Forum Closed
The forum is now to new posts. All the historical content is still available to browse.
if you are looking for musicians to play with, please view the Bands Seeking Musicians list, or use the Musicians Directory
You can use our pages on social media to connect:
download music
| Message Board > General Chitchat > download music |
| Anonymous | hey...anyone know some good sites for downloading music? i have windows 95 so i guess that might cut out a few options i dunno.......is winamp one of them i can't remember - Wed, 5 Mar 2003 4:43pm | ||
| Jason User Info... | not any sites I know of, but some progs that are good and easy to use/learn would be Kazaa-lite or Direct Connect. I'd say IRC but that would take a little learnin. - Wed, 5 Mar 2003 4:46pm | ||
| Anonymous | http://www.imesh.com i now have tenthousand mp3's - Wed, 5 Mar 2003 4:48pm | ||
| Anonymous | 10,000... hmm... and you bought how many?? I'd keep quiet about this if I were you. - Wed, 5 Mar 2003 5:19pm | ||
| Anonymous | Too late, doc. This joker can consider his ass busted. - Wed, 5 Mar 2003 5:22pm | ||
| Anonymous | so what are the websites for this kazaa? i tried http://www.kazaalite.com and it brought me to edonkey?!! - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 2:58pm | ||
| Anonymous | but i do own hundreds of CD's. if the band is worthy i will buy there CD, cause the quality of audio is better on a CD. still to this day, 10-15% of people in north america own computers. i found many new bands via mp3's also i'm sure neptunes and jayz and eminem are doing ok even if i do dowmload there music for free. cause i would never pay for it anyways - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 3:58pm | ||
| Anonymous | Audio Gnome. Just do a Google on Audio Gnome. A little tricky to configure, but once it's up and running you'll find almost anything you want. Read the FAQ. - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 5:31pm | ||
| New Car | I guess Toyota won't mind if I just take one of their cars. I'd never buy one anyway, so what's the loss? - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 5:40pm | ||
| anonymr. | "if the band is worthy i will buy there CD...also i'm sure neptunes and jayz and eminem are doing ok even if i do dowmload there music for free. cause i would never pay for it anyways" Consistency is required in making an unhypocritical argument. If you download, listen and enjoy a piece of music than it's worthy enough to buy. It's as simple as that. And if you can afford it and don't buy it than you're stealing. Sure it's not going to destroy Eminem if you download his music and don't pay for it but it would sure hurt him if everyone did it. A cliche is perfect here: Think macro, act micro. Sorry for the cheese factor but it had to be said. If we don't act that way in this particular issue, what's the point of doing your part to, say, recycle or be courteous or drive responsibly or any other group activity that is bettered by individual responsibility. - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 7:20pm | ||
| Anonymous | you are just pissed off because you don't have a computer or burner. get over it, there are worse things going on in the world that need attention. - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 7:53pm | ||
| Matte Black | Yeah, but this is a music site so there should be nothing more important in this little pocket of the world. Right? I see it two ways. One, if everybody just downloaded music, it would eliminate all of the people who were playing to try and be big rich rock stars, leaving it open for the rest of us who just wanna rock. But (two) if there was no structure anymore and I had to dig through endless shit to try and find music I like or is even half decent, then I'd have less time to actually listen to "good" music or making music of my own. I challenge you to go to a site of all indie artists like garageband.com and pull out a really solid band in, oh, how 'bout 3 hours. Good luck. I'll take my chances plowing through the shelves at Lyle's or Ditch, thanks. - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:47pm | ||
| Anonymous | Not to mention that if everyone just burns their music then record stores and labels can't stay in business and bands can't sell their albums. At some point you have to actually buy some music even if you are downloading as well. - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:20pm | ||
| Jason User Info... | all you people trying to make the arguement, in one half ass way or another, that downloading music is some how harmful or "wrong" (mmm smell that morality) sound SO FUCKING OLD (and stupid). Times are changing. The industry built around profiting from others creativity (I use that word loosely) can not carry on forever in it's present state. And it seems to me music was doing just fine before patents and intellectual property were ever an issue. just my opinion. fire away. - Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:34pm | ||
| Anonymous | Jason, you are absolutely correct that music would survive and thrive without anyone profiting financially just like it did long before anyone came up with the idea of managing, producing, creating, performing for profit. However, if there is no industry behind music than there is no such thing as a music career. The only people that profit directly from creativity are those that create. In the music industry, others profit, for example, by providing a venue to play in or by producing a piece to the next level or by distributing the music to others and on and on. All these people profit because they provide a service someone is willing to pay for. They profit because of the artists' creation just like the artists profit because of their skills. And to flog a dead cat, if that's even the expression, one couldn't dedicate a life to doing what they're good at without the other. Thoughts? And to whoever above said I'm just mad because I don't have a burner (if that was directed at me), I do have a burner and I do download music and burn it. If I like it, I try and make a point to buy it for exactly the reasons I stated above. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 1:51am | ||
| Anonymous | who is it hurting? 1. if ten thousand people hear my indie album and like it chances are a few of them will uy the album. so i sell five copies. if no one hears my indie album, i sell zero copies. 2. artist have been going broke from bad record deals since the start of this industry. the people who loose the most are also already making the most off the product. The Record Company. 3. radio, i don't remember the last time i paid my radio bill. at my parents house there is a boxfull of cassette tapes recorded from the radio.right next to all the albums i bought. remember the we stole music a different way before. 4. video tapes.... i could go on. don't think you steal media? - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 2:53am | ||
| Anonymous | I download a lot of music, and I buy a lot of records. The only thing I would hesitate to download would be some indie album that was released by the band, or a small label--that's stealing directly from the band (not that indie labels don't rip off their bands sometimes, just maybe not as often). I often buy records after downloading a couple tracks I like--usually because I just like the band, or I want the whole package, whatever. I have no compunctions about downloading music by dead people, or Stones records, or anything out of print (obviously) or anything on a major label. Trust me (or don't trust me--look up an essay by Steve Albini called 'Some Of Your Friends Are Already This Fucked') that really cool band that just signed a 'major' record deal is not going to see two bucks out of the twenty you just plopped down for their CD at A&B. The best thing that could happen to them is that everyone downloads their shit, loves it, they get dropped by the label, and release their own record. There has to be a paradigm shift in the way people make money off music, removing the major labels--the only way to stuff the downloading genie back into the bottle would involve government control over the internet that I think most people on this board would find onerous. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 3:19am | ||
| Anonymous | Pretty naive to think the record companies are or will any time soon be hurt by people downloading music illegally. They set themselves up to control media, period. Take Sony, for example, one of the most powerful record labels in the world. Sony makes, and heavily markets the mp3 players and discmans that people use to play their illegally downloaded music in order to get more people doing it. At the same time they rally against file sharing sites using the 'protecting the artist' argument to get a blank media tax levied. Then they collect against 'lost income' due to illegal downloading. Nice little deal for them. You know who's left out of the new loop? the artist. Be as righteous as you want about your 'right' to free music that someone else worked hard to create, but think about who exactly you're hurting the next time you buy blank cd-r's and download. At least when you buy a cd, the artist gets some of the royaltees. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:59am | ||
| Troutbreath | The story of Credence Clearwater Revival is one to think about in this context. As a young band they signed a deal with a producer from hell. He set it up so they had no rights to their own music at all. Years later this guy actually tried to sue Tom Fogerty for sounding.....well too much like Tom Fogerty! If the use of the internet can put the control back in the hands of the artist then so much the better, so far it seems to be working that way. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 11:06am | ||
| Anonymous | The internet doesn't put control back in the hands of the artists at all. Where did you read that? Rolling Stone? Spin? Exclaim? Like they aren't controlled by the major entertainment companies. Yhe best you can hope for on downloads alone is driving around in a van, playing a bunch of poorly organized all ages shows for 100 people a pop. You want to play any of the major venues anywhere, it doesn't matter how many downloads you have, you need to be played on the radio, mtv, etc. To get play on those, you need a label with pull backing you. To get a label backing you hard, you need CD sales. Thats the way it works. There are simply too many areas of marketing that need to be covered to become famous that are controlled by the record labels for a band to do it DIY. The majors are extremely protective over having the exclusive abiliy to decide who is gonna become famous, and they have alot of money going into positioning themselves to maintain the power. The industry is what it is, say what you want about it, it aint gonna change. Name one band who has become a household name without the backing of a major. If you say NOFX on epitaph, you are naive, epitaph is protectd by sony (in a mafia sort of way. It's so funny, like Offspring's 'move' to sony. All the press about it, the angry rantings from epitaph. But it was all orchestrated as a publicity stunt, and the funniest thing is about it is people buy it 100%, and even admire epitaph for it's 'punk cred'. Bands who have asperations of being famous, and can't accept this, are in the wrong profession. The best a lot of downloads can do is convince a major to pick a band up. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 11:13am | ||
| Anonymous | The CCR lawsuit was against John Fogerty by Saul Zaentz of Fantasy Records, who the members of CCR signed an 8 album deal with and welched on when they broke up. When John Fogerty finally got out of contractual obligations with Fantasy in 1984, he was sued for slander for by Zaentz for 'Zantz kant Danz' and 'Centerfield' and sued for copyright infringement for 'the old man down the road' sounding too much like 'run to the jungle'. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 11:48am | ||
| Troutbreath | The highest grossing touring band in the US was the Grateful Dead and they managed to do that without having much in the way of Radio play, an internet presence or MTV videos. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 12:05pm | ||
| Anonymous | With regards to your comments about Sony not being hurt by downloading, etc. you were missing my point. I was not refering to major labels. I was refering to indie labels and stores suffering due to people getting all the music for free. Sure some of the people who download end up buying the music or going to the concert, but what if everyone HAD to go to the record store and listen to or buy these albums. The way it is now with downloading, lots of bands are selling less and less CDs, which means they have less revenue to survive as a band and tour. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 12:58pm | ||
| Troutbreath | "Name one band who has become a household name without the backing of a major. If you say NOFX on epitaph, you are naive" Lorreena McKinnet is a household name that did it without the help of a major label. She was so successfull creating and distributing her own CD's that when she finally did sign with a major label she could do it on her own terms. I've never heard of NOFX. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 1:25pm | ||
| Troutbreath | Laurie Anderson is another one. I could go on. The fact that these examples are all women should tell you something. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 1:32pm | ||
| anonymr. | Troutbreath - "...The fact that these examples are all women should tell you something." Huh!?!? What should it tell me? - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 1:37pm | ||
| Troutbreath | That women who are trying to do something original and creative, without the use of sex as a marketing tool, are not given the time of day by the big record companies. Record companies that are run for and by men. There was a reason for Sarah McCloughlin and others to organize Lilith Fair. So go to Estrofest tonight and show some support for the creative and talented women of Victoria. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 1:40pm | ||
| Anonymous | "Troutbreath - That women who are trying to do something original and creative, without the use of sex as a marketing tool, are not given the time of day by the big record companies. Record companies that are run for and by men." The industry doesn't use sex to sell because it's run by men; it does it because it's easy to manufacture and sell. If it didn't sell, they wouldn't do it. So, in fact, comsumers are largely to blame here; if consumers weren't sold so easily by sex, we wouldn't see it emphasized as much. And a record company would never want to be run "for" men, as you said. It's run for those who have and spend money. They don't care who you are and what your background is - they just want your cash. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 2:47pm | ||
| Anonymous | Who are these consumers if they aren't men? I don't think it's women who care if the lastest flavour of the month is on stage half naked. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 3:03pm | ||
| anonymr. | "Who are these consumers if they aren't men? I don't think it's women who care if the lastest flavour of the month is on stage half naked." No, sex doesn't sell necessarily just because of an attraction to the opposite sex. A consumer may just as readily purchase an album by someone of the same gender as them that has been sexed up for admiration reasons, not attraction reasons. The whole idea that there's teeming masses of horny men out there that drive industries that use sex to sell is ridiculous particularly because the selling techniques work damn well on women as well as men. Sex sells because people want to belong and to feel important. - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 3:45pm | ||
| Anonymous | So, in other words people are just sheep and you may as well take advantage of them any way you can? - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 3:57pm | ||
| anonymr. | "So, in other words people are just sheep and you may as well take advantage of them any way you can?" Yes and no. A lot of people are sheep only because they've never been taught otherwise. I think that when someone's given a choice, such as a consumer given the choice whether or not to purchase something, then it's their responsibility to weigh what they've been presented with. What's being taken advantage of is people's ignorance and complacency. We need more consumer and financial education in our school system. On the other hand, many of us learn to become responsible consumers on our own - should we bother sympathizing with those that haven't? - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 4:17pm | ||
| MWPR | I have to agree with the point about exposure (an overused term but still valuable). We put some songs on our website with the goal of people either listening to them or downloading them. If you can't get our CD then this gets our music out there and gives us exposure. People who hear the songs often want to buy the disc; we've had orders from several places in the states and elsewhere BECAUSE they could hear our music first. We've gotten gigs that way also. Having downloadable music out there sells CDs and benefits the band. Invaluable promotion. Go ahead and download away... http://www.mcgillicuddys.ca - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 4:25pm | ||
| Anonymous | Excellent example MWPR it benefits independent bands - Fri, 7 Mar 2003 7:23pm | ||
| Troutbreath | Thanks for the explanation of BIG Business and the Recording Industry. It all goes to confirm my belief that there is never going to be anything new, interesting or creative coming out of that kind of business model. Television and the Movie Industry have the same problem. The really creative stuff will only be made by the independant artists that stick to their creative vision. I am reminded of the record exec that told Frank Zappa that his band hads no commercial potential. It's a hard road to follow but then Sticky Kola is never going to start wearing skin tight leather pants and a pirate shirt open to the waist anyways. - Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:05am | ||
| Anonymous | "Troutbreath - Thanks for the explanation of BIG Business and the Recording Industry. It all goes to confirm my belief that there is never going to be anything new, interesting or creative coming out of that kind of business model. Television and the Movie Industry have the same problem. The really creative stuff will only be made by the independant artists that stick to their creative vision. ..." I agree that the really creative stuff only comes from those that stick to their creative vision but this isn't necessarily restricted to independent artists. Nowhere does it say that if you have a business model, you can't be creative. The business model will, if used correctly, expose that creativity to the masses in a way that preserves integrity. Of course, there's a lot of examples of art that don't do this but that does not mean that's it's an impossibility. If you want to create art AND expose it to millions of people you HAVE to treat it as a business. - Mon, 10 Mar 2003 12:40pm | ||
| Troutbreath | The Big Recording companies have shown time and again that they can't recognize talent even if it bites them in the ass. There was a time at Warner Brothers that this wasn't so but things have changed there as well. The current state of music, it's genrefication (is that a word?) and division show where the Big guys are at. Sting had to let Jaguar use his song Desert Rose in a commecial before his record company would release it. Sting for fucks sake! His record company didn't think a song with a Turkish singer would go anywhere. The internet is proving to be the answer to this impasse and it is capable of bringing new artist to the attention of millions if used correctly. - Mon, 10 Mar 2003 1:49pm | ||
|
|||
Not logged in
Log In / Register (optional)
