torrent uploaders

:icon_bs:
Always the trollish clown huh...you don't really believe that do you?

ZW

 

I think of lot of people who 'beat' the system do so by either living in or uploading through a server hosted in countries outside of the North America, the UK, etc where torrent-uploading is not illegal.

 

i definitely didnt say, or at least mean that live performances make up for what artists lose in cd and mp3 sales. so dont call me fuckin naive.

and that last paragraph is due to many other factors besides media sharing also. you can't just blame it on illegal downloading.

in my opinion, sharing music is not different than sharing visual artworks like paintings. yes you may have a lil jpeg of mona lisa on your comp and even print it out to hang on your wall, but it doesn't change anything, and acknowledgments still go back to the artist.
bands or artists dont even need to go to a record company anymore to publish music. they're able to create their own record label simply because of technology.

so an artist to you is just a job? just a job to pay the bill? this is just sad...

 

Yes I do.

 

No, a decade or so learning to be proficient on an instrument and another learning composition and PCI recording just to spend all of my spare cash on equipment, studio and rehearsal space rental, etc so I can devote all my spare time to composing, rehearsing, recording, producing and uploading music to the web so someone might download it and listen to my music and think I'm really cool and then maybe come to a show...that would be awesome.

ZW

 

EDIT; Sorry. (deleted cheap shot)


ZW

 

I'm confused here?
Are you talking about a band that is just playing local gigs and weekend fests or are you talking about bands and performers who are pulling in 6 figures plus regardless of who is downloading what. Sounds as though you are mixing the two when they are completely different.

As far as increased rents and cost of living, that effects everybody across the board, but much,much less the big performers who are the ones who's music is being downloaded and shared.

I agree with the idea of it being stealing, but when teachers, firemen/women, police, EMT's etc. start earning six figures I'll maybe be a little more sympathetic towards the poor musician who only earned $195 million last year as opposed to $200 million.

I have always been disgusted with the ridiculous amounts that are earned by entertainers, all types and across the board, when people who actually provide a needed service struggle to get by. When they have to force my kids teachers to take an extra 10 days off without pay, and consequently have to lower the standards for graduation as a result, I find it hard to get upset when some singer with a top selling CD is crying over his lost revenue because of file sharing.

People such as yourself don't fall into the same category because you don't have people downloading your music (awesome work by the way) off the internet. So to equate garage bands with top headliners just doesn't stand up.
I have a friend who plays with 4 different bands and they produce their own CD's and sell/give them away. They do it because they enjoy doing it, not for the dollar. Shit they would be ecstatic if people were sharing their music online.

 

that is exactly like getting a degree in art. it doesnt do much but tell people that you're good at the technical aspect of art..
and should i apologize about overpopulation and continual economic recessions?

 

I'm really talking about the bigger picture here. Without financial and promotional backing most artists are simply not going to get that foot up to breaking even.
Playing for fun is one thing, but unfortunately for most cool art to perpetuate these days it needs to become a self supporting enterprise.
I don't like it anymore than any other non-materialistic hippie type, but it's the game we are handed...Musicians of past eras have had it worse afterall...
What I do requires good health and a great deal of practice. (Thanks for the compliment BTW ) I could go out and play blues-rock guitar in a bar band and probably do well because I've done it since age 14 and don't need to rehearse or practice that much and I could just rest on my laurels so to speak for the rest of my sorry life. But I do think I have something to express and that takes extra effort. I can't maintain the kind of energy I need to keep my head tuned and still work a fulltime job. In order for me to work on creating new music every day I need to get at least some remuneration. Fortunately for me I do maintain a tiny amount of financial backing from fans and benefactors. Really this is all relative on a micro-level. I don't want to get rich, just eat 'n pay the rent.

On the macro level it is the same only bigger. (Duh) If you are not the Rolling Stones and you are with a major label you can end up owing money to the promoters or the record company depending on the contract and ticket sales. sure you could sue them for under-promotion or what not but guarenteed they will make your life hell and kiss your chances for renewal goodbye.
Big time bands come home from world tours all the time broke as hell.
It's a complicated game and I don't claim to know it all but I'm afraid right now it's still the only game in town. Illegal downloading won't change anything
BTW you are being quite inflammatory with your figures...http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-touring-bands-of-the-year-15752.shtml


The Stones sold $162 million worth of tickets by playing their music for 1.2 million concertgoers, while U2 pulled in $138.9 million from 1.4 million fans. U2 had to work a little harder, playing 78 shows in North America, compared to 42 performances by the Stones.

The old record for a tour was $121 million, which the Stones set in 1994.

U2's run at Dublin's Croke Park on June 24-27 was named Boxscore of the year, grossing more than $21.1 million and drawing nearly 247,000 fans.

The top 10 touring is also about: Paul McCartney ($60 million), Rod Stewart ($49 million), Elton John ($45.5 million touring, plus another $30 million via his Las Vegas show "The Red Piano"), Dave Matthews Band ($45 million), Jimmy Buffett ($41 million) and Green Day ($36.5 million).

The year's top-grossing arena was New York's Madison Square Garden, which has earned this for six years. It was the third year in a row that Mansfield, Mass.' Tweeter Center was the top-grossing amphitheater.

Notice those are ticket sales, not how much the band got paid.
I agree record companies get way too much but it's just the way the game is set up. Illegal downloading does nothing to help solve this

also why not compare sports stars salarys with teachers and EMT's?
I would also agree many essential service people need to get paid more.

I know I'm not going to change any minds here so I'll just go ahead and bow out.
This shit is really none of my business.
When I offer downloads of my gong music they are always free anyway



ZW

 

I know my figures are inaccurate, they were to make a point, not to be taken literally .
You know as well as I that touring is but one stream of revenue for them, and is usually done to promote new releases.
The industry that is impacted the most by file sharing is the game/software industry. There are many small companies that put it all on the line in support of a product and can go completely bankrupt, business and personal, due to poor sales. That is followed by the movie/TV industry.
Music is the most vocal because it is the most prevalent in illegal downloads, but not the most damaged by it.

I have always been disgusted with the ridiculous amounts that are earned by entertainers, all types and across the board
By that statement I meant all forms of entertainment, including sports.

Last week I attended a "Constitution Day" seminar with my daughter and her senior history class. The topic this year was The internet and privacy. File sharing was one of the topics discussed. Interesting thing is that the music industry, (don't recall the acronym) are working on a new bill/agreement with Internet service providers. The plan being that ISP's charge a higher monthly fee with a portion going directly to the music industry and then that ISP's customers can download as much music as they want free of per song charges because it is included in their monthly charges. Then it is up to the record company to fairly distribute the earnings to the artist based on downloads.
They were saying there is a good chance that is how they will end up handling it. Not sure if it would be a fee increase for everyone, or a "package" option. I think it would most likely be an additional option.
That sounds like a solution that could work for everyone.

Gongs are pretty awesome and not thought of as an instrument in their own right. I wish you the best in your endeavor to change that.

 

I know we will both be accused of being haters but I agree with this statement as well.

 

Naw, it's a pretty reasonable observation. Pop culture has twisted shit to a ridiculous degree.
It's just that celebritys are sooo cool and we all want to be one...

What we are really talking about here is the 'gimme' instinct.
When we see or hear something or someone cool we instantly have a secret desire to 'own' it in some way or at least a piece of it.
and you know it's just that instinct that marketers exploit when they use celebrity to spread their marketshare.

ZW

 

I totally agree with this.

Thanks again PB

ZW