So what do you think about MP3's?

Just looking for some opinions on internet piracy and how it affects the music industry. Flame away

I like .mp3's, I like not paying for music, and I like things that make me feel dirty and wrong.

The music industry does not even need to exist. The RIAA are just a group of corporate suits that won't be satisfied until they can control all aspects of music.

When a book is copyrighted, its copyrighted to the AUTHOR, not to the publishing house.

I just got cable. I can download a whole album in like 20 minutes.

Mp3's are the greatest thing to happen to us consumers since the cd first came out. We now can try out songs first before we decide to buy them. Most reviews of music don't jive with the way I end up feeling about an album and even my friends opinions differ with mine most of the time. Lots of albums are full of filler material, with only 2 or 3 really good ones and to me that doesn't justify spending $15 on their album.

Lots of people say you should buy the album to support the artist but the way I feel is that if I was a professional artist, I wouldn't want people to buy my album if they didn't think it was truly worth it and now thru mp3's we the consumer are given the chance to make an informed decision. Why is it I can try out a piece of clothes or test drive a car before I buy it ? Of course a segment of people will not buy the cd and just keep downloading songs but I do think that enough people will buy cd's to support the best artists. Maybe this is the music industries verion of "Survival of the Fittest' where not only will all the {censored}ty bands disappear but the major labels will disappear as well.

To the record companies I say, 'you guys dug your own grave' by first signing too many {censored}ty bands on your rosters and then second not marketing most of those bands anyways and then selling the cd's for way too much money. If cd's sold for $5 an album then most people would take the chance and buy them instead of downloading (I would) but the record companies STILL have not got the message and now they're truly gonna pay for it because every year more people are going to download mp3's. I bet the statistics will show something like 10% more people jumping the mp3 bandwagon every year.

I can't wait for the major labels to completely tank, they have deserved it for so long. The fact is most artists on major labels don't make a penny from record sales, so now people downloading the music won't IMO be taking money away from the artists. Some people say by downloading, the artist will sell less records and then get kicked off the label, I say "GOOD ! because they're not getting nearly anything anyways" Sometimes artists are not the best business decision makers and maybe us consumers are gonna have to help them out.

Again lots of people (including record companies) will say that artists signed to a major record label will get lot sof exposure and then get to tour and have people come to their concerts and that's how the band will make money. I say that this industry is so corrupt (I have read the 40 page contracts in music school) and unfortunatley when something stinks this bad, it has to have a major shakeup and level the playing field in some fashion that is more benefical to the artists because right now they are getting close to zero.

Once again I would say mp3's are the greatest things to come out in the music world. Artists (on major labels) might feel pain for a few years but if the major labels disband because of economic pressure and everyone learns exactly why it happenned (corruption greed and stupidity on part of the major record companies) then I think the music industry will be a much better business environment for artists.

was RIAA back in the 60's 70's?

Great post Barracuda. I completley and totally agree with you. Right now I have 617 songs on Kazaa and I had a little over 200 on Napster(i didn't have as many cause I didnt have cable back then). I only buy CDs if the whole album is good. In the past 3 or 4 years I have only bought 4 CDs. Sum 41- All Killer No Filler, Incubus- Make Yourself, Incubus- Morning View, Hoobastank. I have been very happy with all my purchases because all of these albums IMO have been very different from most albums. The different thing is that the whole album is actually good! Thats a rare thing these days.

The reason the record industry is so mad at the whole MP3 thing is because its something they've never had before: competition with another form of music. I'm glad MP3s are out because hopefully the record industries will learn something. CDs are way overpriced and most CDs only have a few good songs. I won't start regularly buying CDs until they are under 10 dollars. I was at Barnes and Noble a couple of months ago and I was gonna buy a Sublime CD. Do you know how much all of them were? 18 dollars! 18 dollars for a CD!!!! Thats outrageous. The record industry is filled with a bunch of losers.

Amazing Fact: My dad just finished a consulting job for a security company that was doing some stuff with CDs. Apparently last year more blank CDs were sold than actual CDs! Also, of all the real music filled CDs in record stores today 33% are counterfeit! So they are not authentic. Hopefully the record industry is learning.

Mp3 made a lot of bands big like Puddle of Mudd,Lifehouse,Tantric etc because when people hear the music they want to buy the cd.

mp3s suck I can't wait until a new better form of compression besides mpx comes out.

I think mp3s are possibly the best thing to happen to the music community since portable cassette recorders.

Not for trying out new artists or downloading tracks from established ones, but for collaboration among musicians - worldwide.

I can record a framework for a song and have musicians from around the country or around the world join in, with no postage costs and no worries about recording medium. I don't have to worry about whether or not Johnny in Australia has a DAT machine or a Minidisk system, and shipping is as easy as a simple email attachment.

Great post Barracuda. I completley and totally agree with you. Right now I have 617 songs on Kazaa and I had a little over 200 on Napster(i didn't have as many cause I didnt have cable back then). I only buy CDs if the whole album is good. In the past 3 or 4 years I have only bought 4 CDs. Sum 41- All Killer No Filler, Incubus- Make Yourself, Incubus- Morning View, Hoobastank. I have been very happy with all my purchases because all of these albums IMO have been very different from most albums. The different thing is that the whole album is actually good! Thats a rare thing these days.

So much for the "try before you buy" excuse for freeloading off the music business. Let's see, you have 617 songs you can listen to and burn to CD whenever you feel like it, and have paid for...how many? Oh, that's right, ZERO. But wait, you did go out and actually buy 4 whole CDs in 3 or 4 years. So I guess having 650 songs at your disposal and shelling out roughly 65 bucks for it over 3 or 4 years is payment enough for the people who perform it, produce it and distribute it.

The reason the record industry is so mad at the whole MP3 thing is because its something they've never had before: competition with another form of music.

It's not another form of music, it's another form of distribution of the same music that someone else paid money to produce. Napster and KaaZaa didn't sign the bands, make the records, pay for the promo and distribute them. Record companies did, good or bad, and regardless of what you may think of them, they are entitled to recoup their investment and earn a profit. The record companies have many problems, but taking stuff they produce and helping yourself to it without paying for it only assures the artist of earning even less money (you don't really think the record companies are going to absorb the loss out of their own pockets, do you?) and of fewer new and unproven acts of getting signed.

CDs are way overpriced and most CDs only have a few good songs. I won't start regularly buying CDs until they are under 10 dollars. I was at Barnes and Noble a couple of months ago and I was gonna buy a Sublime CD. Do you know how much all of them were? 18 dollars! 18 dollars for a CD!!!! Thats outrageous. The record industry is filled with a bunch of losers.

I beg to differ with you on CDs being overpriced. At the risk of sounding like an old geezer, I can assure you that prices of nearly everything have gone up commensurate with CD prices.

When I was a teenager in 1969, I bought a Rolling Stones 12" vinyl LP for $3.50. You got a cover, a paper sleeve and roughly 42 minutes worth of music. Let's compare some other things:

Gas price, 1969: 31 cents a gallon 2002: 1.50 gallon

Increase: 500%

Housing costs, 1969 average 3 BR 2 bath home, 36K nationwide

2002, 140k Increase: nearly 500 %

Cars, 1969 Ford Mustang, 3k, 2002, 23K Increase: almost 800%

Levis jeans, 1969 , 3.00/ pair, 2002, 30.00/ pair Increase: 1000%

Movie tickets, 1969, adult: $1.25 2002 $8. Increase: 625%

Rolling Stones record, 1969, 3.50 2002, 18.00, increase: 500%

The only losers here are the growing number of people who seem to think they are entitled to the fruits of someone else's labor without having to pay for it, accompanied with the naive belief that by refusing to pay, record companies are willingly going to give up their profit margin and still record and promote your favorite bands and risk capital to develop new ones. I'm no fan of major labels, believe me, but no one holds a gun to anyone's head to make them sign a deal, and no one makes anyone buy the music they produce. I don't get why you seem to think you deserve to have it without paying for it simply because you don't want to.

End of rant.

I can't wait for the major labels to completely tank, they have deserved it for so long. The fact is most artists on major labels don't make a penny from record sales, so now people downloading the music won't IMO be taking money away from the artists. Some people say by downloading, the artist will sell less records and then get kicked off the label, I say "GOOD ! because they're not getting nearly anything anyways" Sometimes artists are not the best business decision makers and maybe us consumers are gonna have to help them out.

You've never made a record, have you?

Here's a thought: Why don't all these internet companies get more involved with the artists themselves? Rather than letting consumers(potential buyers)download complete songs why not just have samples of songs? This way, the consumer has a way to gage his of her dislikes and so on without leaving the artist in the dark. It's simple. I think this would solve 99.9% of the problem. Internet companies and artists can strike up royalty/publishing deals so that the companies can provide the consumers with the music and the artist has the opportunity to make money from the sale of their music without being cut-out completely. This would definitely be a plus for the artist since it would create an income they could rely on more heavily rather then expecting something from the record co. I'm sure most of us here have read and heard enough over the years to know that record co. economics are very warped and very much in favor of the record co. making profits and the artists getting nothing.

I don't agree with the notion of getting music for free without having to pay for it. That's B.S. If you get to hear samples of the songs then, you've gotten to try it before you buy it. If your one of those people that has to hear the whole album before hand then, go to the record store to hear it. They usually have a play copy to provide consumers the option of listening to it before purchasing it. Problem solved. If you think it sucks the move on to something else. At least you didn't get burned...

I'm not saying I hate Napster or any other internet music service provider but, they need to create a service that is fair for the consumer as well as the artist. Right now - it's very lopsided. As for the internet - I'm all in favor of hearing a few samples fo someones work but not an entire record.

Many albums today have only one to three good songs on them. Why should I have to pay 15 bucks for one good song and 12 other pieces of crap? If they would start releasing single CDs again then it would be good. The record companies let these bands put out a CD if they have one good song. If they only have one good song and the rest crap they should force them to put out a single instead of a full album.

As for artists losing tons of money, thats BS. The majority of people who have a program like Kazaa and a CD burner don't burn full CDs of one artist. They make mixes. The big artists already have millions of dollars and even with Kazaa they still sell millions of albums. Don't tell me they're losing tons of money and that they need it. Look at Britney Spears. 20 and shes a multi millionaire with three multi platinum albums. File sharing programs have been around for 2 of her albums which still sold millions. As for the smaller artists that don't have lots of money and many people haven't heard of them, programs like Kazaa help them out. They get their name out. When people hear their songs on Kazaa they buy the CDs later resulting in the artists popularity. Also, many music listeners don't have file sharing programs and many of the file sharing program users don't have CD burners. I would like to know how many artists Napster and Kazaa have actually hurt significantly. Probably not many if any at all.

Come on now. 18 dollars for a CD with 13 {censored}ing songs on it???? Thats outrageous. Yes although inflation has occured that is still too much money(BTW I wouldn't use gas as an example cause that is far overpriced as well). A CD with 13 songs on it should be about 10 dollars. It should be a little less than a dollar per song on the CD. If a CD has 15 songs on it it would be a little more.

If you're talking about a filesharing program that makes you pay then thats a good idea. But none of the ones you pay for now are reasonable. I saw an article in a magazine a year ago about different file sharing programs that you pay for. None of them were reasonable even the writer agreed. If there was one where it was 50-75 cents per song then that would be fine with me.

Lets do an example of how much some artists get paid. I don't know what percentage of the cost of the CD the artist gets, but lets say its 15%(if someone knows how much they get then please post). Lets say the average album costs 15 dollars. They would get $2.25 per album sold. Lets say they go gold and sell 500,000 copies. They just made $1,125,000. Thats more than enough money. Kazaa isn't hurting them that much.

I think you should read these articles :

http://holemusic.com/speech/index.html

http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

I think these will give you a much better view of how people actually get paid.

Originally posted by bballdrummer Many albums today have only one to three good songs on them. Why should I have to pay 15 bucks for one good song and 12 other pieces of crap? If they would start releasing single CDs again then it would be good. The record companies let these bands put out a CD if they have one good song. If they only have one good song and the rest crap they should force them to put out a single instead of a full album. It's always been that way to me....I remember a LOT of tapes that had only a few good songs on them. And what was worse was the fact that it took longer to get threw the tapes crappy stuff to get to the good stuff. But what you're saying is that if the rest of the cd sux, it's ok to steal a few songs. I should be able to go into a store and steal a Snickers....I don't like the peanutes so I'll just throw those out, but I crave the chocolate As for artists losing tons of money, thats BS. The majority of people who have a program like Kazaa and a CD burner don't burn full CDs of one artist. They make mixes. Some people I know won't buy a cd period. They'll burn every song if they have to. But even if it's a minority stealing a whole cd....is that ok? As for the smaller artists that don't have lots of money and many people haven't heard of them, programs like Kazaa help them out. They get their name out. I would like to know how many artists Napster and Kazaa have actually hurt significantly. Probably not many if any at all. I agree it can help get the word out about smaller artists.....but I heard about smaller artists before there was even an internet. As far as hurting, the record industry is in somewhat of a slump. I don't know how much MP3's can be blamed or not blamed (of course the RIAA says it's hurt, but can they be trusted?). But it only makes sense to me that millions of people dl'ing songs for free are gonna end up hurting someone. From what I've been told from some industry insiders, many labels are reluctant to sign new bands. Come on now. 18 dollars for a CD with 13 {censored}ing songs on it???? Thats outrageous. Yes although inflation has occured that is still too much money(BTW I wouldn't use gas as an example cause that is far overpriced as well). A CD with 13 songs on it should be about 10 dollars. It should be a little less than a dollar per song on the CD. If a CD has 15 songs on it it would be a little more. I can't remember the last time I payed $18 for a cd. You can usually find cd's cheaper if you look. It would be nice to see cd prices drop though. But I'd like to see them drop and still pay the artist the same, but the label less. From what I understand, artists don't get payed much for record sales. Lets do an example of how much some artists get paid. I don't know what percentage of the cost of the CD the artist gets, but lets say its 15%(if someone knows how much they get then please post). Lets say the average album costs 15 dollars. They would get $2.25 per album sold. Lets say they go gold and sell 500,000 copies. They just made $1,125,000. Thats more than enough money. Kazaa isn't hurting them that much.

Here's some #'s I've been told. An artist can expect about 10-15% of wholesale. A cd may wholesale for 5 or 6 bucks. If they went gold, they may get $500,000. Now if there's 5 guys in a band.....well they each get $100,000. Now they gotta take out their managers cut, their lawyers cut, producers cut, etc.

Now those are some #'s I've heard from people in the industry....I hope it's not that bleak

Bluestrat I did make a record but I don't understand, do I need to have made a record and be on a major label to know everything ? I don't think so. That's why we're reading articles by people who have had major label contracts and are explaining the exact financial numbers of a record contract and how those record companies are ripping them (and us consumers) off. I have also taken Music Business courses and studied the 40 page record contracts which are written in pig latin and have so many clauses (all of which benefit the record company) that you have to have a serious entertainment lawyer to know what's going on.

I agree with you bballdrummer, cd prices are highway robbery. Why is it that in my area (Western Canada) a cd is 12$-16$ and a DVD is only $15. I don't mind the price of the dvd and by the way I could burn that too if I wanted to but I don't because I think the price of that is fair. The cd price on the other hand is a ripoff it should be around $5 to $10. It's a rip off because most big label cd's only have 1-3 good songs and the rest are filler. Why don't the record companies let us choose what songs we want to buy off the cd and pay maybe $1 to $2 for each song ? I would do that. They do it because they want us to pay $15 for the whole album.

Here's another question for you Bluestrat, why do record companies sign so many mediocre bands ? If they are such geniouses of the music business should they not have more of a success rate of what is currently 1 succesfull artist for 10 failures ?

The record companies say they need one high profile successfull artist on their roster to pay for the losses incurred by 10 artists that don't make any money for the label. My point is the whole business structure of the big labels is screwed up and it's time for a change.

Echoplex I agree 100% we should get to hear only 1 minute clips of songs. I have no problem with that. If I want to hear the whole song I should have to go to the record store an listen to it there. Unfortunately the genious record companies have not embraced a technological solution to this whole mp3 thing. That's not our fault it's the record companies fault. Do they think it's just gonna go away by not doing anything. ? I swear if these record compnanies were any other industry they would be bankrupt for such bad business practices.

I love mp3's there a great way for people to get there music heard on the net! and as for mp3.com there amazing! A little slow but not a problem! Mp3's never sound as great as a proper wave but again when your playing it on your computer it makes no difference. As for the things about it being free and stinging record companies! This is bull{censored}! I bought 7 bad religion albums in a month because i heard some mp3's also any band i actually really like, i like to get proper copys of the cd's. bands i dislike i just delete the mp3 and look for new talent!

im no good at this sort of talkin to complex!

As a business person, I fully understand the RIAA perspective and actually agree to it in principle. But the problem I have with the "industry" is that they have not focused on keeping up with technology and finding ways to leverage it to their advantage and profit. The response is to keep it the way it is and take down first those who are advancing technology and now it appears they will be going after the fan to do this.

Will it work? Hell no. Midlle class kids will get fined, a few sites shut down, but more will come. The door has opened whether any of us like it or not and now a solution must be found.

The RIAA should have been funding security technology enhancements for CDs years ago like it was a life and death war, as well as the record companies. But they didn't and they will suffer in the long run.

As an artist, I use MP3 files to distribute my songs to a vast audience. The day will come (closer than you think) when several major artists, not just has beens or new names, will offer their recordings only on MP3 and be able to make a profit doing so and bypass the record company all together. I have not figured out the business model for this yet, but believe me, it will be figured out before the record companies figure out how to solve the problem.

Now that's not a bad idea. People can still sample, but not get the whole thing. Kinda like a movie preview I agree to the idea that people should be able to sample what they buy....but not take the whole thing and give nothing.

Dallasmopar, that sounds like a great idea....bypass the labels alltogether and sell your stuff yourself. Would it hurt much to lose the lable support? Even if someone could sell their music from their web site (or online store or whatever), Kazaa and the like will still be able to get people the same thing for free right?

I think there's something you people don't get. Record companies don't foot the bill for promotion, tours, and album making. They advance the money to the band and the BAND pays for everything. They have to pay the record company back PLUS interest. The music industry is nothing but a bank.

That's basically the way I've been told that it's done...and it blows Seems like the music industry can be pretty corupt. On a side note....do many bands get signing bonuses? Money they don't have to pay back? I heard that Godsmack got an ungodly signing bonus.

(nice pun huh?)

So how are you saying that relates to mp3's?

You still have not explained to me how you think you're entitled to something for free that someone else paid to produce. So far, the only reasons you have come up with is you think it costs too much and the business sucks. Usually, when you think something costs too much, you don't buy it. Let's say you go to the Lexus dealer, and you really like the Lexus. It's too much money, though, but you really want it. Do you come back later when no one's around and drive it off the lot anyway? Or how about groceries?

"4 bucks a pound for ribeye steak is outrageous! So I'm just gonna take it."

I have responded to the arguments for music stealing here with facts and logical points. I have shown you where the cost of music is no more than it was in the 60s, and in fact is a better value because the old LPs had about 40 minutes of music on an extremely fragile format. The file sharing crowd's best arguments are "It costs too much", "The record industry sucks", "The artists make too much money anyway" (as if you have a clue as to how much it takes to produce a professional touring band, and anyway, who appointed you to decide how much anyone should make?). So I guess the next time you come upon a storefront with a smashed window, you can just go ahead and help yourself to the TVs and DVD players, because the store makes too much money, their stuff is overpriced, and everyone else is taking it and if you don't, someone else will. Hey, you didn't smash the window, so it's not really stealing, right? Your problem, in my opinion, is not one with the music business. It is a lack of understanding of the business, accompanied by a low moral standard that uses the flimsiest of excuses to take that which you did not pay for.

Here's another question for you Bluestrat, why do record companies sign so many mediocre bands ? If they are such geniouses of the music business should they not have more of a success rate of what is currently 1 succesfull artist for 10 failures ?

They sign them because it's a business and they think they can make them money with proper development. It's no different than any other business where skill, luck, and marketing are involved. For every pro athlete that gets on the field, there are 10-20 that get signed and don't make the cut. When you are dealing with talent, the bigger the talent pool, the better your chance of returns on your investment. But in music, there is another component: the whims of the public. No one knows why, say, a band like Puddle of Mudd becomes successful when there are 50 bands that are as good if not better and sound pretty much the same. Rather than scorning record companies for signing "mediocre acts" (again, another judgment you make that is purely opinion) you ought to be thankful they do give up and coming acts a chance to succeed or fail. Or perhaps you think your favorite bands ought to continue to make well produced, nicely packaged music on their own dime and flip burgers in their spare time.

Until the laws and the court shutdown Kazaa and other programs like that I will continut to use them. If they are illegal then why haven't they been shut down?

I like your idea, but 2 bucks is more than we pay now. A 13 song CD would be 26 bucks. No thanks. It should be a dollar per song maximum depending on the bands popularity.

Great. You showed s a comparison of the price in the 60s. That just means that music has always been overpriced.

What is your proff for knowing so much about the record industry. You give us all these facts and say that only you are correct. Try looking at it from our point of view. I can see where you are coming from as well. You make some valid points, but as of right now it is not officially illegal to use Kazaa or anything so I will continue to use that and only support the bands that take the time to make albums where all the songs are good. If programs like Kazaa become illegal and shut down then I will start buying more CDs.

Just because you make some good points doesn't mean you are right. We have made some good points and we aren't neccessarily right either. It is all mostly opinions.

BTW BlueStrat, back up your "facts" next time. I'm not saying you're wrong, I would just like some proof.

BTW BlueStrat, back up your "facts" next time. I'm not saying you're wrong, I would just like some proof.

Believe me, don't believe me, I could care less. I have made 5 records, two with labels, been distributed, toured, and have been doing this for 32 years. I will also say I have my own issues with major labels, and am no fan of them, and have turned down two offers to sign in my career. But my credentials are irrelevant to the issue at hand. You have continued to skirt the issue which I have twice raised now, and I can only assume you either don't want to answer it or can't. But, stubborn as I am, let me provide you with one last opportunity to explain to me the question I raised: How do you justify helping yourself to a product (produced by people you seem to disdain) without paying for it and thinking that's it's fair to do so? And don't give me that sophomoric "it's on KaaZaa so it must be okay" crap. I found my first CD on Napster, which had been put up without my knowledge or permission. I emailed them and they took it off immediately when I mentioned the word "lawyer" to them. And while you're at it, tell me why you think CDs, which will last forever and bring you hours and hours of enjoyment, are overpriced other than you don't want to pay that much. On what basis do you make that assessment? Do you know how much it costs to record, produce, market, and get airplay for a nationally distributed CD? Aren't the retail outlets entitled to a profit? You seem to be someone who is concerned about the cost of everything and knows the value of nothing. But, you seem to have no moral qualms about stealing, so anything I say to you is not likely going to permeate your comfortable cushion of rationalization and justification you have created for yourself. But it still doesn't make you any less of a thief, regardless of what you tell yourself. Record companies have a lot of problems, to be sure, but if you don't like a company, don't use their product. Don't be a hypocrite and thumb your nose at how rotten they are but then help yourself to the fruit of their labor because it's well done and you like it, it's just the paying for it you have a problem with.