Hmv

[Traditional_Ale]

I care because I can guarentee that if we sat down together in the same room and played your faveroite track, first from a purchased CD, and then from an mp3 (say, 192kbps) it would be fairly obvious how degrading the sound of mp3s are. And if not, the differences could be explained, and then you may not be able to stand listening to mp3s again.

The most perfect environment most listen to music in is their cars. So maybe try ripping a faveroite track as a .wav file and then as a 192kbps mp3 into your ipod and give it a listen. The idea being that you will understand the value of purchasing the CD, as .wav file are much too large to transmit over the internet.

[RougeUnderoos]

So your main concern is that I'm listening to music of a lower quality, not that I might be stealing it?

I own hundreds of cds and almost as many LPs. It's not like I've never listened to anything but shabby MP3s lifted from the internet. I know there is a difference. It's not that big a deal to me.

[CrusaderPi]

HMV is the Dunder Mifflin of the retail music world. Their business model seems to be obsolete.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

So your main concern is that I'm listening to music of a lower quality, not that I might be stealing it?

I own hundreds of cds and almost as many LPs. It's not like I've never listened to anything but shabby MP3s lifted from the internet. I know there is a difference. It's not that big a deal to me.

And its wonderful you own lots of music. But like gas, it doesnt appear from thin air. A long, hard process goes into making the final product that requires skills that take years of development (hey, just like being a pro hockey player!) and as such its producers must be fairly compensated.

If NHL hockey player's were a dime a dozen you wouldn't be shelling out 50 bucks a ticket to see them play live! If top quality music, musicians, and live performances were a dime a dozen, music would be free and concerts would be given by holograms!

When you do not purchase your music, it makes it's integral worth seem less and the pirates feel even more justified. Just because it is SO EASY TO GET doesnt make it worth any less that any other commodity that requires a life time of commitment to manifest.

Its called ethics, bro. When you download it makes music worthless. If you could download the feeling you get watching Iggy tear it up, you wouldn't think its all that special anymore would you?

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I care because I can guarentee that if we sat down together in the same room and played your faveroite track, first from a purchased CD, and then from an mp3 (say, 192kbps) it would be fairly obvious how degrading the sound of mp3s are. And if not, the differences could be explained, and then you may not be able to stand listening to mp3s again.

The most perfect environment most listen to music in is their cars. So maybe try ripping a faveroite track as a .wav file and then as a 192kbps mp3 into your ipod and give it a listen. The idea being that you will understand the value of purchasing the CD, as .wav file are much too large to transmit over the internet.

And its wonderful you own lots of music. But like gas, it doesnt appear from thin air. A long, hard process goes into making the final product that requires skills that take years of development (hey, just like being a pro hockey player!) and as such its producers must be fairly compensated.

If NHL hockey player's were a dime a dozen you wouldn't be shelling out 50 bucks a ticket to see them play live! If top quality music, musicians, and live performances were a dime a dozen, music would be free and concerts would be given by holograms!

When you do not purchase your music, it makes it's integral worth seem less and the pirates feel even more justified. Just because it is SO EASY TO GET doesnt make it worth any less that any other commodity that requires a life time of commitment to manifest.

Its called ethics, bro. When you download it makes music worthless. If you could download the feeling you get watching Iggy tear it up, you wouldn't think its all that special anymore would you?

Digital quality from a raw CD to a 192kbps Mp3 is not that different, even if it were, there are higher bitrates or other non-lossy formats (.ogg) available. In any case, if you are truely that much of an audiophile (as your point of view seems to be), you'll know that CDs themselves are lacking in audio fidelity and you would prefer vinyl to capture the full warmth and range of the original recording (that is, if it wasn't digitally recorded in the first place which almost everything is these days). I have absolutely no real interest in the quality that CD versus digital file quality provides because I don't inherently believe it is substantially relevant. In any case most of the music I care about isn't even readily available on CD in any easily purchased way anyway. I probably own more vinyl (more and more groups are releasing on vinyl again) than CDs.

Most music is made to express the feeling so of the musician and to be listened to, most musicians would rather their music be heard that care about every last dime they receive. Many musicians are waking up to the fact that the internet and shared music is really a way to spread their music to as vast an audience as possible in the easiest manner possible...and then using that popularity then to make money through online album sales or the growing trend which is live venues and concerts.

Musicians should see file sharing and the internet like radio or online radio, a way to have their music heard and a way to enhance their popularity and listener base versus being trapped in a plastic jewel case in a dusty bin at the music store that nobody will ever pick up and nobody will ever hear. Your argument about the long hard process it takes to create music is not relevant in today's day and age. At home production of music with the latest digital technology is easier than ever and I know many musicians and bands that produce their own tracks with nothing more than PC and off-the shelf equipment, instruments, and software and the difference from professional studio outputs is not apparent. As far as the personal development the musician puts into his/her craft, much of it is for themselves as a musician. You give the example of quality musicians and live performanes as being important and that is probably where musicians will make a larger degree of money in the future. Smaller musicians will always have their niche and loyal followings to support their music.

And I don't think ethics really is at the heart of it, it's value and it's subjectivity to everyone personally. Personally I don't see real value in most music purchased and most music produced is not top quality. I can easily download the value of watching Iggy tear it up with an online stream, it makes no difference to me and in fact, makes me feel even better in that I got a bargain versus paying through the nose for the real game at the dome which could potentially leave me dissatisfied. I will pay when I feel it is valuable to me and that how the market works. People pay when they feel that something substantially interests them and proves a value to them. I listen to a lot of music casually, and I will search it out to download, but to me, it has the same intrinsic value as most music I hear on the radio, I'll simply listen to it, but it is not valuable to me. Music that I deeply care about I will purchase and music I truely love I will go to clubs, concerts, venues for, etc. but the truth is, the majority of music that one downloads probably isn't that good anyway or worthwhile to purchase. I fancy myself as a (albeit totally lame) musician myself and I truely value, adore, and appreciate music and muscianship but I don't see the value of most music reflected in the prices charged for a simple recording. I will pay through the nose of a live performance because you get the added value of communual experience and socialization but hardly ever for one static performance recorded onto a CD that is the same everytime you listen to it while sitting by yourself stuck in traffic in your car...unless it's truely from one of my favorite muscians or something rare.

[Traditional_Ale]

I appreciate where you're coming from, as you make some good arguments. But for the sake of not arguing anymore (as this debate looks like it may turn out to be like beating a dead horse for both of us) I would like to propose we agree to disagree.

I do want to add though, that self-taught novice's with their PC's in their parent's basement will NEVER sound ANYTHING CLOSE to professional productions. Its the difference of about 10,000,000 dollars worth of gear, and working with musicians who have world class skills.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

If you woke up tomorrow and found out you could legally, anonymously, effortlessly and without the knowledge of the gas-seller fill up your tank with gas for free simply by clicking a couple buttons, would you do it, or would you insist on going to the gas station/oil company and paying what you consider a ridiculously high cost for gasoline?

Nope.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Its called ethics, bro. When you download it makes music worthless. If you could download the feeling you get watching Iggy tear it up, you wouldn't think its all that special anymore would you?

Well if me downloading something makes it worthless, then I guess they'll stop making it. For some reason though, people still seem well interested in making music. I bet they've heard of the internet too.

How many musicians out there put down the guitar because they know that on the off chance that they get any sort of notoriety, some guy out there might download one of their songs off the internet, and if he likes it, he'll go buy it?

As for ethics, bro, I'm not too concerned with the ethics in all this. I occasionally filch a free copy of a cd cranked out by some multinational conglomerate that does, by design, charge absolutely as much as possible. Fine for them. That's the way it works. I'm not going to feel guilty for cutting a corner here or there though. I know they don't.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Well if me downloading something makes it worthless, then I guess they'll stop making it. For some reason though, people still seem well interested in making music. I bet they've heard of the internet too.

How many musicians out there put down the guitar because they know that on the off chance that they get any sort of notoriety, some guy out there might download one of their songs off the internet, and if he likes it, he'll go buy it?

As for ethics, bro, I'm not too concerned with the ethics in all this. I occasionally filch a free copy of a cd cranked out by some multinational conglomerate that does, by design, charge absolutely as much as possible. Fine for them. That's the way it works. I'm not going to feel guilty for cutting a corner here or there though. I know they don't.

If you want to pirate Nickelback or anything else you hear on top 40 radio be my guest. If its not top 40 you're stealing from an artist who NEEDS the money, to do things like eat, or pay their bills so they can post on CP about it.

When I finally finish what I personally have been working on for the past three years and release it, it will totally be available for download in full from my website. And I am a NOBODY!

But my physical product will be so amazing to see and hold (and hear!) that hopefully you wont be able to resist shelling out 20 bucks for it after hearing my set at my show that you paid 10 bucks to get into!

[gottabekd]

If you go to a store and pay $15 for a CD, say $1 goes to the artist.

If you download the album for free, obviously the artist isn't getting the $1.

But who is the bigger thief? The record company takes $14 from the artist when you purchase the album, and you only "take" $1 from the artist when you download...

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by gottabekd

If you go to a store and pay $15 for a CD, say $1 goes to the artist.

If you download the album for free, obviously the artist isn't getting the $1.

But who is the bigger thief? The record company takes $14 from the artist when you purchase the album, and you only "take" $1 from the artist when you download...

Best thing I think one can do is at least pay a buck a song for a download. That I think is fair.

[gallione11]

Here's two interesting questions to ponder for those of you on both sides of this debate, speaking from personal experience: If you originally bought say 20 CDs, and someone broke in and stole them, is it now ok to go download them instead of buying them again?

This happened to me about five years ago. I had about 20-30 CDs in my car, and some thief broke into my car and took my stereo and the CDs. My insurance company at the time said they'd pay for the damage to the car and the stereo but not the CDs. So I went ahead and downloaded the songs that I liked from those CDs.

Secondly, I've been in a lose-lose situation when it comes to some of my music. I used to buy Video Game soundtracks... These are imported from Japan. The problem? If you don't buy within the first year or so of the game being released, it is next to impossible to find them...except for one particular website. Turns out, however, that those CDs were coming from Korea or Thailand or somewhere like that... that particular record label pirated from the source.

So another question to consider; what would you do in this situation? Download the songs you like for free, and the original composer get nothing or buy the pirated CDs and the original composer still gets...nothing? I had spent upwards of $300 before I found out about the pirating. Since then, I either buy from a more reputable company when I know I want the soundtrack (since as I said above, you gotta buy it quick) or download the songs if I cannot purchase it from the original manufacturer. (And believe me, as obscure as some of these songs can be, it can be difficult to find.)

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

If you want to pirate Nickelback or anything else you hear on top 40 radio be my guest. If its not top 40 you're stealing from an artist who NEEDS the money, to do things like eat, or pay their bills so they can post on CP about it.

So the "ethics" you referred to earlier only apply to a certain tax bracket?

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

When I finally finish what I personally have been working on for the past three years and release it, it will totally be available for download in full from my website. And I am a NOBODY!

But my physical product will be so amazing to see and hold (and hear!) that hopefully you wont be able to resist shelling out 20 bucks for it after hearing my set at my show that you paid 10 bucks to get into!

Good luck to you. If I happen to go to your show and like your music I'll buy it. If I don't like it, I won't. If I download it and like it, I'll pay for it. If I don't, I won't. Kinda like a test drive.

[greerb]

Originally Posted by gallione11

Here's two interesting questions to ponder for those of you on both sides of this debate, speaking from personal experience: If you originally bought say 20 CDs, and someone broke in and stole them, is it now ok to go download them instead of buying them again?

This happened to me about five years ago. I had about 20-30 CDs in my car, and some thief broke into my car and took my stereo and the CDs. My insurance company at the time said they'd pay for the damage to the car and the stereo but not the CDs. So I went ahead and downloaded the songs that I liked from those CDs.

Secondly, I've been in a lose-lose situation when it comes to some of my music. I used to buy Video Game soundtracks... These are imported from Japan. The problem? If you don't buy within the first year or so of the game being released, it is next to impossible to find them...except for one particular website. Turns out, however, that those CDs were coming from Korea or Thailand or somewhere like that... that particular record label pirated from the source.

So another question to consider; what would you do in this situation? Download the songs you like for free, and the original composer get nothing or buy the pirated CDs and the original composer still gets...nothing? I had spent upwards of $300 before I found out about the pirating. Since then, I either buy from a more reputable company when I know I want the soundtrack (since as I said above, you gotta buy it quick) or download the songs if I cannot purchase it from the original manufacturer. (And believe me, as obscure as some of these songs can be, it can be difficult to find.)

So would this work with allofMP3.com, as well? You are technically buing the music but the artist or record companies don't see any of it. So rather than paying allofMP3 why not just use a P2P client?

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

So the "ethics" you referred to earlier only apply to a certain tax bracket?



Good luck to you. If I happen to go to your show and like your music I'll buy it. If I don't like it, I won't. If I download it and like it, I'll pay for it. If I don't, I won't. Kinda like a test drive.

Are we even on the opposite side?

Thats the whole point! Its the "paying" for it part that people forget when they're rocking out to the latest love they've just downloaded!

Video game soundtracks from Japan can be aquired by establishing a relationship with a retail store and having them mailed. When I was in Japan there was no shortage of video game soundtracks on the shelves (and bargain bins! ) and so the best thing to do is find a store, email them concerning your situation, and hopefully after some good exchanges and customership (is that even a word?) then they won't mind at all sending you an email every tuesday as to whats new, or answering your inquiries.

[SarichFan]

I don't buy anything unless I know it's good first, or if I hear something is good i'll download it, and will often buy it in the store when I would NEVER have if I didn't download it first...

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by SarichFan

I don't buy anything unless I know it's good first, or if I hear something is good i'll download it, and will often buy it in the store when I would NEVER have if I didn't download it first...

I download the music first as well, if it's good, then I will go ahead and buy it...You speak the truth! lol

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Jiggy

I download the music first as well, if it's good, then I will go ahead and buy it...You speak the truth! lol

Both of you must have been lost before the internet hey? Or have you never listened to vinyl other than beats?

Once upon a time listening to music was an experience, meaning you heard about an album from friends, university radio, magazines, shows, heard it in the record store, whatever. The point is that one paid a fair price for it and then because the average attention span wasn't totally destroyed by that point and it was a given to sit down, put on good headphones, and listen.

Not ipods in the car/bus with earbuds that sound like crap. And thanks to that music has become a disposable commodity.

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Both of you must have been lost before the internet hey? Or have you never listened to vinyl other than beats?

Once upon a time listening to music was an experience, meaning you heard about an album from friends, university radio, magazines, shows, heard it in the record store, whatever. The point is that one paid a fair price for it and then because the average attention span wasn't totally destroyed by that point and it was a given to sit down, put on good headphones, and listen.

Not ipods in the car/bus with earbuds that sound like crap. And thanks to that music has become a disposable commodity.

I'm not going to buy a CD that I will not enjoy. Whats wrong with giving it a listen before you buy it? Awww poor artist won't be able to buy a mansion this time around cause his/hers album sucked ....I don't feel bad for them one bit...Put out a good album and ppl will buy it...

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Both of you must have been lost before the internet hey? Or have you never listened to vinyl other than beats?

Once upon a time listening to music was an experience, meaning you heard about an album from friends, university radio, magazines, shows, heard it in the record store, whatever. The point is that one paid a fair price for it and then because the average attention span wasn't totally destroyed by that point and it was a given to sit down, put on good headphones, and listen.

Not ipods in the car/bus with earbuds that sound like crap. And thanks to that music has become a disposable commodity.

Well it's never going back that way. A generation has been raised that see music as a disposable commodity in far too great abundance for what few gems there are - which is what it is. Most people these days get bored of an average song after 2-3 listens...then it becomes worthless and not worthy to purchase or pay for. The old album method of putting together singles in hopes of scoring a hit and then making the buyer pay for all the tracks together (even if most are just fillers) doesn't work anymore. Sure there are a few complete or concept albums out there that are completely excellent or cohesive, but face it, most people only like a few songs and therefore, the rest of the traditional CD is not worth the price paid.

The age of portable music started by the walk-man really made music something to just "have in the background" or "pass the time" with rather than experienced and that's something that will not change...and that inherently removes much of the dollar value out of the music for the average consumer. I have no problem with that and I will download music without giving it a second thought. I will only pay for music that I truely love and feel is good. Most of the stuff included on a CD album...isn't. And yes, nomatter how much you try, there is some music you want but just can't buy nor find anywhere, even from online shops that you are simply forced to download. Nothing can be done about that.

And finally about the nostalgia you spoke about for the old experience of hearing about music or being given it by friends and sitting down and listening to it...much of it happened on bootlegged and home-made copied mix-tapes in the first place which is really no different than file-sharing or downloading music. I don't consider the average price of albums whether in the age of vinyl or the age of CDs to have ever been a fair price. It was just a money-making machine for the studios (which ripped off artists and ignored smaller artists) and now they are crying because they've lost their lucrative sugar daddy.