What is it people fail to understand about Chinese Democracy?

[peter7411226]

I would like to think that in the future, the kids, will discover GNR and Chinese Democracy much in the way kids today are discovering The Beatles, Zepplin, Black Sabbath, the Doors and Hendrix.

In the future, it will be more about the music, and not so much the bullshit. Then Chinese Democracy will be appreciated as it deserves.

i hear beatles had to wear the uniform to look clean. jimmy page's said zep was alternative  at the time.
pop idols have been always safe bets and marketable for the industry.

See but that was my point. When people illegally download music they take away revenue that otherwise couldve been used to take chances on bands that arent "mainstream" or safe bets. It would allow them to look outside of the box. With labels strapped fundswise of course theyre going to turn to the safe bets to make money.

So let me make sure I have this correct. You're saying that illegal downloading is what forces Fortus to play with Rihanna?

Money taken away from the band would force them to take side gigs like I said before. Im sure only Axl is set for life in the band. Also Fortus doesnt have any songwriting creidits on CD which means that he gets considerable less than the people who have publishing rights on the album.

Ok. I just wanted to make sure that it's all because of those terrible illegal downloaders. I wanted to be sure that it's not because or choice or the fact that GN'R haven't played live in over two years. Got it.

In none of my posts did I ever say that that was the sole reason. Its a huge part of it though. Major artists sign distribution deals with major outlets ( walmart, best buy etc...) to recoup some of the money that they will lose from the illegal downloading. To think that illegal downloading hasnt hurt the industry as well as the artists is naive.

[russtcb]

I would like to think that in the future, the kids, will discover GNR and Chinese Democracy much in the way kids today are discovering The Beatles, Zepplin, Black Sabbath, the Doors and Hendrix.

In the future, it will be more about the music, and not so much the bullshit. Then Chinese Democracy will be appreciated as it deserves.

i hear beatles had to wear the uniform to look clean. jimmy page's said zep was alternative  at the time.
pop idols have been always safe bets and marketable for the industry.

See but that was my point. When people illegally download music they take away revenue that otherwise couldve been used to take chances on bands that arent "mainstream" or safe bets. It would allow them to look outside of the box. With labels strapped fundswise of course theyre going to turn to the safe bets to make money.

So let me make sure I have this correct. You're saying that illegal downloading is what forces Fortus to play with Rihanna?

Money taken away from the band would force them to take side gigs like I said before. Im sure only Axl is set for life in the band. Also Fortus doesnt have any songwriting creidits on CD which means that he gets considerable less than the people who have publishing rights on the album.

Ok. I just wanted to make sure that it's all because of those terrible illegal downloaders. I wanted to be sure that it's not because or choice or the fact that GN'R haven't played live in over two years. Got it.

In none of my posts did I ever say that that was the sole reason. Its a huge part of it though. Major artists sign distribution deals with major outlets ( walmart, best buy etc...) to recoup some of the money that they will lose from the illegal downloading. To think that illegal downloading hasnt hurt the industry as well as the artists is naive.

Right. And in none of my posts did I say it didn't harm the industry. Many people know how the industry works so I don't need any information on that front. My point was and still is, that downloading didn't make the industry what it is today. Record labels lust and need to rip people off just because they could did it. Does illegal downloading contribute? Ofcourse. But I maintain that the reason people do it by and large is because the labels brought it on themselves.

[peter7411226]

I would like to think that in the future, the kids, will discover GNR and Chinese Democracy much in the way kids today are discovering The Beatles, Zepplin, Black Sabbath, the Doors and Hendrix.

In the future, it will be more about the music, and not so much the bullshit. Then Chinese Democracy will be appreciated as it deserves.

i hear beatles had to wear the uniform to look clean. jimmy page's said zep was alternative  at the time.
pop idols have been always safe bets and marketable for the industry.

See but that was my point. When people illegally download music they take away revenue that otherwise couldve been used to take chances on bands that arent "mainstream" or safe bets. It would allow them to look outside of the box. With labels strapped fundswise of course theyre going to turn to the safe bets to make money.

So let me make sure I have this correct. You're saying that illegal downloading is what forces Fortus to play with Rihanna?

Money taken away from the band would force them to take side gigs like I said before. Im sure only Axl is set for life in the band. Also Fortus doesnt have any songwriting creidits on CD which means that he gets considerable less than the people who have publishing rights on the album.

Ok. I just wanted to make sure that it's all because of those terrible illegal downloaders. I wanted to be sure that it's not because or choice or the fact that GN'R haven't played live in over two years. Got it.

In none of my posts did I ever say that that was the sole reason. Its a huge part of it though. Major artists sign distribution deals with major outlets ( walmart, best buy etc...) to recoup some of the money that they will lose from the illegal downloading. To think that illegal downloading hasnt hurt the industry as well as the artists is naive.

Right. And in none of my posts did I say it didn't harm the industry. Many people know how the industry works so I don't need any information on that front. My point was and still is, that downloading didn't make the industry what it is today. Record labels lust and need to rip people off just because they could did it. Does illegal downloading contribute? Ofcourse. But I maintain that the reason people do it by and large is because the labels brought it on themselves.

Where is this lust and ripping people off that you are talking about?  If your talking about cd prices being high lets put it into perspective. With inflation prices on everything goes up. Music just like everything else around us goes up in price. But you gotta say the price of a cd over the last five years if anything has gone down. I remember when all cd's in the 90's and early 2000's were 15 bucks and over here in the states. Now you can buy one for like 12 bucks at best buy. I wouldnt necessarily call this a ripoff. Now saying that some people may disagree with me about prices being too high but does that give people the right to illegally download something that so many people put alot of hard work into? I guess alot of people see it as "screwing the man". Your also screwing the bands. How does this equate to the topic? I think CD didnt sell as well as anticipated because many people just got it for free. The one place where I blame the labels is that they shouldve seen this coming and had more tools in place to protect the artists. After all we are there meal tickets. 

[russtcb]

I would like to think that in the future, the kids, will discover GNR and Chinese Democracy much in the way kids today are discovering The Beatles, Zepplin, Black Sabbath, the Doors and Hendrix.

In the future, it will be more about the music, and not so much the bullshit. Then Chinese Democracy will be appreciated as it deserves.

i hear beatles had to wear the uniform to look clean. jimmy page's said zep was alternative  at the time.
pop idols have been always safe bets and marketable for the industry.

See but that was my point. When people illegally download music they take away revenue that otherwise couldve been used to take chances on bands that arent "mainstream" or safe bets. It would allow them to look outside of the box. With labels strapped fundswise of course theyre going to turn to the safe bets to make money.

So let me make sure I have this correct. You're saying that illegal downloading is what forces Fortus to play with Rihanna?

Money taken away from the band would force them to take side gigs like I said before. Im sure only Axl is set for life in the band. Also Fortus doesnt have any songwriting creidits on CD which means that he gets considerable less than the people who have publishing rights on the album.

Ok. I just wanted to make sure that it's all because of those terrible illegal downloaders. I wanted to be sure that it's not because or choice or the fact that GN'R haven't played live in over two years. Got it.

In none of my posts did I ever say that that was the sole reason. Its a huge part of it though. Major artists sign distribution deals with major outlets ( walmart, best buy etc...) to recoup some of the money that they will lose from the illegal downloading. To think that illegal downloading hasnt hurt the industry as well as the artists is naive.

Right. And in none of my posts did I say it didn't harm the industry. Many people know how the industry works so I don't need any information on that front. My point was and still is, that downloading didn't make the industry what it is today. Record labels lust and need to rip people off just because they could did it. Does illegal downloading contribute? Ofcourse. But I maintain that the reason people do it by and large is because the labels brought it on themselves.

Where is this lust and ripping people off that you are talking about?  If your talking about cd prices being high lets put it into perspective. With inflation prices on everything goes up. Music just like everything else around us goes up in price. But you gotta say the price of a cd over the last five years if anything has gone down. I remember when all cd's in the 90's and early 2000's were 15 bucks and over here in the states. Now you can buy one for like 12 bucks at best buy. I wouldnt necessarily call this a ripoff. Now saying that some people may disagree with me about prices being too high but does that give people the right to illegally download something that so many people put alot of hard work into? I guess alot of people see it as "screwing the man". Your also screwing the bands. How does this equate to the topic? I think CD didnt sell as well as anticipated because many people just got it for free. The one place where I blame the labels is that they shouldve seen this coming and had more tools in place to protect the artists. After all we are there meal tickets. 

Overpriced music in every medium, 150 "Greatest Hits" from every artist (each with 1 new track just to sell it), boxing up and barely remastering material people have already purchased, the list goes on.

And we're not they're meal tickets. Any artist that gets into entertaining for a meal ticket, to make tons of money is doing it for the wrong reason in the first place.

[peter7411226]

I would like to think that in the future, the kids, will discover GNR and Chinese Democracy much in the way kids today are discovering The Beatles, Zepplin, Black Sabbath, the Doors and Hendrix.

In the future, it will be more about the music, and not so much the bullshit. Then Chinese Democracy will be appreciated as it deserves.

i hear beatles had to wear the uniform to look clean. jimmy page's said zep was alternative  at the time.
pop idols have been always safe bets and marketable for the industry.

See but that was my point. When people illegally download music they take away revenue that otherwise couldve been used to take chances on bands that arent "mainstream" or safe bets. It would allow them to look outside of the box. With labels strapped fundswise of course theyre going to turn to the safe bets to make money.

So let me make sure I have this correct. You're saying that illegal downloading is what forces Fortus to play with Rihanna?

Money taken away from the band would force them to take side gigs like I said before. Im sure only Axl is set for life in the band. Also Fortus doesnt have any songwriting creidits on CD which means that he gets considerable less than the people who have publishing rights on the album.

Ok. I just wanted to make sure that it's all because of those terrible illegal downloaders. I wanted to be sure that it's not because or choice or the fact that GN'R haven't played live in over two years. Got it.

In none of my posts did I ever say that that was the sole reason. Its a huge part of it though. Major artists sign distribution deals with major outlets ( walmart, best buy etc...) to recoup some of the money that they will lose from the illegal downloading. To think that illegal downloading hasnt hurt the industry as well as the artists is naive.

Right. And in none of my posts did I say it didn't harm the industry. Many people know how the industry works so I don't need any information on that front. My point was and still is, that downloading didn't make the industry what it is today. Record labels lust and need to rip people off just because they could did it. Does illegal downloading contribute? Ofcourse. But I maintain that the reason people do it by and large is because the labels brought it on themselves.

Where is this lust and ripping people off that you are talking about?  If your talking about cd prices being high lets put it into perspective. With inflation prices on everything goes up. Music just like everything else around us goes up in price. But you gotta say the price of a cd over the last five years if anything has gone down. I remember when all cd's in the 90's and early 2000's were 15 bucks and over here in the states. Now you can buy one for like 12 bucks at best buy. I wouldnt necessarily call this a ripoff. Now saying that some people may disagree with me about prices being too high but does that give people the right to illegally download something that so many people put alot of hard work into? I guess alot of people see it as "screwing the man". Your also screwing the bands. How does this equate to the topic? I think CD didnt sell as well as anticipated because many people just got it for free. The one place where I blame the labels is that they shouldve seen this coming and had more tools in place to protect the artists. After all we are there meal tickets. 

Overpriced music in every medium, 150 "Greatest Hits" from every artist (each with 1 new track just to sell it), boxing up and barely remastering material people have already purchased, the list goes on.

And we're not they're meal tickets. Any artist that gets into entertaining for a meal ticket, to make tons of money is doing it for the wrong reason in the first place.

The meal ticket statement was a reference to myself. Im an artist signed to a label and my only gripe is that the industry shouldve been more prepared to protect us from the illegal downloads. I didnt get in the industry with the sole purpose of making money. I dont know where you got that from my statement. But....if my band puts out a product which i worked hard on shouldnt we be compensated accordingly? Do you work for free? I dont either. I equate it to stealing milk. Its expensive but it doesnt give you the right to steal it.

Now having said that...I agree with the greatest hits statement. But there is a reason why they do it. They do it for the same reason they sign the poppy good looking bands that are more of a sure thing than the edgier riskier bands that put out better music. Less risk more chance of profit by putting out a greatest hits package from an established artist. But it all comes down to the same point, they wouldnt have to do this if they hadnt lost so much money from illegal downloads.

[russtcb]

I would like to think that in the future, the kids, will discover GNR and Chinese Democracy much in the way kids today are discovering The Beatles, Zepplin, Black Sabbath, the Doors and Hendrix.

In the future, it will be more about the music, and not so much the bullshit. Then Chinese Democracy will be appreciated as it deserves.

i hear beatles had to wear the uniform to look clean. jimmy page's said zep was alternative  at the time.
pop idols have been always safe bets and marketable for the industry.

See but that was my point. When people illegally download music they take away revenue that otherwise couldve been used to take chances on bands that arent "mainstream" or safe bets. It would allow them to look outside of the box. With labels strapped fundswise of course theyre going to turn to the safe bets to make money.

So let me make sure I have this correct. You're saying that illegal downloading is what forces Fortus to play with Rihanna?

Money taken away from the band would force them to take side gigs like I said before. Im sure only Axl is set for life in the band. Also Fortus doesnt have any songwriting creidits on CD which means that he gets considerable less than the people who have publishing rights on the album.

Ok. I just wanted to make sure that it's all because of those terrible illegal downloaders. I wanted to be sure that it's not because or choice or the fact that GN'R haven't played live in over two years. Got it.

In none of my posts did I ever say that that was the sole reason. Its a huge part of it though. Major artists sign distribution deals with major outlets ( walmart, best buy etc...) to recoup some of the money that they will lose from the illegal downloading. To think that illegal downloading hasnt hurt the industry as well as the artists is naive.

Right. And in none of my posts did I say it didn't harm the industry. Many people know how the industry works so I don't need any information on that front. My point was and still is, that downloading didn't make the industry what it is today. Record labels lust and need to rip people off just because they could did it. Does illegal downloading contribute? Ofcourse. But I maintain that the reason people do it by and large is because the labels brought it on themselves.

Where is this lust and ripping people off that you are talking about?  If your talking about cd prices being high lets put it into perspective. With inflation prices on everything goes up. Music just like everything else around us goes up in price. But you gotta say the price of a cd over the last five years if anything has gone down. I remember when all cd's in the 90's and early 2000's were 15 bucks and over here in the states. Now you can buy one for like 12 bucks at best buy. I wouldnt necessarily call this a ripoff. Now saying that some people may disagree with me about prices being too high but does that give people the right to illegally download something that so many people put alot of hard work into? I guess alot of people see it as "screwing the man". Your also screwing the bands. How does this equate to the topic? I think CD didnt sell as well as anticipated because many people just got it for free. The one place where I blame the labels is that they shouldve seen this coming and had more tools in place to protect the artists. After all we are there meal tickets. 

Overpriced music in every medium, 150 "Greatest Hits" from every artist (each with 1 new track just to sell it), boxing up and barely remastering material people have already purchased, the list goes on.

And we're not they're meal tickets. Any artist that gets into entertaining for a meal ticket, to make tons of money is doing it for the wrong reason in the first place.

The meal ticket statement was a reference to myself. Im an artist signed to a label and my only gripe is that the industry shouldve been more prepared to protect us from the illegal downloads. I didnt get in the industry with the sole purpose of making money. I dont know where you got that from my statement. But....if my band puts out a product which i worked hard on shouldnt we be compensated accordingly? Do you work for free? I dont either. I equate it to stealing milk. Its expensive but it doesnt give you the right to steal it.

Now having said that...I agree with the greatest hits statement. But there is a reason why they do it. They do it for the same reason they sign the poppy good looking bands that are more of a sure thing than the edgier riskier bands that put out better music. Less risk more chance of profit by putting out a greatest hits package from an established artist. But it all comes down to the same point, they wouldnt have to do this if they hadnt lost so much money from illegal downloads.

The meal ticket was your statement and I just plain disagree with anyone getting into art to be famous or make money.

And with the second half, you're making my point for me. The record labels do things "the easy way" to make a buck and people got tired of it. Greatest Hits packages, boxed sets, special editon 10th re-re-remasters, signing easy to sell albums.... none of these things are being done now because of illegal downloading. They've been done since the dawn of the industry and that's the whole point.

[AdZ]

Please don't post that many quotes, just quote what you'd like to reference from the last post.

[russtcb]

Please don't post that many quotes, just quote what you'd like to reference from the last post.

Um. OK, sorry? 

[AdZ]

Well it makes everything annoying to read for everyone else and manages to take up the whole page, think about it.

[russtcb]

Well it makes everything annoying to read for everyone else and manages to take up the whole page, think about it.

Yep. So, again; sorry.

[peter7411226]

The meal ticket was your statement and I just plain disagree with anyone getting into art to be famous or make money.

And with the second half, you're making my point for me. The record labels do things "the easy way" to make a buck and people got tired of it. Greatest Hits packages, boxed sets, special editon 10th re-re-remasters, signing easy to sell albums.... none of these things are being done now because of illegal downloading. They've been done since the dawn of the industry and that's the whole point.
[/quote]

The meal ticket statement was miscunstrued on your part. What I meant by it was that we ( artists) are the mealtickets for labels. I didnt get into the industry for the sole purpose of fame and money. I never said that. We should get paid for our efforts though. Agreed?
Your second point: The labels are totally taking "the easy way" but also the "safe way". Putting out a greatest hits package by an established artist is more of a safe bet than an unestablished artist to make money. Dont kid yourself though, there are more greatest hits albums nowadays than lets say 10-15yrs ago. I mean a band like Warrant should not have a greatest hits album. What did they have 2 hits? Illegal downloading totally plays into this. As Ive explained before, It takes money away from the labels that would otherwise be allocated to signing new artists instead of rehashing old stuff that are safe bets. How do you expect a label to sign new (edgier) artists if they are losing a ton of cash? 

[russtcb]

The meal ticket was your statement and I just plain disagree with anyone getting into art to be famous or make money.

And with the second half, you're making my point for me. The record labels do things "the easy way" to make a buck and people got tired of it. Greatest Hits packages, boxed sets, special editon 10th re-re-remasters, signing easy to sell albums.... none of these things are being done now because of illegal downloading. They've been done since the dawn of the industry and that's the whole point.

The meal ticket statement was miscunstrued on your part. What I meant by it was that we ( artists) are the mealtickets for labels. I didnt get into the industry for the sole purpose of fame and money. I never said that. We should get paid for our efforts though. Agreed?
Your second point: The labels are totally taking "the easy way" but also the "safe way". Putting out a greatest hits package by an established artist is more of a safe bet than an unestablished artist to make money. Dont kid yourself though, there are more greatest hits albums nowadays than lets say 10-15yrs ago. I mean a band like Warrant should not have a greatest hits album. What did they have 2 hits? Illegal downloading totally plays into this. As Ive explained before, It takes money away from the labels that would otherwise be allocated to signing new artists instead of rehashing old stuff that are safe bets. How do you expect a label to sign new (edgier) artists if they are losing a ton of cash? 
[/quote]

There are more then a few artists who had 2 or so Hits packages well before downloading became a problem for the industry in the late 90s. Boxed sets were all the rage for labels in the late 80's and early 90's. The ofcourse you have the CD revolution where the labels got completely out of hand. You had entire catalogs released by major acts 2 and 3 times, all ofcourse for full price or for a little bit more than before. Elvis, Beatles & Pink Floyd spring to mind immediately.

The label's were thinking "people will pay for DSotM, Sgt. Pepper & live Elvis recordings over and over again". So they did it. You could make the argument "well, why did the public keep buying it?" and I say the only answer for that is because they had to. If you want the best sounding version of Sgt. Pepper available, you had to shell out again because the label somehow found a way to add more to it you'd want. All the while selling a product that cost them under $5 to make for around $15 each time.

And I really feel that I should stress again that my stance isn't "ALL OF THIS MAKES ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING OK!" I'm just saying that before the industry decides to play the martyr, they might wanna look at why their customers were anxious to "get back at them" so to speak in the first place.



P.S....I'm quite enjoying this discussion, I hope I'm not coming off as hostile in any way. 

[jarmo]

You can't blame downloading alone for the state of the music business.

Downloading means there's an interest in music. The labels just didn't figure out how to profit from this interest.


Unfortunately as you know, labels aren't mainly about the artistic side of things. It's more about making your quarterly reports look nice in order to please the stockholders.

When that's your #1 priority, you don't really want to develop unknown artists for years without profit. Then it's easier to just put out safe bets like compilations.




The labels want instant results.

It just seems like businessmen dabbling in music instead of music fans dabbling in business....


What's this got to do with Chinese Democracy?

Well the record company got an album that wasn't your ordinary album product. It's an actual album, not a single with bonus tracks that's disguised as an album.

It's not the Pussycat Dolls that the label can push around as they wish.

Just because you manage to sell a few PCD albums, doesn't mean you know how to sell Chinese Democracy. You're not exactly going after the same people.....




/jarmo

[russtcb]

You can't blame downloading alone for the state of the music business.

Downloading means there's an interest in music. The labels just didn't figure out how to profit from this interest.


Unfortunately as you know, labels aren't mainly about the artistic side of things. It's more about making your quarterly reports look nice in order to please the stockholders.

When that's your #1 priority, you don't really want to develop unknown artists for years without profit. Then it's easier to just put out safe bets like compilations.




The labels want instant results.

It just seems like businessmen dabbling in music instead of music fans dabbling in business....


What's this got to do with Chinese Democracy?

Well the record company got an album that wasn't your ordinary album product. It's an actual album, not a single with bonus tracks that's disguised as an album.

It's not the Pussycat Dolls that the label can push around as they wish.

Just because you manage to sell a few PCD albums, doesn't mean you know how to sell Chinese Democracy. You're not exactly going after the same people.....




/jarmo

And I totally agree with that. It's one of the reasons why I hold Best Buy & the label more to blame for the lack of US sales than I do the band or illegal downloaders. The interest was (is?) there. The quality product is there. Who dropped the ball? Was it the people who went to find the music for themselves either on purpose or on accident? Or was it the people who didn't do anything to promote it?

Every buisness has risks and those within any industry who don't take risks eventually get left behind or fail completely. And in the business of music the labels are forcing themselves to be a thing of the past.

[peter7411226]

You can't blame downloading alone for the state of the music business.

Downloading means there's an interest in music. The labels just didn't figure out how to profit from this interest.


Unfortunately as you know, labels aren't mainly about the artistic side of things. It's more about making your quarterly reports look nice in order to please the stockholders.

When that's your #1 priority, you don't really want to develop unknown artists for years without profit. Then it's easier to just put out safe bets like compilations.




The labels want instant results.

It just seems like businessmen dabbling in music instead of music fans dabbling in business....


What's this got to do with Chinese Democracy?

Well the record company got an album that wasn't your ordinary album product. It's an actual album, not a single with bonus tracks that's disguised as an album.

It's not the Pussycat Dolls that the label can push around as they wish.

Just because you manage to sell a few PCD albums, doesn't mean you know how to sell Chinese Democracy. You're not exactly going after the same people.....




/jarmo

I agree with this. My problem is with illegal downloading. I feel that illegal downloading as well as the leaks hurt Chinese Democracy. I feel that labels shouldve anticipated the problem it would become and shouldve done more to protect the artists.

[peter7411226]

The meal ticket was your statement and I just plain disagree with anyone getting into art to be famous or make money.

And with the second half, you're making my point for me. The record labels do things "the easy way" to make a buck and people got tired of it. Greatest Hits packages, boxed sets, special editon 10th re-re-remasters, signing easy to sell albums.... none of these things are being done now because of illegal downloading. They've been done since the dawn of the industry and that's the whole point.

The meal ticket statement was miscunstrued on your part. What I meant by it was that we ( artists) are the mealtickets for labels. I didnt get into the industry for the sole purpose of fame and money. I never said that. We should get paid for our efforts though. Agreed?
Your second point: The labels are totally taking "the easy way" but also the "safe way". Putting out a greatest hits package by an established artist is more of a safe bet than an unestablished artist to make money. Dont kid yourself though, there are more greatest hits albums nowadays than lets say 10-15yrs ago. I mean a band like Warrant should not have a greatest hits album. What did they have 2 hits? Illegal downloading totally plays into this. As Ive explained before, It takes money away from the labels that would otherwise be allocated to signing new artists instead of rehashing old stuff that are safe bets. How do you expect a label to sign new (edgier) artists if they are losing a ton of cash? 

There are more then a few artists who had 2 or so Hits packages well before downloading became a problem for the industry in the late 90s. Boxed sets were all the rage for labels in the late 80's and early 90's. The ofcourse you have the CD revolution where the labels got completely out of hand. You had entire catalogs released by major acts 2 and 3 times, all ofcourse for full price or for a little bit more than before. Elvis, Beatles & Pink Floyd spring to mind immediately.

The label's were thinking "people will pay for DSotM, Sgt. Pepper & live Elvis recordings over and over again". So they did it. You could make the argument "well, why did the public keep buying it?" and I say the only answer for that is because they had to. If you want the best sounding version of Sgt. Pepper available, you had to shell out again because the label somehow found a way to add more to it you'd want. All the while selling a product that cost them under $5 to make for around $15 each time.

And I really feel that I should stress again that my stance isn't "ALL OF THIS MAKES ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING OK!" I'm just saying that before the industry decides to play the martyr, they might wanna look at why their customers were anxious to "get back at them" so to speak in the first place.



P.S....I'm quite enjoying this discussion, I hope I'm not coming off as hostile in any way. 
[/quote]
No worries man. Im enjoying it too.

[jarmo]

I agree with this. My problem is with illegal downloading. I feel that illegal downloading as well as the leaks hurt Chinese Democracy. I feel that labels shouldve anticipated the problem it would become and shouldve done more to protect the artists.

Of course they hurt. Why buy it when you can get it for free?

As well as the fact that the leaks took away the chance for the artist and/or label to plan how/when they wanted people to hear the material.




/jarmo

[peter7411226]

I agree with this. My problem is with illegal downloading. I feel that illegal downloading as well as the leaks hurt Chinese Democracy. I feel that labels shouldve anticipated the problem it would become and shouldve done more to protect the artists.

Of course they hurt. Why buy it when you can get it for free?

As well as the fact that the leaks took away the chance for the artist and/or label to plan how/when they wanted people to hear the material.




/jarmo

Which is exactly what ive been saying. People dont realize how much illegal downloading hurts artists. Besides robbing them of royalties it takes away money from the labels that might go to promotion or other things. While labels shouldve anticipated this long ago it is what it is. Its stealing.

[gilld1]

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

The artists are collateral damage in all of this.  They should be upset with the labels too.  The labels have screwed the fans for years, as well as artists.  I still get irate when I think of the time I rushed to a website and bought the "exclusive" Page/Black Crowes release only to see it come out a few months later with additional songs.

Axl needs to embrace downloading like NIN and radiohead have.  They still do well and they create their own buzz without the meddling of a label.

[marknroses]

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

The artists are collateral damage in all of this.  They should be upset with the labels too.  The labels have screwed the fans for years, as well as artists.  I still get irate when I think of the time I rushed to a website and bought the "exclusive" Page/Black Crowes release only to see it come out a few months later with additional songs.

Axl needs to embrace downloading like NIN and radiohead have.  They still do well and they create their own buzz without the meddling of a label.

All this talk about the damages of downloading and yet no one mentions the one and only GNR album sales triumph in the 2000s which is the Greatest Hits album.

At 4x platinum (and counting), given the amount of downloading of those songs on millions of college students' computers throughout the USA, it is miracle. It may also point to the effect that prior promotions of GNR's music during the heydays did to their legacy.

MNW