Discussion Forums

Theory on burning/copying cds
Last Post 12 Sep 2004 01:44 PM by An Fear. 25 Replies.
Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 212 > >>
Author Messages
An FearUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:16
An Fear

--
12 Sep 2004 01:44 PM
    Dia dhaoibh mo chairde,this is an issue ive been thinking about for a while..i dont burn cds myself but i hav heard a lot about people doing it..so.. i'd just like hear people's opinions on the whole age-old issue of copying/burning cds....i have a theory: 1.a friend copies u a cd that u wud never ever hav bought or heard of otherwise.. 2. u listen to the cd..like it a lot 3.u begin to really get into their stuff..then go out and buy any other previously released material at 12-20 euro a pop.. 4. u start looking out for concert details..upcoming gigs 5.u attend some paying ur 20/30 euro each time...sometimes 40/50 euro..festivals etc. 6.my point is....by illegaly copying an album, the band/record company end up making a hell of a lot more than that copied album was worth in the first place.. I'd just like to hear people's opinions on my point
    spacecadetUser is Offline
    New Member
    New Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:5
    spacecadet

    --
    12 Sep 2004 01:57 PM
    Burning cds is so five years ago. Its all about the mp3 dvds these days. 100 albums a go!
    UnicronUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1696
    Ian Wright

    --
    12 Sep 2004 05:34 PM
    Yeah, and with really s**tty sound compression, 192kBps my arse, YOU CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE, Steve Jobs can blow me, stupid white headphones. I agree with the point that copying CD's can help get newer acts off the ground but I'd be more of a downloading the od MP3 to get an idea about what a band are like.
    BinokularUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1665
    Binokular

    --
    13 Sep 2004 07:53 AM
    There really isn't any issue about burning CDs for friends. This is what constitutes "fair use" under existing copyright law and therefore it isn't illegal. Burning off multiple copies and attempting to sell them for profit on the other hand is piracy. The real issue is that DRM (digital rights management), copy protected CDs and other so-called anti-piracy measures have the potential to take away these fair use rights that consumers have enjoyed for decades and put too much power about how and when we listen to music into the hands of the copyright holder. Copyright is not an indefinite thing, all intellectual property is supposed to return to the public domain after a number of years. Copyright is merely there to ensure the actual creator of the work gets rewarded financially within their own lifetime. The problem with all these protected formats is that it may make it effectively impossible to return such works to the public domain despite their legal status. I know encryption can be cracked but that is a seperate, thorny legal issue. (to see what I mean, do a search in google for a russian guy named "Dmitry Skylarov" for example) Unicron, yes you can tell the difference with MP3s, but I don't think the quality is as bad as you make out. Anyway theres an number of different formats out there, not just MP3. Theres apple AAC (what people are most likely to actually be listening to on their iPods nowadays), Microsoft WMA, Ogg Vorbis, etc. You can't sweepingly dismiss them as useless. Anyway, the difference is minimal, most music that ends up on CD is initially recorded digitally in the studio these days and very few people bother record at anything above 24Bit 96Khz, even for classical music. 192KHZ recording devices have only really started to appear in any meaningful way this year, so it will be a while before they are universally adopted, if ever. Some CDs are arguably worse than a high quality software based digital music file, because a lot of CDs are poorly mastered, especially CDs released during the 80s/early 90s.
    mutchUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:392
    mutch

    --
    13 Sep 2004 09:14 AM
    broadband is not great in this counry so yes burning cd's is pretty big, why do ye think dixons etc sell so many? my theory on mp3's and mass burning: its draining money from the industry leading to a panic attack leading to "safe bets" leading to crap music.
    BinokularUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1665
    Binokular

    --
    13 Sep 2004 09:20 AM
    A theory that doesn't hold up under scrutiny, there is evidence to suggest that file sharing has actually had a positive effect on CD sales. If anything, its the industry thats slowly killing itself with mediocre output and shortsigtedness, then looking for a convenient scapegoat.
    UnicronUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1696
    Ian Wright

    --
    13 Sep 2004 05:21 PM
    Thom Yorke said something along these lines about the CD piracy thing and the drop in CD sales over the last few years. "What they don't realise is that people aren't buying albums because they aren't releasing anything people want to listen to". The big labels are incresingly playing it safer in their release policy and although I don't have any figures to back this statement up I'd imagine that the smaller labels that are willing to take more of a risk on musicians are taking a higher proportion of the record sales. Of course you could also put this down to the fact that file sharing and compressed music files makes it easier for smaller lables and unestablished acts to get samples of their music to an audience.
    mutchUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:392
    mutch

    --
    14 Sep 2004 08:02 AM
    quote:
    Originally posted by Unicron
    Of course you could also put this down to the fact that file sharing and compressed music files makes it easier for smaller lables and unestablished acts to get samples of their music to an audience.
    you see my problem with some of the theories here is I dont know one person that has ever gotten in to a new act through the internet/burning a cd. maybe i know the wrong people.
    BinokularUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1665
    Binokular

    --
    14 Sep 2004 08:11 AM
    I think you know the wrong people Mutch! mind you it must be hard when you live in Nepal A lot of my new discoveries have been through downloading MP3s or borrowing CDs off of friends. In fairness a lot of these MP3s have been obtained legally (Epitonic or similar) and as I said before copying/lending CDs to friends is not illegal either. My latest discoveries are Emperor X (New Order meets Pavement, sort of..) and Asobi Seksu, which means something a bit rude in Japanese, but is great indie pop nonetheless.
    mutchUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:392
    mutch

    --
    14 Sep 2004 08:58 AM
    Well Nepal is difficult to navigate, especially here in the mountains!heh! I'm glad you can prove me wrong, cos it does open up things to everyone (well everyone with a PC and curiousity!) I'm just old fashioned. Give me tapes and a walkman that plays at a different speed any day!
    UnicronUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1696
    Ian Wright

    --
    14 Sep 2004 09:12 AM
    Well Mutch, now you know 2. At least 60% of the music that I've discovered in the last year and really loved has either come from downloading a couple of MP3s for a sample or a friend (actually one friend in particular) slipping me a CD-R and telling me to take a listen to it becasue he thinks that I'll like it. Quite often if I really like an album I'll go out and buy a proper copy of it as well.
    kierryUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:244
    kierry

    --
    14 Sep 2004 10:40 AM
    the highest music sales of the last ten years was the year that napster was most popular. i discovered lots of bands through mp3's. i still do. its better than the radio. and when i find a someone i like i buy the album. mp3's are very important in todays industry. its so dumb that they don't push it.
    El DuderinoUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:179
    El Duderino

    --
    14 Sep 2004 10:53 AM
    what is a ready source for MP3's? is there any sites that offer a variety of MP3's or is it the case that you have to find out what you want to hear before you can find anything you'll like?
    BinokularUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1665
    Binokular

    --
    14 Sep 2004 11:03 AM
    www.epitonic.com is the best out there by a mile, the only downside is that they are a victim of their own success and are unable to admit submissions for new music at the moment, theres still tons of MP3s already there though.
    Vent My SpleenUser is Offline
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:500
    Vent My Spleen

    --
    14 Sep 2004 11:09 AM
    The music industry is patently incapable of dealing with new technology. They painted mp3 as the bogey man and adding the likes of Lars Ulrich hasn't helped (a millionaire many times over bitching about royalties, I ask you). If they had invested half as much time in finding a way to harness the move the digital, they would be a lot better off. Personally, I have a lot of sympathy with those of us who genuinely but a lot of albums and see digital as a way of seeking out more new music. That said, it is the humble artist who is at the bottom of the corporate food chain and no matter how you slice and dice it, they suffer the most. For every one of us who go out and spend our hard earned on CDs, gigs etc, there are dozens who just use it as a free resource.
    El DuderinoUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:179
    El Duderino

    --
    14 Sep 2004 11:28 AM
    Does the artist really lose out that much. If it gets to the point where there's wholesale downloading of the artists material chances are that this artist has already built up alot of hype and probably sold alot of records. MP3's in my opinion are a great liberator for new acts coming through. It means that artists don't necessarily have to sign with big labels anymore to get worlwide distribution. Anyone that i know that does nothing but download music (never go to gigs or buy CDs) only ever downloads popular "mainstream" stuff that's already sold a tonne. It's not out of consideration but it always seems to be the way
    mutchUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:392
    mutch

    --
    14 Sep 2004 12:02 PM
    ok i've set my self an mp3 mission, three new acts in the next three weeks. i'll keep ye posted.
    Vent My SpleenUser is Offline
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:500
    Vent My Spleen

    --
    14 Sep 2004 03:11 PM
    quote:
    Originally posted by El Duderino
    Does the artist really lose out that much. If it gets to the point where there's wholesale downloading of the artists material chances are that this artist has already built up alot of hype and probably sold alot of records. MP3's in my opinion are a great liberator for new acts coming through. It means that artists don't necessarily have to sign with big labels anymore to get worlwide distribution. Anyone that i know that does nothing but download music (never go to gigs or buy CDs) only ever downloads popular "mainstream" stuff that's already sold a tonne. It's not out of consideration but it always seems to be the way
    Agreed. If Brittany Spears looses lets say 500,000 album sales through mainstream downloaders, that's one less ivory backscratcher for her. But to the record company, it's lost revenue which means they are less likely to spend on the left field artists who shift fewer units. I completely agree with you on the way mp3 liberates artists who can't get worldwide distribution but at some point, all artists have to make some revenue to survive which means selling records. We would all like to think of unlicensed digital music downloads as putting one over on the faceless record companies and those rich artists but for every Lars Ulrich/Britters, there are hundreds of acts just trying to get their foot on the ladder, make music and make ends meet. These are the guys who always get shafted by the record companies and this only makes their plight worse. Crikey, starting to sound like a record industry apologist here!! Bottom line, if you download it, like it, you should probably do the band a favour and buy it (until some bright spark figures out how to rid the world of record companies and their filthy marketing machines)
    El DuderinoUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:179
    El Duderino

    --
    15 Sep 2004 06:59 AM
    quote:
    Agreed. If Brittany Spears looses lets say 500,000 album sales through mainstream downloaders, that's one less ivory backscratcher for her. But to the record company, it's lost revenue which means they are less likely to spend on the left field artists who shift fewer units. I completely agree with you on the way mp3 liberates artists who can't get worldwide distribution but at some point, all artists have to make some revenue to survive which means selling records
    I guess the only way around this conundrum is to utilise the likes of bathtub music etc. who will sell MP3s for you. Don't know how much of a money spinner that would be though. You're totally right when you say that MP3s are much better as a promotional tool than as a means to earning a living but I still think that if it's approached in the right way you can at the very least minimalise how important it is to have a label behind you. Anyway, getting back to the original point of the thread. As long as you're not burning a s**t load of copies and selling them on i can't see any harm in copying CDs. Copying music happened alot more back in the 80s and 90s when you didn't need a computer to copy an album, yet album sales were alot healthier back then. The point that was made about there just not being any good stuff being released at the moment is right on the money me thinks
    BinokularUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:1665
    Binokular

    --
    15 Sep 2004 07:19 AM
    Britney Spears makes millions, true, but does who you're stealing from change the act? However as has said before, small scale copying for friends/personal user is not stealing. Peer to Peer filesharing is kind of a grey area though as potentially thousands of people can end up downloading MP3s ripped from just one CD. El Duderino, you still don't need a PC to copy music. Tape decks still work for a start, there are hi-fis with inbuilt CD recorders, and now even MP3 players are starting to offer not just playback but inbuilt recording and MP3 encoding.
    You are not authorized to post a reply.
    Page 1 of 212 > >>


    Active Forums 4.3