Blogs can be wonderful/educational showing people music that they wouldn't otherwise have access to.
However, I still don't understand how the people who run these blogs can morally post albums that can be bought retail.
It's straight up disrespectful to the artist.
- diego
I agree with you in principle - it's why I don't post albums and never plan to but what you're talking about is both 1) a bit of a grey area and 2) pretty much besides the point to most of these guys anyway.
After all, with 1) - the vast majority of the time, it's labels getting ripped off, not artists. And 2) I get the sense that a lot of these blogs exist to attract traffic and some abstract notion of "props" and the morality of the situation > whatever satisfaction these sites enjoy from their 15 seconds of fame.
Voracious consumers of music can't afford NOT to modify their morality; the huge amount of money saved through illegal downloading makes it rather easy, too. Every day is Christmas in MP3 blogland...
If I download an album and really like it, I usually will hunt it down on vinyl.
Likewise, and when it comes to my favourite band I would download their album as soon as it launches but then immediately buy the cd or lp to add to the collection.
nah i dont have a membership to throwback music, i just check out their posts sometimes and see if their stuff is up anywhere else- i'm gonna contact them again about it and see.
Blogs can be wonderful/educational showing people music that they wouldn't otherwise have access to.
However, I still don't understand how the people who run these blogs can morally post albums that can be bought retail.
It's straight up disrespectful to the artist.
- diego
I agree with you in principle - it's why I don't post albums and never plan to but what you're talking about is both 1) a bit of a grey area and 2) pretty much besides the point to most of these guys anyway.
After all, with 1) - the vast majority of the time, it's labels getting ripped off, not artists. And 2) I get the sense that a lot of these blogs exist to attract traffic and some abstract notion of "props" and the morality of the situation > whatever satisfaction these sites enjoy from their 15 seconds of fame.
guys, its 2009.
Just wanted to remind yall.
YAH DUDE! ITS 2009, GET WITH IT! MP3 COLLECTIONS ARE WHERE IT'S AT! MUSIC SHOULD BE FREE, BRAH!
GET OFF THE BULLSHIT AND HELP THIS DUDE MAKE SOME BETTER BEATS.
Blogs can be wonderful/educational showing people music that they wouldn't otherwise have access to.
However, I still don't understand how the people who run these blogs can morally post albums that can be bought retail.
It's straight up disrespectful to the artist.
- diego
I agree with you in principle - it's why I don't post albums and never plan to but what you're talking about is both 1) a bit of a grey area and 2) pretty much besides the point to most of these guys anyway.
After all, with 1) - the vast majority of the time, it's labels getting ripped off, not artists. And 2) I get the sense that a lot of these blogs exist to attract traffic and some abstract notion of "props" and the morality of the situation > whatever satisfaction these sites enjoy from their 15 seconds of fame.
guys, its 2009.
Just wanted to remind yall.
YAH DUDE! ITS 2009, GET WITH IT! MP3 COLLECTIONS ARE WHERE IT'S AT! MUSIC SHOULD BE FREE, BRAH!
GET OFF THE BULLSHIT AND HELP THIS DUDE MAKE SOME BETTER BEATS.
We've had this debate a million times. It will keep on going & going & going.
My opinion hasn't changed in 10 years. Forget 2009...
The game changed back in 1999.
Technically Jonny. To the RIAA & the big labels and even some artist. Even what Good Records does is illegal and/or disrespectful to artist.
DOR - selling used records is against the policies of the RIAA? Maybe if it's a promo.
I'm not against (some) sharing of music. I post albums on my blog sometimes. More often, I post songs, and mixes. Either way, it's technically copyright infringement.
I do find fault with the sense of entitlement expressed in this thread.
Some guys think it's cool to post records on their blogs. Or that it makes them cool. I dunno. I'm happy to share music from time to time. I'm not really trying to do anyone's work for them, though. B-Sides should go digging.
DOR - selling used records is against the policies of the RIAA? Maybe if it's a promo.
I'm not against (some) sharing of music. I post albums on my blog sometimes. More often, I post songs, and mixes. Either way, it's technically copyright infringement.
I do find fault with the sense of entitlement expressed in this thread.
Some guys think it's cool to post records on their blogs. Or that it makes them cool. I dunno. I'm happy to share music from time to time. I'm not really trying to do anyone's work for them, though. B-Sides should go digging.
No, I was more getting at selling used music. To the RIAA, they believe that is wrong. Because you do not actually own the music that you have purchased. And reselling it without the labels or artist getting a cut is wrong in their eyes.
Good thing for the Doctrine of First Sale. But if the RIAA had their way...
DOR - selling used records is against the policies of the RIAA? Maybe if it's a promo.
I'm not against (some) sharing of music. I post albums on my blog sometimes. More often, I post songs, and mixes. Either way, it's technically copyright infringement.
I do find fault with the sense of entitlement expressed in this thread.
Some guys think it's cool to post records on their blogs. Or that it makes them cool. I dunno. I'm happy to share music from time to time. I'm not really trying to do anyone's work for them, though. B-Sides should go digging.
Johnny, thats real easy to say for a guy living in NYC.
I do still dig in real record stores, but in los angeles, there's just not that many of them left.
I don't really mean to project a sense of entitlement, maybe i can sample some stuff and get some of these artists a real check. You know?
As far as real stores that we got left its:
Freak Beat : Best store out here IMO,but ive been through it all at this point.
Ameoba: basically worthless to me as I cant listen to anything.
Whats it called in silverlake that I go to now and again.
All that besides the fact that as a seller of rare and collectible vinyl, i would think you would have an interest in more people being exposed to the music.
I mean, if you are a real record collector, which is who you primarily cater to, an mp3 is not going to suffice right? Technically when I hear that dynamic 5 record off a blog and realize its amazing, that's another one for my want list.
It's not so much about the business. Business has not been particularly affected by digital downloading; it's more just the opinion that I hold about freely sharing music.
I don't particularly care about "exposing the music to a wider audience" because the percentage of people in said audience who will actually pony up for the record they're downloading is tiny.
It's not so much about the business. Business has not been particularly affected by digital downloading; it's more just the opinion that I hold about freely sharing music.
I don't particularly care about "exposing the music to a wider audience" because the percentage of people in said audience who will actually pony up for the record they're downloading is tiny.
The radio is totally different. Completely different. You know that.
I'm not really down with the blog-sharing thing. At least, not the way it's being done right now.
It'd be hype if BMI/ASCAP/etc started hitting up all these blogs, making them report like they do for radio (and a lot of public venues as well). That would be straight comedy. Bloggers would be tight as hell.
The radio is totally different. Completely different. You know that.
I'm not really down with the blog-sharing thing. At least, not the way it's being done right now.
It'd be hype if BMI/ASCAP/etc started hitting up all these blogs, making them report like they do for radio (and a lot of public venues as well). That would be straight comedy. Bloggers would be tight as hell.
I know, I know, im just trolling you.
But I need some beats mane! I know it aint all exactly ethical, but I gotta get back on the grind heavy.
when people were taping from the radio how does that differ from dling off of a blog ?
unless the artist are actually still seeing money and were not duped into some bullshit contract, F*ck the riaa and major record labels.
tons of artists are now GIVING away the music on line. the future is now, most artists (not labels) have stopped making $$ from the actual music they make vs merch and touring. lets be real.
unless of course your mainstream pop and are still able to sell platinum plus.
bsides, i know a few l.a. heads collector/dealers that always turn up heat...
for all bleeding hearts.....
when the artist of any sought after record going for say...$100 and up is contacted by a dealer, who buys all of the remaining copies from the artist for $10-20 a pop....and then turns around and sells them for $100 and up..... artist is in the dark never sees a dime on the reflip. oh what..you aint know your records go for loot cat-daddy.
i know this has happened over a paticular record that was tracked, dude saw the ebay auction after the fact and was heeeeaaated.
when people were taping from the radio how does that differ from dling off of a blog ?
unless the artist are actually still seeing money and were not duped into some bullshit contract, F*ck the riaa and major record labels.
tons of artists are now GIVING away the music on line. the future is now, most artists (not labels) have stopped making $$ from the actual music they make vs merch and touring. lets be real.
unless of course your mainstream pop and are still able to sell platinum plus.
bsides, i know a few l.a. heads collector/dealers that always turn up heat...
for all bleeding hearts.....
when the artist of any sought after record going for say...$100 and up is contacted by a dealer, who buys all of the remaining copies from the artist for $10-20 a pop....and then turns around and sells them for $100 and up..... artist is in the dark never sees a dime on the reflip. oh what..you aint know your records go for loot cat-daddy.
i know this has happened over a paticular record that was tracked, dude saw the ebay auction after the fact and was heeeeaaated.
when people were taping from the radio how does that differ from dling off of a blog ?
The difference is that the radio was generally paying into a system that, all things being equal, was paying back towards the artist. Of course this is not always the case. But taping off the radio would be like taking a song from one of your mixes and putting it on an ipod. Downloading a full album off a blog, with the artwork and track list, even at a low bitrate, is more like buying a CD from an African guy with a blanket laid out on the sidewalk.
unless the artist are actually still seeing money and were not duped into some bullshit contract, F*ck the riaa and major record labels.
I agree, to an extent, but "let's be real"... how many of these albums that people are freaking over are big label swindles? Many of them are private or small indie jobs where the rights are still sitting with the artist or one of their associates (producer, studio owner, etc).
tons of artists are now GIVING away the music on line. the future is now, most artists (not labels) have stopped making $$ from the actual music they make vs merch and touring. lets be real.
That's the ARTIST'S decision, not some dude sitting behind a computer sharing his high-priced record collection.
for all bleeding hearts.....
when the artist of any sought after record going for say...$100 and up is contacted by a dealer, who buys all of the remaining copies from the artist for $10-20 a pop....and then turns around and sells them for $100 and up..... artist is in the dark never sees a dime on the reflip. oh what..you aint know your records go for loot cat-daddy.
i know this has happened over a paticular record that was tracked, dude saw the ebay auction after the fact and was heeeeaaated.
how do yall feel about that ?
It sucks. It's something I rarely do. But it's something that has been going on long before the advent of the internet. To me, it's just not the same thing.
I understand the concept of inventory and retail turnover, of buying 40 copies of a record that will only move over the course of two years. And I'm sure you do too. So while $20 for a $100 record is a pretty low price, is the artist going to take a return (like a distributor) on a $100 record which will turn into a $75 record after people find out there are copies around and then a $50 record when a rogue copy goes for too cheap on ebay and then the dealer is left with 15 copies they paid $20 a piece for that they will not be able to sell?
Giving away music for free to anyone who asks and buying physical copies in a business transaction are not the same thing. Personally, I sleep well at night paying more than fair and paying extra on the back-end when I do better than expected. But beyond that, you'd have to ask all the dealers you buy these same rare records from how they feel about it.
Comments
guys, its 2009.
Just wanted to remind yall.
Yuh blog a dew it proper
www.oslonerdarmy.blogspot.com
Likewise, and when it comes to my favourite band I would download their album as soon as it launches but then immediately buy the cd or lp to add to the collection.
probably posted more raers on there than any other blog mentioned so far (apart from loronix due to loronix's sheer volume)
I also agree that blogs are great tools to hear new music and i do hunt down LPs of stuff i hear through blogs.
http://brnuggets.blogspot.com/
and mention the clumsy, if good intentioned, Chewbone music blog search engine:
chewbone.blogspot.com
man, i would love a membership to throwback music. I contacted dude once and never got a reply. do you have an in?
throwback music never actually had any of those super rare joints! it was just one big hustle
mad rares at
http://mutant-sounds.blogspot.com/
http://rapidshare.com/files/211863671/Dynamic_Five_-_1978_-_Love_Is_The_Key.rar
YAH DUDE! ITS 2009, GET WITH IT! MP3 COLLECTIONS ARE WHERE IT'S AT! MUSIC SHOULD BE FREE, BRAH!
GET OFF THE BULLSHIT AND HELP THIS DUDE MAKE SOME BETTER BEATS.
How do you figure?
We've had this debate a million times. It will keep on going & going & going.
My opinion hasn't changed in 10 years. Forget 2009...
The game changed back in 1999.
Technically Jonny. To the RIAA & the big labels and even some artist. Even what Good Records does is illegal and/or disrespectful to artist.
Naw, it's just that "Common sense revolts at the idea".
I'm not against (some) sharing of music. I post albums on my blog sometimes. More often, I post songs, and mixes. Either way, it's technically copyright infringement.
I do find fault with the sense of entitlement expressed in this thread.
Some guys think it's cool to post records on their blogs. Or that it makes them cool. I dunno. I'm happy to share music from time to time. I'm not really trying to do anyone's work for them, though. B-Sides should go digging.
No, I was more getting at selling used music. To the RIAA, they believe that is wrong. Because you do not actually own the music that you have purchased. And reselling it without the labels or artist getting a cut is wrong in their eyes.
Good thing for the Doctrine of First Sale. But if the RIAA had their way...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2007/05/record-shops-used-cds-ihre-papieren-bitte.ars
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/17/selling-used-cds-is.html
etc etc etc
Johnny, thats real easy to say for a guy living in NYC.
I do still dig in real record stores, but in los angeles, there's just not that many of them left.
I don't really mean to project a sense of entitlement, maybe i can sample some stuff and get some of these artists a real check. You know?
As far as real stores that we got left its:
Freak Beat : Best store out here IMO,but ive been through it all at this point.
Ameoba: basically worthless to me as I cant listen to anything.
Whats it called in silverlake that I go to now and again.
Atomic in the valley, but those guys are dicks.
Its not like Arons is still around or something.
I mean, if you are a real record collector, which is who you primarily cater to, an mp3 is not going to suffice right? Technically when I hear that dynamic 5 record off a blog and realize its amazing, that's another one for my want list.
I don't particularly care about "exposing the music to a wider audience" because the percentage of people in said audience who will actually pony up for the record they're downloading is tiny.
You are opposed to freely sharing music?
Why? You must really hate the radio then.
I'm not really down with the blog-sharing thing. At least, not the way it's being done right now.
It'd be hype if BMI/ASCAP/etc started hitting up all these blogs, making them report like they do for radio (and a lot of public venues as well). That would be straight comedy. Bloggers would be tight as hell.
I know, I know, im just trolling you.
But I need some beats mane! I know it aint all exactly ethical, but I gotta get back on the grind heavy.
unless the artist are actually still seeing money and were not duped into some bullshit contract, F*ck the riaa and major record labels.
tons of artists are now GIVING away the music on line.
the future is now, most artists (not labels) have stopped making $$ from the actual music they make vs merch and touring. lets be real.
unless of course your mainstream pop and are still able to sell platinum plus.
bsides, i know a few l.a. heads collector/dealers that always turn up heat...
for all bleeding hearts.....
when the artist of any sought after record going for say...$100 and up is contacted by a dealer, who buys all of the remaining copies from the artist for $10-20 a pop....and then turns around and sells them for $100 and up..... artist is in the dark never sees a dime on the reflip. oh what..you aint know your records go for loot cat-daddy.
i know this has happened over a paticular record that was tracked, dude saw the ebay auction after the fact and was heeeeaaated.
how do yall feel about that ?
b/w
The difference is that the radio was generally paying into a system that, all things being equal, was paying back towards the artist. Of course this is not always the case. But taping off the radio would be like taking a song from one of your mixes and putting it on an ipod. Downloading a full album off a blog, with the artwork and track list, even at a low bitrate, is more like buying a CD from an African guy with a blanket laid out on the sidewalk.
I agree, to an extent, but "let's be real"... how many of these albums that people are freaking over are big label swindles? Many of them are private or small indie jobs where the rights are still sitting with the artist or one of their associates (producer, studio owner, etc).
That's the ARTIST'S decision, not some dude sitting behind a computer sharing his high-priced record collection.
It sucks. It's something I rarely do. But it's something that has been going on long before the advent of the internet. To me, it's just not the same thing.
I understand the concept of inventory and retail turnover, of buying 40 copies of a record that will only move over the course of two years. And I'm sure you do too. So while $20 for a $100 record is a pretty low price, is the artist going to take a return (like a distributor) on a $100 record which will turn into a $75 record after people find out there are copies around and then a $50 record when a rogue copy goes for too cheap on ebay and then the dealer is left with 15 copies they paid $20 a piece for that they will not be able to sell?
Giving away music for free to anyone who asks and buying physical copies in a business transaction are not the same thing. Personally, I sleep well at night paying more than fair and paying extra on the back-end when I do better than expected. But beyond that, you'd have to ask all the dealers you buy these same rare records from how they feel about it.
b/w