Steve Albini on Piracy

[nowaysj]

but it doesn't impact my relationship with the actual sound

See, that is my point. I don't believe that that is the case. I have no pony in this race, I'm just speaking from my experiences and observations, and everyone can go and do whatever they want to. You can have or perceive to have any kind of relationship with music you want. But how you listen to a sound does impact your relationship to that sound, imo.

I have a lot of late 80's and 90's music on cd, and I hate it. I really hate jewel cases. Straight up, I think I'm a little autistic, or at the least I'm, "sensitive" (in the feyest voice you can imagine), the little squeaks of jewel cases as the door opens on the hinges, it feels like scraping a razor blade through my brain. Every time I want to listen to like some aphex or squarepusher, it is like pain .

Also think the more senses that can be triggered by the musical experience, the deeper, richer the musical experience can be, so like the large cardboard of the vinyl, the impact of the images and graphics, the smell, queuing the record. It's pushing more experience into my brain, touch, smell, images, words, icons, mechanics, delicacy.

I've got cassettes, mp3's (out the ying yang), cd's, vinyl, I've got it all bitch. For the road, it is mp3's all the way. But in home listening, it is like 50% vinyl, the other 50% I'm kind of not listening for pleasure, more analyzing tracks, checking dynamics, frequency content. So listening pleasure it is vinyl. That is why generally speaking, I'm only buying vinyl now. Just found it more pleasurable. Whatevers I'm rambling. BAN ME!

[scspkr99]

lol, nah that all makes some sense especially with regard to vinyl because it really is that different an experience.

I've got about 1000 albums worth of stuff stored digitally and a good 40% of that will be CD's that I ripped. I don't play the CD's any more it's fucking around that I don't need. I enjoy browsing what I want to listen to while sat in front of the computer with headphones on. I don't want to be stood in front of a rack of cd's half of which I wouldn't be able to read the label of. Once I'm happiest listening in front of the computer then the actual physical media becomes less important.

I don't devalue the stuff I've bought digitally and because the experience of getting stuff out of cd cases remembering to put them back the cases and disks getting fucked detracts from the sound I'm not missing anything when I buy digitally.

If I had, or decide to have, time for vinyl in my life it may be that I value that differently but it wont be at the expense of a digital collection

[dubfordessert]

i dislike listening sat in front of a computer, it's a world of difference from putting something on and not standing to attention in front of it, just leaving it there without a billion alternatives at your fingertips on the device which stores or connects you to pretty much everything you do in your life... too messy for your brain

[tyger]

i actually pretty much do think it is offensive to suggest piracy didn't hurt sales. it is blatantly obvious. The studies are probably just becoming old enough and thorough enough to settle on a correlation. But it's just the way it is.. it's everywhere. What can you really expect? I think if you're gonna say it didn't hurt sales you're ignoring the entire world; you're disillusioned. the amount of young kids just DLing unauthorized dupes is staggering. The effects will eventually be recorded and will be inarguable at that point.

i see. so are the scientific studies which didn't come to the conclusion you wanted offensive? or is it only ppl chatting shit on forums which is offensive?

it's not obvious. one effect is illegal downloads substituting for sales. another effect is ppl discovering artists via illegal downloads, and then going on to buy their music. it's not obvious which effect is bigger.

there are also illegal downloads which have no effect either way on sales - i.e. the downloaders wouldn't have bought it anyway, and they don't go on to buy any music as a result of downloading. it may be that most illegal downloads fall into this category, in which case the huge total volume of illegal downloads doesn't tell us much.

the exposure that artists get from illegal downloads can also help them earn more money from touring (this was one of the points albini made), or other sources (e.g. merchandise). so the total effect on artists' incomes isn't only about their income from selling recordings; they might lose on income from sellings recordings but gain from other areas.

[kay]

I think it all just boils down to the fact that humans simply have not developed a connection to digital, intangible media as opposed to media in a tangible format. And therefore, are by and large unable to associate a real value to downloadable things.

We're still really just glorified apes, despite what we keep telling ourselves. We need things to hold/grasp on to to understand that they are real and they mean something. It might be different in a couple generations when society/culture has changed enough. But at this particular moment, intangible goods don't really have the same meaning to us as tangible goods.

[wolf89]

It is like synthetic to separate them. Like boomkat or juno is a part of the mp3 experience, the cd case is part of the cd experience. And the smell of vinyl and the cardboard, and the arm of the turntable, and the spinning, haha, is all part of the vinyl experience. To say music is just a disembodied concept is inaccurate at this time. Maybe when we've been uploaded to the central core, it'll be just pure 1's on 0's, but so long as you are in your body, you will be having a physical experience with your music whether it be digital download, or fragrant vinyl.

see I get this with vinyl more I think it's much better to touch and includes a different listening experience. but CD's an mp3's are often played from the same devices and the CD itself doesn't have any specific material worth.

I flip flop a bit on this and I go through periods where I'm more likely to purchase a CD than I am a download because of the wrapping and those that have a booklet or w/e definitely adds value but it doesn't impact my relationship with the actual sound

It doesn't change the relationship with the sound. However it does change how it is treated in my collection. You have an actual manufactured physical item that you had to acquire somehow that holds a presence in your collection. It's not an intangible file that sits invisible on the computer. You go pull out the cd and put it on.

Of course vinyl is still the best format for me by a long shot and I don't buy cds that often anymore but if I'm gonna buy a full album I'm going to buy a physical copy as I'm just more likely to pull out it and play it than if it's on a hard drive.

Plus I like to look at the stacks of cds or shelves of vinyl and think about where I bought them alll and when. I can track my music collection's growth and evolution and it's something that's going to always stay with me.

also with an album like this you get a whole newspaper to read if you buy vinyl including a fake story on how the album was written. Fake news stories, joke tv listeings and a kids join the dots puzzle that is of a topless lady if you do it.



It's not as important as the music of course but it all adds to the experience and gives you a better feeling for what the band are like and what they were thinking about with this record.

[scspkr99]

I think it all just boils down to the fact that humans simply have not developed a connection to digital, intangible media as opposed to media in a tangible format. And therefore, are by and large unable to associate a real value to downloadable things.

We're still really just glorified apes, despite what we keep telling ourselves. We need things to hold/grasp on to to understand that they are real and they mean something. It might be different in a couple generations when society/culture has changed enough. But at this particular moment, intangible goods don't really have the same meaning to us as tangible goods.

I suspect this is a significant part of it.

There's stuff I don't get though, we pay for services all the time, spotify, net flix, Sky Box office it's like we've made the transition to seeing music and films as services and will pay for them but yet when we pay for a download it seems somehow lessened. Like we understand digital services but not digital goods.

I also take Wolf89's point below. I wonder whether it's because I first got into music pre CD and so never really had any real enjoyment from the media. I'm almost obsessive about my digital collection with backups, naming conventions, artwork all looking to give me a highly organised music collection that suits me. I do wonder though whether the fact purchased downloads are indistinguishable between non paid legal and illegal on the hard drive that that somehow lessens the media as well.

Ultimately I don't think we've much choice, given the fact the media quality the same CD or Download and given resources are finite I don't see any real justification for CD's and would expect them to be almost wholly replaced by the cloud.

There's some evidence of evolution considering this is a discussion about piracy and there's no flames.

[nowaysj]

...

[Today]

i actually pretty much do think it is offensive to suggest piracy didn't hurt sales. it is blatantly obvious. The studies are probably just becoming old enough and thorough enough to settle on a correlation. But it's just the way it is.. it's everywhere. What can you really expect? I think if you're gonna say it didn't hurt sales you're ignoring the entire world; you're disillusioned. the amount of young kids just DLing unauthorized dupes is staggering. The effects will eventually be recorded and will be inarguable at that point.

i see. so are the scientific studies which didn't come to the conclusion you wanted offensive? or is it only ppl chatting shit on forums which is offensive?

it's not obvious. one effect is illegal downloads substituting for sales. another effect is ppl discovering artists via illegal downloads, and then going on to buy their music. it's not obvious which effect is bigger.

there are also illegal downloads which have no effect either way on sales - i.e. the downloaders wouldn't have bought it anyway, and they don't go on to buy any music as a result of downloading. it may be that most illegal downloads fall into this category, in which case the huge total volume of illegal downloads doesn't tell us much.

the exposure that artists get from illegal downloads can also help them earn more money from touring (this was one of the points albini made), or other sources (e.g. merchandise). so the total effect on artists' incomes isn't only about their income from selling recordings; they might lose on income from sellings recordings but gain from other areas.

the evidence cited was a bad joke. I don't pull up the stats i've read supporting or rebutting my claims because the period is still too short. They're all anecdotal or incomplete or inconclusive
But it isn't a difficult reality to just face -- aside from niches of scene-supporting DJs and fans like the ones on this board who buy mp3s and vinyl without thinking twice... this generation and their offspring are pirating all the shit they would've otherwise bought and then some: (album? fuck, why not just grab the discog? it's already rar'd ffs) . My older cousins are now 40 somethings, and they have collections of CD's and mix tapes, but from 2002 or so onward, they even stopped buying. They just use spotify or pandora or whatever. But that's only because members of their generation have less web/tech experience and a stronger link between music and a tangible product. So pirating a torrent is something that disturbs their moral compass way more than it does ours.

Our generation grew up already having Napster blow up. Our taste in music developed at the exact same time we grew entitled to get it for free. This is a phenomenon that has never happened before. People even claim they demo shit by torrent and buy what they like. Ok. Whatever. How did people used to demo shit? the radio? We have soundcloud, ffs. We can even demo shit that would never get airplay. It's an excuse for the truth, which is that our generation vastly devalued music to absolute zero, regardless of its quality. It's too soon to draw for stats. But fucking face the music (pun intended).

[collige]

Your claim that it's "obvious" that piracy -> less sales ignores they myriad other complications that happened as a result of the internet becoming the main way of distributing music.

[nowaysj]

I think it all just boils down to the fact that humans simply have not developed a connection to digital, intangible media as opposed to media in a tangible format. And therefore, are by and large unable to associate a real value to downloadable things.

We're still really just glorified apes, despite what we keep telling ourselves. We need things to hold/grasp on to to understand that they are real and they mean something. It might be different in a couple generations when society/culture has changed enough. But at this particular moment, intangible goods don't really have the same meaning to us as tangible goods.

I suspect this is a significant part of it.

There's stuff I don't get though, we pay for services all the time, spotify, net flix, Sky Box office it's like we've made the transition to seeing music and films as services and will pay for them but yet when we pay for a download it seems somehow lessened. Like we understand digital services but not digital goods.

I also take Wolf89's point below. I wonder whether it's because I first got into music pre CD and so never really had any real enjoyment from the media. I'm almost obsessive about my digital collection with backups, naming conventions, artwork all looking to give me a highly organised music collection that suits me. I do wonder though whether the fact purchased downloads are indistinguishable between non paid legal and illegal on the hard drive that that somehow lessens the media as well.

Ultimately I don't think we've much choice, given the fact the media quality the same CD or Download and given resources are finite I don't see any real justification for CD's and would expect them to be almost wholly replaced by the cloud.

There's some evidence of evolution considering this is a discussion about piracy and there's no flames.

There's some evidence of evolution considering this is a discussion about piracy and there's no flames.

Fuck you, your mom is gay.

Am really quoting you and wolf to say that paradigms are extraordinarily powerful, and that our paradigm for online digital music distribution was through pirating rather than something like itunes, and so that paradigm remains extraordinarily prevalent. It may take us a few generations to value purely digital goods, but what paradigms will be set by then? What fucked situations will we find ourselves in.

Everyone assumes that an open internet is inevitable, so piracy will always be a possibility. I think it is inevitable that the internet will be closed and piracy will not always be such an easy option. Every bit of data you transfer in the future will be monitored and recorded, very little room to dl Thriller.

[alphacat]

^ You can always beat them to the punch:

http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet

[Today]

other things happened since distro went digital, but to deny that sales plummeted is nothing but that -- denial.
part of the recovery in sales and part of the reason it's so different is because of the ability to buy one song at a time, and replacing of the pricing structure. Industries reorganize themselves, it will be a whole new structure eventually. But none of this has to do with the issue of violating copyright --- the fact that those exact crimes have become newly widespread this decade and have an enormous impact on the number of units sold. Probably moreso than any industry has seen ever before.

The counter-claim that piracy doesn't hurt sales, that it even might have the opposite effect, is just insulting and a disingenuous rationale for committing a very popular crime

[kay]

Having a "heated" debate on a music forum regarding OPINIONS on whether piracy is having an effect on music sales and what could be done to prevent it is pointless. For starters, only a certain small subset of humanity actually looks at music forums (or any forum for that matter) and an even smaller subset contributes actively. Most of the people who've posted on this topic don't even know what the majority of the populace thinks about piracy.

[Today]

to be fair, i was presented with a survey and a think tank with sample sizes of about a thousand
I've probably asked almost a thousand people myself what they thought, in person and online in various settings. The word around me is that I'm stupid for buying music, I'm putting principle before practicality "for no reason," etc. etc. Most people who aren't music geeks on forums like this, they don't really value it the same way. The average casual listener will not buy these days. there are plenty of legit free sources too. Just not as active by way of selection (i.e. radio, web streams, whatever ten year old club bangers the dive-bar DJ's have still been dropping).
I'm not even saying everyone's pirating, or that going in reverse to get the gravy train running again is the answer.

All i've been trying to say is that it's not disputable that piracy has displaced former potential buyers from this market. It has. It is. And it will continue to do so unless it is curbed by new incentives to stop doing it.

[tyger]

to be fair, i was presented with a survey and a think tank with sample sizes of about a thousand

you must have missed my links to Felix Oberholzer-Gee & Koleman Strumpf's studies ... here they are again:

The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Political Economy. 2007. 115(1):1-42.

File-Sharing and Copyright. NBER's Innovation Policy and the Economy series, volume 10. ed. Joshua Lerner and Scott Stern. MIT Press. 2009.

there are plenty of legit free sources too.

you mean: sales might have gone down for reasons other than piracy? careful, now!

[incnic]

i dont know really - does vinyl sound warmer than digital? is there a difference in the 'warm bass'
can you tell the difference between an mp3 and a vinyl pressing?

[Today]

there are plenty of legit free sources too.

you mean: sales might have gone down for reasons other than piracy? careful, now!

i'm saying there are plenty of legit sources to demo material from, so that excuse is bullshit rationale for pirating.
If you don't believe it's displaced formerly potential buyers from the market, you're delusional
that's pretty much been my only point aside from the issue of consent -- artists sign a deal with distributors. They make their intentions clear, but they're undermined by crooks with torrent trackers.

[SCope13]

people were buying it before they could steal it. And no, i'm not going to stop using the word "steal"

[capo ultra]

its funny because with the ever-increasing rate of technological progress the arguments against downloading are as archaic as the arguments against tape trading

downloading is dead, welcome to the future