Music should be free. If you don't want it 'stolen' then don't record it.

[sftd]

And to add, John in the other thread in which I read into what you said without giving due pause or injecting my own emotions and lack of proper logic, I issued you an open apology. It was unfair of me, and not deserving of you.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by sftd

John, you are a very well spoken, extremely experienced and obviously intelligent man. You also know more about the music business than I will ever in my life know. However, as I am equally guilty of even in a situation directly associated with you (the no food no home comment) you read things into the comments of others that are simply not there. I have never pirated a single thing in my life, if asked my personal baseline opinion I am firmly against piracy. But all of your responses to what I had written indicated that I was a pirate or some type of thief. I was only asking questions to garner opinions from a wide base of people. If others here took the same message you did out of my text then obviously the error lays with me and my method of writing, and if that is the case I have done myself and all of you a disservice by creating confusion. I don't wish to waste your time but I emplore you to read over my passages again either in this light or in the lack of predetermined judgement.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App

Sorry if I implied that you, personally, were a pirate. I often use "you" in the plural, or general sense. Some of your statements appeared to be coming from a pirate-friendly POV, but I do understand that many people who do not intentionally support piracy often accept some aspects of the thinking used to "justify" the "movement".

Also, having been dealing with similar arguments from so many various people over time has caused me to become somewhat less patient and to appear perhaps more doctrinaire at times than I actually am.

[daceymathers]

Originally Posted by elginchris

the old system of selling music will never work again. anyone who thinks otherwise might as well stop reading this post right now.

all music should be free in cost.

as an artist/label, the only way to make money 'selling' music is through advertising and merchandising.

---end of story---

Fans are not the only ones who want what is "hot". Marketers make entire careers "breaking" underground artist to the main stream. Thats where the deals should be made.

This is one of the method of your music promotion.If you will sell your music free of cost then people listen and as more people will like it more it will sell and more it will be promoted.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by daceymathers

This is one of the method of your music promotion.If you will sell your music free of cost then people listen and as more people will like it more it will sell and more it will be promoted.

No.

That idea is only attractive to two kinds of people - pirates and amateur musicians who will do literally anything to get people to listen to their stuff.

And guess what? It actually doesn't work. People hardly ever listen to that kind of stuff, even for free. The most heavily pirated songs are also the best selling songs. In fact piracy rates track sales pretty closely, percentage-wise.

I'd advise that you read the entire thread before jumping in with a bright idea that has already been discussed to death multiple times.

[Mr. Tom]

Is this thread a joke or what?!?!
Don't see the humor in it...

Why should anything be free?!?!
And if it is, what can The quality be like?

I just went to my local coffee bar,
I ordered a dbl espresso...
I told the Barista: Man, this should be free!

You can probably guess his anwser?!?

I'll try the same line tonite at my local Bar...

Ain't it great to be in a line of work where no-one
cares about quality and/or wants to pay for anything?!?

Best,
Tom

[ionian]

Originally Posted by daceymathers

This is one of the method of your music promotion.If you will sell your music free of cost then people listen and as more people will like it more it will sell and more it will be promoted.

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

No.

That idea is only attractive to two kinds of people - pirates and amateur musicians who will do literally anything to get people to listen to their stuff.

+1

Or to quote the Joker from Batman (1989), " If you're good at something never do it for free. "


Regards,
Frank

[warrenmusic]

I'm a music teacher and songwriter.

With regard to the OP, there have been some interesting models. Pay-what-you-want seemed really promising. But even Radiohead admitted their In Rainbows model was just an experiment, and one they could only pull off given the position they were in, which came in part from years of major label backing (not discrediting their songwriting). Bandcamp does something similar now where you can have Pay-what-you-want with a price floor. Some people busk and play for tips, which is pretty pure except for the fact that you will almost certainly learn that crowd pleasers get more money than your originals even if you're good.

I think a good way to look at "paying" for art (which is not even the best word for it, IMO) is not to pay for it at all. Not like the OP said, but to look at it as commissioning an artist to make more art... "Here, have $5 of mine. I want to see you develop. Eat and pay your bills, because I want to see what you will come up with next. On what level can you create? How high can you go?" This is the type of support our famous composers of the classical era got. A patron and his money, the composer and their commissioned works. In this sense, I look at film composers today and see a very pure form of compensation/commissioning happening. I hold Michael Giacchino, John Williams, and Hans Zimmer in high regard.

Pop/commercial music... it's not really the same scenario. Because you're not paying for the people to write you something. You're paying for something that's already written, recorded, and released. And the costs that go into releasing music digitally are marginal. Paying for ones and zeros to get transmitted doesn't make physical sense. Hence the resurgence of vinyl and even cassette now. Perhaps hipsters are onto something.

I think bottom line is, if you want to make a living writing songs, you had better be ready to sell merch, play the social media game, and put on a kickass show. Just my two cents.

-w

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by warrenmusic

Pop/commercial music... it's not really the same scenario. Because you're not paying for the people to write you something. You're paying for something that's already written, recorded, and released. And the costs that go into releasing music digitally are marginal. Paying for ones and zeros to get transmitted doesn't make physical sense. Hence the resurgence of vinyl and even cassette now. Perhaps hipsters are onto something.

Not true on at least a couple of levels.

First, the music you pay for now subsidizes the music that will be made later.

Second, concerning the cost of digital music: If you want quality music it costs money to produce. The distribution medium is only a small part of the cost. It's expensive to record a commercial quality product. High quality engineering and production costs money - regardless of what the gear pimps might tell you. The fact that someone like William Wittman can track an album with an M-box and 2 good mics does NOT mean that you can, because you don't have his experience and expertise. The talent that it takes to make a commercial recording costs money, that's the bottom line.

I think bottom line is, if you want to make a living writing songs, you had better be ready to sell merch, play the social media game, and put on a kickass show. Just my two cents.

-w

No. Many people are not in a position to "sell merch, play the social media game, and put on a kickass show". Professional songwriters don't sell merch and generally don't play live. And the reality of the situation is that if you're a new act you'll be extremely lucky to break even selling merch and playing shows. Most likely it will cost you money. And if you start getting even slightly popular your merch will be pirated just like your records.

[mikeg09]

Music should NOT be free.
Making music takes hard work just like anything else.

End of discussion. This thread should have been closed a long time ago..

[Gary Ladd]

Originally Posted by mikeg09

Music should NOT be free.
Making music takes hard work just like anything else.

Unfortunately, ALL popular music is currently free via downloading P2P and from lockers like Rapidshare et al.

IF you don't believe me, Gogle an artist/album/song for yourself, it's all out there in .rar files, and from my recent research is more prevalent and easier to use than iTunes or any commercial pay service...

It looks like the criminals have won

[AwwDeOhh]

Originally Posted by Gary Ladd

Unfortunately, ALL popular music is currently free via downloading P2P and from lockers like Rapidshare et al.

IF you don't believe me, Gogle an artist/album/song for yourself, it's all out there in .rar files, and from my recent research is more prevalent and easier to use than iTunes or any commercial pay service...

It looks like the criminals have won

Maybe you want to weigh in on the current US legislation being considered; SOPA and PROTECT IP.

The facts on SOPA

Register of Copyrights: without SOPA, copyright "will ultimately fail"