your opinion of internet music swapping!!

fisifan01

is it a good thing? or is it just pure theft?

Kali

personally if i like an album that i've downloaded or copied, i'll buy it... the net result being that i'm left with lots of crap music on cdr lying around.. any copy i have that i've subsequently bought gets passed on to spread the good word.

darthmise

I don't download anything by bands that are on their own label becasue they are the ones that loose out directly, other than that i think its a great facility.
Strangley enough thugh alot of those type of bands post their songs on the net anyway.

Rabies

a few years ago i used to use napster a lot. just used it to get single tracks that i liked but wouldnt be bothered to buy an album just for them.

when all the hype was released in the media about record labels/artists/companies out of pocket millions because of us downloading free music i didnt really care. i was getting it for free.

now my attitude has changed. i wouldnt mind paying to download an album from the internet if there was a decent price difference between downloading it and my highstreet record store.

that prob wont happen any time soon because of my lovely 56k modem back home.

so until i get a faster connection i have no problem buying the odd album here and there from a record store.

seamus

When I had napster (and an internet connection), I d/l a few songs that I liked, with the result that I bought a hell of a lot CDs, more than ever. There was a yokie on TV the other night (maybe CH4) about it, and the biase was very 'Downloading is illegal, offenders should be shot/hung/jailed, we're losing money', yet every 'pirate' they interviewed, said "Yes, I do download a lot of music, but now I also buy a lot more music, over £100/week".

Another music business type suit was of the opinion that using a small sample of someone's song in a mix, say by a DJ or something, where it wouldn't be published, was stealing, and reaping profit from someone else's music :rolleyes:

I don't think it's occured to the exec types, that they're the ones who are ruining the music business. A massive proportion of artists have no real problem with people using pieces of their music, in fact they take it as a compliment. Obviously too, they like people to buy it, after all, they're trying to make a living, but the business types in the music industry see music as just another product to sell, which is the great ruiner of any artist's music.

They complain that their profits are dropping - 'Oh look! It must be that internet thingy'. Maybe if they actually released some decent music, people would begin to buy albums again, instead of buying the singles from one hit wonders

:rolleyes:

Ruaidhri

personally i'm hugly in favour of music swapping. i used to use audiogalaxy (RIP ) all the time and it's turned me on to bands i would never of heard of,and as a result i'm buying WAY more cd's now.it's a shame that some greedy musicians *cough* metallica *cough* ruined the possible exposure for the smaller bands.

Mr E

I agree, Ruaidhri.

I use Easynews (http://www.easynews.com/) to download from newsgroups, and I love to download indie music from bands I've never heard of. Yeah - lots of it is sh*t, but there is some good stuff there too.........

I also like good quality concert bootlegs (which can't be bought in the shops). They can only serve to help bands exposure in the long run, and they aren't costing the record companies millions.....

God bless the internet!

- Dave.

Kopf

Originally posted by darthmise
I don't download anything by bands that are on their own label becasue they are the ones that loose out directly, other than that i think its a great facility.

this sums up my opinion entirely. with other artists, it's really the record companies losing out the most, and since they rip artists off so much i think they deserve what they're getting. they should have seen this coming and done something about it in the early 90s.

Pigman

I'm of the opinion that if since the advent of mp3s you find you've been buying* even more music (as a result of 'sampling' music or whatever) then go right ahead and keep downloading. On the otherhand if you've been downloading stuff that you would most likely have otherwise bought (ie complete albums by bands you 'love') then you should probably stop downloading (and stop kidding yourself.)




* the act of getting something by paying for it

fisifan01

In My opinion Music is for the people not for money driven record companies. Artists are already recognised for their works by earning money from touring and merchandise sales. since i discovered internet swapping i have doubled my monthly album shopping spree. Internet swapping allowes people to try out new bands that they may like which in turn leads to them buying the albums. if music piracy is fundamentally a bad thing then why are blank tapes and Cds sold.

Mossy Monk

i pushed the wrong button on the poll. i am all for downloading

downloading mp3's has opened up a whole new world for me when it comes to hearing new music. it is much better than watching MTV/VH1 type channels. as a result of my various downloads over the past few years my CD collection has swelled with bands i wouldn't have even looked twice at. it is always a good way to check out an album first to check if the cd is full of nothing but filler material, which i hate with a passion

The Gopher

In theory filesharing is cool.In reality to actually download a full album before you become a great grandad you need broadband.:( I cant be arsed waiting 15 minutes to download a single track when i can get it within 15 seconds on realplayer.

Makaveli

I don't really have a problem with people swapping a few songs. I also think it is a great way to check out albums before buying them. And like most of you, since I started downloading mp3s I've bought a lot more albums.
Also, I don't like buying singles, not like there is ever anything in the charts worth buying, so if I kinda like a song I will just download it.

I cant be arsed waiting 15 minutes to download a single track when i can get it within 15 seconds on realplayer.

Stop pimping this program please.

yellum

Since using resources like Audiogalaxy I got into a load of different types of music. My musical taste boundaries were widened hugely and I've gotten into bands and artists that I would have never have heard before.

Its like whe friends give you a loan of this great new cd of newBandNo.1 and you like them. This time your friends are 50 million other people. Most of the stuff that I really liked I've bought on cd after downloading their stuff online. I also try and see the bands live if they're around my neighbourhood too.

PPC

I haven't bought a single music cd ever. My mp3 collection is just after going over 3500 since the last lan party i was at.
But i strictly believe if you don't pay for the music e.g filesharing via net or lan you shouldn't sell on the music as a lot of people do.
But i do the same as ye with games, i'll try a demo/warez'd copy and if i like it i'll buy it. Last couple of games i've bought for the pc we're: GTA3, Max Payne, Tribes2 and a couple of others. And here again i believe you shouldn't copy for profit as your screwing the artist/developer of money that they could have gotten from your dodgey little sale. I'm totally against the selling of pirated material:mad:. Sharing is fine as its been around years and most of the time as people said they will buy the cd's that they like.

poobags

I was an avid Naoster user. I loved that feeling of having the record companies in a panic. Scurrying to top class lawyers to try a bring the kids down. For once we were not their pawns, they had no control. It was momentous. I don't download much anymore cause my computer is too slow but once I get broadband I'll start again.
And yes I bought many more albums as a result of Napster. The only reason the companies are complaning is beause I'm buying alternative albums many on independent labels.

The real reason they're worried is because we are no longer easy to market for. Alternative is now mainstream and the major record companies have no control over the alternative. They're ****tin the brick cause this could mean a significant decline in the teny booper industry. Nowadays 14 year old girls are downloaded Incubus and such and slowly but surely discovering good music. If a kid downloads Nirvana its not goin to be long before some guy in a chat room recommneds the Pixies and so on and so on.

I think its brilliant. It completly undermines music as a commerical industry. Its giving it back to the people.

LONG LIVE NAPSTER.

alb

Since I've started using napster audiogalaxy etc, I've almost stopped buying CD's completely, when i can download 20+ albums a week it seems a lot to shell out almost 20 euro on just one. However I do go to see live artists that I would never have gone to see if the net hadn't exposed me to their music. Live music is sth that can never be replaced, and ppl will always pay to see this. I also buy albums of up and coming acts I see if they are good enough, these ppl actaully need the money to make a living. I saw that show last week aswell (it was on BBC), and its clear what the problem is, for every artist out there, there's about 200 suits making a living from the music. It's these ppl whose jobs are threatened, not te artists themselves, and its mostly these ppl who are fighting it. Screw them. Music is an art form primarily, not a business but in the last coupel of decades that balance has been thrown, the internet however seems to be providing a way to fix that. I heard the companies complain that without the money from sales they can't afford to take on 20 new artists and promote them etc, **** that! they dump on 19 of them anyway after raising their hopes. What about ppl like the frames and josh ritter who do it alone, suceed by playing excellent live shows and gaining a reputation from it. The press pick up on it and they get all the 'marketing' they need' Maybe more artists need to do it the hard way by actaully going out and performing well rather than walking into a huge record deal when they're 19 because they'll look good on a poster in smash hits. If internet piracy can cause such a change in the 'business' I'm all for it.

deco

I exactly know the feeling...for example I don't download anything by the Frames because I know they do get most of the money from their records and it does help them continue on making music...

Music isn't threatened by file-sharing.....

Only the music industry is...

Music been around since man started to loss his body hair and walk up right, and I didn't see the RIAA around to protect intelectual copyright back then......

staring elf

i download all my music. i haven't bought a cd in 2 years. most of the money from buying artists music goes to the record company who have usually got a huge percentage of the royalties. i don't feel guilty about this because:
every artist makes enough money to survive comfortably (playing 1 or 2 shows a week ensures this, not to mention royalty cheques, merchandise, etc, etc).
an artist should make music because he/she loves doing it and money should never be an influencing factor. therefore, downloading music for free can help to weed out any artists who are only in it for the money, eg. most of the bubblegum manufactured pop crap that is so prevalent in today's music industry. by downloading music, manipulative advertising of pop acts will become less effective which will lead to the actual quality of the music becoming important again as opposed to buying into an image. i hope people can see what i mean. i am currently in a very drunken state having returned from my local public house. i'm tired. as soon as my download of the ben folds five track philosophy is completed i am disconnecting and going to bed. goodnight all. this is my third post here. oooooohhhh, too much alcoholic beverages......damn you mr. mcardles ale.

Greenbean

I don't really know the rights or wrongs of it, but I'm glad its happened or I wouldn't have enjoyed such a diverse range of music - especially at a time (6 years ago) when I totally lost faith in pop music.

If every one in the world demands that they have the right to download/listen to any music they want, would this mean every is morally wrong? I think the main aspect of music down through history is that anyone can repeat it or play it as long as they accredit the original artist - its his work and the reason he's doing it is generally for the love, recognition and addoration of the masses. I would like a system where an artist looking for the fame due his work wouldn't have to turn to a corporate entity like the music industry to achieve this... theres only so much touring you can do like. So maybe the internet is that outlet (mass distribution of his or her "sound" through out the world, and mostly powered by word of mouth.

imp

Most of what I have to say has already been done but here goes.

I've been downloading music ever since the beginning of Napster, then Audiogalaxy (again, RIP) and now *****. I have definitely been buying much more music since p2p became popular, and I'd be buying even more if I had the cash.

Which is another point: European customers are being totally ripped off. You can buy the latest albums for $10-15 in the U.S. (last I heard), but we're being charged around €25 for a new album. Its a total injustice.

I definitely believe that the artists deserve to make a living, and a good one at that for providing so many of us with such high-quality entertainment but most of the price of your average album is soaked up by the label. For example a few years ago it was industry news when U2 were re-signed with a "colossal" 25% royalty being paid to them for every CD sold. Most artists wouldn't even get 10%, but assuming they got 25% which is €6.25, add in production and delivery costs (less than €1 per unit) and that leaves €17.75 for the record company. I mean holy fu<k!!

Certainly if an artist is running their own label then its a different story and they'll probably need that cash to keep it going, but in most cases its the multinationals getting richer and richer.

Although I said they deserve a good living, I still believe that any artist should be in the business not for the money but for the pleasure of making good music and giving enjoyment to as many people as possible.

}:>

fester

I think these file swapping programs have reopened the music industry for many people.

I had (more or less) stopped buying cd until AudoGalaxy (RIP) where i discovered a lot of new sh!t. Now i'd get a new cd every couple of weeks, as opposed to every year!

Just yesterday i was showing a man how to use a file swapping program. He said he used to listen to a lot of music, but had lost interest in the last five years. But he said that these file sharing programs could really get him back into the music scene.
And reading over the last page of posts, i think that sums up everyone’s opinion.

And as an additional point... i feel justified sometimes in downloading whole albums since when i buy them i have to pay ~€30. So if i buy one, download one, buy one etc.... the average cost is a friendly €15.

Off the point a bit... But i'm disappointed that the US decided to introduce excessive royalty costs for internet radio. I felt internet radios were the good guys, helping the music industry without hurting it.

oh sh!t, i forgot about my McD's, it'll be gone cold... ehh better go!

seamus

Originally posted by imp
Which is another point: European customers are being totally ripped off. You can buy the latest albums for $10-15 in the U.S. (last I heard), but we're being charged around €25 for a new album. Its a total injustice.

Well, that's another reason I would use p2p now (if I had the connection) - to get songs from albums while I wait for them to go down in price. Damn Euro. Last year, an album that cost IR£17 was expensive, now €25 (IR£19.70) is the norm? WTF is the story there? How has this blatant increase escaped the authorities? I saw an ad for HMV there that said "Californication - now available for €22, down from €26". What. The. Fúck. This album is almost 2 years(?) old now, it should be only around €15 (£12) now. FS......

zAbbo

havent bought an album in around 3 years, i download all i need, either p2p or here, don`t really care who is getting screwed over either as i`m getting music 4 free. I`d love to have enough money to purchase albums but hey i can get them for free.

Dustaz

There seems to be a hell of a lot of self-justification and a little ignorance of how the industry works in this thread.

To clarify, i download stuff from p2p networks and i also buy albums. One hasnt affected the other appreciably in my case. However, im under no illusion as to how it affects other people. So far there has been 3 people on this thread that get all their music from the internet and do not buy albums. Clearly these people dont care too much about music, unfortunatly they fit the demographic of the record buying public as a whole.

Originally posted by deco

Music isn't threatened by file-sharing.....

Only the music industry is...

Thats a nice sum-up of the thread. The problem is though that the mucis industry is responisble for the music you find so precious. Without it, you wouldnt have the mp3's on your disk, or the cds on your shelf or the vinyl in your case. Like anything, too much filesharing is a bad thing. Whats more upsetting is that it seems to be rock music that is more affected by it than pop. If you were to extrapolate this to one possible end, then the only people actually buying cds (and hence providing income for artists) would be 14 year old girls. Pop would rule the world

People say 'oh i make sure i go to see these bands live'. Where the hell do you think the money for a tour comes from? out of thin air? No, it comes from RECORD COMPANIES who loan it to the bands against RECORD SALES. Recording fees, ditto. Videos, Marketing, Distribution, ditto.

Record companies have been fleecing the public for years and still are, so it is nice to see them get annoyed and fleeced back. As long as people are aware of the way things could go.

p.s. Poobags, sorry to break this to you but 90% of signed bands are signed to major labels or labels that are subsidiaries of major lables, there are VERY few indie labels left

gurramok

Without it, you wouldnt have the mp3's on your disk, or the cds on your shelf or the vinyl in your case

Another thing, why dont the record companies replace all those vinyl/tapes with cds for consumers so that the consumer would not have to fork out more money !

If you were to extrapolate this to one possible end, then the only people actually buying cds (and hence providing income for artists) would be 14 year old girls. Pop would rule the world

Thats the problem, the media/radio stations/record stores/MTV are 'owned' by record companies in their marketing push for crappy pop artists.
Pop does rule the world, it has since the early 90's when Take That/New Kids on The Block were aggressively marketed back then. Thats were the big profits are for the labels.
And real music has suffered alot in the process.

But to stop the likes of me downloading/swapping mp3's since '96, the price of the cd will have to drop. A dvd has much better value than a cd at the same price !
As said vast majority of cds in circulation are controlled by the big 5 labels, not many indie labels in the market.
The fact that artists get less than 10% royalties of the average
cd sold is a disgrace.

Record companies have been fleecing the public for years and still are, so it is nice to see them get annoyed and fleeced back. As long as people are aware of the way things could go.

That's not my problem if things still go as they are. They are fleecing us so i fleece them, an eye for a eye
Its up to labels to change not the fileswapper !

alb

Originally posted by Dustaz
So far there has been 3 people on this thread that get all their music from the internet and do not buy albums. Clearly these people dont care too much about music, unfortunatly they fit the demographic of the record buying public as a whole.

They prolly don't have the money to buy the stuff anyway, I know I didn't until recently. So it's not like i'd have gone out and bought the albums if I couldn't d/l them, I'd just have to have done without.

Thats a nice sum-up of the thread. The problem is though that the mucis industry is responisble for the music you find so precious.

p.s. Poobags, sorry to break this to you but 90% of signed bands are signed to major labels or labels that are subsidiaries of major lables, there are VERY few indie labels left

The music industry has become responsible for it. It shouldn't be and it doesn't need to be. Once upon a time the music industry as we know it today didn't exist and music still prospered. The fact that there are few indie labels left is the whoel point. Lets push more bands back to them instead of the major labels. Good bands can make it without the industry. **** bands can't.

deco

I can't see why the fudge I'm paying €20 for a cd whose intensic cost is 30 cent....

I feel like I'm being screwed over buying cds from major labels...

So I say bugger them....

Mp3's forever!

Dustaz

Originally posted by alb

Once upon a time the music industry as we know it today didn't exist and music still prospered. The fact that there are few indie labels left is the whoel point. Lets push more bands back to them instead of the major labels. Good bands can make it without the industry. **** bands can't.

No, they cant. When was this magical time that bands made it without the nasty music industry? The two are a symbiotic pair.

Dustaz

Originally posted by deco
I can't see why the fudge I'm paying €20 for a cd whose intensic cost is 30 cent....

I think the word you mean is intrinsic.

And thats the whole point of my argument. Ill sell you lots of cds for 30 cents mate. Hope you enjoy listening to silence.
The money you pay is for hundreds of other things apart from the cost of the actual cd. A&R, Recording, Studio Time, Producers fee, Musicians Fee, Mixing, Mastering, Pressing, Distribution and a million other things.

Admitedly, the price is TOO high, but comments like that are moronic.

fester

Say, i was kinda devided on the issue, but i think you have now convinced me that the big music industries are money grabbing pop crap filled corporations that we can live without.

Pop does rule the world, it has since the early 90's

True, take the corporations down and start from scratch. It could work right? It would be better for it, right?

Dustaz

I think youll find that popular music has ruled the music business since the 60's.

Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers?
Monkees?

Nearly all of the motown stuff was manufactured. With the slight caveat that most of them could actually sing. etc etc etc. nothing new here folsk, move along.

fester

I think youll find that popular music has ruled the music business since the 60's.

yeah, i was just thinking that after i posted. I agree.
My point still stands.

BJJ

it's not a good thing, it's a great thing

BJJ

Originally posted by Dustaz



Admitedly, the price is TOO high, but comments like that are moronic.

The only moron here is you Dustaz,
now F*ck off back to your Ireland offline forum.

Winters

If i want 1 song i will download it. its as simple as that. I dont want to go out and buy the ablum if i only want one song. Although i did download thw whole Counting Crows Hard Candy album .. but i plan to buy it so no harm done

Its just the people that download albums, make cds of em and then sell em off that are the real problem. Not the people that download 1 or 2 songs of artist cos they like thoese songs.

Makaveli

Originally posted by BJJ



The only moron here is you Dustaz,
now F*ck off back to your Ireland offline forum.

Actually all his points are valid and make perfect sense. If you cant grasp the concept of reality maybe it's you that needs to fuck off.

fester

Its just the people that download albums, make cds of em and then sell em off that are the real problem

Do people do that? Not that I know of!

And Winters, i know it's not too bad when it's only one or two tracks your downloading... but when you start to get faster internet connections one or two albums aint too bad either. And thats where the problem starts.

fester

...but i dont care.

im going to download 'the cold vein' full album right now
I've already given def jux ~€100 anyway... so i'm owed a free album

poobags

p.s. Poobags, sorry to break this to you but 90% of signed bands are signed to major labels or labels that are subsidiaries of major lables, there are VERY few indie labels left

Exactly Duztaz. Thats what I'm sayin. Thats why the industry is worried. There 90% is threatened because I'm downloading indie and going out and buying indie. My point is, were not easy to market for any more (altough PoPstars would suggest otherwise)
and thats why the industry are worried.

Monkey

"I think youll find that popular music has ruled the music business since the 60's."

That's a stupid statement. Of course it's popular music that is important to the "industry" because the "industry" is about making money and popular music is what makes money. Your just stating the obvious there.

fester

I think i'd like to create the distinction between popular music and pop music ( if u c what i'm saying).

for exmaple...
Eminem is popular but he aint pop.
Britney Spears is popular and pop.

therecklessone

Originally posted by Winters
Although i did download thw whole Counting Crows Hard Candy album .. but i plan to buy it so no harm done

Major harm done...you've downloaded the feckin' Counting Crows. What were you thinking????

I'm not going to comment on the topic of file-sharing, but one thing that is glaringly obvious from this thread is that a lot of people don't seem to know about any other music stores other than HMV and Virgin. What's with paying 25 euro for cds??? I have never paid anything near that for a bog standard cd.

Has no-one ever heard of independant music stores??? Try the Soundcellar for metal/punk/hardcore/rock, you won't pay more than 22 euro. Try Road Records for cds around 21-22 euro. Try Freebird for second-hand cds. Try www.cdwow.ie, where you will find The Coral for 13.95, and Coldplays new album on presale for the same. In short, walk past HMV's door and treat them with the contempt they deserve. Its amazing how much you can save.

Dustaz

Theres 2 different discussions happening on this thread and one is slightly off topic. Ill just say a quick thing on that first.

Originally posted by fester
I think i'd like to create the distinction between popular music and pop music ( if u c what i'm saying).

for exmaple...
Eminem is popular but he aint pop.
Britney Spears is popular and pop.

Popular music IS pop music. I know what your trying to say, but it runs into trouble when you encounter bands like Linkin Park. Are they Pop? theres lots of opinions on what they are and arent. You cannot arbitrarily say that artist X is or isnt pop. You CAN say whether they are popular.

Kids, this is the way the record industry works. Labels sign bands on different deals. Some will be signed because a clever A&R man sees a lot of potential talent in a band. They will be nurtured in so much as they will be allowed record up to 3 albums for very little relative return (this is getting rarer nowadays). The hope is that eventually this band will metamorphise into world beaters and make everyone involved a lot of money. U2, RHCP, REM are good examples of this type of band.
Labels will also sign acts like Take That, Boyzone and New Kids on the Block to PAY for the other bands. These acts are fairly much gaurenteed to give you a huge return on very little investment in the short term. They dont have the longevity to make money in the long term but they provide revenue needed to foster more 'adult' acts.

This has been the situation for the last 40 years, but over the last 10 years it has changed slightly. With the advent of acts like The Spice Girls and Britney Spears it appears that these 'pop' acts can make an enourmous amount of money in the short term, and if conditions are right, can go on generating revenue in the long term. As a result more money is spent in grooming and preparing these acts and as a further result less money is spent cultivating the traditional long term moneyspinners.

The more people download and not buy music from those 'indie' or 'rock' or 'real' acts, the more damage is done. If someone downloads an album by one of these bands, thats one less sale of that album and as far as the record company is concerned, why should they spend money on it if it will never give them any return on it. Thats the simple truth.

Dustaz

Originally posted by poobags


Exactly Duztaz. Thats what I'm sayin. Thats why the industry is worried. There 90% is threatened because I'm downloading indie and going out and buying indie. My point is, were not easy to market for any more (altough PoPstars would suggest otherwise)
and thats why the industry are worried.

Well no, your not buying indie, thats my point. All of the bands you mentioned first time round are on major labels or on labels owned by major labels.

That's a stupid statement. Of course it's popular music that is important to the "industry" because the "industry" is about making money and popular music is what makes money. Your just stating the obvious there.

I would have thought that was obvious too, but it doesnt seem to be. Popularity is generally measured in record sales and record sales is what arent happening when you download music.


Oh and makavelli, thanks but you can safely ignore BJJ. Hes a member of my fanclub, and when hes not posting 20 times to the same top ten list he can be found suckling at the teat of my opinion:)

Thanx 4 The Fish

I used to, and still do d/l song from filesharing sites etc. I haven't bought an album in years coz I haven't needed to. If I find a good new band on these places I look for more of their stuff up there. Can't afford to buy anything much at the mo, but I like to think that when I have the quids I will buy albums again.

MrJoeSoap

Hopefully it'll teach them to charge us 20 squid for an album that cost 2 to make.

Dustaz

The above is a classic example of the ignorance of the general populace.

It didnt cost 2 quid. Read the posts.

towel401

fisifan01 wrote: »

is it a good thing? or is it just pure theft?

its loike, totally awsoem!

2002 was a great year for threads

imeddyhobbs

I always think of the pet shop boys when people talk about music piracy

This group produced several albums in the 80's but never did any live gigs,they just lived off the fat of the land...The Pet Shop Boys have to go on tour now to make money.

Why are concert ticket prices so high now?


If the big acts want to make money now well then they will just have to go on the road.