Opeth : The Ghost Reveries

[J the TyranT]

Ugh, this discussion is headed for the sewer and fast... shit, first time I met the Lamb of God guys they were touring with God Forbid... LoG opened, and I didnt get a chance to hear them, cuz I got there late... so John Campbell goes "Well, you can just check out our shit on Audiogalaxy or something"... and when Hypocrisy toured with Soilwork the first time around, I ran to my house to burn him a PAIN cd [he forgot his before the tour] so he could let everybody listen to it... I had to audiogalaxy that, cuz I didnt have it at the time myself...

So, some of the guys already in the industry dont care... and some do. I remember Nikki Sixx saying Napster helped kids in places like Malaysia get into music they probably wouldnt normally be able to check out... so its a necessary evil...

I've heard from enough people that the real support comes from the tours and t-shirt sales and the like... but, decide for yourself... I'm on both sides of this fence.

 

[Static]

I thought that was a really excellent post Lykis. I really think the issue is blown out of proportion quite often, mp3ing downloading is NOT THAT HARMFUL. In some cases it can be even more beneficial for a band than they would wish to admit (the merchandise, shows and exposure argument).

That said I can understand the stealing aspects that those against it bring up, but I don't believe it strongly enough to not download.


J The Tyrant, this argument does not NEED to get pissy. No potshots at anyone thus far, let's keep it like that...

 

[Kazrog]

I can refute all of your points, Static, very quickly and concisely:

1) Not having a "credit card" is not the issue. You can still set up a bank account and use a "check card" that runs through the same networks. Anyone with a bank account can do this regardless of their credit standing.

2) Illegally downloading music on p2p services requires that you know what you're looking for. If you find out about this music through word of mouth, then you can go to the band's official site and check out their music there. Most bands have some downloadable songs (my band has 5 of them) and many bands have even more streaming audio and video to check out on their websites. Why not go to the source?

3) iTunes is affordable, and most of the bands we listen to are on there. I agree that $17 is outragoues to pay for a CD. The CD is ultimately a dying format anyway.

4) Any reasonable quality mp3 rip is more than good enough for most people to consider that they "have" the album. When you buy an album, you're not buying it for the round disc or the packaging, but ultimatley the music inside, otherwise you wouldn't buy it! Therefore, when you illegally download mp3s, you are stealing the main thing of value. It's like taking the cereal out of the box and saying it's not stealing because you didn't take the box itself. You can't be serious!

I think this is a great discussion, and I've put a lot of thought into this subject. I ultimately think that the present and future of music is iTunes, as well as artists selling their music through their websites. And of course touring!

 

[Static]

Not having a "credit card" is not the issue. You can still set up a bank account and use a "check card" that runs through the same networks. Anyone with a bank account can do this regardless of their credit standing.

I don't know about that stuff...I've been inquiring about a credit card for a while and can't apparently because of income...I'm confused as to ways of paying for shit on the net. I've tried figuring out paypal and all this shit, in truth it confuses me.

Illegally downloading music on p2p services requires that you know what you're looking for. If you find about this music through word of mouth, then you can go to the band's official site and check out their music there. Most bands have some downloadable songs (my band has 5 of them) and many bands have even more streaming audio and video to check out on their websites. Why not go to the source?

Well, you are wrong about the knowing what you are looking for part. I discover music by going to hubs and such that are part of music scenes I appreciate, going by the suggestions of people there and by downloading random stuff. Before downloading I knew nothing about any of this music, after a while of doing it I'd learned all about the genres, and also knew what deserved my money.

But if you download bits of band websites you end up with a bunch of disconnected samples that are out of context and don't make much sense together. I like to know I like an album as a whole album before I purchase it. Like with Dissection's latest samples, they sound like shit to me, but there may be other good songs...so I'd go download.

Any reasonable quality mp3 rip is more than good enough for most people to consider that they "have" the album. When you buy an album, you're not buying it for the round disc or the packaging, but ultimatley the music inside, otherwise you wouldn't buy it! Therefore, when you illegally download mp3s, you are stealing the main thing of value. It's like taking the cereal out of the box and saying it's not stealing because you didn't take the box itself. You can't be serious!

I guess, but I still question how said acquisition is so harmful. And the whole 'stealing is just bad cos it's stealing' thing doesn't sit well with me when you consider how mp3 downloading is much less harmful than people seem to think it is. When the ramifications of doing something illegal is much less than it is put out to be people do it...like smoking weed...and it only turns into something that fucks with society on occasion. Ultimately it is much more villified, shunned and notorious than its actual outcomes deserve.

When mp3s are flying back and forth only intellectual quality is being stolen, not actual money...it is more the pre-conception that these mp3s are going to lead to a lack of profit for the OFFICIAL PRODUCT. That is somewhat of a grey area.

I acknowledge you've had good points but they still don't make me change my mind about downloading, or have much effect on my own personal situation...

 

[Kazrog]

I don't know about that stuff...I've been inquiring about a credit card for a while and can't apparently because of income...I'm confused as to ways of paying for shit on the net. I've tried figuring out paypal and all this shit, in truth it confuses me.

All you need is a bank account. They can issue you an ATM card that has a Visa or Mastercard logo on it, and is a "check card." This is the default way that things work here in the States, and I'm sure you can do this in New Zealand as well. A check card is not a credit card because the money is instantly deducted from your bank account. There is no "credit" involved, it is essentially like writing an electronic check, but it uses the digital transaction infrastructure established by the credit card companies.

Well, you are wrong about the knowing what you are looking for part. I discover music by going to hubs and such that are part of music scenes I appreciate, going by the suggestions of people there and by downloading random stuff. Before downloading I knew nothing about any of this music, after a while of doing it I'd learned all about the genres, and also knew what deserved my money.

That is a form of word-of-mouth. There again, you can go to band websites to listen to the stuff...

But if you download bits of band websites you end up with a bunch of disconnected samples that are out of context and don't make much sense together. I like to know I like an album as a whole album before I purchase it. Like with Dissection's latest samples, they sound like shit to me, but there may be other good songs...so I'd go download.

This totally depends on the artist in question and how their website is set up. Many artists provide streaming audio of their entire new release. Don't blame a worst-case-scenario, in general band websites are getting a lot more clued in to what you're talking about, and they want you to hear more music before you buy.

I guess, but I still question how said acquisition is so harmful. And the whole 'stealing is just bad cos it's stealing' thing doesn't sit well with me when you consider how mp3 downloading is much less harmful than people seem to think it is. When the ramifications of doing something illegal is much less than it is put out to be people do it...like smoking weed...and it only turns into something that fucks with society on occasion. Ultimately it is much more villified, shunned and notorious than its actual outcomes deserve.

And yet you have no numbers to back this up. Why do you think that music sales are decreasing so rapidly every year? The truth is out there, and the numbers show the exact opposite of what you're saying. According to Soundscan, the top 100 albums sold 194.9 million units in 1999, compared to 153.3 million units in 2004. That's a 21% drop in sales since 1999. And the effects have been even more damaging to indie labels, who have increasingly had to consolidate. Most bands are being forced to fork over their hard earned tour merch money to the labels now. It sucks, and I strongly believe that illegal music downloading is to blame. The "weed" analogy has absolutely no relevance to this situation.

When mp3s are flying back and forth only intellectual quality is being stolen, not actual money...it is more the pre-conception that these mp3s are going to lead to a lack of profit for the OFFICIAL PRODUCT. That is somewhat of a grey area.

I think you mean "intellectual property." Intellectual property is obviously not money, but it is property, which ultimately holds even greater value than money itself, because it is a commodity. Bands slave for months writing and recording albums, investing their time and of course their money into equipment, studio fees, and all of the other expenses that go into being in a band. Albums are the end result of a lot of monetary debt -which must be recouped!

There is no gray area, music sales are down, and there's no way you can fight the SoundScan numbers, they are very accurate.

 

[James Murphy]

some random but relevant facts, thoughts, and other minutia:

the guitarist of the band i'm recording and mixing right now just bought the new Arch Enemy at Tower for $10. bargain!

mp3's sound like ass... i will NEVER give up CD quality sound for listening at home... i don't even listen to mp3's on my iPod.. ugghh.

seems to me the issue was leaking the Opeth album when the band had expressely forbid it.... disrespectful whether you think they were "right" to wish that or not.. especially to do it on their own forum.

copyright law is exactly that.. law.

so.. if art should be free in all ways, then i should be able to sneak into museums without paying the entrance fee so that i can look at the art, nevermind that they have upkeep costs for the building and staff and the artwork itself that they need to pay from those door fees?

i don't recall EVER saying that sampling on-line is bad.. i feel the opposite in fact.. it's quite good for music, and bands and labels know it.. that's why there are always legal samples posted for just about every release these days.

touring/merchandise profits are usually eaten up by expenses on tours...so are not available as "recording budgets".

hot dogs suck.. how can anyone eat that crap?

 

[Static]

All you need is a bank account. They can issue you an ATM card that has a Visa or Mastercard logo on it, and is a "check card." This is the default way that things work here in the States, and I'm sure you can do this in New Zealand as well. A check card is not a credit card because the money is instantly deducted from your bank account. There is no "credit" involved, it is essentially like writing an electronic check, but it uses the digital transaction infrastructure established by the credit card companies.

Thanks, I'll actually look into that...

That is a form of word-of-mouth. There again, you can go to band websites to listen to the stuff...

Yeah, bits and pieces don't interest me that much though...the context thing...

This totally depends on the artist in question and how their website is set up. Many artists provide streaming audio of their entire new release. Don't blame a worst-case-scenario, in general band websites are getting a lot more clued in to what you're talking about, and they want you to hear more music before you buy.

I've never heard of an artist providing streaming audio of an entire release, but ok.

It's annoying being fed through a straw the little bits and pieces they choose to throw us. I'd rather listen to the whole thing and then buy it...

And yet you have no numbers to back this up. Why do you think that music sales are decreasing so rapidly every year? The truth is out there, and the numbers show the exact opposite of what you're saying. According to Soundscan, the top 100 albums sold 194.9 million units in 1999, compared to 153.3 million units in 2004. That's a 21% drop in sales since 1999. And the effects have been even more damaging to indie labels, who have increasingly had to consolidate. Most bands are being forced to fork over their hard earned tour merch money to the labels now. It sucks, and I strongly believe that illegal music downloading is to blame. The "weed" analogy has absolutely no relevance to this situation.

Well, I was thinking more on an individual basis. If it has been more harmful overall to the industry and artists then I can't really refute that, but since I know with sincerity that personally I am a true fan of music and buy music whenever I have the opportunity to, and give my support to these artists, I refuse to feel guilty about taking part in downloading.

If other people grossly abuse downloading that is not my problem, because I am aware that I do not. I know that if it wasn't for downloading I wouldn't know anything about music at all and my personal contribution would be nil.

If the industry didn't have its head up it's arse by throwing fits about mp3s and shunning and going on these irrational prosecutions and tried to understand this medium they could turn it to their advantage. I guess that's what they are trying to achieve with regulation but there has been far too many tantrums in the industry about it.

I guess the thing I really hate is just people leaping out and screaming 'you're part of the problem! you're a criminal! mp3 downloading is wrong!' as if everyone that does it is evil. I don't feel like I've abused anything and my love of music is stronger than it ever was, I do what I can for music, really!

I think you mean "intellectual property." Intellectual property is obviously not money, but it is property, which ultimately holds even greater value than money itself, because it is a commodity. Bands slave for months writing and recording albums, investing their time and of course their money into equipment, studio fees, and all of the other expenses that go into being in a band. Albums are the end result of a lot of monetary debt -which must be recouped!

'twas a simple mis-spelling kinda thing. Hmm. Well that point pwnerized me honestly. I can't think of a comeback...

There is no gray area, music sales are down, and there's no way you can fight the SoundScan numbers, they are very accurate.

Oh well, I don't think the fact that I take part in it contributes to the problem, as I am conscientous.

 

[Static]

so.. if art should be free in all ways, then i should be able to sneak into museums without paying the entrance fee so that i can look at the art, nevermind that they have upkeep costs for the building and staff and the artwork itself that they need to pay from those door fees?

None of those analogies sit right we me, because they are different than an mp3 sitting on a harddrive. You can't download a museum exhibition into your room and walk around it. You can't play an expensive painting on winamp from a sharing program. You've got the conceptual similarities but in practice we're talking about much different forms of 'art' here.

 

[James Murphy]

None of those analogies sit right we me, because they are different than an mp3 sitting on a harddrive. You can't download a museum exhibition into your room and walk around it. You can't play an expensive painting on winamp from a sharing program. You've got the conceptual similarities but in practice we're talking about much different forms of 'art' here.

oh.. i see... so because it's easier, it's ok.. gotcha.

 

[Static]

It's ok depending on how you treat it I reckon and the reasons you do it. The harm done is relative to the person. But yeah still, a museum exhibition, it's just...different.

 

[Benny H]

Check this out http://www.m-base.org/mp3_philosophy.html

"My reasons for providing free music comes from my belief that musical ideas should not be owned by anyone. I believe that ideas should be free for anyone to use (but not to necessarily sell to others or make others pay for the use of these ideas). The concept of a commons area where ideas can be used for the benefit of all but for the profit of no one may seem like an unrealizable concept in the world today. Basically greed runs the world today and it is because of this that the concept of ownership exits."

 

[James Murphy]

It's ok depending on how you treat it I reckon and the reasons you do it. The harm done is relative to the person. But yeah still, a museum exhibition, it's just...different.

ok.. whatever you say.
analogies are always "not the same thing". that's the point... a similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar, and a comparison based on such similarity. and with that i'm done... i can only argue semantics for so long until i'd rather open a vein or open fire.

 

[Static]

Agreeing to disagree ain't always so bad a thing, huh?

I dunno. I'm doing my best with my opinion here but oh well. Debating things with people who are smart is annoying, why can't you just all be dumb and stuff!? *

*a joke


...excuse me I'm off to die.

*explodes*

 

[Static]

However people have asked me "if you are going to give away music then how will you survive and make a living?" It does cost money to make recordings, engineers and musicians have to be paid and materials needs to be purchased. However it is not necessary to have the mentality that we need to make a profit from all that we produce. If a person has a strong conviction and a reason for what they are doing, that alone should be enough motivation for the action to be consummated.

That guy is cool.

 

[Ermz]

Check this out http://www.m-base.org/mp3_philosophy.html

"My reasons for providing free music comes from my belief that musical ideas should not be owned by anyone. I believe that ideas should be free for anyone to use (but not to necessarily sell to others or make others pay for the use of these ideas). The concept of a commons area where ideas can be used for the benefit of all but for the profit of no one may seem like an unrealizable concept in the world today. Basically greed runs the world today and it is because of this that the concept of ownership exits."

For that to even have a chance of working, we need to rework the fundamentals of democratic/capitalist society. There is no chance in hell that's gonna happen unless we achieve unification beforehand.

EVERYTHING in this day and age is about ownership, personal gain and greed. That's the driving force of the race.

I mean, how is someone expected to dedicate their full attention and time to music when it can't sustain them financially? This 'equal ownership' idea seems to go under the assumption that our lifestyles are somehow magically managed for us.

 

[Static]

I'm glad I didn't quote that bit, cos it sounds somewhat like the concept of communism. Heh.

I'm more of the belief ownership should be less stringent and people shouldn't be as fucking uptight about it, but saying it should not exist is tantamount to fundamentalism so boourns.

 

[Ermz]

I personally don't care. Bands have the right to protect their intellectual property - they took the time to write and record the music, it's their call.

Despite how much you sugarcoat people's downloading habbits, the last few years have put the industry (at least here in Australia) straight into the shitter. You won't get signed unless the label are sure that you're going to get onto the charts, you're not gonna get a job mixing albums because there are none, fucking hell you're not even gonna get employed as an assistant because none of the studio owners have the means to pay you, nor the work to sustain that shit.

 

[Static]

Regardless of where the industry is in regards to the mp3 issue, I live in fucking New Zealand man. It has NEVER been a strong industry, EVER, so I'm pretty conditioned to the idea that making it in music is tough. I suppose that's one reason I have views like this, perhaps I can't picture myself earning off music!?

But yeah, my opinion on this is very much a personal thing...don't pay too much attention to how it may be fucking up the world, and my personal situation has not been made worse through mp3 for either myself or the industry.

 

[James Murphy]

blah blah blah

 

[Static]

That's not nice.

I like your playing on The Gathering.