If illegal downloading was so bad then why have Prince, Paul McCartney and McFly all GIVEN AWAY albums in newspapers for free? Why have Coldplay, CSS, Dido and Kings Of Leon all recently GIVEN AWAY a free track off their forthcoming album? Why have Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, The Crimea and The Charlatans all as good as GIVEN AWAY recent albums over the internet?

 

For a start, Prince was supposedly paid about a million pounds for the 'free' givaway, and even if the figure is incorrect, it's a safe bet that they actually got paid. In the case of someone like Prince, he's already made millions, so music can be a hobby for him, so it's fine for him to want as many people as possible to own his new music so when they go to the concert the aren't all waiting for him to sing 1999 and Purple Rain. In fact, everyone you mention there have career that are funded by people paying for their music. If they wanted to give away everything they produce from now on, I'm sure they could. But what about all the new music and artists who need the funding? At some point, there needs to be some income stream for people making music that isn't the big arena tours normally reserved for established artists.

 

And yes, some people give away free tracks before an album. That's called advertising. Have you ever been given a free sample of anything when you are in a shop, or with a magazine? It's done on the basis that enough people will come back and buy something later.

 

I don't even have particular qualms about people downloading the odd track for free, especially if it's hard to get elsewhere, or if people genuinely aren't sure if they'll like it. What does bug me is that some people will brazenly brag about never actually paying for any of the music they obtain. It might be good for your personal pocket, but don't kid yourself that it's good for the industry if everyone did the same.

Edited August 31, 200816 yr by Nosey

For a start, Prince was supposedly paid about a million pounds for the 'free' givaway, and even if the figure is incorrect, it's a safe bet that they actually got paid. In the case of someone like Prince, he's already made millions, so music can be a hobby for him, so it's fine for him to want as many people as possible to own his new music so when they go to the concert the aren't all waiting for him to sing 1999 and Purple Rain. In fact, everyone you mention there have career that are funded by people paying for their music. If they wanted to give away everything they produce from now on, I'm sure they could. But what about all the new music and artists who need the funding? At some point, there needs to be some income stream for people making music that isn't the big arena tours normally reserved for established artists.

 

And yes, some people give away free tracks before an album. That's called advertising. Have you ever been given a free sample of anything when you are in a shop, or with a magazine? It's done on the basis that enough people will come back and buy something later.

 

I don't even have particular qualms about people downloading the odd track for free, especially if it's hard to get elsewhere, or if people genuinely aren't sure if they'll like it. What does bug me is that some people will brazenly brag about never actually paying for any of the music they obtain. It might be good for your personal pocket, but don't kid yourself that it's good for the industry if everyone did the same.

 

Why do so many new bands give away tracks through Myspace and various other sites then? Or is that just 'advertising' as well? Oh, and I already made a valid point about the Arctic Monkeys with that one so I won't bother saying any more...

 

And does it matter who gives away music for free? The point is that acts do, at their own leisure and away from record company fatcats. That can only be a good thing. And loads of new acts give away music anyway. The internet has made music so easy to obtain. Forget illegal downloading, why don't people get on their high horses about social networking, youtube or last.fm in the same way? All three are hugely popular ways to listen to whatever you want at your own leisure and for free. Is that really any different to file sharing? Afterall, you're listening or watching a file which someone else has uploaded and you haven't paid for...

 

The internet has changed music so much, the way it's marketed, the way acts view their work, the ease of purchase and listening, the ability to find anything. The CD single is as good as dead, people aren't bothered any more. Yes, there will always be a minority but that's what it will always be, a minority. All this talk of reformatting or price lowering or better value or whatever won't work, there's no point. People have moved on and aren't going to move back in any kind of significant number.

What exactly is so wrong with illegal downloading and free music?

 

People go on about how it's so awful and the worst thing to happen to music ever when in reality it's one of the best. There are so many benefits that have come from illegal downloading, firstly that decreases the absurd levels of power that record labels have. Because of this thing we call 'illegal downloading' it's now becoming far more worthwhile for bands not to have a record contract and release music themselves.

 

Would you go into a record shop & steal a CD from the shelves? I presume not, but illegal downloading is just a candy-coated version of that.

 

OTOH, 'free music' in the form of magazine giveaways is OK, because the artist gets paid by the newspaper as they expect to sell extra copies because of it.

Edited September 1, 200816 yr by vidcapper

Why do so many new bands give away tracks through Myspace and various other sites then? Or is that just 'advertising' as well?

 

Yes, of course it is.

 

Oh, and I already made a valid point about the Arctic Monkeys with that one so I won't bother saying any more...

 

It was a perfectly valid point for why it can be good for bands to give their music away to build a fan-base in anticipation of future sales, which was my point. It wasn't a valid reason for you to have never paid for any music for the past ten years or so.

 

And does it matter who gives away music for free?

 

No. I suspect you have missed the point. Do you understand the difference between someone deciding to give something away for free and you deciding to take everything for free?

 

The internet has changed music so much, the way it's marketed, the way acts view their work, the ease of purchase and listening, the ability to find anything. The CD single is as good as dead, people aren't bothered any more. Yes, there will always be a minority but that's what it will always be, a minority. All this talk of reformatting or price lowering or better value or whatever won't work, there's no point. People have moved on and aren't going to move back in any kind of significant number.

 

That's all well and good, but how does that make it OK to steal whole albums?

 

Would you go into a department store and shove bundles of perfume and make-up and moisturiser into your bag on the basis that some brands give away free samples in magazines?

 

I know full well that the availability of a free download (or CD 'free' with a newspaper) can do wonders for getting music heard, and a little bit of illegal file-sharing probably helps to get some new music heard and talked about. Your arguments aren't new, just flawed.

"The internet has changed music so much, the way it's marketed, the way acts view their work, the ease of purchase and listening, the ability to find anything. The CD single is as good as dead, people aren't bothered any more. Yes, there will always be a minority but that's what it will always be, a minority. All this talk of reformatting or price lowering or better value or whatever won't work, there's no point. People have moved on and aren't going to move back in any kind of significant number."

 

And fifteen to twenty years ago they said CDs had killed vinyl, but now not only is it still with us it's in growth!

 

I think all we need is for the next generation of young teeny boppers to hold CDs in higher regard and with a new wave of future pop stars a resurgence could happen in a few years. When something ceases to be it makes people want it again.

 

BTW The Spice Girls and Police DID have albums out, albeit retrospectives with the odd new track added.

 

As a final note, I buy more CD singles than I ever have done before. And I don't intend to give up. Especially as every release (bar X Factor) is a guaranteed limited edition.

I could probably count on one hand the number of singles I've bought in the last 10 to 15 years, ok maybe on two hands, but it ain't that many!

In the US cd singles are very hard to find and rarely released , I buy some of my stuff digitally but usually if I really like a song or artist I prefer the buy the single which I pick up at online stores such Amazon.co.uk for UK release and a few US based online stores perfectbeat.com . When I was in London a few weeks ago HMV had a decent sized singles collection has this changed ? I say if you enjoy buying them continue to do so. I plan on my buying them until they stop making them :yahoo:

Edited September 4, 200816 yr by ericinatlanta

Would you go into a record shop & steal a CD from the shelves? I presume not, but illegal downloading is just a candy-coated version of that.

 

OTOH, 'free music' in the form of magazine giveaways is OK, because the artist gets paid by the newspaper as they expect to sell extra copies because of it.

No, I wouldn't, but there will be a lot of people who do, just like with anything...

 

People have always shared music before. I'm not old enough to remember, but was there all this hoo-haa surrounding home taping and copying your own albums? It's no different to the piracy that has always happened and always will happened, it just seems that now it's moved on to a different form there seems to be far more publicity surrounding it.

And fifteen to twenty years ago they said CDs had killed vinyl, but now not only is it still with us it's in growth!

 

I think all we need is for the next generation of young teeny boppers to hold CDs in higher regard and with a new wave of future pop stars a resurgence could happen in a few years. When something ceases to be it makes people want it again.

 

BTW The Spice Girls and Police DID have albums out, albeit retrospectives with the odd new track added.

 

As a final note, I buy more CD singles than I ever have done before. And I don't intend to give up. Especially as every release (bar X Factor) is a guaranteed limited edition.

 

Yeah, it's still around, but it's not in great numbers is it? It's still very much a minority. I never said CDs would disappear, I said they'd never grow significantly enough to be a major part of the market again which is what some people are thinking (very wishfully). There will always be enough people to make them still be available, but never in great numbers.

 

Yeah, they released a greatest hits, it's not an album, it's a cash in! They didn't have to get the songs written and spend time and money recording and mastering them. They were already available.

Edited September 4, 200816 yr by RabbitFurCoat

 

It was a perfectly valid point for why it can be good for bands to give their music away to build a fan-base in anticipation of future sales, which was my point. It wasn't a valid reason for you to have never paid for any music for the past ten years or so.

Sorry, I didn't realise that's what I was arguing for..... Have you any proof that there are so many people that never pay for music?

 

No. I suspect you have missed the point. Do you understand the difference between someone deciding to give something away for free and you deciding to take everything for free?

 

Yes, of course. But as I said earlier, this kind of thing has always happened and with virtually every type of product available. And I'd certainly say illegal downloading was 'better' than full on piracy, no one makes a profit out of it...

 

That's all well and good, but how does that make it OK to steal whole albums?

As I've said before, it's always happened with home-taping, I know familes who would never buy the same albums, because if one bought an album, they'd copy it for the other....

Would you go into a department store and shove bundles of perfume and make-up and moisturiser into your bag on the basis that some brands give away free samples in magazines?

 

No, but then I'm not arguing the case for free perfume being good for the perfume industry, I'm talking about the music industry.

 

 

I know full well that the availability of a free download (or CD 'free' with a newspaper) can do wonders for getting music heard, and a little bit of illegal file-sharing probably helps to get some new music heard and talked about. Your arguments aren't new, just flawed.

 

In what way are they 'flawed'? Every reason I've given as to why free and illegal music helps is atleast in someway logical...

 

An artist I'm currently loving and have recently discovered is Little Boots, I've obtained all the music I have by her (two singles, an acoustic version and two mixtspes) illegally because it's not possible to buy it. Next time I want to find some new and exciting music by someone I've never heard of before I shall think twice and instead I'll turn on my local radio station and just buy what the major record labels are telling me to now.

Edited September 4, 200816 yr by RabbitFurCoat

As a collector of singles (CDsingles & 7") I say: continue buying them!

 

It's a shame that more and more singles are released as a download only.

No disc, no sleeve... no information!

 

I still buy 7"singles when they come out.

I like that format the most and I still play them as well.

But I also buy the CD-single of that same release.

But then again, I'm a collector...

 

It's been in the news here in the Netherlands that the CD-single is going to disappear at the end of 2008.

How I wish to live in the UK!

The record companies want you stop buying them, hence them making them not worth the money with the new chart rules. From about 91-98 there wasn't a time limit of 20 minutes, you could have as many formats as you liked - I used to buy them weekly cos of 5/6 mixes and a b-side or 2

We've three HMV stores in Birmingham City Centre (yes it is a bit much ;), and only the smaller one of the three stocks CD singles, which is near the checkout. Out of those, they were about eight or nine, and the songs that were on sale had been about for quite a fair bit.

 

Zavvi, only has one shelf devoted to singles, and again it was some of the long-stayers and Madonna's new one.

 

I'd rather buy a single than download. I mean if I really like a song or a debut hit or two by a new act, you want to rush out and buy it - not download or watch the video on Youtube all the time!

 

Downloading may be the way of the future plus the generous offers from McFly of giving your album away in the papers but it isnt the same isnt it?

 

I still believe the chart is 100% kosher as it's singles only. Notice the long stayers are the ones that are played to death on the radio?

i was in the uk in july and i was shocked by how hard it is to get cd singles,i live in a small town in the west of ireland and cd singles are so hard got apart from online but when iw as going to england i was sure i would be able to look through loads of cd singles but sadly u cud barely find any aprt from some songs in the top 10

 

i would much prefer to buy cd singles than download them,what i love about real cd's is maybe 2-3 years after a song is out and you are going through your cd collection youre like oh i havnt heard that song in ages and u play with downloading that comfort isnt there unless u keep your pc on night and day

i will always buy to support my fave artists. Like the Babes and Mutya.

 

I really need to get my hands on CD2 of Sweet About Me come to think of it.....

No, I wouldn't, but there will be a lot of people who do, just like with anything...

 

People have always shared music before. I'm not old enough to remember, but was there all this hoo-haa surrounding home taping and copying your own albums? It's no different to the piracy that has always happened and always will happened, it just seems that now it's moved on to a different form there seems to be far more publicity surrounding it.

Yes, the music industry used to make the same complaints about home taping. They were wrong then and they're mostly wrong now. It's important to distinguish between people who obtain music illegally when it's available legally and people swapping music on a "you might like this" basis. I've received music on the latter basis and have bought CDs by artists I'd previously never heard of as a result.

 

File-swapping can help the music industry. Illegal downloads (again, making the distinction that I'm talking about songs that are available legally) CAN harm (but not destroy) the industry.