The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
What is the REAL cause of the music industry downturn?? Channel Strip Plugins
Old 1st January 2011
  #121
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I promise you, if you don't cite it as valuable evidence again, I wont say it isn't again.
Chris, the point is to move on from this little back and forth. We disagree. I believe it's relevant, you don't. Fine.
Old 1st January 2011
  #122
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lives For Fuzz View Post
after you.
Do you understand that tiers by data and tiers by speed are very different?
Old 1st January 2011
  #123
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
I believe it's relevant, you don't. Fine.
But you can't tell us why it's relevant?
I mean I've asked you a dozen times.
You can't just walk into an open debate, declare you're right and others are wrong and not explain why?

PS: (I know what's coming - please don't go there)
Old 1st January 2011
  #124
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
But you can't tell us why it's relevant?
I already have and you don't agree. That's the agree to disagree part, Chris.
Old 1st January 2011
  #125
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Do you understand that tiers by data and tiers by speed are very different?
not ultimately. in the end you are paying for a set amount of data over the course of a month. a speed plan limits the amount of data you can get over that period of time, a size limit throttles your bandwidth to dial up speed if you go over - speed and size are part of the same equation when configured into finite amounts of time - in this case, a month.
Old 1st January 2011
  #126
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Chris, the point is to move on from this little back and forth. We disagree. I believe it's relevant, you don't. Fine.
you first.

why is it always you suggesting this of other people but never doing it yourself?
Old 1st January 2011
  #127
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lives For Fuzz View Post
you first.

why is it always you suggesting this of other people but never doing it yourself?
What, does Chris need you looking after him?
Old 1st January 2011
  #128
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
What, does Chris need you looking after him?
just callz it howz I seez it... what's a matter, can't practice what you preach?
Old 1st January 2011
  #129
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Of course, we all see what we want to see. One of us realizes it.
That would be me.


Quote:
This is FUN John. You think it's real, but it's not.
I guess it's just fun for you, which kind of explains why you could cling to such an absurd position in the face of all the real evidence to the contrary.

Quote:
Nobody's minds are being changed here, you're not "fighting the good fight" by arguing on a message board.
Well, evidently YOUR mind isn't being changed because you refuse to consider facts and would prefer to accept propaganda and pseudoscience as reality.

Hopefully that's not true of everyone else. In fact, I KNOW that is not true because my own mind has been changed on certain aspects of this, specifically by the posts of Bob Ohlsson here and on The Womb.

Frankly, it's a bit annoying that you insist on treating a serious discussion as a kiddie playground.

Quote:
If you REALLY cared to make a difference you would do something about the problem rather then spending time here yapping about it. I've offered... but people would rather just argue I guess...
And what would that be?

FYI, I attended (at the cost of a $100 fee) the San Francisco Music Tech Summit to promote my idea for a Bittorrent based legal distribution system to compete with piracy. Where were you?

Quote:
The fact that you can't imagine any impact on the music industry as a result of the worst recession in decades really says something...
The fact the you ignore the history that the entertainment sector in general and the music business in particular are generally unaffected by recession says a lot more.

Let me ask you a question on that subject - If the recession is responsible for the precipitous drop in music sales, why has the video game industry not shown an equivalent drop? Why has it, in fact, shown huge growth over that period of time? If people can't afford $1 music downloads surely they must not be able to afford $40 video games.

As with everything else about your position, you recession argument simply does not hold water.
Old 1st January 2011
  #130
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Ahh so of course I'm evil rather than making a mistake. Thanks John, classy.

I apologize for the misinterpretation.
Accepted.

And no, you're not evil. Pigheaded, yes, but not evil. Well, no more evil than any other radio mook, anyway........ (sorry, just couldn't resist.)
Old 1st January 2011
  #131
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
I already have and you don't agree.
I missed it.
Copy it across or link to the specific post.
Old 1st January 2011
  #132
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I missed it.
Copy it across or link to the specific post.
No, it's over and pointless. Accept it.
Old 1st January 2011
  #133
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
I guess it's just fun for you, which kind of explains why you could cling to such an absurd position in the face of all the real evidence to the contrary.
Honestly, the fun part is the crazy stuff you guys come up with sometimes. If I were to take it seriously, I would be stunned. But I don't, so I just get amused.

Quote:
Well, evidently YOUR mind isn't being changed because you refuse to consider facts and would prefer to accept propaganda and pseudoscience as reality.
That's right, because whatever you say is a fact and whatever I say is opinion.

Quote:
Hopefully that's not true of everyone else. In fact, I KNOW that is not true because my own mind has been changed on certain aspects of this, specifically by the posts of Bob Ohlsson here and on The Womb.
My mind has been changed on several occasions here, or at least it has changed my perspective. I thought the number of files being transferred around was relatively small, for example. However, what changed my mind was not your opinion (or, your "facts."). What changed my mind was data and research.

Quote:
Frankly, it's a bit annoying that you insist on treating a serious discussion as a kiddie playground.
That's what it is, frankly.

Quote:
Let me ask you a question on that subject - If the recession is responsible for the precipitous drop in music sales, why has the video game industry not shown an equivalent drop? Why has it, in fact, shown huge growth over that period of time? If people can't afford $1 music downloads surely they must not be able to afford $40 video games.
This is why this is a playground. Your premise is absurd. Do you really think the music and video game industry are on the same trajectory? You really think that makes sense?

I believe that entertainment dollars go back and forth between different entertainment mediums, including the video game industry. I believe video game spending often eats into spending on other entertainment choices, including music.

The other part of your statement above that is absurd is asking "if the recession is responsible" for the drop in sales, as if there was one neat and tidy answer. I believe, and the data shows me, that it's a variety of factors, INCLUDING the recession, including piracy, including other entertainment mediums, including the internet itself.

So here's where you can make a decision. You can start the circular discussion all over again, where you say "there is no data" or "what other factors" etc that we have already gone on and on about... or you could just accept we look at the data and have a different interpretation. Because, as I've said to Chris, much greater minds than ours have looked at the same inputs and had completely different interpretations.

See the graph attached, just for fun, about the game industry's sales.
Old 1st January 2011
  #134
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
No, it's over and pointless. Accept it.
So, I expect I didn't miss it then. tutt
Old 1st January 2011
  #135
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
So, I expect I didn't miss it then. tutt
heh Perfect!
Old 1st January 2011
  #136
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Honestly, the fun part is the crazy stuff you guys come up with sometimes.
You do give the impression this long running argument is a fun way to pass the time.
As john points out, it actually isn't fun for many creative people.

Quote:
Because, as I've said to Chris, much greater minds than ours have looked at the same inputs and had completely different interpretations.
Really?
Greater minds like your blog guys and economics post graduates?
As far as creativity in the digital age is concerned I'd put Billy Bragg and Ari Emanuel well above you and me, but you labeled one a "rock star = not interested" and never had time between "I know you are but what am I" posts to watch and learn anything from the other.
Old 1st January 2011
  #137
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
heh Perfect!
Funny heh but sad at the same time, because like many questions I've asked you, when i've repeated them enough and in their simplest most direct form, you always switch to comedy mode.
Which tells me you can't answer the simplest of requests.
Surely even you, despite everything, can simply link me back to the post where you explained why data based on year 2000 to 2005 research is relevant in your opinion to the piracy mechanisms we are faced with in 2010/11?
Old 1st January 2011
  #138
Registered User
Lies, damned lies, and statistics ...

A statement such as "1.8 billion illegal downloads" is a stupid statistic designed to deceive stupid people ...

The concept that people should pay for every song they ever hear is absurd. The majority of people listening to music don't pay for it, never have and never will. The technology has changed, but really - we should be comparing mp3 downloads with AM/FM radio and cassette recording since the 1960's ...

There is a long standing historical precedent for the public consuming music for free.

Nobody called radio listeners "thieves" or "pirates" ...

This backlash against people downloading mp3s to be able to hear a song for free has to stop.

I understand the need for artists to get paid for performing their art. But part of the package is understanding that the majority of people have to be able to enjoy their art for free, long before there is any chance that they might receive any renumeration. It's the way it has worked for a long time.

Do you think The Beatles would have gained any recognition if the masses of people weren't able to hear their songs on the radio or tv - for free ... initially?

Obviously - if people enjoy an artist's work, they will have to pay for the concert admission, or the t-shirt, or the merchandise ... and of course the radio & tv stations have to pay to play ... but they rake all that back + profit from advertising, which is ultimately funded by the consumers of the advertised products ... ultimately, nothing is free anyway ...

If mp3 players are so illegal, then ask your government to ban them, and shoot anyone caught playing one ...

There are two sides to this equation ... with blind, stupid greed driving both sides. Some lazy artists think they should be payed for whatever mindless crap they want to create. They think the world owes them something ...

It doesn't work that way. Never has.
Old 1st January 2011
  #139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi View Post

There is a long standing historical precedent for the public consuming music for free.

Nobody called radio listeners "thieves" or "pirates" ...
Oh dear......
You really could have looked back over the forum for past discussions.
this is yet another old chestnut that's been ruminated over time and time again.
Firstly, quite often radio isn't free. You listen to numerous adverts after every few songs.
Do you listen to ads in amongst your illegally downloaded mp3's?

You also don't have a choice what you hear on the radio. The station chooses what you hear. If I don't want to hear Beyonce and beiber all day long, I\there's many a 'free' radio station i wont want to listen to.

Do you have a choice which mp3's you download, or is it forced on you by a media corporation like Clear Channel?

When you are able to listen to free radio and they play a Beatles song, are you able to own that song and play it whenever, and wherever you want?
Or can you only do that if you illegally download a Beatles mp3.

So in the space of about 1 minute I've come up with just a few ways illegal downloading is vastly different from radio.
Old 1st January 2011
  #140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi View Post
Obviously - if people enjoy an artist's work, they will have to pay for the concert admission, or the t-shirt, or the merchandise ...
Uuuuugh, do we have to go here again.
Old 1st January 2011
  #141
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
You do give the impression this long running argument is a fun way to pass the time.
As john points out, it actually isn't fun for many creative people.
Come on. How pretentious. THIS little board is meaningless in the piracy battle, and you wouldn't be here if it weren't fun. You don't think you are actually accomplishing much, do you?

Quote:
Really?
Greater minds like your blog guys and economics post graduates?
Actually, I was thinking more like this:

The Ritz-Einstein Agreement to Disagree

Quote:
As far as creativity in the digital age is concerned I'd put Billy Bragg and Ari Emanuel well above you and me, but you labeled one a "rock star = not interested" and never had time between "I know you are but what am I" posts to watch and learn anything from the other.
What I actually said was a rock star doesn't necessarily have a more accurate view of piracy then someone who has studied the issue.
Old 1st January 2011
  #142
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Funny heh but sad at the same time, because like many questions I've asked you, when i've repeated them enough and in their simplest most direct form, you always switch to comedy mode.
What else is there to do or say? I've said it all to you. You've said it all to me. Respectfully, Chris... what else is there to talk about??

This continues to the point of absurdity, and it becomes funny. heh
Old 1st January 2011
  #143
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
You don't think you are actually accomplishing much, do you?
That's true.


Quote:
What I actually said was a rock star doesn't necessarily have a more accurate view of piracy then someone who has studied the issue.
Well that's of course guess work on your part.
Having been around the odd successful musician I was trying to enlighten you that you could be wrong. As usual it fell on deaf ears.
Old 1st January 2011
  #144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi View Post
Lies, damned lies, and statistics ...

A statement such as "1.8 billion illegal downloads" is a stupid statistic designed to deceive stupid people ...

The concept that people should pay for every song they ever hear is absurd. The majority of people listening to music don't pay for it, never have and never will. The technology has changed, but really - we should be comparing mp3 downloads with AM/FM radio and cassette recording since the 1960's ...

There is a long standing historical precedent for the public consuming music for free.

Nobody called radio listeners "thieves" or "pirates" ...
You know, we've been through this before, but I'll run it down again just in case you missed it the first time.

The argument that people have always listened for free because of radio is a crock.

Radio is not, and never was, free.

Radio is paid for by advertisers.

In the old days of radio one advertiser would sponsor an entire show and would often have their name prominently featured in the show's title, i.e. "The King Business Blues Hour", "The Hallmark Theater", etc. Later stations took to selling advertising slots of 15 seconds to two minutes, which is the model that continues to this day. Simply because it's not the listener shelling out the actual money does not mean that the music isn't paid for.

Furthermore, radio (and TV) is a one-time listen. You don't get to keep the song or show and listen to it at your leisure. You listen when it's on and then it's gone. If you want to listen anytime you want, you pay for a copy.

Quote:
This backlash against people downloading mp3s to be able to hear a song for free has to stop.
No. This freetard bullsh*t has to stop. You do not have the right to take anything you want for free. You do not have to download a song to listen to it. Have you ever heard of internet radio? Have you ever heard of streaming audio on artists' websites? There are numerous ways to hear a song before you decide to buy it.

Quote:
I understand the need for artists to get paid for performing their art.
Evidently not.
Quote:
But part of the package is understanding that the majority of people have to be able to enjoy their art for free, long before there is any chance that they might receive any renumeration. It's the way it has worked for a long time.
See above. Artists are remunerated for airplay. (not renumerated. Renumerate means "recount".) As I just said, there are numerous ways to check out music without stealing it.

Quote:
Do you think The Beatles would have gained any recognition if the masses of people weren't able to hear their songs on the radio or tv - for free ... initially?
See above.

Quote:
Obviously - if people enjoy an artist's work, they will have to pay for the concert admission,
Hardly any bands actually make money playing shows or touring and the few that do have been working at it for years with the backing of record companies paying for tour support. Sure Trent Reznor can afford to thumb his nose at the labels NOW - after he's already used them to establish a huge worldwide base - but without them do you think you'd have ever heard of him? Not bloody likely, he couldn't even get his record played by DJs in his home town before he got famous.

Quote:
or the t-shirt, or the merchandise
WAKE UP, Brighteyes - what makes you think that merch isn't pirated? Of merch that is not sold at the official merch table inside a venue a HUGE percentage is pirated. Parking lot sellers? all pirates. T-0shirts at your local "smoke shop" or poster store? Mostly pirated. Merch at online websites not directly operated by the band, especially those offering merch from a variety of bands? Mostly pirated. Sometimes the pirated merch is better than the official stuff - I know of one case where a band caught a guy selling pirated merch outside one of their gigs and ended up hiring him to do their shirts because he was selling a better quality shirt for less than it cost them to have shirts made.

Quote:
... and of course the radio & tv stations have to pay to play ... but they rake all that back + profit from advertising, which is ultimately funded by the consumers of the advertised products ... ultimately, nothing is free anyway ...
Now you're getting the idea, just stick with that.

Quote:
If mp3 players are so illegal, then ask your government to ban them, and shoot anyone caught playing one ...
If only...... But as we know there are LEGAL uses for MP3 players. You don't HAVE to load them up with stolen songs, you know - you might try paying for what you use for a change.......

Quote:
There are two sides to this equation ... with blind, stupid greed driving both sides. Some lazy artists think they should be payed for whatever mindless crap they want to create. They think the world owes them something ...

It doesn't work that way. Never has.
Nobody ever said that it did. You don't like my stuff? Don't buy it. But if you don't like it, don't steal it , either. Why would you want to steal something you don't like anyway? Are you crazy? People steal stuff they want, not stuff they don't want.

Here, watch this video:

Old 1st January 2011
  #145
John,
You deserve a medal for going back over this bunch of mythology again.
Old 1st January 2011
  #146
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Well that's of course guess work on your part.
Having been around the odd successful musician I was trying to enlighten you that you could be wrong. As usual it fell on deaf ears.
Reread what I said Chris. It is ABSOLUTELY true. Because someone is a rock star, that doesn't necessarily mean they are a music industry expert.
Old 1st January 2011
  #147
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Come on. How pretentious. THIS little board is meaningless in the piracy battle, and you wouldn't be here if it weren't fun. You don't think you are actually accomplishing much, do you?
God, p, sometimes I just wanna slap you upside the head with a large trout.......

Quote:
Actually, I was thinking more like this:

The Ritz-Einstein Agreement to Disagree
Ritz was wrong. Einstein (who incidentally was a friend of my dad's) was right.

Quote:
What I actually said was a rock star doesn't necessarily have a more accurate view of piracy then someone who has studied the issue.
And what we said was that someone inside the industry is almost certain to have at least a somewhat more realistic view of the problem that some ivory tower type sitting in a classroom/office/lab tallying questionnaires or phone surveys answered by people who are motivated to be less than honest about their habits or who have a personal stake in minimizing the impact of downloading. If you ask any freetard about it he's not going to come out and say that he's hurting musicians and he's not going to admit there's anything wrong with what he does.

Please consider yourself trout-slapped.*



*- for those who don't get the reference, this refers to a Monty Python comedy skit (The Fish-Slapping Dance), and also to a somewhat tongue in cheek command in the Internet Relay Chat (IRC) protocol.
Old 1st January 2011
  #148
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Reread what I said Chris. It is ABSOLUTELY true. Because someone is a rock star, that doesn't necessarily mean they are a music industry expert.
But it's almost certain that he knows a good deal more about the industry than someone who is a college graduate student who hasn't had any industry experience at all.

<trout slap #2>

Damn, we need a trout-slap smiley!
Old 1st January 2011
  #149
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
Reread what I said Chris. It is ABSOLUTELY true. Because someone is a rock star, that doesn't necessarily mean they are a music industry expert.
Yes, but it doesn't necessarily mean they aren't.
And not all the people I include in successful musician categories are 'rock stars', that's your own name for them.

To be quite honest, I don't know about economists. I think there is much more to music and the music business than the mere act of selling, making money.
Anyway, I've read the economists take on piracy now.
Guys like Bono, Billy Bragg, Paul McGuiness......they are running businesses.
They go out of their way often to give the less successful artists a leg up. Many have started their own labels to sign what they see as deserving artists the majors wouldn't sign.
They've sat through hours and hours of record company budget meetings.
They've sat through hours and hours of tour planning meetings, and tour budget meetings etc.
I would think after ten or twenty years of that you gain some knowledge and expertise.

Metallica (the devil for most dowloaders) were in town last month.
Some friends of mine were playing one of the smaller clubs in town.
The keyboard player was at the bar and James Hetfield approached her and asked about the band (who weren't in any way heavy rock, or metal). They chatted for a while. He was very enthusiastic about the evening. She wondered why he spent his day off watching unknown bands in small clubs.
I wouldn't do it myself. I presume he's a real music fan, and is interested in the local scene, and less lauded musos in the places he visits on tour.
Oh yeah, he's one of the guys who's only interested in money. Slaps down his fans when they download his album without paying the barstarrd!
I just think you dismiss industry views, and the thoughts of well known musicians way too quickly, and pretty much without any consideration from what I've seen.
When I posted a link to Bono pondering in an article on the future of songwriting in the digital age, you just posted "Rock stars, what do they know? Ha, Ha".
Well just maybe many know more than you are prepared to accept.
Old 1st January 2011
  #150
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Yes, but it doesn't necessarily mean they aren't.
Right.

Quote:
To be quite honest, I don't know about economists. I think there is much more to music and the music business than the mere act of selling, making money.
Absolutely, but leave to economists what is economic... leave them out of the creative. I agree with John, they don't "know," but they can provide insight. You know... data points.

Quote:
I just think you dismiss industry views, and the thoughts of well known musicians way too quickly, and pretty much without any consideration from what I've seen.
No, that's not true. I give industry views due consideration. No more, no less. I think it's a mistake to let an industry police themselves. Take the financial services industry... that hasn't worked out well. As I said, opinions outside the industry (regardless of the industry) can have insight lacking in the industry itself. CAN... not always.

Quote:
When I posted a link to Bono pondering in an article on the future of songwriting in the digital age, you just posted "Rock stars, what do they know? Ha, Ha".
Personally, I think Homer Simpson is HILARIOUS. I can't help but laugh when I see him. I read the article, and it didn't provide many insights to me, but I like Bono.

Quote:
Well just maybe many know more than you are prepared to accept.
MOST people know more than I do. However, that doesn't mean they have better perspective. Some do...
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
smccarthy945 / Music Business
1
ecsound / So much gear, so little time
9

Forum Jump
Forum Jump