4 students sued by RIAA over music sites

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Sir Kenyth: The recording industry is also going to have to realize that selling CD's is on it's way out the door and that buying single tracks that are going to be digitally stored is where it's going. Look at the new MP3 players.

And what of an album, or any piece of music over three minutes? Are they out the door too? Is Jazz and classical music, and any thematic work now obsolete because of the limitations of an MP3?? It's art. Art is not going to be constrained by user demand. Did Jazz shrivel itself up to three minutes crammed with hooks because that's what FM radio dictated?

OK. Lets look at the New MP3 players. Music sounds inferior on them compared to a CD which at 16 bit sounds inferior to the original master.

What you are proclaiming is the death of the album, which is not going to happen. If I want my songs heard ONLY in the context of an album, then I won't make track IDs if I have to. A single song is in NO WAY the truest expression of an artists work.

[Dude 77]

Well all i can say they got what they deserved (i mean the teans)

[Yorick]

What you are suggesting Kennyth, is like saying that films shouldn't contain all those annoying scenes you personally hate, only the good ones, and that the future is the "single scene" trade. Screw the artist and what they're trying to do. It's all about the consumer isn't it??

Music is more than just "product" or a commodity.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Dude 77: Well all i can say they got what they deserved (i mean the teans)

Dude! They certainly did. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Yorick: What you are suggesting Kennyth, is like saying that films shouldn't contain all those annoying scenes you personally hate, only the good ones, and that the future is the "single scene" trade. Screw the artist and what they're trying to do. It's all about the consumer isn't it?? Music is more than just "product" or a commodity.

Yorik what you're saying is more akin to taking bits of a single song out that you don't like, many of the prepackaged artists (britney, N'Sync, etc) have no greater meaning in their songs and no deep message to impart in their album, I know the vast majority of people with cds, unless the cd's are custom cuts with only tracks they want, tand to skip the songs that they don't like, in favor of hearing only the ones they do.

I know there are some artists who arrange their songs to deliver a certain effect, but most top 40's albums don't.

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Yorick: OK. Lets look at the New MP3 players. Music sounds inferior on them compared to a CD which at 16 bit sounds inferior to the original master.

I for one can't tell the difference unless the bitrate is below 128, and most users can't either, the loss in quality is very small, hell when cd's first came out they sounded worse than tapes due to the sampling procedures. as far as music I download, I only download music I physically have a copy of, or stuff that's so old that it's nearly impossible to find, even many "golden oldies" albums don't have much of what I want to find

[realbinky]

To support morgeruat, albums by top 40 "packaged" bands are sold such that a few songs are hyped and popular, and other songs are filler. Why should I be forced to buy songs I DON'T WANT. That is what they are doing. Also, the imbalance of a 10 song CD being priced almost the same as a 20 song is not at all fair. (assuming the songs are fairly equal in length and popularity). How about "collections" where the only way to get only a couple new songs, is to by a set of 40 songs for 50 bucks, where you already own all the other songs on other albums, how is that fair? Oooh, how about that a DVD movie that includes stuff you don't get at the theater (2 hours plus, deleted scenes, behind the scenes stuff, etc) vs a CD that has 40 minutes of music, and NOTHING I can't get off the radio, where the prices are often only a few bucks different. How is taping the radio (legal, right?) vs internet downloading different (except for some quality ?)

Yes, Yorick, it IS all about the consumer. If CD producing companies and RIAA practiced fair market policies, then consumers would buy more. What do they do? They PRICE FIX, they shove stupid (there are some) laws down our throats, they sue everyone and anyone, and they take (IMO) more then their share from CD sales. THAT is why I don't wish to buy CDs, I can't/won't/don't get what I want, and it would support currupt, despotic companies, such as those represented by RIAA. Until RIAA members play fair, I certainly will not.

These kids DO NOT deserve to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars, but more like $1000 to $1500 in fines, IF THAT. Like if RIAA wins the suits, then musicians will get a penny. They will keep it ALL, and the poor musicians who this put on the streets and starved (really now) STAY poor.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Morgeruat: Yorik what you're saying is more akin to taking bits of a single song out that you don't like, many of the prepackaged artists (britney, N'Sync, etc) have no greater meaning in their songs and no deep message to impart in their album, I know the vast majority of people with cds, unless the cd's are custom cuts with only tracks they want, tand to skip the songs that they don't like, in favor of hearing only the ones they do. I know there are some artists who arrange their songs to deliver a certain effect, but most top 40's albums don't.

I stand by what I say. Lifting songs from a CD is like lifting scenes from a film.

Of the records made on the planet, how many are in the top 40? If the top 40 is your only measure, then classical and Jazz no longer exist. Neither does world music, new age/relaxation, celtic, most hardcore funk, dance and a plethora of heavier music styles.

The album, is the artists primary expressive vehical at the moment, alongside the instantaneous expression of live performance. A 'single' has historically been lifted to promote an album. Like a few scenes of a film made into a trailer.

Bands like Led Zepplin never released singles, they only released albums. The aforementioned independent Jazz genre rarley release singles.

You are quite mistaken if you believe denying artists the full album as an artform is the way of the future.

As I said, if listeners persist in lifting single songs off albums, I guarantee you'll find artists doing longer and longer songs that merge 'movements'.

I love it how you write off the Britney/NSync albums too. Do you even know the name Max Martin? DO you understand what he even does? The guy is a genius. Working within the constraints of pop music is a very challenging art, and he time and again does wonders within those constraints.

[ 04-11-2003, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by realbinky: To support morgeruat, albums by top 40 "packaged" bands are sold such that a few songs are hyped and popular, and other songs are filler. Why should I be forced to buy songs I DON'T WANT. That is what they are doing.

Fillers?

How many albums have you recorded realbinky?

So just because you don't like a song, it's called a filler? And what if the songs you don't like, don't correspond with the songs others don't like. Would that make the whole album one of fillers? Why release an album at all?

Secondly, have you ever heard of songs "growing on you"? Songs "taking some effort" to understand and enjoy?

Singles are generally the most ACCESSIBLE, not the best from an album. Often the most expressive work on a record is the one least likely to be a single, and the one that takes more to eventually like. It widens your pallette.

Put it another way.

If you went to a show, to see an artist, do they give you the option of them skipping the songs you don't want to hear, and only playing your personal favorites? No. Their audience is bigger than just you, and they also release things for THEMSELVES. If you don't like a few songs tough cheddar.

[ 04-11-2003, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Gnarf]

The laws are made in a way so that it's the circumstances that decide whether or not you're breaking rules, and not what you're actually doing... I can for free listen to an album over and over if I borrow it from a friend, not even considering. But I can't download one song from an album that I consider buying, even if I delete it after listening to it once. It doesn't make sense.

...and btw

Bands like Led Zepplin never released singles, they only released albums

Led Zeppelin did release singles...