If an artist is A) not super rich, B) on an indie or self-owned label, and C) his records are available where you live, is there any excuse for downloading them instead of buying them?

yes, which is why I prefaced that with 'strict economic'...

if we believe that expensive-to-make music has important social value, then yeah, in the long-term we need to find a way to fund it, because the current system isn't going to for much longer. see: newspapers

Well I've been hesitant to get involved here, because A)it seems to me we've all had this same discussion in the recent past on another thread B)I don't personally know what the answer is, I don't pretend to, and I don't care, I only have faith that it will eventually appear.

What I WILL say right now is that what I do most of my downloading for is to TRY things. TRY B4 YOU BUY. Either that or I'm just catching up on some record or other I already bought years ago and no longer have access to, etc. So speaking as an American who has not yet tasted what Spotify must be like, it seems to me that model is a good way to start as far as I know. A place where music can be played, tried out, maybe paid for after a certain number of plays, whatever. But this endless downloading and dumping into folders and not ever getting around to listening to it drives a person (me) mad. If everything was instantly available, there would be no need for that excess.

Like say, 25 cents to play a song one time, 50 for two...topping out of course at some level or the market will allow. Moving to an ad for the album after three plays. It isn't hard folks! Pardon my impatience with the technological progress of the human race, thanks.

Bimble, you should look into Lala.com. It is for US citizens, and it allows a free first time streaming and then a very cheap purchase for permanent streaming abilities. There is a thread about it here that was bumped recently.

I say this as an ex-user that moved on from the company as it's focus shifted, but it kind of fits an attempt at a different digital model.

Last.fm has been good to me lately; most everything that I'm hesitant about dropping cash on is streamable, with a big increase in lo-fi punk shit in the last couple years (something that I find particularly hit and miss).

But what this thread has really convinced me of is that I should be bootlegging Jay Z albums and sending the money to Finnish rappers in some sort of copyleft global arts socialism.

I think it will be interesting the see where the whole internet/cloud computing/futuristic technologies takes us in the sense of music production and how this affects things in the long run. Like now it's about digital copies of songs, what about in 15 years when everyone has 3d printers that can download models to recreate virgin vinyl first pressings on the molecular-scale?

yeah, wow dude, can't wait for that

15 yrs from now is gonna be more like this I think
http://arcona.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/statue_planet.jpg

can't remember if the apes had 3-d printers, though

http://www.hear2.com/images/2007/12/29/natgeo_musicsales2_6.gif

Wonder if this chart account for changes in inflation?

...this is the stuff with which I took issue; it still strikes me as wrong, most especially the "art should be made for the love of it" - sez who?

― worm? lol (J0hn D.), Friday, May 29, 2009 6:07 PM (5 days ago) Bookmark

Love seems to be worth more than money to those crazy beatnik beardo art types.

yeah I know Devendra is begging for change on Melrose Ave as we speak

Begging for LOVE.

that's a beautiful chart