Music and Internet Ethics

[linkous]

http://www.factmag.com/2016/01/09/us-fa ... ng-to-pay/

Here is my prediction.In five years time it will only be 30 year olds and older who will think they should/might pay for music, in 10 years time albums will be donation based because physical formats like CD and vinyl will be obsolete, as archaic as cassettes. Artists will rely on the goodwill of fans to pay a voluntary payment for downloads, the main income will come from gig tickets. Record comapanies will die out hopefully, after being the architects of their own downfall by phasing out CD and vinyl in favour of digital formats when costs become prohibitive. The internet and touring will be used as tools for promotion, home studio recording will be the way to go to save on costs for the artist.

I'm not saying this is my preferred outome, I just think it's inevitable - you can't stop progress.

But why even download when you can stream? I think the whole era of personal music collections is largely coming to an end.

For reasons of quality I would prefer download over stream. I have quite a large collection of 24 bit high res downloads, the sound quality is stunning and far, far superior to the quality of streaming. Also 16 bit downloads can be burned to a CD for those who want to listen that way. Thankfully at the moment we still have a four way choice - vinyl, CD,download and stream. However that wont last, technology and the beancounters will see to that.

[Zip City]

Streaming costs data, which is not unlimited

[linkous]

Streaming costs data, which is not unlimited

Only if you are mobile surely? And even then not all the time.

[Zip City]

Streaming costs data, which is not unlimited

Only if you are mobile surely? And even then not all the time.

I listen to the majority of my music in the car or at work both of which would require me to eat data on my phone

[Clams]

Streaming costs data, which is not unlimited

Only if you are mobile surely? And even then not all the time.

I listen to the majority of my music in the car or at work both of which would require me to eat data on my phone

If u have Spotify premium you can download all of your music to your phone or computer. Voila, no data charges.

[sactochris]

How can anyone use internet and ethics in the same sentence and maintain a straight face.

[beantownbubba]

How can anyone use internet and ethics in the same sentence and maintain a straight face.

Donald Trump is running for president of the United States of America. I never thought I'd see those 2 things in the same sentence, either and yet...

[linkous]

Streaming costs data, which is not unlimited

Only if you are mobile surely? And even then not all the time.

I listen to the majority of my music in the car or at work both of which would require me to eat data on my phone

Streaming costs data in some situations, which is not unlimited

Ok, fixed that for you

[lotusamerica]

http://www.factmag.com/2016/01/09/us-fa ... ng-to-pay/

Here is my prediction.In five years time it will only be 30 year olds and older who will think they should/might pay for music, in 10 years time albums will be donation based because physical formats like CD and vinyl will be obsolete, as archaic as cassettes. Artists will rely on the goodwill of fans to pay a voluntary payment for downloads, the main income will come from gig tickets. Record comapanies will die out hopefully, after being the architects of their own downfall by phasing out CD and vinyl in favour of digital formats when costs become prohibitive. The internet and touring will be used as tools for promotion, home studio recording will be the way to go to save on costs for the artist.

I'm not saying this is my preferred outome, I just think it's inevitable - you can't stop progress.

But why even download when you can stream? I think the whole era of personal music collections is largely coming to an end.

For reasons of quality I would prefer download over stream. I have quite a large collection of 24 bit high res downloads, the sound quality is stunning and far, far superior to the quality of streaming. Also 16 bit downloads can be burned to a CD for those who want to listen that way. Thankfully at the moment we still have a four way choice - vinyl, CD,download and stream. However that wont last, technology and the beancounters will see to that.

Tidal streams at 16 bit quality FYI, so we're really only talking about the high res market, which isn't mainstream.

I'm with you on high res audio, I am just referring to what I think is an unstoppable train away from personal collections and CDs. Other than the vinyl niche, physical product is disappearing, as everyone knows, but moving forward, I think downloads themselves become irrelevant and storing things on a hard drive outside of an offline play library inside a subscription package will also disappear except for a few of us weirdos. When people can listen to almost anything they have ever heard at a push of a button, there just is no reinforcement for going to the effort of downloading, saving, buying or even getting a CD from the shelf.

[Bill in CT]

I'm with you on high res audio, I am just referring to what I think is an unstoppable train away from personal collections and CDs. Other than the vinyl niche, physical product is disappearing, as everyone knows, but moving forward, I think downloads themselves become irrelevant and storing things on a hard drive outside of an offline play library inside a subscription package will also disappear except for a few of us weirdos. When people can listen to almost anything they have ever heard at a push of a button, there just is no reinforcement for going to the effort of downloading, saving, buying or even getting a CD from the shelf.

I am a collector and will continue to be one. I mostly buy music on CD but also some vinyl and cassette and home video. I think that if physical media ever disappears completely it will hurt the independent artists most of all…particularly ones who are not well-known. My favorite record store is Aquarius Records in San Francisco (linked below). I've learned about many obscure artists from their write-ups and samples. Does Spotify and similar services turn people on to truly obscure music in that way? I seriously doubt it.

http://aquariusrecords.org

[John A Arkansawyer]

Here’s why the music labels are furious at YouTube. Again.

Peter Kafka: I don’t understand why the industry is complaining about YouTube and its use of the DMCA again. Viacom spent years on this in court, and got soundly defeated. Hasn’t everyone learned to accept this by now?

Cary Sherman: We accept the inevitability of death. It doesn’t mean we have to like it...

[John A Arkansawyer]

Today's scandal du jour is probably better discussed under the 3DD NC thread. All I'm going to say is that I really do hate finks of all sorts.

[John A Arkansawyer]

Today's scandal du jour is probably better discussed under the 3DD NC thread. All I'm going to say is that I really do hate finks of all sorts.

And it turns out my hunch was right in guiding me not to specify who the finks were. In this case, they turn out not to be the Usual Suspects. Or maybe they are. I try never to trust tech fuckbags, and as always, the younger the worser.

[Zip City]

I have no idea what you're talking about

[LBRod]

I have no idea what you're talking about

I thought it was just me.

[John A Arkansawyer]

I have no idea what you're talking about

I thought it was just me.

I was deliberately vague because I thought something was fishy about it. In brief, a band of which I was barely aware had a sex tape involving two of the members released to the public by an untrustworthy associate. Or so they said. It turns out to be a clumsy hoax.

[Zip City]

I have no idea what you're talking about

I thought it was just me.

I was deliberately vague because I thought something was fishy about it. In brief, a band of which I was barely aware had a sex tape involving two of the members released to the public by an untrustworthy associate. Or so they said. It turns out to be a clumsy hoax.

I saw that. Band is called Yacht

[John A Arkansawyer]

I was deliberately vague because I thought something was fishy about it. In brief, a band of which I was barely aware had a sex tape involving two of the members released to the public by an untrustworthy associate. Or so they said. It turns out to be a clumsy hoax.

I saw that. Band is called something dull and boring

Fixed that for you.

I'm all for a good hoax that either twists peoples' minds up or makes them think (or both!), but this one sucked rotten eggs.

[tinnitus photography]

great read from Anohni (fka Antony):
https://thecreativeindependent.com/peop ... -industry/

The “Drone Bomb Me” video was paid for by Apple. It was an experiment and a challenge for me. The record companies can’t afford to advance the whole cost for making the record anymore, let alone pay for an ambitious video. So after a lot of hemming and hawing I agreed to work with Apple on the video. I wanted the video to have a wider reach, and only Apple could offer me the resources to do so.

No one got paid to do that video except the hairdresser. The whole thing was done basically for free, just to make a product that we were then obliged to rent exclusively to Apple for a fraction of what they would had to have paid for it if they had framed it as an advertisement, which is of course what it was, though I didn’t want to admit it at the time.

My being bought as a politically outspoken artist is a more potent advertising tool for Apple than a 100 more explicit ads. It creates the false aura for Apple of being cutting edge, of being artist advocates, of being innovative mavericks, of being environmentally friendly, of caring about people and communities, instead of being the McDonalds of consumer high tech whose wealth was largely pilfered from what was once a biodiverse music industry.

How brilliant is that? All of us pitching in as if we were working for a charity, and Apple, one of the biggest companies in the world, walks with an ad. I felt like a house cat that had been declawed. Those are the terms of engagement now in the music industry. We really get what we deserve. I am sure we are already at a point where we are forfeiting important artistic voices as a consequence of this.

Think of Philip Morris sponsoring all the world’s dance companies, companies that celebrate breath and healthfulness. Now think of Apple, Nike, Samsung and Google selling their products as the face of independence, creative freedom, and democracy.

All it took was one generation to forget. It’s like, you clearcut a forest and a few years later the young ones never remember that there were ever any trees. They grew up playing on dead stumps and that’s the new normal. It’s the same thing with the kind of capitalism we’re experiencing now. The trauma is so quickly erased, and the new terms for engagement are accepted as an inevitability.

[beantownbubba]

great read from Anohni (fka Antony):
https://thecreativeindependent.com/peop ... -industry/

The “Drone Bomb Me” video was paid for by Apple. It was an experiment and a challenge for me. The record companies can’t afford to advance the whole cost for making the record anymore, let alone pay for an ambitious video. So after a lot of hemming and hawing I agreed to work with Apple on the video. I wanted the video to have a wider reach, and only Apple could offer me the resources to do so.

No one got paid to do that video except the hairdresser. The whole thing was done basically for free, just to make a product that we were then obliged to rent exclusively to Apple for a fraction of what they would had to have paid for it if they had framed it as an advertisement, which is of course what it was, though I didn’t want to admit it at the time.

My being bought as a politically outspoken artist is a more potent advertising tool for Apple than a 100 more explicit ads. It creates the false aura for Apple of being cutting edge, of being artist advocates, of being innovative mavericks, of being environmentally friendly, of caring about people and communities, instead of being the McDonalds of consumer high tech whose wealth was largely pilfered from what was once a biodiverse music industry.

How brilliant is that? All of us pitching in as if we were working for a charity, and Apple, one of the biggest companies in the world, walks with an ad. I felt like a house cat that had been declawed. Those are the terms of engagement now in the music industry. We really get what we deserve. I am sure we are already at a point where we are forfeiting important artistic voices as a consequence of this.

Think of Philip Morris sponsoring all the world’s dance companies, companies that celebrate breath and healthfulness. Now think of Apple, Nike, Samsung and Google selling their products as the face of independence, creative freedom, and democracy.

All it took was one generation to forget. It’s like, you clearcut a forest and a few years later the young ones never remember that there were ever any trees. They grew up playing on dead stumps and that’s the new normal. It’s the same thing with the kind of capitalism we’re experiencing now. The trauma is so quickly erased, and the new terms for engagement are accepted as an inevitability.

Surely an on-target analysis and certainly very sad.

But how sad is it that he either didn't understand what was happening until too late or that he chose to not understand until too late for his own purposes. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, more or less, nobody can take advantage of you unless you let them.

[tinnitus photography]

BtB, did you read the entire article? she veers way off from the music industry towards the end. interested in your thoughts.

[beantownbubba]

BtB, did you read the entire article? she veers way off from the music industry towards the end. interested in your thoughts.

Did not, will do.

[tinnitus photography]

it's worth reading. hopefully others will read it as well.

[beantownbubba]

Oh, I didn't realize that she used to be that Antony. Sorry for the incorrect pronoun.

I've never met a political theory that I thought was 100% correct, but I think this is a largely correct relatively standard but cleverly phrased leftist analysis. To the extent she adds to the discussion, she gets the modern spin which takes into account the convergence of technology, the arts and big business and the particularly benign way that many, especially the young, are inclined to view technology to our collective detriment. To me that's really the impressive heart of her argument: "if it's Apple or Google it must be good, right?," while not connecting the why, how and consequences of those companies making huge profits at the expense of so many. She also exposes the myth of "the technology frees the artist from the corporate machine and that's a good thing" way of thinking that is a related corollary and which has helped get us into this mess. What she leaves unexplained or unexamined is how this ties back to the artist's plight, or IOW, what's a poor struggling (or not so struggling) artist supposed to do about the reality of the current marketplace now that he or she can allegedly make his/her own music in his/her bedroom and distribute it to the world on the internet without "interference" from the suits between shifts at McD's?

As with most leftist analyses, she imputes more intentional conduct and purposeful, planned conspiracies to the bad guys than is likely the case, but I file that under the difference between correct and largely correct.

A couple of tasty sound bites:

"Capitalism is not a system of morality. It’s a system of economics based on wealth extraction, from the land and from people. Our minds are being formed to be dependent upon and addicted to corporate interfaces and systems."

"It’s like AIDS. There’s this underlying systemic immune deficiency that enables the outbreak of any number of what they used to call 'opportunist infections.'” I especially like the "opportunistic infections" phrase/analogy.

[tinnitus photography]

BtB, thanks for reading the rest, and for your always thoughtful analysis.

I think the takeaway for me is that it's definitely easy to create and possibly connect with an audience now via technology, but that creating enough interest to make a career out of it is fleetingly rare.

[beantownbubba]

BtB, thanks for reading the rest, and for your always thoughtful analysis.

I think the takeaway for me is that it's definitely easy to create and possibly connect with an audience now via technology, but that creating enough interest to make a career out of it is fleetingly rare.

Not "merely" interest but a willingness to spend money in support of that interest in spite of the available freebies (whether from the artist you're interested in or even easily substitute-able ones if you have that much of an aversion to spending money). The first hurdle was always either hard or ridiculously random; the second used to be heartbreak hill and is now Mt. Everest.

[John A Arkansawyer]

It's long past time for The Growing Backlash Against Big Tech to take a bite or two out of the new robber barons' asses.

[SOPA] was a bad piece of legislation. But my point here isn’t to re-litigate the merits. I want to talk about how it went down to defeat. Basically the IP holder industries wanted it and the tech industry was against it. There were exceptions. But that’s the gist. Tech was against it in part for ideological reasons but also because it was out of sync with its business models and the networks it was building. Again, to a great degree people from the tech industry just genuinely thought it was wrong. But those were the battle lines.

[John A Arkansawyer]

Drifting away from the music part...

Facebook’s Heading Toward a Bruising Run-In With the Russia Probe

As someone recently observed, Facebook’s ‘internal policies’ are crafted to create the appearance of civic concerns for privacy, free speech, and other similar concerns. But they’re actually just a business model. Facebook’s ‘internal policies’ amount to a kind of Stepford Wives version of civic liberalism and speech and privacy rights, the outward form of the things preserved while the innards have been gutted and replaced by something entirely different, an aggressive and totalizing business model which in many ways turns these norms and values on their heads.

[beantownbubba]

It's long past time for The Growing Backlash Against Big Tech to take a bite or two out of the new robber barons' asses.

[SOPA] was a bad piece of legislation. But my point here isn’t to re-litigate the merits. I want to talk about how it went down to defeat. Basically the IP holder industries wanted it and the tech industry was against it. There were exceptions. But that’s the gist. Tech was against it in part for ideological reasons but also because it was out of sync with its business models and the networks it was building. Again, to a great degree people from the tech industry just genuinely thought it was wrong. But those were the battle lines.

John Marshall wrote:
As someone recently observed, Facebook’s ‘internal policies’ are crafted to create the appearance of civic concerns for privacy, free speech, and other similar concerns. But they’re actually just a business model. Facebook’s ‘internal policies’ amount to a kind of Stepford Wives version of civic liberalism and speech and privacy rights, the outward form of the things preserved while the innards have been gutted and replaced by something entirely different, an aggressive and totalizing business model which in many ways turns these norms and values on their heads.

I've been thinking about this stuff a lot lately, post Equifax, Facebook/Russia, etc. There are no easy answers: we are all so technology-dependent and it's awfully hard to get away from that especially since there are plenty of benefits and efficiencies associated with the tech explosion. But as these quotes (and plenty of others if one looks even a little bit) make clear, a good starting point is to gain some understanding of what's really going on, who benefits and what the risks are. Or, put another way, Google, Facebook and their friends are not our friends, whatever the "socially conscious" veneer. Big Brother is pretty much the same to you and me whether he resides in Washington DC or Silicon Valley.

[John A Arkansawyer]

I can't wait to get on the rail for this show!

WARNER MUSIC SIGNED AN ALGORITHM TO A RECORD DEAL — WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

The news was covered widely, with commentators tossing around phrases like “the end is nigh” while hand-wringing over the idea of coders coming for musicians’ label contracts. But the press release wasn’t exactly right, and questions about the future of music are even bigger than anyone thought.