Solution for everyone

[Basilisk]

Again..very valid insight...you may very well be right...now what do you think the solution is?

What kind of reform is needed?

435815[/snapback]

The current practise seems to be widespread copying and "pooling" by which groups of fans in developing nations make combined purchases and then copy for everyone in the pool... so an immediate solution would be a country-by-country licensing system authorizing a certain number of copies for some nations, which would at least give the official nod to the practise and perhaps even encourage more to buy into the idea... that's just an off-the-cuff thought however.

 

My greater goal is to encourage the liberation of sound and the promotion of the free alternative as a viable means of music distribution. I think a lot of people confuse my quest as one of total overhaul... it's not that. I'd just like to see much more music being released for free in a professional way as an alternative to the commercial system of labels and distributors. The last half decade has seen enourmous change in technology and especially in the purpose and kinds of releases that come out... I mean, look around. Why do new artists put out whole albums? Promotion, in most instances. It's a bit of a waste though, as so many of them aren't very polished and don't show the kind of maturity a lot of trance fans desire, but it sure is good enough for the vast teeming hordes. Why not release these albums for free to the net, with a professional presentation? That's even better promotion, imho.

 

There are just late night ideas though... I've got to get on with writing my articles on the subject. Then again I post half-baked ideas to get some dialog going to make my essays more ironclad

[niobium]

Any ideas what that "tag" or unique thing should be? What would be a cool thing that would make it more individual?

435803[/snapback]

 

This is messy and has some logic holes but it gives maybe

some idea what I have in mind:

 

i) reserve 1024 'single bit' addresses somewhere inside the track.

 

ii) these 1024 bits will be one half of the bits used to verify uniqueness of the

copy.

 

iii) purchaser is provided with a 1024 bit number like a password sort of thing.

 

iv) the first 1024 bits are uploaded by sending the music file. The second 1024 bits

are provided by the owner.

 

v) verification of uniqueness is done by concatenating the bit strings into a 2048 bit

number. The 2048 bits are hashed and compared against the label's database.

 

vi) transfer of ownership of the copy is done through a mechanism controlled by

the label. The original owner must 'cash in' his 1024 bits. The new owner then

receives a new 1024 bit number and claims ownership.

The original owner cannot claim ownership since he does not have the new 1024

bit number and thus cannot get his copy verified anymore.

[visine]

The current practise seems to be widespread copying and "pooling" by which groups of fans in developing nations make combined purchases and then copy for everyone in the pool... so an immediate solution would be a country-by-country licensing system authorizing a certain number of copies for some nations, which would at least give the official nod to the practise and perhaps even encourage more to buy into the idea... that's just an off-the-cuff thought however.

Interesting...but how would you implement this contry-by-country license?

 

 

My greater goal is to encourage the liberation of sound and the promotion of the free alternative as a viable means of music distribution. I think a lot of people confuse my quest as one of total overhaul... it's not that. I'd just like to see much more music being released for free in a professional way as an alternative to the commercial system of labels and distributors. The last half decade has seen enourmous change in technology and especially in the purpose and kinds of releases that come out... I mean, look around. Why do new artists put out whole albums? Promotion, in most instances. It's a bit of a waste though, as so many of them aren't very polished and don't show the kind of maturity a lot of trance fans desire, but it sure is good enough for the vast teeming hordes. Why not release these albums for free to the net, with a professional presentation? That's even better promotion, imho.

 

Do you think the industry is ready for this? Sure everyone will think "hell yeah I want the music for free"..but look how many people have free music on their web site as opposed to those that released on so and so label..Do you think that those that offer their music for free will look more "proffesional" in the eyes of the public or the ones that get released on the label? Are those who offer it for free considered amateur/demo scene or the pros? Does public perceive antiscarp to be of comparable qualty and popularity as Twisted records and will antiscarp be a better promotion than being released on Twisted?

[visine]

This is messy and has some logic holes but it gives maybe

some idea what I have in mind:

 

i) reserve 1024 'single bit' addresses somewhere inside the track.

 

ii) these 1024 bits will be one half of the bits used to verify uniqueness of the

copy.

 

iii) purchaser is provided with a 1024 bit number like a password sort of thing.

 

iv) the first 1024 bits are uploaded by sending the music file.  The second 1024 bits

are provided by the owner.

 

v) verification of uniqueness is done by concatenating the bit strings into a 2048 bit

number.  The 2048 bits are hashed and compared against the label's database.

 

vi) transfer of ownership of the copy is done through a mechanism controlled by

the label.  The original owner must 'cash in' his 1024 bits.  The new owner then

receives a new 1024 bit number and claims ownership.

The original owner cannot claim ownership since he does not have the new 1024

bit number and thus cannot get his copy verified anymore.

435822[/snapback]

So how do you think would that lead to more interest in buying?

[niobium]

So how do you think would that lead to more interest in buying?

435824[/snapback]

Like I mentioned above, it is a way to preserve the uniqueness

and finiteness of the .wav downloads. Only those people with

the proper 1024 bit signatures can authenticate on the website.

All other copies can be recognized as forgeries.

[Basilisk]

Interesting...but how would you implement this contry-by-country license?

 

-shrug- no details in my mind right now... it's worth more thought, I think - this global issue of the wealth gap.

 

Do you think the industry is ready for this? Sure everyone will think "hell yeah I want the music for free"..but look how many people have free music on their web site as opposed to those that released on so and so label..Do you think that those that offer their music for free will look more "proffesional" in the eyes of the public or the ones that get released on the label? Are those who offer it for free considered amateur/demo scene or the pros? Does public perceive antiscarp to be of comparable qualty and popularity as Twisted records and will antiscarp be a better promotion than being released on Twisted?

435823[/snapback]

The thing is, Antiscarp doesn't give a shit. The tracks aren't mastered, it isn't released to be crowd pleasing, it isn't packaged as a whole... I love what they do but it's not pro and it ain't trying to be. I think a physical release is often going to trump a digital release in terms of how professional it seems - it's substantial, right? But I can see a really well done digital release trumping a lot of the shoddy releases that come out. People respect hard work and quality control, and I don't think that is exclusively tied into the traditional label heirarchy and the need for purely commercial releases with no other options.

 

Is the industry ready for this? Yeah I'd say it's ready for a kick in the ass.

 

Much more on this later. I'll probably save most of it for the articles I'm authoring on the subject.

[Otto Matta]

Damn, my head is spinning after all that...

 

Regarding the need for labels: Labels to me, at least in the genres we tend to enjoy here, are an organized umbrella of a certain sound. Some label owners are like artists themselves in how they gather a certain sound that did not exist in an organized way before. For that reason they're a good idea. Some of us will buy from a certain label we really like, even if we've never heard the artist before.

 

Another issue I have is that I really, really enjoy having a designed package with my music, something I can hold and something I can look at while the music is playing. Downloaded music does not allow for this experience.

 

But regarding how to inspire more buying? I'm all for privacy rights, but I personally believe that anyone who downloads more than a moderate amount of music should be punished severely. Music, as we all know, is very similar to a drug. We can't get enough of it. But it's a relatively harmless drug, affecting only our wallets, if anything. Downloading, on the other hand, is a more serious drug. It's the kind that affects other people's wallets for the sake of the downloader's immoral and out-of-control habit.

 

So if we, as the animals we are, operate on a system of reward and punishment, the severe cases of downloading should be punished harshly, which may scare other downloaders into not downloading as much.

 

On the reward side, perhaps when you actually buy a new album at the regular price you can register it online somehow and receive credits to download more stuff from legitimate sites, perhaps label sites, artist sites, etc. Maybe those credits could be made generic so that if the person doesn't want to use them to purchase music related to the purchases from where they were earned, they can go to any number of other places and use them.

 

Maybe with each new CD purchased you get, say, 10 generic credits (after registering your CD), and those can be used to buy, say, two to four new, unreleased tracks, depending on their size.

 

Maybe some labels can inspire more buying by having "sales" on how many credits some particular tracks are worth. The labels that attract more legitimate downloads may attract more sales from people who want the entire albums, complete with package art.

 

I don't see how a credit system would keep downloading down, however, because free will always be better than paying. That's where government needs to step in. After all, that's what government is for, isn't it?

[ritual om]

the dvd,maybe even the livepa discount is interesting.

 

but the thing is that,in the way things have shaped nowadays,through a cd sale many people are involved,most of which are trying to make a living.this makes the cd price high.so reducing the number of people is the first thing.

i i remember correctly the main portion of the cd price goes to the distributor.so one must seek new ways of introducing the cd to the market.

[visine]

the dvd,maybe even the livepa discount is interesting.

 

but the thing is that,in the way things have shaped nowadays,though a cd sale many people are involved,of which most are trying to make a living.this  makes the cd  price high.so reducing the number of people is the first thing.

i i remember correctly the main portion of the cd price goes to the distributor.so one must seek new ways of introducing the cd to the market.

436301[/snapback]

Yeah, good point. Traditional distributors have been the main channels for the labels making the labels very dependant of the distributor. Wasn't it Flying distribution bankrupcy that was one of the main reasons so many labels folded like Matsuri, Flying Rhino etc.? One obvious channel would be to offer the CD's on the label's site. Any other ideas?

[ritual om]

Yeah, good point. Traditional distributors have been the main channels for the labels making the labels very dependant of the distributor. Wasn't it Flying distribution bankrupcy that was one of the main reasons so many labels folded like Matsuri, Flying Rhino etc.? One obvious channel would be to offer the CD's on the label's site. Any other ideas?

436317[/snapback]

 

this means that by doing that he also has the distributor's expenses cause the label continues to give cd's through the distributor.this doesn't change anything.

 

the point is to get rid of the distributor,totally, so that the total cd price would be 6-9 euro.

[RAH]

this means that by doing that he also has the distributor's expenses cause the label continues to give cd's through the distributor.this doesn't change anything.

 

the point is to get rid of the distributor,totally, so that the total cd price would be 6-9 euro.

436319[/snapback]

notice there are some cases where the distributor is the actual label, like wirikuta

[visine]

this means that by doing that he also has the distributor's expenses cause the label continues to give cd's through the distributor.this doesn't change anything.

 

the point is to get rid of the distributor,totally, so that the total cd price would be 6-9 euro.

436319[/snapback]

 

That's exactly what I was thinking. Offer you CD directly online from your site and bypass the distributor, save money and offer CD's for less money.

[ritual om]

notice there are some cases where the distributor is the actual label, like wirikuta 

436320[/snapback]

 

so what?

[ritual om]

That's exactly what I was thinking. Offer you CD directly online from your site and bypass the distributor, save money and offer CD's for less money.

436321[/snapback]

 

yes i just added that they should offer them only online.

[RAH]

so what?

436322[/snapback]

well it's just that it's a little difficult to cut the middle man if they are also making the cd's...

[ritual om]

i must add that lossless sinlge track sell would be great cause in many cases you just want a couple of tracks from a compilation (especially for dj's)

 

if the price is reasonable(i guess it is easy possible cause no distributor is participating in the process) it would have success.

[ritual om]

well it's just that it's a little difficult to cut the middle man if they are also making the cd's...

436327[/snapback]

 

i don't get you.

[amphiton]

A thought came in...

 

if the artist releases a DVD with 5.1 Surround Sound - it would make it really hard to download because of the size - 4.7GB... on the other hand most of the downloaders feel ok listening to 192kbps mp3 and only strong market players would survive - I mean not every artist has the equiptment to make 5.1 sound.

 

Also I've been thinking lately about making a distribution company here in Ukraine - the same thing could be done in other countries as well. I asked many people derectly and through our psy-forums and they say that buying CD for ~8 Euro is OK and they would be very happy to do so... and I know labels receive only 6 Euro per CD. It wont be very profitable, but I could do that for the music.

 

...just thoughts.

[ritual om]

a fact is that the new generations are brought into a world of downloading.they never bought any music and it is possible that they never will.their moto is:

i can dl;why bother buying?it's a matter of conscientiousness.

 

to be able to reach this sceptic is even more difficult.

 

 

if you can prohibit fast speed connections...do it

but the profits are so vast that it is impossible to do it.

[ritual om]

when you see cd's that cost 23 euro then you strengthen one's thought of downloading.the whole music thing has become very commercial and many people are urged into piracy...i know many of them

[RAH]

i don't get you.

436329[/snapback]

that you can't cut down the price of the middle man if they are also the ones that distribute the Cd around and make the actual CD as labels traditionally do.

 

if you want to bypass a label, you could still group together with other people that want to release music, pool your resources together and release a cd without traditional label affiliation. what most people do though is simply create a new label and thats why there are so many new ones, i pressume. It's simply another way to brand your product.

 

You could simply, like it has been stated here, bypass the actual cd creation and go for online distribution selling wav's or mp3's but when you're getting gigs it just sounds much better to say you have already released two albums or one or whatver. It gives your work some confirmation. nevermind you sold two copies, including your girlfriend and your grandma. Plus it gives your work some validation, actually owning it in your hand as palpable product. people in this scene do not give the same respect to a cd that was distributed exlcusively online, free or if it has been charged.

[ritual om]

that you can't cut down the price of the middle man if they are also the ones that distribute the Cd around and make the actual CD as labels traditionally do.

 

if you want to bypass a label, you could still group together with other people that want to release music, pool your resources together and release a cd without traditional label affiliation. what most people do though is simply create a new label and thats why there are so many new ones, i pressume. It's simply another way to brand your product.

 

You could simply, like it has been stated here, bypass the actual cd creation and go for online distribution selling wav's or mp3's but when you're getting gigs it just sounds much better to say you have already released two albums or one or whatver. It gives your work some confirmation. nevermind you sold two copies, including your girlfriend and your grandma. Plus it gives your work some validation, actually owning it in your hand as palpable product. people in this scene do not give the same respect to a cd that was distributed exlcusively online, free or if it has been charged.

436342[/snapback]

 

agreed.just don't feed the distributor.

[Rupture]

great ideas posted here!

 

and if the cd's came with a free acid blotter inside of them?

jk

[ritual om]

if some labels of one scene cooperated and made their own distributor which means a low rise of the cd price it would be great.i don't know .of course,if there are other difficulties involved.

 

i guess that most people nowadays in this scene compose music just for the glory.

 

so they don't bother much for the profit

[visine]

if some labels of one scene cooperated and made their own distributor which means a low rise of the cd price it would be great.i don't know .of course,if there are other difficulties involved.

 

i guess that most people nowadays in this scene compose music just for the glory.

 

so they don't bother much for the profit

436353[/snapback]

Here is another thing. Some small labels released CDs exclusivelly from their website...but they charge full prices even though there is no ditribution/middleman Why not pass on some of those savings onto the customer? Maybe they are afraid their product will be deemed less valuable if it costs less then what other people sell it for at places like psyshop or saikosounds.