Mellow U Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 There was never a way And there's never a day To convince people You can play their game You can say their name But you won't convince people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lada Laika Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (btw, i pirate everything because i strongly believe that for artist to achieve spiritual purity and creative peak, he/she need to be fucking poor, so my conscience is clear.) And that would make them able to record music... how, exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coax Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 caze when you talk about slowly starving labels of their cash, are you talking about the major labels like the Beyonce and Kanye type artists are on? Cause how many people who are music fans actually download those. Aren't we actually talking about thousands of small-medium sized independent labels, and why would you want to starve those of cash? second thing though, it seems impossible to me to calculate in any meaningful way who downloads something who wouldn't have bought it anyway, versus those who would have, versus the spread afterward. the fact that copying something digital is so fast and 'ephemeral', plus nobody really knows the future (and what they would have done) makes it completely impossible to get an overview I think. however in terms of this, I do think this argument had more force 10 years ago when there sometimes were no previews online at all. many people would download an album just to check it out, but nowadays there are previews of just about anything, at full length, so at least people should be more judicial in picking what they download, but in that case it would show they only download stuff they actually like and /should/ buy. but you know, all that said, i think we're in a better world now than we were 15 years ago. the dynamic and fast culture with easy access to everything really just results in a flood of great music, and no issues getting a hold of it. while it results in a lesser value of music in general, which hurts artists, we still see a lot of artists that are still going, almost seemingly more than ever before. it's really just up to each individual to make an effort to support the artists they like. although with streaming this will probably get even worse i guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 if you think taking someones art without paying for it isnt stealing, you are literally mentally retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 if you think taking someones art without paying for it isnt stealing, you are literally mentally retarded. no, you are someone who understands the basic definitions of words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psn Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 *RETARDS LITERALLY* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 i like to sprinkle literally around liberally, and lubricated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 caze when you talk about slowly starving labels of their cash, are you talking about the major labels like the Beyonce and Kanye type artists are on? Cause how many people who are music fans actually download those. Aren't we actually talking about thousands of small-medium sized independent labels, and why would you want to starve those of cash? I'm not talking about thousands of small-medium sized independent labels. I would think the fans of mainstream artists are mostly getting their content via app stores and streaming services these days, they're not getting their stuff from slsk and torrent sites in any great numbers (the what.cd charts was dominated by genre/alternative works with only the odd mainstream thing popping up from time to time, the quantities that were involved with what.cd are dwarfed by the volumes major labels distribute though). second thing though, it seems impossible to me to calculate in any meaningful way who downloads something who wouldn't have bought it anyway, versus those who would have, versus the spread afterward. the fact that copying something digital is so fast and 'ephemeral', plus nobody really knows the future (and what they would have done) makes it completely impossible to get an overview I think. however in terms of this, I do think this argument had more force 10 years ago when there sometimes were no previews online at all. many people would download an album just to check it out, but nowadays there are previews of just about anything, at full length, so at least people should be more judicial in picking what they download, but in that case it would show they only download stuff they actually like and /should/ buy. It's obviously impossible to tell in each individual case whether someone would have done one thing or another, all I was saying was that one way of doing it is not in any way immoral (supporting what you can, what you like/listen to most, or maybe even what you best think could do with your support - up and coming folks vs long dead jazz musicians for example), but doing other things certainly isn't ok (freeloading everything). There have been many studies done on the overall impacts of piracy though, and they all basically say the same thing, that it doesn't have a negative impact that they can find. So while there are certainly individual jerks being jerks, it seems to balance out via increased exposure/engagement via non-jerks. but you know, all that said, i think we're in a better world now than we were 15 years ago. the dynamic and fast culture with easy access to everything really just results in a flood of great music, and no issues getting a hold of it. while it results in a lesser value of music in general, which hurts artists, we still see a lot of artists that are still going, almost seemingly more than ever before. it's really just up to each individual to make an effort to support the artists they like. although with streaming this will probably get even worse i guess Streaming can make for a better experience for everyone actually, in the past I would just download anything I hadn't heard of to check it out before buying, if it was crap I might listen to it once and forget about it, if it's good I'd probably buy it (if people start taking the piss they could easily limit the number of times you could stream something). Recently I've been streaming stuff on bandcamp rather than downloading first, sticking it in a wishlist which I'll go through every month. Presumably the folks at bandcamp have good data on the ratio between streamers and purchasers, would be interesting to take a look at. The mp3 download model won't last either, but I'm probably going to remain stuck in my ways on that regard for a while yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganus Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I work a full time job and I buy as much music as I can afford, in digital, directly from the artists, so as to have the maximum impact... I make music too, would love to make a living from it, but I think folks bitching about not being able to do it for a living are being unrealistic! Supply and demand is how economics works, and there is an overabundance of music and art... And the morality argument is bullshit. Is everyone streaming music stealing it, when there is a paid download alternative? There is a gigantic grey area. If you dont already have a fan base, and you want 5 people to listen to your album ever, go ahead and put it on Bandcamp for $10! However, if people listening to your music is your goal, you should have it streaming, and encourage folks to share it freely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mellow U Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Or, you know, learn to be good at doing a thing, and then charge people to experience your doing of the thing. Until someone duplicates your doing of the thing and hands xeroxes out to everyone waiting in the line to see you. That's when technology has surpassed your ability to have any kind of job security doing the thing, thereby rendering the value of your doing the thing worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganus Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 I like your music and I have bought several albums from you. It's not your fans that are the problem. I don't know how you can expect to compete when there is so much out there that's free, and so many other artists to split our disposible income between. Job security is doing something that there is a demand or scarcity for. Media is in a huge bubble right now, if you make art, you should be doing it for you, because you are the main person who is going to care. Learn to code? Sorry to be harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mellow U Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Okay, a few things: 1. I'm not ungrateful for any support I've received, from you or anyone else. I do not make music for money - I try my best to make money with music. 2. There is no expectation where my music's success is concerned. I don't even expect anyone to listen. I do hope, however, that I'd be able to ply a trade as a craftsman of any other ilk (such as a woodworker or startup restaurant) without fear of someone taking my work without compensation. This is what I meant about a lack of job security. If I were in any other trade, just about, you wouldn't be able to take what I create for free so easily. This is the convenience of the times. 3. I do not agree that piracy being an atmospheric condition that puts undeniable strain on content creators is mutually exclusive with units sold or not sold. Like someone else said earlier, many people who download things have no intent to buy them in the first place. This intent, however, is not enough to justify the holes dug into an otherwise viable model for business, and it does nothing to compensate for the very real effect of people treating such a convenience as a right. 4. I work very hard doing what I do, and it's quite callous for anyone to see the outer side of it and presume to know what goes into the operation. I work around eighty hours a week, between the recording of new things, mastering music for other artists and labels, prepping my own work for release, assembling the physical editions, updating the web, doing promotion, filling and shipping existing orders, handling correspondence with both business contacts and customers and somehow still finding the time to actually rest, raise my four year old daughter, keep my home clean and do all the other mundane things that everyone has to do. Again, there is zero expectation that any of it will make money - in fact, anyone who follows my label or Recycled Plastics can tell you that I've carefully engineered the design of all my physical items to be as cheap and bracing for loss as possible. If I didn't, I wouldn't have even made it this far. So you're partially correct, that part of running a business that survives is knowing the market and knowing when things are changing. I've always taken it upon myself to learn from the ground up, in all aspects of this business. I needed a website ten years ago, so I taught myself enough basic HTML to make one. I needed printed matter in low pressing runs, so I bought a disc duplicator. I needed to pad my résumé for video game scoring jobs, so I took some night courses for studio recording certifications. The list goes on, but it's safe to say I'm a perpetual student here. That said, what I do know here is that I create things that, within this media bubble you mentioned, other people do not create. So I refuse to do those things for free. And so far, it's been a worthy endeavor. Not one I'd recommend to anyone who makes less than 600 albums in ten years, but a solvent living that is worth doing because it allows me to continue doing what I love, instead of "learning to code" or doing some other thing that deflates my brain. And for that, it's worth fighting against things like piracy, instead of just rolling over and letting a good idea wilt because people all around me think I should just get with the times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hello spiral Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brisk Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 caze: I just read your explanation, and like every other person's "why stealing isn't stealing" it's full of shit. It actually made me dumber just reading it. Download as much as you want but stop making stupid excuses for it. It really doesn't matter what you say. Mellow U and usagi are on point. Acquiring a paid thing without paying for it is stealing, and it doesn't matter how many times you tries to explain why it's not. You are wrong, FFS. why am I wrong? 'stealing is stealing' isn't an argument. I'm not acquiring any paid things, I'm acquiring copies of them, even the law recognises this, which is why it's not a criminal offence. The law absolutely does not recognise this, at least in most circumstances. Try making duplicates of the currency you have in your pocket and see how the law reacts to you just "acquiring copies" Try walking into your doctors office, access their computer, and make a copy of the patient records "just to share it with others" etc.. Gabe Newell described it best. Piracy, at least for most people, is a service problem. It used to be a big issue for music, because fans didn't have anywhere to buy records apart from record stores and a few online places, often only in limited quantities. Making rips of the vinyl I purchased was something I used to do religiously every week for years, simply because I didn't want to wear out my vinyl collection and I wanted to have a more convenient way to listen to them while traveling to university/work etc... Now, Spotify has a huge collection of music and has reached a point where most artists have at least some presence there. I mean, Les Rallizes DéNudés are on there, and they're legendary for not having even made a studio album. Besides that, there's tonnes of other music sites, from iTunes, Beatport, Tidal... And of course, Bandcamp. Right now, apart from a tiny minority of labels that refuse to sell digitally, pretty much everything is accessible legally from one site or another. Fans finally have access to most of their favourite music and artists have the means to get paid for their work. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this what everyone wanted? The same principle applies to video games. Steam pretty much killed piracy for me, simply because I finally has a place to get most of the games I wanted to play, with the benefit of having access to it whenever I wanted. Netflix did the same for movies/tv shows. As far as I can see it now, the only valid excuse people have left is that they simply don't want to pay for music/games/films. That's fair enough, but the mental gymnastics people will use to justify why this isn't the case for them is just getting more and more ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hello spiral Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 How do people stand on buying 2nd hand records/CDs? The money still doesn't go to the artist in that case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usagi Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Gabe Newell described it best. Piracy, at least for most people, is a service problem. on this point, I think Gabe/Valve certainly have the right perspective when it comes to how they've structured Steam. I haven't pirated a single game since I became a regular Steam user 10+ years ago, except for ones that weren't available on Steam. there's something to be said about that approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4d0 Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganus Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Mellow U, I respect what you're saying, and I think you should be able to make a living at your craft, especially if you are selling your services and skills to others, and not just trying to serve your own creative self-interest. If you are successful in this, then I have all the more respect for you. I just get tired of hearing artists raging against piracy; free media is a huge part of our current culture, folks may as well be raging against the printing press. And streaming services are as much to blame or more than piracy... They perpetuate of art being freely and instantly available, and to the user, it's no different from downloading illegally except for the fact that it's easier to use! Anyone preaching about downloads being immoral while owning a Spotify, Google Play, or Apple Music subscription is a hypocrite. *cough cough* But yea, Mellow U, I admire you, and I think you're on the right track. You just gotta adapt to what folks want to actually shell out dough for For folks saying "I could make a living, if it weren't for piracy", read the time and effort Mellow U puts into it! The economy doesn't have room to support as many artists as want to support themselves with their art, so only the hardest working, most industrious people can do it! You have to be selling a service, or a performance, you can't just expect your creativity to float you... Cause you know what? The people listening to and buying independent music are artists too. That's nothing to do with piracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brisk Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 And streaming services are as much to blame or more than piracy... They perpetuate of art being freely and instantly available, and to the user, it's no different from downloading illegally except for the fact that it's easier to use! Anyone preaching about downloads being immoral while owning a Spotify, Google Play, or Apple Music subscription is a hypocrite. *cough cough* Comparing a legal streaming service with torrent trackers is disingenuous. Spotify and the other streaming sites you mentioned pay their artists every time someone plays their record. That's the key difference. When someone downloads an album from a torrent, then the artists sees nothing, at least from an immediate perspective. In regards to streaming services, I hear a lot of artists/labels moan about Spotify's royalties to artists being low, but they send me quite a substantial payment every single month. Far more than any other streaming/DD site, outside of Bandcamp actually, though it's likely that this is because a lot of my music is streamed there. Either way, artists should use every means of income at their disposal and as streaming is now one of (if not the most) used means of listening to music for the majority of people, it's stupid not to use it as an additional source of income. Even with only a limited amount of plays, it's still more than what you'd get from someone torrenting your music, which is exactly zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganus Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 Sure. I agree that artists should have their work on streaming services, at least for the fact that it allows them better exposure. It's good to hear you can make some money from it. This reminds me of the discussion of Apps vs. Mobile sites: http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1954 Basically the analogy I see there is that streaming services are good for reaching a wider audience, but the pay per-user is minimal, and Bandcamp digitals + physical mediums are good to provide for the fans who want a permanent copy of your music and are willing to pay for it, so you get higher pay per user but less users... I don't agree that torrent sites are a wash, because they can lead to long term fans. Sites like tT let me explore a large library of music before I had a credit card when I was a teen, and now I regularly pay for releases from many of those artists. To me torrent sites and also are just another medium of exposure, because my primary goal is to have listeners and create fans. Since you can't beat it or stop it, you may as well see the bright side anyway. But to each their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaosmachine Posted November 26, 2016 Share Posted November 26, 2016 ah crap. i get busy with work for a week and this happens... :( anyone have an xnx invite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted November 26, 2016 Share Posted November 26, 2016 il repeat myself as i always do, i both buy and pirate loads of music, i dont give a fuck. suck my dick. if i like your music, or even a label that you are on, there is a very high chance ive paid real money for your music. i also like to browse and consume loads of shite by piracy that i will either listen to once and delete, or, play out and then buy, either in wav or vinyl. i have no moral issue with this method of consuming music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 ah crap. i get busy with work for a week and this happens... :( anyone have an xnx invite? i can trade it for an invite to the LTM subforum, deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YangYing Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 there is still hope for watmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.