Illegal Music Downloading

[Magic]

Well said Riff Raff. I live in a fairly rural area, and would have to travel a minimum of 50 miles to a major record store. Sometimes even a major record store doesn't have some of the music I am looking for.

So you may think, buy it online. Amazon is a good source, but I worry about Identity theft and the selling of some of my personal info to advertisers, which is done routinely by all these online sources (be sure to read the fine print on their privacy policies).


If I download, it is for my own listening pleasure and to evaluate the music. I have no intentions of selling the music or copying for profit.

 

[Riff Raff]

^^ exactly, thats why I rarely buy music online if ever. I love to be able to get them in music shops.
But as I said if the artists are so bothered at least have the decency to make all your albums available, sure some might not sell well but Id still buy them, that surely counts for something?

 

[aeroplane]

If I don't own something but want to hear it badly enough, I'll just either break down and buy it or search for a YouTube clip.

I'm not interested in becoming an AOL or Yahoo News front page story the next time the Feds decide to randomly select a single illegal downloader (out of several million who do it) to prosecute and hit with obsence monetary fines. The authorities practically pick these poor bastards name's out of a hat, as far as I've seen, considering most of these people had downloaded a negligible number of songs that has been matched or surpassed by ten million other people out there with computers who could just as easily be hauled in, using that logic.

In the label versus artist debate, I'll always side with the artist. However, there are a handful of bands who have a very tight grip on their complete catalog of music. That includes groups like Motley Crue, Metallica and Kiss. Motley Crue is now doing everything through a "Motley Records" imprint, Metallica ended up getting "control" of their catalog sometime after the Napster mess and Gene Simmons ended up getting "control" of the Kiss catalog somewhere along the line. They still are on a label but can do whatever they wish with the songs.

With that said, does anyone care to name which 5 or 6 currently active artists have a tendency to reissue the same studio albums, greatest hits collections, outrageously overpriced boxed sets or dvd collections over and over and over again the most often? In case a hint is required, I put some of the answers in the paragraph above.

Wasn't it mostly Pearl Jam's idea about 10-15 years ago to do a big world tour in which they proceeded to make a live cd from every single date on the tour (three to four months worth of shows), which were promptly sold for $10-12+ each?

That may sound good to some fans. However, it wasn't exactly good for the wallets of the more irrational fan who decided he had to have every single cd from that run to complete his collection. Especially when there are bands who are a little more liberal of letting fans get ahold of live recordings without paying a dime (i.e. Phish or the Dead). And you could trust there are a few dozen people out there who are into Pearl Jam who tried to complete that entire collection.

Besides, if bands are unhappy with the money they make on their album sales, then they can leave the record label and do it themselves. That's what Collective Soul did. That's what Prince did. In fact, I saw an interview with Prince from about 6-7 years ago in which he explained how his current studio album (self-released) had only sold around 50,000 copies but he explained that he had already made more money off of that particular studio album than he had from the sales of any of his previous albums, some of which had sold over a million copies (or more).

Point being, I don't see every artist as being an innocent victim without any control over their own career.

 

[Magic]

What really irritates the hell out of me is some music executive making the decision on what "should or should not" sell in the market. If the exec. decides the album might not sell, they dont make a very good distribution of the album. This to me is far worse damage to an artist than any illegal downloading!

 

[Riff Raff]

What really irritates the hell out of me is some music executive making the decision on what "should or should not" sell in the market. If the exec. decides the album might not sell, they dont make a very good distribution of the album. This to me is far worse damage to an artist than any illegal downloading!

Exactly plus assuming it wont sell or fans wont like it is ridiculous anyway, how do they know that?? I often like material they seem to see as not worth having in shops.

 

[Magic]

If I don't own something but want to hear it badly enough, I'll just either break down and buy it or search for a YouTube clip.

I'm not interested in becoming an AOL or Yahoo News front page story the next time the Feds decide to randomly select a single illegal downloader (out of several million who do it) to prosecute and hit with obsence monetary fines. The authorities practically pick these poor bastards name's out of a hat, as far as I've seen, considering most of these people had downloaded a negligible number of songs that has been matched or surpassed by ten million other people out there with computers who could just as easily be hauled in, using that logic.

In the label versus artist debate, I'll always side with the artist. However, there are a handful of bands who have a very tight grip on their complete catalog of music. That includes groups like Motley Crue, Metallica and Kiss. Motley Crue is now doing everything through a "Motley Records" imprint, Metallica ended up getting "control" of their catalog sometime after the Napster mess and Gene Simmons ended up getting "control" of the Kiss catalog somewhere along the line. They still are on a label but can do whatever they wish with the songs.

With that said, does anyone care to name which 5 or 6 currently active artists have a tendency to reissue the same studio albums, greatest hits collections, outrageously overpriced boxed sets or dvd collections over and over and over again the most often? In case a hint is required, I put some of the answers in the paragraph above.

Wasn't it mostly Pearl Jam's idea about 10-15 years ago to do a big world tour in which they proceeded to make a live cd from every single date on the tour (three to four months worth of shows), which were promptly sold for $10-12+ each?

That may sound good to some fans. However, it wasn't exactly good for the wallets of the more irrational fan who decided he had to have every single cd from that run to complete his collection. Especially when there are bands who are a little more liberal of letting fans get ahold of live recordings without paying a dime (i.e. Phish or the Dead). And you could trust there are a few dozen people out there who are into Pearl Jam who tried to complete that entire collection.

Besides, if bands are unhappy with the money they make on their album sales, then they can leave the record label and do it themselves. That's what Collective Soul did. That's what Prince did. In fact, I saw an interview with Prince from about 6-7 years ago in which he explained how his current studio album (self-released) had only sold around 50,000 copies but he explained that he had already made more money off of that particular studio album than he had from the sales of any of his previous albums, some of which had sold over a million copies (or more).

Point being, I don't see every artist as being an innocent victim without any control over their own career.

Oh I agree with you, Aeroplane. I thought this was the whole thought behind the indie movement. Instead, indie has come to mean a "genre" instead of another way to distribute and profit from the music.

If I was a musician, I would definitely invest in my own recording equipment and pay from my own pocket to distribute. But not all budding artists have any money at all...........so they are in a catch 22.

 

[aeroplane]

Exactly plus assuming it wont sell or fans wont like it is ridiculous anyway, how do they know that?? I often like material they seem to see as not worth having in shops.

That's sort of like something I remember Dee Snider of Twisted Sister talking about in the mid-2000's.

Around 2003-2004, he had cut a deal to reissue the entire Twisted Sister catalog on cd through a label called Spitfire/Eagle. During one of the interviews promoting these reissues, he was asked how come he had went through so much time and trouble to release these albums all over again.

His reply:

"Because nobody can find them anymore. I've been hearing about it for years. They're not in the stores. Most of them are still in print but the label won't even send them to the stores. All someone can find, if they're lucky, is the greatest hits. The second an artist does a best of, the label now considers the studio albums to be "catalog" albums and it doesn't matter what happens with them anymore. If a store calls up and says they want to order some Twisted Sister, all anyone will send them is the Greatest Hits or if they want a specific album they will get told by somebody that the old studio albums are no longer a priority and are suggested to stock the Greatest Hits at their store instead.

Face it, the old Twisted Sister albums are a pure impulse buy. Same with other bands from the era. Nobody walks into a music store off the street planning on buying Twisted Sister's Come Out And Play or Armored Saint's fourth studio album. They buy it on impulse because they look through the album racks, see the front or back cover and think it looks cool or they used to listen to the band back in the day or maybe their older brother or father did. When you can't find an album in the stores, that takes away the impulse buy completely. That makes a big difference for an artist on the back end."

(Dee Snider's thoughts)

 

[LG]

^^That is spot on Aero, you go into a Wal-Mart to try and find a studio album and unless it's a new release you are out of luck. Add to that the fact most of my good stores are gone now and you really have to have good connections to find rare or out of print CD's now.

Good on Dee Snider for getting his old band's music back out there, a compilation is fine, but if I like a band I Want to explore their entire discography.

 

[Harkat]

sometimes this world makes me sick.

 

[Fisha]

At which times?