Filesharing and piracy

[Koeppi]

A search didn't turn anything up so I'll asume there's no thread about this...

I just wondered what Primordial's official stance is towards filesharing, music cd's in particular.

I got into Primordial by downloading 'Spirit...' and 'Storm...' and have since then attended 3 live shows and will buy my 2nd album next month. Add a shirt and a longsleeve.
I understand that it might piss off any band if their stuff gets pirated, but I do think that especially in a scene with a lot of 'underground' bands piracy plays an almost essential role in raising awareness of a bands work:

First, it makes the music accessible to international audiences who might otherwise not even heard of the band.
Second, even with a good income it is impossible to buy every CD released in a particular subgenre. A downloaded album might turn into a sold shirt and another visitor at a concert.


So, opinions?

[GoG]

hehe, reminds me of when i found out about primordial. my best friend had gotten "spirit the earth aflame" and i really liked "the burning season", so i burned the cd from him. listened to it occasionally for about 6 months without thinking too much of it. then one day i really listened to it and fell in love with the other tracks as well. then when the next album came out, i bought my first primordial album, "storm before calm".

then i thought i should check out the older ones, whom were still available from the old mp3.com site (2 tracks per album iirc), where i downloaded "autumn's ablaze" and got totally freaked out by the track (i still believe that the bass drums in that song are the most perfectly produced bass drums ever). so when the re-releases came out a while later i bought both "a journey's end" and "imrama". after that i finally got around to buy "spirit..." as well, plus i found "the burning season" EP in a store at some point. then it's just continued and i now own all primordial cd's in original copies. but i prolly wouldn't owned a single one if it hadn't been for burning cd's and mp3s with them in the beginning...

[TreeHandThingy]

Artists don't generally make their money from selling CD's (they get small royalties), unless they are a huge band. They make their money through doing gigs and merchandising. The record companies are the ones who make money from CD sales. Whether you think it's right or not, It's the record companies who suffer from downloading music the most.

[Qwallath]

I also discovered Primordial through downloading - like most other bands I listen to today. I rarely buy albums I haven't heard.

It was "Dark Song" and "Autumn's Ablaze" I think, back in 2000, through Napster no less! Still two of my favourite tracks.

The way I see it: sure, it's illegal, but it's also a matter of common sense. I download things. If I like it, I eventually buy it, if I don't like it enough, I eventually delete it.

Heck, I downloaded "To the Nameless Dead", but I'm for sure buying it in two weeks - 2CD edition definitely. I see it as a sort of unasked for promo ;-)

[PE.ST]

I must admit, I see no reason to download, as things stand today, there usually is enough information, through songs or otherwise, already up on various sites throughout the web, myspace being the brightest star, for you to decide upon an album. And if you can't decide if you like a band, or an album by 1-2songs of that band/album you probably won't like it anymore regardless of a full download. There's no denying that a download might result in a sold shirt or a concert visit, where the "real" money is. But to use the argument that a cd-sale is such a small piece of the cake, for a bands income, to justify your own downloading is plain wrong. If anything, small bands with a limited opportunity to perform ('cause of moderate sales/exposure/dayjobs etc.) and a limited fanbase, is more dependent on its followers support, through cd-sales and whatnot. I'm not an expert on how a label works, but I suppose if you, as a band, generate very little income to the label, through conventional cd-sales, you are less likely to get the opportunity to perform, and thus sell tickets/shirts. Vicious cycle anyone?
True, some artists prosper on the web, and have made their careers of it, Lily Allen being the most obvious example. But most metalbands isn't Lily Allen, and most metalbands can't generate enough interest from the mainstream community (nor do they want to) to sustain themselves as she has.

So in conclusion boys and girls; If you have the means, buy the album, support your favorite bands in any way you can. Be it a shirtsale or a e-greeting card wishing Nemtheanga a happy birthday.

P.S: I am not in league with the devil (being Sony/EMI etc.)

[Hauk]

I got into Primordial from the damn internet. Which is terrible!!! They're from Skerries ^^,. I knew there was a band from here that had a few albums released but I didn't really know much at that stage. Then I got listening to Immortal and I eventually saw a link on myspace and was like "hmm, I know that name", so I hit the Primordial myspace, listened to all the songs, then went googling..

So I decided to buy 'Spirit the Earth Aflame', then I bought TTND when it came out.

Eoghan

[Transient]

without record labels (the ones who are hurt by downloading) bands would have no money to record, produce merchandise, and tour. its a cycle, and you cant take one part out without drastically effecting the rest

[GoG]

Originally Posted by Transient

without record labels (the ones who are hurt by downloading) bands would have no money to record, produce merchandise, and tour. its a cycle, and you cant take one part out without drastically effecting the rest

it depends... on what music you make and your demands. i work full time right now in order to buy enough equipment to record the albums i want to make, now i basically need only a new sound card and a new computer (which i will have before the end of the summer). then after that, i can make albums without having to care about a record company as i use my own equipment that i have no debts on. sure, it's a solo project with no live element and i program the drums (which is the hardest instrument to record), and my knowledge ain't always the best in terms of production, but i can still create a lot better produced albums that some old school metal bands with my limited knowledge.

and i got complete freedom, i make music between extreme metal, ambient, post metal/rock and other things to odd to describe properly, all under the flag of Human Industry, and i can make pretty much all the music i want without having to bother if others like it. i don't care if i sell any records or if other people like it, the only thing that matters is that i enjoy the music, and that others have the possibility to hear it...

that said, i download music without paying for it without mind it, as i create music myself and put it up on the internet for free (although the site is down currently as i forgot to renew the server and address... =P ) i feel that at some level, i do to other as i expect others to do to me. but i have bought all primordial, isis, meshuggah and tool albums as i love those bands. if it's good music, i buy the record to show my respect and support in a way, but unless it's awesome i just keep the mp3s...

[Koeppi]

That's not really the point though.
It all boils down to this:

1. "If I don't have the money to buy the album, is it ok to dowload it?"

- That's what my first post refers to, and this has been going on for ages, it's the tape-trading of the year 2000. Sure, it's faster and better but it's essentially the same.

2. "Why should I pay 15+ bucks for an album if all I get is a jewell case and some liner notes when I can get it for free?"

-This is a result of technological progress, and the answer is simple:
Give me something for my money. Special editions, like Primordial's recent albums, the latest Bolt Thrower or Kreator's Enemy Of God are good examples.
Great cover art and/or bonus discs is all I want.
Obviously, this goes for Major Label bands only.


There are some other things, but they don't really apply to Metal I think.

[Transient]

ive now put all my recordings up for free too on the crowned page, but at some point i did try to sell a cd and didnt do that hot anyway. we've sold about 20 shirts...it just depends if you dont mind spending tons of money and getting none of it back/if you want to make a living on it

[Retarded Kitty]

MP3s on most CDs are only 128 kbps. When you purchase MP3s on a legal site they are usually double or triple the sound quality at around 320 kbps. Depending where you get them. I've gotten some bm MP3s that were 1411 kbps classical quality.

[Meatbix]

Originally Posted by Retarded Kitty

I've gotten some bm MP3s that were 1411 kbps classical quality.

At that bitrate there's no point in using mp3 as a format, you might as well just upload an uncompressed WAV file. MP3 at 256kbit/s or 320kbit/s sounds great, but higher than that you're better off either just going uncompressed or us=ing a lossless format like FLAC.
128kbit/s MP3 sounds like arse.

[mortal portal]

Major labels can afford to take a hit in regard to people ripping off music. I could care less about them - they made their own beds as far as I’m concerned by being the drivers behind “improvements” in audio technology and always have been.

The other aspect is that these things are being marketed as “improvements” when they are rather to the contrary. Recent studies that show that the quality of audio listenership has never been at a lower time in history due to the MP3. As someone who records his own music and spent a year mixing and mastering 3 songs, this is bad news.

The other unfortunate aspect is that, like language, art is rendered obsolete by those “improvements,” because then these drivers get to decide whether or not they are going to make a work available in the new format.

I’ll point to ZZ top as an example. With the exception of “Tres Hombres,” you can’t get their albums with Frank Beard’s original drumming on anything but the original pressings of vinyl now. All of the “Re-masters” (again, which most would assume to be an improvement) have had the drum tracks replaced with drum machine. Granted, there were probably some contractual things involved here regarding royalty distribution amongst members of ZZ Top and Warner Bros. contracts, which is a whole other mess, but there are plenty of other musics that will never again be reproduced in their intended format (e.g. with artist control).

On the other hand, my band will be saving a lot of money and avoiding a lot of waste (not exceeding demand with supply – which is always a risk when you are not a career band) by not printing CDs. Our label (shameless plug - http://www.bindrunerecordings.com) is working it out so that we will soon have CD-quality paid downloads of our music available directly from the label’s site with full color artwork available to print as well. That helps us keep the price low ($5 as opposed to $10 or $12 – which is what we would need to charge to break even on printing costs).

As GoG pointed out, recording technology has also never been more affordable – you don’t have to spend $24,000 on a 24-track reel-to-reel machine anymore.

So, it’s a trade-off, and it all depends on who is going to maintain control of this digital behemoth. As for the internet, it really is the only truly free market at the moment. I hope we can keep it that way.

Regardless, people who truly value music as art are and always have been in the minority – and they will still pay for things that are of value to them. The metal underground is a truly powerful force that has always defied market principles – it’s survived trends as its own currency more than any other art form I can think of. But we need to know our history to stay alive…