TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Steve Angello's Antipiracy Statement
Pages (8): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 »

quote:

Originally posted by junkie_val i usually stay out of threads like this, but.... i agree with him and i am shocked to hear these kind of responses. do you think tracks just make themselves? do you think there is no cost to making music? do you think a studio just magically appears with loads of free gear? i spend alot of time and money in the studio and to see people respond in such a negative way hurts. i know he kinda went off the deep end a little with his post, but rightfully so he's pissed. val

Remember people on TA are a very small percentage of the industry, but if this thread is any indication on the general consensus, it's no wonder tracks aren't making any money these days.

Music isn't cheap folks. But it's provided extremely cheap to the public to entice people to purchase. Yet even with that incentive, and incredibly easy accessibility (iTunes, Beatport, etc) people still find it easier to pirate without any remorse or thoughts about it. I know many people who even play out at clubs playing illegally obtained music (some who I know will even read this thread).

Personally, if you're just going to listen for aesthetic value and pirate a couple tunes I don't really care, as long as you kick out a couple bucks here and there. But if you're going to perform and make money off of illegal tunes that's pretty much a slap in the face to every other DJ/Producer in the industry who's actually working their ass off in the studio to provide you with music. Anyone who does this should be completely ashamed of themselves, but that's my personal opinion. That said, I've played downloaded tunes in the past, but I've since grown up and realized the possible impact of doing so. It's important that if you're in the industry to understand how things work.

The convenience factor of stealing music is only one of the problems with this situation. The fact that people don't even care or realize how much it's hurting the industry (especially dance music, which isn't a massive market compared to pop, etc) is what's more disturbing.

Artists depend on royalty cheque's from tracks to survive, in some cases. Sure, making music is a way to advertise for DJ gigs which will garner more overall revenue, but those royalty cheque's are still vitally important.

The majority of people here will never understand royalty percentages, producer advance negotiations, or just how much work and effort goes into releasing a track (I'm not even talking about MAKING the actual song), and even if people did, today's social standards prove that they wouldn't care anyway.

The music industry is changing, that's obvious. For the better? That's yet to be seen as things are constantly evolving. Will things disappear? Not at all. People will just end up changing and adapting to the different way of whatever type of music distribution the future holds.

quote:

Originally posted by darouge11 lol hes probably making more money doing gigs then making tracks.....

Exactly.

Artists should produce music for the love of music, not solely for monetary reasons. If fans appreciate your music they will follow you, and you should be able to make your income from shows and gigs, which is wehre alot of artists seem to make their money from.

Look at Prince. He gave away his last album for free, then proceeded to tour at sold out shows. Looks like this is the way of the future.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky Exactly. Artists should produce music for the love of music, not solely for monetary reasons. If fans appreciate your music they will follow you, and you should be able to make your income from shows and gigs, which is wehre alot of artists seem to make their money from. Look at Prince. He gave away his last album for free, then proceeded to tour at sold out shows. Looks like this is the way of the future.

sigh.

besides the prince thing as possibly the worst example ever in the history of backing up an argument, the stagnant fact remains that if you are a professional artist you should be PAID for the WORK you do.

You wouldn't expect to walk out of a automobile dealership with a brand new car - simply because some company really loves making cars - so how can you expect to receive music that takes time, effort, equipment investment (to name a few) for free? Where does the culture of entitlement come from?

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen people still find it easier to pirate without any remorse or thoughts about it.

I think people are changing their perceptions about music, valuing it as a free commodity. If you can listen to radio for free why pay for music?

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Personally, if you're just going to listen for aesthetic value and pirate a couple tunes I don't really care, as long as you kick out a couple bucks here and there. ... Anyone who does this should be completely ashamed of themselves, but that's my personal opinion. That said, I've played downloaded tunes in the past, but I've since grown up and realized the possible impact of doing so. It's important that if you're in the industry to understand how things work.

Chris, I agree with you in that if you're a dj yourself, that you should help support the producers. But to the mass audiences wehre do you draw the line? What is acceptable: supportinig the artists for a few tunes, an album? As music becomes completely accessible and requires only a small of time to obtain free music, at what point would you need to force monetary compensation for every single track that you release? maybe artists need to rethink how they value their music and realize a different model for revenue. Instead of trying to sell all of their music for $1 a track, they should give away their music for free to the public (ala Radiohead and Prince) and only force compensation from people that actually profit from their music (radio stations, DJs etc).

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Artists depend on royalty cheque's from tracks to survive, in some cases. Sure, making music is a way to advertise for DJ gigs which will garner more overall revenue, but those royalty cheque's are still vitally important. The majority of people here will never understand royalty percentages, producer advance negotiations, or just how much work and effort goes into releasing a track (I'm not even talking about MAKING the actual song), and even if people did, today's social standards prove that they wouldn't care anyway.

Sure royalty cheques are important for an artist to survive, but on the flip side, maybe some artists should realize that their music sucks and not have to rely on royalty cheques and to rant and rave to force money from their fans. The internet is democratizing the music industry and unfortunately weeding out crappy artists who are demanding their slice of the pie. The bottom line is that if you produce quality tracks and earn the respect and adoration of your fans, the money will follow (via shows and gigs etc).

How exactly do you think Radiohead got to be in a position to give out music for free in the first place???

This is why i miss vinyl. It at least kept people honest and forced them to pay for their tracks, although they were pricey.

The customer will always want stuff (products) for free...and even if it's free, they'll find an excuse for more.

You don't see Dolce & Gabbana, Valentino, or Cavali put out stuff for free that they spend their time designing and making for months.

As someone already mentioned, it's a double edged sword. On one hand, it helps promote small, independent artists who would otherwise never get exposure...but it also kills artists who are in the same boat but already have exposure and rely on sales to pay for any future work. Tours and live gigs def. pay the big $$$....but that's only for established big artists for the most part. The smaller bands, artists don't get to 'Tour'.

Fast to jump to conclusions much? Woooosh!

quote:

Originally posted by Irishaddict besides the prince thing as possibly the worst example ever in the history of backing up an argument, the stagnant fact remains that if you are a professional artist you should be PAID for the WORK you do.

Radiohead's latest album is another example. They gave away their music for free realizing that there was no way to stop all the pirating. Some people paid a dollar, some paid for the whole album, but people were still pirating b/c it was easier to get the album for free off torrent sites than to sign up on their website to get the album.


but here's another example laura. as a pvd fan i used to travel around to diff gigs to see him spin. as a fan who donwloaded his music for free, i repaid my respects by attending alot of his shows and buying his CDs.

Do i have remorse or guilt for downloadinig pvd mp3s for free? No. Am i completely ashamed of myself as Chris Allen pointed out? Hell no. But i have help support the artists (pvd is one of the main example) by supporting his income in alternative ways (seeing 12+ pvd gigs in chicago/nyc/ibiza).

quote:

Originally posted by Frenchie Fast to jump to conclusions much? Woooosh!

what?

I'm patiently waiting for when the music industry finally collapses because of illegal downloading (lol), so it could rebuild itself from the ground up. Musicians would make music no matter what. Music existed long before labels existed, and music will continue to exist after the labels die.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky but here's another example laura. as a pvd fan i used to travel around to diff gigs to see him spin. as a fan who donwloaded his music for free, i repaid my respects by attending alot of his shows and buying his CDs.

right.

and i go back - how did pvd get to the point of getting bookings in the first place? Do you honestly believe that no one watched the sales of the tracks - in order to rank their level of "popularity" and thereby decide to book the dj? That there aren't entire companies who monitor radioplay - in order to compensate the artists accordingly?

I'm an idealist at heart but seriously the logic is ass-backwards on this one.

quote:

Originally posted by Irishaddict what?

LOL no not you.

quote:

Originally posted by Irishaddict right. and i go back - how did pvd get to the point of getting bookings in the first place? Do you honestly believe that no one watched the sales of the tracks - in order to rank their level of "popularity" and thereby decide to book the dj? That there aren't entire companies who monitor radioplay - in order to compensate the artists accordingly? I'm an idealist at heart but seriously the logic is ass-backwards on this one.

actually laura.

if it wasn't for napster in 1999, i probably would never have discovered either pvd or edm and would probably still be listening to hiphop/rap.

so to counter your argument, you would have to say that pvd grew into who he is today b/c alot of people discovered his music by downloading his songs (like me).

quote:

Originally posted by Stilez As someone already mentioned, it's a double edged sword. On one hand, it helps promote small, independent artists who would otherwise never get exposure...but it also kills artists who are in the same boat but already have exposure and rely on sales to pay for any future work.

There is never enough exposure, there is no plateau in how big you can become. Making music is a hobby first of all not a job, people do it because they enjoy to do it, not because they think about how much money the track will make. The more people download the track for free in return the more people will buy it as well because the hype behind the track increases.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky Exactly. Artists should produce music for the love of music, not solely for monetary reasons. If fans appreciate your music they will follow you, and you should be able to make your income from shows and gigs, which is wehre alot of artists seem to make their money from. Look at Prince. He gave away his last album for free, then proceeded to tour at sold out shows. Looks like this is the way of the future.

Since when was it your right to get music for free?

Also, the problem isn't having your fans support you, it's getting the fans in the first place. If you're a new artist, how exactly do you get exposure? Putting your tracks online for free? Right, because hundreds of people don't already do that right now.

Working with labels is a way to promote yourself and build a reputation and a name for yourself. You can't expect to have fans if nobody knows who you are.

As for your reference to Prince, he's pretty much one of the biggest names for music in the world. Of course he can release an album for free. Do you think he could do that as a nobody and expect the same result? If you think that's possible, you're living in an exceptionally delusional dreamworld.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky I think people are changing their perceptions about music, valuing it as a free commodity. If you can listen to radio for free why pay for music?

I guess that's a matter of pespective. Radio is a good promotional tool, but again: how do you get your tracks on radio play when it's not coming from a proper label? You think mailing your tracks to radio stations is going to get you airplay? See delusional dreamworld comment above.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky Chris, I agree with you in that if you're a dj yourself, that you should help support the producers. But to the mass audiences wehre do you draw the line? What is acceptable: supportinig the artists for a few tunes, an album? As music becomes completely accessible and requires only a small of time to obtain free music, at what point would you need to force monetary compensation for every single track that you release? maybe artists need to rethink how they value their music and realize a different model for revenue. Instead of trying to sell all of their music for $1 a track, they should give away their music for free to the public (ala Radiohead and Prince) and only force compensation from people that actually profit from their music (radio stations, DJs etc).

I don't understand your "where do you draw the line" comment. It was only a few years ago where there was NO option to pirate music, and did that bother people then? No, the PRICE of CD's did.

Monetary compensation wasn't forced upon the public, it was forced upon the artists FROM the public so they would attempt to buy music again.

Nobody should be forced to give anything away for free. What if you went into work and your boss said "you're doing such a great job that for the next 3 months I think you should do this for the good of the company, for free." How exactly would you respond? Something you've been working for/on for X amount of years now and you're told to just give what you do away for free. I hardly think you'd be pleased with that.

And again, Radiohead. You have to be joking. You're contradicting yourself by saying "new artists should shine through if they're good enough" and then you throw in one of the world's leading artists. As a side note, the releasing of their album online for free was a publicity stunt. Radiohead's latest album is in stores now.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky Sure royalty cheques are important for an artist to survive, but on the flip side, maybe some artists should realize that their music sucks and not have to rely on royalty cheques and to rant and rave to force money from their fans. The internet is democratizing the music industry and unfortunately weeding out crappy artists who are demanding their slice of the pie. The bottom line is that if you produce quality tracks and earn the respect and adoration of your fans, the money will follow (via shows and gigs etc).

I'll go back to my comment regarding your job. What if your boss walked in and said "you know what, you're working for free" without any reason whatsoever. Should you thus assume that you suck at what you do because you've been told to provide your service for free? Give me a break.

I also disagree with your comment about "crappy artists". I'd say there are MORE artists these days than ever. And everyone who makes a beat in Reason thinks they can be the next Tiesto.

Your bottom line is flawwed. You cannot expect to make music of pure quality and thus rise to the top. You need marketting, proper representation, and a proper business model. Just making good music and thus demanding your fans to recognize this will never happen. You need to be at a certain level for that to happen.

quote:

Originally posted by Porky actually laura. if it wasn't for napster in 1999, i probably would never have discovered either pvd or edm and would probably still be listening to hiphop/rap. so to counter your argument, you would have to say that pvd grew into who he is today b/c alot of people discovered his music by downloading his songs (like me).

Yes PVD definitely came to be from you downloading his tunes from napster. Bit ego-centric don't you think? Don't get me wrong, as it's been said the exposure is there at a grassroots level but to model your career on the "honour system" is a tad much - not to mention doomed to failure. It's back to the culture of entitlement - would you walk out of a store with something you hadn't paid for? Why do you think you should be allowed this freedom with music?

Unfortunately you can only gauge success in a regulated market, and the "through the rose coloured glasses" account you give does not lend itself accordingly.

quote:

Originally posted by geroin There is never enough exposure, there is no plateau in how big you can become. Making music is a hobby first of all not a job, people do it because they enjoy to do it, not because they think about how much money the track will make. The more people download the track for free in return the more people will buy it as well because the hype behind the track increases.

i see where you're coming from here. though that holds true for the most part (cause if you love something, it doesn't matter if you get paid for it or not...you'll still cont. to do it), the reality of the matter is that one would hope that one could make a living doing what they do best, or love to do...and that involves being compensated (I'm not saying big $$ right off the bat..but at least enough to live on or buy materials etc..to continue making what it is you love to do) for your work.

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon everything on the planet gets stolen

that is all!
just man up and do your thing Mr. Angello. You aren't counting your change, thats for sure!

quote:

Originally posted by Irishaddict Yes PVD definitely came to be from you downloading his tunes from napster. Bit ego-centric don't you think?

I'm not ego-centric.

Don't you think alot of his fans discovered him from downloading his music?

Or do you think his packed gigs are the result of the majority of the audience all discovering and buying his music legally?

quote:

Originally posted by Irishaddict Unfortunately you can only gauge success in a regulated market,

Wouldn't you say that the unregulated nature of the internet is probably the best way to promote your music?

My biggest problem with buying music is I can rarely find the track I want on iTunes when it comes to EDM. If the music was actually easy to purchase, more people would purchase.

What happened to artists releasing all those FUBAR files onto Limewire and such to flood the search engine with bad files. Do they still do that? I always downloaded less music when it was taking me 15 minutes to find a good file :P

quote:

Originally posted by Porky I'm not ego-centric. Don't you think alot of his fans discovered him from downloading his music? Or do you think his packed gigs are the result of the majority of the audience all discovering and buying his music legally? .... Wouldn't you say that the unregulated nature of the internet is probably the best way to promote your music?

I don't disagree with this comment.

However.

I think a live recorded set released to the public is much better to download to 'introduce' someone to EDM. Releasing a single or an entire album of singles that will provide your advertising for your career to continue isn't the best way.

Giving away "something" for free is fine, but giving everything up for free will never work.

The reality is, you still need to make a living.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Since when was it your right to get music for free?

I never thought I had a right to get music for free. I buy alot of albums and mp3s legally. It's just the garbage music that I don't care about. If i had to consciously pay for every single track that would be infeasible.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen If you're a new artist, how exactly do you get exposure? Putting your tracks online for free? Right, because hundreds of people don't already do that right now.

myspace is a start. Whenever i head a good track i always check out an artist's myspace page to see if the rest of their stuff sounds good. i would gladly pay $1/track for songs on myspace that i liked but unfortunately the online distrubution system is so unorganized that i try to see if it's available on p2p sites.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Working with labels is a way to promote yourself and build a reputation and a name for yourself. You can't expect to have fans if nobody knows who you are.

I disagree. Promotion is fine but will only get you so far. True talent will find it's fans.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Radio is a good promotional tool, but again: how do you get your tracks on radio play when it's not coming from a proper label? You think mailing your tracks to radio stations is going to get you airplay? See delusional dreamworld comment above.

I agree with you. A clash between the old and new systems.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen It was only a few years ago where there was NO option to pirate music, and did that bother people then? No, the PRICE of CD's did.

I hated buying a CD for one song and then hearing that the rest of the album blew chunks. I now gladly pay for only the songs that I want.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Nobody should be forced to give anything away for free. What if you went into work and your boss said "you're doing such a great job that for the next 3 months I think you should do this for the good of the company, for free." How exactly would you respond? Something you've been working for/on for X amount of years now and you're told to just give what you do away for free. I hardly think you'd be pleased with that.

I agree with you 100%. Nobody should work for free. So if you're not able to even sell single tracks, you should leave the music business. Maybe music production is not your forte.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris Allen Your bottom line is flawwed. You cannot expect to make music of pure quality and thus rise to the top. You need marketting, proper representation, and a proper business model. Just making good music and thus demanding your fans to recognize this will never happen. You need to be at a certain level for that to happen.

i agree with you chris, marketing, proper representation, a proper business model are all important. BUT... the bottom line is that crappy music is crappy music. you can never demand your fans to respect your music. You either have talent or you don't. And you don't need to be at a certain level of fame for your fans to recognize your talent, you either are gifted or you're not.

I have alot of respect for people who are able to produce or mix solid, original edm, whether it be trance, house, techno or any other genre.

i think part of the problem unfortunately is that there is such a massive abundance of edm. millions of copies of a given track floating around online. its tough for most people to justify spending their hard-earned cash on something their friends get for free, let alone something that will be 'outdated' in a month or two. artists need to understand that this isn't going to change, regardless of their bickering efforts (ala Angello, Tenaglia).

in any other business if a consumer can get a product cheaper somewhere else, THEY WILL. the same applies for music. artists eventually will adapt to consumer demand. hopefully edm doesn't start sucking too much in the process.

The reality of the matter is that the labels are no longer the main distribution channel: the Internet is. Artists can bitch, plead, enforce restrictions on the general public all they want, but piracy is here to stay. It's not going away, it not going to go out of fashion, and there's NOTHING the labels or artists can do about it. Even if all artists colluded to not make any more music until people stopped pirating it, one clever ****** would make music and put it up for free, and fuck it up for the entire cartel. The listeners hold the reigns now.

If you're an artist or a label and you're terribly upset about what the Internet is doing to the music industry, do us all a favour and don't whine about it. Just GTFO and find another job.

The only way you can stop me from downloading your music is if you stop making it.

And don't threaten to do it either. Just do it. Even if the majority of big artists decided to stop making music because of pirating and went back to flipping burgers, those who would remain in the music industry would have to scour myspace for those unknown artists making good music with pirated Cubase. And those unknown myspace kids would get discovered, and they would take the place of the big names that left. And piracy would reign supreme, yet music would remain. What a paradox.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur If you're an artist or a label and you're terribly upset about what the Internet is doing to the music industry, do us all a favour and don't whine about it. Just GTFO and find another job.

+1

In the end, the internet is forcing artists to produce for the love of music. I really don't see it being an economically feasible career if you have mediocre talent (who are the biggest whiners).

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.