Jump to content

vkxwz

Members Plus
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

1 Follower

About vkxwz

  • Rank
    New Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Australia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia
  • Interests
    Making garbage music

Recent Profile Visitors

586 profile views
  1. I don't see them doing anything with a renewal / rebirth theme considering what they said in tomorrows harvest interviews and how that stuff hasn't really changed. Geogaddi weirdness would be great though
  2. Just to add some more probably wrong ideas about this track; that squelching sound that runs throughout, sounds like the sound of cutting flesh, that in mind plus the bubbling at the end sounds kinda disturbing And nowadays I hear some of the lyrics as, "slit your throat, in your imagination" Also, the voice in this track sounds like the same voice that is hidden in Palace Posy from Tomorrow's Harvest, wonder if it's a friend of the brothers'? It doesn't sound like either of their own voices It's also weird to see people site google lyrics / bocpages lyrics as the "true" source
  3. I guess my main point is that people can move to another field if they can't support themselves with music, it wouldn't be fair to only pay artists a fraction of the money if they were being forced to make music for a living. I have to ask this though, if there was no Spotify, how would an artist sell their music to begin with? Are the days of having a small chance of getting signed to a label really what you prefer over anyone being able to get their music out there cheaply which is possible now? That fantasy version of Spotify you just explained really does sound great though, I do agree.
  4. Way to chop off the explanation for what I said.. But anyways, would you say it's unfair if I can't make enough money to live on just from selling bottles of my piss through the internet? Oh no I'm being underpaid I deserve to be able to do *whatever* I want and receive a good income for it !!!
  5. Yes, what's wrong with this? Like any other field, if someone isn't good enough at making music that other people enjoy then they won't be able to make enough money to have it as their only source of income. Only difference is that with music there's a space between what being employed vs unemployed is in other industries, so there is a possibility that you could pour all your time into it and not make enough to live on if you really don't know what you're doing. You'd have to be pretty stupid to willingly do that though considering it's not particularly difficult to find an entry level job ju
  6. Then you go get a job that pays enough to support you... If this really leads to a drop in jazz musicians and live jazz is something that the public wants to hear then they'll start being paid more, supply and demand What IS ignorant is thinking that musicians should be subsidized because they should be able to live a musician lifestyle despite the fact that the demand for their work isn't enough for them to live on.
  7. Fascinating, I have friends who've had issues with their discography's being merged with another artist of the same name who got on Spotify first so I think this is just bad design rather than a conspiracy to take money from artists... And it seems like Spotify has no real reason to do this? They don't make money per streams(ignoring ads but that's nothing compared to subscription revenue), they just pay artists per play, so why create fake music and then pay themselves nothing....
  8. Hot take that I actually believe: Like everything else on our society art should be paid for as if it is the commodity that is. If an artist is motivated enough to create something great to get their message/ideas/whatever out there they'll do it without the draw of money. And if it's great it's likely will get recognition and therefore income as a result anyway. This also weeds out the people making mindless art that wastes peoples time and people that aim to soullessly hook people for no reason other than money.
  9. I agree there's far more noise but I believe there's also more great music being created now just because of the sheer amount of it being made nowadays. Guess it's impossible to really quantify that however.
  10. Takes 5 minutes more and it costs more money to aquire the music that way, even if it was just as quick as searching in Spotify the average person wouldn't spend the extra money and that's not laziness.
  11. Yeah I agree they may be getting rich off artists work but at least they're stopping piracy and funnelling that money(Ok, some) back to artists rather than artists getting nothing. I'm far from a ludite but the real issue is that the internet has made it so easy to distribute and share music which means people no longer need to pay anything at all. So the only reason they will pay is for convenience which streaming services now provide, and artist do make at least some money off that now. Can't help but feel like some people complaining are just pissed off that they can
  12. Mate what are you on about, the average listener wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between high quality flacs and what spotify streams. In their eyes it's just a pain in the ass and more expensive for literally no change to buy hq stuff from artists and put in on their phones. Hate steaming services all you want but you have to be braindead to think it's just "laziness". Everyone's always crying about how the music industry is ruined thanks to streaming services, piracy, whatever the fuck. Just sounds like excuses for why they aren't making bank. In the music industry wh
×
×
  • Create New...