|
|
Post by Kyle on Dec 25, 2003 21:10:34 GMT -5
hi first of all.; i think music should be free. how can you own sound.. it seems stupid to me. i am a muscian and i put all my music free on the net. while selling that same music on cd.. and there are enough people buying it (ok - it's not on a label or anything, or nothing big) - true fans do support their loved bands... i mean since i got to know mp3's i have never bought as much cd's.. you could divide it in 2 parts when you sell your music, is it because you want money for it? or do you make music because you like doing so, and appreciate it when people like it? anyway - i downloaded everything by xiu xiu.. i ordered then everything i could find on the net (yes, i have all the records now  so, downloading mp3 is a whole different thing than stealing. i hope you all sincerely understand that... + by downloading those mp3's, i sent some to friends.. my best friend hates xiu xiu (sorry  ) but i got several other friends who also ordered your stuff from the net.. so you did make some money thanks to me you don't have to fear money when you make good music! and you do make good music, so don't worry! i hope you don't hate me for this, it's just my opinion. on the new record: i only listened it twice and untill know i prefer every other record you made.. it's good, but not as fantastic.. now, every record grows on me (i took a long time for knife play, but now it's one of my favs) so .. hopefully it gets better with time.. and! tomlab is a fantastic label. hope to see xiu xiu soon in europe. that would be like saying paintings should be free because you can't own colour...or paint. Music is a piece of art. |
|
|
|
Post by thad6000 on Dec 26, 2003 8:50:52 GMT -5
i find it odd that no one has, in this rediculously long argument, brought up the fact that in the end, mp3's, sonically sound like shit. i realize that the majority of people reading this and the majority of people not reading this don' t care- or don't find it noticeable enough to care. i'm fairly new to the whole mp3 thing but that is my #1 complaint of the format is how horrible they sound- in comparison to the cd or, better yet, record. on the other hand, they are free so maybe thats why no one is complaining. the few times i have downloaded stuff- which has never been a whole album, i always buy the stuff later on. in a sense- mp3's kind of exist as a a free promo tool for the bands. i understand that bands need to get paid but i've been into underground music for almost 20 years now and the bands have never gotten paid. there has always been the big bad wolf who steals from the band. in the past it was always the major labels which makes this whole mp3 thing even more interesting b/c they are sort of getting what they had comming for decades. well, look how i have babbled on. its a tough debate that i don't think will ever have universal resolve and i also don't think that mp3's are going away anytime soon- even if they do sound like shit.
|
|
hipperthanu
Pretty Girl
well you should be happy for me.
Posts: 54
|
Post by hipperthanu on Dec 26, 2003 13:27:32 GMT -5
actually the weirdest part is he/she/it signed up for an account.. haha.. non-anonymous idiocy.
"arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics... even if you win, you're still retarded." (in poor taste, but stunningly accurate)
|
|
hipperthanu
Pretty Girl
well you should be happy for me.
Posts: 54
|
Post by hipperthanu on Dec 26, 2003 13:35:06 GMT -5
on the "mp3s sonically sound like shit" debate, and yeah that's another wholllllle debate. it really depends how you're listening to them, and how they're encoded. an mp3 encoded very well, is nearly perfect, yeah the waveform is different, but i've given many anti-mp3 friends blind-listens and they can never tell, with a well-encoded mp3.
but like everything else, it's personal preference and a debate that'll never end. i frequent the shn/flac lossless downloading bootleg places, and EVERYONE in these scenes is anti-mp3 and they always reference the same fucking half-eloquent arguement some guy made about mp3 being "lossy" and whatnot. though the true standpoint would be calling them "possibly lossy" or such.. but yeah, it's a seperate arguement, and maybe a stupid one. but i have tons and tons of well encoded mp3s that sound great, on my expensive soundcard and great speakers, etc etc. so it's not a universal truth, no matter what some anal audiophiles might tell you.
(and by the way, records should be called "lossy" or maybe "addy" since they add sounds, hiss, etc, people just happen to LIKE the type of sound they add or take away)
|
|
|
|
Post by wim on Dec 26, 2003 14:20:10 GMT -5
i wrote a long post / then i forgot to enter a name and i lost everything but it came down to this: i agree on the practical side! (to susie and that other human  ) but still.. on the metaphysical side, there are interesting things to be said. byeyyeye! |
|
|
|
Post by wim on Dec 26, 2003 14:33:15 GMT -5
that would be like saying paintings should be free because you can't own colour...or paint. Music is a piece of art. no, that would be saying that photographs (copies) of paintings should be free. and you can own paint. trust me anyway. music is a total different artform than paintings or sculptures. (this is something most art-scientists agree on, i believe) aaarrrghh and i don't want to discuss this anymore as i agree for the most part. i'm just being a pain in the ass. |
|
|
|
Post by MonkeySidekick on Dec 29, 2003 20:56:44 GMT -5
"arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics... even if you win, you're still retarded." (in poor taste, but stunningly accurate)[/quote]
hey hip, that is hilarious!! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Zack on Dec 30, 2003 3:32:52 GMT -5
I think that the "music should be free!" argument is completely retarded. It's people like this that give mp3s or whatever a bad name. "I download it, burn it, then don't buy it- I wasn't going to anyway, so it's not a loss  " is also the most idiotic argument I can see. I'll admit to dowloading more than my share of mp3s. I'll also admit to buying almost everything that I liked eventually. I end up buying something ridiculous like 10+ CDs a month, so I try to hear what I plan on buying before I plunk down the money (and a lot of time, I have to order stuff). Especially when it's out of print or an import (a good example would be the new Dizzee Rascal record, which I downloaded, and then paid $25 for the UK import- which I never would have done had I not heard it first. And for the record- I'm also getting the Matador release). I don't feel particularily evil as I do buy the stuff eventually. I've bought 100+ discs this year, pretty easily, and gone to I think 17 shows. And at almost all of them, bought a grip of merch (I dropped over $100 at the merch table when I saw Ween). I think that mp3s can be helpful to get stuff. Almost all of my favorite records this year, I wouldn't have heard without learning of the bands through mp3 (and that goes for Xiu Xiu). Ween has one of the very best setups, I think. They basically let almost all their shows, demos, outtakes, and stuff like that get traded freely. But not the LPs. It works well. I mean, they do something for the fans, and the fans are pretty responsive in return (I bought the new album on CD & vinyl, went to 2 of their shows, and spent ~$150 on merch through the website & the show, this year alone). I dunno, it'll take a while, but I hope that it's more accepted by bands. I also hope that there's some way to thwart non-buying assholes. PS: Jamie, I'm sorry about downloading FabMusc. I didn't have the self control. I promise to buy it on CD, vinyl if it comes out, and go see you play again, and buy lots of merch. <3. |
|
|
|
Post by In Here on Jan 2, 2004 18:57:04 GMT -5
This board wouldn't exist without mp3's, because no one would know about your music. You talked about how sales are negatively affected by downloads, I would argue that WITHOUT those download, you would hardly be selling any albums.
On the other hand, ethically, I agree with you, but logically, I think you're slighty off the mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by wim on Jan 5, 2004 8:39:28 GMT -5
I think that the "music should be free!" argument is completely retarded. It's people like this that give mp3s or whatever a bad name. "I download it, burn it, then don't buy it- I wasn't going to anyway, so it's not a loss " is also the most idiotic argument I can see. for the record: this is totally not my argument..... an ideal place would be where music is free. i do realize it's impossible. i download stuff, check it out, then buy it if i like it. music should be free in the way that it doesn't depend at all of how much it sells. it's a small code of ethics for me. anyway: you totally misunderstand me.. cause if i meant it like you said.. why would i go to 50+ shows this year and spend about 60% of my money on cd's/music? (i'm a kid - i don't have to pay rent and stuff.. but i still have to buy food if i go out and so on..) i'm pro mp3 cause i think it benifits the artists who are in it for the music, not the money. fuck money. i even think music shouldn't be a job. i hate art as a job. (but that's maybe more a personal matter) |
|
hipperthanu
Pretty Girl
well you should be happy for me.
Posts: 54
|
Post by hipperthanu on Jan 5, 2004 21:31:51 GMT -5
the problem with not having art as a job is it makes art less desirable. the idea that it's even POSSIBLE to do something that would never feel like work, and survive off of it, that's amazing.
maybe philosophically that'll ruin it being pure art or blah blah blah. but i want all the musicians i like to never have to work a "real" job. unfortunetly i'll never happen, but it's a nice thought.
if i ever win the lottery, they're all free to live in my unhippie artists commune, with 25 touring vans and a free-for-all recording studio. behehehe.
|
|
marigold
Tasty
one day. i am goiingto growwings.
Posts: 12
|
Post by marigold on Jan 6, 2004 6:41:46 GMT -5
the problem with not having art as a job is it makes art less desirable. the idea that it's even POSSIBLE to do something that would never feel like work, and survive off of it, that's amazing. maybe philosophically that'll ruin it being pure art or blah blah blah. but i want all the musicians i like to never have to work a "real" job. unfortunetly i'll never happen, but it's a nice thought. if i ever win the lottery, they're all free to live in my unhippie artists commune, with 25 touring vans and a free-for-all recording studio. behehehe. nothing else to say. i do perfectly agree. it can sound naive, of course, but it's so beautiful to think about art in this kind of way. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil J on Jan 9, 2004 0:25:38 GMT -5
on the "mp3s though the true standpoint would be calling them "possibly lossy" or such.. but yeah, it's a seperate arguement, and maybe a stupid one. but i have tons and tons of well encoded mp3s that sound great, on my expensive soundcard and great speakers, etc etc. so it's not a universal truth, no matter what some anal audiophiles might tell you. (and by the way, records should be called "lossy" or maybe "addy" since they add sounds, hiss, etc, people just happen to LIKE the type of sound they add or take away) this is the worst piece of garbage I have read all week. If you don't know what you are talking about, then stay the fuck out of the discussion. It makes actual audio engineers cringe when we read shit like that. you don't even understand what lossy compression is, how dare you make a comment on it |
|
|
|
Post by wim on Jan 9, 2004 9:51:07 GMT -5
this is the worst piece of garbage I have read all week. If you don't know what you are talking about, then stay the fuck out of the discussion. It makes actual audio engineers cringe when we read shit like that. you don't even understand what lossy compression is, how dare you make a comment on it hmm i do understand this all.i think... but erm.. i don't mind the sound quality of mp3's.. some are good (=you can't notice the difference) some not.. it's only the preview of the actual thing.. i don't need a better format for previewing songs.... |
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Jan 11, 2004 5:51:30 GMT -5
i'm a bit late on this, but i'm going to give my two cents anyway. i lightly skimmed through the pages so i'm sure many valid points have already been made, but i'm going to reply anyway.
if you know how independent artists and record labels works, there is no argument in this. the post wasn't even focusing on fabulous muscles, but about the whole effect downloading [and not purchasing] has on those involved with putting out this independent album. the post is faultless. if i were him and found out it's been leaked, hell, i would publicly say something about it too. some of these anonymous fucks read the post irrationally as some sort of egotistical "me xiu xiu me support me me" and a question of intelligence or loyalty, rather than for what it is.
there's a fucking huge number of people out there who just download music no matter how much they love it or how much money they have. some people just figure it as "oh, i think i'll go lavish myself in a ten dollar meal instead of buying this xiu xiu album." i mean, little fucking choices, you know? they see the whole mp3 thing as just easier. i know one album makes a huge difference, so on the nov tour i bought a promise and gave it to a friend who i thought might like it. like i said, it's the little things. it's a good thing that he made that statement because we all need to be CONSTANTLY reminded to support the independent community.
blah.
anyhow, i skimmed through some bullshit about jamie's character. nobody is perfect, but what the fuck? i talked to him briefly after a show and he was incredibly kind and thoughtful. what the hell was he gonna get out of me....two dollars and some cents?
|
|
) but i got several other friends who also ordered your stuff from the net.. so you did make some money thanks to me 
)
" is also the most idiotic argument I can see.