What is Digg?84 Comments
- affanjam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+75A world without the RIAA would be such a better place. World Peace.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+33I see rainbows, bunny rabbits and puffy clouds myself.
- sonmiles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27??? How do you figure? If an artist is truly talented and makes music that strikes a chord in people, I think the artist would be successful and the music would make its way in to many people's music collection. All the RIAA is doing is exploiting the artists they see fit for the masses and getting their large cut.
"Radio plays what they want you to hear They tell me it's cool but I just don't believe it..." - jmnormand, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20is not having 99% of the "music" we have now really a bad thing?
- templest, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Backstreet Boys, N*SYNC, New Kids on the Block, Milli Vanilli, Britney Spears, Love Inc., Those dudes that sung that one "Where do you go!?" song, George Michael, Fitty Cent, that one new white rapper with all the metal in his mouth that makes him look like he has a built in FM-Tuner implanted in his face, those ***** that sing that "whisper song" or whatever the hell, "my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard" anyone?...
Yes, it would be really tragic if that %99 never existed. I don't know how I'd live. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16And y'all are forgetting about the wonderful distribution mechanism known as the internet. All you need is an assload of bandwidth. The RIAA is no longer nessecary, and is just a middleman that steals money from artists and consumers. The internet can handle legal music distribution now.
- Computer_Kid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12All of the world would look like this if the IRAA didn't exist:
http://www.ccjonesphotos.com/PS/images/Rainbow%20over%20Victoria%20Falls.jpg - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9how am i supposed to know what i like without them paying radio stations to play what they think i should like?
- detrate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11one word: "YAY!"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7the RIAA, (and the labels) like most unions, was a good thing at one time. The time was when artists didn't have established distribution channels, and when representation meant protection, and paying a band long before they had turned a profit.
But now they are just another hand in the pot, and like unions, are more interested in their own preservation than they are interested in getting music in front of listeners. Now that there are places that listeners go (take your pick - torrents, itunes, whatever) the role of the label has become obsolete.
That said, ask any indie bands you know - it's hard out there to get from 1000 fans to 1 million. Without someone spending a LOT on promotion, bands stay small for a long time. - D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I don't like the RIAA but f it ceased to exist all of it's employees would be laid off and would go back to being cranky old people spraying hoses at kids during Halloween. We don't want that do we?
- Tomos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I guess it would be silimar to a world without lawyers!
- tavisjohn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yea, instead of a 12+ track CD having 1 good track, we would have ALOT more GOOD QUALITY MUSIC!
I choose Quality over Quanity! Bring back the era where music was good, and bands made $$$ having conserts every year or 2!
Now they pump out crappy music by the CD, and sue their customers to make money! - stonyhill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That's not what the RIAA is worried about -- they're counting on it. That's why they've laid off all of their A&R guys. They don't develop bands any more. They wait for the grass roots to develop bands, and then the RIAA signs them, because the RIAA still controls access to many things musicians want -- like hookers, limos and blow. Of course, if all you want is a decent recording and a way to distribute it, you no longer need a traditional record label.
- cyclotron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Exactly. Most bands would never gain popularity without the music industry. (The Fall are a 20+ year old band and you kids probably havent heard of them)
- Hypersapien, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"The job of record labels is to sort through all the crap to find what they consider good music that they can sell."
Then why do the major labels keep publishing crap? - mrblister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Places like rock.com are great for promoting small indy bands, and getting them out in front of their fans. But I agree, there are a lot of small groups that have, and seem like will, never get very widespread attention.
- wonderboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bart: Mr. Hutz when I grow up I want to be a lawyer just like you.
Hutz: Good for you, son. If there's one thing America needs, it's more lawyers. Can you imagine a world without lawyers?
[Hutz imagines a scene of people of all nationalities (plus Elvis) holding hands and dancing around in a circle under a rainbow]
Hutz: Argh. - alexandreracine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The signer of the group is already without the RIAA!
"but the fact remains: the rest of his band abandoned him mid-tour (aside from the keyboardist, to whom he is married)."
She's hot :)
http://www.thefall.info/fallsite/wp-content/plugins/falbum/wp/album.php?album=72057594127004240&page=2&photo=141371594 - OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think without the RIAA there would be fewer bands that are world renowned. But the local music scene would expand greatly.
We would probably get pushed with the same amount of corporation created bands though (boy bands). They make their money off merchandising and advertisers anyways. - cyclotron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3In all fairness to the music industry, there is always a critical mass when it comes to consumption. The Fall or others may succeed because they have already they established themselves, but for thousands of other bands, musicians benefit from the organized and narrow music industry method of promoting bands. Bands succeeding without touring, marketing and advertising are the exceprion, not the norm.
- phynixx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Music would still be around with out the RIAA. It might be coming from the organization that is just as bad (or worse), or it might've developed through some other method, but we would still have music much in the same way that we know it today.
Music has been around in some form or another for ages. It wouldn't have simply ceased to exist b/c some greedy-ass organization didn't come into being. Remember music (and the 'American way') created the RIAA, not the other way around (although there is something to be said about not having to listen to all the crap that wouldn't have made it w/out the RIAA).
The RIAA (not the internet) obsoleted itself through it's own practices. Just like all big things though, it's just taking a while to die (and may not have realized that it's dead yet). If the internet didn't start things, it would've been something else. - Travelsonic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"That said, ask any indie bands you know - it's hard out there to get from 1000 fans to 1 million. Without someone spending a LOT on promotion, bands stay small for a long time. "
But wasn't your arguemtn that "we wouldn't have 99% of the music we have"? We would still have the music, just without the middleman it would (initially) need adaptation, and would take longer, but we would have music. And BTW, the RIAA and it's ilk do not control 99% of the music out there.
It is getting easier (and cheaper) to record music - for example, for the guitar, you can record through your amp through an audio jack into Audacity, run it through low/highpass filters to eliminate the amp buzz and you would have (with some other *minor* tweaking) a good guitar track. add some drums and bass (easily (and to some degree, depending on what you use *good*)) and you would have easily barring any songwriting efforts made an easy Green Day-esque (minus lyrics) song. - fugazi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I don't see pictures? I want to LOOK and see how it would look like, not just hear what it would be like. :P
what the hell is with this I didnt click to reply here but whatever - cryptocom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is precisely what I'm doing with a collaborator. We both have extensive experience in music production/creation, and we have embarked on a first cd mission. We're both determined to bring it to completion, market it, and get some gains off it completely without the help of mainstream labels, and exclusively with Creative Commons licensing and Indie support. Very liberating.
:) - shark72, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The Fall? Never heard of them. Oh, I guess that's the point...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I'm not forgetting the "internet". Most of the history of music occurred before it existed.
- tidu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3^^^
one million dollars says that no one else will get this one - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"I see rainbows, bunny rabbits and puffy clouds myself."
Okay, Lenny. - Cerberus047, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7But we wouldnt have the spice girls... i cant live without "iff you waanna be myyy loooovaaa you gooootttaa get wiiith my frrrriiieeeennndddsss"
- Junto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Cough.... TOR
- uttles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I've said this since the first days of Napster. The reason record companies and the RIAA don't like free online music is because it takes control away from them and increases competition. It's never directly reduced their profits, but it will have the long term affect of reducing their profits when people realize there is better, more original music out there that the RIAA companies don't control.
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2RIAA? That crap doesnt exist here in the netherlands. I can download and put online whatever the hell I like and nobody will arrest me for it. I don't care about all that murrcan *****.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2There are other forms of music beside country music.
- ummagummas08, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1TRUE!!! Clearchannel owns about 90% of the radio in atlanta, and it ***** blows. Try hearing 'Barracudda' by Heart twice a day. Anyone in atlanta- listen to 88.5 or 91.9 if you actually listen to the radio
- The42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yay Dispatch!
I'm gonna have "Flying Horses" stuck in my head all day now. Dispatch rocks. - lupinglade, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Dunno, but Love Inc. is one great band. The rest, indeed.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The job of record labels is to sort through all the crap to find what they consider good music that they can sell. They do this by promoting it to radio stations, funding studio time (money which the band will pay back if successful), etc. If you replace this model with the MySpace model, where fans only promote music, you place a lot more risk on the artists, since now they need to pay for studio time off of their own dime. Try going to a bank for a loan for studio time vs. a record label, and you get an idea of the risk that a label is willing to take on an artist. On the bright side, you can get good quality recordings using amateur equipment these days, so bands can be self starters on a low budget.
- ummagummas08, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Has anyone heard of Phish? They got popular in the same sense of these bands, only I dont think they used the internet as much.
***** the RIAA, and anyone who supports it is a freaking retard. - m00nmaster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3No, Lipps Inc. is the great band.
- KarateMedia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Alienjournalism:
Or perhaps they've heard of Pavement. "Slanted and Enchanted" was like a Fall tribute album. - liquidizer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes, but let's not forget that The Fall has been through its share of record labels over the years, including Phonogram. We have yet to see a band truly break through online without using the record industry machinery at all. Without organisations protecting the rights in and earning money from their back catalogue, The Fall probably couldn't afford to operate.
- tidu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Of Mice and Men?
- Samurailink3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm sick of the RIAA, I want music, I want to burn it to a CD, I want to put it on my MP3 player, I want to add it to slideshows and movies I make, I want to listen to the music without security holes in my system (ala Sony), I want to be able to send a good song to a friend without them having to purchase a license. I'm sick of this DRM *****. I'm indie all the way and all the RIAA is doing is making it harder for people to get their music out.
God forbid people actually get to listen to the music they purchased! - Catachresis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1JAWBONE AND THE AIR RIFLE
WHO WOULD THINK THEY COULD BRING HARM
JAWBONE AND THE AIR RIFLE
ONE IS CURSED AND ONE IS WARM - Cheyne, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hmmm. But not every group can grow like this. Artists need their record companies ect to promote them. There is a reason that RIAA associated record companies dominate the charts. They are good at what they do. Have a look at the Billboard charts right now. How many community grown non RIAA bands are there? Not many. And I don't want to hear that all of the Billboard music sucks, because that's hardly the point, the point is that they are selling records, and that's is, at the end of the day, what it's all about.
Dugg for the good read. - cyberfelon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Because idiots keep buying it.
Good music exists on major labels right now, but it doesn't cater to the lowest common denominator so it doesn't sell. - saudama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The RIAA is losing ground, and will continue to do so until they lose everything they had going for them. I heard somewhere that they spent more on lawsuits than they get in record sales revenues. How messed up is that logic?
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1davidarussel as I'm sure you know already, people hate reading that their voting record is responsible for this sort of thing. They want to live in this fantasy where you can vote whatever you want and it has no consequences.
-
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 