What are people's thoughts on paying for music?

[davef]

Want to see what the breadth of opinion is on this one. Just curious, is all. (I don't work for the RIAA!)

Anyone with suggestions for other options, let me know.


EDIT: In the absence of my ability to edit the options above -
please mentally amend "I pay for all the music I listen to" to "I paid for all the music in my collection",
amend "I pay for most of the music I listen to" to "I paid for most of the music in my collection",
and amend "I pay for none of the music I listen to" to "I paid for none of the music in my collection".

That's what I meant, but LE4dGOLEM helpfully pointed out that we all listen to the radio...

[LE4dGOLEM]

Quick point: "I pay for all the music I listen to". If you answer that, you'd better not listen to the radio.

[davef]

@ LE4dGOLEM - You're correct, didn't notice that. I'll amend it.


ETA: Ummm, anybody know how to edit poll options?

Fix'd. I don't think members can edit polls. If you can, it's done by editing your first post.

[LE4dGOLEM]

@ LE4dGOLEM - You're correct, didn't notice that. I'll amend it.


ETA: Ummm, anybody know how to edit poll options?

Fix'd. I don't think members can edit polls. If you can, it's done by editing your first post.

Fixed. I don't think members can edit polls. If you can. It's done by editing your first post.

[davef]

Tried editing the first post but all I could edit was the text, not the poll. Thanks anyway

[davef]

Hmm, lots of ppl viewing, very few voting, nobody posting....

[parkaboy]

i <3 torrents. it lets me acquire albums to see if the band is truely support worthy. it also lets me acquire albums that are rare, foreign or out of print.

if i like a band or artist enough to buy their cd, i'll go to their show and buy it directly from them, or better, i'll buy other merch so a larger percentage goes to the band itself. i do not like record companies.

[aisling]

If I really really enjoy the music and believe that the artist deserves to be payed for it, I'll go out and buy the album. That is, if I have a spare $20 on me. I'm not allowed to have a job because my parents won't let me, and they're not going to buy my music for me, so I don't see why I should have to be music-less because of my financial situation. When you create music, you're creating it for the world to hear and enjoy. It shouldn't be all about the money.

[Spectre]

I usually comment ad infinitum on topics like this but I've done it to death on various forums.

I pay for most of my stuff, but I can understand situations where it shouldn't be deemed criminal do get music for free.

Nuff said.

[Fluff]

I pay for most of my music. It's easy enough to listen to a sample of a tune before making a purchase.

I have got a lot of mates who are artists, run record labels, or both, and so I believe in supporting the industry.

Saying that, I also think there are times when it's ok to download music for free.

[Pau!]

I download lots and lots of music, quite simply because I'm into the indie scene and it's the easiest way to get a listen to a couple of songs and see if I like it.

I also own quite a few CDs, directly because of the downloading. I don't like taking chances with my money, and although I have bought random CDs before (to mixed results), I usually find it best to download, check it out, then buy. Most of my luxury money goes to music-related things (Most expensive thing I own is my guitar, saved up a while for it, and own a bunch of CDs and like to go to live shows.)

[TheTankengine]

First of all, I do not listen to the radio. My antenna is not connected to my stereo in my car, so no, not everyone listens to the radio.

The vast majority of people downloading torrents, or music/movies from limewire/shareaza/NAPSTAR (I just made that up, but it would be cool) or wherever say they download it just to try it out, then purchase said item. I think these people are full of bullhonkey. I have no moral qualms about downloading something, then just using that forever. I already have the digital file, why get it again?

However, I do make it a point to seed my torrents to a ratio of around 2. I'm all about community. So the way I see it is like this: I'm not going to buy it, but maybe the 2 people i give it to will buy it. Then, that is two more sales that the artist wouldn't have had before. They don't even have to pay me anything, I just listen to or watch their content. Everybody wins!

[LE4dGOLEM]

I already have the digital file, why get it again?

Sound/Picture quality? =\

[TheTankengine]

I already have the digital file, why get it again?

Sound/Picture quality? =\

I can download VBR mp3s or 320 kbps mp3s. I will admit to the world that I am no audiophile. So quality of audio above those levels is really of no concern anymore.

Video, on the other hand, is not quite "there" in terms of quality yet. Its getting really good though. Xvid compression is really very good, so long as it isn't compressed down to a VCD or something ridiculous. I try to go for full length movies that are compressed down to about 1.5-2 GB. This way you get the full sound (no clipping!) and about 90% of the colors and precision. I have a 22" widescreen lcd and these movies look rather good on it.

I am in a different boat with movies than music though. Bandwidth speeds are so high that transferring audio files of excellent compression and quality are no big deal. Maybe 120 MB for a CD is no big deal. But if you get full DVDs, you are talking 5 GB, possibly up to 9. The time frame on something like that is too long when you can only get a max of ~100 kb/s. Like I said though, Xvid/Divx compression is making it accessible.

[davef]

Interesting comments.

As a musician myself, I obviously believe in artists getting paid for their work. I don't believe in artists getting 15% and the RC getting 85% (mostly it's even more than 85%) but those who try to oppose the RC by deliberately not paying for music are missing the point.

Artists don't get their (albeit meagre) cut when you (and I'm trying not to use the word Steal here, because I don't think the tern is appropriate) don't pay for music, and while the usual defence trotted out is that "Britney/Robbie/Metallica/U2/whoever doesn't need the money", the fact is that the majority of artists don't sell nearly as many albums, so one dollar or euro out of their pocket means much more than it does to Brit et al.

The other point is this (and it's one that no-one ever seems to bring up) - the music wasn't recorded for free. SOMEBODY paid for studio time, an engineer, (or if it's a home recording, a PC/Mac, recording software, microphones ect.), musical instruments, duplication of CDs, advertising/PR and countless other expenses involved in making an album. Now, if you're an accountant, you don't work for free. If you're a doctor or lawyer you certainly don't. Ditto nurses and teachers (and they do say that those are vocations, not careers). So why should a musician? The principle is no different to saying "Everyones gotta eat, so I think it's Ok to steal from my butcher". There are plenty of ways to enjoy music for free - there always was the radio, now we've got stuff like Pandora and other streaming Net channels (who still pay artists out of their advertising revenue). You could even learn the guitar - buy one for $100 and you have enjoyment for life!

Now, I'm not militant about it, either. I have illegally copied music in my collection (who doesn't?). I'm not made of money, (the starving musician cliche is a cliche for a reason!) but I buy as much as I can. And I agree with Fluff and Spectre that sometimes it is appropriate, and necessary to give music away. (The keyword there is Give - I still believe it should be up to the artist) I'm not opposed to copying an album or two of a particular artist to see if I like it, in which case I'll buy some more. What I can't stand is someone who downloads multiple gigs of mp3s just so they can have an impressive iTunes library, or the complete worls or Bowie/the Stones/the Beatles/REM etc. Most of which they'll never listen to. Or even like. I mean, who actually likes ALL of REMs albums? (And I say that as a fan, but they've gotten pretty boring lately. And don't get me started on RHCP....)

I hope no-one takes this personally - this certainly isn't an attack on anyone. And I also hope no-one feels I'm being too opinionated - "Who the hell does davef think he is? He's here barely a wet week and launches into THIS diatribe??"
It's just that I've rarely seen a muso's point of view in thie type of discussion, so I wanted to share my own.

So there you go. Dissect at will. And please keep voting, thanks!!


ETA: TheTankEngine - yours is the attitude I'd like to change. I'd like people to realise the expense that goes into the creation of an album or movie, so that they WILL have some moral qualms about using it forever. And frankly, your theory that those two to whom you seeded your torrents might buy the movie is a cop-out. It doesn't matter what happens to the movie once you've downloaded it - if you see no wrong in never paying for anything then another torrent user subsequently buying a hardcopy of a movie obtained from you is immaterial. Claiming that the prices of CDs or movie tickets are too high is not a justification for never paying for it (TankEngine - this isn't a claim you made, but it's an excuse I hear regularly). You paid for your computer, and someone had to design and build that, and it wasn't cheap. Same goes for your clothes/car/stereo. You probably bitched about the price but handed over the cash anyway. Once again, why should someone not get paid for the use of something they created?

[Pau!]

I will admit that there's a robin-hoodian style to how I decide to purchase music; I am much more likely to buy the CD of a less-popular band, perhaps one I saw at a small show, than a CD of a much more popular group. Although the law doesn't take need into account when determining morality (and really, it's a difficult position to defend, there is some hypocrisy involved), I do in my personal choices, even though it's true that a large part of it is "I like music. I am not patient/morally stringent enough to wait to be able to buy it, so I will download it."

[Traisenau]

Ehh, I have so little music that it really doesn't affect me economically weather or not I buy it, so I do buy it. However when I want to try out a new band then I just go to Pandora and listen to a song or two of theirs.

[chan the evoker]

If I appreciate the data that I use, and my financial contribution would enable its creator to provide more of that data, I pay them. Therefore, entities like Wikipedia, Mark Overmars, my public broadcasting system, and Weird Al all get my money. I guess I should buy a t-shirt to support xkcd as well.

[damienthebloody]

i think filesharing is one of the best things that can happen to a band. i have quite a large number of cds, and the majority of them are cds i have bought as a direct result of illegally downloading music.
there are hundreds of bands that i love that i would never have even heard of without the internet, and would never have listened to without filesharing.
the most effective way of increasing a band's popularity, i think, has always been the simple act of having one friend say to another "listen to this, it's awesome" and playing it to them. filesharing allows the network of people that you can do that with to expand by several orders of magnitude, and so as a result, i have a lot of special affection for obscure funeral doom bands from the other side of the planet that i would otherwise never hear. and if i like a band, i buy their cds, and i go to their concerts, and maybe help them in some way continue.

[shadebug]

I download music, but I buy albums. The way I see it music should be public domain, but if you're going to get an entire album's worth, give the artist some credit

[Peshmerga]

I never pay! Not for anything!

[notzeb]

You don't have my opinion up

Music should cost money (it took them work to make it)... but trying to ENFORCE that is nonsense. I'll get my music whether you want me to or not.

It's just like piracy. I'm sorry, but without tamperproof chips, there's nothing you can do about it. All you can do is make it real inconvenient for real people. It's like trying to give someone a cookbook that they can't read - it just doesn't make sense.

"this book describes how to cook a pizza."
"ok cool!"
"but somehow you will find it impossible to show the book to someone else, to cook a pizza on an identical oven that doesn't belong to you, or to sell any of the delicious pizzas that you make."
"wait, what? wtf?"

[davef]

Look, I never said I wanted to stamp out every instance of copyright violation. (It's not practical, and I really don't think it's necessary.) What I would like to see is a reduction in the attitude that music 'should' be free in all cases, without any real consideration for the processes and individuals that brought the music to you in the first place.

Arbitrarily, it's the same as saying that all food should be free, or all books, or all televisions. Notzeb - in the cookbook example you gave, you paid for the book in the first place, right? Fair enough, I'll admit that people distribute books among their friends, as well as albums and DVDs, all of which violates copyright. But nobody has a library full of books none of which were paid for, whereas many, many people have thousands of songs that were not paid for, and don't see that there is a moral discrepancy in this behaviour.

All I'm trying to say is that there is much more to this than simply parroting some highfalutin' notion that "music is for everybody, man, no-one should have to pay for it - besides, you'll never stop people copying music so why bother?"

[German Sausage]

this notion of never paying for music - who will make it? shove that up your arse and smoke it.
sorry if that sounds crude (it is, clearly) but it came to my mind then and i like the sound of it.

[notzeb]

No, I'm saying that we ARE morally obligated to pay for music.

But there's no incentive too, and there never will be.

And who has more than a megabyte of good music? (btw, if they don't listen to it, can you consider that stealing?)

[fjafjan]

I think that file sharing is the best thing to have happened to musical distribution ever, no doubt, the worst thing the protests from the previous industry, as it harms the artists opposing the vastly superiour new alternative.

and I have alot of good music..:S
I do not think it's stealing if you download something, listen to it and throw it away, I could do that at the record store (well not throw it away, but simply not buy it ) difference is I don't have to walk down there and borrow the limited equipment etc

What is more interesting than this topic is:
If you have limited money, if you pay for as much stuff as you can, setting yourself up for a "personal debt system", with rent simply equaling inflation, who is hurt by that?

[Derjaak]

I download music freely.

If I really like the band, I support them by buying one or two of their CDs...

I used to feel a little guilty about the downloading I do. But then, I took a look at my CD purchases per year. They've easily tripled since I started downloading music, just because I get to be exposed to more and different kinds of music.. I get to listen to more music, and more of my money makes its way to the music industry... What's the problem here, again?

[TheTankengine]

Interesting comments.

As a musician myself, I obviously believe in artists getting paid for their work. I don't believe in artists getting 15% and the RC getting 85% (mostly it's even more than 85%) but those who try to oppose the RC by deliberately not paying for music are missing the point.

Artists don't get their (albeit meagre) cut when you (and I'm trying not to use the word Steal here, because I don't think the tern is appropriate) don't pay for music, and while the usual defence trotted out is that "Britney/Robbie/Metallica/U2/whoever doesn't need the money", the fact is that the majority of artists don't sell nearly as many albums, so one dollar or euro out of their pocket means much more than it does to Brit et al.

The other point is this (and it's one that no-one ever seems to bring up) - the music wasn't recorded for free. SOMEBODY paid for studio time, an engineer, (or if it's a home recording, a PC/Mac, recording software, microphones ect.), musical instruments, duplication of CDs, advertising/PR and countless other expenses involved in making an album. Now, if you're an accountant, you don't work for free. If you're a doctor or lawyer you certainly don't. Ditto nurses and teachers (and they do say that those are vocations, not careers). So why should a musician? The principle is no different to saying "Everyones gotta eat, so I think it's Ok to steal from my butcher". There are plenty of ways to enjoy music for free - there always was the radio, now we've got stuff like Pandora and other streaming Net channels (who still pay artists out of their advertising revenue). You could even learn the guitar - buy one for $100 and you have enjoyment for life!

Now, I'm not militant about it, either. I have illegally copied music in my collection (who doesn't?). I'm not made of money, (the starving musician cliche is a cliche for a reason!) but I buy as much as I can. And I agree with Fluff and Spectre that sometimes it is appropriate, and necessary to give music away. (The keyword there is Give - I still believe it should be up to the artist) I'm not opposed to copying an album or two of a particular artist to see if I like it, in which case I'll buy some more. What I can't stand is someone who downloads multiple gigs of mp3s just so they can have an impressive iTunes library, or the complete worls or Bowie/the Stones/the Beatles/REM etc. Most of which they'll never listen to. Or even like. I mean, who actually likes ALL of REMs albums? (And I say that as a fan, but they've gotten pretty boring lately. And don't get me started on RHCP....)

I hope no-one takes this personally - this certainly isn't an attack on anyone. And I also hope no-one feels I'm being too opinionated - "Who the hell does davef think he is? He's here barely a wet week and launches into THIS diatribe??"
It's just that I've rarely seen a muso's point of view in thie type of discussion, so I wanted to share my own.

So there you go. Dissect at will. And please keep voting, thanks!!


ETA: TheTankEngine - yours is the attitude I'd like to change. I'd like people to realise the expense that goes into the creation of an album or movie, so that they WILL have some moral qualms about using it forever. And frankly, your theory that those two to whom you seeded your torrents might buy the movie is a cop-out. It doesn't matter what happens to the movie once you've downloaded it - if you see no wrong in never paying for anything then another torrent user subsequently buying a hardcopy of a movie obtained from you is immaterial. Claiming that the prices of CDs or movie tickets are too high is not a justification for never paying for it (TankEngine - this isn't a claim you made, but it's an excuse I hear regularly). You paid for your computer, and someone had to design and build that, and it wasn't cheap. Same goes for your clothes/car/stereo. You probably bitched about the price but handed over the cash anyway. Once again, why should someone not get paid for the use of something they created?

First of all, I have never capitalized the first 'e' in Tankengine, so I don't know where you get off vandalizing my good name. (i keed i keed!)

You really should know something though. It is extremely difficult, practically impossible actually, to change another's opinion when the only thing standing in between your logic and their logic is apathy. As they say in the ghetto, apathy's pimp hand weighs strong.

[Patashu]

I heard all the real revenue comes from live concerts.

[william]

I heard all the real revenue comes from live concerts.

This is true. Apparently Chuck D of Public Enemy made more money by selling about 5000 records online using a service of his own making than in his entire career with Def Jam records, and remember we're talking about a band that has gone platinum several times.

[Narsil]

I voted for all music being free. Because I do not care about the economic/social/legal breakdowns that would ensue, I just want some FALL OUT BOY!!!!

Sorry, the above was a quote from every 13 year old in the United states. Not my words. I wasn't even aware it was possible to say "want" and "Fall Out Boy" in the same sentence without "to die".

[Sprocket]

this notion of never paying for music - who will make it? shove that up your arse and smoke it.
sorry if that sounds crude (it is, clearly) but it came to my mind then and i like the sound of it.

The best music was made by people whose sole jobs it was to make music.

Woudln't it be cool if they were able to erradicate free music downloading on the internet (not mix cd making and such) and we could talk to our grand children about those 10 glorious years when we could download music, legally, on the internet for free? I mean...not worth it...but cool.

[Memo]

I pay for none of the music I listen to. CDs are way too expensive around here and after so many years using mp3s... well, CDs seem archaic.
iTunes is not available here either.

[Sprocket]

Cds are a solid way for me to have music. Plus I can guarentee sound quality. I like having cds, they're self-organized, and listening to a cd the way the artist intended it totally has a differenet effect. Finally I like to permanance of a cd. If I loose all my stuff on my computer, I still have my cds.

[ccromwell]

I absolutely refuse to buy albums released on major labels, and that's what it comes down to in a nutshell. I refuse to shell out fifteen dollars for a recording only to see sixty-five cents of that fifteen dollars go into the artist's pocket and the rest of it go into some corporation executive who is on the payroll of the organization that is trying to drive me, the music lover, into oblivion with their racketeering and extortion (that's the Recording Industry Association of America). I simply will not stand for it, and while I understand that engineers and sound technicians who are in the employ of Sony BMG and Universal and whatnot deserve to be paid as well, my primary concern is the artist, and the RIAA has been driving the artist into the ground for so long that I simply cannot in good conscience purchase a physical recording of an album released on a major label. There are many major-label artists whose music I enjoy, and if I want to support them, I will gladly go out and see their show, and I am more than happy to buy CDs and t-shirts and cupholders and whatever else there, but if I were to go out right now and walk into the local Wal-Mart and buy that same CD and bring it home with me, I honestly don't think I could, in good conscience, take them out of the package and listen to them. I take my ideals about music very seriously - so much so that, last Christmas, when my aunt bought me Pink Floyd's P.U.L.S.E. live album (which I had been looking for for a long while), but when I received it, I couldn't open it because I knew where the money spent on it had gone.

Independent labels, on the other hand, are an entirely different story. I simply don't have a lot of disposable income to put towards CDs - this, admittedly, is a factor in why I very rarely buy physical copies of albums - but if I feel a strong desire to support a band on an indie label, I am usually more than happy to go out and buy their album. But again, I would much rather go out and see a band live and pick up as much swag as my arms can carry back to the car than buy an album anyway.

[George Orr]

I'm mostly in the "download, then buy if it's really good" category, but in some cases I just go ahead and buy the CD. This is either a) because I can't find a download of it anywhere, and what I've heard on internet radio/etc. has been really good, or b) It;s an artist I know, respect and enjoy. Then I go ahead and buy it, although sometimes if I'm too impatient....

[Root5]

"Don't take away money from artists just like me
How else can I afford another solid gold Humvee?
And diamond-studded swimming pools, these things don't grow on trees
So all I ask is everybody, please...

Don't download this song."

-Weird Al Yankovic

I don't have any moral problem with downloading music. I buy the CD if I want to collect them, or if I want the extra sound quality. That said, I've bought about 50 CDs, soo...

[darry]

I heard all the real revenue comes from live concerts.

This is true.

um... not really! most tours make little or no money, their value is publicising the band and the music. i've been on tours that didn't break even.

one think that a lot of people don't seem to understand is that being a musician is a job (and that it's not easy and full of laughs, but that's for another topic). i don't have any problems with people downloading stuff to try it out, but not to buy music at all is exactly the same as stealing food from a supermarket.

[Jauss]

I agree with what a lot of people have posted.

Basically, I have a limited amount of money. Hell, even if I was pretty well off there's still no way I could afford to buy all the music I like. I've gone into credit card debt from buying cds because I felt they should be supported and that doesn't really help anyone. So I download a lot of stuff, often to check out a band I don't know yet or because I want this one ridiculous random hit from the 80's. I don't download whole albums...

However, I do rip my friends cds sometimes though and let them rip mine. I'm also a passionate acolyte of the Art of the Mix. Before one of my best friends left for the summer I ripped about 60 of his cds. A group of us sometimes buy the same cds because we love them that hardcore, but often we have kind of an informal system where one of us will be buy it and give a few copies around. We can't afford to do otherwise, so it's either I don't buy your music and don't listen to it or don't buy your music and listen to it and love it and tell other people about it.

And when I do have money I'll buy the album of a band I really like, especially if they're a smaller band and I think they really need it. Also, I'll go to their show when they tour (which is also the best place to buy cds) and sometimes buy other merch too. Pretty much all my shirts are band shirts.

There's this cool little local band called Barons In Trees and I can't really afford to buy their music or merch right now (though I don't actually possess any of their music, just listen to it on myspace), but I've gone to two of their tiny $5 shows with a friend cuz that's what I could do. They made me play percussion at their last show and gave me a bird ornament from their photo shoot.

I have a lot of musician friends, so I definitely believe in giving back when you can.

[Rodan]

Pandora internet Radio keeps sending me E-Mails about this court-battle thing. It's starting to bug me.

EDIT: also, I don't have moral issues with downloading things (that obligatory Pirate's Cove is bookmarked). I generally just listen to Weird Al, and I've already bought most of his CD/Dual-Discs, so I downloaded the whole bunch so I could listen to them on my computer...
If I ever branch out in music, then I'll download, then maybe buy. Youtube is always handy for listening to a specific song.