Good Downloading Site With a Monthly Fee? (with bonus discussion included inside!)
- Thread starter NinjaGeek
- Start date
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
You could always do the torrent thing. You can find just about anything there remotely heard of. Some stuff is not attainable there, of course.
EDIT: Oh, I just realized you wanted one with a monthly fee... I don't know much about that, but I believe TorrentLeech.org has a $40 monthly fee, but of course you can get high quality movies/DVD rips, PC programs, music, ect. I heard that site was extremely professional.
EDIT: Oh, I just realized you wanted one with a monthly fee... I don't know much about that, but I believe TorrentLeech.org has a $40 monthly fee, but of course you can get high quality movies/DVD rips, PC programs, music, ect. I heard that site was extremely professional.
Most of those "independant" mp3 subscription sites are dodgy as fuck. Especially ones located in countries like Russia. Why on earth anyone would pay for that stuff is beyond me. I can assure you the artists aren't seeing so much as a dime of the money you pay for those mp3s so if you just want the mp3s you might as well download them for free from your p2p services of choice.
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
I was under the interpretation that with Rapidshare you could only DL 1 file every 3 hours. I might be thinking of something else, but I was pretty sure Rapidshare was what I was thinking of
DarkBliss
...And okra for all
Hint: that site is partially in English.
Also,you can bypass rapidshare's time limit by disconnecting and connecting again.
Never fails.
Also,you can bypass rapidshare's time limit by disconnecting and connecting again.
Never fails.
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
Well, that wasn't a hint dude, but I figured it out. That site links you to rapid share (ect.) to get the file. Some of the files I clicked on earlier were not still up. If you're going to do that kind of thing you might as well Torrent it... I honestly don't think the bands ever see any money that you pay when you download from those pay sites. ITunes, yes / Sites like that, no.
Not quite three hours, but yeah...got some In Flames bootleggs off there, but took forever. Still, fast downloads, and you don't have to wait if you pay.
Definitely. The only difference between pirating the music and getting it from a subscription site is that you lose money. Either buy it somewhere or check sites like mininova.
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
DON'T buy music on the Internet unless it's the physical thing being sent to you. I would make it a point not even to use iTunes since it's a piece of shit.
I think there is a place for legal online music services. I would probably use them under certain circumstances if the currently available stores weren't all rubbish. For stuff I really care about I will probably always want physical media but I also have quite a bit of music that I like but not necessarily enough to actually go and buy the CD and have it take up space on my shelf. For that kind of stuff, if I could download good quality mp3s and throw a few bucks at the artist in doing so I'd gladly do it. My main conditions would be that it's:
1) Cheap (99 cents per song is ridiculous, why buy an album online if it comes out as expensive as buying the actual CD with booklet)
2) No DRM of any kind (in other words complete freedom of use)
3) High quality files (192kbit at the very least) available in a multitude of different formats (so you can download a 320k or high quality VBR one for home use and a 128k version for on your portable music player for instance)
4) Online store with a very broad selection (it's not like the concept of shelf space exists on the internet, go nuts I say) and a good interface that makes it quick and easy to find and pay for stuff.
As far as I'm aware not a single one of the major online music distributors currently checks out on all of those (or even on a few of them). They'll learn someday, hopefully.
Sadly the one thing that came close to this (the OINK bittorrent tracker) is dead now. But that is essentially what online music distribution should be like. If there was a legit service as good as that I'd be all over it.
1) Cheap (99 cents per song is ridiculous, why buy an album online if it comes out as expensive as buying the actual CD with booklet)
2) No DRM of any kind (in other words complete freedom of use)
3) High quality files (192kbit at the very least) available in a multitude of different formats (so you can download a 320k or high quality VBR one for home use and a 128k version for on your portable music player for instance)
4) Online store with a very broad selection (it's not like the concept of shelf space exists on the internet, go nuts I say) and a good interface that makes it quick and easy to find and pay for stuff.
As far as I'm aware not a single one of the major online music distributors currently checks out on all of those (or even on a few of them). They'll learn someday, hopefully.
Sadly the one thing that came close to this (the OINK bittorrent tracker) is dead now. But that is essentially what online music distribution should be like. If there was a legit service as good as that I'd be all over it.
PanzerKunt
Black Metal Jihad
I have edited this thread to remove the Russian plugs. I always find subjects like this to put me in a grey area of letting people share links etc. but also this site is made to help and support bands. When you buy from those Russian sites, sure it saves you some money, and you get your tunes, but the artists and labels who put that stuff out make $0, nada, zilch. The "royalties" (yes in quotes) are little to none and go to the Russian royalty company and never make it back to the artists.
The more you buy from places like that, the less albums we're going to be seeing from artists and the less they make to put this stuff out for us.
Sometimes I wish I could share certain info that comes to me from labels/bands but sadly can't. That said, soon you will be seeing some big changes coming, labels closing/consolidating, cutting WAY back (in signing/money/staff), changing the number of bands they can sign/market, you name it. It's getting worse and worse for artists, and sad to say to make a living from music any more is few and far between. Sure, many do it out of love, but to see pennies returned for all that time vested is sad.
The more you buy from places like that, the less albums we're going to be seeing from artists and the less they make to put this stuff out for us.
Sometimes I wish I could share certain info that comes to me from labels/bands but sadly can't. That said, soon you will be seeing some big changes coming, labels closing/consolidating, cutting WAY back (in signing/money/staff), changing the number of bands they can sign/market, you name it. It's getting worse and worse for artists, and sad to say to make a living from music any more is few and far between. Sure, many do it out of love, but to see pennies returned for all that time vested is sad.
It is sad in a way. But it's not all as dire as you're making it sound. It is an unavoidable fact that the current distribution model that most of the music industry adheres to simply doesn't work anymore. It was established in a time when record labels were far more powerful than they are now, when they were in complete control of the distribution of music and had free reign to distribute and price it as they saw fit (and they sure made good use of that). But that time is over now. The control, which is the entire foundation on which this business model is built, lies with the public now.
Whether major record labels like it or not, the internet is not going to go away. And things like DRM can only do so much. If music can be played it can always be copied. The public has made it clear that they do not want to spend anywhere near the amount of money on CDs that record labels and retailers have grown used to. The point is they shouldn't be expecting that amount in the first place. They were lucky that they could milk the situation for as long as they have and make obscene amounts of profit on something that should essentially be an art form. At this point they can either evolve and give people what they want (affordable music, online or physical, along the lines of what I said in my previous post) or they can stick to the outdated model and die off. It seems many labels are hellbent on doing the latter rather than face reality and try to come up with ways to use the potential of the internet to their advantage.
Honestly, the entire music industry can crash and burn tomorrow for all I care and I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Many people working in it are holding on to jobs that shouldn't even exist in the first place. Even if it were to go away overnight (which it obviously won't), something better will take its place eventually. Music existed well before the concept of a "music industry" or a "record label" did and it isn't going to go away just because people can't make much money off it anymore. And with the internet there will always be a low-cost and easy way to promote and distribute/sell it independantly, something that never existed before.
Whether major record labels like it or not, the internet is not going to go away. And things like DRM can only do so much. If music can be played it can always be copied. The public has made it clear that they do not want to spend anywhere near the amount of money on CDs that record labels and retailers have grown used to. The point is they shouldn't be expecting that amount in the first place. They were lucky that they could milk the situation for as long as they have and make obscene amounts of profit on something that should essentially be an art form. At this point they can either evolve and give people what they want (affordable music, online or physical, along the lines of what I said in my previous post) or they can stick to the outdated model and die off. It seems many labels are hellbent on doing the latter rather than face reality and try to come up with ways to use the potential of the internet to their advantage.
Honestly, the entire music industry can crash and burn tomorrow for all I care and I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Many people working in it are holding on to jobs that shouldn't even exist in the first place. Even if it were to go away overnight (which it obviously won't), something better will take its place eventually. Music existed well before the concept of a "music industry" or a "record label" did and it isn't going to go away just because people can't make much money off it anymore. And with the internet there will always be a low-cost and easy way to promote and distribute/sell it independantly, something that never existed before.
I should add, that when I talk about this stuff, I am not including major labels in my equation. I'm talking the labels that put out stuff that we listen to, with the biggest of those being stuff like Century Media, Nuclear Blast, SPV.
Cairath, (and this isn't picking a fight but I am curious) how do you not think it is as dire as I may make it out to be? I'm curious to the rationale of your reply.
Cairath, (and this isn't picking a fight but I am curious) how do you not think it is as dire as I may make it out to be? I'm curious to the rationale of your reply.
Well like I said, the way I see it is that music at its purest is a form of personal artistic expression. Something that can (and perhaps should) exist separately altogether from whether or not someone can make a living (or even earn a few bucks on the side) off it. Even if the entire music industry would vanish tomorrow it isn't going to stop talented and driven people from making great music. And people will find new ways to promote, and distribute/sell that music. With the internet that is possible now moreso than ever.
Producing music on a semi-professional level is also something that is now more easily done than ever before. There are loads of audio editing suites for the PC and Mac that come with features that used to be exclusive to expensive recording/mixing studios. Up until the early 90's there was literally no way for a band to record, mix and then distribute or sell their own music independently and worldwide (not necessarily for free, but at a cost level that is not impossible to deal with for an amateur band). It just couldn't be done. Now you can, and many people do so successfully.
To illustrate, just a few days ago I ordered the new CD by Phil Western (someone loosely affiliated with Skinny Puppy if that means anything to anyone here). It's a CD-R album with handmade packaging limited to 250 copies. You e-mail him directly, ask if he has any copies left, and if he does you Paypal him the money ($15 including shipping anywhere). Is he going to make loads of money this way? Not really, obviously. But then that isn't his goal to begin with. He is getting his music to people that otherwise would never have been able to get their hands on it and all the money made from it goes directly to him. Another example is When Day Descends, a band by forum member YaYo (I don't know if he ever posted on this particular UM forum though). Basically the same thing.
Being able to actually live off your music is a luxury at best and I'm not even sure it's a healthy one. And it often involves having to make artistic concessions at one point or another to be able to maintain that lifestyle. No matter how much artistic integrity you have, if you get used to the music being your actual livelihood you can't convince me that it at no point affects your approach to writing and producing music.
So is this a dire situation? Maybe for the people you talk to, people working in the industry and for bands that are used to being able to comfortably live off their music (since by doing so they rely directly on the wealth of the labels that are currently going under). But for music lovers, not really. The only reason why the situation in the music industry is constantly portrayed as disastrous is because it is constantly presupposed that the status quo must be maintained (coincidentally this is always done by industry people and almost never by music fans), and yet reality dictates that it simply can't be.
Producing music on a semi-professional level is also something that is now more easily done than ever before. There are loads of audio editing suites for the PC and Mac that come with features that used to be exclusive to expensive recording/mixing studios. Up until the early 90's there was literally no way for a band to record, mix and then distribute or sell their own music independently and worldwide (not necessarily for free, but at a cost level that is not impossible to deal with for an amateur band). It just couldn't be done. Now you can, and many people do so successfully.
To illustrate, just a few days ago I ordered the new CD by Phil Western (someone loosely affiliated with Skinny Puppy if that means anything to anyone here). It's a CD-R album with handmade packaging limited to 250 copies. You e-mail him directly, ask if he has any copies left, and if he does you Paypal him the money ($15 including shipping anywhere). Is he going to make loads of money this way? Not really, obviously. But then that isn't his goal to begin with. He is getting his music to people that otherwise would never have been able to get their hands on it and all the money made from it goes directly to him. Another example is When Day Descends, a band by forum member YaYo (I don't know if he ever posted on this particular UM forum though). Basically the same thing.
Being able to actually live off your music is a luxury at best and I'm not even sure it's a healthy one. And it often involves having to make artistic concessions at one point or another to be able to maintain that lifestyle. No matter how much artistic integrity you have, if you get used to the music being your actual livelihood you can't convince me that it at no point affects your approach to writing and producing music.
So is this a dire situation? Maybe for the people you talk to, people working in the industry and for bands that are used to being able to comfortably live off their music (since by doing so they rely directly on the wealth of the labels that are currently going under). But for music lovers, not really. The only reason why the situation in the music industry is constantly portrayed as disastrous is because it is constantly presupposed that the status quo must be maintained (coincidentally this is always done by industry people and almost never by music fans), and yet reality dictates that it simply can't be.
Matt
Active Member
I don't use pay sites to download. I use blogs, etc. I buy 94.32189% of the stuff I d/l, so it's not like I'm stealing from the artists.
ShredHeadJHJ
oh noes itz a opinionn
Well, I don't agree. I wish bands could somehow make a better living off their music, but I don't see Nergal working at Hot Topic for a 2nd job. The guys that are serious about their craft will make a living out of playing live shows a lot of times. The day that I Google Tony MacAlpine & find out that he just got fired from McDonalds is the day I COMPLETELY stop down loading music.
Anyways... WTF... We don't need this conversation here. The man just asked what some good pay sites were.
Yes, god forbid we actually turn a thread into a discussion instead of just listing websites. Besides, it was a reply to Deron's question so you're in no way obligated to read it or anything. But fine, here's my on-topic response:
In short, no. If you want to buy straight mp3s with no DRM technology the only big online store to my knowledge that does that is Amazon (they are actually by far the best one right now, offering DRM free mp3s at 256k VBR quality which is better than most stores do) but they do not work with a monthly fee. You pay per song or per album and it's like 90 cents per song or something so that is still very pricey. Monthly subscription with no DRM is just not going to happen right now. I'm sure in the future there will be stores that will attempt this model but right now the music industry is still firmly trying to repackage their broken business model into an equally broken online version of it (i.e. they are still under the delusion that they can charge outrageous prices and at the same time also retain complete control over what the customer can and cannot do with their music).
As far as obscure metal though, I imagine Amazon's selection will be quite limited (I suppose it depends on your definition of obscure).
This is ofcourse under the assumption that you wanted to legally buy mp3s. If not, then, well, um, it's the internet, you know.
In short, no. If you want to buy straight mp3s with no DRM technology the only big online store to my knowledge that does that is Amazon (they are actually by far the best one right now, offering DRM free mp3s at 256k VBR quality which is better than most stores do) but they do not work with a monthly fee. You pay per song or per album and it's like 90 cents per song or something so that is still very pricey. Monthly subscription with no DRM is just not going to happen right now. I'm sure in the future there will be stores that will attempt this model but right now the music industry is still firmly trying to repackage their broken business model into an equally broken online version of it (i.e. they are still under the delusion that they can charge outrageous prices and at the same time also retain complete control over what the customer can and cannot do with their music).
As far as obscure metal though, I imagine Amazon's selection will be quite limited (I suppose it depends on your definition of obscure).
This is ofcourse under the assumption that you wanted to legally buy mp3s. If not, then, well, um, it's the internet, you know.
