when they are mostly on subscription services like spotify. I never had a subscription service before but I bought spotify because of all of the hype. the only feature that has really impressed me with spotify is the feature that has been available on subscription services before spotify. Specifically, Watch the Throne and The Carter IV were available on Spotify within a couple of weeks of their release. It makes me regretful that I bought Watch the Throne when it came out.

How can album sales still be a metric for measuring an albums popularity when then songs are freely streamable on subscription services within a couple of weeks?

Fuck a billboard, with the help of the interwebs couldn't we come with a number for all the times that a song was played on youtube, subscription service, scrobbled on last.fm, ec/?

Help me understand the music industry in 2011.

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

>Help me understand the music industry in 2011.


________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
http://concretesoundsystem.com
Mo'Nium - http://monium.tumblr.com/

RIP Nick Ashford - http://bit.ly/rfgMKh

Look at the height of the old school music industry. In 1999, the music industry revenue was $14.6 billion/ in 2011, netflix made $791.5 million in one quarter. annualized that and its 3.156 billion dollars. That's the revenue of ONE company streaming music on a subscription basis. Feels like with company's competing to stream muisc, and people purchasing music, you can reach that number again.

IDK.

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

went to a house party where dude had a HUGE record collection...going thru his stacks & finding shit to play, the whole rigamarole of putting the record on, setting the needle etc was real cool

everyone was also sky high so that prolly contributed too


do or die

and the old school DJs were describing all that went into djaying a party: Figuring out the crowd and what music they would want to hear, gathering those records, transporting those records to the party, hoping they had room for all the crates at the spot (I remember getting into parties for free because I carried crates) and taking all that ish home. Then mp3s and Sorato came along and every dj could show up at the party with every track they want on their laptop.

Just as easily could have been that question as well.

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif

lol I know.

I've become old and stubborn at 29 but this whole idea that you "stream" whatever you want I just don't buy. I'm not feeling it. Not as a complete, wholesale replacement for me having the cd or vinyl.

Streaming is below mp3's for me.

It's cool as an app on your mobile or as a substitute when traveling. I love streaming with Netflix, but I still buy dvd's and blurays. In fact, if there's something I discover on Netflix, eventually I buy it for myself. To own. Not to stream from some f'n cloud where if the company goes belly-up or doesn't pay for a particular license, WHOOPS!, no more 'certain-movie-or-album' for you.

You've heard it all before, but I need a tangible, actual product. Yes, the music is what's matters most which is why I make exceptions if an artist I like goes strictly digital. But I prefer something I can call mine, not merely "access" to it.

__
I don't like the beat anymore because its just a loop. ALC didn't FLIP IT ENOUGH!

Flip it enough? Flip these. Flip off. Go flip some f*cking burgers.(c)Kno

Allied State of the National Electric Beat Treaty Organization (NEBTO)

>You've heard it all before, but I need a tangible, actual
>product. Yes, the music is what's matters most which is why I
>make exceptions if an artist I like goes strictly digital. But
>I prefer something I can call mine, not merely "access" to it.

http://zhiphopcleveland.com/files/2011/09/don-cheadle-captain-planet.png

Hopefully my other save the planet actions and choices balance out my evil cd's, records, video games, and dvd's. :)
__
I don't like the beat anymore because its just a loop. ALC didn't FLIP IT ENOUGH!

Flip it enough? Flip these. Flip off. Go flip some f*cking burgers.(c)Kno

Allied State of the National Electric Beat Treaty Organization (NEBTO)

in the first place.

Like, the folder on your computer that says "My Music?" It's not your music! Someone else made it for you, and you merely have the privilege of listening to it. Maybe this change in the way we consume music will get rid of this 20th century delusion once and for all. It could even potentially change the way we look at copyright, while at the same time cutting down on "piracy." Actually, I'm sure this is already happening.

The only question is, can musicians make money this way?

There ain't no "privilege" involved. I shelled out hard-earned money for that copy and it is mine.

You can't play it in public or on the radio, make new copies, even for personal use, or even use any piece of it for any new work at all, regardless of whether it's commercially available or not. You have merely purchased the rights to listen to that music in private as many times as you'd like, until "your" copy wears out.

You know, it used to be you couldn't hear music unless someone played it for you...

I swear, modern humans think they're entitled to anything they want.

That copy belongs to me. LEGALLY. I bought it.

The fact that there are limitations with regard to how I use the copy does not change the fact that as a material product, I bought it. It is MINE.

(By the way, I CAN play it in public and on the radio, and I do. I just can't make further copies of it.)

I'm not saying that I own the compositions or the mechanicals. But I own THAT copy that I paid for.

I didn't purchase "the rights to listen to it." I purchased a physical commodity which shall remain in my possession permanently.

If I don't call it "my copy," praytell: how should I describe it?

Look, dude: I have a pretty large record collection, including several rare records from private labels that no longer exist and whose masters have been lost. When labels want to reissue some of this music, they come to me master off MY copy of the record, which I bought. I've even had some instances where the label itself doesn't have the master or any copies of the record and so they come to me.

And you know what? They gotta pay me for the use of my record. Because while the MUSIC on the record may belong to them, the PHYSICAL OBJECT on which the music is stored is MINE. And there is no legal basis for them to come to me and say "Give us the record, because it's ours, we made it" etc

They made it and they sold it to me. I paid money for it that I could have used to feed my family.

Now it is MINE.

BY LAW!!!

This is simple commerce, commie.

however it also happens to be a remarkably asinine one.

How is this cat gonna tell me I don't own some shit I paid good money for, and that it is a "privilege" for me even to listen to it?

Which socialist commune do these people come from?

being which, music belongs to the artists that wrote or crafted the song. now we could argue the practicality of the point of everyone having different music, but that's what i think the poster was getting at.

which is a commercial product that is manufactured and sold for profit.

all belongs to whatever publishing and record company owns it.

You do NOT own the recording. No matter how many times you have played that record on the radio or in the club, no matter how many record companies have approached you for that record. You just don't. No matter how strongly you believe you do. That is what the law says.

Ain't nothing communist about that.

No, they cannot take your copy away from you, as long as that copy is a legal recording legally acquired. But if the court decision in a lawsuit case suddenly decides that a certain sample was not licensed properly, they can recall that record from the stores. It would be ridiculous for them to ask people who already bought it to send their copies back, but I wouldn't be surprised if a court also were to rule that it was legal for them to snatch your 1st print copy of Ready to Die from your hands and snap it in two when they saw you playing it in the club. I don't think there has ever been such a case, but it's a fun hypothetical situation to consider.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4823028.stm

The only thing you own is a slab of vinyl. Owning the physical product gives you the illusion that you own the music as well. Regardless of how it my seem to you, you do not own the "music."

(With regards to playing it in public or on the radio, legally one has to license the mechanical rights, which are different from the master rights.)

To state the obvious.

NOT A REAL TRASHCAN


Shocking, I know... Team coverage at 11!

the reality and the representation. I'm trying to show you they are not the same, and different rules apply.

means that the owner of the folder thinks they literally own the MUSIC as opposed to a facsimile of it.

well I guess ya got me, then!

>You can't play it in public or on the radio,

You have merely purchased the rights to listen to
>that music in private as many times as you'd like, until
>"your" copy wears out.

WRONG.


How do you explain Club mixes or Extended DJ mixes ( which were released by the labels)? Not too many DJ's play records at home.

How do you explain the Billboard Club Play chart? Is there an exemption that allows radio to play records ( which they DIDN'T buy)?


Once you buy a record/CD/File/whatthefuckever it's YOURS. Period. You can do with it whatever you want.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGFwGwV1lZc

What's good in the Hood?

Just passin troo before I hit the gym.

I just said you have to get a license. Simply buying the record does not give you permission to play it in public or broadcast it over the radio. That's why there are representatives who go around to restaurants, bars, and clubs to try and get them to pay for a license. Usually they get told to fuck off and the place gets away with it, but that's the law.

Don't try and argue with me dude, you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

>I just said you have to get a license.


umm. no. The liscence thing is for BUSINESSES. and even THEN it's not strictly enforced. If it's enforced at all. There was talk of it a few years back, but how do you explain the fact that 99.9999999999% of nightclubs have DJ's and or bands. I'm a working DJ and I've NEVER had to present a liscence inANY venue I've played.


Simply buying the
>record does not give you permission to play it in public or
>broadcast it over the radio.

You're just wrong, face up to it.

That's why there are
>representatives who go around to restaurants, bars, and clubs
>to try and get them to pay for a license.

I just addressed that.

Usually they get
>told to fuck off and the place gets away with it, but that's
>the law.

and if it was the *law*, don't you think those same bars and restaurants would do it? Why risk losing your business over a license? You think they tell the liquor board or the health department to "fuck off"? No. Why? because those are enforcable laws that would result in major penalties. If not, then a loss of some type of license, i.e the right to see food or booze. At best, it's probably something ASCAP BMI and the others *want* people to do.

>


>Don't try and argue with me dude, you clearly don't know what
>you're talking about.

Actually, that would be YOU. And again, if the buyer of the record doesn't Own it or have the right to play it in public, why do labels put out Club and DJ mixes, Genius? ( let alone the gazillion DJ promos they ship out )Explain that.

Noe to your point, I can't duplicate the shit ( like THAT ever stopped anybody) or use it in the background of a show, etc. without paying for it. But if I bought it as a listener, I can pretty much do whatever the fuck I want to do with it.

Doesn't change anything, but nice try!

Here's how public performance music licensing REALLY works:

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/music-licensing3.htm

DJ man is saying that once he buys a record, he can do whatever he wants with that record. That's mostly right. He can sell it, smash it, give it away, etc. He owns that physical LP and has all the rights appertaining to the ownership of physical property.

Though I would have framed it differently, James on the other hand is essentially saying that ownership of the physical record does not give you ownership rights in the underlying copyright of the music that is embodied in the record. With regards to that copyright, you have a somewhat limited implied right to use the copyright for private use and other fair use rights. So just because you have own a record that doesn't give you the right to take the music and put it in a movie you are making. Most people get that. What most people aren't aware of is that you are technically also suppose to pay for public performances of the music in commercial establishments. A DJ wouldn't typically have the license but venues and radio stations usually pay for blanket performance licenses from ASCAP and BMI. Of course public performance is a hard right to track and enforce but during these hard times for the music industry, ASCAP and BMI have become more aggressive in sending people into the field to find venues in breach of their public performance right. The venues they are cracking down are becoming smaller and smaller to include your neighborhood bar with a jukebox.

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

>Though I would have framed it differently, James on the other
>hand is essentially saying that ownership of the physical
>record does not give you ownership rights in the underlying
>copyright of the music that is embodied in the record.

Both disco and I have granted this several times over but jamesL seems to be fixated on some metaphysical idea of how we are being given the "privilege" to listen to music we paid for and that it's such a fucking tragedy to store mp3s in a file that says "My Music" when the music isn't really yours.

smh

That is my argument. We seem to have different perspectives when it comes to the relationship between consumption of music and ownership of music. To me, the only music you "own" is the music you create. If you cannot make music on your own, you should be grateful to be living in America in the 21st century and to have such access to all kinds of music. That, to me, is a privilege. And I believe you should respect the artists who create music for you by supporting them financially and respecting their rights.

But both of you also seem to counter the fact that public performance is the exclusive right of the copyright owner. So that's where I was trying to educate you, but you decided to argue without actually understanding the law. I thought it was a pretty good example of how you can NOT do "pretty much whatever you want" with your copy of the record, and that you do not own that musical recording in any sense, but I guess you still don't see it that way. And that's fine.

Just don't tell me I'm wrong when the information is freely available, and if you just did your research, like I have done, you would find that I know what the fuck I'm talking about.

>Both disco and I have granted this several times over but
>jamesL seems to be fixated on some metaphysical idea of how we
>are being given the "privilege" to listen to music we paid for
>and that it's such a fucking tragedy to store mp3s in a file
>that says "My Music" when the music isn't really yours.
>
>smh


*SMH* indeed.

n/m

-------------------------
“The other dude after me didn’t help my case. It was just like…crazy nigga factory going on.”
Dre makes no apologies for his own eccentricities. “I was young, and searching, trying to find myself,” he says. “Never did.”-- Andre B

and them services only have like 40% of what i wanna hear

>and them services only have like 40% of what i wanna hear


__
I don't like the beat anymore because its just a loop. ALC didn't FLIP IT ENOUGH!

Flip it enough? Flip these. Flip off. Go flip some f*cking burgers.(c)Kno

Allied State of the National Electric Beat Treaty Organization (NEBTO)

were GODS amongst men?


yea...

yea...no one cares about the old heads waving their canes begging for CD/LPs or the ever retarded resurgence of cassette.

Artists will make money off touring...like they always have.

Smart artists will get their head above water then go indie...cept alot of artists are ignorant so look for a redefining of a 'Label'

Basically everything will be fine...the industry is purging the dead weight. All that is left is for internet radio to usurp terrestrial.

>Artists will make money off touring...like they always have.

You're sure this is a factual statement?

Or are you just regurgitating the current party line?




(pssst: I suspect the latter!)

but the fact is you can't expect to stop the infinite copying of digital files. Youngins D/L...they dont give a fuck. Streaming curtails this but not enough to stop the bleeding. For the record, I do feel spotify's royalty rates should be increased as it is currently unfair.

What can't be converted into a digital experience?...live shows. Money maker.


I would love to see IPv6 get poppin allowing for more accurate recording of individual internet plays. Hopefully, driving bigger payouts from adverts/subscriptions. The future is so bright folks bitch and moan all day...boring.

>What can't be converted into a digital experience?...live
>shows. Money maker.

True enough. But at the same time, the people who trot out this line refuse to acknowledge the reality that it costs money to stage a series of live shows and the amount of money made from them when weighed against the expenses is really not that large at all. A lot of bands actually tour at a loss at the end of the day.

But y'know... that's WAY too specific to talk about here. Let's just keep our conversation limited to pie in the sky and such aerial confectionary matters.

of an artist's income. But I'd rather not get into all the "This is how it used to be" talk. Publishing, Merch, Touring, sync, etc. ALL respective parts of the cash cow i know..but its boring convo ONLY because things are changing. I'd rather debate the new revenue lanes that can potentially open up given the music biz' increasingly symbiotic relationship with tech.

Any objections to my other points?

I'm not that interested in discussing the rest of your points.

I'm just so tired of hearing this "Artists should go make their money on the road" cure-all remedy being parroted by people who clearly have little understanding of the industry, or who don't know that many acts depended on their record labels to subsidize those big tours that everybody likes to reminisce about.

__
I don't like the beat anymore because its just a loop. ALC didn't FLIP IT ENOUGH!

Flip it enough? Flip these. Flip off. Go flip some f*cking burgers.(c)Kno

Allied State of the National Electric Beat Treaty Organization (NEBTO)

its just a justification for stealing

i think imma write a paper on how pussy the new generation is...
cuz thats what they are everytime they pay for a meal they dont like at a restaurant...or pay for a train/plane ride thats late

cuz thats there justification..."why should i pay for what i might not like"

its total BS.

cats THINK it will be like this forever...but it surely will not

and what about RECORDING artists...some artists have NO intention or want of hitting the road

>I'm not that interested in discussing the rest of your
>points.
>
>I'm just so tired of hearing this "Artists should go make
>their money on the road" cure-all remedy being parroted by
>people who clearly have little understanding of the industry,
>or who don't know that many acts depended on their record
>labels to subsidize those big tours that everybody likes to
>reminisce about.

^^^^^
The truth will pass through fire but it will not burn©


Bonus point for "aerial confections".

>I'm not that interested in discussing the rest of your
>points.
>
>I'm just so tired of hearing this "Artists should go make
>their money on the road" cure-all remedy being parroted by
>people who clearly have little understanding of the industry,
>or who don't know that many acts depended on their record
>labels to subsidize those big tours that everybody likes to
>reminisce about.


Since whenever I need some loot, I can just "go out on the road"...

THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif

>Artists will make money off touring...like they always have.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1392686/Lady-Gaga-admits-went-bankrupt-spending-millions-tour-costumes.html

Well, I have a kid now so that's one thing but still...

Actually, when the whole file-sharing, and a bit later, blog-thing took off, I became enarmored with it and even stopped working full-time since I didn't need much money anymore and I also needed more free time to listen to all the music available.

However-and this might sound corny as fuck but I don't care-I became unhappy with this; searching for records in used stores and reading about music to check out etc. was something I had been doing since I was seven and I jst felt incomplete; it was like a big part of my life that had just disappeared and downloading and shit just couldn't fill that void not to mention that the sheer enjoyment I got out of finding a dope record in physical form beat the downloading aspect by far so I stopped and went back to my old ways.

And yes, it's the music that matters and it doesn't matter if it's digital or you own it or blah-blah but I don't care; I come from a different era...

That being said, I love Spotify and use it at work all the time because I can obviously not bring my record-collection there and my MP3 player only holds 2 Gb so it's great if I'm in the mood at work to hear a certain record,,,

>Actually, when the whole file-sharing, and a bit later,
>blog-thing took off, I became enarmored with it and even
>stopped working full-time since I didn't need much money
>anymore

>> even
>>stopped working full-time since I didn't need much money
>>anymore

I wish I could live like that, but neither my American nor my Igbo side will ever allow it to happen!

that's why.

what a waste it'd be to use my cans+amp on lossy shit. i prefer physical copies and vinyl anyway.

And that's where I do a lot of my listening.

it's more than possible and relatively affordable.

1) Open Cd

2) Insert disc in player

~Austin

*Slides in favorite CD...unreadable in car but works on a PC CDROM?!?*
*Car immediately fills up with random unlabeled CDRs*
*Loan friend your favorite CD...6 mos later you forgot who*
*Hits pothole...*
*Carry entire music collection in a Case Logic booklet...stolen by random car thief*

i could go on but u get the point...Minor initial inconvenience in favor of instant access to infinite songs.

~Austin

*Dropped smartphone, out several hundred dollars to replace it
*Drive out of the 3G coverage zone, lose reception
*Carrier eliminates your unlimited plan, you rack up a giant bill
*Smartphone stolen by random ass car thief

Help me understand what your saying if you don't mind.

180 gram vinyl will always sound better than any digital mp3.

but their life changes. not everyone that buys music is a audiophile, music critic, or technologically savvy.

sad all around :(

i miss hearing that snap/crackle sound from the source...

and b/c regardless of the fact that we can get the music for free or for cheap via some streaming service, we're supposed to love the music as art so much that we want to give the artist money so they can produce more music.

that's the model today.

i just read a blog entry from a porn producer who's borrowed the tiny violin the music industry plays for itself and is now playing the world's smallest violin for himself and the porn industry in an attempt to make us all feel the same guilt about porn that we are supposed to feel about records. he wants us to buy porn b/c we love it so much that we want to support the artists w/our money despite the fact that it's freely/cheaply available all over the Internet.

Most of the labels I know that deal in vinyl seem almost uninterested in expanding their audience beyond the people who already do like owning vinyl.

I haven't seen any wide appeal begging people to buy the stuff. It just so happens that there are people who DO like buying it and the market exists to service that segment of the population.

Now, if you wanna say that they are interested in stopping people from acquiring their products illegally... Yeah, that's a different thing altogether. You can buy the shit or not buy it, but if they can try to stop you from stealing it (yes, that IS what it is) then why would they not?

I have them all and the convenience of mp3's trumps all.

That being said... record labels should have worked with Napster instead of fighting it. They wasted a good 20 years fighting a losing battle.

>That being said... record labels should have worked with
>Napster instead of fighting it. They wasted a good 20 years
>fighting a losing battle.

Not nitpicking, just saying.

They = the industry. Including wrecka stow owners & acts.

Wrecka stores obviously have more of a vested interest in people buying records, but again I don't think they are really appealing to the mainstream buyer who would have otherwise downloaded mp3s.

How many actual "mainstream" record stores still exist? Not counting the likes of Best Buy who were already selling CDs as loss leaders for years?

In *my* experience at least, most record stores appeal again to the vinyl freaks who are more than likely buying older records, not new stuff. So the notion that stores are operating on the model of "buy records or there will be no more music produced."

They are definitely begging people to support their local record stores, but in that case they are not losing their clientele to illegal downloading.... They're losing it to eBay, GEMM, CDandLP.com, DustyGroove USA, etc.

In other words: you are talking a bunch of horseshit.

you don't get what i'm saying. probably b/c i wasn't really saying much of anything to begin with. you're determined to make this into something.

have fun w/that. lol

>i wasn't really
>saying much of anything to begin with.

so, again. good luck w/your argument, fella.

lol

You could have left it there, but you wanted to keep going.

So I go'd along with you.

>i just read a blog entry from a porn producer who's borrowed
>the tiny violin the music industry plays for itself and is now
>playing the world's smallest violin for himself and the porn
>industry in an attempt to make us all feel the same guilt
>about porn that we are supposed to feel about records. he
>wants us to buy porn b/c we love it so much

i worry about anyone with that kind of attachment to porn

but i disagree that ppl shouldnt feel guilty for downloading music for free. theres no difference between that and stealing apples from an orchard or a cow from a farm. dont act like its your right.

idk about the idea that 'guilt' is the model today though. the emerging model now is how can we get people to pay - whether mp3s, streaming, subscription services, whatever - for something they have no incentive to pay for? guilt isnt effective enough to make people pay for anything. no one buys records or cds out of guilt, they buy it cos they like it. which is what is eroding the music biz - people buying something cos they like it rather than cos they have to (as they did when there was no other way of 'accessing' the 'content'), its a very niche business that only a minority of ppl will be sympathetic to.

>but i disagree that ppl shouldnt feel guilty for downloading
>music for free. theres no difference between that and stealing
>apples from an orchard or a cow from a farm. dont act like its
>your right.

There is a big difference.
If I steal your cow you don't have it anymore. You can't sell it, you can't get milk from it, you can't get meat from it.

If I download your album i've just made a copy. You still have the music. The only thing that is lost is a -potential- sale.

I'm not saying downloading music isn't wrong. But copyright infringement is not theft.
________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

>There is a big difference.
>If I steal your cow you don't have it anymore. You can't sell
>it, you can't get milk from it, you can't get meat from it.

but if i had a cow, and every morning before i could get the cows milked, 10-20 ppl came in and milked the animal dry before i had a chance to get near her, any profits i could make would be lost for the day. if it happened every single day, id be even more fucked. which is more or less what happens with music.

>If I download your album i've just made a copy. You still have
>the music. The only thing that is lost is a -potential- sale.

no it is a sale lost. before, unless someone copied an album for you, or you borrowed it from a library, you couldnt hear it. now you can hear a more or less perfect copy and dont have to buy it. even if you didnt like it, before you would prob have had to buy it (yeah you could listen to it on a listening station at tower or hmv but that takes time - most people would just hand over the cash). now you dont. so it essentially is a lost sale.

>I'm not saying downloading music isn't wrong. But copyright
>infringement is not theft.

sure. its just old fashioned music bootlegging really (where it WAS a lost sale, as people would be shelling out cash for a tape or cd) updated for the free culture of the web, but without any costs involved. before people wanted shit for cheap (and bootleggers would have to charge for the cost of the copies they made), now they want it for free.

Which is why God created fences. Music biz needs better fences.

its impossible

you can only try and persuade people that somehow they should stop trampling over that fence and consider paying a little to get to the cow without having to endure the trouble and hassle of the steal

which is what the biz is trying to do now with things like spotify

it seems to be working i think

convenience is what people seem to want the most and i think for most people even the idea of youtubing songs through searches or googling for torrents is hassle they can cut if they just have something like a streaming service

ultimately the thing which needs to be restored is the transaction and cash for music exchange, how thats done i think no one really cares about, as long as part of the old model - where artists get paid, labels sell music - is back in place securely

im not sure this is healthy exactly for how we treat and regard music but at this point worrying about the psychology of music buying-listening is prob a minor concern

but i haven't checked for Spotify. i haven't heard anything about it that interests me.

i'll stop downloading/youtubing only when i can't do it anymore.

i've said before...the reason i pay for bread at the supermarket is b/c i don't know a place where i can get that same bread (or a close enough version) for free. if i did, i wouldn't pay for it at the supermarket.

if i couldn't get music for free i would pay for it. like i used to. religiously.

>>There is a big difference.
>>If I steal your cow you don't have it anymore. You can't
>sell
>>it, you can't get milk from it, you can't get meat from it.
>
>but if i had a cow, and every morning before i could get the
>cows milked, 10-20 ppl came in and milked the animal dry
>before i had a chance to get near her, any profits i could
>make would be lost for the day. if it happened every single
>day, id be even more fucked. which is more or less what
>happens with music.

But the cow can't be milked dry, that's the point. People could milk it all day and it would still give more. The fact that you spend years studying bio-engineering and developed the breeding program that produced this cow and now everybody can get free milk while all you get is the thanks from the villagers. Well, that is a problem.




>>If I download your album i've just made a copy. You still
>have
>>the music. The only thing that is lost is a -potential-
>sale.
>
>no it is a sale lost. before, unless someone copied an album
>for you, or you borrowed it from a library, you couldnt hear
>it. now you can hear a more or less perfect copy and dont have
>to buy it. even if you didnt like it, before you would prob
>have had to buy it (yeah you could listen to it on a listening
>station at tower or hmv but that takes time - most people
>would just hand over the cash). now you dont. so it
>essentially is a lost sale.

But it isn't. I don't have a lot of money, but I try to pay for as much music as my budget allows. The rest of the music I consume I download.
So let's say I have 10 albums, 2 of which I bought and 8 I illegally downloaded.
If I didn't had the option to download those 8 albums then I just wouldn't have heard them. There would be no lost sales because I didn't have the money to buy them in the first place.

I'm not saying this is true for everybody, but i'm willing to bet that a large percentage of this website couldn't afford the mp3 collection they have if they had to pay the official price.


>>I'm not saying downloading music isn't wrong. But copyright
>>infringement is not theft.
>
>sure. its just old fashioned music bootlegging really (where
>it WAS a lost sale, as people would be shelling out cash for a
>tape or cd), but without any costs involved. before people
>wanted shit for cheap (and bootleggers would have to charge
>for the cost of the copies they made), now they want it for
>free.

I think we want everything for free all the time, as long as we can get away with it.

http://3.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kpcvvy3eqK1qz4a62o1_500.jpg

________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

it's why stores have security systems. hell, it's why the security industry exists, generally. to keep us from getting everything for free all the time. b/c that's the 'natural' order of things.

________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

i'm sure there are plenty folks who've paid for all of their mp3s. but there are a number who haven't and couldn't afford to do so.

> he
>wants us to buy porn b/c we love it so much that we want to
>support the artists w/our money despite the fact that it's
>freely/cheaply available all over the Internet.

If there's anything hackers like, it's porn. No matter what scheme they come up with to force people to pay for it, somebody will hack it. The underlying motivation is way too deep.

one
k. orr

rant about why anyone not buying music is truly destroying music and shouldn't be called a music fan (I mean the people who don't buy ANYTHING, regardless of how much they like it).

Instead I'll just say that subscription services, for me, are a pretty good deal. I presently have Rhapsody. I pay less than $15 a month and I can dowload any album I want. Their collection is pretty satisfactory, I can't find maybe 1 out of every 70 albums I search for, if that. I don't care that I don't own the mp3s and can't burn them because they allow you transfer them to specific mp3 players (The Sandisk Sansa line, some others). So I basically just keep about 20 albums on my Sansa on at a time and then switch em up when I get bored of 'em. Well worth my money cause this way I can take my music wherever.

I still buy albums too. I basically use Rhapsody to listen to albums (they are fairly high quality digital files) and then I go and order whatever I really like as a physical CD so I can rip it to FLAC and store it on my computer.

I hear Zune subscription services are just as good if not better.

So basically I have the same amount of access as the free music crowd for a very small price (less than 4 dollars a week) and all of the artists still receive some form of compensation just for me playing their songs or adding them to my library. If they're making good shit, they will receive full compensation as I will go to their websites and order their albums.

>when they are mostly on subscription services like spotify.
>I never had a subscription service before but I bought spotify
>because of all of the hype. the only feature that has really
>impressed me with spotify is the feature that has been
>available on subscription services before spotify.
>Specifically, Watch the Throne and The Carter IV were
>available on Spotify within a couple of weeks of their
>release. It makes me regretful that I bought Watch the Throne
>when it came out.

That doesn't impress me at all. If spotify wants to compete with torrents, they have to have albums on the day of release.




>How can album sales still be a metric for measuring an albums
>popularity when then songs are freely streamable on
>subscription services within a couple of weeks?
>
>Fuck a billboard, with the help of the interwebs couldn't we
>come with a number for all the times that a song was played on
>youtube, subscription service, scrobbled on last.fm, ec/?

That wouldn't work.
Those numbers might give a more complete picture of popularity now, but once they actually start to matter in a way billboard does now, they will be fudged in no time.




________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

The selection is MUCH better, and you get cd's the day they come out.

Fair gripe regarding Subscription Services not having all the songs you want. But a Subscription Service that included a cloud service for your own tracks can fix that.

In my head I am building the perfect Music App and it would be composed of services that are already available now, but all in one place. Including:

1. A subscription service. The great thing I have discovered about subscription services is that it has me listening to albums I would never have bothered to purchase or even steal.
2. Cloud Service - Spotify doesn't have every song, so I want a cloud service Like Google Music so I can upload the tracks that are covered by the subscription service.
3. Last.FM Statistics - I want lots of data on what people are listening to. WHich songs are trending up.
4. Facebook Integration - I want to know what my friends are listening to (but judging from spotify's facebook integration, my friends are listening to crap).
5. Facts about the track/band/album etc.- I want allmusic, wikipedia info to pop up when I select a track. Also would like to know which of my friends are listening to the same track. Maybe an online space to discuss the track/album etc.

What else am I missing here. Maybe I should have started a seperate post re: dream music App.



**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

i'd like to be able to listen to (if not download...lol) tracks from my friends' libraries.

Maybe it could use a turntable.fm/listening room type aspect.
________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

ie

Rah is listening to 'What these bitches want' - DMX f. Sisqo WHY didn't these 2 make a album together?!!

ill unfriend your ass for that


do or die

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

i haven't liked using Pandora any of the 3 or 4 times i've tried it. i like having more control over music selection. Pandora tries too hard to select music for me.

The Killer AP will definitely need some sort of radio feature.

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

Like podcast that are only for subscribers. That way people can do shows with music without having to worry about copyright issues.
________________________________

(屮ﾟДﾟ )屮

they coulda had a streaming app with a radio based off the shit you listen to offline

http://www.spotify.com/us/help/faq/local-files/does-spotify-upload-my-local-files-to-its-servers/

**********
the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

...but its used and artists will see no money from this ...i wouldnt expect kids who didnt grow up on wax or any physical medium for that matter to have the same need to BUY and OWN music

i wonder if the movie and publishing industries will adapt better. i sense they are, as ebooks are doing pretty well so far (well they would with amazon monopolising the game). so maybe it will just be music that is permanently fucked.

Movies isn't that big of an issue. Movie Theaters are much more popular than concerts, so that would be their version of that kind of revenue (i.e. the movies is popping off every day basically, concerts vary).

As for Ebooks, I'm really surprised they're growing. I mean I've never read on a Kindle or an Ipad or whatever, but if it's anything like reading on the computer (same kinds of screens?)....then that fucking sucks. I strongly prefer printed materials over digital. If I read more than 15-30 minutes on the computer I feel all fucked up.

Music seems to be the most convenient thing to get freeloaded like that. Small files, easy portability/accessibility and easily digested.

>Movies isn't that big of an issue. Movie Theaters are much
>more popular than concerts, so that would be their version of
>that kind of revenue (i.e. the movies is popping off every day
>basically, concerts vary).
>
>As for Ebooks, I'm really surprised they're growing. I mean
>I've never read on a Kindle or an Ipad or whatever, but if
>it's anything like reading on the computer (same kinds of
>screens?)....then that fucking sucks. I strongly prefer
>printed materials over digital. If I read more than 15-30
>minutes on the computer I feel all fucked up.

They use electronic ink that mimics how text looks on paper. It's not backlit like your computer monitor, iPad, mobile phone, etc. so no strain on your eyes. Now, color e-readers, mobiles, and tablets ARE backlit and I have no idea how someone can read page after page on those lol.

Either way, I also prefer regular old books, but I have an e-reader and it's cool for traveling.


__
I don't like the beat anymore because its just a loop. ALC didn't FLIP IT ENOUGH!

Flip it enough? Flip these. Flip off. Go flip some f*cking burgers.(c)Kno

Allied State of the National Electric Beat Treaty Organization (NEBTO)

>Movies isn't that big of an issue. Movie Theaters are much
>more popular than concerts, so that would be their version of
>that kind of revenue (i.e. the movies is popping off every day
>basically, concerts vary).

although im sure im always reading about attendance figures no being quite what they used to be and dvd sales are definitely down compared to the boom years (though maybe that normal - cant expect them to stay the same, maybe we make the same mistake with music sales)

blu ray is basically the last man standing with movie physical formats, now that hd-dvd is on the way out

so that will eventually just leave netflix and so on when it comes to home viewing

soon it will just be pay to play streaming direct to your smart TV

and im sure most people can/do the same with torrents already

just find it in divx and there you go

Apart from providing an experience that presumably cannot be replicated via home viewing/illegal downloading (though that is changing), they get to charge higher prices for the experience to make up for dwindling revenues.

and they get to charge a bit more for it too

though you can get 3d glasses for tvs now too!

so im wondering how thats going to go

personally i think 3d is completely useless

i cant think of any great examples of it being used

apart from piranha 3d!

LOL

i kid.

i think Cameron used 3D effectively in the movie (no stupid throwing/pointing things at the camera just for the 3D), but i was still so bored by it i fell asleep after an hour.

but in terms of servicing the movie, i mean, does it do anything? it just seems pointless mostly (plus it makes everything dimmer, which i find annoying)

i think its a technology that has to be used in a gimmicky (and this can be fun) rather than trying to make it seem like some great new leap in filmmaking

ie it made sense in piranha 3d cos it was like the fish were coming at my head and about to eat my face lol

...whatever mane, smh.