Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
People get music for free - detrimental to artists?
Log In to post a reply
Pages: 4 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 | Next ]

View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Archigram
Archigram
375 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

Vinyl + downloads = perfect balance. I don't buy CDs anymore.

Oct 08, 2008, 21:34


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Kazak
Kazak
1619 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

Archigram wrote:
Vinyl + downloads = perfect balance. I don't buy CDs anymore.


Oct 08, 2008, 21:40


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

murilix
murilix
87 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

Well, IMO it depends.
It surely is detrimental to artists like Stereolab who always had moderate sales and now might have their moderate sales cut by half, including the fact they don't do "hard sell"...
I think the biggest problem related to things being free is the fact people don't have to listen to same record more than once. When people buy discs and spend money on them, they'll always give their $$$ a second chance. Now, it's only a matter of hitting the delete button. OK, every now and then we rediscover some long lost file lurking on our HDs, but that's not the same.
I do believe music has worsened even more because of the Internet. Before, one would have to please disc jockeys (or not) to get exposure, now you have 30 seconds, maybe one minute to make an impression, otherwise it's the next on the playlist. Yes, it is far more democratic, but also way more stupid. New bands are much more focused on selling their image than making good music. That sucks.

Oct 09, 2008, 04:41


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Bytor Peltor
Bytor Peltor
165 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

I've enjoyed reading the different opinions about downloading......better than the opinions are the reasons and justifications we give for doing so. From what I've witnessed, most people are foolish when it comes to downloading. Not the legality / moral part of it, but constantly downloading stuff and NEVER listening to it. NEVER listening because they are too busy downloading. I even know people who do this with the legal music they purchase.

I feel that most bands create their own fortune. Look at Sonic Youth and their SYR label......why doesn't Stereolab do the same thing? The same thing when it comes to touring: Example - Stereolab is coming to Texas and NOT playing Houston which is the fourth largest city in the United States. There is no doubt the show would sell out just like it did on the 'Sound Dust' tour (last time they played Houston). Choosing to play Austin & Dallas and not play Houston simply doesn't add up $ $ $.

Oct 09, 2008, 14:30


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Kazak
Kazak
1619 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

Actually they didn't play Dallas this time around either. I know because I live in Norman, Oklahoma and had to drive all the way to Austin to see them. perhaps they decided on Austin as a way to split the difference between Houston and Dallas?

Oct 09, 2008, 14:42


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cybele
cybele
736 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

"Re-issue, Re-package. . .double-pack with a photograph. . .extra track with the tacky badge."

How many greatest hits can Moz and Smiths possibly release? I guess he recently worked with Marr on another greatest hits re-issue, even though you have them all if you bought Louder, Hatful, and the World Won't Listen.

It's not as if these greatest hits albums require hours of studio recording time. . .

Cybele

Oct 09, 2008, 14:53


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cybele
cybele
736 posts

Best Of Albums - Shit You Already Have

I wrote about this above, but the worst thing to me is remembering my days collecting (and paying for) Smiths and Morrissey stuff. They/he'd release yet another 'best of' album but purposely add a rare track from some obscure, out of print b-side single. As a teenager, not really understanding money the way I do now, I would spring $20 for the import -- even if 9/10 songs were already owned. This was after paying for any single I could get my hand on (many of them imports).

Thank God file sharing gives us a way out of that--but that still hasn't stopped Morrissey and the Smiths from releasing two new 'best of' albums this year alone.

Smith and Morrissey - some of the greatest tunes of all time, but give us a damn break will ya? It's a little insulting and hypocritical if you live(d) in Whalley Range.

Cybele

Oct 09, 2008, 15:04


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

easychord
69 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

Stereolab has done what it has done that being in the past. As for now Stereolab is touring, producing CDs, vinyl records...What other avenues can they explore to increase their revenues? Commercial advertising would presumably go against Laetita?s values. What about videos? In either case I believe that royalties are paid for each time the video is shown. What about a line of clothing endorsed by Laetitia? What about owning studios and leasing them out to start up bands? If Laetitia is looking for more income then she is apparently not ready for retirement. Getting older, touring will eventually become more difficult. Having the second band Monade was a good step but she eventually will need to explore more avenues of revenues.

Oct 09, 2008, 15:26


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cyberpainter
cyberpainter
5940 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

They were on that payless commercial, so they must not mind that. The payless one I saw was about breast cancer research though.

Oct 09, 2008, 16:58


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

easychord
69 posts

Re: People get music for free - detrimental to artists?

Would it not be awesome to own some clothing with a Laetitia Sadier trademark. I'm typically a thrift shopper but would pay extra for some "Sadiers". And when someone asks you where you got those shoes that wouild lead into a conversation about Stereolab.Victoria Beckham has those jeans with the stars on the back pockets that everybody loves. Laetitia could top that!

Oct 09, 2008, 17:25

Pages: 4 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 | Next ]

add a reply to this topic
________________________________________________________________\______________________________________
stereolab table Index