uh ok, i agree adiogalaxy is good, but i found it a little big :-| like it really slows things down depending on your computer....
Kazaa has a VERY small range but does have stuff like shihad and fur patrol, but i've heard from friends about backdoor trojans that you can aquire if you don't have an extremely secure system....
there are websites too... i even d/led bailter space once from one....i think one is mp3spider or something....anyway, if you want exact details, yell out.
sheeeit mate! NZ artists struggle to make anough cash to eat, let alone carry on making great music for you to enjoy. how 'bout helping them out by paying them 20 bucks for their stuff now and then?
yeah but teina (without being condascending) it is possible to be both a lover of music programs like that AND support nz music.
1) i download quite a bit of music but it stays on my computer, i buy cds for parties and for general better quality listening times
2) i think in general, new zealanders need to broaden their ideas on how to support new zealand bands. rather than just writing about them and saying how apparently the other songs on the cd are just as good as the singles, people should go and get their cd. instead of saying the band is apparently great live, people should go to a concert. wow im rambling.... i just think there's too much talking and not enough doing and buying in new zealand.
3) i decided to conduct a little survey on napster quite a while ago. i asked 152 people with shihad mp3 files over a few months 'which country do you live in?'. 98 of those people lived in america, and most had discovered shihad over the internet. so the argument of 'music sharing helps smaller bands' also applies when describing a country as small and relatively unknown as new zealand.
4) where the hell do you get your cds from???? mine cost me 35 bucks and up!!!! please give me some advice ;) ;)
hmm, I'm all for song sharing in that I'll usually d/l a song or two from a band I've never heard from before to see if I want to buy the album, I've never d/led a whole album. Plus I like my music too much to listen to mp3 quality, I need the real deal with the cover art and all.
Heh audiogalaxy also helped me make my kiwi music mix CD by getting excellent tracks I haven't got the album for so that people overseas could hear what the fuss is about.
jimi, regarding point 4 -- you can't go wrong with smokecds.com -- most of their new release NZ (and, indeed, most stock in general) is $NZ23.95 or thereabouts. And there's always my wee site, NoiZyland.com, for a similar sort of deal with a smaller range of NZ-only stock.
hallo,
Teina i'm a bit like stefan, i only d/l one or two songs from an album and if i really like them i'll get the album... i think these programs have helped me in supporting musicians, seeing some stuff i've d/led i had never heard of, and hence if i had not heard them thanks to the almighty napster (and friends) i wouldn't have heard them...
also...unfortunetly not everyone has enough dough to buy as many c.ds as one would want... c.ds here are only $AU20 but things get hard when you don't have a job.
if i like an album enough i'll buy it, and that's what it comes down to. Also i love good cover art,,,so if it is good... yes, i'll be more interested in buying it.
Teina, don't feel like you're being attacked! I totally agree with your point!! Being a "Non-Zealander" I have to support the downloading practice, but not when it's with no intentions of buying what you like!
Although I've only ordered a couple NZ cd's thus far, I never would have bought anything without the net and MP3's making the world such a small place!
Anyone not supporting the music they like? I hope they download a virus! ROck oN NZ!
I agree with all you're mp3 comments. however, I beleive that every mp3 you have that you didn't pay for is ripping off the artist directly. there is no other way to look at it. rationalise all you want - you're stealing.
when a band doesn't sell enough cds they stop recording - point blank.
i'm not attacking you lot either - just don't *tell* people it's OK to do this.
CD's sound way better anyways... maybe we should talk about what else is required for you to actually buy the CD - personally i hate those "enhanced video" type things... but seems like you need extra's to get people to put their money where their mouth is...
freebies are always good like the free t-shirt that came with "Mer De Noms" by A Perfect Circle, though it does piss me off when they give the freebies away about a week or so after the album comes out.
great artwork makes it a beautiful object that i want on my shelf. discounted tickets for an upcoming gig always gets me. stickers...love stickers.... not a big fan of t-shirts but that's cos they never fit chicks. i like enhanced but not so much the music videos more for the 'get to know the band" type DIY video stuff. booklet type sleeves - K&D I think have a whole book with one of their CD's and it's gorgeous NIN stuff is nice too.
Freebies never entice me to buy an album but it's choice when you do get them. The goodshirt stickers were cool because they were like a surprise when you opened the cd. As for enhanced videos, they almost put me off becasue for ages I owned a cd player that wouldn't play enhanced cds properly and I am still bitter.
Well me neither, unless I like the band but if you had the choice of having the album on mp3 or buying (and theorectically you didn't mind mp3 albums) the freebies would tip the scale, no?
ok i agree that technically downloading one song is stealing that song from the artist. but sometimes things are for the greater good, aren't they?
if the band knew i would download a song to find out what everyone was talking about and then decide to buy their cd, would they still be bitter about me downloading it in the first place? i know i'm not representative of the whole downloading community but i know HEAPS of people who do the same sorta thing as me.
cds ARE way better, which is why i only have mp3's on my computer (on which i can't play cd's) for when im doing homework. i wonder how many people are like me??? i don't know that's for sure, but i bet it'd be a fair few.
i just think while its not 'ok' to actually rip off artists, and a lot of the time that is what happens with file sharing, there can be a number of positive side effects to it all, that people sometimes miss.
it's such a hard argument because it's so easy to do and you can justify it in so many ways. Like downloading that copy of The Razor's Edge you used to have on tape but chewed in the stereo of your mates Torana. Or downloading that obscure cover of a Clean song by a band who's catalog has been deleted.
I can accept the 'try before you buy' argument...the rest seem a bit bogus when you look at them closely.
Artists have to spend thousands of dollars to make, record, promote and produce their music. Even for the lucky bands that have a record company pay for stuff up front, at the end of the day it's their cash they're spending. I know of plenty of bands who have taken out personal loans so that they can get their music out there. To argue that it's ok to download stuff "cos I can't afford to buy music" is just lame... subscribe to that vein of thinking and you're making damn sure that the bands can't afford to make music.
The MP3 argument is massive and I'm not denying the great things about mp3 and the freedom of choice the internet has provided for music. I mean hello! nzmusic.com! but I do want to say that I believe that if you're looking for music on the web - you don't *have* to go to d/l programs like napster and audiogalaxy to find it . Practically every bands website has downloadbale songs or samples, there's thousand of bands on MP3.com that actually get paid for having their stuff downloaded and there's a multitude of sites out there where you can buy single MP3's for a couple of bucks.
Fuck I dunno. It's an argument that I never win but at the end of the day I'll happily pay my favourite band $20 for their cd even if I'm a little strapped (so what if I'm not my power companies favourite customer!) cos I reckon it's the best way I can show my appreciation for what they do - fucken paying them for it!
yeah but once again it depends on the band. A friend of mine told me to d/l some Refused songs so I did, a few weeks later I own the album, they broke up a while ago so I don't think they have a website still up (ok I never checked). Some people in the States start talking about Tenacious D so I grab some mp3s of their stuff, I've now organised a trade for a kiwi album for a D album. But then again there are those that do "abuse" the file sharing thang and they probably are the majority, I am defending the napster/variant scence for selfish reasons but it is because I want to be exposed to new stuff. Also I can say to other people overseas, hey d/l this song by so and so kiwi band and if they like it, direct them to a website like soundsnz.com or organise a trade.
Stefan........you probably dont give a shit but heres a very good "Refused" site (see bottom link) i.e. manifestoes, pictures, the official site sucks and is run by epitaph.
Refused are by far the ultimate in "hardcore" (with need for a better word) you might like the lead singers new band "the international noise conspiracy" (http://www.digitalfarmers.com/tinc/)
which sound like a very angry, very left wing version of the beatles.
"the speakers explode and we are blinded by a wall of sound, screams, beats. the movement flows through the room as the band is on fire, flying across the stage. naive, beautiful, yet serious and scarred" - Refused "The shape.............
I think that the whole d/loading thing is a "grey" area.
The way that I figure it it, someone had to buy the song originally to put it on the computer - so the bands get their cut - and it is better for bands to be heard than not isn't it?
Than again, about the only CDs that I buy are from NZ artists - but I refuse to part with my hard-earned readys just to get something I might listen to once when I can get it for free.
I have no problem sharing music either - most of my shared files are kiwi - and it is great when people d/load them - I normally tell them the name of the album in case they want to buy it anyway.
A friend of mine lent me a CD by a NZ artist - on the condition that I wouldn't put it on the computer, and since she asked I respected her wish. But I am quite happy to put on something that I have brought - isn't it like taping a CD to play in the car????
Told you it was a grey area.....
I'm not sure if you guys have this over there in NZ, but I can go into any music store and say "Hey, open up that CD, I want to listen to it to see if I like it." They do it because they want satisfied customers.
Nothing makes me more upset than buying a cd that I don't like, and I think this is a very good way for bands to get a bad reputation. People that buy CDs based on a false idea of the bands sound will say, oh that band sucks, etc.
I am aware that many bands webpages have downloadable versions, or more frequently, SAMPLES of songs. I don't care. I am not buying a whole CD just because 'I heard a bit of a song that sounded like it might be good'. Fuck that.
I am the consumer, give me some credit. I'm not trying to sound like a dick, but I don't like being tricked into buying music. Since I don't prefer pop chart schlock rock, I like to be able to listen to music that doesn't get played on the radio (and maybe it should!).
In the end I'm not coughing up my hard non-earned student loan money for a CD by that latest ONE-HIT-WONDER band, just so that I can listen to it twice and throw in an old shoebox under a rock.
If your band deserves money you shall get it. If I download you and dislike you too bad, but I may pass you on to someone that does, and they may buy your album because of it. Since I've used MP3's, I have not bought one album that I have regretted!
I FEEL NO GUILT IN DOWNLOADING MUSIC. I FEEL AS THOUGH FINALLY, I HAVE THE POWER TO DECIDE WHAT IT IS THAT I WILL LISTEN TO AND WHAT I WILL BUY!! Not the record companies, not the radio, and not the TV. I choose.
Downloading: to me it isn't about being cheap, and it isn't about stealing. It's about freedom. It's about making informed decisions. Most importantly, it's about access to music that 'deserves' my money. No longer will money go to the band that markets themselves the best, and that's what the music industry is afraid of. An industry based on talent rather than business. Thay are afraid becaus they can't control talent.
Trust me Teina, MP3's are helping the little guys, especially music from NZ! I'm sick of being told that I'm a bad person because I download music. Sorry, but a CD is an investment, and I'd prefer if that investment had some rewards. Good memories are not often made to bad songs. I shall continue to filter what enters my ears.
Rock on everyone! Dowload at will, buy at will. Although supported music sounds good on the radio, (the real) good music needs support.
Sorry, i know you think you're right Coluch but your still stuck in the 2000 paradise mentality of Napster. I just can't let your comments go.
We've all 'seen things your way' - and moved on. You have to get over yourself and stop thinking it's your right to download the property of others. Reality dictates that people who pay to make stuff and get nothing for it are sick of it and are making changes to stop this happening. I don't like it anymore than you but get used to it. I hate Metallica for their stance on this.
No one is telling you you're a bad person - it just sucks that you think it is your "right" to take this stuff. You are stealing, but thats OK once in a while - as long as you don't take it for granted. I know for a fact that it ISN"T helping the little bands. Record labels give out less deals because they sell less music right now. Ever heard of undermining your own market?
we have to find another way to unearth good music, share it and buy it. Going against the will of the industry and artists is sticking your head in the ground and hoping they don't come after you. Napsters gone, hotline's going, gnutella sucks, spyware is here, terrorism will speed up our loss of privacy. We need something else.
Sorry for sounding preachy - just wanting some informed debate on this topic.
this discussion has gone a bit beyond me, in the sense that i sympathise with both sides equally, which kind of leaves me with no opinion!! :P
i know, however, that this isn't going to stop me downloading music. BUT it's also not going to stop me consciously buying whatever money i have on new zealand cd's ahead of overseas ones.
what often annoys me in this kind of debate is the quote "the music industry lost billions of dolars last year because of file sharing programs'. now i may be horribly wrong, but i don't think they actually LOST billions of dollars, they just didn't receive money they may or may not have received in the first place. it's making the situation sound a lot worse than it is and its bloody annoying.
one thing you guys could clear up for me. i read in something like rip it up a while ago that bands didnt even make money off cd's, just other stuff like any tshirts that were made and a portion of touring profits.
is this true? this was in an article that had nothing to do with downloaded music either so they can't have been trying to prove a point or anything......
anyone seen this site before? nz top 20 singles, including the nz tunes (anika moa, stellar*, che fu, the feelers), all for mp3 download.
i remember rianz did a bit of a witch-hunt for illegal mp3 sites a couple of years back, and this was the sort of thing they were trying to stomp out. obviously they didn't completely succeed (or maybe they did, and this site has popped up since), but, the question that's raised for me is should there be some sort of ongoing watchdog to 'seek and destroy' sites like this? (which can be done, as opposed to the peer-to-peer stuff, which seems to be a much trickier beast to control).
If you look at the RIAA's report on music sales in the year 2000 that was released earlier this year, they decry the huge decrease in CD singles sales last year (down 35.8 percent) and yet CD singles sales account for only roughly 1 percent of their overall sales (using the numbers right off their chart). Why do you think the RIAA feels the need to constantly misrepresent and mislead the public?
The truth is that overall music sales have increased significantly since the introduction of Napster and related music swapping services. The industry is in no danger of extinction, and the internet is a valued promotional tool for smaller bands to get their music heard. You wanted an informed debate. THIS is an informed debate.
I am interested in how you "know for a fact that it (downloading) isn't helping the little bands".
In response to your comments,
-I'm not saying I think I'm right, I'm just expressing my opinion for what it is and what I know.
-I don't like how you are speaking for others when you say "We've all seen things your way - and moved on." I can't believe you could make a comment like that AND THEN tell me to get over myself. I know that I don't speak for everybody, maybe you should recognize that you don't either.
And I'm not full of myself at all. I simply love music. Nobody is losing money because of the MP3's on my computer. More bands are peaking my interest because of it -and making money from me.
OK. Game on then if you like. Simpler this time - When I d/l an mp3, the artist didn't knowingly release, it's illegal.
Thats the way it is. My main point - we should change this.
Specifically to Coluch:
Basically I was reacting to you're self-righteous and preachy tone about downloading music (incl. NZ artists) mp3's, which 'hooked' me into react to your comment.
I 'guess' you're bringing some more informed issues into this debate - your RIAA report point sounds interesting - do you have a link to it online? Otherwise you speak of "truth" about music sales, industry in no danger, and internet valuable promo tool - whats this based on? I would definitely be interested.
In hindsight I think you probably weren't saying 'I think I'm right' - it just sounded like it and was a bit hard to swallow, hook, line and sinker.
I do know of some things where little bands have felt the impact of Napster - we should talk about this somewhere else maybe..?
I didn't say/mean you're full of yourself - i reckon I was hearing a lot of my own recent words in you're comments - and was half reacting to my own guilt. Sorry if it sounded a bit too focussed on you personally - it isn't.
I also like music somwhat (!), and all I want is you're interest, support, and money (haha!). peace
Ok Dust,
I agree with you totally 100% that downloading SHOULD be illegal, and in essence it is. But what is the punishment for owning an illegal song? If something is illegal yet holds virtually no punishment, it kind of makes the law futile no?
Making a mixtape for your car is just as illegal, but I don't feel guilty about that and I don't really think I should. I also refuse to feel guilty about using my computer as a way of testing out music. I buy just as many if not more CD's because of it....
ON THE FLIPSIDE....
I know people abuse the technology and download entire albums, and that is wrong (unless you already own them of course). If these people are so cheap, I wonder if they would've even bought the CDs if they couldn't DL them?
Ok, so we've established good (in my opinion) and bad qualities of downloading music, but believe it or not there are also good things about MP3s. For example Dust, am I to assume that you are in a band from your latest closing comment? If so I'd like to hear somethin of yours! And yet more good things about MP3s....
Go to the URL below and download the song by GOLDFINGER, MEST, and GOOD CHARLOTTE. It is about the Sept. 11th attacks and all of the proceeds from the downloads are being donated.
I don't think making a mixtape for your car is illegal. I think (and I may be wrong, of course), that you are allowed to make duplicate copies of any music (or other media like video or computer software) for your personal use.
There are certainly a lot of good things about mp3 technology. I'm not sure about Dust, but I am in a band -- Debris -- and we got into mp3 six years ago. We were one of the first dozen bands on mp3.com (in the days when their entire mp3 catalogue fitted on their front page), and have used mp3 as our main means of self-promotion ever since. Since then we've had thousands of downloads from mp3 sites like mp3.com, our own site, and peer-to-peers like Napster. Oddly enough though, and this is perhaps indicative of the 'good-for-indies' v. 'bad-for-majors' argument that seems central to the debate, the most concentrated interest we ever got from via Napster was when someone (not us!) listed one our songs as an unreleased Radiohead track. We got a stack of email from people who had downloaded it, and either hated it and wrote to tell us so, or were actually interested enough to find out a bit more about us.
Generally, our mp3s generate a constant trickle of interest from people, which is nice, and is interest we certainly wouldn't be getting without a format like mp3, that allows quick transfer of songs. We've had people asking us to be on compilations, tracks to be used in short films and docos, and even managed to flick on a frew CDs -- again, all things that would have been well out of our reach in the dark pre-mp3 days. As Coluch points out, as a 'sampler' of a band's wares (particularly one you're not going to hear on the radio airwaves), there's nothing better than an mp3.
I think the real problem lies in the fact that Napster/Kazaa et al. combined with mp3 makes it impossible for bands who want to protect their copyright from doing so. I've got no problems with people downloading our band's tracks, but that's a choice the band's made -- someone like Radiohead or the Prodigy has that decision made for them by a 13 year old boy in his bedroom, who decides to rip their CDs and drop them into his public mp3 folder.
It's a tricky one to balance, but one suspects that the majority of music file-sharing that goes on is (as the RIAA figures would suggest) of major-label arists' singles. Why would anyone need to 'sample' these tracks? Chances are you can flick on the radio and hear most of them on the radio (probably several times) over the course of the day. Like it? Go and buy the single.
Indie bands who want to get their mp3s out there don't need file-sharing, they can just put them on mp3.com or their own homepage.
I don't know where I'm going with this now. I seem to have convinced myself that Napster-style programs are evil and wrong, and I'm coming out in support of the major label corporates...how very odd...ah, that'll do for now, anyone else...?
just a quick fix to that first paragraph above: "you are allowed to make duplicate copies of any music that YOU ALREADY OWN (or other media like video or computer software) for your personal use.
hey this is going places :D
- thanks for you're calming response Coluch!
Noizy's an excellent indie artist using mp3's well example type! I'll hope he can input from "the band" angle better than I.
FYI: Unfortunately I'm not in any band - can't play music - just consume it like oxygen. I guess my role (in part) is more from the lowest of low part of the industry : the music media (just kidding journo's). But I'm no journo.
Hope to add to the discussion once my day from hell ends...
I am a poor student. Every penny I earn (and I mean EVERY penny) goes towards buying music. I cannot possibly buy any more music without getting a job (which doesn't look likely right now). So every good cd that comes out, I will buy - as long as I can afford it.
If not, I might download stuff off it, and have a listen.
But if I didn't have a computer, I wouldn't have bought that cd anyway (since I couldn't afford it) so there is NO lost income at all.
In fact I make a point of buying albums if I really really like it on mp3, simply because I think that particular artist deserves my money.
Logically, I can't see how my situation is to the detriment of anyone. My consumption hasn't dropped. In fact, if anything, it's increased, as my awareness of bands have.
"you are allowed to make duplicate copies of any music that YOU ALREADY OWN (or other media like video or computer software) for your personal use."
Is trading mixtapes illegal then noizyboy?
You're mistaking buying with listening. Every time you listen to a song, the artist (and record company and songwriter) is entitled to some money. Radio and TV stations in NZ pay APRA a license fee to play songs. This licence fee is divvied up to the artists etc, so when you hear a song on the radio or tv, its paid for. When you play a cd you've bought, the cost of the CD is divvied up by the record company, but the songs on it are paid for, the various parties have got their income.
When you listen to a song you downloaded with gnutella, nobody gets paid. It may work out to be 10c for the artist, or $30 bucks for the album, but there is your lost income.
Some bands like Debris are happy for you to share their music, but most aren't (I don't know of any record companies that approve of it).
Listening to mp3s of music you don't own *is* illegal. Sure, it's not like committing murder, but it's not legal. We all have mp3 guilt, but justifying it like that won't make it go away.
Kid_A :: "In fact I make a point of buying albums if I really really like it on mp3, simply because I think that particular artist deserves my money."
Nice one. Obviously, it's not a black-and-white argument, and some bands (indie and major label) will reap the rewards of people listening to their tunes via mp3. I too am a pretty heavy mp3 downloader, and also make an effort to hunt out and pay for the stuff I like (or buy it off mp3.net.nz). Not everyone, I imagine, is as considerate in their listening/buying habits as you and I though, Kid_A.
Kid_A :: "Is trading mixtapes illegal then noizyboy?
Yep. For personal use is fine. As soon as you give it to someone else, you're breaking the law. Not the biggest crime in the world though, as Foaf points out, and this particular form of 'piracy' (tape-sharing) has been around for at least a couple of decades without it making the same sort of splash in the media as mp3/file-sharing. The real difference between mix-tapes and mp3 sharing is that mixtapes are personal one-to-one type affairs that are never really going to impact artist sales, they're only tape copies after all. However the growth of CDR-burning might change this a bit, and I hear quite a few high school kids are getting busted selling mix CDs at school now -- 120 mp3 tracks on a single disc, that sort of thing. And the quality is heaps better than the old TEAC 90.
Lots of indie labels use mp3 as a promotional tool. Kog and Muse are good NZ examples. Major labels do too, but they tend to throw out the sort of stuff that use to be buried somewhere like track 4 of a CD single (the bullshit-remix or a live recording type of thing).
I think the split in this argument boils down to those who are feeling the freedom from a controlled media vs a 'free' media, i.e the consumer chooses who and how they access music. I'd be interested to know where the pros and cons are from. I think a New Zealander may have a different view since they are in a smaller market, and the lost income is felt more directly, it defintely hurts the small record lables, and the bands they represent in a country that only has (relatively) small record labels. In a larger market like the states the 'record company' we are talking about could be 'Sony', who own so much media access they basically have controlled who we listen to and how we access it for so long that people in North America have felt frustrated and powerless. Here comes along this new age of information sharing and we once again have control. In a country like New Zealand we are talking about small, personal, 'involved' record labels and their artists losing income, in North America we are talking about companies like SONY, huge faceless multinationals who own movie studios, televison stations, radio stations, soft drinks, movie theatres, music venues, not to mention the technology necessary to listen to music. The small record lables in North America are more likely benefitting from mp3 band promotion. Is it a surprise that given the opportunity people have turned away from this controlled access in search of alternative access. I agree that artists should be compensated for their work, but why should some VP of Sony get paid millions of dollars a year, just because he represents the biggest bully in the schoolyard. And I'll just repeat what has been said by others here, I listen to mp3's to filter my purchases, not to replace them. If limited to radio, you are limited to what someone else wants you to hear.
"You're mistaking buying with listening. Every time you listen to a song, the artist (and record company and songwriter) is entitled to some money. Radio and TV stations in NZ pay APRA a license fee to play songs. This licence fee is divvied up to the artists etc, so when you hear a song on the radio or tv, its paid for. When you play a cd you've bought, the cost of the CD is divvied up by the record company, but the songs on it are paid for, the various parties have got their income."
I tell you what, if one of those radio survey people comes to my door, I'll lie, and say I listen to The Edge 24 hours a day. That'll make sure Deep Obsession and Klee get their share.
ok i haven't read the last 5 or so posts
because im growing square eyes from the length of the letters haha
anyway i just wanted to bring forward to things
1) scott from unwritten law said that he doesn't mind bands using mp3's as the band only makes money from touring and merch. He said many bands were the same.
2) i thought this was kinda funny... Lars ulrich or whoever from metallica was causing all the cafufal over napster, but if you check one of metalica's early c.ds read the inside cover. under lars' thankyous it says "and thankyou to these people because they let me copy my favourite bands' music in their garage".
it says something pretty close to that anyway.
3)there are people hunting out bad mp3 files. On audiogalaxy for instance theres are filters stopping some more popular songs being d/led. Someone has set up these songs under the files "simon and garfunkle" instead. wonder how long it'll be before they get caught...
File sharing is great, since first using Napster & WinMX my interest in music has accelerated greatly. I usually buy the CD if I like a few songs by the artist, this has happened many times. But yes, it is very hard to find NZ music in any programs I've tried. Try just normally downloading stuff by going to the band in questions site. For example, Jester's site has some live versions I've downloaded.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Technorati
audiogalaxy has a fair bit, they had ...
audiogalaxy has a fair bit, they had some supergroove and king kapisi last time I looked.
[ http://www.audiogalaxy.com ]
uh ok, i agree adiogalaxy is good, but ...
uh ok, i agree adiogalaxy is good, but i found it a little big :-| like it really slows things down depending on your computer....
Kazaa has a VERY small range but does have stuff like shihad and fur patrol, but i've heard from friends about backdoor trojans that you can aquire if you don't have an extremely secure system....
there are websites too... i even d/led bailter space once from one....i think one is mp3spider or something....anyway, if you want exact details, yell out.
sheeeit mate! NZ artists struggle to ...
sheeeit mate! NZ artists struggle to make anough cash to eat, let alone carry on making great music for you to enjoy. how 'bout helping them out by paying them 20 bucks for their stuff now and then?
yeah but teina (without being ...
yeah but teina (without being condascending) it is possible to be both a lover of music programs like that AND support nz music.
1) i download quite a bit of music but it stays on my computer, i buy cds for parties and for general better quality listening times
2) i think in general, new zealanders need to broaden their ideas on how to support new zealand bands. rather than just writing about them and saying how apparently the other songs on the cd are just as good as the singles, people should go and get their cd. instead of saying the band is apparently great live, people should go to a concert. wow im rambling.... i just think there's too much talking and not enough doing and buying in new zealand.
3) i decided to conduct a little survey on napster quite a while ago. i asked 152 people with shihad mp3 files over a few months 'which country do you live in?'. 98 of those people lived in america, and most had discovered shihad over the internet. so the argument of 'music sharing helps smaller bands' also applies when describing a country as small and relatively unknown as new zealand.
4) where the hell do you get your cds from???? mine cost me 35 bucks and up!!!! please give me some advice ;) ;)
cya
hmm, I'm all for song sharing in that ...
hmm, I'm all for song sharing in that I'll usually d/l a song or two from a band I've never heard from before to see if I want to buy the album, I've never d/led a whole album. Plus I like my music too much to listen to mp3 quality, I need the real deal with the cover art and all.
Heh audiogalaxy also helped me make my kiwi music mix CD by getting excellent tracks I haven't got the album for so that people overseas could hear what the fuss is about.
jimi, regarding point 4 -- you can't ...
jimi, regarding point 4 -- you can't go wrong with smokecds.com -- most of their new release NZ (and, indeed, most stock in general) is $NZ23.95 or thereabouts. And there's always my wee site, NoiZyland.com, for a similar sort of deal with a smaller range of NZ-only stock.
[ http://www.smokecds.com ]
hallo, Teina i'm a bit like stefan, i ...
hallo,
Teina i'm a bit like stefan, i only d/l one or two songs from an album and if i really like them i'll get the album... i think these programs have helped me in supporting musicians, seeing some stuff i've d/led i had never heard of, and hence if i had not heard them thanks to the almighty napster (and friends) i wouldn't have heard them...
also...unfortunetly not everyone has enough dough to buy as many c.ds as one would want... c.ds here are only $AU20 but things get hard when you don't have a job.
if i like an album enough i'll buy it, and that's what it comes down to. Also i love good cover art,,,so if it is good... yes, i'll be more interested in buying it.
BUZZAH!!! May I also add??? Teina, ...
BUZZAH!!! May I also add???
Teina, don't feel like you're being attacked! I totally agree with your point!! Being a "Non-Zealander" I have to support the downloading practice, but not when it's with no intentions of buying what you like!
Although I've only ordered a couple NZ cd's thus far, I never would have bought anything without the net and MP3's making the world such a small place!
Anyone not supporting the music they like? I hope they download a virus! ROck oN NZ!
[ http://www.smokecds.com ]
I agree with all you're mp3 comments. ...
I agree with all you're mp3 comments. however, I beleive that every mp3 you have that you didn't pay for is ripping off the artist directly. there is no other way to look at it. rationalise all you want - you're stealing.
when a band doesn't sell enough cds they stop recording - point blank.
i'm not attacking you lot either - just don't *tell* people it's OK to do this.
CD's sound way better anyways... maybe we should talk about what else is required for you to actually buy the CD - personally i hate those "enhanced video" type things... but seems like you need extra's to get people to put their money where their mouth is...
freebies are always good like the free ...
freebies are always good like the free t-shirt that came with "Mer De Noms" by A Perfect Circle, though it does piss me off when they give the freebies away about a week or so after the album comes out.
great artwork makes it a beautiful ...
great artwork makes it a beautiful object that i want on my shelf. discounted tickets for an upcoming gig always gets me. stickers...love stickers.... not a big fan of t-shirts but that's cos they never fit chicks. i like enhanced but not so much the music videos more for the 'get to know the band" type DIY video stuff. booklet type sleeves - K&D I think have a whole book with one of their CD's and it's gorgeous NIN stuff is nice too.
Freebies never entice me to buy an ...
Freebies never entice me to buy an album but it's choice when you do get them. The goodshirt stickers were cool because they were like a surprise when you opened the cd. As for enhanced videos, they almost put me off becasue for ages I owned a cd player that wouldn't play enhanced cds properly and I am still bitter.
// Freebies never entice me to buy an ...
// Freebies never entice me to buy an album
Well me neither, unless I like the band but if you had the choice of having the album on mp3 or buying (and theorectically you didn't mind mp3 albums) the freebies would tip the scale, no?
The creditcard sized bottle opener that ...
The creditcard sized bottle opener that I got with tool - lateralus is weird, yet handy :)
ok i agree that technically downloading ...
ok i agree that technically downloading one song is stealing that song from the artist. but sometimes things are for the greater good, aren't they?
if the band knew i would download a song to find out what everyone was talking about and then decide to buy their cd, would they still be bitter about me downloading it in the first place? i know i'm not representative of the whole downloading community but i know HEAPS of people who do the same sorta thing as me.
cds ARE way better, which is why i only have mp3's on my computer (on which i can't play cd's) for when im doing homework. i wonder how many people are like me??? i don't know that's for sure, but i bet it'd be a fair few.
i just think while its not 'ok' to actually rip off artists, and a lot of the time that is what happens with file sharing, there can be a number of positive side effects to it all, that people sometimes miss.
cya
it's such a hard argument because ...
it's such a hard argument because it's so easy to do and you can justify it in so many ways. Like downloading that copy of The Razor's Edge you used to have on tape but chewed in the stereo of your mates Torana. Or downloading that obscure cover of a Clean song by a band who's catalog has been deleted.
I can accept the 'try before you buy' argument...the rest seem a bit bogus when you look at them closely.
Artists have to spend thousands of ...
Artists have to spend thousands of dollars to make, record, promote and produce their music. Even for the lucky bands that have a record company pay for stuff up front, at the end of the day it's their cash they're spending. I know of plenty of bands who have taken out personal loans so that they can get their music out there. To argue that it's ok to download stuff "cos I can't afford to buy music" is just lame... subscribe to that vein of thinking and you're making damn sure that the bands can't afford to make music.
The MP3 argument is massive and I'm not denying the great things about mp3 and the freedom of choice the internet has provided for music. I mean hello! nzmusic.com! but I do want to say that I believe that if you're looking for music on the web - you don't *have* to go to d/l programs like napster and audiogalaxy to find it . Practically every bands website has downloadbale songs or samples, there's thousand of bands on MP3.com that actually get paid for having their stuff downloaded and there's a multitude of sites out there where you can buy single MP3's for a couple of bucks.
Fuck I dunno. It's an argument that I never win but at the end of the day I'll happily pay my favourite band $20 for their cd even if I'm a little strapped (so what if I'm not my power companies favourite customer!) cos I reckon it's the best way I can show my appreciation for what they do - fucken paying them for it!
yeah but once again it depends on the ...
yeah but once again it depends on the band. A friend of mine told me to d/l some Refused songs so I did, a few weeks later I own the album, they broke up a while ago so I don't think they have a website still up (ok I never checked). Some people in the States start talking about Tenacious D so I grab some mp3s of their stuff, I've now organised a trade for a kiwi album for a D album. But then again there are those that do "abuse" the file sharing thang and they probably are the majority, I am defending the napster/variant scence for selfish reasons but it is because I want to be exposed to new stuff. Also I can say to other people overseas, hey d/l this song by so and so kiwi band and if they like it, direct them to a website like soundsnz.com or organise a trade.
stefan - here's a tenacious d vid done ...
stefan - here's a tenacious d vid done by John K. heh heh the man is twisted.
[ external link ]
Stefan........you probably dont give a ...
Stefan........you probably dont give a shit but heres a very good "Refused" site (see bottom link) i.e. manifestoes, pictures, the official site sucks and is run by epitaph.
Refused are by far the ultimate in "hardcore" (with need for a better word) you might like the lead singers new band "the international noise conspiracy" (http://www.digitalfarmers.com/tinc/)
which sound like a very angry, very left wing version of the beatles.
"the speakers explode and we are blinded by a wall of sound, screams, beats. the movement flows through the room as the band is on fire, flying across the stage. naive, beautiful, yet serious and scarred" - Refused "The shape.............
Sweet
matt
http://www.twolaneblacktop.musicpage.com/
[ http://www.angelfire.com/punk/refused/ ]
Thanks Teina, yeah I'd heard he did ...
Thanks Teina, yeah I'd heard he did the clip for them.
Matt: yeah I've heard of International Noise Conspiracy too, keeping an eye out for their CDs, cheers.
if they wnt 2 sell CDs then they ...
if they wnt 2 sell CDs then they shouldnt make them so damn. I do buy CDs but i cant afford 2 buy every single one.
I think that the whole d/loading thing ...
I think that the whole d/loading thing is a "grey" area.
The way that I figure it it, someone had to buy the song originally to put it on the computer - so the bands get their cut - and it is better for bands to be heard than not isn't it?
Than again, about the only CDs that I buy are from NZ artists - but I refuse to part with my hard-earned readys just to get something I might listen to once when I can get it for free.
I have no problem sharing music either - most of my shared files are kiwi - and it is great when people d/load them - I normally tell them the name of the album in case they want to buy it anyway.
A friend of mine lent me a CD by a NZ artist - on the condition that I wouldn't put it on the computer, and since she asked I respected her wish. But I am quite happy to put on something that I have brought - isn't it like taping a CD to play in the car????
Told you it was a grey area.....
-------- TRY TO SEE THINGS THIS WAY ...
-------- TRY TO SEE THINGS THIS WAY ---------
I'm not sure if you guys have this over there in NZ, but I can go into any music store and say "Hey, open up that CD, I want to listen to it to see if I like it." They do it because they want satisfied customers.
Nothing makes me more upset than buying a cd that I don't like, and I think this is a very good way for bands to get a bad reputation. People that buy CDs based on a false idea of the bands sound will say, oh that band sucks, etc.
I am aware that many bands webpages have downloadable versions, or more frequently, SAMPLES of songs. I don't care. I am not buying a whole CD just because 'I heard a bit of a song that sounded like it might be good'. Fuck that.
I am the consumer, give me some credit. I'm not trying to sound like a dick, but I don't like being tricked into buying music. Since I don't prefer pop chart schlock rock, I like to be able to listen to music that doesn't get played on the radio (and maybe it should!).
In the end I'm not coughing up my hard non-earned student loan money for a CD by that latest ONE-HIT-WONDER band, just so that I can listen to it twice and throw in an old shoebox under a rock.
If your band deserves money you shall get it. If I download you and dislike you too bad, but I may pass you on to someone that does, and they may buy your album because of it. Since I've used MP3's, I have not bought one album that I have regretted!
I FEEL NO GUILT IN DOWNLOADING MUSIC. I FEEL AS THOUGH FINALLY, I HAVE THE POWER TO DECIDE WHAT IT IS THAT I WILL LISTEN TO AND WHAT I WILL BUY!! Not the record companies, not the radio, and not the TV. I choose.
Downloading: to me it isn't about being cheap, and it isn't about stealing. It's about freedom. It's about making informed decisions. Most importantly, it's about access to music that 'deserves' my money. No longer will money go to the band that markets themselves the best, and that's what the music industry is afraid of. An industry based on talent rather than business. Thay are afraid becaus they can't control talent.
Trust me Teina, MP3's are helping the little guys, especially music from NZ! I'm sick of being told that I'm a bad person because I download music. Sorry, but a CD is an investment, and I'd prefer if that investment had some rewards. Good memories are not often made to bad songs. I shall continue to filter what enters my ears.
Rock on everyone! Dowload at will, buy at will. Although supported music sounds good on the radio, (the real) good music needs support.
~Johnny C
[ http://www.smokecds.com ]
Sorry, i know you think you're right ...
Sorry, i know you think you're right Coluch but your still stuck in the 2000 paradise mentality of Napster. I just can't let your comments go.
We've all 'seen things your way' - and moved on. You have to get over yourself and stop thinking it's your right to download the property of others. Reality dictates that people who pay to make stuff and get nothing for it are sick of it and are making changes to stop this happening. I don't like it anymore than you but get used to it. I hate Metallica for their stance on this.
No one is telling you you're a bad person - it just sucks that you think it is your "right" to take this stuff. You are stealing, but thats OK once in a while - as long as you don't take it for granted. I know for a fact that it ISN"T helping the little bands. Record labels give out less deals because they sell less music right now. Ever heard of undermining your own market?
we have to find another way to unearth good music, share it and buy it. Going against the will of the industry and artists is sticking your head in the ground and hoping they don't come after you. Napsters gone, hotline's going, gnutella sucks, spyware is here, terrorism will speed up our loss of privacy. We need something else.
Sorry for sounding preachy - just wanting some informed debate on this topic.
this discussion has gone a bit beyond ...
this discussion has gone a bit beyond me, in the sense that i sympathise with both sides equally, which kind of leaves me with no opinion!! :P
i know, however, that this isn't going to stop me downloading music. BUT it's also not going to stop me consciously buying whatever money i have on new zealand cd's ahead of overseas ones.
what often annoys me in this kind of debate is the quote "the music industry lost billions of dolars last year because of file sharing programs'. now i may be horribly wrong, but i don't think they actually LOST billions of dollars, they just didn't receive money they may or may not have received in the first place. it's making the situation sound a lot worse than it is and its bloody annoying.
one thing you guys could clear up for me. i read in something like rip it up a while ago that bands didnt even make money off cd's, just other stuff like any tshirts that were made and a portion of touring profits.
is this true? this was in an article that had nothing to do with downloaded music either so they can't have been trying to prove a point or anything......
cya
Jimi, you may be interested in Courtney ...
Jimi, you may be interested in Courtney Love's comments on making money from music
[ external link ]
And Steve Albini too......
And Steve Albini too...
[ external link ]
an old article and more a response to ...
an old article and more a response to another article but a good read none the less:
[ external link ]
anyone seen this site before? nz top 20 ...
anyone seen this site before? nz top 20 singles, including the nz tunes (anika moa, stellar*, che fu, the feelers), all for mp3 download.
i remember rianz did a bit of a witch-hunt for illegal mp3 sites a couple of years back, and this was the sort of thing they were trying to stomp out. obviously they didn't completely succeed (or maybe they did, and this site has popped up since), but, the question that's raised for me is should there be some sort of ongoing watchdog to 'seek and destroy' sites like this? (which can be done, as opposed to the peer-to-peer stuff, which seems to be a much trickier beast to control).
[ http://www.nztop20.f2s.com/nztop20.php ]
Hey Dust, If you look at the RIAA's ...
Hey Dust,
If you look at the RIAA's report on music sales in the year 2000 that was released earlier this year, they decry the huge decrease in CD singles sales last year (down 35.8 percent) and yet CD singles sales account for only roughly 1 percent of their overall sales (using the numbers right off their chart). Why do you think the RIAA feels the need to constantly misrepresent and mislead the public?
The truth is that overall music sales have increased significantly since the introduction of Napster and related music swapping services. The industry is in no danger of extinction, and the internet is a valued promotional tool for smaller bands to get their music heard. You wanted an informed debate. THIS is an informed debate.
I am interested in how you "know for a fact that it (downloading) isn't helping the little bands".
In response to your comments,
-I'm not saying I think I'm right, I'm just expressing my opinion for what it is and what I know.
-I don't like how you are speaking for others when you say "We've all seen things your way - and moved on." I can't believe you could make a comment like that AND THEN tell me to get over myself. I know that I don't speak for everybody, maybe you should recognize that you don't either.
And I'm not full of myself at all. I simply love music. Nobody is losing money because of the MP3's on my computer. More bands are peaking my interest because of it -and making money from me.
OK. Game on then if you like. Simpler ...
OK. Game on then if you like. Simpler this time - When I d/l an mp3, the artist didn't knowingly release, it's illegal.
Thats the way it is. My main point - we should change this.
Specifically to Coluch:
Basically I was reacting to you're self-righteous and preachy tone about downloading music (incl. NZ artists) mp3's, which 'hooked' me into react to your comment.
I 'guess' you're bringing some more informed issues into this debate - your RIAA report point sounds interesting - do you have a link to it online? Otherwise you speak of "truth" about music sales, industry in no danger, and internet valuable promo tool - whats this based on? I would definitely be interested.
In hindsight I think you probably weren't saying 'I think I'm right' - it just sounded like it and was a bit hard to swallow, hook, line and sinker.
I do know of some things where little bands have felt the impact of Napster - we should talk about this somewhere else maybe..?
I didn't say/mean you're full of yourself - i reckon I was hearing a lot of my own recent words in you're comments - and was half reacting to my own guilt. Sorry if it sounded a bit too focussed on you personally - it isn't.
I also like music somwhat (!), and all I want is you're interest, support, and money (haha!). peace
Ok Dust, I agree with you totally 100% ...
Ok Dust,
I agree with you totally 100% that downloading SHOULD be illegal, and in essence it is. But what is the punishment for owning an illegal song? If something is illegal yet holds virtually no punishment, it kind of makes the law futile no?
Making a mixtape for your car is just as illegal, but I don't feel guilty about that and I don't really think I should. I also refuse to feel guilty about using my computer as a way of testing out music. I buy just as many if not more CD's because of it....
ON THE FLIPSIDE....
I know people abuse the technology and download entire albums, and that is wrong (unless you already own them of course). If these people are so cheap, I wonder if they would've even bought the CDs if they couldn't DL them?
Ok, so we've established good (in my opinion) and bad qualities of downloading music, but believe it or not there are also good things about MP3s. For example Dust, am I to assume that you are in a band from your latest closing comment? If so I'd like to hear somethin of yours! And yet more good things about MP3s....
Go to the URL below and download the song by GOLDFINGER, MEST, and GOOD CHARLOTTE. It is about the Sept. 11th attacks and all of the proceeds from the downloads are being donated.
Rock on Dusty my boy.... rock on.
[ external link ]
I don't think making a mixtape for ...
I don't think making a mixtape for your car is illegal. I think (and I may be wrong, of course), that you are allowed to make duplicate copies of any music (or other media like video or computer software) for your personal use.
There are certainly a lot of good things about mp3 technology. I'm not sure about Dust, but I am in a band -- Debris -- and we got into mp3 six years ago. We were one of the first dozen bands on mp3.com (in the days when their entire mp3 catalogue fitted on their front page), and have used mp3 as our main means of self-promotion ever since. Since then we've had thousands of downloads from mp3 sites like mp3.com, our own site, and peer-to-peers like Napster. Oddly enough though, and this is perhaps indicative of the 'good-for-indies' v. 'bad-for-majors' argument that seems central to the debate, the most concentrated interest we ever got from via Napster was when someone (not us!) listed one our songs as an unreleased Radiohead track. We got a stack of email from people who had downloaded it, and either hated it and wrote to tell us so, or were actually interested enough to find out a bit more about us.
Generally, our mp3s generate a constant trickle of interest from people, which is nice, and is interest we certainly wouldn't be getting without a format like mp3, that allows quick transfer of songs. We've had people asking us to be on compilations, tracks to be used in short films and docos, and even managed to flick on a frew CDs -- again, all things that would have been well out of our reach in the dark pre-mp3 days. As Coluch points out, as a 'sampler' of a band's wares (particularly one you're not going to hear on the radio airwaves), there's nothing better than an mp3.
I think the real problem lies in the fact that Napster/Kazaa et al. combined with mp3 makes it impossible for bands who want to protect their copyright from doing so. I've got no problems with people downloading our band's tracks, but that's a choice the band's made -- someone like Radiohead or the Prodigy has that decision made for them by a 13 year old boy in his bedroom, who decides to rip their CDs and drop them into his public mp3 folder.
It's a tricky one to balance, but one suspects that the majority of music file-sharing that goes on is (as the RIAA figures would suggest) of major-label arists' singles. Why would anyone need to 'sample' these tracks? Chances are you can flick on the radio and hear most of them on the radio (probably several times) over the course of the day. Like it? Go and buy the single.
Indie bands who want to get their mp3s out there don't need file-sharing, they can just put them on mp3.com or their own homepage.
I don't know where I'm going with this now. I seem to have convinced myself that Napster-style programs are evil and wrong, and I'm coming out in support of the major label corporates...how very odd...ah, that'll do for now, anyone else...?
[ http://mp3.com/debris/ ]
just a quick fix to that first ...
just a quick fix to that first paragraph above: "you are allowed to make duplicate copies of any music that YOU ALREADY OWN (or other media like video or computer software) for your personal use.
hey this is going places :D - thanks ...
hey this is going places :D
- thanks for you're calming response Coluch!
Noizy's an excellent indie artist using mp3's well example type! I'll hope he can input from "the band" angle better than I.
FYI: Unfortunately I'm not in any band - can't play music - just consume it like oxygen. I guess my role (in part) is more from the lowest of low part of the industry : the music media (just kidding journo's). But I'm no journo.
Hope to add to the discussion once my day from hell ends...
The way I see it... I am a poor ...
The way I see it...
I am a poor student. Every penny I earn (and I mean EVERY penny) goes towards buying music. I cannot possibly buy any more music without getting a job (which doesn't look likely right now). So every good cd that comes out, I will buy - as long as I can afford it.
If not, I might download stuff off it, and have a listen.
But if I didn't have a computer, I wouldn't have bought that cd anyway (since I couldn't afford it) so there is NO lost income at all.
In fact I make a point of buying albums if I really really like it on mp3, simply because I think that particular artist deserves my money.
Logically, I can't see how my situation is to the detriment of anyone. My consumption hasn't dropped. In fact, if anything, it's increased, as my awareness of bands have.
"you are allowed to make duplicate copies of any music that YOU ALREADY OWN (or other media like video or computer software) for your personal use."
Is trading mixtapes illegal then noizyboy?
You're mistaking buying with ...
You're mistaking buying with listening. Every time you listen to a song, the artist (and record company and songwriter) is entitled to some money. Radio and TV stations in NZ pay APRA a license fee to play songs. This licence fee is divvied up to the artists etc, so when you hear a song on the radio or tv, its paid for. When you play a cd you've bought, the cost of the CD is divvied up by the record company, but the songs on it are paid for, the various parties have got their income.
When you listen to a song you downloaded with gnutella, nobody gets paid. It may work out to be 10c for the artist, or $30 bucks for the album, but there is your lost income.
Some bands like Debris are happy for you to share their music, but most aren't (I don't know of any record companies that approve of it).
Listening to mp3s of music you don't own *is* illegal. Sure, it's not like committing murder, but it's not legal. We all have mp3 guilt, but justifying it like that won't make it go away.
Kid_A :: "In fact I make a point of ...
Kid_A :: "In fact I make a point of buying albums if I really really like it on mp3, simply because I think that particular artist deserves my money."
Nice one. Obviously, it's not a black-and-white argument, and some bands (indie and major label) will reap the rewards of people listening to their tunes via mp3. I too am a pretty heavy mp3 downloader, and also make an effort to hunt out and pay for the stuff I like (or buy it off mp3.net.nz). Not everyone, I imagine, is as considerate in their listening/buying habits as you and I though, Kid_A.
Kid_A :: "Is trading mixtapes illegal then noizyboy?
Yep. For personal use is fine. As soon as you give it to someone else, you're breaking the law. Not the biggest crime in the world though, as Foaf points out, and this particular form of 'piracy' (tape-sharing) has been around for at least a couple of decades without it making the same sort of splash in the media as mp3/file-sharing. The real difference between mix-tapes and mp3 sharing is that mixtapes are personal one-to-one type affairs that are never really going to impact artist sales, they're only tape copies after all. However the growth of CDR-burning might change this a bit, and I hear quite a few high school kids are getting busted selling mix CDs at school now -- 120 mp3 tracks on a single disc, that sort of thing. And the quality is heaps better than the old TEAC 90.
Lots of indie labels use mp3 as a promotional tool. Kog and Muse are good NZ examples. Major labels do too, but they tend to throw out the sort of stuff that use to be buried somewhere like track 4 of a CD single (the bullshit-remix or a live recording type of thing).
[ http://www.muserecords.com/ ]
I think the split in this argument ...
I think the split in this argument boils down to those who are feeling the freedom from a controlled media vs a 'free' media, i.e the consumer chooses who and how they access music. I'd be interested to know where the pros and cons are from. I think a New Zealander may have a different view since they are in a smaller market, and the lost income is felt more directly, it defintely hurts the small record lables, and the bands they represent in a country that only has (relatively) small record labels. In a larger market like the states the 'record company' we are talking about could be 'Sony', who own so much media access they basically have controlled who we listen to and how we access it for so long that people in North America have felt frustrated and powerless. Here comes along this new age of information sharing and we once again have control. In a country like New Zealand we are talking about small, personal, 'involved' record labels and their artists losing income, in North America we are talking about companies like SONY, huge faceless multinationals who own movie studios, televison stations, radio stations, soft drinks, movie theatres, music venues, not to mention the technology necessary to listen to music. The small record lables in North America are more likely benefitting from mp3 band promotion. Is it a surprise that given the opportunity people have turned away from this controlled access in search of alternative access. I agree that artists should be compensated for their work, but why should some VP of Sony get paid millions of dollars a year, just because he represents the biggest bully in the schoolyard. And I'll just repeat what has been said by others here, I listen to mp3's to filter my purchases, not to replace them. If limited to radio, you are limited to what someone else wants you to hear.
"You're mistaking buying with ...
"You're mistaking buying with listening. Every time you listen to a song, the artist (and record company and songwriter) is entitled to some money. Radio and TV stations in NZ pay APRA a license fee to play songs. This licence fee is divvied up to the artists etc, so when you hear a song on the radio or tv, its paid for. When you play a cd you've bought, the cost of the CD is divvied up by the record company, but the songs on it are paid for, the various parties have got their income."
I tell you what, if one of those radio survey people comes to my door, I'll lie, and say I listen to The Edge 24 hours a day. That'll make sure Deep Obsession and Klee get their share.
Deal?
ok i haven't read the last 5 or so ...
ok i haven't read the last 5 or so posts
because im growing square eyes from the length of the letters haha
anyway i just wanted to bring forward to things
1) scott from unwritten law said that he doesn't mind bands using mp3's as the band only makes money from touring and merch. He said many bands were the same.
2) i thought this was kinda funny... Lars ulrich or whoever from metallica was causing all the cafufal over napster, but if you check one of metalica's early c.ds read the inside cover. under lars' thankyous it says "and thankyou to these people because they let me copy my favourite bands' music in their garage".
it says something pretty close to that anyway.
3)there are people hunting out bad mp3 files. On audiogalaxy for instance theres are filters stopping some more popular songs being d/led. Someone has set up these songs under the files "simon and garfunkle" instead. wonder how long it'll be before they get caught...
File sharing is great, since first ...
File sharing is great, since first using Napster & WinMX my interest in music has accelerated greatly. I usually buy the CD if I like a few songs by the artist, this has happened many times. But yes, it is very hard to find NZ music in any programs I've tried. Try just normally downloading stuff by going to the band in questions site. For example, Jester's site has some live versions I've downloaded.
[ http://www.geocities.com/propagandacrew ]