The MP3 question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massplanck

hmmm.

I would hope that any producer who releases/makes money from their music/performances would be using legit software or at least making a decent effort towards sorting it out.

---

trouble is it's a bit hard when you don't make any money because everyone downloads your music..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Francisco Scaramanga

When napster first hit the news a years back, I thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread, and downloaded feckloads of stuff. To be fair, it wasnt ever really dance music though, more like if there was some band that only ever did one good tune and I couldent be asked to buy the whole album I'd just download that one tune.

And I used to have no doubt thousands of pounds worth of cracked software as well.

But I slowly felt more and more guilty about it, and eventually decided to be honest about it all, and not rip people off (it helps that I have more money now than I did then).

So now I dont. I am admittedly using a ripped off copy of Reason 3, but I will pay for it, I only got a copy of Reason 2.5 6 months ago or something (and thats a bought copy) and now that I know Reason 3 is worth a few more bucks I'll dish it out when I can.

As for MP3's, I am still on soulseek, and I do use it, but primarily to download mixes, which I dont have any moral/ethical issues with. I also download the occasional track to check it out, but if I like it, I'll buy the real thing. If I dont like it, although it may still live on my hard drive, I dont listen to it, and so dont really feel guilty about having downloaded it. Every so often stuff like this gets rounded up and deleted anyway.

As for playing out with tunes that I've downloaded, well, I have played a few old funk tracks and that sort of thing, but they are impossible to find on any format, and the artists who did them may well be dead anyway, so I dont get bothered about that, but thats about it.

Downloading and playing out new tunes is unforgiveable if you ask me. If someone slipped in a classic or two that are impossible to get on vinyl I could probably forgive them, but not if its something that could easily be bought in the local record shop.

---

You can upgrade 2.5 to 3 for about £70 can't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IQ

I dont know what cracked versions you have been using, but the ones i have used work perfectly.

---

I like the way you left the urls on your sig so they can chase you up without much bother... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crime

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massplanck

hmmm.

I would hope that any producer who releases/makes money from their music/performances would be using legit software or at least making a decent effort towards sorting it out.

---

trouble is it's a bit hard when you don't make any money because everyone downloads your music..

---

Yeah. Thats the paradox i'm afraid. Then again you couldnt make music if you didnt have the software ( if you use software that is)

Thing is. Its probably about time every techno track in history was put into a huge databass where people downloaded a track for say 99c. I dunno something like an underground itunes with every release ever available.

Lets say someone want the last four release on Crime records on mp3 format and is more than willing to pay... where can the punter go to to get this?

How is Warps mp3\album download thingy doing does anybody know?

uTunes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crime

trouble is it's a bit hard when you don't make any money because everyone downloads your music..

---

there's money in techno? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massplanck

Thing is. Its probably about time every techno track in history was put into a huge databass where people downloaded a track for say 99c. I dunno something like an underground itunes with every release ever available.

---

Excellent idea. I would love to organize something of this sort. However, i believe you would run into a number of issues:

1) First and foremost, financing. A project of this magnitude will REQUIRE a hefty sum of captial to pay for research, contracting, licensing, legalities, insurance, server space, web fees,and the list goes on and on. One could posit that you [the company] may decide to provide the infrastructure, but the majority of the "lesser known" labels approach you with their music to be hosted and licensed, but this is of minimal effect to the overall cost in order for something like this to be profitable (yes, it has to be profitable for something of this magnitude must not be simply sustainable, but able to generate earnings). Think about it, major companies such as Napster, Realnetworks, Apple, and most recently Yahoo, all provide "itunes" style services, yet only the two larger-cap companies are the only ones returning positive earnings and they are all publicly traded (i.e. shares are held by the public thus generating substantial amounts of workable capital)!!! Moreover, those positive earnings for Apple and Yahoo are not related to their download services, but other products and services.

2) Politics. Yes, politics. Who will and won't want to be a part of it? Who controls it? Who is affected? How are they affected? Will the heads from Detroit support it? Or for that matter will heads from different geographic areas support it and others not? How will it be advertised? Will it be marketed? Does the undergroundness of the music get lost in all the red tape? Politics will no doubt play a part in a massive database of catalog after catalog of years worth of underground music. I mean look at what happened to DEMF and what it has evolved into with regard to the political implications...

3) Finally, major labels/big business. Let's say a major holdings firm accepts the most astounding business proposal ever to fund such a project. Now imagine something like this being profitable in say 5 years. Eventually big business will eventually need to do [and what they already do]what they call on Wall Street "growing their company" by "mergers and acquisitions." If something that is a profitable commodity to say Universal, BMG, Sony, or EMI approaches the owner(s) of such a label with a ridiculous offer (which may only be fractional to the conglomerate) with a huge settlement buyout, stock options and the like, well, let's be realistic folks, I think everyone has their price. Now MANY will argue against this point, because of the whole "screw the man, f*ck the establishment, punk snot dead" schpiel, but those people would be opposed to something like this in the first place.

I hate to sound like a jaded pessimist and I apologize for getting off topic, but out of everything I've read so far, this stuck out the most and it inspired me to write.

Plus I've been writing essays on topics in metaphysics, ethics, Nietzsche, and Spinoza nonstop for the past 3 weeks so arguing seems to be flowing freely. :cool:

Send me some of those reports Joe.
Also Great points from a monopoly perspective. :clap:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joseph Isaac

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massplanck

Thing is. Its probably about time every techno track in history was put into a huge databass where people downloaded a track for say 99c. I dunno something like an underground itunes with every release ever available.

---

Excellent idea. I would love to organize something of this sort. However, i believe you would run into a number of issues:

1) First and foremost, financing. A project of this magnitude will REQUIRE a hefty sum of captial to pay for research, contracting, licensing, legalities, insurance, server space, web fees,and the list goes on and on. One could posit that you [the company] may decide to provide the infrastructure, but the majority of the "lesser known" labels approach you with their music to be hosted and licensed, but this is of minimal effect to the overall cost in order for something like this to be profitable (yes, it has to be profitable for something of this magnitude must not be simply sustainable, but able to generate earnings). Think about it, major companies such as Napster, Realnetworks, Apple, and most recently Yahoo, all provide "itunes" style services, yet only the two larger-cap companies are the only ones returning positive earnings and they are all publicly traded (i.e. shares are held by the public thus generating substantial amounts of workable capital)!!! Moreover, those positive earnings for Apple and Yahoo are not related to their download services, but other products and services.

2) Politics. Yes, politics. Who will and won't want to be a part of it? Who controls it? Who is affected? How are they affected? Will the heads from Detroit support it? Or for that matter will heads from different geographic areas support it and others not? How will it be advertised? Will it be marketed? Does the undergroundness of the music get lost in all the red tape? Politics will no doubt play a part in a massive database of catalog after catalog of years worth of underground music. I mean look at what happened to DEMF and what it has evolved into with regard to the political implications...

3) Finally, major labels/big business. Let's say a major holdings firm accepts the most astounding business proposal ever to fund such a project. Now imagine something like this being profitable in say 5 years. Eventually big business will eventually need to do [and what they already do]what they call on Wall Street "growing their company" by "mergers and acquisitions." If something that is a profitable commodity to say Universal, BMG, Sony, or EMI approaches the owner(s) of such a label with a ridiculous offer (which may only be fractional to the conglomerate) with a huge settlement buyout, stock options and the like, well, let's be realistic folks, I think everyone has their price. Now MANY will argue against this point, because of the whole "screw the man, f*ck the establishment, punk snot dead" schpiel, but those people would be opposed to something like this in the first place.

I hate to sound like a jaded pessimist and I apologize for getting off topic, but out of everything I've read so far, this stuck out the most and it inspired me to write.

Plus I've been writing essays on topics in metaphysics, ethics, Nietzsche, and Spinoza nonstop for the past 3 weeks so arguing seems to be flowing freely. :cool:

---

I don't think thats needed. Even if labels, even vinyl labels release all their back-catalog through random online stores, all thats required is a central, text based database to link everything up. With search functions and sorted by categories. Discogs style.

You search up a label and all links to any online stores selling their music would come up. Simple and easy and not run by anyone with a particular agenda. NO POLITICS.

it would be very cool. i know i'd pay $1 for mp3s...

but...practically speaking...how would labels deal with all the paperwork and credit card shizznizzle for $1 or $2 orders? i mean, with itunes, it's one bill for all the songs you buy. this one could potentially have like 14 different P.O.s for a single order...

i'm exhausted and don't know if that came out coherent...am i making sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IQ

I dont know what cracked versions you have been using, but the ones i have used work perfectly. A crack only bypasses the registration issues and has nothing to do with the core program...

---

I dunno man.

These programmers are getting smarter and smarter, and I know for a fact that a lot of high end software these days relies upon copy protection which de-optimizes the code unless a valid key or dongle etc. is in place.

I'm convinced this is the case with Cubase SX 2 and upwards.

Possibly this is negligible on a high-end PC, but when you're at the lower end of the system requirements spectrum, you can really feel it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechMouse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IQ

I dont know what cracked versions you have been using, but the ones i have used work perfectly. A crack only bypasses the registration issues and has nothing to do with the core program...

---

I dunno man.

These programmers are getting smarter and smarter, and I know for a fact that a lot of high end software these days relies upon copy protection which de-optimizes the code unless a valid key or dongle etc. is in place.

I'm convinced this is the case with Cubase SX 2 and upwards.

Possibly this is negligible on a high-end PC, but when you're at the lower end of the system requirements spectrum, you can really feel it.

---

I tend to agree. I cant be bothered with all the messing around anymore. I'm saving up for my legit copies of cubase + abeleton.

also. Is it possible that software companies share cracked registration numbers information amoungst themselves and give each other the go ahead to 'ruin' cracked software when the user is installing another app. For a few mates of mine this seems to have been the case when abelton suddenly stopped working and started complaining about need a correct registration key. It knew it was a cracked copy... but only after some new VST plugins were installed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massplanck

Yeah. Thats the paradox i'm afraid. Then again you couldnt make music if you didnt have the software ( if you use software that is)

---

Well, as I say, I use hardware, bottom line, the way I look at it is it's no different to people copying tapes back in the day, there's no point debating what you're going to do about it when it's impossible to do anything about it.. the only thing I can think of that might actually work to some extent is to make the CDr manufacturers and manufacturers of things like final scratch, MP3 players etc to charge a levy on their products to contribute to people who are having their stuff copied (Like what happened with blank tapes in the 80s).. then what will happen is the majors will cream all this money leaving the small artists/labels with zilch.. thiings such as "databases of every techno track" just ain't going to work, who is going to compile it when there isn't much money in it? My thoughts personally over all of this is if it ever got so bad that I couldn't make ANY money out of records I would stop releasing and only play live, and play a fresh live set every time, then leave the mp3 crew to do my releasing and promoting for me.. I earn most of my money from performance anyway, so really it doesn't make much odds..

the bottom line is, you are never going to stop people downloading, so there's no point in worrying about it, if your music is really good people will buy it anyway...

I dunno. Maybe we cant complain about mp3 downloads untill someone actually comes up with a decent solution where people can actually pay for them.

hmmm. what about mp3 licensing being given to online shops & downtown stores to sell music as mp3? Leave it in their hands to sort out the nitty gritty.

I dunno crime. you might have a few more quid in your pocket if it was possible to legitimately download your music from somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crime

the only thing I can think of that might actually work to some extent is to make the CDr manufacturers and manufacturers of things like final scratch, MP3 players etc to charge a levy on their products to contribute to people who are having their stuff copied (Like what happened with blank tapes in the 80s)

---

They do this already.

Consumer CD-R's have a small tax on them.

Also, I think somewhere in Europe (Scandanavia possibly?) recently introduced a per-GB tax on mp3 players, which has done stupid things to the price of some units - e.g. the 40GB iPods. Which is, IMHO, dumb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechMouse

Also, I think somewhere in Europe (Scandanavia possibly?) recently introduced a per-GB tax on mp3 players, which has done stupid things to the price of some units - e.g. the 40GB iPods. Which is, IMHO, dumb.

---

Why? is it dumb I mean... explain why it's dumb...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massplanck

I dunno crime. you might have a few more quid in your pocket if it was possible to legitimately download your music from somewhere.

---

Possibly, but legal downloads are not going to stop illegal downloads are they? As I say, if you're going to lose sleep over this issue, you'll be an insomniac for the rest of your life, cos it's not going to go away...
And as I say, if the music is strong enough, you'll sell ok, not everyone in the world downloads music.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crime

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechMouse

Also, I think somewhere in Europe (Scandanavia possibly?) recently introduced a per-GB tax on mp3 players, which has done stupid things to the price of some units - e.g. the 40GB iPods. Which is, IMHO, dumb.

---

Why? is it dumb I mean... explain why it's dumb...

---

if you were using your ipod to only put on legal albums you owned then you have the rights to the music and shouldnt be paying a anuther fee.

just make records and yall be alright.....tons of djs kicking about who luv wax and no piricy atol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crime

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechMouse

Also, I think somewhere in Europe (Scandanavia possibly?) recently introduced a per-GB tax on mp3 players, which has done stupid things to the price of some units - e.g. the 40GB iPods. Which is, IMHO, dumb.

---

Why? is it dumb I mean... explain why it's dumb...

---

Why should a 40GB iPod be subject to twice the tax of a 20GB iPod? What if I promise to only use 20GB, and use the rest of the storage to move round data files to and from work?

Also, what about other caveats... for example: if I load my iPod with only tunes which are either my own, or those of friends whose permission I have - should I be able to claim my tax back? What about mixsets, freely downloadable from the net?

On a related note - how will they guarantee me, the consumer, that my tax is going to the correct people? Why should Britney-effing-Spears get a small percentage of my tax contribution, when I doubt that (for example) Blackout Audio will get a penny. It's a stupid, impossible-to-accurately-regulate, DUMB system.

It's dumb because they're trying to force the existing outdated music business model (i.e. you give us money, we give you music in some format) onto a market which has a completely different dynamic.

The people pulling the strings at the top of the entertainment business tried this shit on with cassette decks when they came out. Courts said "no". They tried it on when VCRs came out - "It'll kill the movie industry!" they screamed. Courts said "no". They tried it on with CD writers when they became more widespread. And now that everyone and their mother has access to broadband internet and it's easy to get free mp3, they're trying to squeeze every last penny out AGAIN.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - sooner or later some bright spark who's far smarter than me will come up with a way of getting this right, and will make a shitload of money for his trouble.