Banana's Beard Emporium - The Off-Topic Chat Thread

So next time you go to Waterstones, you go in and take a book? But it's okay, because you're sharing?

Old person opinion? No, the opinion of someone who works in the industry and sees day in day out the spectacularly negative impact it has on bringing on new music.

Thanks for the arrogant, idiotic young person opinion though.

 

To be fair it is undeniably different now. Our money doesn't go as far, there are no jobs and students have ridiculous debt.

 

That is true Joe, and yes, I agree. But the current situation is seriously stifling the ability of new, innovative artists to break through.

 

Most of the music I own, I got for free when I was younger. These days I feel far too guilty to do that and I buy every new album I get now, and am buying some albums I'd already got for free - I like owning physical copies

 

Students have always had debt Joe, and there's always been unemployment. Albums are actually cheaper to purchase now (and hell, it's SO much nicer having a physical product by the way) than they were when I was at university. I do take your point about how far money goes though. The sense of entitlement is grating more than anything.

 

Not really the same, if music was 10-20 pence a song then maybe I'd consider it. I can buy a book on amazon for than 50p so that example,you gave is pretty irrelevant to me.

 

Shame Spotify doesn't seem to be the answer to the problem. The whole idea of the product being free for the consumer and paid for by advertisers works so well in some markets but apparently artists make **** cuts from Spotify.

 

A (physical) book will cost on average £5-10 for a paperback, the same as an album. If you're able to buy a book for 50p, then it's hardly a new, popular book. A song that's currently charting will generally cost 79-99p. So yes. It's pretty much the same and entirely relevant.

Are you aware of how much it costs to produce an album vs how much it costs to make a book by the way?

 

Spotify/YouTube revenue is a joke Joe, sadly. The problem is, the way it's being countered (well it's not being countered, it's being dented, though it's a drop in the ocean comparatively) is by massive hikes in live ticket prices. So by stealing music (and yes, it's stealing) you're pricing yourselves out of seeing your favourite acts live.

 

Blame the consumer for having **** taste: the sooner people stop buying albums of the likes of One Direction and turn to better, more indie artists, the better.

 

I'm not going to be buying music anytime soon, so there's really no point in lecturing me about it.
My original question was about Mac computers and internet security.

 

Your sense of entitlement is admirable. Well done.

 

To be fair, I downloaded Midnight Memories a while back....it's not a bad listen.

 

Cheers.

 

No. You see that's the issue - because people steal music, the record companies (or what's left of them) are crippled, and therefore unable to take risks on alternative or innovative artists. Hence why an artist will pretty much never get signed without X number of Facebook 'likes' or Twitter followers etc etc. The majors will ONLY sign artists that are fully packaged up and they know will bring them a pretty much instant return. Hence why the safe bets are the X Factor kids, or acts that are the same or similar to what is selling right now. It's low-hanging fruit.

Therefore, for instance, if a new artist, let's call him.....oh.....I dunno....David Bowie/Jimi Hendrix comes along with something way off kilter to the current norm, whereas because of the obvious talent at hand, in days gone by the label could afford a risk and put money into what is termed 'artist development'. They could take the hit if the first album didn't sell bucketloads because they would have a three album development strategy in place. That does not happen now. You have to sell right off the bat, or you're dropped. Ergo, no dangerous experimentation, no innovation. That's too risky.

So basically you're left with the status quo (no, not that one!) There will be exceptions to this, and it's a slightly simplified way of putting the situation out there, but that's the reality. By stealing music, you're making your own beige musical beds to lie in I'm afraid.

 

Sooooo you're saying I should un-like One Direction on Facebook?

 

lets not go mental

 

Same with piracy and the film industry then. Think the gun-loving Charlton Heston once said that the problem with films being an art form is that it's a business and the problem with films being a business is that it's an art form.

 

Any male aged between 16-25 would give literally anything to be a member of One Direction.