 Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is free.
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| silver |
Taken from the news page:
Love (happy / UK) hardcore? Starting out producing or DJing or both? making a ton of great tracks but not really making any headway into the scene? We hear you... As record companies that released hardcore albums close shop, stop releasing or merge we are now at a point where all major albums are locked up by major labels and feature a majority of tracks from a select number of artists and labels.
As if being a new producer is hard enough, not even getting a look in for any sort of album or even options to get the tracks out alot of producers have given up or left for a different genre. Think it's tough being a newbie, even established artists and producers are being locked out of CD options were it being a label deciding on what type of tracks the album will use or the DJ's only using tracks signed to their label or own productions.
So what is the future for artists and the up 'n' comers? We've heard it before, sure if you have talent you will be noticed, but how to do you get noticed? Independent releases for starters, releases like Hardcore Underground, Hardcore Addiction, Hardcore Revolution, Pure Hardcore and even Crush on Hardcore (abet free but fully licensed), just to name a few. The albums don't have big advertising campaigns or sometimes even banners, but they are self funded by the artists, DJ or small labels run by 1 or 2 people. The releases feature a wide variety of different styles, artists, producer, singers, DJs and talent!
Get the info out there and make an informed decision where hardcore music comes from and who needs your support. |
| Samination |
i blame people who just buy albums or tapepacks, and i blame labels that didnt start using cd/digi earlier so people would have been interested in getting singles instead |
| Future_Shock |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
i blame people who just buy albums or tapepacks, and i blame labels that didnt start using cd/digi earlier so people would have been interested in getting singles instead
you want to blame people who only buy albums or tapepacks... when there are people who don't even buy that? One word: filesharing.
But wait a second... aren't you a self-admitting file-sharer? Or just used to be? Or am i thinking of someone else?
You can blame whoever you want, but underneath everything, it's filesharing that's ****ed hardcore, and the music industry in general. There's just **** all money in it compared to previously. |
| acidfluxxbass |
I blame commercialisation..
when you get an album with enough funding to sell in shops, you move allot faster..
albums funded by the artists are never going to make major sales asfirst because for mass sales you need to have the funds to pay designers, packagers and distributors... |
| Wilky |
Im an ex filesharer, the only thing i illegally download is tape/cd packs. Fack payin for them! I used to buy vinyl but dont anymore. I never have and never will (i dont think) pay for mp3 files... I do buy compilations. The people to blame are the O.A.P Producer crew as its down to them all this |
| Triquatra |
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
You can blame whoever you want, but underneath everything, it's filesharing that's ****ed hardcore, and the music industry in general. There's just **** all money in it compared to previously.
no money, no commercialisation....chaos!!!!!! oh noes!!!!!! |
| Meathead |
I must have misread the intial post, becuase i didnt see anywhere any mention of whos to blame for the downfall of the music industry. |
| Triquatra |
i didnt actually see any questions :P i saw a statement |
| Samination |
Andy: do you really think filesharing THE ONE THING that's hurting hardcore?
I wont deny it's a one of the things in the equation of losses, but it's still not the only one.
is filesharing the reason the bigger labels are picky about the tracks that are going to appear on the CDs? not likely, it will still be pirated.
greed, no money, no real options to buy the music other than importing expensive vinyls, selling labels dont want to sell singles... the list of reason why hardcore's bust is long, but it all roots into, what kind of people are listening to hardcore?
meathed: i was one who blamed people :P |
| Dogsy |
I have a few mates down my way who are into Hardcore but they just dont explore it enough and mainly go for the stuff that comes to them. Like when theres a hardcore heaven event its mainly the big names playing or they will only hear of the latest bonkers cd when they see the advert.
So I rekon its down to people being lazy and not exploring music they love just expecting it to come there way and only go for artists they know and wait for the next HTID or something to come out. So all these awesome artists are missing out. Its a shame because they put so much heart into the music. I hope they soon get the reconision( cant spell today) they deserve! |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Dogsy:
I have a few mates down my way who are into Hardcore but they just dont explore it enough and mainly go for the stuff that comes to them. Like when theres a hardcore heaven event its mainly the big names playing or they will only hear of the latest bonkers cd when they see the advert.
So I rekon its down to people being lazy and not exploring music they love just expecting it to come there way and only go for artists they know and wait for the next HTID or something to come out. So all these awesome artists are missing out. Its a shame because they put so much heart into the music. I hope they soon get the reconision( cant spell today) they deserve!
Like I said, its all depends on the people who listens to hardcore.
blame filesharing? blame yourself for what kind of crowd you're aiming for.
This makes me think that DJ DNA and DJ Vinylgroover all did the right thing.
And Andy: yes I am pro-filesharing, but not when it comes to hardcore. If it can be bought digitally or CD or it's still actively sold, I wont share it. If it's out of print and vinyl or not actively sold anymore, I will keep sharing it. Who gets any money from 2nd hand sales anyways, except the seller? royalties doesn't exist on 2nd hands, so in any way, filesharing and 2nd hand sales are a loss to the producers, but there's no money in filesharing compared to 2nd hand selling (so... what's more evil?) |
| Samination |
I wont try to drag this too long... I like hardcore. Not much the current form of it, but there's still tracks made that I like, but hardcore today isnt the easiest to come buy.
It's nice to see that well known labels like Next Generation (with it's sisterlabel Blatant Beats) releases digital songs at the same ttime as the Vinyls. This means that they want as many people as possible to listen to their music. And they also have almos their complete backcatalogue up on the digital store. That's a large plus for those people who like older hardcore.
Al/DJ Storm, like the NuEnergy Collective, release their digital songs a few month after the vinyl release. This is ofcourse a little letdown for us/those who actually like the music and doesn't bother about it being on mp3 or not. But this propably helps to keep the filesharing down a little so the vinyls will sell
Joey Riot, and basicly the whole Serious Sounds store release digitals before, or on the same day as the vinyl release. And Lethal Theory is supposted to be a great success, even with filesharing counted (atleast in the beginning).
Scott Brown did try it, but he stopped updating his own store after a while. We've all heard his point on filesharing, but who can blame him? he's a large name too, but that still didnt stop Brisk from keeping NG/BB updated with mp3s.
And Hixxy... what ever happened here? He made a big promise with his MP3 store in 2005, and kept saying it's coming and under testing for 2 years. Did he notice the success IMOdownload had in the begining, but felt taht too many people would hear his shitty production? (dont get me wrong, I just dont like his newer stuff) |
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i didnt actually see any questions :P i saw a statement
Exactly. And a statement totally unrelated to filesharing yet that somehow is where this debate eded up. Strange.
What i got from this statement: it's becoming ever more difficult for up and coming producers to get their tracks on compilations/labels.
The conclusion everyone else seemingly arrived at: Oh Noez!!! Filesharing is killing teh scenez!11!!1ONE!!! |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i didnt actually see any questions :P i saw a statement
Exactly. And a statement totally unrelated to filesharing yet that somehow is where this debate eded up. Strange.
What i got from this statement: it's becoming ever more difficult for up and coming producers to get their tracks on compilations/labels.
The conclusion everyone else seemingly arrived at: Oh Noez!!! Filesharing is killing teh scenez!11!!1ONE!!!
Even if I didnt mention it, people would still have this in mind.
Silver doesn't like talk about filesharing, understandable, he does run labels too, but if we're not allowed to talk about it, the problem will never be fixed. I know that he knows (eheh) that I've made some (alot of) posts about this, but he hasn't removed them, but I still feel that he could just delete them.
I want to keep discussing it, because I was once just a "leech" who starting buying the music he likes. Heck I even pay loads of money to order music from Japan, but I could buy this locally or digitally, it would save me money i could buy more with
|
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
meathed: i was one who blamed people :P
Well in that case, you're the one to blame!!! 
Btw i agree with you about the 2nd hand thing. If a song or whatever cant be bought in a way that directly benifits the original artist/label IE a record is out of stock and cannot be bought diditally, then imo its up for grabs. Look on Hardcoreproducer.org Al storm gave away his CD of Hardcore Underground 2 for free (possibly a huge publicity stunt for the upcoming Hardcore Heaven awards but whatever). It is no longer available to buy in a way that directly benifits the original propriter(sp?) and if bought 2nd hand will only benifit the ebay/discog user you're buying it off so imo why not get it free? ONLY AS A LAST RESORT (for anyone who may accuse me of filesharing)! |
| Samination |
I dont mind getting called a filesharing twat any more, because people always think "once a thief, always a thief". But even thiefs can be rehabilitated, but idiots cant :P
Also, I forgot to mention. There are people who actually download complete songs just to sample it. If they like it, they'll buy it when possible, if not they'll just delete the songs. I for one would like this option. The songs doesnt need to be high quality, but I prefer to listen to a song so I could determine if I want it or not (it's not always a 1 minute or 2 minute sample will help) |
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i didnt actually see any questions :P i saw a statement
Exactly. And a statement totally unrelated to filesharing yet that somehow is where this debate eded up. Strange.
What i got from this statement: it's becoming ever more difficult for up and coming producers to get their tracks on compilations/labels.
The conclusion everyone else seemingly arrived at: Oh Noez!!! Filesharing is killing teh scenez!11!!1ONE!!!
Even if I didnt mention it, people would still have this in mind.
I doubt it seeing as how the original post was in no way whatsoever related to filesharing
|
| Samination |
sure you jest?
well, propably depends on what you think does the most damage, filesharing or big labels sucking up all glamour? |
| Meathead |
Jest?
There was no mention of filesharing though? And i doubt very much that up and coming producers not "making it" in hardcore or making it on compilations is at all connected to filesharing. So i really dont see how you came to that conclusion. Did you even read the original post? |
| acidfluxxbass |
maybe smaller artists like the way it is. less commercialized they are, less their stuff gets file shared.
i dunno...
what was silvers point, again? |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
Jest?
There was no mention of filesharing though? And i doubt very much that up and coming producers not "making it" in hardcore or making it on compilations is at all connected to filesharing. So i really dont see how you came to that conclusion. Did you even read the original post?
I have read it, but I wasnt the one who started the filesharing talk. Did you even my original reply? I just expressed that the labels should have consentrated on consumers (singles) instead of djs (vinyls) |
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
Jest?
There was no mention of filesharing though? And i doubt very much that up and coming producers not "making it" in hardcore or making it on compilations is at all connected to filesharing. So i really dont see how you came to that conclusion. Did you even read the original post?
I have read it, but I wasnt the one who started the filesharing talk. Did you even my original reply? I just expressed that the labels should have consentrated on consumers (singles) instead of djs (vinyls)
Yes i did and fair point it was actually Influx who started that shite, although i didnt say you were the first to mention filesharing :p . You may not have started the filesharing debate but you did blame a completely unrelated entity also. |
| Triquatra |
if people go back to the original statement
the way it reads is about making it as a new producer.
Love (happy / UK) hardcore? Starting out producing or DJing or both?
making a ton of great tracks but not really making any headway into the scene?
So what is the future for artists and the up 'n' comers?
but how to do you get noticed?
its about who you put your trust in, where you put your money, where you send your music to get promoted... |
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
maybe smaller artists like the way it is. less commercialized they are, less their stuff gets file shared.
i dunno...
what was silvers point, again?
Something about filseharing evidentally  |
| Fishy |
Drama Drama  |
| Ken Masters |
How did the big doggs make a name for themselves? They started their own labels, events & radio. They pushed a scene forward which, @ the time, really was a hit or a miss.
They pushed it forward for the love of their scene & wanted everyone else to jump onboard & be part of the action. Isn't this how all scenes kick off.
Stop trying to suck up to the big doggs & be part of their albums, labels, events, ect. Get the finger out & do what all these guys done in the first place! Afterall, by the time you do start to make a name for yourself a lot of these guys will be finished with the scene anyway.
Do what you want to do & don't stop pushing forward 
|
| Mortis |
quote:
Originally posted by djkenmasters:
How did the big doggs make a name for themselves? They started their own labels, events & radio. They pushed a scene forward which, @ the time, really was a hit or a miss.
They pushed it forward for the love of their scene & wanted everyone else to jump onboard & be part of the action. Isn't this how all scenes kick off.
Stop trying to suck up to the big doggs & be part of their albums, labels, events, ect. Get the finger out & do what all these guys done in the first place! Afterall, by the time you do start to make a name for yourself a lot of these guys will be finished with the scene anyway.
Do what you want to do & don't stop pushing forward
Well said. This is the mentality that people need to adopt or nothing will ever change. |
| TheOneNOnly |
I buy everything from online.
For a simple reason.
Big large labels don't control the sites I buy off, and tell who and who can't be on it. I buy the music I like, and don't buy the music I don't.
It's simple.
Sure people will file share, that's their choice. I agree with sharing files that aren't being sold anymore, and won't be sold by the company more. They aren't making money, so why stop people from getting songs they can't anywhere else? All music should be heard, but should be bought from the label while they still sell it. |
| Revs |
Filesharing has also it's good sides : It allows small DJ's who don't have much money to get tracks for mixing. If you don't have money, and can't buy any tracks, how do you proove your skills ?
However, I don't think it's okay when people who can affoard it fileshare them, and the thing actually is, you don't know who can affoard it, and who can't. |
| Trimms |
OMG SUPPORT UNDERGROUNDCORE DOWNLOAD MY ALBUM!!!!111!!!11!!!111!!11!ONE!!!!!: www.myspace.com/djtrimms
|
| Triquatra |
quote:
Originally posted by DJ Revs:
Filesharing has also it's good sides : It allows small DJ's who don't have much money to get tracks for mixing. If you don't have money, and can't buy any tracks, how do you proove your skills ?
im confused....how can they show their skills if they are downloading mp3s?
this suggests to me that they have a timecode based system or cd decks - and in that case, if they can afford that - they can afford to buy the tunes!
at what....£1.30 a tune? thats not asking much, at all.
|
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
quote:
Originally posted by DJ Revs:
Filesharing has also it's good sides : It allows small DJ's who don't have much money to get tracks for mixing. If you don't have money, and can't buy any tracks, how do you proove your skills ?
im confused....how can they show their skills if they are downloading mp3s?
this suggests to me that they have a timecode based system or cd decks - and in that case, if they can afford that - they can afford to buy the tunes!
at what....£1.30 a tune? thats not asking much, at all.
Just what i was about to say. What a ****ing ridiculous comment to make (Revs not your Triquatra)
The majority of people who fileshare im sure are not DJs anyway, but consumers.
And this thread STILL isnt about filesharing. Its about up and coming producers, stay on topic or else!!!! |
| choonland |
as I see it, the original statement is only saying:
"BUY THESE ALBUMS:
Hardcore Underground, Hardcore Addiction, Hardcore Revolution, Pure Hardcore and Crush on Hardcore " |
| djepi |
Maybe there is a solution that might help a little...
Silver - you do a hell of a lot to promote hardcore already but hows about this:
I keep missing loads of good tunes I'd pay for if I knew they existed. How about you putting something perment on the front page of your top 10 tunes of the week (not a chart thing but a quality check of whats out - your opinion is trusted by me!). Something really simple and Flash based (no MP3 or youtube links please - I just can't be bothered).
Like the kind of top 10 tracks on beatport - simple, no messing, no downloads, just streams.
This is a massive site with major potential to do even more for the scene.
Its just too much effort the way things are currently setup to find out whats new/good. Again I can't stress it enough ...something simple! |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by djepi:
Maybe there is a solution that might help a little...
Silver - you do a hell of a lot to promote hardcore already but hows about this:
I keep missing loads of good tunes I'd pay for if I knew they existed. How about you putting something perment on the front page of your top 10 tunes of the week (not a chart thing but a quality check of whats out - your opinion is trusted by me!). Something really simple and Flash based (no MP3 or youtube links please - I just can't be bothered).
Like the kind of top 10 tracks on beatport - simple, no messing, no downloads, just streams.
This is a massive site with major potential to do even more for the scene.
Its just too much effort the way things are currently setup to find out whats new/good. Again I can't stress it enough ...something simple!
He's trying to keep the frontpage updated with Vinyl releases. The bad thing about that is that he only just updates it with releases native to imorecords/hhc.com/hbs store. I wish he'd also announce the monthly updates from Shanty @ Electronica Exposed, even if his store doesn't sell them. This would propably help more of the newcomers Shanty has on his labels.
Also, what happened to Leto's monthly/bi-weekly digital updates? I know that there's been little hardcore released digitally lately, but there's still releases, even if its from "underdog" labels like those on imorecord's imodownload.
Time to get on topic!!!
If I where to support producers, I would still want to support those I like, by buying singles. This way the artists I want to pay for will get their money. I wont be able to do so on Combilations, as my money is shared between artists listed on those albums. If there's music I don't like, why should I support that artist's track? I can't say I'm out of money, but economicly, why should I get an product I don't like? It would be like buying dark chocolate when I know I don't like dark chocolate |
| Future_Shock |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
I must have misread the intial post, becuase i didnt see anywhere any mention of whos to blame for the downfall of the music industry.
Samination said he blamed people who only buy tapepacks/cd packs. I said i blamed filesharing.
It's a fair point, and i find it kind of moronic that you can't see it, because normally you do pick up on things pretty quickly.
Record labels are above everything a business. They need to get money from somewhere to survive. If they don't bring much money in (or none at all) what label is going to take a chance on a new artist? They don't want to be out of pocket - why don't they just continue releasing stuff they KNOW is going to sell - considering as that's what their profession is, and that's how they're getting food on the table?
I fail to see how lack of money in the music industry DOESN'T affect new artists getting signed.
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
Andy: do you really think filesharing THE ONE THING that's hurting hardcore?
I wont deny it's a one of the things in the equation of losses, but it's still not the only one.
is filesharing the reason the bigger labels are picky about the tracks that are going to appear on the CDs? not likely, it will still be pirated.
greed, no money, no real options to buy the music other than importing expensive vinyls, selling labels dont want to sell singles... the list of reason why hardcore's bust is long, but it all roots into, what kind of people are listening to hardcore?
meathed: i was one who blamed people :P
I agree, it's not the only one either, but it is a large reason. There's 100 other reasons, but only a few big ones - that, to me, is the biggest one.
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i didnt actually see any questions :P i saw a statement
Exactly. And a statement totally unrelated to filesharing yet that somehow is where this debate eded up. Strange.
What i got from this statement: it's becoming ever more difficult for up and coming producers to get their tracks on compilations/labels.
The conclusion everyone else seemingly arrived at: Oh Noez!!! Filesharing is killing teh scenez!11!!1ONE!!!
ive already explained how filesharing affects producers. I find it almost comical that you don't think it affects the scene at all... especially considering as people who USED to produce full time are taking on other jobs to cover their expenses. That means less music.
Are you getting the concept yet?
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
Jest?
There was no mention of filesharing though? And i doubt very much that up and coming producers not "making it" in hardcore or making it on compilations is at all connected to filesharing. So i really dont see how you came to that conclusion. Did you even read the original post?
I mentioned filesharing because samination said who he blamed for it being hard for up n comers to break through. I listed what i thought was a big reason to blame.
It's natural flow of conversation. Because i had a reply about filesharing - which was VALID, as i've explain twice now, does not mean i'm at fault for other people commenting on it.
I can say what i want - especially as it was a valid argument - and people can reply. That's their prerogative. Do you KNOW how forums work? Surely you've seen how quickly forums go off topic? Why are you being so anal about THIS one?
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
Jest?
There was no mention of filesharing though? And i doubt very much that up and coming producers not "making it" in hardcore or making it on compilations is at all connected to filesharing. So i really dont see how you came to that conclusion. Did you even read the original post?
I have read it, but I wasnt the one who started the filesharing talk. Did you even my original reply? I just expressed that the labels should have consentrated on consumers (singles) instead of djs (vinyls)
Yes i did and fair point it was actually Influx who started that shite, although i didnt say you were the first to mention filesharing :p . You may not have started the filesharing debate but you did blame a completely unrelated entity also.
I am seriously stupefied that you think filesharing doesn't affect up and comers.
stupefied. I'm lost for words. |
| Triquatra |
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic |
| Meathead |
You dont seem very lost for words tbh.
Im not even bothering toi read your essay after reading the first few lines pal. Im aware that filesharing is a huge problem for hardcore and the music scene in general, but this thread was nothing at all to do with filesharing until you brought it up.
It was, how i read it, about how up and coming producers are finding it increasingly difficult to get their tracks noticed and onto big compilations and labels. Is this the work of nasty p2p users? no. is it the work of tapepacks/cd packs from events? no becuase these producers/DJs arent at these event s to have there tracks recorded and sold on illegally for a start.
The way i read the statement was that big labels and compilations dont want up and comers material. They want established artists. So what are these up and comers to do? Go to labels and compilations that do. How is that a result of filesharing? Big labels and compilations dont want tracks belonging to small time artists out there in the public so they can be fileshared, instead they want Hixxy and Styles' stuff to be fileshared?
I do not see at all why you brought filesharing up, i dont see why samination brought cd packs up and yes youre right i do usually pick up on things quite quickly, but there is no logic whatsoever in what you two are saying. You are taking th initial post and coming up with your own interpritations and causes to go with it and are firing blame off accordingly.
EDIT (i was bored and read the esaay after all)
Please dont patronise me on how forums work mate.
Basically Triquatra is kind of right. I dont see what this topic (initially) had to do with filesharing so why people have turned it into that is my concern. Im not being anal i honestly couldnt care less when a topic goes off from talking about someones love life to then talking about one's love of tomato ketchup on mushy peas and which brands are best for the respective products. It makes no difference to me. How people arrived at that discussion does. If a topic has nothing to do with filesharing and somehow gets onto that topic rather unjustly id like to talk about why. If people have arrived at a conclusion and i see no logical reason how they could do so ill say something about it.
|
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go? |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
You dont seem very lost for words tbh.
Im not even bothering toi read your essay after reading the first few lines pal. Im aware that filesharing is a huge problem for hardcore and the music scene in general, but this thread was nothing at all to do with filesharing until you brought it up.
It was, how i read it, about how up and coming producers are finding it increasingly difficult to get their tracks noticed and onto big compilations and labels. Is this the work of nasty p2p users? no. is it the work of tapepacks/cd packs from events? no becuase these producers/DJs arent at these event s to have there tracks recorded and sold on illegally for a start.
The way i read the statement was that big labels and compilations dont want up and comers material. They want established artists. So what are these up and comers to do? Go to labels and compilations that do. How is that a result of filesharing? Big labels and compilations dont want tracks belonging to small time artists out there in the public so they can be fileshared, instead they want Hixxy and Styles' stuff to be fileshared?
I do not see at all why you brought filesharing up, i dont see why samination brought cd packs up and yes youre right i do usually pick up on things quite quickly, but there is no logic whatsoever in what you two are saying. You are taking th initial post and coming up with your own interpritations and causes to go with it and are firing blame off accordingly.
EDIT (i was bored and read the esaay after all)
Please dont patronise me on how forums work mate.
Basically Triquatra is kind of right. I dont see what this topic (initially) had to do with filesharing so why people have turned it into that is my concern. Im not being anal i honestly couldnt care less when a topic goes off from talking about someones love life to then talking about one's love of tomato ketchup on mushy peas and which brands are best for the respective products. It makes no difference to me. How people arrived at that discussion does. If a topic has nothing to do with filesharing and somehow gets onto that topic rather unjustly id like to talk about why. If people have arrived at a conclusion and i see no logical reason how they could do so ill say something about it.
Maybe me and influx did start flaming to quick, but based on the last line in the original post, the original poster wanted us to discuss how to get up n comming noticed, and solving the problems why they are not noticed.
I don't know the details on how Slipmatt, Hixxy, Demo and co did back in the earlier days, but it does sound like what djkenmasters said, they showed themselfs instead of just hoping to be showned or asked to be showned |
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
|
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
quote:
Originally posted by DJ Revs:
Filesharing has also it's good sides : It allows small DJ's who don't have much money to get tracks for mixing. If you don't have money, and can't buy any tracks, how do you proove your skills ?
im confused....how can they show their skills if they are downloading mp3s?
this suggests to me that they have a timecode based system or cd decks - and in that case, if they can afford that - they can afford to buy the tunes!
at what....£1.30 a tune? thats not asking much, at all.
Just what i was about to say. What a ****ing ridiculous comment to make (Revs not your Triquatra)
The majority of people who fileshare im sure are not DJs anyway, but consumers.
And this thread STILL isnt about filesharing. Its about up and coming producers, stay on topic or else!!!!
yeah revs thats a pretty damn stupid thing to say, especially as you do fileshare full songs..
|
| Future_Shock |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
i get aggressive when people tell me points are invalid. Which you did.
Then when i actually took the time to explain it, you told me you didn't even read it.
I've explained my view on how filesharing really DOES in fact, affect up and comers. Especially considering as i've had some of my tracks fileshared and it almost cost me a vinyl signing. So don't tell me it has nothing to do with it, when you really don't know the perspective of an up and comer, yeah?
I don't have anything against you at all, i actually think you're a solid bloke, but you instantly dismissing my point without understanding it makes YOU a knob, not me.
I do apologize for being condescending though. |
| Gammer |
I blame the economy |
| MAtRiCks |
It's all Gammer's fault |
| Yoko |
My 2 cents referring to the original topic:
The area I live in is dominated by the rap/rock/pop cut that has consumed America. The closest I can get to any form of electronica is through stores that sell CD compilations and a few albums released by artists. Not cheap but not expensive, about the same price for other genre music. Its only that its all Club/Dance stuff, no real hardcore/hardstyle/gabber/ect . . . Its the shit they play in clubs, mostly dance anthems from Tiesto/Darude/PVD/Buuren/Corsten/ect . . . Don't get me wrong, I fking love Corsten production and Buuren on the ASOT . . . but down here in the lower part of the states, its "if its not on the radio, its stupid" mentality. I honestly believe I am one of 12 people in the Columbia area that knows what Hardcore is. And probably 1 out of 100 in the state with 4 million people. Do you see my big problem?
NOTE: There are record shops around the state but all they carry is what DJs down here use, the rap/rock/pop shit. Even the special orders don't have any hardcore/hardstyle on them. But go over the Texas Houston/Dallas area or up to the Northeast in Mass/NYC/Canada and both are full of hardcore DJs / Events. But do I really want to drive 1000+ miles for an event? NO.
Another 2 cents: I won 4 CDs from the competitons hosted by HappyHardcore.com, received only 2 due to errors but that was 2-3 years ago so meh . . . anyways, thats the only hardcore I have - Hardcore Nation 3 and a Helter Skelter Hardcore mix. Since the stores around here don't carry anything remotely that you could call Hardcore, I had to look online for it. Amazon.com has the CD compliations that I want, such as some SB stuff where he gives the DJ Friendly tracks on CD 2 and other CDs back in the early 2000's when Hardcore was GOOD. Hardcore today is too much ClubExtreme style stuff. Too much vocals, no true instrumental tracks, I know there are some, but not like there used to be. Its all singing and shit now.
Anyways, looking online for CD Compilations and Albums they are about $40-50 USD just to order because they are "IMPORT" status . . . when Amazon UK carries them for a lower price but I have to use Amazon US >__> Anyways, have not really gotten into digital downloads yet, mainly because I don't know what songs are what. Like right now I'm listening to some old mixes that Silver sent me. The tracks on here are amazing and I would love to DJ with them. But I don't have a clue as to what the IDs are and how to get them. |
| Yoko |
Oh, and Filesharing . . . sure it has some impact but it is not why the industry has gone down like it has. I fileshare for samples and such in my production, other than that not much. But like Sami said, stuff that is out of production, share that stuff up, who are you stealing money from when the people that put it out 5 years ago went out of business 2 years ago? Who? The artist's royalities? Nope, those are done by the label, and if its out of business, then tough luck. |
| Meathead |
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
i get aggressive when people tell me points are invalid. Which you did.
Then when i actually took the time to explain it, you told me you didn't even read it.
I've explained my view on how filesharing really DOES in fact, affect up and comers. Especially considering as i've had some of my tracks fileshared and it almost cost me a vinyl signing. So don't tell me it has nothing to do with it, when you really don't know the perspective of an up and comer, yeah?
I don't have anything against you at all, i actually think you're a solid bloke, but you instantly dismissing my point without understanding it makes YOU a knob, not me.
I do apologize for being condescending though.
I said the point was invalid becuase imo it was. Youre right i dont have the perspective of an up and comer so why not tell me WHY the point IS valid? If someone is in the wrong educate them as to why. I believed it wasnt valid, i didnt see a logical connection so why not fill me in rather than just tell me im wrong and it is valid without actually telling me why? If you look again i did actually read your post in its entirety. Im sorry that filesharing has already had its impact on you, genuinely, it sucks. But me dismissing your point without understanding it fully (which i had no way of understanding fully at first) doesnt make me a nob. It makes me ignorant to what is going definitely, but not a nob. I accept your apology like i sadi you seem like a decent bloke and i hope you accept mine, here goes. You have a valid point, filesharing is an issue, a big one, it may not be the only cause for labels/compilations ignoring up and coming producers but its there so im sorry. And sorry for calling you a nob. |
| Future_Shock |
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
i get aggressive when people tell me points are invalid. Which you did.
Then when i actually took the time to explain it, you told me you didn't even read it.
I've explained my view on how filesharing really DOES in fact, affect up and comers. Especially considering as i've had some of my tracks fileshared and it almost cost me a vinyl signing. So don't tell me it has nothing to do with it, when you really don't know the perspective of an up and comer, yeah?
I don't have anything against you at all, i actually think you're a solid bloke, but you instantly dismissing my point without understanding it makes YOU a knob, not me.
I do apologize for being condescending though.
I said the point was invalid becuase imo it was. Youre right i dont have the perspective of an up and comer so why not tell me WHY the point IS valid? If someone is in the wrong educate them as to why. I believed it wasnt valid, i didnt see a logical connection so why not fill me in rather than just tell me im wrong and it is valid without actually telling me why? If you look again i did actually read your post in its entirety. Im sorry that filesharing has already had its impact on you, genuinely, it sucks. But me dismissing your point without understanding it fully (which i had no way of understanding fully at first) doesnt make me a nob. It makes me ignorant to what is going definitely, but not a nob. I accept your apology like i sadi you seem like a decent bloke and i hope you accept mine, here goes. You have a valid point, filesharing is an issue, a big one, it may not be the only cause for labels/compilations ignoring up and coming producers but its there so im sorry. And sorry for calling you a nob.
Thing is man, i did explain it to you... Albeit in a very condescending way, but i did. Probably shouldn't have explained it in the tone i did, but the information was there :)
My post was in complete relevance to labels ignoring up and comers because they're making such minimal profit from their own tracks (an established name) that there is no point taking a chance on a newbie. When most large vinyl labels are producing hardcore for a profession, it's not in their best interest to do anything that won't push their label further. With the current finaincial situation in regards to hardcore, an up and comer won't do this - therefore a lot of people get overlooked.
If there was a lot more money in it and big labels werent SCRAPING by, then there would be no harm in signing a no-name. And let's be honest, filesharing is a BIG reason why there isn't so much money in hardcore anymore - and music in general.
I know there will be some responses saying "it shouldn't be about te money anyway" but labels are a business, and businesses need money to stay afloat. Fact of reality.
The argument that started about filesharing and the music industry and general and about it "killing teh scene" wasn't started by me. JUst because i mentioned the word "filesharing" does not mean i'm responsible for what everyone says after my post.
I guess that's all i have to say about it. |
| Eufeion |
I'll tell you what it is....
It's people like myself, Darwin, Fracus & co what work n work to try an bring new music to this industry but not given the light of day for event bookings to air our music enough.
I for one have a handfull of booking for the entire year!!
Kinda sux when you put so much effot into making music for a scene where a lot of new people only see the day in day out headliners at big events. |
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
i get aggressive when people tell me points are invalid. Which you did.
Then when i actually took the time to explain it, you told me you didn't even read it.
I've explained my view on how filesharing really DOES in fact, affect up and comers. Especially considering as i've had some of my tracks fileshared and it almost cost me a vinyl signing. So don't tell me it has nothing to do with it, when you really don't know the perspective of an up and comer, yeah?
I don't have anything against you at all, i actually think you're a solid bloke, but you instantly dismissing my point without understanding it makes YOU a knob, not me.
I do apologize for being condescending though.
I said the point was invalid becuase imo it was. Youre right i dont have the perspective of an up and comer so why not tell me WHY the point IS valid? If someone is in the wrong educate them as to why. I believed it wasnt valid, i didnt see a logical connection so why not fill me in rather than just tell me im wrong and it is valid without actually telling me why? If you look again i did actually read your post in its entirety. Im sorry that filesharing has already had its impact on you, genuinely, it sucks. But me dismissing your point without understanding it fully (which i had no way of understanding fully at first) doesnt make me a nob. It makes me ignorant to what is going definitely, but not a nob. I accept your apology like i sadi you seem like a decent bloke and i hope you accept mine, here goes. You have a valid point, filesharing is an issue, a big one, it may not be the only cause for labels/compilations ignoring up and coming producers but its there so im sorry. And sorry for calling you a nob.
Thing is man, i did explain it to you... Albeit in a very condescending way, but i did. Probably shouldn't have explained it in the tone i did, but the information was there :)
My post was in complete relevance to labels ignoring up and comers because they're making such minimal profit from their own tracks (an established name) that there is no point taking a chance on a newbie. When most large vinyl labels are producing hardcore for a profession, it's not in their best interest to do anything that won't push their label further. With the current finaincial situation in regards to hardcore, an up and comer won't do this - therefore a lot of people get overlooked.
If there was a lot more money in it and big labels werent SCRAPING by, then there would be no harm in signing a no-name. And let's be honest, filesharing is a BIG reason why there isn't so much money in hardcore anymore - and music in general.
I know there will be some responses saying "it shouldn't be about te money anyway" but labels are a business, and businesses need money to stay afloat. Fact of reality.
The argument that started about filesharing and the music industry and general and about it "killing teh scene" wasn't started by me. JUst because i mentioned the word "filesharing" does not mean i'm responsible for what everyone says after my post.
I guess that's all i have to say about it.
there's a torr3nt on one site containing a big chunk of scott browns discography.
10,000 downloads...
I think filesharing has a slight impact because that'd have been like £8,000 in revenue for scott if they tracks were being sold at 79p or whatever each.. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
i get aggressive when people tell me points are invalid. Which you did.
Then when i actually took the time to explain it, you told me you didn't even read it.
I've explained my view on how filesharing really DOES in fact, affect up and comers. Especially considering as i've had some of my tracks fileshared and it almost cost me a vinyl signing. So don't tell me it has nothing to do with it, when you really don't know the perspective of an up and comer, yeah?
I don't have anything against you at all, i actually think you're a solid bloke, but you instantly dismissing my point without understanding it makes YOU a knob, not me.
I do apologize for being condescending though.
I said the point was invalid becuase imo it was. Youre right i dont have the perspective of an up and comer so why not tell me WHY the point IS valid? If someone is in the wrong educate them as to why. I believed it wasnt valid, i didnt see a logical connection so why not fill me in rather than just tell me im wrong and it is valid without actually telling me why? If you look again i did actually read your post in its entirety. Im sorry that filesharing has already had its impact on you, genuinely, it sucks. But me dismissing your point without understanding it fully (which i had no way of understanding fully at first) doesnt make me a nob. It makes me ignorant to what is going definitely, but not a nob. I accept your apology like i sadi you seem like a decent bloke and i hope you accept mine, here goes. You have a valid point, filesharing is an issue, a big one, it may not be the only cause for labels/compilations ignoring up and coming producers but its there so im sorry. And sorry for calling you a nob.
Thing is man, i did explain it to you... Albeit in a very condescending way, but i did. Probably shouldn't have explained it in the tone i did, but the information was there :)
My post was in complete relevance to labels ignoring up and comers because they're making such minimal profit from their own tracks (an established name) that there is no point taking a chance on a newbie. When most large vinyl labels are producing hardcore for a profession, it's not in their best interest to do anything that won't push their label further. With the current finaincial situation in regards to hardcore, an up and comer won't do this - therefore a lot of people get overlooked.
If there was a lot more money in it and big labels werent SCRAPING by, then there would be no harm in signing a no-name. And let's be honest, filesharing is a BIG reason why there isn't so much money in hardcore anymore - and music in general.
I know there will be some responses saying "it shouldn't be about te money anyway" but labels are a business, and businesses need money to stay afloat. Fact of reality.
The argument that started about filesharing and the music industry and general and about it "killing teh scene" wasn't started by me. JUst because i mentioned the word "filesharing" does not mean i'm responsible for what everyone says after my post.
I guess that's all i have to say about it.
there's a torr3nt on one site containing a big chunk of scott browns discography.
10,000 downloads...
I think filesharing has a slight impact because that'd have been like £8,000 in revenue for scott if they tracks were being sold at 79p or whatever each..
That revenue doesn't EXIST! since Scott Brown have stopped dealing with digital downloads, how can you say he'd earn that at all? |
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Andy_Influx:
quote:
Originally posted by Meathead:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DjTriquatra:
i think what meathead is more or less trying to get at, (and i agree with him) is that this is turning too much into a "should filesharing be legal, what do we think we should be allowed to file share" *yawn* topic
not quite, it was just mentioned, but it's propably the reason why i didnt want to mention it anymore.
Andy_Influx, Isn't once enough? I'd understand it if you actually did said it in different posts, and he kept saying that, but all in the same go?
The man has a point. Influx: Why do you set out your post so that by the time you get to your second point youre assuming ive read the first, before youve actually posted it? Makes it seem very patronising, like im still not getting the message and youre having to drive it home repeatedly like your talking to a child with down-syndrome who stumbled upon a computer and smashed his fist on the keyboard, which im not really. That aswell as the explaining in lamest terms how a forum works makes you come accross as a bit of a belittling nob in some of your posts. Ive seen that you are actually an ok bloke, you wished me a happy birthday a few eeks back which i was greatful for, so i know youre not in fact a nob. But you dont come accoss too well when you set your posts out like that.
i get aggressive when people tell me points are invalid. Which you did.
Then when i actually took the time to explain it, you told me you didn't even read it.
I've explained my view on how filesharing really DOES in fact, affect up and comers. Especially considering as i've had some of my tracks fileshared and it almost cost me a vinyl signing. So don't tell me it has nothing to do with it, when you really don't know the perspective of an up and comer, yeah?
I don't have anything against you at all, i actually think you're a solid bloke, but you instantly dismissing my point without understanding it makes YOU a knob, not me.
I do apologize for being condescending though.
I said the point was invalid becuase imo it was. Youre right i dont have the perspective of an up and comer so why not tell me WHY the point IS valid? If someone is in the wrong educate them as to why. I believed it wasnt valid, i didnt see a logical connection so why not fill me in rather than just tell me im wrong and it is valid without actually telling me why? If you look again i did actually read your post in its entirety. Im sorry that filesharing has already had its impact on you, genuinely, it sucks. But me dismissing your point without understanding it fully (which i had no way of understanding fully at first) doesnt make me a nob. It makes me ignorant to what is going definitely, but not a nob. I accept your apology like i sadi you seem like a decent bloke and i hope you accept mine, here goes. You have a valid point, filesharing is an issue, a big one, it may not be the only cause for labels/compilations ignoring up and coming producers but its there so im sorry. And sorry for calling you a nob.
Thing is man, i did explain it to you... Albeit in a very condescending way, but i did. Probably shouldn't have explained it in the tone i did, but the information was there :)
My post was in complete relevance to labels ignoring up and comers because they're making such minimal profit from their own tracks (an established name) that there is no point taking a chance on a newbie. When most large vinyl labels are producing hardcore for a profession, it's not in their best interest to do anything that won't push their label further. With the current finaincial situation in regards to hardcore, an up and comer won't do this - therefore a lot of people get overlooked.
If there was a lot more money in it and big labels werent SCRAPING by, then there would be no harm in signing a no-name. And let's be honest, filesharing is a BIG reason why there isn't so much money in hardcore anymore - and music in general.
I know there will be some responses saying "it shouldn't be about te money anyway" but labels are a business, and businesses need money to stay afloat. Fact of reality.
The argument that started about filesharing and the music industry and general and about it "killing teh scene" wasn't started by me. JUst because i mentioned the word "filesharing" does not mean i'm responsible for what everyone says after my post.
I guess that's all i have to say about it.
there's a torr3nt on one site containing a big chunk of scott browns discography.
10,000 downloads...
I think filesharing has a slight impact because that'd have been like £8,000 in revenue for scott if they tracks were being sold at 79p or whatever each..
That revenue doesn't EXIST! since Scott Brown have stopped dealing with digital downloads, how can you say he'd earn that at all?
If they were bought legally, he'd have made that much revenue..
do you even know what revenue means??? |
| Samination |
If Scott Brown had a legal site for downloading his song, then he would have earned those £8.000 for those 100.000 downloads.
But since he doesn't have one, he haven't earned any.
How can he have lost revenue if he's not selling any digital downloads?
To my understand, revenue is the winnings you get from incomes subracted with costs.
so, how does this equation go ->
£0 income - £0 expenses = £-8000 revenue?
£0 in income since he haven't sold any of the tracks, and £0 in expenses since he didnt do the work of putting them online.
Artists and labels need to think anew. You can't keep on doing the same thing all the time. You can't force us consumers to do what you wan't because you want to stay in the same way always. People have always evolved, why shouldn't buisness plans evolve too?
I salut Luna-C, the freedom fighter.
... maybe the mods should just delete everyone's posts excepts kenamasters & Eufi's |
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
If Scott Brown had a legal site for downloading his song, then he would have earned those £8.000 for those 100.000 downloads.
But since he doesn't have one, he haven't earned any.
How can he have lost revenue if he's not selling any digital downloads?
To my understand, revenue is the winnings you get from incomes subracted with costs.
so, how does this equation go ->
£0 income - £0 expenses = £-8000 revenue?
£0 in income since he haven't sold any of the tracks, and £0 in expenses since he didnt do the work of putting them online.
Artists and labels need to think anew. You can't keep on doing the same thing all the time. You can't force us consumers to do what you wan't because you want to stay in the same way always. People have always evolved, why shouldn't buisness plans evolve too?
I salut Luna-C, the freedom fighter.
... maybe the mods should just delete everyone's posts excepts kenamasters & Eufi's
You are referring to profit... Revenue is the money you get in only with NOTHING subtracted.
and is this not scott browns store? http://www.evolutionrecords.co.uk/
If scott brown can make money from his tracks, but isn't, then its opprtunity cost, whereby, he's losing money that he could have earnt.
In fact, most songs are sold at £2, meaning its £20,000 he could have made if they were bought legally.. |
| Nav |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
In fact, most songs are sold at £2, meaning its £20,000 he could have made if they were bought legally..
I can safely tell you that Scott Brown has probably made more from that ******* than if he had a digital download store. Know why? Because if he had a digital store, a few people would buy it, and the rest would leak onto ******* sites.
However, since people are downloading the mp3s, they are hearing the music. If they hear the music and like what they hear, they go out and BUY it, meaning on a CD or on Vinyl. However, I seriously doubt that EVERY user who downloaded the ******* downloaded EVERY track or even SOME of the tracks, and I doubt even more than everyone who downloaded a track would have bought it instead had a download been available.
This argument of calculating losses has been going on for years. The RIAA and other copyright industries are incorrect: artists do not lose the full sum of all the files people have downloaded. I can safely say that without filesharing, I would not have put near as much money into Hardcore as I have today. |
| Jimouk |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
If Scott Brown had a legal site for downloading his song, then he would have earned those £8.000 for those 100.000 downloads.
But since he doesn't have one, he haven't earned any.
How can he have lost revenue if he's not selling any digital downloads?
To my understand, revenue is the winnings you get from incomes subracted with costs.
so, how does this equation go ->
£0 income - £0 expenses = £-8000 revenue?
£0 in income since he haven't sold any of the tracks, and £0 in expenses since he didnt do the work of putting them online.
Artists and labels need to think anew. You can't keep on doing the same thing all the time. You can't force us consumers to do what you wan't because you want to stay in the same way always. People have always evolved, why shouldn't buisness plans evolve too?
I salut Luna-C, the freedom fighter.
... maybe the mods should just delete everyone's posts excepts kenamasters & Eufi's
You are referring to profit... Revenue is the money you get in only with NOTHING subtracted.
and is this not scott browns store? http://www.evolutionrecords.co.uk/
If scott brown can make money from his tracks, but isn't, then its opprtunity cost, whereby, he's losing money that he could have earnt.
In fact, most songs are sold at £2, meaning its £20,000 he could have made if they were bought legally..
So Scott Brown needs that £20,000 to continue producing? Right?
|
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Jimouk:
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
If Scott Brown had a legal site for downloading his song, then he would have earned those £8.000 for those 100.000 downloads.
But since he doesn't have one, he haven't earned any.
How can he have lost revenue if he's not selling any digital downloads?
To my understand, revenue is the winnings you get from incomes subracted with costs.
so, how does this equation go ->
£0 income - £0 expenses = £-8000 revenue?
£0 in income since he haven't sold any of the tracks, and £0 in expenses since he didnt do the work of putting them online.
Artists and labels need to think anew. You can't keep on doing the same thing all the time. You can't force us consumers to do what you wan't because you want to stay in the same way always. People have always evolved, why shouldn't buisness plans evolve too?
I salut Luna-C, the freedom fighter.
... maybe the mods should just delete everyone's posts excepts kenamasters & Eufi's
You are referring to profit... Revenue is the money you get in only with NOTHING subtracted.
and is this not scott browns store? http://www.evolutionrecords.co.uk/
If scott brown can make money from his tracks, but isn't, then its opprtunity cost, whereby, he's losing money that he could have earnt.
In fact, most songs are sold at £2, meaning its £20,000 he could have made if they were bought legally..
So Scott Brown needs that £20,000 to continue producing? Right?
who suggested that? I'm sure he's just pissed off.. I would be...
and i doubt people would download a huge chunk of his music, then buy them legally...
once an illegal downloader, always an illegal downloader
a cheetah can't change it's spots
can't teach a dog new tricks
water under the bridge
dont leap before you look
rollercoaster ride
... i forgot my point quite a while ago... |
| Nav |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
and i doubt people would download a huge chunk of his music, then buy them legally...
I doubt that they would buy ANY had they not stumbled upon that illegal download. |
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Nav:
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
and i doubt people would download a huge chunk of his music, then buy them legally...
I doubt that they would buy ANY had they not stumbled upon that illegal download.
well, there are different methods of discovery, but you dont get illegal downloaders suddenly decide to use actual mp3 stores rather than torr3nt..
i dunno really.. its not my area of expertise at all.. all i know, is that it has a large effect on producers, while not devastating.. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
You are referring to profit... Revenue is the money you get in only with NOTHING subtracted.
and is this not scott browns store? http://www.evolutionrecords.co.uk/
If scott brown can make money from his tracks, but isn't, then its opprtunity cost, whereby, he's losing money that he could have earnt.
In fact, most songs are sold at £2, meaning its £20,000 he could have made if they were bought legally..
I might have gotten that backwords, thank you.
And yes, Scott Brown has a mp3 store on his site, but it contains just about 1% of his total backcatalaogue, and it was last updated late 2005. If We indid counted those from the downloads, even if they're £2 each (which is overpay for 192kbps nowadays), it would still not get close to those £8000 in loss
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
once an illegal downloader, always an illegal downloader
... i forgot my point quite a while ago...
Right, so I don't spend atleast £2000 on Hardcore yearly? naah, I just download my hardcore illegally, because I started out illegal, i will always be illegal... wtf?
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
well, there are different methods of discovery, but you dont get illegal downloaders suddenly decide to use actual mp3 stores rather than torr3nt..
i dunno really.. its not my area of expertise at all.. all i know, is that it has a large effect on producers, while not devastating..
If you don't have any expertise in the area, why are making such big claims that those who download illegally wouldnt buy if they can. what do you think happened to me?
Not many, but i do atleast know of 2 who also started out illegally but ended up legal (more legal than me to quote), and one of them are even more known than me |
| acidfluxxbass |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
You are referring to profit... Revenue is the money you get in only with NOTHING subtracted.
and is this not scott browns store? http://www.evolutionrecords.co.uk/
If scott brown can make money from his tracks, but isn't, then its opprtunity cost, whereby, he's losing money that he could have earnt.
In fact, most songs are sold at £2, meaning its £20,000 he could have made if they were bought legally..
I might have gotten that backwords, thank you.
And yes, Scott Brown has a mp3 store on his site, but it contains just about 1% of his total backcatalaogue, and it was last updated late 2005. If We indid counted those from the downloads, even if they're £2 each (which is overpay for 192kbps nowadays), it would still not get close to those £8000 in loss
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
once an illegal downloader, always an illegal downloader
... i forgot my point quite a while ago...
Right, so I don't spend atleast £2000 on Hardcore yearly? naah, I just download my hardcore illegally, because I started out illegal, i will always be illegal... wtf?
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
well, there are different methods of discovery, but you dont get illegal downloaders suddenly decide to use actual mp3 stores rather than torr3nt..
i dunno really.. its not my area of expertise at all.. all i know, is that it has a large effect on producers, while not devastating..
If you don't have any expertise in the area, why are making such big claims that those who download illegally wouldnt buy if they can. what do you think happened to me?
Not many, but i do atleast know of 2 who also started out illegally but ended up legal (more legal than me to quote), and one of them are even more known than me
but the vast majority of of people won't change. they aren't dj's or are that loyal to the scene. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by acidfluxxbass:
but the vast majority of of people won't change. they aren't dj's or are that loyal to the scene.
Who are actually loyal?
Those who go raves?
those who buys combilations?
those who buys singles?
I dont know if I said it on this thread (I've discussed this thread on the IRC chat), but Hardcore's got it all wrong. It should be about the music, not the guys who mixes the tunes. Nowadays it feels like people don't care who makes the music, just that Darren Styles is mixing it (which basicly limits his choice of records to 4 people :P). That's one of the reason why newcomers dont get signed. |
| DeezeNuts |
If it wasn't for filesharing, some people would have never even known that this genre exists.
That's just how it is to some people in the US - it is UK oriented after all. |
| Mortis |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
but Hardcore's got it all wrong. It should be about the music, not the guys who mixes the tunes.
Well said. That's the way it used to be and that's the way it still should be. You go to an event to hear the music not to stand and stare at the DJ box. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by Mortis:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
but Hardcore's got it all wrong. It should be about the music, not the guys who mixes the tunes.
Well said. That's the way it used to be and that's the way it still should be. You go to an event to hear the music not to stand and stare at the DJ box.
I actually meant more like singles vs combilation.
Artists should be encouraged to release more songs, not just to feature them on combilations. |
|
|
