John Clees wrote:
50% of the cost involved now goes to shipping across the pond(s)
Maybe it's just me, but the idea of sending a recording of something across the world via post seems a really old idea. Especially something that most likely existed first as a digital file
Traditions are the enemy of progression! I just hope a few of the artists I follow change their mind so I can actually buy and play their music!
Actually, I remember emailing Mr G one time asking for his track 'Moments' (this was before it was released as digital, around 2005/2006 or something). Back then the only way I could buy the track was to give some dude on discogs my money. I told Mr G that I wanted to give him
my money and I wanted the .wav file, not a second hand vinyl sent half way around the planet.
He sent me the track, but didn't want the payment. I guess he felt a bit weird accepting my $2 via paypal, but I really wanted to pay him.
Back then I was convinced that this was the way things would progress. It seemed much more personal buying straight from the artist... but then it never took off and all I saw were more labels popping up with 'limited editions' and 'hand stamped' gimmicks, scarcity became cool, people moaned about digital music and always associated it with mp3's and beatport... and discogs sellers continued to raise prices and created small businesses from doing so, and people complaining about that as well..
..and then threads (like this one we're in now) pop up, where people admit that they wouldn't buy from an artist who they loved the music of, if they sold their music as digital as they wouldn't trust them. From some twisted idea that music isn't real as a file (even though it was most likely a digital file before it was put onto vinyl), isn't as valuable and that we can't trust artists that don't follow the traditional way of releasing their music.
I think it's obvious what the problem is.