Piracy and MP3's

[toledo3]

Ever since the dawn of MP3's (or maybe even cassette tapes) there has been a great deal of hand wringing over whether they have a negative or positive impact on the record industry.

I see so many posters argue that MP3's have had no impact, while others staunchly proclaim that they have been the downfall of the music industry.

Well, like so many things in life, I don't think it is that simple. I feel that there are BOTH positive AND negative factors at play.

I have peers who used to buy a couple albums a week, who now do nothing but download music- illegally. I have other friends who check out old tunes that they couldn't buy anyway because they are no longer available. Then there are friends who use the downloading like radio....they use it to preview records or songs that they actually couldn't hear on the radio due to limited playlists...and more often than not, actually wind up buying the records.

There is a great deal of overlap among those three groups as well...

However, I think it is undeniable that piracy has had a major impact .... a negative one.... on the industry. Please hear me out.

I don't think it is a direct correlation. I think that, in the end, it has most likely resulted in as many records being sold as there have been records ripped off.

What I do think has happened, is that it has DEVALUED music. Even regular buyers of music just don't feel that it has as much inherent worth.

Of course, MTV and the industry have had a damning effect on music. Who could deny that? I just think that, in order for us to get out of this hole, we need to own up to the complexity of the situation and thoroughly analyze all of the numerous factors at play, instead of trying to make this a black and white issue.

[alphajerk]

no, the industry devalued itself putting out shit entertainers with no substance. downloading music has very little to do with negative impacts on the industry and will probably be the driving force to the rebuilding of a new and better industry.

[toledo3]

Originally posted by alphajerk
no, the industry devalued itself putting out shit entertainers with no substance. downloading music has very little to do with negative impacts on the industry and will probably be the driving force to the rebuilding of a new and better industry.

While, from my perspective... I kinda agree- I also think it is all very relative.

I mean, a kid in high school may actually prefer Usher to Stevie Wonder.....Vanessa Carlton to Linda Ronstadt.....as misguided as I think that is, it is reality....and it is valid.

One of the amazing things about music is that EVERY emotion possible can be conveyed....not only that, but it can also convey cultural identity. That is a very complex interation.... when you or I do not like something, it says alot more about what we can relate to emotionally and culturally, than it says about whether the music is "good".

I know that you have to disagree with what you just wrote, because of other things you have posted. Isn't the Flaming Lips on a major label? How about the Meatpuppets, or Beck, or Q.O.T.S.A...or _______? Just like would probably say there are exceptions to the rule, others would like artists you may say are vapid. And their opinions are just as valid, whether or not you or I disagree.

While I think it is pretty hard to quantify whether there has been more positive or negative impact from downloadng (Like I said- I think there has been positive AND negative), I think it is hard to blaim it all on the industry's choice of artists.

I mean, it is easy to forget how many HORRIBLE, imo, acts were signed in the 50's, 60's, and 70's...because they simply do not get played anymore.

I think the issue is larger than whether or not you or I think that the acts being signed are subjectively "good".

[biggator6]

If you want to really get a good laugh..

go dig up all the industry propaganda from the 70's when cassettes came out.. sounds EERILY like their current hand-wringing over Mp3.. like, almost verbatim.

Cassettes were going to be the end of the music industry, why would ANYONE buy music if they could copy it? yaddayadda.

Hilarious stuff. I personally don't buy the 'piracy killed industry' argument much.. I side more with the 'they're putting out shit, stopped doing any kind of artist development, can an artist if they don't go platinum on their first effort, etc, etc'

the industry has shot itself in the foot - and is fighting madly to keep doing so.

[toledo3]

Originally posted by biggator6
If you want to really get a good laugh..

go dig up all the industry propaganda from the 70's when cassettes came out.. sounds EERILY like their current hand-wringing over Mp3.. like, almost verbatim.

Cassettes were going to be the end of the music industry, why would ANYONE buy music if they could copy it? yaddayadda.

Hilarious stuff. I personally don't buy the 'piracy killed industry' argument much.. I side more with the 'they're putting out shit, stopped doing any kind of artist development, can an artist if they don't go platinum on their first effort, etc, etc'

the industry has shot itself in the foot - and is fighting madly to keep doing so.

Stop being a linear thinker.... why does it have to be "either/or"? How about "BOTH".

This industry has become out of touch AND piracy has also had an impact.

I think it is hard to deny that one someone illegally downloads an album FOR FREE, that money is NOT going into the pocket of the artists. So, not only does the artists get crapped on by the industry, but also by the "fans".

Someone explain to me how downloading an album for free is not taking away money from the artist. Please.

Of course, I also think that people download stuff, and go out and buy albums.... just like used to happen with cassette or what still happens with radio.... so there is give and take in the world of piracy.

My intuition is that the real killer is CD burning/ copying, not MP3's. When a friend approaches you with a copy of a burned CD, you are much less likely to go out and buy it. It's not like in the days of cassettes, where a dub was substandard quality... which gave more motivation to go out and get a real copy.

[alphajerk]

Originally posted by toledo3
My intuition is that the real killer is CD burning/ copying, not MP3's. When a friend approaches you with a copy of a burned CD, you are much less likely to go out and buy it. It's not like in the days of cassettes, where a dub was substandard quality... which gave more motivation to go out and get a real copy.

are you talking about image burining? or CDR's from mp3's? because i have gotten full albums from friends as mp3's and after hearing it went and bought the real deal and blown away by the difference and fully thought my $12 was worth the money spent. had i not gotten it, i might not have bothered to go to the store just to buy it.

so mp3's are pretty much the same as cassettes. i used to copy songs on cassette when i was a kid... was i a "felon" back then too? felon at age 6.... thief. hmmm, dont think it works that way.


but i agree with you about "when you or I do not like something, it says alot more about what we can relate to emotionally and cultural" but that only serves to remind me what a sad state our cultures really in now. i do NOT think the majority of major label releases are worth a damn, nor do they convery any emotion except crass commercialism, which ultimately is what is running the morality of this country right now... and the descisions of the labels.

sure there are a few that "get through" and maybe one day there will be another "meme" band that blows everything apart and makes the industry clone whatever "meme" that blows through. the industry really isnt capable of anything more than crass commercialism with its investors they have to answer to. profit as the motivation behind an artform has never served the artform well.... the filim industry has just as big of a problem at times. forunately for them, they have a well built independant industry that is filled with great films, something that in music, the labels have seen as a threat and not embraced like the film industry has. i think the film industry really learned lessons with videotape that the music industry could really be humbled by which not only improved the film industry but elevated it to a much higher degree than it ever thoguht possible.

[alphajerk]

Originally posted by RobertPhilbeck
TV
HDTV
Movies on demand 24/7
Nintendo
X-box
internet

There are far more fun things to do than sit around listening to music all day. Especially when it can be gotten of the net for free.

i think those are much more legitimate arguements for the demise of the music industry than piracy. each one of those also vulnerable to piracy as well.

[oudplayer]

Originally posted by RobertPhilbeck
I think the "cassette" comparison that biggator brought up is negligible. A few neighborhood teenagers dupping one another's favorite tapes at roughly 30 minutes for each dub, is a far cry than tens of millions of people firing entire albums across the internet in seconds.

Depends where you're talking about. There has been a widely disseminated pirate cassette industry throughout the world with the exception of the few countries (the US included) that imposed such steep taxes on blank cassettes that comparatively few people bought them. But in China, India, Turkey, Egypt, the cassette (and now CD) piracy industry is very visible and has been for several decades - on the street you'll have competing vendors selling burned CDs or copied cassettes for $.50 or $1.

Regarding piracy and mp3s versus various formats, I don't think there is really that much difference. Billions of units of music are pirated each year regardless of the format, and it's been that way for a while.

Something else is happening currently.

[toledo3]

Hmmm.... I agree about crass commercialism in music today... but how is that different from yesteryear?

Frankie and Annette, Herman's Hermits, Doo Wop, British Invasion, Ricky Nelson, Sugar Pie Honeybunch, Surf Music, Motown with their matching suits and dresses, Moptop wigs, Beatle Boots, Chuck Berry's take on Country and R&B- Rock N' Roll, Jingle Bell Rock, Woodstock, Kung Fu Fighting, KISS, Blue Moon, Fascinating Rythm, etcetera......

All totally crass commercialism. Still, debatably entertaining though.... just like today's music. However, the industry was STILL successful, despite that commercialism.

I agree about competition in the field of entertainment as well...but....

Drive in movies, TV, Radio, Surfing, Hot Rodding, Weekend Dances, "Sidewalk Surfing", model cars and airplanes, Twister, etc......

Just as we have new, current forms of entertainment, that competes with music for attention, so did the people of "yesteryear".

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I can step on either side of the argument and see a great deal of validity. I think we all owe it to ourselves to do that. Blindly choosing one side or the other isn't going to solve any problems.

[toledo3]

Here's a thought.


Back "in the day" music was less segmented. A radio station played pretty much every type of "popular" music.... rock, country, r&b, etc.... musician's and listeners had a wide palette to draw from.

The music scene was more unified. A country guy would get influenced by a blues guy, who would then influence a rock guy, who would then pick up something from a r&b guy.... and the cycle went around and around. The Rolling Stones could get up on a stage and jam with Merle Haggard and Ray Charles, and they all could find a common ground.

Imagine Simple Plan jamming with Usher and Shania. Not as much common ground at all. And maybe it could work out, but would it be worth hearing?

The unity of the 50's, 60's and even 70's and 80's allowed for there to be a kind of "competition". Music seemed like it was "going somewhere". The Beatles would one up the Beach Boys and then vice versa. Then Phil Spector would kick everybody's asses into gear. Motown would be listening to that and come up with something. It seems like bands were almost challenging one another throughout the decades. I think that led to alot of innovation... and also led to some stellar performances that would not have been achieved if not for that climate.

Because of musical, and cultural fragmentation, it is hard to imagine that kind of situation happening in the near future. The idea of each artists' album being better, or the music scene "going somewhere" almost seems quaint.

[RinnyTin]

I think it's also part of a larger cultural phenomenon, comprised (in part) of the following:

1) the "need" for instant gratification, i.e. movies on demand, cell phones, blackberry, instant messaging, everybody wants it now and then want it fast, and downloading an mp3 at home is far more satisfying in that regard than going out to a store and buying a CD.

2) Everybody wants everything for free, "retail is for suckers", it's all about free schwag, promotional copies, being "on the list", etc.

3) It's the new thing, the high tech thing, and young people like to do things in the new high tech way.

[alphajerk]

Originally posted by toledo3
Drive in movies, TV, Radio, Surfing, Hot Rodding, Weekend Dances, "Sidewalk Surfing", model cars and airplanes, Twister, etc......

drive in movies.... in cars [with radios on the way to and from]
tv.... all 3 channels of it
radio... MUSIC
surfing... waves of water instead of air
hotrodding [cruising].... big part of listening to music
weekend dances... again music
?sidewalk surfing?

[biggator6]

toledo - you have a great point about the segmentation of music.. Radio is a HUGE part of the reason for where the industry is today. Not to mention the deregulation, allowing Cheap Channel to own 1200+ stations - homogenizing every market.

I grew up in Boston, listening to WBCN, where local bands could be in regular rotation.. no more. Anywhere.

There was an interesting special about this whole thing called 'how the music died' on PBS.. they went back to the introduction of the CD and explained how a lot of this happened.

As they tell it:
CDs introduced - people run out to replace their collections - record sales are artificially inflated

huge congomerates see this inflated sales figure and buy up independent labels

suddenly - independent labels have to start reporting 'quarterly numbers' and can't take a 'down year' in return for longevity of an artist. Records have to be delivered on a schedule.

They point to this as the beginning of the downward spiral.. we're just seeing the accelerated pace now.

[Bob Olhsson]

Obviously there are lots of other problems but the unauthorized exchange of files hurts the vast majority of artists who can no longer count on recovering even modest recording costs from sales. The simple fact is that investment in new artists has all but dried up because investors can't see where they'll get their money back.

The problem has very little to do with the major labels however their sales being off 40% from their peak isn't exactly instilling confidence in investors or helping the studio business.

[alphajerk]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
Obviously there are lots of other problems but the unauthorized exchange of files hurts the vast majority of artists who can no longer count on recovering even modest recording costs from sales.

i cant believe this statement. i work with a band who offers pretty much their whole album as mp3's for FREE and i watch their e-commerce cart selling CD's by the dozens a day now... sure, its not major label movement of albums [millions], but they have sold more albums than the majority of major label artists AND have more than paid for their recording, their manufacturing, and pay for touring from touring [including hotels, gas, and dropping of transmissions and brakes while on tour] and they are unsigned. mp3's [along with a lot of reviews, probably gotten FROM the mp3's posted as some places we know we didnt send CD's to] have pretty much started this chain of sales independantly through their own site. that is just one instance i can monitor daily [i can watch the downloads in a day from mp3's and watch sales resulting]


i really dont think mp3's have anything to do with the downfall of the music industry, which also seems a bit weird.... we are all talking as if it is dead already, which obviously it isnt. maybe we can all feel change in the winds? as jules said, the gates are open and the horses have escaped... what are you gonna do about it? sit there and whine about mp3's and piracy? or use it to your advantage?

[Jose Mrochek]

wow alpha your a different man. what happened ? it's the first positive reply I read from you. I'm glad things are working out for you, and yes I do agree with all you said.

[jlotto]

when a good album (be it rock, rap, r&b) comes out, people buy. check the soundscans.

Problem is way too many albums without substance and people are not buying those.

[bunnerabb]

My intuition is that the real killer is CD burning/ copying, not MP3's. When a friend approaches you with a copy of a burned CD, you are much less likely to go out and buy it. It's not like in the days of cassettes, where a dub was substandard quality... which gave more motivation to go out and get a real copy.

I'd like to weigh in on this, if I may, because I was there in the height of the "cassette bootleg" days.

Smack in it.

Bootlegging cassettes was not at all like the present P2P model that is, to some extent, crippling sales.

This is why:

Let's set the Wayback for 1972, Sherman...

Billy goes over to Danny's house. Danny's brother just scored a cool assed cassette recorder. It's a Pioneer. All the mod cons.. EVEN DOLBY B!

He bought a cassette player from Radio Shack, for the car, with AM/FM and a Supertuner and it's mounted in the dash with some wicked 6"x9"s and a power booster. It sounds BITCHIN'!

Ok.. so, Danny's brother is making some cassette copies of his favourite albums, because he's got a cool turntable and a receiver with a tape monitor and he can do this without springing for a phono pre. Danny has conned his big brother into allowing him to buy a few C-60 Maxells and making him some tapes, too. This process occurs in real time. So, 2 ½ hours later, Danny has three albums worth of songs. He takes these into his cool, double dubbing deck cassette player and pops them in. The quality is.. acceptable. Billy cons Danny into loaning him his dupes to make his own dupes on his dad's rig. The quality is.. not so good. By generation three, you need a source album or some damn pricey gear for the late '70s, early '80s.

Albums are still THE medium for fidelity, which is still very important, then, and tapes are seen as a convenient way to carry your music with you in your car (8 tracks were also in the taper paradigm, briefly) or the really hip new thing that loomed on the horizon, from SONY: the Walkman.

The industry gets wind of this practice, (which, realistically, classical fans from Boston to Berkley had been doing for YEARS as they taped classical FM broadcasts to their ponderously pricey reel decks, via their snazzy McIntosh and Fisher tube systems) and breaks down and starts doing stuff like the King Biscuit Flour Hour where taper fans can snag ONE OF A KIND performances on tape, off of the FM.

WMMS in Cleveland, THE flagship station in the 1970's also had the "Coffee Break Concert" where you could go to the Agora.. the real one, on E. 24th, and see a new, hip, 'MMS approved breakout artist for a buck in the middle of the afternoon, OR.. if you weren't cool enough to be able to make the show, tape it off of the radio thanks to Agency Recording sending a two track mix of the gig over the air. The studio was upstairs.. very handy.

It didn't interfere with the product sales and offered fans a sense that this was indeed, THEIR music and that the radio stations (radio stations weren't just a Clear Channel sat feed and a cart machine, then) and artists and record companies.. CARED.

Ok...

So...

Let's move up to 1999, Sherman.

Peer 2 Peer.

In the time it took for Danny and Billy to archive three albums to a dodgy quality tape, anybody with sufficient bandwidth could have snagged about FORTY SONGS from FORTY ARTISTS, in full, lossless digital, sacrificing only whatever was originally on the CD that was above 16kHz and ALL OF THEM HITS.

In their underpants. While eating.. watching TeeVee.. whatever. They didn't have to do anything that involved them in the process, like shop, get dressed or even pay attention to a tape counter.

Bing.

No waiting, no messing about.

No scratched sources. No ruined magnetic tapes running over dodgy rollers and capstans. No quality loss. No expense for storage medium. No having to buy a cassette deck to play them back, mummy and dah popped for the "family PC" - and no filler.

Put on your earbuds, open Winamp... Bob's not only your uncle, he's dressed as Santa.

Pick the hits like a jukebox and receive the songs to your small box in the den FASTER THAN IT TOOK TO PLAY IT.

You own these songs all for the simple act of pressing "DOWNLOAD NOW".

And.. you could do it every night. Music became like baseball cards or pog caps. The more you had, the cooler.

"You .. GOT THAT MANY?? WOW! I'M gonna have 1,000 .mp3 in a week, too!" The process, much like digital editing, began to supercede the actual content. The tail wagged the dog shitless.

Now... Take that and look at it exponentially. Millions, literally millions of songs up for grabs, 24/7, always open, all the hits, all the time. No ads, no editing out commercials, no duplication loss, no (until the "Poison The Well" campaign started on P2P networks) shitty source materials and F R E - bloody - E.

Free.

No cost.

That....

Is not the same tin of cookies.

I assure you.

Now.. if the record companies and the RIAA had had the SIMPLE BLOODY COMMON SENSE to simply install a sales window in this gaping hole that was cut into their distribution paradigm, a lot of this shit would have gone away a lot easier.

"Did you see where it's all, like 'buy this song for a 1.00', now?, where Napster used to be?"

"Yeah.. shit.. "

"Are you buying them?"

"I.. mostly, yeah.. I mean.. it couldn't have lasted forever.. and it's a reasonable price, you know?"

"Yeah.. it sure was cool to get stuff for free for a bit, though."

"Yeah.. I like that I can go to a kiosk in the mall, though and grab like, new songs into my USB drive or my iTunes Kiosk Kit® while my mom is shopping.. I mean... 5 tunes, five bucks in the little bill thingy.."

"Yeah. I use those, too. It was.. Napster was fun, though."

"Yeah.. hahahahah"

Is that had been an actual conversation in 1999, we'd all be in better shape, now and people would be more focused on the 12 tracks of shit that bloat out Brittney Aguilera CD's for 16.99 than the "brand new marketing channel that put sales up 16% last year."

Kids want to be on the cutting edge, regardless of what it is, but they know when they're being spoon fed shit.

They do.

We did, back there in 72.

So do they.

[lawrence_o]

Originally posted by alphajerk
no, the industry devalued itself putting out shit entertainers with no substance. downloading music has very little to do with negative impacts on the industry and will probably be the driving force to the rebuilding of a new and better industry.

Guys,

Since the coming of MP3, the business has gone down and down.
How can you still believe that this has nothing to do with it?

It is certain that people will no longer buy CDs they would have bought if downloading hadn't been around.

Whatever motives people have for not buying, i.e. not "good enough" well, if you don't like a song you don't download it. You download it because you want to listen to it and if you keep it, it means that you feel it's good enough and from that point, a fee has to be paid to the authors, it's that simple!

Hey, I drove this Ferrari but you know what? I'll just put it in my garage and leave it there. But I won't pay because actually, it's not good enough and I would not have bought it had I not been able to so easily steel it. Comon guys, who are you kidding here?

You geniuses here might change your minds whenever the day comes that your "making a livin'" can be easily stolen without anybody givin a f.u.c.k about it. Piracy kills the business! It' has always been around, true, but since the digital era, no quality loss is experienced and that made things exponentially worse.

I really hope they catch all the bastards and hang 'm high for the sake of the Big fantastic studios and artists who nowadays can't make their living because of pirates' selfishness!

Kind regards
Lawrence.

[lawrence_o]

Originally posted by jlotto
when a good album (be it rock, rap, r&b) comes out, people buy. check the soundscans.

Problem is way too many albums without substance and people are not buying those.

Way is also that many good albums are no longer promoted due to financial loss at record companies => artist never gets a break.

Kind regards
Lawrence

[lawrence_o]

Originally posted by jlotto
when a good album (be it rock, rap, r&b) comes out, people buy. check the soundscans.

Problem is way too many albums without substance and people are not buying those.

Way is also that many good albums are no longer promoted due to financial loss at record companies => artist never gets a break.

Kind regards
Lawrence

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally posted by alphajerk
... i work with a band who offers pretty much their whole album as mp3's for FREE and i watch their e-commerce cart selling cds by the dozens a day now...

You are comparing apples and oranges. That ISN'T an unauthorized download.

The point is that artists ought to have the choice depending on their particular music and their particular fans. I know people who went from a decade of being able to count on selling two to five thousand copies a year to being lucky to sell a few hundred. This change happened virtually overnight after their albums appeared on Napster. I'm sorry, lower mid-level artists being forced to stop touring and get day jobs is not good for the future of music. Piracy has eroded music's middle class. This will only lead to more high profile ex-mousekateer music stars and fewer new fans being attracted to music.

I'm glad it's working for your friends but there are plenty of people it hasn't worked for and it seriously doesn't work for individuals who invest in taking artists who aren't wealthy to the next level. Today's generation of young artists haven't got the same opportunity for success that their predecessors had and they are the real victims, not the major labels.

[jlotto]

Originally posted by lawrence_o
Way is also that many good albums are no longer promoted due to financial loss at record companies => artist never gets a break.

Kind regards
Lawrence

if the album sucks all the promotion in the world not gonna help. major labels been spending mass amounts of $ for years on bullshit that they expect the public to buy. Flash a video, put an artist on mtv for interviews, throw some iposters up, do in-stores, radio morning shows, etc. None of that dont mean anything anymore if the album is not hot. Public not being suckered anymore.

Also, You have to compete for that teenagers $ now. My 14 year old brother gets $50 and his choices lie between a new playstation 2 game or a few albums. Game wins out most of the time unless its a hot album.

[jhamburg]

My $.02:

People are stealing music for 2 main reasons.

1) It's there and easy, why pay for something when you can get it for free.

2) Since the information is ephemeral, it's much harder to conceptualize the act of downloading as stealing. It's not as if the consumer went into their local store and ganked a copy of the latest record. Very few people have any idea of the real cost of creating the intellectual property, it's next to impossible to reify. So, unless pre-schoolers are given basic morality lessons which teach the value of intellectual property and feel BAD when they download, we're screwed, certainly #1 is never going to change.

Which brings me to #3, the (hopefully) eventual solution. As the technology evolves, the information pipe coming into everyone's home will more and more be considered a utility. Few people balk at paying their DSL/phone/cable/water/gas/electricity bill. fewer still actually steal those utilities, they realize that it costs something to maintain the lines, the switchboards, to generate the electricity ...

So what needs to happen is that users get billed for their monthly data usage. Now, in the simplest terms a portion of that income will be sent to ASCAP like entities which will attempt to survey usage/downloading and pay artists accordingly. THis is obviously fraught with difficulty but it would be possible. The other method, also fraught with privacy issues is to have any digital media give a little ping to some central database when it is transferred. Then, artists are given a micro-credit according to the percentage of usage. If the privacy problems could be solved, I doubt any consumers would have trouble paying $2 or so for an album, which would ideally be split between the record company (marketing machine) and the artist.

I really think that something along these lines will be what ultimately allows people to continue making a living making music. What all of us should be doing now is working with the record companies(!@&) to build a political lobby for something like this to be implemented in the next 10-20 years. Though the social and market forces we are dealing with are incredibly powerful, it would be possible.

cheers,

joel

[lawrence_o]

Originally posted by jlotto
if the album sucks all the promotion in the world not gonna help.

You are completely.... right. On the other hand, if the album is bloody great but can't get promoted?

My 14 year old brother gets $50 and his choices lie between a new playstation 2 game or a few albums. Game wins out most of the time unless its a hot album.

That's a correct remark you make. Games and cell phones cost kids a lot. Music is basically free so that allows them to invest in other things for the same money. I hadn't looked at it this way but I guess you could thus state that the music industries' loss is the computer -and telecom industries' gain? hmmm...

Now suppose tomorrow the PS2 game would be relatively small sized and available free for download somewhere on the net. Suppose the music CD would be big-sized and unavailable for download... Your kid's choice might be different I'd say.

Kind regards and have a nice weekend dudes. I'm goin home now.
Cheers.

[BillyJack]

Heart felt apologies to all concerned! FORMER-MP3er here. All the bitching and whinning I hear is not what stopped me from downloading files, education did. A good friend of mine took the time to show me what work goes into the creative process and I was blown away by it. I never realized the effort involved, to be honest. My humble suggestion would be to band together, not to be on here complaining but, to get things changed in our schools and communities. As a result of my new passion for creative listening, even my son (16) has now shown signs of appreciation for the artistic side of it and I find him more out to set behind the piano than to be online trying to download what someone else said was cool. Shoot, I even caught him listening to jazz!

My point is, greed will never share the benifits of business and I used this greed as my excuse for steeling others work and for that I'm sorry. My hope is that the passions of music making still has enough fire in it to be worth sharing with others, thus making a more appreciated and sought after idea. This, again in my humble opinion, seems to be the only saving grace for the industry! Without the appreciation it will continue to be "Give me now! Give me easy! And Give me free!"

[alphajerk]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
You are comparing apples and oranges. That ISN'T an unauthorized download.

no its actually a BETTER comparison because the FREE version sits right next to the BUY IT button for the CD. one doesnt have to search kazaa for it. i hate to break it to everyone, but p2p isnt a piece of cake either. sure the "popular" stuff is available but then again, its played umteen times a day on radio anyway.... not like we arent sick of the song to begin with. most artists are difficult to find on p2p, and cult bands seem to have more bootlegs and unreleased stuff from their searches than albums on it.

the other thing is p2p has gotten so loaded with fake files that it can sometimes take a while to get the track to begin with.


and to address lawrence.... the files dont always STAY on the hard drive and the ferrari comparison IS oranges and apples... the ferrari is first a physical object and second, you CAN test drive one before you buy one. my mp3's either a] get deleted if the song sucks, b] stay on my HD and i buy the CD, or c] after i buy the CD i re-rip the cd at a better bitrate for listening while working on the computer [which is legal].

CD's there are a NO RETURN policy which has gotten me too many times in the past with shitty albums i think p2p and the likes is almost karmic payback to the industry. i love it. i will do it. i will keep doing it. and there is absolutely NO LOGIC that will prevent me from previewing albums [or songs] before i decide to buy them.... and fwiw, there IS MAJOR quality loss with mp3's whether you hear it our not. the difference is HUGE.


and why all you are bitching and whining about mp3s and people DLing them as the fall of the industry and refuse to accept the industry has put out shit for the longest time.... im going to go look for more interesting independent bands online, maybe go see some live shows of said bands when they roll through town [and there are still a LOT of touring bands], and buy their CD and maybe a tshirt if its cool enough. i SUPPORT bands [hell, i even put some of them up for a night while in town]. i dont support labels and i do hope the majors die a very ugly death.... all while crying about mp3's.

[alphajerk]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
The point is that artists ought to have the choice depending on their particular music and their particular fans.

let me address this too. making music is somewhat like a child.... you care for it, you raise it, you release it out into the world and hope for the best but to think you can control it once you release it is short-sighted at best.

[NeoVXR]

I think, neither current CD business models, nor file sharing reflect the value of music in a sustaining way.

It is totally irrelevant how many thousand songs a kid or just someone has on her mass storage.
the only thing that counts, is how many hours a day people listen to ANY music.
if play time of all devices is costly, people will consciously choose music they like best. so it comes to the problem of reporting the listening times of every piece of music to the artist payment organisations. this can be solved, and also downloading frequency should contribute to the payment, because the song is by this considered "interesting".
technology will be created to do it right, but will it be supported by law and economy?

[Blaise]

so if you are one of those people that complain about piracy and mp3s is it safe to assume that

1. you have never downloaded an mp3
2. you have never copied a cd
3. you have never taped a song of the radio
4. you have never made a mix tape of songs
4. you have never borrowed or listened to a peers pirated material
5. you don't own a tivo
6. you have never bought computer software and then installed it on more that one computer
7. you never rented a movie and then made a copy of it
8. you have never missused an aerosol product

this list really goes on and on. Have you ever read the DMCA???
and i'm sure if you are or have ever violated any sort of intellectual property rights piracy you have rembursed the owning parties in full with interest IRS style?

If your going to be self-righteous about piracy at least don't do it half-assed

The only real problem that i have with mp3s is that they sound like garbage

The main problem with this industry is that the artists and the studios are at the bottom of the feeding trough while the same people that bring you AOL 9.0 optimized and proffesional wressling are on top. Getting 3% net on an artistic creation sure sounds like a fair deal to me.