A message from DJ Shadow...

[youthful_implants]

Well, they do art for free, infact they risk arrest and prosecution, even jail, all for a bit of street cred, there is no premise that they should be charging people to view their work.

So why can't musician evolve to that mindset, where musicians "do it for the love of music"?
It will weed out those who do it for the bling, and if someone becomes reknown for what they are doing, they will have opportunities to perform live thrown at them and the money will also appear.
To refer back to grafitti, just like Banksy or other grafitti artists who have "made it".

you cant pirate graffiti, well you can, but you know what I mean.

musicians who are good, trained, qualified do it because its their job. this whole doing for the love thing is utter nonsense.

do you do your job for the love of it?

would you go to work for no wage, just for the love of working? I doubt it dude.

[JAMESSSS]

I know lots of musos who have a day job and do it for the love of it????

[youthful_implants]

amateurs presumably.

[almax]

i just think there is a new paradigm evolving with music and some people are trying to cling to the past, the mold is well and truly broken and big record companies are trying to fix it with blu tack, a coathanger and some gaffa tape.
Things aint what they used to be, i said it before, you can't stop the internet, you need to evolve with it and rely on live performances more.

[almax]

amateurs presumably.

well yeah, isnt that the definition, if you are professional, you get paid, if you are an amateur, you don't

[youthful_implants]

i just think there is a new paradigm evolving with music and some people are trying to cling to the past, the mold is well and truly broken and big record companies are trying to fix it with blu tack, a coathanger and some gaffa tape.
Things aint what they used to be, i said it before, you can't stop the internet, you need to evolve with it and rely on live performances more.

do you know what I think?

I liken it to climate change, everybody says 'not my problem, nothing I do will make any difference, I'll be dead before the world is etc etc.'

If you love music, passionate about it, you'll buy it and encourage others to do the same.

If you don't love music you'll keep stealing it, and killing it just as you probably are the environment.

[almax]

Yeah man, great analogy, very similar question of ethics

(the internet)it swallows up the conventional notions of capitalism and takes you in it's wake leaving you with 2 options: adapt, or be left behind.
You're never going to stop free downloads, but if we all put forth an ethic, an agreement to support artists if you can afford to, everything will be ok.
The broke people that download stuff for free weren't going to buy it if that option wasn't available. By getting it for free they can enjoy it and become fans.
When they are fans they will eventually support the artwork by purchasing it if they can.
The people that have plenty of money but still don't want to give any of it away to an artist they appreciate are cunts, and you have to just acknowledge that there's always going to be a certain percentage of them out there, and just accept that fact and move on.

[youthful_implants]

yeah but when you're up against the massive amount of ignorance, and misunderstanding which is mirrored in this thread - you realise how hard that is going to be.

educated, sensible adults some of whom claim to like music a bit talking about musicians doing it for the love lol, or not entitled to payment etc etc just goes to show that its not going to change anytime soon.

[almax]

[almax]

YI -Do you record and distribute mixes?

[JAMESSSS]

Who is saying musicians aren't entitled to payment?

[shepherd]

[youthful_implants]

YI -Do you record and distribute mixes?

nice try lol.

[youthful_implants]

haha

[almax]

YI -Do you record and distribute mixes?

nice try lol.

nice avoidance of the inconvienient question.

[youthful_implants]

YI -Do you record and distribute mixes?

nice try lol.

nice avoidance of the inconvienient question.

its not inconvenient at all I just choose not to be baited.

[deviant]

Why shouldn't he use the internet to rant, like every other fucker in the known universe?

coz it makes him look like a dick

When you DJ you don't say 'pay me what you think I'm worth, you say THIS IS MY FEE.'

I do get paid what people think I'm worth... and I do play for free from time to time... In fact, me and a whole bunch of other dudes put on a whole free party at much expense and time to ourselves a month ago and it was rad.

So he's quite entitled to put a price on his own music IMO.

and then people are quite entitled not to pay it,

--------------------------

Alex, I see your point, and I do agree with you, the new culture is very hard... I just think that there's a lot of ranting and misery going on and not much hardening the fuck up. So, let's see if there's a way that we can help change it for the better OR a way of adapting that benefits all... I'm not defending the current way of doing things.. I'm just saying IT IS THE WAY IT IS... If you can change it for the better then this is probably the wrong way to go about it (shadow that is).

[youthful_implants]

Why shouldn't he use the internet to rant, like every other fucker in the known universe?

coz it makes him look like a dick

When you DJ you don't say 'pay me what you think I'm worth, you say THIS IS MY FEE.'

I do get paid what people think I'm worth... and I do play for free from time to time... In fact, me and a whole bunch of other dudes put on a whole free party at much expense and time to ourselves a month ago and it was rad.

So he's quite entitled to put a price on his own music IMO.

and then people are quite entitled not to pay it,

--------------------------

Alex, I see your point, and I do agree with you, the new culture is very hard... I just think that there's a lot of ranting and misery going on and not much hardening the fuck up. So, let's see if there's a way that we can help change it for the better OR a way of adapting that benefits all... I'm not defending the current way of doing things.. I'm just saying IT IS THE WAY IT IS... If you can change it for the better then this is probably the wrong way to go about it (shadow that is).

Its not really about hardening the fuck up and accepting it for being shit.

I dont get that.

Its all about improving it where it can be, talking about it, and seeing what can be positively achieved.

Hating on artists who dont like piracy is not what I would describe as positive or valuable contribution to that debate.

[JAMESSSS]

I don't think anyone is hating on Shadow or anyone else for not liking piracy are they?

[youthful_implants]

I don't think anyone is hating on Shadow or anyone else for not liking piracy are they?

yeah they did on page 1, have you read it?

[JAMESSSS]

I have, and I still don't think anyone was saying that?

Well, Hardy was bagging Bono. I'm not going to count that though.

[C.I.A.]

[JAMESSSS]

OK maybe pirate cat is hating on Shadow.

[almax]

Who is saying musicians aren't entitled to payment?

YI was the only one asserting that someone was saying that, no-one actually said they shouldn't be paid.
I mentioned that Graffitti artists don't get paid, and said musicians should be doing it for the love of music, never said they shouldn't be paid though.
Perhaps he is too busy to read the posts properly, i certainly do that sometimes and jump to conclusions without proper reflection.

[youthful_implants]

I have, and I still don't think anyone was saying that?

Well, Hardy was bagging Bono. I'm not going to count that though.

ok sorry my part in this discussions over, as no one said anything of the sort I must have imagined it.

what a silly billy I am.

[JAMESSSS]

So we can all go back to saving the rain forest now?

[youthful_implants]

Who is saying musicians aren't entitled to payment?

YI was the only one asserting that someone was saying that, no-one actually said they shouldn't be paid.
I mentioned that Graffitti artists don't get paid, and said musicians should be doing it for the love of music, never said they shouldn't be paid though.
Perhaps he is too busy to read the posts properly, i certainly do that sometimes and jump to conclusions without proper reflection.

you're the sort of guy who loves being right aren't you?

or thinking that you're right.

you would prefer to argue with me to prove me wrong over piracy because even though you know it's wrong because I'm the one saying it you would prefer to prove me wrong on a technicality than admit in principle that I might be right.

am I right?

[deviant]

Why shouldn't he use the internet to rant, like every other fucker in the known universe?

coz it makes him look like a dick

When you DJ you don't say 'pay me what you think I'm worth, you say THIS IS MY FEE.'

I do get paid what people think I'm worth... and I do play for free from time to time... In fact, me and a whole bunch of other dudes put on a whole free party at much expense and time to ourselves a month ago and it was rad.

So he's quite entitled to put a price on his own music IMO.

and then people are quite entitled not to pay it,

--------------------------

Alex, I see your point, and I do agree with you, the new culture is very hard... I just think that there's a lot of ranting and misery going on and not much hardening the fuck up. So, let's see if there's a way that we can help change it for the better OR a way of adapting that benefits all... I'm not defending the current way of doing things.. I'm just saying IT IS THE WAY IT IS... If you can change it for the better then this is probably the wrong way to go about it (shadow that is).

Its not really about hardening the fuck up and accepting it for being shit.

I dont get that.

Its all about improving it where it can be, talking about it, and seeing what can be positively achieved.

Hating on artists who dont like piracy is not what I would describe as positive or valuable contribution to that debate.

yeah, ok.... I didn't get the not liking piracy thing tbh, I know that was in there,,,, But I thought it was more about the culture of bloghouse, twitterverse, facebook promo, etc etc (obviously these things are a by-product of priracy).

[almax]

double post

[almax]

Who is saying musicians aren't entitled to payment?

YI was the only one asserting that someone was saying that, no-one actually said they shouldn't be paid.
I mentioned that Graffitti artists don't get paid, and said musicians should be doing it for the love of music, never said they shouldn't be paid though.
Perhaps he is too busy to read the posts properly, i certainly do that sometimes and jump to conclusions without proper reflection.

you're the sort of guy who loves being right aren't you?

or thinking that you're right.

you would prefer to argue with me to prove me wrong over piracy because even though you know it's wrong because I'm the one saying it you would prefer to prove me wrong on a technicality than admit in principle that I might be right.

am I right?

No, you are trying to project that onto me.
I just think, as ive posted 2 time before, that piracy/the internet cannot be stopped, and artists need to stop trying to resist it as its futile, and embrace the future and adapt to make money in other ways.
I have never said piracy is good have I?
Fucking hell mate, stop trying to get so personal, firstly you create an argument which no-one started (RE artists not entitled to payments) then you assume that others writing in this thread have "massive amounts of ignorance" and now you are trying to judge my character, why are you getting so upset? its just the internet.

[deviant]

Its all about improving it where it can be, talking about it, and seeing what can be positively achieved.

That's actually what I was saying (after "harden the fuck up") if you read it again...

[youthful_implants]

No, you are trying to project that onto me.
I just think, as ive posted 2 time before, that piracy/the internet cannot be stopped, and artists need to stop trying to resist it as its futile, and embrace the future and adapt to make money in other ways.
I have never said piracy is good have I?
Fucking hell mate, stop trying to get so personal, firstly you create an argument which no-one started (RE artists not entitled to payments) then you assume that others writing in this thread have "massive amounts of ignorance" and now you are trying to judge my character, why are you getting so upset? its just the internet.

lol I'm not upset, but you are pedantic.

[system]

what we have AGAIN is a music model for users but not for musicians.

i do like the potential of spotify for all involved ... plus last fm etc but this is a really good point. somehow some people have begun to think that pandering to the consumer is now what effective marketing strategy is.

so you get lame shit like crowdsourcing, and design by consumer committee etc, and make your own TV ads like Smith Chips and Yaris and Subway - and bad ad campaigns where they all bang on about 'a car designed for you', 'we asked you what you wanted in a frozen TV dinner', 'a brand for you' etc etc. Feels like some brands and some industries are afraid to not pander wholly to the consumer. The funny thing is, right now, the companies which are the most successful are generally assertive in their relationship with their consumers. I believe most people want to be told how things are - not asked how they think they should be personally.

music unfortunately has suffered the most publicly with this - pay if you want, user first policy. again the problem is when a product becomes data - intangible - stealing it becomes okay. When the industry has wanted to protect its livelihood it's been put up as a greedy money hungry evil ... an already filthy and undeservedly rich industry trying to protect its gravy train. At the same time users are now expecting more music, better music, cheaper (or free) and easily accessible.

imagine other industries following suit - supermarkets changing their business model to work only for the consumer. Or the auto industry. Or IT? I can - I'd doubt personally many of us would have jobs after a while of the consumer centric model eroding all that is desirable about operating within a certain industry.

from what i can see, it has been existing businesses that have had issues with trying to transition to the new delivery model (in particular).

I'd argue that services like soundcloud have done wonders for producers, services like last.fm, pandora, et al provide great services for music listeners and services like the itunes music store have made the purchase process easier for consumers.

the internet cannot be stopped

the nature of distributed computing makes it hard, but unfortunately a pretty strong effort can be made in this regard.

[system]

i think most of his points are valid but the future of media is instant streaming
just got back from uk and IMO BBC iplayer and spotify are the way media is going and for the most part they are awesome
owning things is going to fade away and musicians are going to be earning pennies for streams

totally agree. (as much as i love physical product - i.e. gatefold lps.)

[autumnleaves]

I don't think we can thank the record companies for boundary-pushing music. .

where else does music come from, if not from record labels? does it just materialise out of thin air?

artists dont have the time to be promoting themselves, releasing all their own music and deal with making it as well.

thats why we have a thing called a record company that takes care of all that for the artists.

its not an evil, out-dated or corrupt institution - its a very real and workable way to manage artists and sell music.

I wasn't talking about record labels full stop, I think it was implied that I was talking about the biggies. The ones who are most complaining about piracy. I'm not saying it's corrupt as a whole, I'm just responding to your and Shadow's claim that big record labels losing money means a loss of good quality music, I don't think it does at all. It just means less of a huge pay packet. Plus so little money from each sale goes to the actual artist that it does make them a corrupt and out-dated institution, when you can start your own label (FFD, Groundation, etc) and make a good living if your music is good.

[shepherd]

system - i reckon things like soundcloud and last are great ... but i am pretty certain neither make any money so who knows how long they can survive.

pandora is in a similar boat. spotify appears to have a better model, but then again who knows.

absolutely no argument these services are incredible for users - but they are being populated and existing generally on borrowed funds and eventually this money is either paid back or cut off.

what happens to this plethora of music awesome when the VCs backing these companies cut off their pocket money ... or the large companies that have acquired them cut back their expenditure and costs to levels in line with their revenues?

however there are successful and profitable music businesses that have spawned from the web, like Sound Alliance here in Oz

[Direkt]

You can't stop the internet.
I am very fond of the internet. It holds a very special place in my heart, and I spend hours and hours every day on it. It's a living, breathing information pipeline, and it swallows up the conventional notions of capitalism and takes you in it's wake leaving you with 2 options: adapt, or be left behind.
You're never going to stop free downloads, but if we all put forth an ethic, an agreement to support artists if you can afford to, everything will be ok.
The broke people that download stuff for free weren't going to buy it if that option wasn't available. By getting it for free they can enjoy it and become fans.
When they are fans they will eventually support the artwork by purchasing it if they can.
The people that have plenty of money but still don't want to give any of it away to an artist they appreciate are cunts, and you have to just acknowledge that there's always going to be a certain percentage of them out there, and just accept that fact and move on.

Musicians and comics have one thing going for them; they perform live. The downloaded shit that people get off the internet is just an advertisement for them to see them live. If you like it, you'll hopefully enjoy it way more live with your friends as you share a special night out with them and feel the vibes of the crowd, get drunk/high etc whatever.

The ultimate motivation for any artist should never be money, it should be the art. Everything else takes care of itself if you honor the agreement between the artist and the fan: The artists appreciate you, and they write and perform this for your (consumer) enjoyment. When you enjoy it, it makes it all worth while for the artist. When you enjoy it you become a fan, and that is how the artist supports themself.
What artists "lose" in lost revenue for a performer because of "illegal" downloads you gain ten fold in free publicity and advertising.

That said, I think it's different for the movie business. For them piracy is a serious deal, because the movie is the entire product. It's not like they're going to do an Avatar live show. That digital copy that you download is the whole product, and many people (myself included) enjoy movies in the privacy of their own home as much if not more than seeing them in a theater full of strangers with the looming possibility of the experience being ruined by some fuck head that can't shut up while other people are enjoying the film.

Good post mate. Except I disagree with the part I've highlighted in bold. There's not much point to free publicity and advertising (aka marketing and promotion) if you don't actually sell anything.

[Direkt]

Why shouldn't he use the internet to rant, like every other fucker in the known universe?

Why shouldn't he be upset people steal his music, or feel entitled to its value?

Graphic Designers charge fees for their work, their fees vary but they have developed a price for their work.

When you DJ you don't say 'pay me what you think I'm worth, you say THIS IS MY FEE.'

So he's quite entitled to put a price on his own music IMO.

The people who are going to benefit from this music and internet explosion are NOT THE ARTISTS AT ALL.

its the millions of micro-internet labels that rip them off, dont master the music properly and do very little to promote their artists.

People who are going to benefit from this music and internet explosion are THE CUNTS STEALING ALL THE MUSIC AND SHARING IT.

so you see the artists are really up against it. no one likes doing shit for free, NO ONE.

People talk about adapting and moving on rather glibly, but the fact is, and anyone who sells music will tell you the same - there is nothing to adapt to. There is no miracle business model to make it all good again, piracy has fucked the industry in the arse.

Again,
Although I wonder if piracy would be as prevalent as it is if the record companies hadn't been ripping consumers off for years with over-inflated prices on CD's. $30 for CD's was the norm years back, and don't forget that 10-15 years ago (or however long CD's have been around for), $30 was a fair bit more money than what it is today. If nothing else, it left very fertile ground for the pirates.

[Direkt]

So he's quite entitled to put a price on his own music IMO.

and then people are quite entitled not to pay it.

Ken oath.

BUT, you're not entitled to just steal it.
(not aiming that specifically at you).

This whole argument (music piracy) is one that pisses me off.

It's not rocket science.

If you steal, you're an asshole.

[Hardy]

Well, they do art for free, infact they risk arrest and prosecution, even jail, all for a bit of street cred, there is no premise that they should be charging people to view their work.

So why can't musician evolve to that mindset, where musicians "do it for the love of music"?
It will weed out those who do it for the bling, and if someone becomes reknown for what they are doing, they will have opportunities to perform live thrown at them and the money will also appear.
To refer back to grafitti, just like Banksy or other grafitti artists who have "made it".

you cant pirate graffiti, well you can, but you know what I mean.

musicians who are good, trained, qualified do it because its their job. this whole doing for the love thing is utter nonsense.

do you do your job for the love of it?

would you go to work for no wage, just for the love of working? I doubt it dude.

Hats off to anyone that makes a living off it, but ayone that views making music as a "job" has no business making music.

[almax]

Well, they do art for free, infact they risk arrest and prosecution, even jail, all for a bit of street cred, there is no premise that they should be charging people to view their work.

So why can't musician evolve to that mindset, where musicians "do it for the love of music"?
It will weed out those who do it for the bling, and if someone becomes reknown for what they are doing, they will have opportunities to perform live thrown at them and the money will also appear.
To refer back to grafitti, just like Banksy or other grafitti artists who have "made it".

you cant pirate graffiti, well you can, but you know what I mean.

musicians who are good, trained, qualified do it because its their job. this whole doing for the love thing is utter nonsense.

do you do your job for the love of it?

would you go to work for no wage, just for the love of working? I doubt it dude.

Hats off to anyone that makes a living off it, but ayone that views making music as a "job" has no business making music.

You have to consider session musicians in this too though.
They may not be "creating" the music, but they are paid to play it and it would be somewhat of a job to them.

But i guess if you were good enough of a musician, classically trained etc etc, what are the chances that you would be mass produced and pirated heavily? Most of these musicians would be earning coin from playing in orchestras and what not yeah? So pirating for them wouldnt be as much of an issue.

Would anyone pirate Andre Rieu's CDs?

[DBoy]

Not a good example. People at my work copy and share his CD's.

[Direkt]

But i guess if you were good enough of a musician, classically trained etc etc, what are the chances that you would be mass produced and pirated heavily?

Huh?

[almax]

Well if you read the sentence direktly (see what i did there) after what you quoted

But i guess if you were good enough of a musician, classically trained etc etc, what are the chances that you would be mass produced and pirated heavily? Most of these musicians would be earning coin from playing in orchestras and what not yeah? So pirating for them wouldnt be as much of an issue.

whats the percentage of musicians that come out of the VCA and colleges just like it all over the world to produce their own album?

[almax]

Not a good example. People at my work copy and share his CD's.

over the internet?
either way its still pirating

[mrj]

i just think there is a new paradigm evolving with music and some people are trying to cling to the past, the mold is well and truly broken and big record companies are trying to fix it with blu tack, a coathanger and some gaffa tape.
Things aint what they used to be, i said it before, you can't stop the internet, you need to evolve with it and rely on live performances more.

I agree with Al, well put.

I not an industry expert, or really an industry anything so all I can do is talk about my own experiences.

I buy most of my music but not all, and of that that I purchase I do so online (although I might occassioanlly buy a CD). I tend to buy stuff on itunes regularly, and I buy stuff off beatport and also boomkat. In fact my music purchasing has probably gone up since the advent of purchasing music on the internet (although I'm probably spending about the same). I love buying music on the internet, and it's so cheap (what like 1.20 a song or something) that if I can only afford $5 that week I can still get some new music to play with. I don't purchase all my music though, when it comes to stuff like a madonna track that is probably on one of my sisters CD's somewhere, or some track that I used to have on a CD but it got stolen from me at a party or I left it in the bottom of my car and it got scratched or something, then I tend to download it from limewire or similar. Same goes for things that I can't find on pay sites which happens occassionally. Also I tend to get stuff from Soundcloud and stuff as well. Ocassionally I rip songs from friends CD's too, other that's really not that often. But all in all I'd say I probably buy more than 75% of my music.

There will be people out there who don't buy any of their music. There will be people that buy all their music. But I'm guessing that most people fall into a category similar to me, that buy some of their music, and just fileshare dl the rest.

I don't think that such a model spells the doom of the recording industry. Music existed before modern capitalism and it will continue to. The recording industry will adjust, musicians will adjust, and life will go on. It always has.

[autumnleaves]

Well, they do art for free, infact they risk arrest and prosecution, even jail, all for a bit of street cred, there is no premise that they should be charging people to view their work.

So why can't musician evolve to that mindset, where musicians "do it for the love of music"?
It will weed out those who do it for the bling, and if someone becomes reknown for what they are doing, they will have opportunities to perform live thrown at them and the money will also appear.
To refer back to grafitti, just like Banksy or other grafitti artists who have "made it".

you cant pirate graffiti, well you can, but you know what I mean.

musicians who are good, trained, qualified do it because its their job. this whole doing for the love thing is utter nonsense.

do you do your job for the love of it?

would you go to work for no wage, just for the love of working? I doubt it dude.

Hats off to anyone that makes a living off it, but ayone that views making music as a "job" has no business making music.

I get what you mean, but I'm not sure I agree completely... Once you get serious about music, you can have it both be a "job" and a passion. Look at LTJ Bukem, that dude works his arse off and I've no doubt he sees it as a business like any other, but he also loves what he does. I agree though, music is not a good choice for a career if you just want to make money, for two reasons, one there's little money in it, and two, there's something we expect from music that we don't expect from pushing papers. But I guess anyone who really does their job well feels some form of passion for it, it's just that music is more commonly felt passion for

[youthful_implants]

But I guess anyone who really does their job well feels some form of passion for it, it's just that music is more commonly felt passion for

I think thats the reason why everyone is so blase about it. MRJ says the industry will be fine, will adapt and all of that heartwarming stuff.

While being optimistic is commendable it doesn't acknowledge the reality of whats happening, but I've already touched on that.

Without people changing their habits, or ISP's changing their approach to illegal file sharers then a lot of people will not manage to adapt and move on.

Survival of the fittest? Maybe, but it does annoy me that because people think that music is fun 100% of the time they seem to think musicians don't work at it, that it isn't or shouldn't be a job.

Of course it is and it isn't always fun, it isn't always easy and all Shadow was pointing out was that its like anything else in life - subject to change yes, for reasons beyond our control for sure, and when it happens - it hurts.

[Expert Knob Twiddler]

I know lots of musos who have a day job and do it for the love of it????

like wise. professional not amateur.

[youthful_implants]

I know lots of musos who have a day job and do it for the love of it????

like wise. professional not amateur.

thats nice.

I'm not saying people who play for fun dont enjoy it, and neither am I saying people who get paid do enjoy it.

there is more pressure when playing for your living and its as simple as that.