I download the album first. If it's affected by the loudness war, then I won't buy it even if the music is good. I try to support bands by going to live shows.
Who downloads/who does'nt
- Thread starter JontRevolting
- Start date
Saparmurat_Niyazov
Member
With all this conflicting information, I wonder how much those that are anti-downloading really know about how bands get paid. I'm not claiming to know more than anyone here, but it seems like no one can get their facts straight. To me the moral issues about artistic compensation are so gray and ambiguous. Let's face facts: a vast majority of artists, including those that are well known, survive through the income they receive via a "day job". Art, be it music or any other medium, generally doesn't pay well. So, when I DL an album by "melodic death metal band X" for free, how much are they really missing out on, considering all the guys in the band work at Wal-Mart and shit when not playing music? Conversely, when I buy a t-shirt at "melodic death metal band X's" concert, is that enough for them to buy a home and quit their day job? Or is it just enough to put some gas in the van so they can make it to the next show? I'm not arguing in favor of or against DLing, I'm just trying to put a wider perspective on the issue.
Draehl
Lurker
Really when it comes down to it with everything I download the band is either getting paid when I end up buying it, or it's something I wouldn't buy in the first place, but keep it because it's free. Am I getting something for nothing? Yes. You could make a moral argument against that. Would they be getting paid if I couldn't download it? No.
I can't say the same for everyone else, but I'd imagine it's at least partially the case for many.
I can't say the same for everyone else, but I'd imagine it's at least partially the case for many.
PhlegethonVeins
Autopsy Obsessed
Not much for conflicting information there. These albums for the band to sell on their own aren't a replacement for actual money. Most of my information comes from what I learned in my music business classes at ipr (my courses were completed there in 07 however so I won't deny some of the info being out of date) and the numerous band members I am/have been in personal contact with to a good degree from a variety of genres and label contracts. I won't claim complete knowledge on such, however I doubt the information I am aware of has been skewed to the point it lacks relevance.
There's nothing unethical about that in the long run since you're still buying music. You're just not buying everything you get a chance to hear. But it's unrealistic to expect that of anyone in an age where you can download 50 albums a day.
Seditious
GodSlayer
Seditious
GodSlayer
that depends on how much money you have, how much of what you have you are willing to spend on music, how much of what you're willing to spend on music you liked them enough to spend on them, and whether or not you'd have even made yourself aware of their music so as to consider spending money on it if it wasn't for the illegal downloading medium.
in my case, most of the bands I currently feel are worth paying for I'd never have heard of if not for the ability to hear full albums in total convenience. ...but, of course, had I never had such a source of comparison, I'd just have carried on in teenage poor taste, enjoying whatever band the TV showed me--so, it's not so much that I'm depriving Bloodbath, for example, of any money by shunning iTunes, but that my awareness of Bloodbath prevents me from ever giving Slipknot any money
...the internet introducing people to what's out there, in this sense, hurts shitty famous artists, just as an education deals a blow to the income churches could make.
Seditious
GodSlayer
Nor does being on the internet entitle you to rape the English language.
the topic is piracy.
Seditious
GodSlayer
same.
I always wonder if the speaker buys CDs but is saddened by the fact, or if they download the album and paypal to the artist the amount of money they feel the album is worth (so that their protest of the artist's choices doesn't come at the artist's expense), or if they give the artist 0% and are just making a piss poor justification of what they're doing by offering that argument, instead of just saying 'yep, piracy, 100% of what they deserve, wanna fight about it?'.
I download. I understand the frustrations that the artists have, but I don't let it deter me, because as a listener I've had more frustrations than I can count. I've been spurned one too many times by bands with good track records who all of the sudden release utter shit. So, I download, and if I like it, I but it. Simple. I don't particularly like downloading as it takes away immensely from the album as a whole, but like I said. Better to try before I buy than to waste my money.
PhlegethonVeins
Autopsy Obsessed
Which is a form of theft just with copyrighted materials.
theft
Parts of Speech:*noun
Definition:*stealing
Synonyms:*annexation, appropriation, break-in, burglary, caper, cheating, crime, defrauding, deprivation, embezzlement, extortion, filch, fleece, fraud, grab*, heist, holdup, hustle*, job*, larceny, lift*, looting, mugging, peculation, pilferage, pilfering, pillage, pinch*, piracy, plunder, purloining, racket, rapacity, rip-off, robbery, robbing, score*, shoplifting, snatch*, snitch, steal, stickup, swindle, swindling, swiping, thievery, thieving, touch*, vandalism
I meant more like $10-15 (or whatever the average price of an album is). You'd be downloading the album, but giving the band the full amount, and in turn helping to support the band. The reason I suggest this is because I often hear people say "well that band isn't going to make any money even if I bought the album." Note: I never hear anyone saying they'd like to help out the label, itunes, or anyone else but the band. So if you want to download albums illegally, but have the slightest interest in supporting the band, maybe sending them $10-15 for each album isn't a bad option?
The loudness war unfortunately is affecting 99% of CDs being released these days. Even Burzum's new album is loud!
PhlegethonVeins
Autopsy Obsessed
Thing is, I doubt most that use this excuse actually care about that, its just an excuse(for most) so of course they wouldn't be sending the band the full 10 to 15 dollars.
I know, and that's basically my point. The people who say this are only trying to help out themselves, and attempting to justify an excuse.
Episteme
Member
I'm basically like most people here. I download all my stuff, the music I really like I buy. But being a poor student in university, I can't really afford to buy CDs all the time.
It's not that I'm against downloading. I just feel that people should be fair about these sorts of things. If someone downloads an album and likes it, or certainly enough to keep the mp3s, then why not buy the album? If the fact that a band isn't going to be making that much money on selling the album bothers some people, then send the band some money.
When people download and have hundreds of GBs of music on their computer but don't own any CDs or plan on buying any in the future, this creates a problem for a lot of people. Not just for bands, labels and the like but for people who enjoy buying music in physical format. If in the future all we are left with is digital downloads (at most), then that would be pretty sad.
And I often hear people, even bands say "well, there's always going to be people releasing CDs and records regardless of how poorly albums are selling"...but honestly, if bands aren't making money off what they are doing, how can I honestly expect them to bother spending money to record and release an album for the public? They might as well just do live shows and nothing else like unsigned underground bands do. I guess that wouldn't be a problem for most metalheads though because they would prefer everything to be completely underground and obscure anyways, right?
When people download and have hundreds of GBs of music on their computer but don't own any CDs or plan on buying any in the future, this creates a problem for a lot of people. Not just for bands, labels and the like but for people who enjoy buying music in physical format. If in the future all we are left with is digital downloads (at most), then that would be pretty sad.
And I often hear people, even bands say "well, there's always going to be people releasing CDs and records regardless of how poorly albums are selling"...but honestly, if bands aren't making money off what they are doing, how can I honestly expect them to bother spending money to record and release an album for the public? They might as well just do live shows and nothing else like unsigned underground bands do. I guess that wouldn't be a problem for most metalheads though because they would prefer everything to be completely underground and obscure anyways, right?
No, not really. I'm just offering my perspective in hopes to get people understand that downloading illegally (and not buying music) actually does have quite a negative impact. Not everyone realizes this, or cares, which is unfortunate. The point of this thread was to discuss the issue was it not?
Similar threads
