A Sampling

[Analogman]

This poll sez: nine people are very, very good liars.

 

 

 

Yeah, actually, most people can't differentiate between a 128 kp/s MP3 and a 256. I remain convinced that this is just a fucking bullshit strawman argument dredged up by audiophiles with nothing better to do with their time.

 

I disagree - but we have already had this talk about a thousand times on here.

[Golden Smoghead]

I almost-never actually download anything illegally for myself, BUUUT my friends and I often burn each other CDs of things we think the other will like and swap them around. I figure it evens out in the long run. For example, I would've never listened to The National at all if someone hadn't burned me a copy of Alligator -- which led to me legally dl'ing Boxer and Sad Songs. It's just a fact that none of the music I like best really represents itself all that well in the 30-seconds iTunes preview. And in fact, I usually dislike music at first that ends up being my favorite (Steve Earle is the ultimate example of this for me personally).

 

I kind of agree with the original post, it's just kind of how you find out about new music anymore, someone pushes you a copy (whatever form). Bad, good, indifferent, if guys as old as me (29) feel comfortable doing this, then you know almost none of the high school kids are actually spending their cash on music when it's so easy to get it free. I think the other threads about how the industry needs to get creative in order to make money are spot-on.

 

Best thing I've seen so far is probably the NIN model that Trent Reznor recently used. Just my $.02.

[Guest Hollinger]

I download all kinds of stuff from album sharing blogs... most of it gets listened to once and then ignored. If I really like something, I'll buy the cd. I have an eMusic account, so I pay to download stuff there. I'll also pay to download albums off of Amazon (or sometimes iTunes, though I try to avoid it for the DRM).

[Mr. Kinsley]

I used to, but I got a rather nasty computer virus that I'm assuming came from said activities. A buddy of mine does though, and he sends me some stuff every now and again - so I guess I'm in the "sort-of" category.

[DAngerer09]

I download all kinds of stuff from album sharing blogs

I saw Josh Ritter the other night and I just read this interview with him.

 

Speaking of performing, I know firsthand that your live sets are awesome. With downloading and blogging becoming a near mainstream commodity, a lot of artists have to rely on their live shows to be profitable. What is your stance on the new downloading era?

I don't have a problem with it, really. There are a ton of bands, myself probably included, that wouldn't be nearly as big as they are without the help of downloads and blogs. I think it's a whole new wave of technology really, how the radio was for singers when it first came out. It all depends on what the artist wants to make of it, they can capitalize of it or ruin it for themselves. So, it's really a new path that is reshaping the industry and each artist can tame it how they want.

[VenusStopsTrain2]

I don't download it..usually what happens is people burn copies for me of their stuff so I can get an idea of what I like...but there are a few I need to get around to actually buying so I'd own them and not just have copies.

[mybenito]

Before the internet me and all my friends had dual cassette recorders. We shared our cassette collections like crazy.

[radiokills]

Yes.

[LouieB]

Since I don't download music I guess I can't vote....its kind of like living in Michigan or Florida...

 

LouieB

[Analogman]

Analog is hardly dead. Forget that I am a cheerleader: I am also way on top of the situation and it

[tongue-tied]

In my listening experience, there is a noticeable leap in quality between 128kps and 256kps MP3, and from 128kps MP3 to AAC. But beyond that rate, and FLAC, seems like overkill. I love LPs, but because they're analog doesn't mean they're done right. Maybe it's in the mixing these days that the pros are better at mixing to CD than LP, or maybe it's something to do with the plants, but I find the results to vary wildly with new records. It's a little ironic too, seeing how a lot of bands that go with LPs these days also go full on audiophile, splitting an album into two thick vinyl discs. My original Clash 'Combat Rock' LP is wafer thin and it's one of the best sounding records I have. It's also much more enjoyable because there's six songs and 20+ minutes of music before you have to flip. Wilco, enough with the 3 song 12 minute sides, please.

[TCP]

I voted yes, for a few reasons. The first, I just finished college, I have a job but the hours aren't great yet, I don't have $20 to pay for CDs which I don't listen to that often now that I have my MacBook. Second, I don't want want to but CDs anymore now that I have a record player, but finding new vinyl around here is hard.

[froggie]

i used to, before Lars shut down the free version of Napster. havent done so since

[tongue-tied]

I voted yes, for a few reasons. The first, I just finished college, I have a job but the hours aren't great yet, I don't have $20 to pay for CDs which I don't listen to that often now that I have my MacBook. Second, I don't want want to but CDs anymore now that I have a record player, but finding new vinyl around here is hard.

 

There are $10 digital downloads. And there are internet/mailorders for vinyl, which sometimes comes with a free digital copy. Just sayin.

[DAngerer09]

There are $10 digital downloads.

 

There are free digital downloads, as well. Just sayin.

[bjorn_skurj]

Yeah, actually, most people can't differentiate between a 128 kp/s MP3 and a 256. I remain convinced that this is just a fucking bullshit strawman argument dredged up by audiophiles with nothing better to do with their time.

No, it isn't. I can tell the difference, and I am not really that discriminating. The more familiar I get with digital music, the bigger I like my files to be. At some point, I am going to get a mongo hard drive and re-rip everything I ripped at 128/196 kpbs AAC at 256.

[PopTodd]

If something is out-of-print or not commercially available, and I have a friend who is willing to upload it for me, I have no problem downloading it. It's not hurting the artist, and I'm sure as hell not going to pay $100+ for something that I may or may not like. And, if I do like it in the end... I'm STILL not going to pay $100+ for it.

 

But if it's a "leak"... I'll wait until the album comes out, when I can hear samples at a listening station or online before I make up my mind about whether or not to buy it.

[CortezTheKiller]

Yeah, actually, most people can't differentiate between a 128 kp/s MP3 and a 256. I remain convinced that this is just a fucking bullshit strawman argument dredged up by audiophiles with nothing better to do with their time.

I'm far from an audiophile, and I can definitely hear the difference.

[mfwahl]

I download quite often and if I like it I usually buy it so I can listen to it in the car. A real cd sounds a lot better than something I've burned for whatever reason (sometimes the spacing between tracks just isn't right on a burned cd). I don't see downloading as that big of a deal. It's good for a band's PR. Most bands make most of their money on tours anyway. By downloading I've discovered a lot of bands that I would never have gone to their shows if I didn't hear the album first for free. Plus people have copied cassettes and CD's from each other for a long time. If it's from my next door or some guy in Germany what's really the difference?

[caliber66]

If it's from my next door or some guy in Germany what's really the difference?

You're right. Both methods are illegal.

[Doug C]

I still buy cds but regularly download songs/albums when a friend sends me a megaupload-type link or I see one posted in a message board. I have occasionally searched for free downloads, but not very often. I feel that when someone buys something, it is their's to do with as they please. The business model of music distribution is changing. It really isn't a new concept. I taped many a cassette for friends of albums and they for me back in the Stone Age.

[Analogman]

Album-loving artists blame iTunes for changed music tastes

 

By Jacqui Cheng | Published: August 28, 2008 - 01:30PM CT

 

Online music sales continue to skyrocket at the expense of CDs. iTunes continues to be the leader of the pack, too, not only in online sales, but music sales overall. But a small rebellion is brewing against iTunes as artists become disgruntled with the hit they're taking on overall album sales thanks to the now-wildly-popular method of cherry-picking favorite tracks for download.

 

As we reported on Infinite Loop back in June, Kid Rock is one of the artists who have begun to speak out against what they consider to be an unfair distribution system in iTunes. Rock said at the time that iTunes was representative of the "old system," where distributors and record labels take money instead of giving it to artists. iTunes, for instance, pushes the a la carte music track system instead of allowing artists to sell music in album-only format. But selling millions of singles isn't necessarily as lucrative as selling far fewer full albums, and for some artists (we don't necessarily include Kid Rock in this category), there's the artistic vision realized only in the full-album experience.

 

Rock eventually decided that he was boycotting iTunes and not placing his new album on the popular online service. "In so many ways it's turned our business back into a singles business," Kid Rock's manager Ken Levitan told the Wall Street Journal today, referring to iTunes as "part of the death knell of the music business."

 

Since June, Rock has sold 1.7 million copies of his Rock 'n' Roll Jesus album, and sales have grown steadily in 19 of the last 22 weeks. Levitan says that, if the album was sold the iTunes way, most of those sales would have merely shown up as 99

[mfwahl]

I like that artists refuse to put their music on there, but I wouldn't blame iTunes. Most music today is created for quick consumption and digestion and fits iTunes perfectly. Now people don't have to buy shitty albums to hear one good song. But if it's a good album, they miss the whole point of it.

[Party @ the Moontower]

We have every Wilco live show that was taped and shared thanks to FHF. I don't listen to Wilco albums (although we have them), just shows because I enjoy hearing the energy of the crowd. I'd be sad without live shows.

[jmacomber68w]

I say Ive averaged 2 albums downloaded a year (illegally that is). But once I download them I end up buying them, I like having the actually media that goes along with it. I do however have tons of live shows from my fav bands, but those are legal. I often borrow cds from friends and put em on my itunes though, I guess that would be considered frowned apon.