why paying for movies/games/audios?

[McLaren]

ahaha... I was scanning over this page before I read it and I saw the crying baby. I just knew that was gonna be directed at me. :D

just a few things:

"you can test-drive a sculpture?"

yes, you can. stand still and stare at it for about fifteen minutes, voila, test driven.


"in all seriousness, when grown-ups purchase something it is usually an act of compromise."


I guess this is where I tell you that I must not be like most grown-ups. I don't compromise in that manner when it comes to possessions. not in such an outrageous ratio.

sure, that BMW has everything I want, except it has a 4cyl when I want a 6cyl. I buy it anyway because engines size comprises about 5% importance, while all the other great features make up 95% of what I want.

now with cd albums, it's just the opposite. I really only want 5% of the music on that album. the other 95%, I feel, is being forced into the deal. I never said artists today are making crap music compared to many years ago. if this was 1950, I would still be irritated by this. but it's 2006, and we are exploding with technology for the artists to connect with their fans and truly give the fans what they want. I believe artists want this, but they're being stimied by RIAA.

'ok, so the house is in a bad neighbourhood, but it's got a huge pool!'.

see, this statement would never leave my mouth. a bad neighborhood greatly outweighs having a huge pool by 99-1. I feel sorry for the sap that willingly moves into a bad hood just for a huge pool, that's sad and maybe materialistic.

'I don't really want mayo, but that turkey looks really good!'.

NO POSSIBLE WAY... I know for a fact that non-mayo eaters will not eat a sandwich with mayo on it, no matter how good it looks. I like mayo so I don't understand this. but every single time I meet a mayo hater, they truly are a mayo hater, and would most likely rather starve to death than eat that substance.


"but i will ask once more - have you ever bought a CD, got home, been mildly disappointed, and forgotten about it... only to start listening a few months later, start slowly getting into it, and realised it's one of your favourite albums of all time?"

nope. this has actually never happened. my taste in music seems to be quite concrete. if I don't like it the first time I hear it, then I won't like it the next 60 times I hear it, no matter how much later.

 

[thujone]

but they're not representative of all music. and crucially, they're not the ones who get hurt by downloading.

then who's paying for the CDs? Certainly not the band. Anyway, bands that only make CDs and are in it for the money deserve to get stiffed. Bands that go out and reach the fans on a local level by doing as many shows as they can just because they fuckin love to deserve money and they do get the money. The last Weezer CD I downloaded, but when they came to town I paid a fat penny to see them live and it was definitely awesome. After hearing a live performance, a CD is like a shadow; it's just another imitation and nobody seems to give a shit because if anyone did then we'd all still be buying VINYL and really enjoying the quality of sound on $500 Sennheiser headphones. Can't copy vinyl, but a CD is just a cheap digitized copy anyway so I don't see why anyone should be made guilty for refusing to pay for a COPY when they can get that exact duplicate for free. File-sharing is forcing the artists to become more diverse because they realize that nobody is gonna pay for poor quality when they can get it for free (there's little difference between the music playing in the background on a band's site and the mp3, save that when you have the mp3 you don't have to keep going back to the damn site to hear the song again), and those so-called artists that comment against it are just being bitches because they don't want to do what they're supposedly paid to do; entertain. Ohh no, they'd rather make their shitty tunes then turn it all over to the RIAA, an entity that has offered so kindly to do all their work for them and bully the consumers into buying it, then giving the money-grubbing artists a fat cut because they wanted to PUSH their music on the international community rather than let their fame spread the old-fashioned way; BY HAVING TALENT.

 

[SA]

After hearing a live performance, a CD is like a shadow; it's just another imitation and nobody seems to give a shit because if anyone did then we'd all still be buying VINYL and really enjoying the quality of sound on $500 Sennheiser headphones. Can't copy vinyl, but a CD is just a cheap digitized copy anyway so I don't see why anyone should be made guilty for refusing to pay for a COPY when they can get that exact duplicate for free.

So, a CD is a copy, an immitation of the original and vinyl is not. Thanks for the lesson.

 

[dr seuss]

Mclaren - well, it's a good job you can test-drive CDs as well kind of makes our arguments somewhat irrelevant

then who's paying for the CDs? Certainly not the band.

how do you know?

Simon posted earlier on that the last 4 CDs he purchased were arranged through an artist-preferential contract system. does that make it ok to pay for?

Anyway, bands that only make CDs and are in it for the money deserve to get stiffed. Bands that go out and reach the fans on a local level by doing as many shows as they can just because they fuckin love to deserve money and they do get the money.

this does not make sense. not every band can tour the world. not every band who releases a studio album is 'in it for the money'. how do you think bands get gigs? playing down at the local pub isn't enough to support 4 members of a band, no matter how much they love their 'local' scene. you need to tour. and how do you get gigs on the other side of the country? the world?

have you ever paid to go see a movie? if so, why? i mean by your logic we should only be paying for theatre, not (gasp!) pre-recorded movies!

The last Weezer CD I downloaded, but when they came to town I paid a fat penny to see them live and it was definitely awesome.

good for you. it has no bearing on the argument tho

After hearing a live performance, a CD is like a shadow; it's just another imitation and nobody seems to give a shit because if anyone did then we'd all still be buying VINYL and really enjoying the quality of sound on $500 Sennheiser headphones. Can't copy vinyl, but a CD is just a cheap digitized copy anyway so I don't see why anyone should be made guilty for refusing to pay for a COPY when they can get that exact duplicate for free.

i don't think vinyl is better 'sound quality' than CDs. what audiophiles consider 'warm, man' is basically only distortion anyway. fuckabuncha analogue wearaway media if i wanted pops, crackles and a limited lifetime i'd listen to my music on dubplates and you can copy vinyl.

tell me, is pink floyd's reissued Dark Side Of The Moon (remastered in 5.1 surround) worth paying for?

File-sharing is forcing the artists to become more diverse because they realize that nobody is gonna pay for poor quality when they can get it for free (there's little difference between the music playing in the background on a band's site and the mp3, save that when you have the mp3 you don't have to keep going back to the damn site to hear the song again), and those so-called artists that comment against it are just being bitches because they don't want to do what they're supposedly paid to do; entertain. Ohh no, they'd rather make their shitty tunes then turn it all over to the RIAA, an entity that has offered so kindly to do all their work for them and bully the consumers into buying it, then giving the money-grubbing artists a fat cut because they wanted to PUSH their music on the international community rather than let their fame spread the old-fashioned way; BY HAVING TALENT.

this may be true for some artists. i suspect they're an absolute minority.

again, do you know many people in the music industry? 99% of the musicians i know, and 99% of the people who work with them and around them - well, they're completely the opposite.

it might help you to feel better about yourself to assert that artists who rely on CD sales are 'money-grubbers'. but sadly for you, it doesn't make it true.

 

[McLaren]

Mclaren - well, it's a good job you can test-drive CDs as well kind of makes our arguments somewhat irrelevant

but you can't test drive cds. where did you get that from? in one of my posts I even commented on how there is no cd sampling at brick and mortar store. only one store around me allows you to listen to a new cd. but that is only if you pay to join their goddamn club. so again, you have to pay to decide if you want to pay for the cd. that sucks. how does that even out to where the customer is actually benefitting from the purchase?

 

[alasdairm]

^ admittedly, i've always lived in big cities with lots of options but many large record-store chains offer cd listening stations off-the-shelf. in my experience, most smaller outlets will allow you to listen if you simply ask them.

that aside, most online vendors (e.g. amazon) allow you to listen to a portion of a cd. it may only be a short clip but it's analogous to a test drive.

alasdair

 

[McLaren]

well for me, a shitty sounding 20 second clip is not analogous to a test drive. I have strong tastes in music and I can't determine if I might like a song from that kind of sound clip.

 

[Sprinklervibes]

I think buying work from artists instead of copying it is a form of respect for their work, if you appreciate it why not buy the album to support them? It'll make them keep doing what they are doing.
I don't feel so bad about copying from wellknown artists (the poor steal from the rich or something like that) but for underground/beginning artists I think you should cut them some slack. Copying such albums shows a lack of empathy IMO

 

[Coolio]

Sprinklervibes, how do you ever hear the underground/beginning artists in the first place?

 

[SA]

...how do you ever hear the underground/beginning artists in the first place?

I think you need to stop and think about the logic of that for a second, Coolio. If you're implying that Sprinklervibes' only option was to download those artists' music in order to discover them, how did he know what to download to begin with? Did he just pull their name out of a dream? You discover new music and new artists by hearing them at parties, festivals, concerts, broadcasts, radio... out in the real world. It sounds like the only possible scenario you've considered is where a friend told him "Yo, check out this new band, man. They're dope! Download their shit, yo!".

 

[Coolio]

SillyAlien, actually that is how I've discovered all the music I know and have ever known. Either that, or browsing sites like allmusic.com for bands I already know, and going through their 'similar artists'.

I've never gone to a concert unless I already knew the band I was going to see, and I've never had a band open for any of them that I found worthwhile. On the radio or at parties, how the hell are you supposed to know the artist and track name?

I have never discovered music out in the real world, only by reading and from recommendations by friends.

 

[GrOwThSpUrT]

I download a lot of stuff, I have to admit to that. However, when I find something good, I also buy it. Good movies, good cd's, if I download them and like them, I'll buy them. I like listening/watching a lot of stuff, and it would just get too difficult finding the stuff that I like without spending all my money. I realise this is not exactly the best thing to do, but this way I'm seeing a lot of things, some of which I like, which I then promote by actually buying their stuff and spreading the word to others.