Opinion: Music — Buy, Rent, Beg Or Steal?

Gizmodo AU

When it comes to online music, you’re spoilt for choice — or are you? What are the upsides and downsides of the current Australian music market models?

The reaction to Microsoft’s launch of Zune Pass last week by the readership was initially one of excitement, followed up by a rather muted “meh” when it became clear that what Microsoft was offering was a subscription only service. Gus did a run-down of the subscription offerings over on Lifehacker, and this got me pondering on online music choices and their pros and cons. Here’s my take on the Australian market as it stands.

Buy

Examples: iTunes, BigPond Music
Pros:It’s entirely legitimate, and somewhat free of DRM; there’s certainly workarounds via CD ripping and things are less restricted than they used to be. Choice is fairly wide with a tilt towards more popular music. You don’t get anything physical, but you do get the correct artwork and sometimes exclusive extras.

Cons: Per track pricing means that if you want to listen to a lot of music, it’ll get costly pretty quickly. For positional reasons, folks don’t like giving Apple money, and there’s no denying that iTunes (the dominant platform) charges Australians more for digital music than our American counterparts. Also, there’s always that danger that your friends will notice you spent $1.69 on Barbie Girl in a drunken spending frenzy.

Rent/Subscribe
Examples: Zune Music, Qriocity
Pros: Equally legitimate to buying music, but cheaper on a per-track basis — technically speaking. The key pitch here is the width of available material, usually expressed in the millions of tracks. Millions of tracks means there has to be something you’ll like, right? Subscription services are frequently streaming ones, and that means you don’t have to give up storage space for your tunes. Most subscription services also make it easy to listen to specific genre types at the tap of a finger or click of a mouse. Cross device portability means you can have the same favourite saved tracks across laptops, smartphones and tablets.

Cons: The selection is indeed wide, but for every dozen tracks you’ll love, there are going to be tens of thousands you hate, unless your music tastes are incredibly wide. The key downer for subscription music is inherent in the subscription model — as long as you keep paying you can keep listening, but once your payments dry up, all you’ll hear is yourself whistling.

Beg: Free online music sources
Pros: It’s free! It’s also legal to listen to freely available works, and there’s quite a lot of them out there. Whether you’re lining up playlists in YouTube or searching out creative commons music, you never need to pay a penny for a wide variety of musical types. Online streaming radio means never even having to think about the next track.

Cons: It can be time intensive to track down your tracks. Quality can be highly variable; there are solidly some gems out there, but there’s a lot of dross as well, and there’s no telling if that YouTube video you queued up has somebody’s “amusing” remix of Smack My Bitch Up in the middle of Mozart’s Fifth. Online radio quality is usually quite low, and you may be served hundreds of ads for services you can’t even use.

Steal:
Pros: It’s free! The world’s music sources can be yours for only the cost of a download.

Cons: It’s illegal. Sure, some may not fuss about this, under the whole “rich artists are rich anyway” or “try before I buy” argument, but somewhere, somebody’s got to get paid. Equally, while it’s rare, given it’s illegal, there’s always the risk of legal action for your downloading actions. Quality is also highly variable, because you’re relying on others to do the ripping and sourcing for you.

Images: Photosteve101, Brandon Giesbrecht and aloshbennett

Discuss

(132 Comments)
Go to : 1 2
  • [–]

    Alex

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:13 PM

    I buy CDs…

    • [–]

      olearymo

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:30 PM

      Cee… deees…?

      • [–]

        James

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:49 PM

        What is Cee Dees? :P

    • [–]

      k

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:50 PM

      +1
      I buy CDs, and rip them lossless.

      I bought online music for a while via itunes (about 6 albums). Quality = shit. So I know buy CDs, and rip to FLAC. I’ve re-bought those albums on CD. For less. With better quality. A case, a booklet. Something to hold in your hands.

      I’ve converted half a dozen “mp3 junkies” to FLAC by playing them their own favourites side-by-side. The difference is phenomenal when you actually *listen* to it.

      • [–]

        olearymo

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 5:07 PM

        Really? You find the downloaded ones to have noticeably bad quality?

        I’m not asking out of disbelief or having a go at you, I’m just curious. Talking the 320k stuff?

        I also used to rip CDs, out of a purist kinda ideal, but then I went with the 256/320k aac stuff from itunes and just do ‘convert to mp3′ to 192. Probably makes some people sick but sounds okay to me. (maybe I have damaged ears :P )

    • [–]

      Richard

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 7:18 PM

      Ditto, namely because its the same price as buying digital albums anyway. Occasionally I’ll go digital if I really do only want a single track.

      On that note however, the article is wrong to list digital purchases as being single tracks only as a con. iTunes etc also have album sales also.

  • [–]

    James

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:15 PM

    Mostly steal, sometimes buy when can’t find to steal. Deplorable? Yes. Do I care? No.

    I should, but I don’t. And I’m also a musician with my own CD’s to hawk to people, so I should totally care about this…..but I’m also broke and have 200GB a month to use. Do the math.

    • [–]

      James

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:17 PM

      Hey Alex….. Wanna buy a CD? LOL

    • [–]

      wsDK_II

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:25 PM

      How are you stealing?

      you are not taking something away from someone.

      the difference is you are not giving to someone.

      it is like saying those who dont give to charity are stealing…

      • [–]

        Daniel

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM

        That comparison is not even close to being logical.

        And the “omg no one is actually losing something physical” story is tired and stale from poeple justifying their theft.

        • [–]

          Corteks

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:40 PM

          Indeed it’s an illogical comparison.

          I personally think it’s important to note the difference though. It’s not really “stealing” as we see it for everything else. Comparing it to stealing a car, as is done in that anti-piracy ad, is rather stupid cause it isn’t comparative.

          Instead of “stealing” it’s piracy. Sure you haven’t removed the previous owner of what they have, but you have taken what they have for your own benefit while offering them nothing in return. Still bad, but it isn’t stealing in the sense that we use it for pretty much everything else.

      • [–]

        Big Windows

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:37 PM

        Very confusing reasoning. If I am reading this correctly… Anything that doesn’t manifest as a visibly physical purchasable product… Cannot be stolen… Does that include electricity… Most absurd statement I have heard for awhile…

        • [–]

          Daniel K

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:19 PM

          you are saying that electricity is not physcial????

          think about that for a bit, and then read the rest of my comment.

          if you consume electricity you are consuming it from a base station, or mid station, thus you are removing it and it needs to be replaced. Thus it is stealing.

          If you were to COPY the electricity then it would not be stealing

          • [–]

            Ben Zemm

            Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:58 PM

            Is using solar panels stealing? You are taking energy from the sun instead of buying it from the grid. From the owner of the grid you are “stealing” because you are not giving them money but you are still enjoying electricity. I think this is the closest analogy.

            Bands make more money from performances, so I go and see the bands I like IRL as much as possible, but that’s a little hard up here in Brisbane. :-/

      • [–]

        Steve

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:54 PM

        That’s… not even analogous in the slightest. I had to read it twice to understand what you are saying and even now, it’s so illogical.

        So anything that doesn’t physically fit in your coat-pocket is not stealing? How about intellectual property? Trade secrets? I’d argue these are far more serious cases of theft than shoplifting a CD.

        Piracy is theft you doofus. Yes, we all know the platitudes that musicians are all overpaid ingrates who have Gulfstreams and how record companies are all greedy fatcats, but that’s beside the point.

        Record executives will sooner see the grunts in in their business suffer before their own salaries are affected by piracy. So you’re screwing someone over while trying to get a free lunch.

        • [–]

          Articuno

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:02 PM

          intellectual property rights exists.

          According to IP law in Australia, its stealing or at least infringing upon one’s intellectual property rights.

          Hence, an argument can be made that it is stealing.

        • [–]

          Daniel K

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:20 PM

          copying IP is just that, COPYING.

          stealing MUST involve the removal of something from an entity.

          For example, if i were to take your phone out of your hands, then it is stealing.

          if i were to place my hand on your phone, and take away ONLY A COPY then it is copying.

          why is this so hard for people to understand?

          • [–]

            Steve

            Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

            Now you’re just resorting to semantics. If someone provides a good or service in the expectation that it will be exchanged for money, but someone else takes that property unlawfully, that is theft.

            You’re stealing their product (music) and indirectly taking their income and revenue, which would otherwise be paid for due to lawful purchase of said product.

            I don’t understand why you insist on being 12 year olds in this matter and coming up with bizarre mental acrobatics to put a different label on piracy, like as if IP theft somehow dilutes the responsibility.

            • [–]

              Big Windows

              Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:02 PM

              OK reading up on it and given that theft is incorrect terminology. Do you think that copyright infringement is legal if the person who holds the copyright seeks redress for the infringement. Given that the copyright holder is entitled to at law? Do you think you are doing the wrong thing… in the end?

          • [–]

            TSH

            Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

            This.
            The distinction between theft and copyright infringement is very clear. Copyright infringement is not legal, but it is NOT stealing. Same goes for many other IP rights.

      • [–]

        Me

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:08 PM

        F$%# the rest ‘wsDK_II’… that is the single best way of describing music I have ever read.

        If all you muzo’s out there put 100% good song’s on your albums, people would by them. Instead we get 2 hit’s and 15 pieces of shit you slapped together last night.

        • [–]

          MotorMouth

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:44 PM

          That’s just plain bullshit. I generally find the best tracks are the non-single, non-airplay cuts that you probably think of as filler. I reckon that less than 1% of the albums in my collection contain even one dud song. You are just trying to justify being a complete arsehole.

        • [–]

          Steve

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:49 PM

          That’s a bullshit argument if I’ve ever heard one. So… only albums that have 100% good songs don’t get pirated? How about you buy singles then you idiot.

      • [–]

        MotorMouth

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM

        Of course you are taking something from someone. What if you went and worked for someone for a week, thinking you were going to get paid, and they decided not to pay you? You’d be no worse off, right? I don’t think you have even the slightest idea how much time, effort and money goes into creating a decent piece of finished music. I hate it, it is abject misery. I’d rather be working as a labourer but you don’t think you’re stealing from me when you illegally download the product of my hard, horrible work? Fuck you!

        • [–]

          James

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:54 PM

          I think you’re forgetting the rarely thought about upside of piracy.

          More people than ever before will hear your music because they got it free and grew to love what you do. When you tour, your sales ticket sales go through the roof as many people who would’ve never previously considered to see you are now coming to see you. It is a proven fact, and it’s made the live music scene much bigger for touring artists and letting them book more shows that sell out.

          • [–]

            Steve

            Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:02 PM

            Ah yes, the old “Build it and they will come” excuse. I’m sorry, but the vast majority of piracy occurs to established acts. For every internet success story like the Arctic Monkeys, there are countless examples of musicians losing revenue due to piracy.

            So what about these cases? The ones who don’t need any more exposure? Is it wrong to pirate their music? And in admitting so, will you be saying there is ‘good piracy’ and ‘bad piracy’?

            • [–]

              James

              Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:09 PM

              Well, I must admit since you pointed that out about already established artists, I’m crushed that they won’t be able to make that downpayment on their second Lamborghini and will quit pirating right away.

              • [–]

                James

                Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:13 PM

                ….tell that to Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, who is embracing the new way things are done. He released his last album for free on the net off his website. He even admits that he’s made too much money off the backs of his fans.

              • [–]

                Steve

                Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:24 PM

                Again, repeating what I said above. Pirates have this bizarre cognitive dissonance, where they refuse to classify their actions as theft, they assume that all established artists are overpaid ingrates with lambos and gulfstreams, because it’s easier to reconcile and morally easier to digest if it’s a ‘victimless crime’.

                It’s a hell of an assumption, and doesn’t make it any more legal or right.

                Artists only get a fraction of the money coming in from sales, the rest goes to record companies. Executives will sooner cut workforces before lost sales start impinging on their salaries. So no, you’re not just affecting corporate fatcats and overpaid musicians.

                I agree with you about Trent Reznor. Personally, I think most of musicians get paid more than enough from concerts alone. I simply take issue with the fact that you’re coming up with increasingly convoluted thought processes to somehow greenlight piracy. It’s not okay. I’m not RIAA, I don’t give a shit about some poor students ripping a few tracks. They at least acknowledge that it’s wrong, but do it for whatever reason: poor, overpriced downloads, etc.

                • [–]

                  James

                  Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM

                  never did I say that it’s okay. Don’t know where you got that from. If you bothered to read my very first post at all, you’ll see the words “Deplorable? Yes. Do I care? No.”

                  I still feel the same way. I choose to save myself money. That’s the way I do it.

                  • [–]

                    James

                    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:53 PM

                    another reason why Piracy is so popular. I hear something, I love it, I can have it in about 2 minutes to put on my iPod. I don’t have to wait to get down to the CD shop and pay an exhorbitant price for it. So then I have the choice of buying it through iTunes or just torrenting it for free.

                    Guess which option wins.

                  • [–]

                    Steve

                    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:57 PM

                    To be perfectly fair, half of it is directed at wsDK_II who outright okays piracy. As a corollary, I just take issue with your statements that attempt to present it as more acceptable because either there are perks for the occasional unknown band, or the assumption that established musicians are rich and they won’t miss your money.

                    I agree with your original statement. I just don’t agree with your later assumptions. We both agree it’s wrong, I just think it’s irresponsible to use such excuses because they’re morally expedient.

                    • [–]

                      James

                      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 4:01 PM

                      ….and still I don’t give a shit. If I can acquire something for free or choose to buy it, I’m going the free route. I may not care about making money from my music, but I don’t have a whole lot of it to spend either.

                    • [–]

                      Steve

                      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 4:40 PM

                      So you love it. You just don’t want to pay for it. Okay.

                • [–]

                  MotorMouth

                  Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:45 PM

                  Trent Reznor might earn a good living from concerts but I can tell you for a fact that his support bands often have to pay to get on the bill. The biggest pay cheque we ever got from a gig was 1500 euros. Unfortunately, it cost us about three times that to get to and from the gig in Germany and we only got that much by signing exclusively for that festival. Normally we are lucky to get $100 a show. That means that we’d need to play 10 shows a week, every week, for us to earn anything like a decent wage for the time and effort involved. Only the very top echelon of original artists can earn a living from concerts, the rest of us do it because we love it.

                  interestingly though, in the good old days a concert ticket was less than twice the price of an LP. e.g. When Public Image Ltd first toured in the early(ish) 80s, records were $8 or $9 and it cost $15 to see PiL. The first time I saw Simple Minds was at the Capitol Theatre and I think that cost about $20 (records were about $8 then). Now if I want to go and see any touring band, even ones like Icon of Coil that you have never heard of, it is $50 minimum, more like $70 if it is a good venue. That’s more like three times the cost of an album, so I don’t really see how the buying public are better off in the end.

            • [–]

              MotorMouth

              Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:35 PM

              Why would I give a shit about that? I’m not some pathetic loser who wants everyone to love him. I create music for entirely personal reasons and I wouldn’t give a toss if no-one ever heard it. But it bugs the hell out of me that people think they have the right to just steal it from me, when it has cost a lot to make. You can try and justify it to yourself but the reality is that you are stealing from me, my band-mate and our small, independent label and there is no excuse for that.

              • [–]

                James

                Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM

                I don’t know what you’re doing wrong then. I have two bands, an original music one and a cover band. My cover band, which is a 3 piece, makes $1100AU per gig, which is nearly every damn friday and saturday night. A cover band! Split three ways, it’s a tidy little earner. Admittedly, the original music band makes stuff all becuase no one wants to listen to music they’ve never heard of. Unfortunately. Still gets paid the same but rarely gigs.

                • [–]

                  MotorMouth

                  Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 5:00 PM

                  The fact it is your cover band that earns money really says it all, don’t you think? I sure as hell earn much better money doing my retro DJ thing but I see that as a job as much as my actual job (except I can drink while I do it). Playing other people’s music has very little appeal to me, although we do have a few well chosen covers in our repetoire.

                  • [–]

                    James

                    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 5:22 PM

                    I absolutely agree. It does get tiring. I’m finishing up at the end of this year with the cover band to get more involved with the original side. I’ll miss it, but like you said, it does get boring.

    • [–]

      Titsnass

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

      Don’t like the word ‘stealing’, myself, I prefer the term borrowing! As in a ‘copy’ of an MP3, I’ll destroy it when I’m done, promise..

  • [–]

    moggyx

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:20 PM

    I’d be all over subscription services if they were not streaming. I dont care if it has DRM on the tracks, I just want decent quality (256kbps) tracks, that I download once and have as long as my subscription is valid.
    Are there any options like this at the moment? I could not tell if Zune was purely streaming or not.

    • [–]

      Hugh

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:53 PM

      Correct Me If I’m wrong, But doesn’t spotify do something like this? The ability to download and stream? Pity it doesn’t have an Australian version yet… :/

    • [–]

      TSH

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

      Nokia tried this with its “Comes with music” handset/offering. Maybe it was just ahead of its time, maybe they failed at marketing it, but in any case it flopped.

  • [–]

    MotorMouth

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:21 PM

    Its hard to be sure but it appears Zune will offer both subscription and purchasing options, so it will fit into the first two categories, depending on what suits you best.

    Using a Zune device or WinPhone 7 phone will also gift you with band bios and photos for the artists you have loaded up. All you need to do is connect it via wi-fi and all the extra goodies magically appear. It elevates the Zune experience well beyond anything else available. It is the closes thing I’ve discovered to a proper collection (CD/record), in that it gives you something relevant to look at while you are listening.

  • [–]

    Danny Allen

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:24 PM

    I honestly tend to just torrent most music — HOWEVER — I’m always buying CDs from the acts I see on tour, and it’s nice to know that merch tends to go directly to the band.

  • [–]

    Chris

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:25 PM

    Im super excited for launch of zune here, for anyone with a windows phone it defaintly makes an interesting choice

    • [–]

      B

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:59 PM

      Microsoft sales rep?

  • [–]

    Roachless

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:27 PM

    I hate buying full CD’s. most of the time I hate 70% of the songs on them. I love itunes, being able to buy just the tracks I like. However, @ $3 a pop it seems a bit much.
    Especially when americans pay way less. Its digital. It uses the same amount of bandwidth to send it here as it does to send it to someone in America.

    That said, I do use youtube a lot to listen to stuff, and I have been known to download a hard to find song illegally. But if everyone always steals, no one will want to make new stuff, and we all miss out.

    • [–]

      MotorMouth

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:44 PM

      People like you are the reason I hate having our music on digital services. Albums are all that is important to me. It is the only form of music I listen to. (Well, a few mini-albums and the occasional EP, too.) A song gains so much more from context and we put a massive effort into how our albums go together. In my collection of something like 1000 albums I can only think of a handful that have a song that I ever feel like skipping. If an album only has one or two good songs on it, then I won’t buy it (or those songs).

      • [–]

        Roachless

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:21 PM

        People like me?
        People who dont want to pay for music they dont like?
        There is nothing at all stopiing you from still purchasing full albums, even on iTunes. What’s it to you that I pick and choose my songs instead?
        Why is the way YOU buy and listen to music better than the way “people like me” buy and listen to it?

        • [–]

          MotorMouth

          Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:49 PM

          Yeah, people like you who have no respect for the artist. If I had my way you would only be able to buy whole albums of our work, because we make albums. I’d rather have none of your money than have you pick over our carcass for the odd tidbit that might take your fancy. I suppose you would go to an art gallery and ask the artist to paint a different background before you’d buy their work?

          • [–]

            olearymo

            Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM

            You’re perfectly free to record the entire album as one track, MotorMouth.

            Perhaps if every track was worth getting, people would buy every track? Really, you’re being a bit attacking here about the whole thing.

            • [–]

              Roachless

              Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 2:13 PM

              Thats the way it USED to be. you HAD to buy whole albulms. Then they made “singles”, where popular songs would be sold on a CD just on there own, with maybe a cover or acoustic version included.

              No. I much prefer the way it is now. I only have to pay for what I like. I dont want to be forced to buy an entire album of twat if there is only 1 or 2 songs I like on it. YOu know what I would do instead? Steal it. download the songs I like and then the artist gets nothing.
              I am happy to pay for the stuff I listen to. I refuse to pay for music I dont like just because the artist “put a lot of effort into it”.

              Once you sell your music, it’s not yours anymore, it’s ours, and I for one dont want to pay for a load of tripe that I dont want to listen to.

          • [–]

            Luke

            Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 7:40 PM

            Not everybody likes every song on an album. As a consumer why buy a full cake when you only want one slice, the rest will only go to waste.

            Really… if someone just bought one song from you, shouldnt you be happy that they bought it and either them not bother because they only like one song and dont want to justify the money for songs they dont want or them just pirate it and you get no money at all?

  • [–]

    Sam

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:31 PM

    Prior to around 2000; I solely bought CDs.

    From then till around 2005 – I bought CDs of music I loved, and downloaded music (via IRC, Napster, Morpheus, KaZaA and BitTorrent) which I merely enjoyed. By “enjoyed” I mean, it was good to have on in the background, but if I were faced with the choice of pay money for it, or not listen to it – I’d choose the latter.

    From 2005, pretty much any music I’ve obtained has been torrented from closed communities. Though admittedly, from that date the amount of new music I consume has dropped dramatically. I don’t like fact that I haven’t paid for music from bands I really like, but 2005 corresponds with the time my disposable income dried up and I moved out, got married and had kids – and music is far too easily obtained for free where there is bigger priorities to spend my money on.

    • [–]

      Daniel

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:46 PM

      The old “i’m poor, but i deserve it, so i’ll just steal it”.

      • [–]

        Sam

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:54 PM

        No, I’m just a hypocrite about it :)
        I don’t feel the need to justify my actions to myself, or anyone else.

  • [–]

    simon c

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM

    +1 for buying CDs. Sure its more expensive but I like physical media and Im willing to pay for it. The day I can’t buy physical media is the day I stop consuming.

    • [–]

      MotorMouth

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:48 PM

      How are CDs more expensive? These days I am forced to buy most of mine from amazon.com and places like that, as there are no more good record shops. Usually I can get them delivered for $15-$18. Back-catalogue albums often work out to less than $10 delivered. Where can I buy an MP3 album for $10?

    • [–]

      olearymo

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 5:12 PM

      I still buy CDs for the bands I really, really love – good to have the physical media, booklet, etc

      • [–]

        Hellmouth

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 7:39 PM

        Thanks Motormouth, you just gave me my LOL moment for the day.
        So… if someone likes a song from your album and is pretty meh about the rest you would rather not get a sale?
        Because you have already decided for them that is they don’t consume your “art” in the way you see fit then they don’t deserve to hear it at all?
        Do you only let reviewers write reviews if they write it how you want as well?
        GTFO, you are no musician, you are a perfect example of a music snob who puts far more importance on your “art” than the background elevator muzak it probably is…

  • [–]

    Corteks

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM

    I’ve been buying a lot of music online recently through Beatport (https://www.beatport.com). Also sometimes Bandcamp (http://bandcamp.com/) if artists have their tunes up there.

    Most of what I listen to is electronica of various sorts, I’m not sure how you’d go with more mainstream stuff on those sites, but the pricing is usually pretty great from what I’ve seen. Sometimes full albums are only $10 all up, EPs are usually between $5 and $10. Since signing up for Beatport I’ve been buying a lot of new music, because it’s music that I actually give a shite about and it’s bloody easy to just log in, hit purchase, then start listening.

    Oh and the MOST IMPORTANT PART? DRM free files that aren’t intrinsically linked to any specific program. At least with Beatport you can even choose the format of your DL, the site is kinda geared towards DJing after all.

    One other thing to note, Beatport purchases are done in USD so you you don’t have to worry about pricing ignoring any current exchange rate advantages like we have in Aus at the moment.

    Gotta say the “buy” examples in the article are pretty crappy ImO.

  • [–]

    Pat

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:33 PM

    I guess that depends on the artist… If its so-so, then I pirate. If it’s an artist I particularly like, then I buy, either a CD or through iTunes.

  • [–]

    Jake

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:35 PM

    Money from legal CD or Digital purchases don’t make much impact on the band’s direct earnings – but sales figures, units moved and general successfulness of a production does heavily influence whether the label that paid for it all is going to bother keeping the band going on their cash.

    I download a lot of music for free but I try to buy the stuff I really enjoy – normally on vinyl purely because I feel like I’m getting a lot more than purchased downloads or plastic CD’s; it’s a novelty but meh. I probably had it downloaded before I bought the vinyl anyway.

  • [–]

    The Gremlin

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:36 PM

    I used to buy CDs and I still do on occasion provided I like 90% of the music in there. These days is mostly iTunes.

    I don’t steal.

  • [–]

    f4ction

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:36 PM

    I know what I do is wrong but I download “big name” music and buy smaller, indie stuff from iTunes. I’ll help groups get big but once they’re there I’m done :P

  • [–]

    moloko

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:37 PM

    Steal album,delete all songs except the 2 that don’t suck usaully. If I like the artist I buy ticket to concert when touring. Purchased many CD’s back in the day when I had money to blow.

  • [–]

    Big Windows

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:40 PM

    Is anyone even vaguely interested in whether the ultravoilet service will get up and going and be sustainable. I think it is an interesting concept, just need to know more about it.

  • [–]

    Just This Guy ...

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:46 PM

    So.. My options are:
    Use iTunes:
    NEVER going to happen until we are priced the same as everyone else at the very least, but probably not then anyway as I detest Apple on principle
    Subscribe:
    Completely irrelevent to my choice in the music i am after in the first place
    Steal: AKA Copy the file from someone who already has it.

    Or go fully old school and find a music shop that actually has what I’m looking for. Good luck with that if you’re over 15 and want real music from real musicians.

    Will happily pay for songs I want, but they must be high quality lossless, DRM free (because I wish to play them wherever and however I feel at the time) Pointless otherwise.

    • [–]

      Just This Guy ...

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:49 PM

      Oh yes. And I AM a muso (play in several bands and write my own material) and I still say screw the music “industry”
      Bands like Metallica et al, are simply money whores. Sod ‘em.

      • [–]

        Steve

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:57 PM

        You kinda ignored the bulk of the industry and chose as your example the biggest sell-outs in music short of 50 Cent. No-one’s arguing that Lars Ulrich is a money-grubbing douche, but it also ignores how plenty of up-and-coming acts are being neglected because their spreadsheets don’t add up.

    • [–]

      Brashes

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:56 PM

      +1 for Lossless… I’m happy to download music at a cost; but it’s not happening until I can legally find lossless audio. Back to Amazon and the agonising 4 week wait for CDs. Or JBHiFi… But they’re all in shopping centres where I live, and dislike shopping centres almost as much as I dislike MP3 audio. Guess I’ll just sit here in silence.

  • [–]

    James

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 1:54 PM

    Try MP3VA.com

    Costs about a tenth of itunes. Woohoo!

    • [–]

      Labrys

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:29 PM

      You sir are my new hero.
      This site is awesome.

    • [–]

      Chemenski

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 11:45 PM

      Just because you pay for it, does it make it legal?
      These are ridiculously low prices. Seems too good to be true, most likely is.

  • [–]

    dd

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:00 PM

    copyright infringement is not stealing it is just copyright infringement

    • [–]

      MDolley

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:05 PM

      I think Copyright Infringement is a type of stealing.

      Take identity theft for example. It’s technically fraud, but people call it identity theft because the end result is somebody having stuff they shouldn’t

      Arguing semantics seems kind of pointless because no matter what it’s called it’s still illegal.

      • [–]

        Labrys

        Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:32 PM

        It could be said that the difference between murder and manslaughter is a semantic one too but it can make a big difference to what the penalty is.
        The whole legal profession is based around semantics so I think it is important to be calling something what it is when it comes to legal issues.

  • [–]

    MDolley

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:00 PM

    I listen to the radio to and from work. That’s pretty much the only music I will listen to.

    Last music that I actually obtained was from Bigpond Music because it was cheaper than iTunes and DRM free.

    • [–]

      mattt

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

      Have to agree, I mainly listen to JJJ Unearthed on digital radio at home and JJJ in the car. The great thing about unearthed is all the music is freely available for download from the triple j unearthed website.

  • [–]

    sammyl

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:07 PM

    Ovi / Nokia music on my N9 is great. Albums are generally cheaper than iTunes!

  • [–]

    whiteanvil

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

    I was lucky enough whilst in the UK to sign up with the eMusic service. A subscription service that gives you (x) amount of credit per month to use in their download store.

    Because the selection is mostly indy you tend to get a lot more EP’s than you do at an Itunes.

    It is a pity that it is not available in australia (silly silly content owners restricting their own market)

    • [–]

      Labrys

      Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 3:39 PM

      It used to be available and then they sold out to the major music labels who then decided they need to f**k over anyone not American.
      I still use it as I believe if you had already subscribed they could not legal stop providing you the service.

  • [–]

    EarPleasure

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    I buy CD’s, rip them at lossless.
    This way I don’t have to be online, it’s music anywhere, anytime I CHOOSE.
    Btw, why spend only a dollar or two less and get music that is of an inferior quality…256kbps = CRAP/LIFELESS Music.
    How about the studios release more music in either SACD, or DVD-A quality?

  • [–]

    Jeff

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:29 PM

    I am a DJ, I get most of my music from http://www.mymp3pool.com, It costs $US 20 per month but its unlimited… you can download how much as you want, but their selection is mainly focused on music you would hear in a club.

    Otherwise I use Itunes or more than likely type in google “song title 4shared” and download lol

  • [–]

    swenson

    Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 2:32 PM

    So…
    I torrent almost all music, based on the idea that the artists are making boat loads of cash regardless of how many people torrent or buy their music – BUT – if I like a smaller up and coming band that isn’t very big and needs the support, then I’ll buy.. case by case basis i suppose, cheers

    • [–]

      vin

      Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:21 PM

      my way of thinking is that if they want my money, they’ll have to PERFORM for it.
      as in not mime or anthing, but actually pick up some instruments and do something on stage!!!
      if they’re big enough, they’ll get the extra money from promotions etc anyway…
      and the fact that record companies get most of the money make me even more determined to be stingy!

Go to : 1 2

Join The Discussion