Downloading Is, In Fact, Killing Music

Radagast · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:00 pm

Ha ha this means I fucked Gary Holt up the arse by buying Tempo of the Damned second hand and not going to see X-odus when they toured last year.

That'll learn 'im.

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:00 pm

Eternal Idol wrote:

Chew on this. The boys from Collective Soul were on Howard Stern about a month ago. Collective Soul, a band who has sold Millions of albums worldwide. You know how much they made off of those albums? $150,000. That's it. To split between the band. The label took ALL of their money. Pat Monahan from Train, another multi-platinum act, said the same thing. The musicians aren't seeing the money from album sales. Period. The only person you fuck by downloading music is the LABEL, not the band. There is a whole trail of great musicians who sold millions of albums and never saw a dime. Robert Johnson comes to mind. Even in the 50's, before they had computers, labels were fucking artists up the ass.

Like I said, touring and merchandise is where the bands make profit. That's even what they guy from Collective Soul said. We make money from concerts, not album sales.

People who download albums and don't buy, weren't going to buy it anyway. They never did. Before downloading they made a CDR or Recorded Cassetttes of albums. And if you buy Used CD's, guess what? The band isn't getting paid for that eithier. So next you're going to say Used CD's are killing the music business? :roll:

AS LONG AS YOU GO TO CONCERTS THE BANDS WILL BE FINE.

I think cases like these are more often found in the pop world than the metal world. If the band isn't intelligent enough to check the contract out before they sign it, fuck 'em.

My point above's true, people who would buy albums now don't because of the net. And more people listen to music than go to concerts (I'm a perfect example of this).

lizardtail · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:04 pm

Zad wrote:

If the band isn't intelligent enough to check the contract out before they sign it, fuck 'em.

yeah, but what choice do they have? they already decided they wanted to be screwed..

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:10 pm

lizardtail wrote:

Zad wrote:

If the band isn't intelligent enough to check the contract out before they sign it, fuck 'em.

yeah, but what choice do they have? they already decided they wanted to be screwed..

The majority of popular music nowadays is just a rehash of older stuff, I'll grant you that. When people with genuine talent come along doing something new (GY!BE?) they do all right.

Eternal Idol · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:13 pm

Zad wrote:

Eternal Idol wrote:

Chew on this. The boys from Collective Soul were on Howard Stern about a month ago. Collective Soul, a band who has sold Millions of albums worldwide. You know how much they made off of those albums? $150,000. That's it. To split between the band. The label took ALL of their money. Pat Monahan from Train, another multi-platinum act, said the same thing. The musicians aren't seeing the money from album sales. Period. The only person you fuck by downloading music is the LABEL, not the band. There is a whole trail of great musicians who sold millions of albums and never saw a dime. Robert Johnson comes to mind. Even in the 50's, before they had computers, labels were fucking artists up the ass.

Like I said, touring and merchandise is where the bands make profit. That's even what they guy from Collective Soul said. We make money from concerts, not album sales.

People who download albums and don't buy, weren't going to buy it anyway. They never did. Before downloading they made a CDR or Recorded Cassetttes of albums. And if you buy Used CD's, guess what? The band isn't getting paid for that eithier. So next you're going to say Used CD's are killing the music business? :roll:

AS LONG AS YOU GO TO CONCERTS THE BANDS WILL BE FINE.

I think cases like these are more often found in the pop world than the metal world. If the band isn't intelligent enough to check the contract out before they sign it, fuck 'em.

My point above's true, people who would buy albums now don't because of the net. And more people listen to music than go to concerts (I'm a perfect example of this).

It doesn't matter what kind of music you're referring to. Labels are greedy and want to exploit the attist. Only one band gets the majority of royalties that they are owed for album sales. That's Metallica who fought Elektra tooth and nail in court for years to get that. Same with the famiies of Jimi Hendrix and Elvis Presley. Elvis made his label way more money than he got paid. Why do you think fossils like the Rolling Stones still tour to this day? That's where they make their money. Plus, if labels didn't charge ridiculous prices for albums, more people would buy. I have a decent paying job, and still buy used more often than not. I can't afford new albums. The average price for albums where I live is $16.99. That's way too much, especially if the album is less than 40 minutes. If labels would pull their heads out of their asses and lower prices, I guarantee you more people would buy. Life is expensive, and sometimes you have more important things to spend money on than a CD.

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:17 pm

Eternal Idol wrote:

It doesn't matter what kind of music you're referring to. Labels are greedy and want to exploit the attist. Only one band gets the majority of royalties that they are owed for album sales. That's Metallica who fought Elektra tooth and nail in court for years to get that. Same with the famiies of Jimi Hendrix and Elvis Presley. Elvis made his label way more money than he got paid. Why do you think fossils like the Rolling Stones still tour to this day? That's where they make their money. Plus, if labels didn't charge ridiculous prices for albums, more people would buy. I have a decent paying job, and still buy used more often than not. I can't afford new albums. The average price for albums where I live is $16.99. That's way too much, especially if the album is less than 40 minutes. If labels would pull their heads out of their asses and lower prices, I guarantee you more people would buy. Life is expensive, and sometimes you have more important things to spend money on than a CD.

Jesus Christ, just because you can't afford caviar doesn't give you a right to steal it. Music is not a right, it's a hobby, as I said above. You have to pay for it. Can't afford it? Tough shit. I get more out of my small collection of real CDs knowing I paid money for them than someone with thousands of MP3s does.

lizardtail · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:19 pm

Do you?

You can't be too conservative when you're wrong, you know. and putting your faith in money over music just doesn't fly on planet lizardtail

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:20 pm

lizardtail wrote:

Do you?

You can't be too conservative when you're wrong, you know. and putting your faith in money over music just doesn't fly on planet lizardtail

I do. And you're repeating yourself - music is not my religion, even if it is yours.

Radagast · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:21 pm

Zad wrote:

Jesus Christ, just because you can't afford caviar doesn't give you a right to steal it. Music is not a right, it's a hobby, as I said above. You have to pay for it. Can't afford it? Tough shit. I get more out of my small collection of real CDs knowing I paid money for them than someone with thousands of MP3s does.

Woah, woah, hypocrite alert!

Just after saying that music is merely a commodity and a hobby, you attach some sort of etheral value to the listening of albums that were paid for rather than ripped off?

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:23 pm

Radagast wrote:

Zad wrote:

Jesus Christ, just because you can't afford caviar doesn't give you a right to steal it. Music is not a right, it's a hobby, as I said above. You have to pay for it. Can't afford it? Tough shit. I get more out of my small collection of real CDs knowing I paid money for them than someone with thousands of MP3s does.

Woah, woah, hypocrite alert!

Just after saying that music is merely a commodity and a hobby, you attach some sort of etheral value to the listening of albums that were paid for rather than ripped off?

I don't see the problem. If I bought a house, I'd get more out of it than squatting there, doesn't stop the house being a commodity. That's actually a prop to my side, the way you put it.

Radagast · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:25 pm

Well you're attempting to shoot down liz's assesment that music is more than just hobby by saying that more honestly aquired music is somehow more worthy and a more rewarding listen - which obviously implies that there is something there beyond the sum of the parts, no?

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:28 pm

Radagast wrote:

Well you're attempting to shoot down liz's assesment that music is more than just hobby by saying that more honestly aquired music is somehow more worthy and a more rewarding listen - which obviously implies that there is something there beyond the sum of the parts, no?

Only because I've put time and money in to acquire it. Compare it to collecting anything else, stamps, for example. Paying for one item, then taking it home and enjoying it and the fact you own it, gives it more value than something found in the street.

He was saying music that is given out free is better than music which you have to pay for, which is the chief point I was arguing against.

Radagast · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:30 pm

I simply find an inherent contradiction in your argument.

That will be all (read: I'm going home for the day).

Orion · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:31 pm

I find nothing wrong with downloading as long as you consitently buy albums also. Do I have way more music downloaded than bought? Fuck yes. That being said I buy quite a bit of music.

Also, I agree with what Eternal Idol has been saying. If you go to concerts you are still supporting the band. I've been to several concerts of bands that I only knew about because I had downloaded there shit. So downloading got me to go spend money on a concert where I usually buy at least a shirt or a CD, sometimes both. Whithout downloading I never would have gone.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:32 pm

I buy whatever CD I can find that's really good, but I have to download a LOT because where I live metal is practically nonexistant. Whenever I go somewhere where metal has more importance, I always bring back a ton of cds

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:34 pm

but I can't figure out how kerrazy torrents works! where are the torrents? it's all forum!! could someone please explain? the site 'm using for torrents has very little!!

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:41 pm

Radagast wrote:

I simply find an inherent contradiction in your argument.

That will be all (read: I'm going home for the day).

I see where you're coming from: if music is just like everything else, why not treat it like everything else? But I feel bad if ripping people off in any shape or form, even if they can afford it. As I said, I get more pleasure from something paid for than something stolen.

EisenFaust · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:44 pm

Uhmm Zad.. Weren't you the one speaking about an upload thread some weeks ago?

Eternal Idol · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:46 pm

Zad wrote:

Eternal Idol wrote:

It doesn't matter what kind of music you're referring to. Labels are greedy and want to exploit the attist. Only one band gets the majority of royalties that they are owed for album sales. That's Metallica who fought Elektra tooth and nail in court for years to get that. Same with the famiies of Jimi Hendrix and Elvis Presley. Elvis made his label way more money than he got paid. Why do you think fossils like the Rolling Stones still tour to this day? That's where they make their money. Plus, if labels didn't charge ridiculous prices for albums, more people would buy. I have a decent paying job, and still buy used more often than not. I can't afford new albums. The average price for albums where I live is $16.99. That's way too much, especially if the album is less than 40 minutes. If labels would pull their heads out of their asses and lower prices, I guarantee you more people would buy. Life is expensive, and sometimes you have more important things to spend money on than a CD.

Jesus Christ, just because you can't afford caviar doesn't give you a right to steal it. Music is not a right, it's a hobby, as I said above. You have to pay for it. Can't afford it? Tough shit. I get more out of my small collection of real CDs knowing I paid money for them than someone with thousands of MP3s does.

First off, I don't even download music. How ironic is that? Someone who doesn't download defends it. I have a massive real CD collection, so in a way you are preaching to the choir.

But, I'm not going to sit here and delude myself into thinking that the labels aren't stealing the artists work in the first place and rigging up the contracts to where they are the only ones cashing in on it. If anyone is stealing from the artist it's the label, not the downloader. The artist does all of the work and the fat cats reap the reward. There is no such thing as a record contract that is beneficial to the actual artist. The labels spin it as a privilege for the label to distribute a certain album. A privilege the artist has to pay for. The artist is something for the label to make a few bucks off of, and when that artist is no longer profitable, they spit them out. Art never factors into that equation.

So, yoiu can blame capitalism if you want, for that is the real culprit here. My point is it's an issue that has several layers to it, and the onus can't be placed on one certain thing.

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:47 pm

EisenFaust wrote:

Uhmm Zad.. Weren't you the one speaking about an upload thread some weeks ago?

Yes. If people are going to do it anyway, might as well make it official, not hide it away.

Metal Reviews

Downloading Is, In Fact, Killing Music

Who is online