record industry, because people paid for music.

[fwdkfwdkfwdk]

I could not agree more with the OP. I am also a college student, patiently waiting for a subscription based lossless-format music service.

Currently, I spent nearly 75% of my paychecks on music equipment. I don't make very much money. I spent my hard-earned cash to record a CD of my own, and I still give it away for free. As the poster said "it's not worth 10$" even though some people really enjoy it.

Anyone read "The Future of Music" by Dave Kusek and Gerd Leonhard? Great book about the future of the industry.

Basically, if the music industry decides too, the consumers can get this great service while the industry makes record profits. I don't get why this is not happening yet. Haven't finished the book!

[Jam]

Originally Posted by fwdkfwdkfwdk

I could not agree more with the OP. I am also a college student, patiently waiting for a subscription based lossless-format music service.

Currently, I spent nearly 75% of my paychecks on music equipment. I don't make very much money. I spent my hard-earned cash to record a CD of my own, and I still give it away for free. As the poster said "it's not worth 10$" even though some people really enjoy it.

Anyone read "The Future of Music" by Dave Kusek and Gerd Leonhard? Great book about the future of the industry.

Basically, if the music industry decides too, the consumers can get this great service while the industry makes record profits. I don't get why this is not happening yet. Haven't finished the book!

You may be correct about a subscription based distribution model, I'd need some data about the revenues, how the money would be split and the like before I could agree or disagree.

Where this argument falls down is if the pirates continue, this is a moot point, if the product is available without paying the subscription, why would the die hard pirates pay ?

There is an obvious answer to this, charge any one with internet connection the subscription fee.

But, and it's a big but, this is self evidently less equitable because you are forcing people to pay for something they may not want, need or engage with on any level.

The current system, for all it's faults, means the consumer makes the decision.

James

[Jam]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

1 PERSON TALKED OF A SEMI SOLUTION, THE REST OF YOU TRIED TO ATTACK MY CHARACTER


solutions change the world, not cheap shots on ones character

Did you miss my response to your earlier post ?

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/4126359-post209.html

It sounded like you were saying that it's reasonable to expect something in exchange for labour, I think I pointed out why that doesn't tally with piracy.

Would you care to elaborate ? Or offer a solution ?

James

[Batchainpuller78]

wow you go out to have a nice BBQ, a good nights sleep, you wake up again, and there's pages and pages more of this discussion.

unbelievable...

First of all since the CD-recorder, quickly followed by the Internet Download rage, musicians did get hurt financially.
I just have to look at my brother, his music (that i'm not really fond of, but still I respect him for what he did) was enjoyed by plenty of youngens 15-30, he did fairly well in the States, Japan & Europe for a Belgian artist with Lords of Acid & Pragha Kahn.
He has stopped making music, and has been complaining about this situation for the past 8 years, he certainly felt that album sales were affected and income of those sales dropped tot the point were he no longer felt it was worth the thousands of hours he spent working in the studio to create and complete albums.
So he now started a restaurant (next to music he luckily had a passion for food and wines)

so that's just one close by example where I could see that the digital format and easy acces and copying does affect people in the music industry.
second all the bigger labels here cut down half their staff over the past years.
And if labels don't get their money they are never going to get in a position again where they are going to take chances on risky talent or unconventional music that's uncertain if it will recoup the investments they make in it.

Okay but the pro-pirate people have something against labels...
Start your own, do your own promo and distribution, organize your own tour, yeah very tiring and time consuming this amateur industry. maybe there would be some time and will left to actually be concerned with the music.
most artists I know are to nice people to be organized business men.
And those who are, generally make a different kind of music, they do tend to think of music as a product that needs to sell and make an impact or go along the trends of what is hip and consumable at this moment instead of digging deep down in themselves to find the music that comes from their souls or emotions.

As for the argument that downloading Illegal music makes you buy more music you would have not bought before... I don't know, it might be a small percent... I see lot's of people with thousands of songs on their Ipod, but not thousands of LP's and Cd's.
some do buy those Itunescards for the shop, a lot don't.

I never downloaded illegal songs, I'm not very fond of the digital music format, I don't think it was ever intended as decent music medium, it might develop to that, but Me too would rather see a nice whole package of album, artwork, pictures, linernotes, something physical you can grasp and If you play it on your stereo you get rewarded with a nice and rich sound.
When listening on studiomonitors or quality homestereo speakers to any compressed digital audio format I just cringe.

I discovered most music I like through friends record collections and talking about music with friends and acquaintances, If i'm interested I might check online for myspace, or youtube or Amazonsnippets to see if I like it enough to buy it. No need for downloading it.

I don't know if a form of software protection will help, as as soon as there is software to protect something there are people hacking and cracking it usually with succes.

For the people with entitlement to music for free that was not intended to be gotten for free the counter argument of using their services for free has been made here a lot... and to me that seems a pretty valid point.
So xmostynx next friday I need a PA and a live sound guy for a gig, So will you come and do that all for free, you get a nostar spare bedroom and a sandwich, you dig?

Unfortunately I can't offer a solution for this conundrum.
Subscription based music format? as long as there are ways around that a lot of people will try.
so the only solution is to grow a culture with independent thinking people with some form of moral and ethics .
(but those odds are even slimmer )
as greed will turn most people into very unethical beings.
Be it I want to consume NOW and as much as I can, or companies putting out garbage for the poor sobs that would get tricked in departing with their usually hard earned cash.
as history has shown, cultures, systems and societies will develop and grow reach a high point and start to crumble. I think we are crumbling. ;-)

[chrisso]

Yes.
Interestingly I was watching a Don Letts film about punk last night.
(Fantastic historical film by the way.)

Anywhoo...
There was a similar climate back then (mid 70's), perceived bloated bands on bloated major labels.
Young people started putting their own bands together, recording their own records and releasing them on their own labels, starting their own magazines.
They completely bypassed the establishment music biz.
I think they understood the value of selling stuff (records, fanzines, gigs) to pay for the punk revolution to continue.
The subject of cross fertilization was brought up too though.
Kids went out to clubs and heard the music (records), they got together at each others houses and played records. Read the magazines and fanzines. They talked about the new bands.
Maybe that's the difference with the downloader generation.
They don't talk to each other anymore, and they don't get together.
They all live separate lives in little boxes (bedrooms).
That's why they feel justified in illegal downloading to explore new music, instead of using the methods previous generations used.

[soundrick]

Best thread ever........

I've never seen more soapboxing and people patting themselves on the back in one location on the internet before. thumbsup thumbsup

Since all this debate seems to boil down to is the "selfish, elitist, entitled generation" VS the "self-righteous, morality police, 'our generation is better than yours' generation", and no one has made a relevant suggestion for possible solutions to the problem, maybe we should get a little counter to keep score so we know who is right in the end.
dfegad

[Jam]

Originally Posted by soundrick

Best thread ever........

I've never seen more soapboxing and people patting themselves on the back in one location on the internet before. thumbsup thumbsup

Since all this debate seems to boil down to is the "selfish, elitist, entitled generation" VS the "self-righteous, morality police, 'our generation is better than yours' generation", and no one has made a relevant suggestion for possible solutions to the problem, maybe we should get a little counter to keep score so we know who is right in the end.
dfegad

Wow, how is your contribution moving this debate forward ?

I'll offer a solution if I may. All of the concerned parties conduct their business in the way they deem fit. They compete to offer the best product they can to their customers at the price they deem reasonable.

If people don't like or approve of these practices, they exercise their remedy by not financially supporting them.

Nobody takes these works, properties, labours without consultation, permission or even contacting the owners. If this can't be done voluntarily, then the owners have recourse through legal means to make them cease and desist. If the current legal system does not have the facility for this, the law should be changed so it does.

James

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by soundrick

Since all this debate seems to boil down to is the "selfish, elitist, entitled generation" VS the "self-righteous, morality police, 'our generation is better than yours' generation", and no one has made a relevant suggestion for possible solutions to the problem

Pages of insight from all angles of the debate and that's all you took from it?