Premier Rock Forum

best thing that ever happened to music.

and i'm not trying ot be incendiary, or trolling. (or cheap)

a step towards the decommodification of art, and an embrace of the inevitability of truly free sharing of all ideas and information. and a great promotional tool. i can even count the number of acts i've checked out live entirely because i had the opportunity to hear the album for free before hand.

when people get mad about sharing and argue that they're supporting artists and music by buying CDs, part of me feels like this is akin to saying you support emancipation by buying slave cotton.

anyhow, its a touchy debate, but its something i'm really curious about hearing what you guys think (particularly steve, if you're reading this)

i'm working on sort of a treatise that i'll probably publish some time this summer and i've debated the subject a lot with indie kids and hipsters, and lawyers, and artists, and am curious about the sound geek take on it.

thanks
badhat

Hold on, I find it hard to say that musicians' conditions are "slaves" to their labels. Record labels give them a way to make money and get their actual music around. Think of the diffuculty the bands would have without a label to organize the band and pay them.

ok i'm really kinda pissed right now cuz i just finished the longest fucking rant on sharing i've ever written, and my comp munched it.

i'll try again tomorrow.

but this gist of it is:

a) sharing is inevitable. whether you agree with it or not, the information revolution we're in the middle of has seriously fractured to very concept of "intellectual property". how can you own something that is infinitely, perfectly and freely replicable?

b) i think it- in addition to being inevitable- also represents an opportunity for the democritization of music, and for the decentralization of corporate influence over pop culture.

c) the important thing is to figure out how do artists make a living. as the system works now, most of them/us aren't making a living anyhow, so the RIAA and all these legislative entities talking about protecting artists by prosecuting piracy is blantant, disingenuous pandering to corprorate interest.

i love the idea of filesharing and recorded output in general as a marketing tool. Its a reality for a lot of bands now anyhow... a way to get heard without having to print eight billion CDs and hang out in front of the metro and throw them at people.

With webboards and sharing and the fact that anybody can make a decent demo now for the cost of a P4, a breakout box and a couple of microphones, we have an opportunity to rob corporate taste makers of some of thier power, and return money to the pockets of regonal and local and independant artists. and stop subsidizing the worthless, interchangeable bullshit that the majors spit out over and over again trying to milk ever glimmer of a pop culture trend for everything its worth.

anyhow... there was more to it that that, and if this thread stays afloat, i'm always up for a good argument, and for being challenged/potentially even learning something...

so everybody feel free to chime in.

not all at once now...

Although I don't feel really strongly pro or con on this issue it brings up interesting questions about how recording, media and distribution affect our relationship with music. My early memories of music are of music boxes, 45's and a "close and play" record player: physical objects that seemed to contain music. If you were raised in a musical family or didn't have these kinds of objects around maybe your early memories of music are more related to performance. How would the elimination of tangible media affect our perceptions about music? Recorded music has been around our entire lifetimes and records have shaped our musical cultures to a great extent. Records have carried different styles of music all over the world. I think about the impact of delta blues records in 60's Britain for example. People heard the records and started bands. Not to get nostalgic, but don't you remember the first time you listened to.... A record is a fetish for rock 'n' rollers. I feel weird about letting go of that tangible aspect, regardless of the "commodification" side. Are you suggesting that the de-objectification (sorry, probably not a word) of music will result in decommodification? If the bands control the records there's no need to eliminate physical media.
Also, I like the craftsmanship side of records and you just don't get that sense from an MP3. Making records is a physical process in which people often bang on guitars, beat the hell out of drums and slice up big reels of tape with a razor blade. At the end of the process there is a tangible result. Although in some ways the record is already done when it's just a master tape, some of the record artwork is also really incredible (not on CD's) and I think the whole thing is part of the culture. I wonder if releases can have as much "weight " or impact on MP3 as the real thing.

lee

I dont do any large amount of filesharing stuff. I prefer very much to have a tangible cd and artwork as opposed to a file on my computer. But then again, people who grew up with LPs are sentimental to them. Since I grew up with cassetes and CD's, i've always been satisfied with them. It seems that a new generation will be satisfied with a band's website and mp3s. Besides, i think most of the people on this board are going to have a higher appreciation of music 'as an artform' than a casual music fan who is happy enough to have a mix of their favorite songs on their computer.

As for filesharing, I think its nothing but goodness for most independant artists. But, it bothers me that artists have no clear cut way of controlling their product. If metallica doesnt want their music to be given away freely over the Internet, i think its their right to say so. After all, if you put out the effort to create music, you should have the right to decide what medium it is presented in. I don't feel guilty at all downloading Mike Watt and Public Enemy songs on Kazaa since those artists have publicly stated they approve of such. Plus, musicians who want their music out there will post mp3s on their websites. Sonic Youth posts most of their B-sides in addition to streaming their current album.

badhat wrote:best thing that ever happened to music.

Hooey. Its one of a series of technological developments that have led to the wider dissemination of music. No more important than sheet music, shape note music, player pianos, the grammophone, radio, the cassette tape or Don Kirshner's Rock Concert. It's exactly the same, actually, as it has been opposed by the entrenched music industry in exactly the same terms as all of its predecessors. Quit thinking you, (or your generation's technologies) are the first to have been significant. Sheesh, fucking kids.

a step towards the decommodification of art, and an embrace of the inevitability of truly free sharing of all ideas and information.

Hey, what on earth makes you think art needs to be "de-commodified?" You can hear anything you like for free, you can look at anything you like for free. They have these library things for books, the great art of the ages is on display in galleries and museums, and there's this whole broadcasting thing that brings an assortment into your home. The art is always free. The objects aren't.

What you really mean is that you want to have physical copies of music and you don't want to have to pay anyone but your ISP, some computer companies, a telephone or cable company and the CDR manufacturer in order to have them. You're willing to pay people, just not the band or the record label. I can't fault you for it -- when I was a kid I would spend all afternoon trying to sneak into a $3 movie. My time meant nothing to me, and I liked feeling that I got something for "nothing." I liked feeling that I outsmarted the tyrannical tickets/ushers/snackbar paradigm. In other words, I was wasting my energy for a trivial economy because I felt superior for having done so.

The technology (photocopiers) has been in place for decades to allow anyone to copy a book, page by page. It is seldom done, because it isn't worth the trouble in comparison to just buying the damn thing. That is how most adults (by that I mean people who work full time jobs) get their records as well. That they might become interested in the music through file sharing speaks to your next point.

and a great promotional tool.

I agree wholeheartedly, and I think bands interested in this sort of promotion should embrace it. Metallica's stance always struck me as odd, considering that their entire early fan base was made of 80's metal underground cassette traders. That's how I first heard them, on a dub of a cassette of a demo. The act and the impulse are similar with file sharing.

when people get mad about sharing and argue that they're supporting artists and music by buying CDs, part of me feels like this is akin to saying you support emancipation by buying slave cotton.

Slaves had no participation in the direction of their careers. Musicians, even ones in bad business arrangements, have at some point decided to get involved in the music business. I have sympathy for those who are being exploited, and gross exploitation it is, but they weren't sold into it, and making a comparison to the trade in slaves is a trivialization of that abomination. Next you'll be calling Bush a "Fascist."

I disagree with those who think file sharing is theft. Walking into a record store and stealing a copy is theft because it deprives the store of its property, and prevents it from selling that particular copy. File sharing doesn't involve anybody losing anything, and it doesn't prevent anybody from selling as much of the thing as he likes.

i'm working on sort of a treatise that i'll probably publish some time this summer and i've debated the subject a lot with indie kids and hipsters, and lawyers, and artists, and am curious about the sound geek take on it.

You think this juvenile pastime warrants a "treatise"? What's the matter, did someone else already dibs Tony Hawk video game cheats as a topic?

Whatever. It's another overly-trumpeted part of the current technology-dazzled scene that has a few practical implications but in the long run is trivial compared to, say, the doctrine of pre-emption.

As a musician, I don't consider it theft, and I don't need to be protected from it. As a fan, I suppose I could use it to find things (like the 1990s band Leo from Berlin, or the first Stackwaddy EP, or the Wrecked Chopped and Screwed version of Big Mo's "City of Syrup," or the unreleased Smashchords demos) that I haven't been able to find elsewhere, except that I'm too busy earning a living.

best,
-steve

Steve, I'm not a punk kid (or even- sadly- a kid at all anymore), so don't presume.

and the "best thing that ever happened ot music" thing was hytperbole, just get things rolling, make a big entrance. as was- obviously- the slavery comparison. its not so much a comparison of musicians to slaves, as a comparison to the backwards (i think) logic of believeing that supporting the industry is doing any favors to artists or to music in general.

Would you agree that for the most part the industry is- by and large- pretty fucked up and exploitative? would you agree that spending 20 bucks on a CD when 2 go to the artist and 18 go towards perpetuating an archaic infrastructure and paying the hoards of industry lawyers who are lobbying congress to put away college kids who steal metallica CDs is not particularly supportive of art or artists?

Interestingly, despite your venomous tone, it seems like we're in agreement on most of the discussion, and i'll address your counterpoints later today, as i too am currently busy making a living.

thanks,

badhat wrote:Would you agree that for the most part the industry is- by and large- pretty fucked up and exploitative? would you agree that spending 20 bucks on a CD when 2 go to the artist and 18 go towards perpetuating an archaic infrastructure and paying the hoards of industry lawyers who are lobbying congress to put away college kids who steal metallica CDs is not particularly supportive of art or artists?

I think an easier way to deal with this issue may be to stop shopping at FYE and Sam Goody's.

I hate when people say the entire recording industry is fucked and that they all charge 20+ dollars for records that cost fifty cents to manufacture. That's incredibly ignorant and blatant use of misinformation. I see most of the records I like for little more than fifteen bucks, at what's probably the MOST EXPENSIVE independant music store in my locale. Getcher shit together.

This is why there are kids my age downloading every album that comes out saying that the label is just screwing the artist anyway so what do I have to care when labels like Matador split profits 50/50 between the label and the artist. I don't see any gross exploitation there.

TheSadDebaser wrote:I think an easier way to deal with this issue may be to stop shopping at FYE and Sam Goody's.

downloading is even easier, and that really only one part of the argument.

TheSadDebaser wrote:This is why there are kids my age downloading every album that comes out saying that the label is just screwing the artist anyway so what do I have to care when labels like Matador split profits 50/50 between the label and the artist. I don't see any gross exploitation there.

well thats kind of unfairly indie-centric, doncha think? particularly since what... 85% of all music is released by 5 major labels (Sony, EMI, UMG, Time Warner, & BMG) source: FTC.

so as long as you are ok with limiting yourself to 15 percent of all recorded music, thats a workable stopgap. but it still neglects the philosophical issues of a real need for a reevaluation of intellectual property law (i think).

the funny thing about that is, the indies as a community seem to be more keen on sharing as a promotional tool anyhow. Either out of forsight or simply becasue they lack the money to wage the kind of war that the RIAA affiliates are hell bent of waging, in talking to people from various labels and just visiting thier websites as well, the independent attitude ranges from "fuck yeah its a great way to get our acts heard" to "eh, it sucks but what are we gonna do about it?"

its only the majors that seem to be really agressively pursuing the issue. which is odd, given that i read last month that the much touted filesharing slump is actually fairly misleading, since it turns out that- yes the majors have suffered a sales decline of about 9% over the past few years, but they've also collectively reduced thier output by about 15-20 percent, depending on who you ask. So they're acutally making more money per unit than ever before, but they're putting out fewer albums too.

i think that another part of why the indies seem less concerned is that, at least in part, indie's court a demographic that still likes vinyl, that still wants the physical packaging, which- thanks to collectors- will probably always survive as a boutique industry. even as broadband infrastructure expands to make solid state storage and sharing the dominant distribution model within the music industry at large.

I chafe at steve's sorta backhanded comment about sneaking into the movie and thinking that i'm being "subversive", when the real motivation isn't anti-estqablishment, particularly, but pro-community, and beyond that- just trying to be practical. If a law or mode of morality is so abstract and unenforceable as to require what has thusfar amounted to an "honor system", (don't steal music becasue we tell you its bad, because we've set up an economy where we're creating an artifical scarcity to validate our industry) then it really need to be rethought, i think.

The real revolution here is that information, data, code, music anything that can be broken down into 1s and 0s is now freely infinitely and perfectly replicable. SO it seems counterintuitive in this climate to try to regulate access to ideas. On the other hand, i'm firmly in favor of controlling whether or not other people profit from my art (radio, jukeboxes, public broadcast, placement, dmx, scoring, etc), but trying to enforce laws that say its illegal for me to listen to (or have in my posession) some hard drive space devoted to a metallica album just seems kinda ludicrous.