Ill explain a bit:
I just love the smell of vinyl, love the sleeves, love the fact that you actually have something you can touch, a mp3 is a empty medium, it has no emotional value to me.
music should be free!!!
you go out to eat, you tip the waiter.
you take a cab, you tip the driver.
someone carries your bags, you give them a tip.
artists make the things that make us happy, help them out. how anyone can have a problem giving money to an artist is beyond me.
if the artist is not offering the music for free on their web site, and you get their music for free off the web, you're stealing. the whole point of whether or not they 'deserve' the money is moot, they're not giving it away.
then there's lowest common denominator of society, the cheap and selfish. the same people that, when in traffic before a tunnel will go to the head of the line and cut in, the same ones that don't tip, the pains in the ass that drag down the rest of society.
I love it when some schmuck brags about how many mp3s they have but they only own 20 CDs. yeah, a real music lover.
sorry, but COSM is not a viable example. if he had a wife or kid he could not do what he does, he's very flexible in what he can let slide, IMO.
the art of vinyl is gone where you had SIDES of a record. songs were chosen to fill time on each side but also for each side to be a journey. CDs killed that. then there's the artwork, that connection you have to the music, dragging around the same few CDs for a week, popping them in and out of the player as opposed to dialing up text on a little LCD screen where all the music looks the same.
you take a cab, you tip the driver.
someone carries your bags, you give them a tip.
artists make the things that make us happy, help them out. how anyone can have a problem giving money to an artist is beyond me.
if the artist is not offering the music for free on their web site, and you get their music for free off the web, you're stealing. the whole point of whether or not they 'deserve' the money is moot, they're not giving it away.
then there's lowest common denominator of society, the cheap and selfish. the same people that, when in traffic before a tunnel will go to the head of the line and cut in, the same ones that don't tip, the pains in the ass that drag down the rest of society.
I love it when some schmuck brags about how many mp3s they have but they only own 20 CDs. yeah, a real music lover.
sorry, but COSM is not a viable example. if he had a wife or kid he could not do what he does, he's very flexible in what he can let slide, IMO.
the art of vinyl is gone where you had SIDES of a record. songs were chosen to fill time on each side but also for each side to be a journey. CDs killed that. then there's the artwork, that connection you have to the music, dragging around the same few CDs for a week, popping them in and out of the player as opposed to dialing up text on a little LCD screen where all the music looks the same.
I agree that if you like an artist, you can and should contribute to the art. If by going to see their show, or even by donating money to the artist, then you can insure that the art is supported and the artist keeps making it. But to expect that people will pay for music is no longer a sustainable expectation.
Part of the reason why is this fallacy that buying a CD actually supports the artist. This hasn't been true in decades. The only people who make money off a CD is a record company, and I would argue that most record companies are entirely complicit in the death of most artists' longevity.
So bottom line is that I don't think it's as simple as tipping a waiter. Also, in a lot of countries, waiters don't get or expect tips. So there's more to this than just the black and white pay-for-music argument.
Part of the reason why is this fallacy that buying a CD actually supports the artist. This hasn't been true in decades. The only people who make money off a CD is a record company, and I would argue that most record companies are entirely complicit in the death of most artists' longevity.
So bottom line is that I don't think it's as simple as tipping a waiter. Also, in a lot of countries, waiters don't get or expect tips. So there's more to this than just the black and white pay-for-music argument.
nobody is going to just 'donate' money to an artist. you buy a t-shirt or some music or a sticker or whatever. I go to a concert because it's fun, not because I want to give them money. the whole cause and effect model is backwards here.nebulae wrote:I agree that if you like an artist, you can and should contribute to the art. If by going to see their show, or even by donating money to the artist, then you can insure that the art is supported and the artist keeps making it.
that's true because of assholes like the OP, the model has to change. BUT as a consumer we can buy stuff from the artist, that doesn't change. your view is true from the artist, they have to change, that doesn't mean the consumer has to cut off traditional flows of money.But to expect that people will pay for music is no longer a sustainable expectation.
bullshit. sources!! that's a blanket statement. prove me that and I'll reconsider. I know the labels take cuts, you're saying that cut is now 100%.Part of the reason why is this fallacy that buying a CD actually supports the artist. This hasn't been true in decades. The only people who make money off a CD is a record company, and I would argue that most record companies are entirely complicit in the death of most artists' longevity.
other countries don't tip? so what? that's not the point. that person made something beautiful, I'll exchange money for the enjoyment, thanks!So bottom line is that I don't think it's as simple as tipping a waiter. Also, in a lot of countries, waiters don't get or expect tips. So there's more to this than just the black and white pay-for-music argument.
for people like nathannn it's only a matter of being cheap and lazy. you seriously think he weighs the pros and cons of the global music economic market when looking for free music while sitting in his mom's basement on a Saturday night?!? no.
no you don't. you can sell anything you want regardless of what's proven. there's no metric in existence that's proves that value of music, none. the Billboard charts? I doubt anyone here puts much weight in those.levimoniz wrote:The amount of concern I've seen in this forum over the whole getting paid thing is pretty ridiculous to me.
To aspire is one thing, but dudes:
You must prove your value to society FIRST.
It's like, why are you even worried at this point? A lot of you don't even make your music available HERE, let alone anywhere else in the world, and you're worried about not being able to make a living?
What?
everyone that owns Live has to put out music? the set of people who use Live and the set of people who want to make money from making music in Live are not the same thing.if someone is asking for money for something you give them money for that thing.
-
pucklermuskau
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 7:26 pm
- Contact:
hey now, all he is saying, if a little belligerently, is that an album worth buying is more than a simple recording these days. Albums are multi-art packages, and asking people to pay for what is effectively promotional material for their live acts is a hard sell these days. Give me a finished piece of physical work, don't just sell me bits on a plastic platter.
i drop on the lokeymassive
Tone, this is a good debate, and I respect your right to have a passionate point of view. I'd request that you not denigrate the debate by name-calling, as that only weakens your message.
I'll refute each of your points:
1. I have had many people click on my Donate button on nebulae.com. I personally have donated to many artists simply because I love the music. My most recent was for Angstrom's fantastic record. And I'm sure Radiohead will have something to say about your notion that no one donates money for a record.
Or even Nine Inch Nails, who sold a collectors item for their last album for $80 each, while basically giving away their record by streaming it at high quality mp3s on their site. The model has changed, and people consume differently and compensate differently.
What I find interesting is that you call the OP lazy and label him as a cynic, and then you yourself are cynical about whether people will donate to artists. Seems like you gotto decide if people will pay or won't pay, and if people are decent or aren't. I think people basically are good, and those who like my music will support me for it.
2. I agree that a consumer can support the artist and should. But I disagree that buying a CD is right way to do it....
3. If the CD is sold by the artist directly, or CD Baby, or the mp3 is on Beatport...basically sources where I know that the artist gets the bulk of my money, then I'm totally fine with buying a CD after I've checked out the music (either via mp3 download or streaming the music off myspace or the artist's site, etc). But if it's a major label and I'm buying from any store, then I'm willing to bet that the artist gets about 7-10% of my money total. And talk to anyone who's done a major label deal - by the time a label does the creative accounting with the chargebacks from the advances, a "profitable" album can leave the artist owing the label. Classic WTF. So unless you are an established artist, you ain't gonna see anything from a major label deal. Why do you think so many people go indy? And why do you think even major artsts tour all the time? Because that's how they make their money. And I'll gladly see a band on tour, because I know they will make money off me, which is a good thing.
Ok, so you want sources:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... nts_10_cds
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/200 ... kdown.html
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture ... 2007.ars/1
4. The issue with countries where people expect tips and where they don't is that you had made an analogy of paying for services. I was simply using the same argument that the expectation to be paid for music is changing, just like in some countries, there is no expectation for tips. The tip argument has nothing to do with how you choose to support the artists you like.
5. Whether Nathann thinks about the global music marketplace and its morality before he torrents mp3s is not really a concern of mine. What I look at is how consumers as a whole behave and what they expect. I believe Nathann is the voice of many young people who consume music expecting it to be free. They have been socialized into thinking it is and should be free. And he's simply stating an opinion that he's not willing to pay for something unless there is additional value. The same is now true for long-distance calling or getting a free phone with new cell service, or free wi-fi at coffee shops. Things get commoditized, and when they do, expecting payment for them just leads to frustration.
Anyways, we can agree to disagree at this point *hugs*
I'll refute each of your points:
1. I have had many people click on my Donate button on nebulae.com. I personally have donated to many artists simply because I love the music. My most recent was for Angstrom's fantastic record. And I'm sure Radiohead will have something to say about your notion that no one donates money for a record.
Or even Nine Inch Nails, who sold a collectors item for their last album for $80 each, while basically giving away their record by streaming it at high quality mp3s on their site. The model has changed, and people consume differently and compensate differently.What I find interesting is that you call the OP lazy and label him as a cynic, and then you yourself are cynical about whether people will donate to artists. Seems like you gotto decide if people will pay or won't pay, and if people are decent or aren't. I think people basically are good, and those who like my music will support me for it.
2. I agree that a consumer can support the artist and should. But I disagree that buying a CD is right way to do it....
3. If the CD is sold by the artist directly, or CD Baby, or the mp3 is on Beatport...basically sources where I know that the artist gets the bulk of my money, then I'm totally fine with buying a CD after I've checked out the music (either via mp3 download or streaming the music off myspace or the artist's site, etc). But if it's a major label and I'm buying from any store, then I'm willing to bet that the artist gets about 7-10% of my money total. And talk to anyone who's done a major label deal - by the time a label does the creative accounting with the chargebacks from the advances, a "profitable" album can leave the artist owing the label. Classic WTF. So unless you are an established artist, you ain't gonna see anything from a major label deal. Why do you think so many people go indy? And why do you think even major artsts tour all the time? Because that's how they make their money. And I'll gladly see a band on tour, because I know they will make money off me, which is a good thing.
Ok, so you want sources:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... nts_10_cds
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/200 ... kdown.html
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture ... 2007.ars/1
4. The issue with countries where people expect tips and where they don't is that you had made an analogy of paying for services. I was simply using the same argument that the expectation to be paid for music is changing, just like in some countries, there is no expectation for tips. The tip argument has nothing to do with how you choose to support the artists you like.
5. Whether Nathann thinks about the global music marketplace and its morality before he torrents mp3s is not really a concern of mine. What I look at is how consumers as a whole behave and what they expect. I believe Nathann is the voice of many young people who consume music expecting it to be free. They have been socialized into thinking it is and should be free. And he's simply stating an opinion that he's not willing to pay for something unless there is additional value. The same is now true for long-distance calling or getting a free phone with new cell service, or free wi-fi at coffee shops. Things get commoditized, and when they do, expecting payment for them just leads to frustration.
Anyways, we can agree to disagree at this point
*hugs*fuck that noise!!!nebulae wrote:I'd request that you not denigrate the debate by name-calling, as that only weakens your message.
back in my day we'd go to the record shop and blow all our expendable income on music. we'd even be so crazy as to (gasp) buy an album only because the artwork was cool or the band had a really cool name, or it was on a good label. then you listen to it and it sucks, oh well. I sometimes still do that. people don't love music like they used to, I LOVE music stores, I can spend hours in the smallest of them and spend hundreds when I didn't mean to.
how you've got some standard where you have to go over the album song by song, get your approval, be impressed then maybe you'll get the CD, after you download it first, just to check again. these aren't music fans, these are cheap and lazy people. cheap because they won't put out money, lazy because they won't go to a store. it's not name calling, they're adjectives to describe the situation.
artists DO get money from CD sales.
torrents are stealing, period.
btw the thread is called "music should be free" not "music should be marketed differently."
^ werd...I miss long afternoons at the record shop - going thru used bins, listening at listening stations, talking about it with whomever you're with, discovering great first albums...
I can still remember the day Mrs. Neb and I discovered the first Hooverphonic record and we were both just blown away at the listening station in that great CD store in Eugene, Oregon...so yeah, I totally get where you're coming from. I think that as music stores slowly go under, that experience will transition, but the human connection slowly gets lost for sure.
I can still remember the day Mrs. Neb and I discovered the first Hooverphonic record and we were both just blown away at the listening station in that great CD store in Eugene, Oregon...so yeah, I totally get where you're coming from. I think that as music stores slowly go under, that experience will transition, but the human connection slowly gets lost for sure.
that is pretty cool, like someone took the time to make your tunes available to the world, spread those seeds!!nebulae wrote:^ oh, one last disagreement...
I still remember the first time I saw a nebulae song on a torrent site. I was OVERJOYED!!!!!!!!!
it was a bummer to see Tower Records SF shut down, the building looks the same but it was an icon. Ameoba on Haight St still does great business, it's always crowded.
how's this for an argument against me... how many of the CDs do I buy used? how much money does the artist get for that? one my last trip I had 3 $2 CDs, I had to go find ANOTHER one because the 4th is free.
when I run the world artists and teachers will live for free.
-
pucklermuskau
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 7:26 pm
- Contact:
i think the point of this thread might be that it is the artist that should be marketed differently, not the music. The music has no need of monies. It is only the artist that needs recompense. Nebulae has it right, i suspect. Making money off of the bulk distribution of recordings just isnt a profitable exercise anymore, artists looking to support their efforts need to return to models of live performance and partronage that worked before the strange blip that was the recording industry reared its greedy head.btw the thread is called "music should be free" not "music should be marketed differently."
i drop on the lokeymassive
Tone Deft wrote:interesting...
I'm going to lmfao if you lot can convince me to go home, learn how to torrent and feel good about stealing music. I'm having a Dorian Gray moment...
Easy: next time you are unsure if you should buy a cd, and then you torrent the songs, decide you love it, then go see the artists and pay him/her $50 for the concert...you just made a web 2.5 transaction that has bypassed some greedy record label that's worth nothing and adds no value.