Good Music!

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's like I said before, you voted against Bush I assume? Even if you KNEW your vote wouldn't make the difference and cause him to lose, it was enough to know that when the chips were down, regardless of the outcome, you wanted to know you had made a contribution to bringing about the lesser of two evils, right?

Same as me with downloading. I just like to know that when the chips were down, I put my money where my mouth was and paid for the work. I paid for NIN's With Teeth album and it's a piece of shit. I wouldn't buy it again if I didn't have it, but I'd not download it either. Whilst I HATE that album, I do complain about it, I'd willingly step up to a downloader who was dissing it and say "Well wait, you didn't spend money on it, why are you bitching?"

-AC

Word man. I respect that. So respect here.

Just don't get all the arguing, even when people do seem to support who they like.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Absolutely, I agree totally. I'm just saying, it'd suck wouldn't it? Real bad. That whole point was more about how having shit mainstream (for the most part) isn't all bad.

-AC

touche

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The greater good, in your opinion, is the fall of all majors. There couldn't be a worse thing to happen.

An excerpt from my new play, 'It Wasn't Actually All That Bad'.

Outside, in a concentration camp workyard, Jack and Jerry discuss life.

Jack: Even if we never leave this place- alive, at least- it's inevitable that history will learn from the mistakes being made today. This will never happen again, and in that small portion of good we have to find comfort.

Jerry: I still think this is the worst thing to happen in the history of mankind.

Jack: Whoa whoa whoa. Have all the majors fallen?

Jerry: G-good point.

Well not worse thing to happen overall, of course.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
[B]I don't buy that safe-route "A lot of them do, a lot don't." More don't than the amount that do, it's a fact. Hence why it's such a financial problem.

If you download it and don't pay the band, you have their property on your computer that they should have your money for, they don't. How is there any attempt at justifying this? What good has the exposure done? Someone now has a copy of their album for free in a manner they do not wish to have it distributed. If that person didn't know about them, they're not gaining, but they're not losing. If someone knows about them, steals their album and doesn't pay them, what do they get? Nothing. They LOSE an album sale. "Hey! I love your band!" "Sweet! Got our album?" "Yeah...downloaded it." "Wha-what? Dude, buy it." "Why? What's the point?" "Support us." "I am, go you guys!" Yeah, doesn't do much. Your logic is extremely flawed.

"If they don't know about the band, it's the same as them knowing and not paying." It's not is it? No. Stupid.

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
The point is they are gaining sales through file sharing. It's not justifying people who download and don't buy the album, I was just saying that in most cases with obscure bands those people wouldn't have bought the album anyway, and neither would others who actually do support the band cause none of them would've known about them.

As far as album sales goes, it's exactly the same.

You're making a redundant point. Ok yes, it's possible and factual that some people illegally download and then go pay for the album. Right, what's the point? You said it was better for the band if someone illegally downloaded and DIDN'T pay than if they didn't know the band at all. This is false. As I have proven.

Secondly, no it's not. If someone has a copy of their album illegally downloaded that they didn't pay for, it makes no sales difference as in, they haven't sold one. It makes financial difference, which is bad. You're making redundant points. You think the band earns money off burned copies or something? If 5 kids each legally buy an album and share it among their friends, who share it among their friends, who then upload it to Kazaa or Soulseek or whatever, do you have any idea how bad that affects record sales?

Apparantly the answer is no, you do not.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not actually wrong, both proving you and your following claim wrong. Though I'll allow this to continue.

That was a reasonably well known artist though, it wasn't an indie artist was it? He wasn't going around struggling, getting music fans to come to his shows. He was famous for many things in the lower end of the mainstream circuit.

Go on...waiting for your point here. Comparing "MC's" who can afford to have a mouthful of platinum to a band touring their hometown and surrounding areas in a van, struggling to make profit because they have to pay their label and compensate for "fans" stealing from them, isn't a good way to go, but continue.

I swear reading your posts is like watching a bunch of dudes trying to hump a keyboard. All that comes out is a mess and letters.

If your GOAL is to be famous (successful is different) then whoring yourself is what you do, and it's a disgrace. All those American Idol esque people.

MF Doom is successful, Cannibal Ox are successful. On the other hand, Radiohead are successful, Metallica are one of the biggest selling bands of all time and they reached that point before any of the Load stuff happened (which doesn't matter to me anyway), on a major. Opeth had 7 albums on various indie labels from 96 to 2005 before they signed to a major and nothing bad has happened. Infact, they even had bad cases with their indie label claiming rights to songs.

Majors may be, in comparison, worse overall than indie labels, but that's not always the case. Majors get a bad rep and indies get a better rep than they sometimes deserve. Infact, that's where a lot of the worst rip offs happen.

-AC

damn AC are you agreeing or disagreeing with me???

when you say indie artist, wtf do you mean? an artist who is signed to an independent label (like rap-a-lot records) or are you talking about unsigned artists who distribute their own shit and mostly do gigs and open mic nights?

Originally posted by #16
damn AC are you agreeing or disagreeing with me???

when you say indie artist, wtf do you mean? an artist who is signed to an independent label (like rap-a-lot records) or are you talking about [b]unsigned artists who distribute their own shit and mostly do gigs and open mic nights? [/B]

Why are you asking when it's all in the post? Read it again, it's all there.

What do you think I mean when I say indie artist? If I meant unsigned I'd say unsigned.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You said it was better for the band if someone illegally downloaded and DIDN'T pay than if they didn't know the band at all.

Secondly, no it's not. If someone has a copy of their album illegally downloaded that they didn't pay for, it makes no sales difference as in, they haven't sold one. It makes financial difference, which is bad.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why are you asking when it's all in the post? Read it again, it's all there.

What do you think I mean when I say indie artist? If I meant unsigned I'd say unsigned.

-AC

^damn son youre vague

ok then why the hell you think theyre struggling? once an independent artist sells 20,000 units theyre set. believe me 20k is very easy to sell with the help of a little promotion(file sharing). i know this cat from QB he's the exec. producer for Poet's new album and he told me that once an album pushes that kind of numbers its all good because it only takes 30k to produce an album. in fact, theyre doing an album launch in fat beats,nyc next week... all my ny heads, holla @ me for details.

I like a couple artists:
1.)Amy Kuney
2.) Eisley
3.) Ashlee Simpson
4.) Rihanna
5.) Thrice

These are all different genres....but those are my top 5 bands!

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
No, I never said that.

You:

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
Even the ones who DON'T pay the band in any way whatsoever are only denying them of a profit they wouldn't have had a chance at without file sharing anyway. None of these people would have heard of this band if their music wasn't freely distributed throughout the internet and promoted on forums like this one. They basically would've been limited to the select few who'd be willing to purchase an album based on a review or audioclip from the band's website.

A profit they wouldn't have had a chance at were it not for file sharing? So you're saying just because this person COULD have chose to pay for it, but didn't, it's a plus because they discovered the band and COULD have paid them profit? Clarify yourself if this isn't what you mean. If it is, then what I said previously still stands.

Originally posted by Afro Cheese
It doesn't really make a financial difference unless the person in question would've bought the album if it weren't for illegal file sharing. In most cases, with indie bads, they would not have.

What are you talking about? If people illegally download but then buy the album, fine. I've said this, why continue drilling the point? There's no oil here, slick.

If you download illegally, you are not allowing the artist to get the profit they deserve, unless you then buy the CD.

Originally posted by #16
^damn son youre vague

There's nothing vague about that massive post I just did. It's spelled out as clear as day. If you can't grasp it, shame.

Originally posted by #16
ok then why the hell you think theyre struggling? once an independent artist sells 20,000 units theyre set. believe me 20k is very easy to sell with the help of a little promotion(file sharing). i know this cat from QB he's the exec. producer for Poet's new album and he told me that once an album pushes that kind of numbers its all good because it only takes 30k to produce an album. in fact, theyre doing an album launch in fat beats,nyc next week... all my ny heads, holla @ me for details.

They're set? For what? What are you even getting at? Illegal downloading is stopping an artist getting their pay, which they deserve, for the work they created. End of story, it needn't go further. You're getting into all kinds of irrelevant bs.

This isn't about producers.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They're set? For what? What are you even getting at? Illegal downloading is stopping an artist getting their pay, which they deserve, for the work they created. End of story, it needn't go further. You're getting into all kinds of irrelevant bs.

This isn't about producers.

-AC

im saying theyre set. theyre set meaning they getting profit. tell me 80k is small amount.

for the nth time, file sharing is promotion. an artist cant survive without that. yes they losing potential money from illegal downloads but theyre also benefitting from it. why the f*ck do you think nike paid lebron james 90 million to endorse them? that's 90 mill that theyre risking not seeing again but theyre taking a risk because they are thinking about the reward in the long run.

i told you what my dude told me because he's somebody that knows the ins and outs of the industry, especially the independent side of the biz. compared to you saying a rapper needs to reach gold to see profit (lol) i think he knows better.

peace

Originally posted by #16
im saying theyre set. theyre set meaning they getting profit. tell me 80k is small amount.

Yes and where did I say they're NOT getting profit? Nowhere. Where did I say that illegal file sharing without purchasing the albums as a result, gets them less profit than they should have? Everywhere. Good, we can move on.

As an aside: 80K is nice to look at, but you give that to someone in the real world and after bills and other essentials, plus indulgences, you aren't going to have much. 80K is nothing in today's society.

Originally posted by #16
for the nth time, file sharing is promotion. an artist cant survive without that.

Factually incorrect. That said, all you know is hip hop. We're talking about illegal file sharing without any attempt to pay for the goods. Not downloading and then going out and paying the money. Pay attention.

Originally posted by #16
yes they losing potential money from illegal downloads but theyre also benefitting from it. why the f*ck do you think nike paid lebron james 90 million to endorse them? that's 90 mill that theyre risking not seeing again but theyre taking a risk because they are thinking about the reward in the long run.

How did Lebron James of the NBA and his Nike contract come into this? Try to stay on point please. Nothing to do with anything at all.

Secondly, how are they benefitting from losing money? Go on, this should be good. You tell me how they are benefitting from losing money from illegal downloads.

Originally posted by #16
i told you what my dude told me because he's somebody that knows the ins and outs of the industry, especially the independent side of the biz. compared to you saying a rapper needs to reach gold to see profit (lol) i think he knows better.

peace

I was referring to medium sized bands and musicians still on indie labels, not people who are known within their city and have their friends and family supporting their shit while they're on a label that's probably produced out of a basement.

You can "think" whoever knows better and think what you want, the FACT is, you clearly don't know much.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Factually incorrect. That said, all you know is hip hop. We're talking about illegal file sharing without any attempt to pay for the goods. Not downloading and then going out and paying the money. Pay attention.

How did Lebron James of the NBA and his Nike contract come into this? Try to stay on point please. Nothing to do with anything at all.

Secondly, how are they benefitting from losing money? Go on, this should be good. You tell me how they are benefitting from losing money from illegal downloads.

I was referring to medium sized bands and musicians still on indie labels, not people who are known within their city and have their friends and family supporting their shit while they're on a label that's probably produced out of a basement.

You can "think" whoever knows better and think what you want, the FACT is, you clearly don't know much.

-AC

^ok my bad for assuming people will buy an album they dl'd because they like it. id give you that.

i referred lebron to show you the concept of risk/reward between file sharing.For example: 'Bron appearing in mags holding a pair of shoes wit nike logos will catch people's attention but nothing is assured that they will buy his shoes, ya feel me? lol you think A&R's dont leak theyre artists album? some artists are just not going to get any burn from any radio station (even independent ones) no matter what they do... so for them, one of their options is leaking the album on the net and hope people will like it enough to buy it.

lol from the way you described your idea of an indie artist it will be a surprise if people would even care enough to bootleg them

Originally posted by #16
i referred lebron to show you the concept of risk/reward between file sharing. 'Bron appearing in mags holding a pair of shoes wit nike logos will catch people's attention but nothing is assured that they will buy his shoes, ya feel me?

Yeah, and Nike pay for those advertisments to appear in magazines. It's all contractual. Those files aren't meant to be on the net, that's why it's what we call "illegal". I thought even you knew this.

Originally posted by #16
lol you think A&R's dont leak theyre artists album? some artists are just not going to get any burn from any radio station (even independent ones) no matter what they do... so for them, one of their options is leaking the album on the net and hope people will like it enough to buy it.

From where did you extract this theory? Because it is arguably the stupidest idea I've ever heard.

Any artist that willingly says "Here's our hard work, illegally download it" deserve everything they get. Half the time they end up complaining as they move on and need the money. I'm in defense of people who DON'T ask to get their music put on the net, who DON'T ask to get ripped off. Yes, leaks happen sometimes whether the artist wants it to or not, which is when YOU as the listener should take the responsibility to say "Ok, if I'm gonna download this, I'm gonna buy it if I like it. If I don't like it I'm going to delete it and not ***** about disliking it because I've lost nothing at all."

Originally posted by #16
lol from the way you described your idea of an indie artist it will be a surprise if people would even care enought to bootleg them

Wasn't the way I described it, it was the way you interpreted it.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
From where did you extract this theory? Because it is arguably the stupidest idea I've ever heard.

Any artist that willingly says "Here's our hard work, illegally download it" deserve everything they get. Half the time they end up complaining as they move on and need the money. I'm in defense of people who DON'T ask to get their music put on the net, who DON'T ask to get ripped off. Yes, leaks happen sometimes whether the artist wants it to or not, which is when YOU as the listener should take the responsibility to say "Ok, if I'm gonna download this, I'm gonna buy it if I like it. If I don't like it I'm going to delete it and not ***** about disliking it because I've lost nothing at all."

Wasn't the way I described it, it was the way you interpreted it.

-AC

^that wasnt a theory, i know a few a&r's who leak their artists albums to create some buzz. real talk. how the hell do you think i get retail copies of albums 2 days before they get dropped. keyword here is A&R's not the artist, therefore they dont know what the f is happenin.

"Yes, leaks happen sometimes whether the artist wants it to or not, which is when YOU as the listener should take the responsibility to say "Ok, if I'm gonna download this, I'm gonna buy it if I like it. If I don't like it I'm going to delete it and not ***** about disliking it because I've lost nothing at all."

that's my attitude when downloading albums son, trust.

hey you probably have tons of cds? mind taking a pic and posting it here? ill do mine if you do yours.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You:

A profit they wouldn't have had a chance at were it not for file sharing? So you're saying just because this person COULD have chose to pay for it, but didn't, it's a plus because they discovered the band and COULD have paid them profit? Clarify yourself if this isn't what you mean. If it is, then what I said previously still stands.

That was originally my point for crying out loud. All this time you've been harping the point "Hardcore downloaders won't change" which isn't my concern, per se. It's a small part of the whole picture, nobody really denied what you're saying.

Point, no I'd rather not do that.

-AC

sleeping

White Stripes - Seven Nation Army