Uh...I'm not sure why you care, but I'll tell you anyway. Someone I know said, 'Hey, want to hear a new NIN song?' I said, 'Is it legit?' He said, 'Yes, a valet stole the music from TR's car and put it online.' So I said, 'Okay.' It wasn't impatience that spurred me to listen to The Line Begins to Blur.
Besides, what you said is a moot point - singles are released all the time before an album, and everyone hears them. Like The Hand That Feeds. Why did YOU listen to it?
-Smitten Kitten-
Still, that contradicts your claim that "songs work better within context of an album." What difference does it make what song it is, provided it's from an album? He didn't WRITE it as the first single, I'd wager, but made it so after it was complete. If you honestly believe what you're saying, then you're less intelligent than I was giving you credit for. If you believed the claim I quoted above, you wouldn't have listened to any song off of WT.
Yeah, I read his thoughts about how you can't 'unhear' things (and totally ruined the ending of Million Dollar Baby for my brother when I read it aloud) too, but really. Single or unintentionally leaked song, there's no difference.
-Smitten Kitten-
Way to completely ignore the gist of my post.
"Trent's music is not your friends property to give."
Boo ****ing hoo. That's really noble of you and everything, but it's pointless. Once it's in the mass media (by whatever means, honest or otherwise), there's no going back - and no reason to. It's in the fold. Anyone who wants it can have it. While it sucks that it was stolen, there's no reason NOT to listen to it, unless one thinks it would destroy her listening experience. And, I didn't think that, and it didn't, so I'm clear.
You can cite moral high ground as a reason not to, but that's weak reasoning. That's like saying, "I won't watch the Paris Hilton sex video because she didn't mean for it to be released." She doesn't give a damn at this point; it's already out there and it can't be reversed. Trent can have his ideals, but that doesn't mean everyone has to adopt them as her own and find it morally repugnant to listen to songs as singular works or *gasp* out of sequence.
-Smitten Kitten-
Originally posted by smittenkitten
Boo ****ing hoo. That's really noble of you and everything, but it's pointless. Once it's in the mass media (by whatever means, honest or otherwise), there's no going back - and no reason to. It's in the fold. Anyone who wants it can have it. While it sucks that it was stolen, there's no reason NOT to listen to it, unless one thinks it would destroy her listening experience. And, I didn't think that, and it didn't, so I'm clear.You can cite moral high ground as a reason not to, but that's weak reasoning. That's like saying, "I won't watch the Paris Hilton sex video because she didn't mean for it to be released." She doesn't give a damn at this point; it's already out there and it can't be reversed. Trent can have his ideals, but that doesn't mean everyone has to adopt them as her own and find it morally repugnant to listen to songs as singular works or *gasp* out of sequence.
-Smitten Kitten-
That's Paris Hilton, she obviously doesn't give a shit. Trent quite clearly does.
If you didn't think downloading and listening to it ruined your experience that's fine, doesn't harm me, doesn't harm you.
I just think it's very disrespectful to download stuff that hasn't been given to you or released by the artist. Like it or not, boo hoo all you want because the fact is, it ISN'T yours to give away.
You cannot dispute that. It's like saying that just because shops store items you can go take them. You can't. Just because some shithead decided to completely rip Trent off and put his hard work all over the net unintended and without permission, doesn't mean that it's right to download it.
-AC
"I just think it's very disrespectful to download stuff that hasn't been given to you or released by the artist. Like it or not, boo hoo all you want because the fact is, it ISN'T yours to give away."
That's all well and good, but a) I'm not giving it away, and b) who HASN'T listened to leaked works?
"You cannot dispute that. It's like saying that just because shops store items you can go take them. You can't. Just because some shithead decided to completely rip Trent off and put his hard work all over the net unintended and without permission, doesn't mean that it's right to download it."
I don't (just go and take stuff) - and while I'm currently NOT paying for the music I do have from the new album, you can sleep easy knowing that I'm going to buy it as soon as it's released. And again, I'm going to hear them ALL eventually, so I don't see why it's so horrid to listen to leaked stuff, besides the fact that it's not what the artist 'wants.' Well, shit. I wanted NIN to put out an album in under five years, and it didn't happen. I wanted NIN to FINALLY make it to Alaska (where I grew up), and they never came. I wanted those cute Chanel heels, but they were too expensive. Point being: we don't always get what we want. Oh well. I don't feel guilty and I'm not going to for going against TR's wishes. He and I just don't share the same dream, you know?
I'm all for supporting the artists by actually purchasing the music. Unless, of course, they make one brilliant song and sell it on an album full of duds. Then I will download it and not pay a cent and not feel bad about it - that's what happens when you decide to make shitty music as fast as you can to make a buck.
-Smitten Kitten-