promoting and selling music in the 21st century

[rogue star]

I was prepared to cut u off at every turn, with your half-arse excuses for what is blatently detrimental to the scene, but instead i shall leave u to your narcissistic ways

may peace be with you

pointless and meaningless post. thanks for nothing!

well pointless is dragging this topic over 2 threads and so far no one agrees with what your saying, so i guess its apples and oranges again

[Jennifer]

in my opinion, it seems you're doing this to try to feel better about what you've done. we're not answering your questions to your satisfaction, and you take that as if we're taking things personal, or not understanding where you're coming from. i think we understand the situation, and things just aren't that black and white. dubstep is not the same as rock, etc etc.
bottom line, we think that downloading dubstep illegally (especially before its release) is wrong, and you're not likely to change our minds.

[pompende]

I will restate that I am a (small time) producer of music, and I truly believe that I benefit from having my music shared freely.

thats great man. let me know if you release anything. I'll stand outside the record store passing out cdr's of it so you get "maximum exposure."

perhaps I wouldn't want the tracks out prematurely.

really??!!?!
and how do you know that the unmarked collection of tunes you have is really the forthcoming album and not some premature copy?

I'm just wary of cats with "holier than thou" attitudes stating their opinions as gospel on forums.

omg are you trying to make some sort of joke at your own expense?

I'll draw an analogy to the war in Iraq.

jesus christ.
you've displayed about as much "critical thinking" as a Catcher in the Rye book report. Just so you know.

Oink was taken down today, and cleanly - with a little cooperation from ISPs, the police in the UK and Holland, along with int'l police forces and Interpol could soon be banging on the doors of many many users, all across the world. This could also set an interesting precedent for handling torrent sites, and punishing users heavily.

come on, man. cool that.

Let me pose another question that looks at the issue from a different angle. Let's pretend for a moment that P2P file sharing never existed. Do you think more or less people would be aware of dubstep?

i might prefer a smaller audience. soooooo many halfass tunes coming out now.
anyway, i got into dubstep by downloading mixes off of this very forum. p2p groups like OINK didnt even have dubstep available in 2k5. Indeed i imagine that the MAH dubwarz show in jan 2k6 exposed more people to this sound than any ammount of filesharing ever could have or will. file sharing does not have hype. file sharing does not have a sexy voice.

Yes I would like to see the artists I respect succeed and make a living from their art, as this would provide me with more music to listen to. However, I am happy with what I get, indeed I am grateful, since I remember the days of dubstep when we were overjoyed to be able to buy one release a month. I can't afford all the music I want, but I've never seen the need to bolster this with ill-gotten wares.

Well, you clearly still have way more money than me.
I am 100% persuaded by and aligned with the arguments put forth about the moral implications of file-sharing. But, seriously, the avid anti-p2p members on this board need to check themselves. Being in a position to buy decks and 12"s is an essentially centered and non-universal position, frequently used here to degrade those who may simply be in less fortunate economic positions. Operating under the assumption that filetraders perefer to steal music rather than pay is alienating, insulting, and ultimately regressive.
see Battle Gong above

seriously, im already living on crackers, cant afford to go out with my friends...what the fuck do you want? Will it bother you too much if I use free mp3s to play around beatmatching tunes on the computer? I would love to have my fave tunes wax with tables to play them but since that's not a possibility for me right now, do I have to stay at home listening to itunes radio?

All I'm illustrating is that there is a slippery slope here

my goodness! you do love logical fallacies!

now apply that same kind of p2p loss example to a much smaller scene like ours, and you can see how hard and brutal it is. our scene is so small in comparison to other genres that every single P2P loss is a massive blow to the potential of a record label. none of the record labels have promotional staff, street teams and networks to facilitate releases. it's all grassroots and the internet. why do you think there are so many dubstep mixes for free? because this is OUR promotional system. it works, and people that poach albums on P2P are basically putting up a big middle finger to our whole scene.

The only thing hindered is growth. The core of music buyers in this scene isn't dwindling, in my eyes, but I do see people becoming interested in this music recently that have not and will not buy any tunes in any format.
Obv not in a position to say but i would guess that any wound to record sales is self-inflicted by labels overestimating their consumer base. (just coz youve got a nice clubnight doesn't mean you can shift 1k plates).
Anyway, i liked that post, found it illuminating.

I hardly listen to CDs or MP3s at all apart from on my computer, and it's entirely stuff I'm sent or the odd mix. Everything I listen to when I'm chilling at home is on vinyl, or the odd CD from the few that my flatmate or I have bought over the years

that sounds really nice man. However, I am still bothered that you might posit that the use of illegal DLs for personal use is inherently amoral, thus ascribing intent to people you know nothing about, disregarding extant and static circumstances.

Just to be clear: I would love to be spending 100 pounds on vinyl a month but somehow cant make this happen while putting myself through school.

[b&w]

i might prefer a smaller audience. soooooo many halfass tunes coming out now.

Personal attacks aside, pompende, I think you make some valid points in your extensive post. The quote above is not one of them. It is illogical. Sure there are halfass tunes, but how is a smaller audience for dubstep going to prevent untalented people from making music?

I'd reckon you're in a narrowminded fringe minority of misguided "purists" who want to keep the so called dubstep "scene" all to themselves.

[thinking]

Well, you clearly still have way more money than me.
I am 100% persuaded by and aligned with the arguments put forth about the moral implications of file-sharing. But, seriously, the avid anti-p2p members on this board need to check themselves. Being in a position to buy decks and 12"s is an essentially centered and non-universal position, frequently used here to degrade those who may simply be in less fortunate economic positions. Operating under the assumption that filetraders perefer to steal music rather than pay is alienating, insulting, and ultimately regressive.
see Battle Gong above


Just to be clear: I would love to be spending 100 pounds on vinyl a month but somehow cant make this happen while putting myself through school.

so you call me out for apparently making assumptions about other people's financial situations and whether or not they can afford all the music they want, but then make similar assumptions about me. Hmmmm.

I take a moral standpoint AGAINST filesharing because I simply don't agree that, just because it's there for free and you can't/won't buy it, you should take it.

Let's rewind 10+ years to the pre-Napster days - did you steal music then? Did you buy a bunch of CDs, rip them and then take them back for a full refund? I can't afford anything like the amount of music I'd like to own, but I don't go and download it just because. I get sent a lot of stuff pre-release, often for review purposes, but I will always try and buy the vinyl when it comes out - I often can't afford to do so and yes it's a fucking bummer.

I don't like this assertion that simply because technology enables something, it's okay to disregard the surrounding moral issues, or to assuage your own guilt by convinving yourself there's no other option.


btw I don't want the above to seem like a personal attack - bar the first para, 'you' is aimed at all & sundry, not you specifically.

[danolboy]

I'd reckon you're in a narrowminded fringe minority of misguided "purists" who want to keep the so called dubstep "scene" all to themselves.

I reckon that if you're looking for people to goad and want to start getting pointlessly anal/aggressive with your arguments, you should head over to D.O.A. I'm sure they will accomodate you.

[/quote]

[b&w]

[I reckon that if you're looking for people to goad and want to start getting pointlessly anal/aggressive with your arguments, you should head over to D.O.A. I'm sure they will accomodate you.

Whatever dude. I call em like I see em. pompende was getting personal with his comments, something I don't think is necessary to make a point. So, I called him out by taking a stab at his orientation as a member of the dubstep community. When someone says they don't want a "scene" to grow or get too big that just sounds like fear based reasoning to me.

And ThinKing raises an interesting point. If you are in a position to help the "scene" via radio airplay or some other sort of promotional visibility, isn't it OK to get your music for free? I wonder if MAH buys any dubstep. IMO she shouldn't have to with all of the love and energy she puts into promoting the music /artists.

So, again, where do we draw the line with this? Is it OK to accept free music if you are then in turn giving back to the "scene"? And just how much do you have to be supporting the "scene" to warrant receiving free music?

[parson]

still failing to differentiate between free being given and free being taken

[thinking]

So, again, where do we draw the line with this? Is it OK to accept free music if you are then in turn giving back to the "scene"? And just how much do you have to be supporting the "scene" to warrant receiving free music?

as I have regularly iterated, it is everything to do with the artist/label - it is down to them to decide how to disseminate their music/product. Trying to have some kind of merit system based on how much someone contributes to a scene is risible.

[wil blaze]

All I am saying is, if advanced sharing helps spread the word and buzz about a new release how is that disrespectful?

Are you smacked?

If someone doesn't want you to do something (in this case share a tune/album pre-release) and yet you do it anyway knowing full well the artist don't want that to happen... it is disrespectful. FULL STOP...

the fact that it may or may not help build a buzz etc is completely irrelevant... and it should be up to the artist/label how much they want to be heard pre-release.

[wil blaze]

Sharing a whole release before it is even in the stores and announcing it to the world is removing the incentive for some people to buy it.

How do you know this? What if it builds a buzz and actually gets more people to buy it? Why does this possibility not occur to people?

of course it occours to people but at the end of the day it's not your decision to make...

i would never normaly say this on a forum... but you are being a prick!

some people ey?

[wil blaze]

[quote="pompende

Yes I would like to see the artists I respect succeed and make a living from their art, as this would provide me with more music to listen to. However, I am happy with what I get, indeed I am grateful, since I remember the days of dubstep when we were overjoyed to be able to buy one release a month. I can't afford all the music I want, but I've never seen the need to bolster this with ill-gotten wares.

Well, you clearly still have way more money than me.
I am 100% persuaded by and aligned with the arguments put forth about the moral implications of file-sharing. But, seriously, the avid anti-p2p members on this board need to check themselves. Being in a position to buy decks and 12"s is an essentially centered and non-universal position, frequently used here to degrade those who may simply be in less fortunate economic positions. Operating under the assumption that filetraders perefer to steal music rather than pay is alienating, insulting, and ultimately regressive.[/quote]

hang on mate... so your saying if i'm a car lover but i can't afford a ferrari... i should steal one?

it may sound harsh... but if you can't afford to buy music that's unfortunate... but it still don't mean you should steal it!

[joshaphex]

I have just worked hard on getting a solely digital mix compilation release through Itunes to try and promote the legal downloading and help move dubstep that way and I find it interesting how the first reply is - well why the fuck should I pay that when I can download a bigger mix for free. Maybe becuase you need to keep the music alive?!

I agree with those anti theiving people in this topic, Dubstep is in no way in a position to do what Radiohead did or even what madonna is doing with LiveNation and signing all her music over to a promotions/live events company cus live is where the money is now! If FWD/Ammunition or DMZ etc were making enough off their live events to live, release tracks for nothing etc then maybe it'd be different, but what do you want to do? support a scene through payin 30 quid to go to a rave and over 300 to go to a mainstream gig or maybe you could just shell out the fiver for a 12" and still support it....

[b&w]

Here's a thought:

Ways for independent artists/producers to make money:

1. Live gigs (DJ or live PA)

2. License music for film/TV/other commercial avenues

3. Selling merchandise (T-shirts, slipmats, etc.)

Sharing music has been around since the advent of recordable media. The fact is if artists/producers want to make a living off of their music they have to branch out into some of the ventures listed above.

[wil blaze]

Here's a thought:

Ways for independent artists/producers to make money:

1. Live gigs (DJ or live PA)

2. License music for film/TV/other commercial avenues

3. Selling merchandise (T-shirts, slipmats, etc.)

Sharing music has been around since the advent of recordable media. The fact is if artists/producers want to make a living off of their music they have to branch out into some of the ventures listed above.

entirely true but that still in know way justifies the illegal sharing of music... especially not pre-release!

stop digging mate the hole's only getting deeper!

[b&w]

entirely true but that still in know way justifies the illegal sharing of music... especially not pre-release!

stop digging mate the hole's only getting deeper!

Wil, read the title of this thread...it's not called "the argument for illegal file sharing". You (and others) are choosing to harp on one aspect of my position; i.e., that I believe that P2P file sharing and sharing music in general can be a good marketing strategy, and in many ways help the artist/producer reach more people. While I believe this to be true, I am not closed off to other people's opinions.

All I am saying is that, at the end of the day, if dubstep (and other indie) producers/artists/labels really want to make a living off of their music they need to diversify/get creative. In this context, why not use the reality of the P2P culture we live in to your advantage?

Again, please refer to the title of this thread and offer your .02 if you haven't already.

[misk]

i thought, when i read the title of this thread, that i would get to read an interesting discussion about ideas people may have had that would allow for more forward-thinking solutions to the filesharing problem that plagues music.


instead i see theres an argument here. BORRRRRING.


carry on

[b&w]

i thought, when i read the title of this thread, that i would get to read an interesting discussion about ideas people may have had that would allow for more forward-thinking solutions to the filesharing problem that plagues music.


instead i see theres an argument here. BORRRRRING.


carry on

Does this mean you've got nothing to contribute?

[shonky]

Here's a thought:

Ways for independent artists/producers to make money:

1. Live gigs (DJ or live PA)

2. License music for film/TV/other commercial avenues

3. Selling merchandise (T-shirts, slipmats, etc.)

Sharing music has been around since the advent of recordable media. The fact is if artists/producers want to make a living off of their music they have to branch out into some of the ventures listed above.

Is a bit shit for producers that don't dj, play live or want to have their tunes on commercials though. As a lot of music for tv and films is commissioned which may well limit artistic freedom or a way of selling albums that represent label rosters there aren't really a great deal of openings for that.

[b&w]

Here's a thought:

Ways for independent artists/producers to make money:

1. Live gigs (DJ or live PA)

2. License music for film/TV/other commercial avenues

3. Selling merchandise (T-shirts, slipmats, etc.)

Sharing music has been around since the advent of recordable media. The fact is if artists/producers want to make a living off of their music they have to branch out into some of the ventures listed above.

Is a bit shit for producers that don't dj, play live or want to have their tunes on commercials though. As a lot of music for tv and films is commissioned which may well limit artistic freedom or a way of selling albums that represent label rosters there aren't really a great deal of openings for that.

agreed