Best music download program?

Conrado said:
It's like they're trying to tell us what is good or not to buy. Too much money to tell people what they should think, when actually they can think for themselves and have an opinion of their own.
Click to expand...
You think too highly of the population. Our society revolves around this philosophy. What car do you drive? What clothes do you wear? The popularity and exclusiveness of these two items are greatly judged by how they are marketed so why do you expect music to be any different.

Targetting p2p users is like arresting people who take drugs. It doesnt solve the problem, u have to hit the people who harvest that gear in the first place.
 
dam0 said:
You think too highly of the population. Our society revolves around this philosophy. What car do you drive? What clothes do you wear? The popularity and exclusiveness of these two items are greatly judged by how they are marketed so why do you expect music to be any different.

Targetting p2p users is like arresting people who take drugs. It doesnt solve the problem, u have to hit the people who harvest that gear in the first place.
Click to expand...

You're right, maybe I think too highly of the population in general. But I can't help wondering: what if there were no ads or marketing at all? What if they were forbidden, like cigarrettes ads were forbidden in many countries? How would producers trade whatever they're making?

In this scenario, I think people would have to go after the information they need and the information they want. They would be more active, because they would have to go for it, and not just being bombed with a lot of info telling them what to wear, what to drive or what to feel. I know, it's a difficult exercise, but think about it.
 
Stu Hirst said:
you're on a forum frequented by plenty of people who make music, asking where the best place to steal it is...
Click to expand...
In all fairness tho, somebody DID give her the answer. Just playing devils advocate....
 
Stu Hirst said:
so because a lot of people do it, that makes it ok?

"
Click to expand...
Stuie, a lot of people take drugs. A lot of people think it's ok. IT'S STILL ILLEGAL.........discuss:lol: :lol: :lol:

If your a saint then feel free to comment on others downfalls. But I strongly suspect your not.....

Point made.
 
drug taking is a slightly different kettle of fish though. Its not a question of whats legal and illegal. Thousands of people downloading britney spears tracks means that she'll only be able to afford a medium range private jet. However, when its down to house music or a similar genre with a lesser audience then its more of a problem. As stu said, many of the record labels we all respect; barely break even. I'm not talking about beep like subliminal and defected (we all have our opinions!). Pressing vinyl is a costly business for low units so money made by the artist is minimal. Because of this, house labels often just take the safe option and end up with a variation of a record we've heard a thousand times before. Thats the supposed knock on of downloading mp3s though i'm sure we'd still have a **** load of crap house music if no one downloaded music illegally, but at least the small-time artists and labels could make money again.

The drugs racket on the other hand.... The end user (in mass quantities) funds a large criminal operation both in the UK and at the source. I think a few more people get hurt than when downloading mp3s. But as with the britney spears example... who gives a beep.
 
Stu Hirst said:
I don't think I agree with it being a "dying industry", when bands like the Arctic Monkeys are just about to become the fastest selling debut artists of all time !
Click to expand...

Exactly. That just proves that it's not on the decline. If people didn't care, they could've easilly have downloaded the Arctic Monkeys album but instead people bought it in their droves and that would've been an awful lot easier to find for download compared to a dance 12"
 
I literally use the download, as someone mentioned before to sample artists music.

I much prefer to buy the CD once I know I want it. I'm not a criminal, I'm just doing, like what was said before most people have at some point or another!...
 
It makes me laugh when record labels blame downloading for the decline in single sales. They shot themselves in the foot when they started releasing crappy Now [insert number here] compilation albums. Why buy 5 top singles when you can get about 30 for the same money? That's what started the decline. Likewise, the average commercial punter will buy a Gatecrasher or MoS CD with 18-20 2-3 minute mixes rather than go out and search for a single they like. It used to piss me right off when I would buy an album like that, and then find that practically every compilation out for the next 6-12 months would have practically the same tracks on it. Greed is the key here, and I don't mean the consumers. I also read an article online (I think I still have the link somewhere- I'll try to dig it out), where the MIAA was trying to bully people caught downloading music into paying the about $8 per track to settle out of court. Of course people are going to end up in court as a result, and of course people are going to resent the recording industry aswell. I have downloaded music in the past, and I might well do so again, but I only downloaded full-length versions of mixes that I already had copies of. Why the hell shouldn't I have the full version of tracks that I've already bought and paid for? If I had the skills I'd do my own 'extended mix' versions of the tracks I like, but I don't. What I don't do is download obscure stuff that I like, like psy-trance. I will pay for that, as I know that the labels make little, if any profits. But I hardly think that a person downloading Tiesto's latest stuff, or Paul van Dyk's or whoever's is going to harm them personally.
 
You'll find the people most hit by illegal downloads are the record companies, not the artists. Most artists make their money through radio play, Gigs and or sponsorship deals. I've heard very few artists (or infact any of any artistic integrity) complain one bit about illegal downloading.

As for the smaller artists/labels. Well, don't the new formats and the alternative methods of exposure now remove the requirement of the artists reliance on the independant record labels. Bands such as the Arctic Monkeys actually embraced the internet and that is how they became so popular.

It doesn't cost very much make a track, it costs a lot to publicise and distribute it, file downloading takes away these costs making the music industry more efficient so ultimately the music will remain. It's just the record exec's in the big old cars might have to cut back a bit. I'll shed no tears over that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top