xilddx

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1340210713' post='1701168'] While we're at it, congratulations to the OP Mr Ben Jamin - his first sixteen-page thread, I do believe [/quote]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1340210389' post='1701160'] I disagree. The feedback we've had from folk who have discovered us on the interweb bears testament to the fact that the interweb works [/quote] But only because they were LOOKING for you! They didn't magically DISCOVER you. Perhaps nostalgia is killing music

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1340209853' post='1701141'] There are plenty of other bands that have been revived due to the internet. We play a lot of the same vanues as many of them. Balaam and the Angel And Also The Trees Alien Sex Fiend are 3 bands from our era that we've found are still working after years of having their material unavailable........ As I said before we are being exposed now to a whole new audience of people who were not even born first time around. Does that not make us more akin to a new band? OK so maybe we play on the legacy a little but in all seriousness it isn't much. Our original record company never spent anything on marketing in the first place. that's probably why so few people have ever heard of us. That and we are sh*te.... The difference between us and a new band is that we have a catalogue of material to market. Recording a catalogue of material is nowhere near as expensive as it used to be. The playing field is far more level with new bands than you are implying. [/quote] Only because nostalgia is so much easier to get hold of now.

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1340200677' post='1700925'] I strongly disagree. The internet is the greatest markrting tool ever given to the artist [/quote] In theory yes, in practice no. The people who pick up on something on the internet and share it and think it's OMFG this is awsome!!!!! are many, but those who OMFG you are so right!!!!! and reshare only tend to like pap with a massive marketing angle, cute kittens balancing plates, good cleavage, or stuff that's already popular. Even then it's the video getting shared and the music seems to be incidental. There is a massive load of sh*t to wade through before the good stuff hits your search results, and I think people are fatigued with that and prefer the push model, hence the sharing revolution.

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340196254' post='1700777'] Indeed I never knew we had so many members locked into an archaic way of doing things and refusing to move with the times [b]always thought we were an enlightened bunch willing to embrace new ways of doing things. [/b] [/quote] Not when the only basses that matter are Fender Ps and Js, and the occasional Oly White Jag of courseseseses.

What a depressing thread.

[quote name='Earbrass' timestamp='1340194046' post='1700727'] It's here: [/quote] The music in a choir is written by a professional, your choir is conducted by a professional in most cases at that level.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1340193231' post='1700703'] Correct me if I'm wrong, but earlier in the thread you said that piracy was a black and white issue and that anyone who stole as much as a single song was a thief and a c**t. Now you're saying that stealing a song is alright, so long as its just to put on a mixtape for your mate. Seems like you agree with me after all. Some piracy is bad. Some piracy is ok. Hooray, everyone wins. [/quote] No, not what I meant at all. One is bad, one is worse.

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340192781' post='1700679'] Because it is making out that someone on here making music for fun is not as good as someones who does it "Professionally". That perhaps is part of the problem. Maybe the problem is not the sharing but some people see their music as more valid and better because they get a cheque from it when an album is sold. Without the money they are no longer getting the validation that their music is better than their best mate from high school who works during the day, records at night on Audacity, uploads it to youtube and gets their pleasure simply from people listening and enjoying their music. Music was an entertainment, an art to be enjoyed by EVERYONE. songs got passed about and the writers long forgotten. Now it's no more than a newspaper to be bought used and forgotten about when the next one comes along. [/quote] You have not understood me. Where do you get time to develop as an artist?

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340191691' post='1700633'] Really ? any evidence that ticket and merch prices are linked to file sharing? Artists get a small cut of they pie when it comes to Album sales I suggest if there is any inflated price it's not because of the artist losing out but record company execs losing out. [/quote] And what happens when the old bastards are too old to tour? Or get ill? Where's their income going to come from?

[quote name='4000' timestamp='1340192463' post='1700663'] Ah, the dole. Happy days, long ago. As for the rest, yep, I certainly qualify. [/quote] Me too.

[quote name='Earbrass' timestamp='1340192404' post='1700661'] Please see my edited post above. [/quote] No, can't find it. Where is it?

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340192166' post='1700652'] Oh wait hold on it didn't and we are still hearing the same old bullshit trotted out. [/quote] BRX has already explained this tired old bullshit HTiKM argument further up.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1340192144' post='1700650'] No but there's a difference between getting a single track from a band (in amongst a load of others) on a mix tape from a mate and downloading their entire recorded output because you're too cheap to pay for it. [/quote] This is the real issue.

[quote name='4000' timestamp='1340192089' post='1700649'] All absolutely true, but not necessarily helpful to the growth of an artist or the development of talent. How many classic albums would not have been made had the artist in question been working 10 hours a day at Tescos? Or if they had been made, how long would they have taken and what would the quality of the results been like? How many people who do a full-time job can either employ skilled sound engineers or afford to spend the time to learn Protools etc back to front, even assuming their ears are up to it? These days once I get home from work I hardly have the energy to pick my bass up, let alone come up with the next Dark Side of the Moon. Maybe that's just me. [b]On the subject of making your money from gigs, has anybody playing originals tried this recently? Lets just say I'd be on bread & water for the forseeable future...if that.[/b] [/quote] Me too. But we are in the age of the tribute act and the covers band, they are making the small time money now. They'll have f*** all worth covering in 15 years probably.

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340191759' post='1700637'] No offense Nigel but that makes you sound like a pretentious twat. [/quote] Why? Most of us are hobbyists here, most of us are underdeveloped as musicians due to the pressures of working for a living and all the other sh*t we have to deal with. I suppose if one is on the old king cole the we get more time to practice and write.

[quote name='Earbrass' timestamp='1340191696' post='1700634'] a rather patronizing assumption, don't you think? [/quote] Why is it?

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340189167' post='1700573'] Where does an artist make the majority of their money? Album sales or gig and merch revenue? [/quote] Vastly inflated ticket and merch prices to compensate for loss of revenue due to file sharing.

[quote name='Wil' timestamp='1340189818' post='1700590'] That's exactly what I do, I work a day job to pay for my hobby making music. If I could make a living out of selling music, I'd probably be happy about that, but this is the 21st century and I think it's unrealistic to think that people wont share music digitally in the same way people did with cassette tapes, or further back, did around camp fires. To me music is a form of human expression first and foremost, not a commodity, it's ethereal. Once it leaves the speakers it enters your brain and it's yours forever. Honestly, I would rather someone heard my music for free and enjoyed it, instead of not hearing it at all because they're not able to/prepared to pay for it. But that's just me. [/quote] I think you are missing my point. The music you are happy to give away is underdeveloped hobby music. If you are happy slowly developing as your limited free time time allows, doing a few unpaid gigs, and giving your hobby music away, then good for you, I'm happy for you.

[quote name='Wil' timestamp='1340188413' post='1700557'] Me too. I'd just be chuffed people were enjoying my music tbh. [/quote] But to sustain a career in music is not then easily possible is it. To make the best music you can make and really represent yourself at your best, you need to dedicate a lot of time to it, practising, writing, refining, learning, touring, promotion .. giving yourself the best chance at a sustainable career. You can't do all this and have a day job to pay the rent and eat and fund the next musical project.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1340187206' post='1700530'] Yes, we totally agree. My original point way back in the mists of time was that describing copyright infringement as stealing was a silly thing to do. Copyright infringement is a crime, but it is not stealing. I was just being pedantic [/quote] Blimey. What's all this 9 pages about then? Yes, it is not theft, stealing, nicking, half inching. It is COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1340186180' post='1700504'] What's the practical difference between having immediate, on-demand access to 1000 music files stored at home on a hard drive or having immediate, on-demand access to 1,000,000 music files stored on a hard drive in the server room of companies like Spotify or YouTube? [/quote] Convenience. Accessibility. Portability.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1340184755' post='1700453'] I wasn't talking about stealing anything or buying anything, but using a perfectly legal streaming service to listen to the music of my choice whnever and wherever I want. Nothing illegal about it - indeed, I presume the music industry supports such services. [/quote] So what's the problem then? I thought we were talking about the rights and wrongs of ILLEGAL downloading. The music industry IS changing, there are more ways to consume music and hear it before buying it, and yet people have £100s / £1000s worth of illegal music on their devices and deprive the artist and the industry of income. I'm arguing that this is WRONG.

[quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1340183762' post='1700417'] So, have I got this right?.. If I download a song illegally, i'm a ****, even if i've contributed to that artist's income in other ways If I stream the same song legally, i'm a good guy. [/quote] There are many ways to hear music before you buy it without thieving it. Your illegal actions mean that loss has occurred. Just because that loss led to some gain does not make your illegal action right or good. If you beat the sh*t out of me and that inspires me to become a Karate black belt, I'm not going to thank you for beating the sh*t out of me, am I.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1340183147' post='1700398'] Anyway, I'm leaving this discussion. Its getting ugly and people are reading what they want to read, not whats actually been written. For the record: 1. I firmly believe in supporting artists and musicians (and I do, at every opportunity) [b]2. I believe that in many cases piracy is both legally and ethically wrong and cannot be justified 3. I [i]also[/i] believe that in many cases, piracy can actually be a good thing for artists and musicians.[/b] [/quote] Basically then, you are saying nothing at all. You are leaving this discussion because you don't seem to be able to articulate any sound reasoning.