dragonfly February 29, 2008 Share dragonfly Member February 29, 2008 mine also what do you listen to, where are they from, and how do end up finding it (either to buy, or how did you hear about it in the first place)? Dark - same to you: how do end up finding it (either to buy, or how did you hear about it in the first place)? i look at chinese websites (yesasia, malmusic) etc. to buy albums and ebay to buy second hand stuff. most of her stuff is not for print and therefore, no longer for sale and shouldnt you know who i listen to? the one and only of course and as i'm typing this, i'm listening to the album that is my avatar, "I am not Lonely" I bet if you listen to that album you are lonely... well, when i listen to Inquisitive Woman, it does not mean i turn into an Inquisitive Woman... Um, actually it does. Sorry to tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwEEziL February 29, 2008 Share dwEEziL Member February 29, 2008 Case in point? Anyone that listens to "Indigo Girls". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymo February 29, 2008 Share anonymo Member February 29, 2008 would you use a subscription service that offered unlimited downloads, or is the bottom line it has to be free? I'm not sure what you're asking. Would I pay for...no...I can't even figure it out. Rephrase. Yes I would use an unlimited download subscription service, especially if it was free. No I would not use a...ok, I quit...the more I analyze your question the more I get confused. Does anyone know how the music labels work now?? I'm not fully convinced the artist's are still even getting a share of the cd sales. I wouldn't be suprised if the labels are now paying artist a flat fee to make the album and that's it. Most artists just get an advance from their label to record an album which the artist then pays for out of their royalty from CD sales. Once their advance is paid off they begin to receive the royalties for CD sales. The royalties paid to artists is generally anywhere between 0.02% (SJ's new album) to 20% (U2 or RadioHead). Only mainstream artists with ridiculous marketing backing from their labels ever see money on CD sales after their advance is paid off. Or if you're someone like RadioHead and have hundreds of thousands of dollars to throw around and no need for marketing beyond initial release advertising you can record your own album and release it for free or for donations on the internet, but no normal artist could even fathom to do this without pandering to major labels for at least a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stutters February 29, 2008 Author Share stutters GC Alumni February 29, 2008 anonymo, please circle one. - i would use a paid subscription service that offers unlimited downloads - i would not use a paid service. music should be free, as long as the artists are somehow being compensated for it. - i would not use a paid service, and screw the artists. not my concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymo February 29, 2008 Share anonymo Member February 29, 2008 anonymo, please circle one. - i would use a paid subscription service that offers unlimited downloads - i would not use a paid service. music should be free, as long as the artists are somehow being compensated for it. - i would not use a paid service, and screw the artists. not my concern. Right...considering #2 doesn't makes sense and #3 is just out of the question considering I am currently subscribed to a music service and an artist (I lol'd a little too, don't worry). I'm going with #1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwEEziL February 29, 2008 Share dwEEziL Member February 29, 2008 I think anonymo is just being difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stutters February 29, 2008 Author Share stutters GC Alumni February 29, 2008 how does #2 not make sense? i'm asking if you would pay for music, or if you think that model is broken? here's an easier question - what music service are you subscribed to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymo February 29, 2008 Share anonymo Member February 29, 2008 how does #2 not make sense? i'm asking if you would pay for music, or if you think that model is broken? here's an easier question - what music service are you subscribed to? music should be free, as long as the artists are somehow being compensated for it. Well it can't be free if there is compensation involved. Even advertising is compensation. I think the emerging model of subscription/pay-per-song services is the answer. Once people give up their material need for some kind of physical medium when purchasing music we can finally cut out the major labels and distributors. Right now, because of the size of these major labels (like Sony, EMI etc) artists do not (or did not) have much choice in how to distribute their music to the masses. This is where the RIAA comes into play, they (among other unmentionable things) fight for the artist's right to equal distribution of profits. Unfortunately, there really isn't much room to fight. The RIAA just comes out looking like an evil anti consumer organization, which they really aren't, their hands are just tied (ok, so they could do nothing, which would garner them the same reputation from artists that they have with the consumer, and they're fighting for the artists, not the consumers after all). With the independent music subscription services (independent as in not a service like iTunes) becoming more prevalent, more and more artists are realizing that they can actually make money on their creations without having to payoff the mob (major labels) just to get air time. The key here is a service that doesn't pander to the major labels but is focused on the artist. I am not sure if eMusic (what I subscribe to currently) does this or if they sequester their product from the major labels (or both) as I haven't really put that much thought into the subject lately (as I'm not currently selling any of my music it hasn't been very important for me to find out). Basically, a service that caters to the artists would be ideal. Turning the profit sharing model on its head would attract all artists and still be profitable for the service. The only issue now is how do artists get money to record albums? That is another issue that hopefully time will solve as we are beginning to see the ability to record and master albums with a simple home computer and pro-sumer audio gear. My hope is that by the end of the decade, large record labels (who use the current model to share profits with artists) will no longer be viable businesses and will either fade or adapt to the new model. The record industry started as a way to scam the (less than business wary) artists and has grown to a nearly unstoppable force. Only the consumer can put an end to the chain and it has been chugging along ever since Napster. All we need now is time (and a watchful eye on the labels as I am positive they are pouring resources into finding ways to maintain their ridiculous profit margins). So...does that answer your question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stutters February 29, 2008 Author Share stutters GC Alumni February 29, 2008 yes, it answered my question and validated some of my assumptions. thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonfly February 29, 2008 Share dragonfly Member February 29, 2008 (edited) I think the emerging model of subscription/pay-per-song services is the answer. Once people give up their material need for some kind of physical medium when purchasing music we can finally cut out the major labels and distributors. I simply like to get a whole CD including packaging because I see the whole thing as the work of art. I don't want crap-quality mp3's (which I know are not usually what you pay for online), I like my 44100 WAV files that sound good. I like to see the album art, pictures of the band, who the band thanks/mentions, influences, lyrics, etc. That's why I like to buy CDs (among other reasons). When I don't have the rest of the package and only have a few songs I like, I feel like I'm missing out. EDIT: Not trying to steal your thread, and not trying to start a debate. Just stating why I think some people would still like to buy CDs. Edited February 29, 2008 by DarkArchon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.cLaShiZ February 29, 2008 Share Dr.cLaShiZ Member February 29, 2008 I think the emerging model of subscription/pay-per-song services is the answer. Once people give up their material need for some kind of physical medium when purchasing music we can finally cut out the major labels and distributors. Backed hard. Cd's in my opinion are only good for transporting the music from the show to my computer 1 hour later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwEEziL February 29, 2008 Share dwEEziL Member February 29, 2008 (edited) I ripped all the CDs I owned to mp3 long ago and haven't bought one since. I think the last CD I bought was maybe back in 1999 or 2000. As long as I'm on record with the music selling company and can re-download the music if I end up having an hdd crash, I'm fine with not having physical media. Edited February 29, 2008 by dwEEziL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymo February 29, 2008 Share anonymo Member February 29, 2008 I think the emerging model of subscription/pay-per-song services is the answer. Once people give up their material need for some kind of physical medium when purchasing music we can finally cut out the major labels and distributors. I simply like to get a whole CD including packaging because I see the whole thing as the work of art. I don't want crap-quality mp3's (which I know are not usually what you pay for online), I like my 44100 WAV files that sound good. I like to see the album art, pictures of the band, who the band thanks/mentions, influences, lyrics, etc. That's why I like to buy CDs (among other reasons). When I don't have the rest of the package and only have a few songs I like, I feel like I'm missing out. EDIT: Not trying to steal your thread, and not trying to start a debate. Just stating why I think some people would still like to buy CDs. Considering that digital distribution (in whatever form) contains high quality MP3s (or other format) would you be alright with all the extra media to be digital as well? Jeez...now you've got me asking questions...SJ!!!! yes, it answered my question and validated some of my assumptions. thanks. I had to throw in the bit about the RIAA...it was a great opportunity. You may go back to your blind hate now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stutters February 29, 2008 Author Share stutters GC Alumni February 29, 2008 @anonymo: you are confused, which is cute and mildly entertaining. I simply like to get a whole CD including packaging because I see the whole thing as the work of art. I don't want crap-quality mp3's (which I know are not usually what you pay for online), I like my 44100 WAV files that sound good. I like to see the album art, pictures of the band, who the band thanks/mentions, influences, lyrics, etc. That's why I like to buy CDs (among other reasons). When I don't have the rest of the package and only have a few songs I like, I feel like I'm missing out. EDIT: Not trying to steal your thread, and not trying to start a debate. Just stating why I think some people would still like to buy CDs. nope, this is the core issue i'm getting back. i'm not sure if anonymo is talking about liner notes = media, but if liner notes, lyrics, and the other goodies of a cd were bundled into a lossy format, would you still buy a cd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwEEziL February 29, 2008 Share dwEEziL Member February 29, 2008 Just like my OS', I don't care too much about eye candy in music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonfly March 1, 2008 Share dragonfly Member March 1, 2008 Anonymo: Am I just imagining the sound difference between dl'd songs and CD quality? I feel like I can hear it in some of the high-end frequencies like the cymbals and some distortion effects. Maybe it's like the old 1080i/p argument though, who knows. I'd swear I can hear a difference though... nope, this is the core issue i'm getting back. i'm not sure if anonymo is talking about liner notes = media, but if liner notes, lyrics, and the other goodies of a cd were bundled into a lossy format, would you still buy a cd? To be honest, maybe not... In some ways I dont want to be on my computer for everything I do - too much and I feel like I waste my time. At the same time though, if I had all the artwork/etc in a digital medium then I could go on my pc to look at that, and burn a disc to listen to when I dont want to be on my pc. There's just something very satisfying to me about having that complete work of art in physical form right in front of me, that I can take with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymo March 3, 2008 Share anonymo Member March 3, 2008 @anonymo: you are confused, which is cute and mildly entertaining. Well I am now...so tell me, what am I confused about? nope, this is the core issue i'm getting back. i'm not sure if anonymo is talking about liner notes = media, but if liner notes, lyrics, and the other goodies of a cd were bundled into a lossy format, would you still buy a cd? Yes, by media I meant everything you would get with a CD that doesn't included, well, the CD itself. Sorry that was so terribly difficult to decipher... DarkArchon, yes, there is a very noticable difference between the quality you're used to with MP3s and CDs...I was hoping that you would imply an equality of compression when considering my question. How about we throw in specialized stores (booths basically) that can provide high quality printing of "liners" that you specifically want in the physical realm as opposed to the digital? (ie, you download the album and decide you want the extended media that goes along with it, you just find this booth at the mall and they print it off for you in a nice sleeve of some sort) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonfly March 3, 2008 Share dragonfly Member March 3, 2008 DarkArchon, yes, there is a very noticable difference between the quality you're used to with MP3s and CDs...I was hoping that you would imply an equality of compression when considering my question. How about we throw in specialized stores (booths basically) that can provide high quality printing of "liners" that you specifically want in the physical realm as opposed to the digital? (ie, you download the album and decide you want the extended media that goes along with it, you just find this booth at the mall and they print it off for you in a nice sleeve of some sort) Just call me dark I was wondering about the downloaded music vs cds for quality because the only downloaded songs I've heard were available from the artist's website, or songs my sister has, all of which sound muddied. If you can get those booths to thunder bay, they sound like a great idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now