hogrot wrote:Brinkman wrote:I waited until Shellac's Canadian tour about five years later so I could buy the first two albums and a tour shirt from them in person.
this to me is as much of an endorsement for downloading as it is an argument against. buying direct from a touring band is something I try to do. I did it with mclusky- bought a t-shirt and the three full lengths I'd had on my ipod for a year when i got to see them play. If I didn't have the mp3s I would've bought the albums from someone else.
This to me is just an endorsement of Mclusky. Supposing you got sick of the mp3s after giving the band a try for a few months, you would have gone to their show and bought the albums from them out of some sense of obligation, right?
When you spend money on something you hold it in a different light than if that same thing were given to you for free. Music critics are mostly useless for this very reason and their motives are suspect; are they heaping praise and hyperbole on an album to further a friend's career and ensure that the trickle of promotional releases flows their way? And when nothing's in it for them, aren't they more likely to prematurely dismiss an album that deserves multiple listens before it opens up? I think the subsequent reappraisal and reissue of thirty-year-old albums is evidence of this phenomenon.
Telling normal people they should should go out and pay for something you got for free is dishonest, as is dismissing an album that's value for you was artificially cheapened when you elected to download it.
So tell me which Mclusky LP I should get first and I will pony up for it, on your word, all old-fashioned like ma and pa did. Well, assuming it's already in stores.