Black Metal.

[MasterOLightning]

Not to mention that it's a victimless crime, especially when it comes to OOPs and unreleased material. When Atheist and Cynic were out of print for all those years, in a pre-Myspace/Youtube world, these bands certainly benefited from continued exposure via downloads.

 

[Omni]

Oh, and to whoever said that bands will continue to make music even if everyone keeps downloading it, some bands can't afford to record anything if people just download everything that they release and never want to buy it. Not everyone has major label backing and tons of promotion, and most metal bands and those in other less mainstream styles of music most likely don't.

 

[~Derek~]

I buy cds, as well as download.

When I look back I have a lot of fond memories buying CDs, and honestly, I'd prefer it if I didn't download at all. The whole experience of buying a CD, the first listen and enjoying music along with the artwork, and especially waking up the next morning remembering that you've got that CD to look forward to and listen to is a million times better than listening to a bunch of mp3s you just downloaded. Not only that, but I am much more likely spend more time getting into the album and appreciating it than with mp3s.

...but because of downloading I've discovered so many more bands that I probably wouldn't have ever listened to or even heard of, had I not downloaded in the first place - my CD collection would be a fraction of what it is.

That being said, I'm not at all proud of downloading and I think it’s a shame that albums are being leaked up to two months in advance to it’s release date. I really don’t like the whole downloading culture either. The whole, “I’ve got more gigs of music than you! This album just leaked seconds ago, and I’m going to be the very first person to write a review about it on metal-archives!” type stuff.

Now that I have paypal though and can buy online, I am going to download a lot less. The local music shops have a pretty poor to average selection for music so it didn't help when I really wanted to buy cds. I am even considering re-buying a CD player – since mine broke like three years ago - for when I want to listen to my CDs. For whatever reason I don’t like listening to CDs on my computer. Of course I will still use my Zen Vision W, it’s convenient and practical, and I will still rip cds onto my comp for this purpose.

Hopefully this makes sense in the morning, I'm tired and it's almost 6am.

It was the morning. And I sgree with you, I just don't download unless friends give me samples of things, which is essentially what MySpace and Youtube does. I'd rather own the CD anyways.

 

[Alter]

Not to mention that it's a victimless crime, especially when it comes to OOPs and unreleased material. When Atheist and Cynic were out of print for all those years, in a pre-Myspace/Youtube world, these bands certainly benefited from continued exposure via downloads.

It is easye exposure for bands; very similar to tape trading that benefited the 80's metal scene that everyone holds so fucking dear to themselves.

 

[tagradh]

Oh, and to whoever said that bands will continue to make music even if everyone keeps downloading it, some bands can't afford to record anything if people just download everything that they release and never want to buy it. Not everyone has major label backing and tons of promotion, and most metal bands and those in other less mainstream styles of music most likely don't.

Maybe. Home recording is getting easier and cheaper all the time though.

 

[Alter]

I find Omni's argument to be 50% true and 50% vacent given the fact that thousands of crust punk bands in squats all around the world are able to record good quality records every year. Downloading hurts labels much more that the artists. Are there any statistics that support the notion that indie labels are hurting bad? I understand that record shops are being hit hard but what about the labels?

 

[Omni]

A good example of a fairly obscure band that was hurt by downloaders is Elend, who had to quit recording music for a while due to the fact that their label couldn't afford the studio time and hiring of session musicians for their albums since nearly everyone who listened to them downloaded their albums instead of buying them.

It's easy to say that crust punk bands can record albums on the cheap, but a band like Elend is unable to record their music without people actually buying them since their music can't really be created in a DIY fashion.

 

[Cythraul]

It's funny how you're rebutting an argument when I didn't actually make an argument.

First of all, what I said is that I hate "the downloading culture and mentality," which is distinct from this imaginary argument that you and the others have conjured in your own minds.

Don't be ridiculous. You don't have to offer me a set of premises and a conclusion in order to be criticized for the assumptions that (apparently) underlie a sentiment you express. You said the following:

Is it really an outlandish concept for you people go, say, go without hearing an album if you can't buy it, or, hell, even waiting until you buy an album to listen to it? Do you have that much of a short attention span that you can't be content with what you already own?

You are clearly criticizing people who download albums. On what grounds? If your grounds were merely that people who download have short attention spans, or that the "downloading culture" is annoying for some reason or another, it would be reasonable to ask you "What's the issue here?" Is it an actual ethical issue that demands attention or not? I was being charitable in making the criticism that I did, because I assumed you were actually criticizing downloading because you think it has some ethical importance and is therefore worth sweating over. My response was meant to show that there is no context-independent ethical issue here.

As far as "ethically on par" goes, are you sure that not stealing an apple and stealing an apple that you wouldn't have bought anyway because you can't afford it are "ethically on par?" I'm pretty sure that stealing something that you wouldn't have bought and not stealing the thing are not moral equivalents. Whether or not something tangible is taken away is irrelevant. What is relevant is the something illegally or unethically gained.

It's funny how you accuse me of misinterpreting you, yet you clearly do not seem to get what I was on about. The point was that the artist whose album I download incurs no loss from my act of downloading their album. The person from whom I steal an apple incurs an actual loss as a result of my act of stealing their apple. That has ethical importance.

But to go on, if you "literally have no money" then yes, you are, in fact, supposed to continue to refrain from illegally acquiring that which you are not allowed to acquire by given means.

Why? Because it's the law or because there's some ethical importance that attaches to my act of downloading?

Contrary to what V5 seems to believe, for reasons that he assuredly won't be able to explain, art is not above the law, which makes the dubious claim that obtaining art is above the law doubly absurd. "Law and art don't really overlap?" Bullshit. Of course they overlap. And not only do those two overlap, but the act of obtaining art is fully grounded in law, so suggesting that "music is meant to be heard and therefore it is acceptable to obtain music by illegal means" is absurd. With respect to CD-Rs, if I'm not mistaken, the law does not permit burning CD-R copies of albums to be used by other people as a normal CD, i.e. in place of the 'real thing.'

That's all well and good, but I haven't committed myself to anything V5 has said and I really don't see how the law is relevant in deciding a matter of ethics.

And no, I certainly was not being obstinate.

Really? You certainly seem to be being rather obstinate about an ethical view that I don't think stands up to scrutiny. Seriously, how exactly does anything of ethical importance attach to an act of downloading an album?

edit: In fairness to you, I don't think the general phenomenon of downloading is really a positive thing. I realize that there's practical significance in being unyielding about the laws in these matters, but I don't think there is anything of ethical importance that attaches to my individual acts of downloading albums. In so far as I do what I can do within reasonable limits to financially support the artists that I like then there is really nothing of consequence that results from my downloading albums that I don't yet have the resources to acquire in physical form. I don't make it any more possible than it was before for this kind of phenomenon to continue by downloading an album. Strictly speaking, I am doing nothing wrong. That's not to say that nothing of practical significance hangs on whether this downloading phenomenon continues or not.

 

[Dak]

I am surprised no one has mentioned two other important but often overlooked facts in the debate over downloading:

Labels take a large chunk of CD profits
Bands make a better percentage from CONCERT tickets.

The purpose of commercial music was to drive ticket sales. The majority of people screaming about downloaders are the labels, not the artists. I am sure the artists don't complain about increased exposure and therefore theoretically higher ticket sales which = more money FOR THE ARTIST(S).
Metallica even apologized for the Napster issue, and if you think about the fuss they raised, it really was a greed issue, since they already had relative market saturation and weren't worried about gaining added exposure through file-sharing.

 

[Omni]

Dakryn doesn't seem to understand that not all labels are as greedy as big labels, and also doesn't get that not all bands play live shows.

 

[Alter]

A good example of a fairly obscure band that was hurt by downloaders is Elend, who had to quit recording music for a while due to the fact that their label couldn't afford the studio time and hiring of session musicians for their albums since nearly everyone who listened to them downloaded their albums instead of buying them.

It's easy to say that crust punk bands can record albums on the cheap, but a band like Elend is unable to record their music without people actually buying them since their music can't really be created in a DIY fashion.

I thought I was on your ignore list. Whatever, decent reply. I'll take it though I do believe home recording is becoming very cheap and will become the next progession to studios.

 

[Mort Divine]

I mean yeah I download, but I'll go on kicks where over a course of a month I'll have spent close to 300 dollars on CDs. So it isn't like I'm complete scum.

 

[Alter]

Yeah, I used to be totally anti-download but than I relized that I dig music a ton so why not download and buy? I still support labels and recordshops whenever I can. Seriosuly.

 

[Omni]

I thought I was on your ignore list. Whatever, decent reply. I'll take it though I do believe home recording is becoming very cheap and will become the next progession to studios.

You were, and still are. I can click a little "view post" button on every ignored post that you make. I did so here because your post was obviously a reply to what tadragh had said about my post, since you had also posted directly before him. Simple logic there, dude.

Anyway, Elend's music couldn't really be recorded in a home setting since they use session choirs and real orchestral music arrangements.

 

[A1a23]

WTF!! This is a black metal thread not a downloading debate thread! I think Deron needs to get over here and settle this.

 

[Ultimate_Symphony]

WTF!! This is a black metal thread not a downloading debate thread! I think Deron needs to get over here and settle this.

STFU. Not every day you see a decent discussion going around here.

 

[skeptik]

It's funny how you accuse me of misinterpreting you, yet you clearly do not seem to get what I was on about. The point was that the artist whose album I download incurs no loss from my act of downloading their album. The person from whom I steal an apple incurs an actual loss as a result of my act of stealing their apple. That has ethical importance.

MY point was that you are not in a position to be stealing anything, whether or not the form of stealing entails any actual tangible loss. And if I recall correctly, stealing falls under the concern of ethics. Taking something to which you do not possess the right of ownership is stealing and unethical, regardless whether or not it is lawful, which answers the next part:

Why? Because it's the law or because there's some ethical importance that attaches to my act of downloading?

As I explained in the posts following the one you're quoting, I was not arguing under the principle that downloading is illegal and therefore unlawful, but that it is stealing and therefore wrong and unethical. That it also it unlawful is a mere convenient (or in this instance inconvenient, since it necessitates that I rebut further arguments that I never put forth myself) happenstance.

That's all well and good, but I haven't committed myself to anything V5 has said and I really don't see how the law is relevant in deciding a matter of ethics.

I was not responding only to your post, actually. Your post was a springboard for discussion. And as I said above, it is a matter of ethics regardless of law, but ignoring the ties between law and ethics is kind of silly as well, as they do overlap.

Really? You certainly seem to be being rather obstinate about an ethical view that I don't think stands up to scrutiny.

Since when has stealing outside of immediate necessity ever been subject of scrutiny? Do we not condemn stealing? Maybe you don't think it stands up to scrutiny because you have something at stake in it not meeting such standards.

Seriously, how exactly does anything of ethical importance attach to an act of downloading an album?

Really? You can't imagine what ethical concern may arise from forgoing artistic rights and ownership rights in illegally downloading? Stealing is as much the act itself and the criminal as it is anything else. Stealing is stealing because one acquires something by unethical means that he does not have any right to possess when such rights are relevant to the discussion, which I think it is fairly obvious that it is in this instance. Is it as unethical and morally objectionable as walking into a store and stealing a physical copy of a CD? Perhaps not, but that does not make the act of illegally downloading any less wrong.

I don't think there is anything of ethical importance that attaches to my individual acts of downloading albums.

Why? In what way is it permissible for you to steal? Simply because there is no tangible loss to the victim?

In so far as I do what I can do within reasonable limits to financially support the artists that I like then there is really nothing of consequence that results from my downloading albums that I don't yet have the resources to acquire in physical form.

Outside of the ethical matter, perhaps.

I don't make it any more possible than it was before for this kind of phenomenon to continue by downloading an album.

This can be said for nearly any type of stealing, but that doesn't make it any better. That my stealing a candy bar doesn't lead to further stealing of candy bars does not make my personal act of stealing justifiable.

Strictly speaking, I am doing nothing wrong.

Strictly speaking, you are doing something wrong. What is at question here is whether or not you care.

 

[Mort Divine]

Why are you bothering arguing something that has no real practical application? Theories and shit are nice and all, but what does it matter if it doesn't have any real application?

 

[Captain.Howdy]

black metal is wat i mainly listen too, along with death metal...

im into more of the original BM like Darkthrone, Mayhem, and yes even Burzum...

 

[Matt]

I'm pretty sure most bm artists support some downloading. It's necessary for underground bands to get things out and get known. Also, a person who can't afford to buy and instead downloads inevitably will talk about it on thar intrawebnet, and word of mouth is highly important for underground music. Not many people are like Koude or Nec, who seem to buy everything the instant it comes out.