Great Stuff Records or why youtube gets a worse place for mu

[Themis]

im 25, and if i talk to an 18 year old, there are worlds between us

but maybe you consider 25 not as kid anymore

[reddie]

I work since I was 15. Always made money from my own work, now I'm 28 and I really envy you rich 'kid's' from western europe who enjoy life that way. Enjoy it as much as you can.

Anyway, back in topic. I didn't have time to read all the comments, there are a lot of good points and Chris you got some great replies about the whole story. I concur with you most of the times.

Labels nowadays are giving EP's free to DJ's by their own will. Some of the those DJ's never even play those tracks.

[Shepherd_of_Anu]

If revenues are down for individual artists its because new technology has enabled the consumer and given them the power to buy only what they want. No longer are we forced to by a 14 track album with 11.5 songs that are mediocre at best. Aren't overall revenues up though? Its hard to find reliable information, there seems to be a lot of conflicting articles out there.

Personally I don't really buy into the music industry's piracy fear machine. They are doing good and if not then let them fold. That is capitalism, if they can't succeed they shouldn't exist. A new model will emerge. People love music. Business monetizes what people love. Its not complicated.

2. Come on, digital downloads allow you to buy just the track you want, and not the 14 fillers like on a cd. And that has been for years. Using that as an excuse for downloading illegally is the most retarded reason ever.

Yeah that would seem pretty retarded. So retarded in fact that I can't tell why you thought that was meant to be a justification

It was just a thought on a potential explanation for lower revenues for individual artists. It was not meant to be some kind of excuse for illegal downloading. From now on I will try to keep my posts a little more streamlined and centered on only a single monolithic point. Unlikely though... i like to wander with my thoughts.

Don't get me wrong, I can see how it can be frustrating when you see your labels music being thrown up everywhere on the internet but that is just how it is these day. Fighting reality is an uphill battle and doesn't really seem to be worth the effort.

I think having music that is heavily pirated is a mark of success. Sometimes I might do a search on youtube and come up with no hits. It makes me think the producer I am checking out mustn't be all that successful or popular. Not that being successful or popular is a proper gauge of quality or talent but the world is the way the world is. For many people that is enough to write someone off. By the way... this last paragraph was a separate thought.

one problem with mp3 is that everyone can easily multiply it million times on his home computer..

that's unique in the whole economy.. seriously don'tlot of other producst for which it is the same case..

imo something everyone can multiply without any costs or loss of quality isn't saleable.. or at least less saleable.. that affects porn which is watched on the computer but even more mp3s..

If revenues are down for individual artists its because new technology has enabled the consumer and given them the power to buy only what they want.

yeah great.. that's why people only buy the track which is on the mtv top10 and not the whole album anymore.. sure the single track is what they want in the first place.. but you don't know that you don't want any other tracks of the same artist too.. it's an affront to the artist to just buy an a-side or one single song out of an album.. (it's different when you prelisten all of his songs and just like one f.e.) but the majority of people doesn't care about any other tracks of an artist except for the one which happens to be in the top10.. even single cd's had more than one song on it.. mostly two songs and a remix..
for the musical education this developement was devastating..

affront to the artist? I often feel that is an affront to the consumer that they are expected to buy a bunch of tracks they don't want just to get that one track they do. Sometimes you see artists (especially ones who put out music often) put out an EP with one really good track and then a couple that sound so so and you can't help but get the feeling that the B side seemed kind of thrown together to meet a deadline. then strangely enough another EP comes out shortly after with the same situation. One good tune and some more ok stuff. Why not just put out one killer release? Make more money by putting out two releases I guess?

on the flip side to this... sometimes I have bought a record for an A side and ended up liking the b side better in the long run.

this is all diverging from the original topic though... You tube quality sucks so its not like anyone would rip it for general music listening unless they are obtuse. No self respecting techno aficionado would tolerate it and if the music is great they would undoubtedly end up purchasing it... or find a better source for their piracy but that is another matter, lol

[pafufta816]

i've heard arguments for why illegal downloading is hurting labels/artists, but i've yet to see much constructive talk about the situation. marshall mchluhan had many ideas on how forms of media become obsolete, and CD culture, record labels, etc. these are things that are becoming obsolete. and who does it hurt the most? i mean lady gaga probably has her tracks pirated more than mike dehnert. is mike hurting from mp3 blogs? no, the illegal downloaders are generally less willing to spend money, so they won't pay for it if it's not available for free anyway. so the argument that dehnert is loosing money, while slightly true doesn't sum up the reality.

i mean it's the same sh!t that lars ulrich was all hemmrhoiduppity about 10 years ago. nine inch nails and radiohead have found constructive methods for responding to the new media environment. they are exceptions of course, most people aren't world renowned, or can self release music to any notice or profit.

if anything i'd say illegal downloading gave netlabel culture, especially techno/house/electro, quite a boost. as people don't feel that purchasing things online is "real" enough for them. they cannot percieve monetary value in it.

[trak660]

More labels should do their own YouTube channel. The sound could be degraded a bit to discourage the pirates.

I played a party this weekend with a kid who had all pirated software. Even his XP had that message on the desktop for going online with a pirate copy. Every track was low bitrate dubstep. It's up to good digital DJs to disapprove of those who don't respect the music or how it should be presented. It's so easy and cheap to sound good. There's no excuse for f-ing around.

[juhokusti]

you illegally distributed music that didn't belong to you. If the label wanted to distribute it, they would have posted it on youtube themselves.
It's not because "everyone is doing it" that it is right. Think about the fact that because of your "love", a million people listened (or downloaded) these tracks and imagine how much revenue the labels and the artists you "love" missed out on. Just because you bought the record doesn't give you the right to upload it. Period.

Don't play innocent, because everyone knows there are plenty of software tools to rip music from Soundcloud or Youtube and people like you don't do it for the love of music, but to get the attention and see the hit counter go up. It just boggles me where the fun is in all that, but hey, long live the internet I guess.

+1

[John Clees]

to get the attention and see the hit counter go up.

haha : that is funny..

an email would have been polite, but then again, perhaps they have 1000's of violations and the time email, asking someone to please take it down. also they risk their own company, business, and profits by taking more time to ask, or even to get fined if things aren't correct and just deleting it is much more efficient.

[simonb]

Youtube for me has been a great way of discovering music. Whether it's getting into a certain artist, hearing a full track that I'm ambivalent about buying after only hearing a 2-minute sample (soundcloud is also good for this), or just randomly finding new stuff, it's valuable and all it does is make me spend MORE money on vinyl and downloads.

PS. I'm 23 and buy all my music. I've been guilty of a few illegal downloads in the past for listening purposes but my DJing collection is 100% legit and, in fact, mostly vinyl. I got into DJing when I was 14 and played exclusively vinyl (not that much of it on a teenager's earnings!) and even though I got into the digital thing eventually I'd mostly still rather buy vinyl when I can afford it. It might be different for the guys my age who're just getting into it in the last few years but I know a good few who at least pay for stuff on Beatport. This is techno and house DJs. Electro, dubstep, etc, that's another story...

PPS. There is no apostrophe in "videos"