Music industry reluctantly embraces file-sharing technology

[Ritual]

Originally posted by Modderrhu
That could well change, however, if we do see that revival of real talent.

Real talent hasn\'t gone away. Just because it\'s not real talent that has made the big bucks lately doesn\'t mean there aren\'t any talented bands out there. There\'s plenty, most likely more than ever. You just have to look elsewhere than commercial radio stations or big record stores to discover it.

Also, in my opinion, a band that puts \"fillers\" onto a record is either not that great a band, or they have a poor attitude towards their audience. A respectful artist doesn\'t release tracks that don\'t hold their own.

Concerning this new service... I\'m not that thrilled! You need to use a special player software to play the tracks and that software will pass information back to the server how many times each track has been played. If I download tracks (which I rarely do) I want to be able to use them as I see fit, maybe put them on a CD-R so I can play them on my stereo or bring to a friends house or similar.

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by Ritual
Concerning this new service... I\'m not that thrilled! You need to use a special player software to play the tracks and that software will pass information back to the server how many times each track has been played. If I download tracks (which I rarely do) I want to be able to use them as I see fit, maybe put them on a CD-R so I can play them on my stereo or bring to a friends house or similar.

That\'s when you buy it. Come on, don\'t look a gift horse in the mouth.lol

 

[Modderrhu]

Originally posted by Ritual
Concerning this new service... I\'m not that thrilled! You need to use a special player software to play the tracks and that software will pass information back to the server how many times each track has been played.

Pretty much what I was thinking was: so you can download the tracks for free, but only from that site, I expect. It would still be illegal to use other file-sharing services.

 

[Evil Dave]

Wait a minute, hold on, the site and player are offering free downloads, which if you like, you can keep without paying a dime.
When it\'s free, I tend not to complain about it.

The alternative is always going out and buying a CD without hearing it.

Jeez, just no pleasing some people.


Edit:
Eh, might not be going through after all.
Labels back away from Qtrax

 

[Modderrhu]

lol Keep your hair on, Dave - what little you usually keep anyway.

Just pointing out that it\'d probably still be illegal to use other file-sharing services, and that those who have downloaded music still have illegal content.

Yes, it\'s free, entirely free, just with restrictions. The music has been paroled instead of liberated, if you like. TINSTAAFL, still true, isn\'t it?

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by Modderrhu
Yes, it\'s free, entirely free, just with restrictions. The music has been paroled instead of liberated, if you like. TINSTAAFL, still true, isn\'t it?

True, but even if it\'s not completely without restriction (and I doubt it ever will be) it\'s still a lot better than the alternative, and a step in the right direction.

Damnit, you guys, I\'m supposed to be the cynical one...

 

[Ritual]

I\'m not saying this is bad, Dave. I just think it isn\'t as good as they may have you believe. For instance, they clearly say that they still own the material that you have downloaded. And, because you have to use their software they can see what you do with the files you\'ve downloaded.

Personally, I\'ve no problem paying for getting music on a physical medium. Furthermore, I prefer listening on music on vinyl (call me old fashioned) as you can\'t beat the feeling of putting on a slab of vinyl and hearing the sound of the needle as you put it onto the record. I manage to find the music I want and generally listen to some samples of it before deciding if to buy. I usually try to buy as close as possible to the source (i.e. artist or the record label that puts the music out) as that ensures that as much of the money I pay as possible reach the artist.

 

[supervike]

I never could quite understand the \'illegality\' of downloading music for your personal use. Sure, if you sold it to someone else, that would be a problem.

But musicians used to fall over themselves to get \'airplay\' and many artist are given a real chance because of downloads.

Yeah, if Metallica felt we were taking food out of the mouths of their children, maybe they\'d have a point. But, I was much more apt to spend money on Metallicas CDs, buy a shirt, go to a concert, whatever when i could hear a song on my computer. Why didn\'t they have the same fit when it was played on the radio? When I was a kid, we\'d make our own \'mix tapes\' from songs on the radio. I still bought albums and cds though.

I guarantee I will not spend a dime on anything \'metallica\' because of their stance.

Greed has killed the industry as far as I\'m concerned.

 

[squig hunter]

Down wit da man!lol

Squig

 

[AinuLainour]

Originally posted by Dragonsreach

Originally posted by AinuLainour Successful is being able to rely on music as one would on your average career.

So by that would you class the hundreds of thousands of Session musicians and Music teachers as Successful or Unsuccesful?

..?

They would be successful, I felt that was made fairly obvious to be completely honest. It\'s being successful in a band that worries me at this point.

 

[Ritual]

Originally posted by supervike
Greed has killed the industry as far as I\'m concerned.

Luckily, there\'s a huge undergrowth of small, independent, DIY labels and musicians who release their own stuff. You have to work a bit harder as a consumer to find the stuff, that\'s all. But, once you do you\'ll get better quality for less money and the money you do pay doesn\'t go to a bunch of media hot shots to help sustaining their jet set life style.

These small labels and struggling musicians need all the support they can get, because in reality they are the ones suffering the most from illegal file sharing. If a band, who normally would sell let\'s say 5000 copies worldwide of a record (which doesn\'t make them that big of a profit), sees their sales drop to 3000 copies that means a lot to their income.

 

[EArkham]

The difference between 5000 copies with a major record label and 5000 copies with your own record label is such a huge difference it\'s sickening.

In fact, this link is a mostly accurate explanation of what happens with a record deal, though I\'ve known some musicians who would have considered themselves lucky to get 10 royality points.

From the link
A songwriter who writes 100% of an album\'s worth of let\'s say 10 songs will therefore make 70 cents per album sold. This is payable from record one. It is therefore extremely beneficial for artists to write the music they record!

Note that 70 cents per record is the \"extremely beneficial\" deal! Understandable that most successful artists have their own labels.

Kep

 

[Bengoodall]

Thats always been it though, I dont think the whole metallica thing started with them, cause they dont actually make much off a record, most of the revenue goes straight back to the record companies.

If the songwriter gets 70cents outta the total of say 15 bucks, who gets the rest?

Mr Griffen thank you very much.