R.I.P. Recorded Music

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Apr 04 - 02:51 AM

The qualification I'd make to what Harvey wrote is that, where a recording is no longer available in its original form - especially when that is because the publisher doesn't see it as commercially viable - it ought to be possible to download it via the net.

I'd like to see some online source of these, geared towards folk music - with some way of using this to channel money to the musicians involved.

Generally speaking I prefer to buy recordings direct, from the side of the stage or whatever, knowing that all the money goes to the artiste; or from record sellers at festivals, who are part of the folk world, employing musicians as staff and that kind of thing. (And from jumble sales, boot fairs, charity shops and such, which are the only place to find lots of recordings – though in principle there's not much difference between buying a record second-hand and copying it. In neither case does the artiste get any additional payment on top of the original record sale. But it's a matter of scale, which is what really matters.)

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: Genie
Date: 02 Apr 04 - 01:34 AM

Arkie, thanks for that link to the New Scientist article. I heard a news report about that on NPR today, and I'm not surprised.

I'm much more bothered by contemporary 'payola' ("indies" taking a cut to get a song added to a radio station's playlist), genre stagnation (stations ignoring listener preferences that don't fit their preconceived notions about their "format," and the focus on too narrow a "target demographic" (usually under 35) than I am about good musicians being hurt by internet downloads.

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: GUEST,Obie
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 07:59 PM

Harvey,
   What you say would be admirable if it were only true, but the facts differ. Most internet piracy is not of the work of the poor starving singer/songwriter. It is the stuff produced by the big name companies
who are making billions of dollars by overcharging for a product, often exploiting the producers of the music for whom you express concern. They use their muscle and legal departments to increase their bottom line at the expense of both the artist and the fan of the music. They charge the fan dollars and they pay the artist in pennies. The writer of the material often gets nothing because their copyright is being ignored or has been stolen. That is not to say that it is not honourable to refuse to steal from thieves, but it is hard to soar like an eagle while flying with turkeys!

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: Arnie Naiman
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 06:41 PM

In my younger days before computers in the home, I copied quite a few records on to tape becuase I was a poor enthusistic music hungry kid without enough morals. I knew I was a stealing when I did it and felt guilty, and only later went out a purchased a lot of those recordings when I could aford it. I was probably the exception. I was worried that one of those artists might wind up in my house and see the stuff. When I started to have recording products myself, it put everything in perspective right on my doorstep. The computer that is in almost every household in North America has made it so easy and so fast to copy or download and people have taken to it in a big way. It's a turkey shoot for free stuff. Sure it's a huge audience out there in computer land- perhaps God is telling us that music should just be free for all after all. Try telling that to a professional musician or a folk music record company that just invested in a recording. If this keeps up there will be no investment in them at all - why bother.

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: harvey andrews
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 05:23 PM

I feel strongly that I'm banging my head against a brick wall.The modern morality is not one I was raised with. It's basically "if you can't protect it I'll nick it".
All this about corporations, prices etc is like listening to some young kid trying to excuse his crime. It's boring. if a song is played on the radio or tv the writer etc gets royalties. If a book is borrowed from the library the writer gets lending rights. If a million copies of a song are downloaded from the Internet the creator get not one penny. Not one. Battles were fought for years to get rights for creative people...read about the struggles of Blues singers in the early days of recording.I don't know what you do for a living but I wish I could steal your time and skills without payment and see how you like it.
I'm speaking here not for myself but for all the creative people who try to bring pleasure and music in to people's lives in a decent and fairly paid way. They deserve respect and fair payment for their work.
I won't post on this issue again as it just makes me angry and I don't like to get angry.The way people have treated those who have created some of the most wonderful things in this world makes my blood boil. It's been going on since time began.
But please no more attempts at reasoned arguement or justification.
Theft is theft and if you're happy being a thief just say so and realise that that's what you are.

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: GUEST,Arkie
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 04:56 PM

There are those who focus on the worst possible scenario and those who focus on the best. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle. In the music industry there are at least three general areas: the mass produced and promoted recordings; smaller independent companies with limited production and promotion; and those who issue self produced recordings. Costs and profit levels will certainly vary for each one. And a general statement about what is a fair price will not apply to each group. What I challenge is the concept that anyone who shares music over the internet is a thief. The internet has opened the door for anyone who has music worth hearing to be heard. If a performer's music is heard by a million people, the sales of their recordings will be far greater that if they are heard by 35 people. While there are without any question people downloading music who have not intention of buying, those people have always been with us, and always will be. On the other hand there are also many for whom music is an important aspect of their lives and they are the best potential customers one can expect to find. I would suspect that if one is having trouble selling their CDs there is no one downloading them either.

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: GUEST,Obie
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 04:43 PM

Yesterday there was a very important court decision in Canada.
The music industry was trying to subpeona IP's to provide lists of people downloading music on the net.
The judge said that it was no different than trying to force libraries
to provide lists of people using photocopiers. The case was thrown out.
In my personal opinion this was a wise ruling. It does not say that it is legal to download shared music. What it does say is that it places a persons right to privacy above that of the petitioners. The recording industry has been using court threats and lawsuits as a means of intimidation. This removes the wind from their sails. The recording industry is using a lot of propaganda to make people believe that these downloads are theft and a criminal act. This is not so! It is a violation of copyright and is a civil rather than criminal offence. Nobody should know that better than the recording companies, as they have been stealing copyright throughout their existance.
It is hard to find sympathy for them!
                Obie

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 03:40 PM

Damn, I thought that was going to be a pic of Celine Dion's buttercups

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: open mike
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 02:41 PM

are these what we call buttercups? lesser celandines

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: harvey andrews
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 02:27 PM

I'm with Arnie. The article says "For these albums each increase of 150 downloads corresponded to another legitimate album sale"
Thus 150 people get somebody's work for nothing for one album bought. Why is it the people who don't make a living from music always defend music theft? All they have to do is apply the figures to whatever trade they are in.
Let's say Arkie runs a restaurant, would he like 150 customers getting his food for free so he can sell one meal? Or maybe he sells newspapers,or petrol or...anything.
If you make your living by selling, theft is theft.
It's the principle. All we ask is fair trade. Hundreds of respected artists today gamble by self-financing and selling their own work.

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: Arnie Naiman
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 01:59 PM

Arkie
Heaven forbid if an indie artist recovers his costs to produce and promote a recording or even make a profit by selling a CD for $17.00.
Those Harvard snobs are probably downloading all their music for free and want to justify it by studying the economics of selling big time music in Wall Mart and places like that. I know that lots of people copy my cd's (thankfully some really buy them)- should I be happy about that?

Subject: RE: R.I.P. Recorded Music
From: Pied Piper
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 01:56 PM

Thanks for the link Arkie.
TTFN
PP

Subject: RE: Obit: Recorded Music
From: GUEST,Arkie
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 11:28 AM

It is far too early to write off recorded music. File sharing and internet presence has been the greatest thing to happen to the music industry in decades as it has provided an alternative to the major recording companies and Clear Channel's attempt to control what music listener's are allowed to hear. If one follows the logic of labeling a file sharer as a thief, then everyone who has copied a TV show or movie on a VHS tape, or 'horrors' on a DVD is a thief as is everyone who has checked a book out of a library or read a magazine in a doctor's office, or copied the words of a song from the radio or recording. All have used a "commodity" without paying the copyright owner their just due. The only real difference is that the recording industry has the resources to buy the law. As for downloading of music hurting recording sales there are far more reasons why sales are diminishing than file sharing. Other businesses that have seen sales decline have blamed the economy. Only music blames internet users. The music industry says nothing about the dramatic rise in DVD sales. They certainly don't blame an overpriced product, but the industry was doing well with cassettes selling for $9.98. CDs which cost less to produce than cassettes have continued to be marked near $17.00

Here is a New Scientist article on the subject.
New Scientist

Here is the original paper.
Original Paper

Subject: RE: Obit: Recorded Music
From: Cheap Tracks
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 10:40 AM

"Just because mini-disc recorders are available does not mean most people have them. Most people have never heard of them"

Even with good mics, live concert recordings from the audience cannot compare to a proper, multitrack recording of a live show. This is not a limitation of the equipment, but the nature of the acoustics, P.A. gear, the inherent crowd noise at a live show, etc, etc ...

There's a lot more to getting a good recording than sticking a microphone in front of the stage. It often takes me 90 minutes or more to unload all my recording gear and get setup for a concert.

Subject: RE: Obit: Recorded Music
From: Willie-O
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 09:14 AM

April fool???

Most performers I know probably sell most of their recordings at gigs. And now that the standard for recording quality is so high, most concert-goers (fortunately) do not have either the equipment, knowledge or the interest to make a live recording on the fly that they will actually want to listen to. (Just because mini-disc recorders are available does not mean most people have them. Most people have never heard of them)

Either way, the situation is indeed a boon for live performance.

W-O

Subject: RE: Obit: Recorded Music
From: Cool Beans
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 09:10 AM

Celine Dion is in bloom?!

Subject: Obit: Recorded Music
From: Pied Piper
Date: 01 Apr 04 - 08:43 AM

As the internet becomes more and more involved in the distribution of Recorded Music and pirating undermines the profit margin, live music will become increasingly important to the point that no one will mind if you record the gig and take it home with you.
This will mean that people that make their livings from music will have to be able to do it live.
This could lead to a renaissance of live music for all genres and Trad performers will be well placed to step into the breach.
A tad optimistic maybe but it's a lovely spring day and the Celandines are in bloom.

TTFN
PP