What a bunch of babies
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
http://pitchfork.com/news/66252-jack-white-trent-reznor-beck-more-join-petition-against-youtube/
as if youtube's copyright policy isn't already fucked enough
>>65854044
The worst part is that they're mad that Youtube makes money off their ads and not them, like youtube doesn't need to make money and run a site and platform.
They're all washed up hacks the lot of them really aside from like 2 artists who I somewhat lost respect for.
>>65854044
Honestly I buy records a lot but if music managed to survive through the tin pan alley and fake book days it's gonna survive through this.
>>65854065
which two?
st vincent and meghan trainor are the only two I think are relevant
>>65854105
Beck is more relevant than Meghan Trainor already.
Ariel pink said in an interview he preferred youtube over spotify
and I've found too many good albums off youtube suggestions
even the comment section gives better recs than /mu/
>>65854126
yeah right
what has he done in the last 2 years?
meghan just dropped an easy top 20 aotysf
>>65854183
he won the grammy for best album?
>>65854193
yeah for an album over 2 years old
thats not doing anything
face it he's washed up
>>65854183
Did she? Is it like her first one? I actually did listen to that one and man did I despise every second.
>>65854044
They're not wrong, music sharing services are cancer. And Trent is an OG pirate, he was part of Oink's Pink Palace back in the day.
Fuck 'em. They have way more opportunity for money now than ever.
>>65854229
I only heard the singles from the first one and turned my nose up to it hard. This one seems pretty different at least from those. Very little of the doo-wop angle if any.
they have a point
before the internet, all of you could have been in shitty bands and made enough money to pay rent and eat
now literally no one makes any money at all from music
it sucks desu
people don't value music anymore, music has literally become worthless
if you still had to buy music, you would be far better off, what you had would mean a lot more to you
music was a lot more important before you could just steal it
>>65854248
THIS
FUCK all of them.
wtf happened to jack white??
tidal, now this?
>>65854105
>>65854183
>respecting meghan trainor
what's wrong with you
>>65854277
hey I'm just as surprised as you but her new album is solid as fuck
>>65854144
do you have any other hobbies tryhard. also are you a homo sex?
>>65854260
This desu senpai, most of this thread is clearly teenagers, as someone who's actually made an attempt to make studio music the industry is a broken joke, I've relegated it to hobby status so I can eat.
>>65854317
I collect meme mugs for my tumblr
>>65854260
>people don't value music anymore, music has literally become worthless
>if you still had to buy music, you would be far better off, what you had would mean a lot more to you
Maybe this is a positive development? Is music intrinsically worthless? Are we beginning to evolving beyond our need for music? Will future generations view music and and our irrational affection for it the same way as we view heroin and religious fanatics?
>>65854377
>heroin
What?
It would be all peachy if we lived in a post-scarcity Star Trek-esque society where we could all produce and consume by choice without having to worry about making or spending money, but we're not there yet, and won't be for a very long time if ever. You can't have it be that way for the arts and nothing else, the way things are going music, writing, movies etc will just die out. I feel the Internet will end up being locked down before then, we're on our way to that, I've been saying it would happen since I was a kid. The openness we had say 15 years ago just can't last with a large audience. Then again you're probably just meming.
>>65854105
I was a little sad when I saw that both Annie and Byrne signed it, I respect them a lot but this is stupid.
>>65854367
this answered both questions thank you
>>65854105
I was talking about Vince Staples and St. Vincent.
I mean Taylor Swift is relevant but she's a Snake
>moan all this time about rampant piracy
>something comes along that curbs it and the artist gets at least something
>"WOW NO I WANT MORE"
Fuck it, back to piracy it is then.
> the most successful pop and rock stars of our era are upset we're not giving them more money
I don't know why, but I think I expected more of Trent Reznor. Oh well
>>65854446
t. entitled teen boy
>>65854426
np
>>65854260
you can make money by going out and playing music. you sleep on floors. you buy a bag of doritos and pump some nacho cheese in the bag while the store clerk isn't looking. you travel to gigs in a cramped van.
you do what it takes. if you can't then maybe it isn't for you. that's how to make money playing music. like they did before this shit generation existed. these entitled fuckers who feel like they deserve everything, free college, free healthcare, free music.
books sell because they are a physical, tangible thing. music files aren't a thing. they want you to pay for 8 megabytes of 0's and 1's. paintings sell because they are a physical form of art that you can own and appreciate with more than one sense.
idk maybe the /v/ pasta is right. maybe music is the lowest form of art. all i know is that petition form is looking more and more cringy just like the Tidal release pictures.
>>65854404
By music being like heroin, I mean, will the people of the future view music as destructive, dangerous, addictive, a waste of time, and, the only tangible benefit being temporary pleasure, ultimately better never dabbled with?
Maybe music should be illegalized?
nobody would give a fuck about these oldhags if it wasn't for the internet
pitchfork made them
>>65854470
this.
it's as stupid as people who donate money to Trump. Motherfuckers for what? He's a billionaire, supposedly. and yet there they are, giving him $. and there he is asking for it.
>>65854495
>By music being like heroin, I mean, will the people of the future view music as destructive, dangerous, addictive, a waste of time, and, the only tangible benefit being temporary pleasure, ultimately better never dabbled with?
No.
might be a good thing honestly. What has the music industry brought us besides a bunch of derivative shit?
>>65854494
It has nothing to do with the artistic value of music and everything to do with how the Internet has changed distribution, and this goes for any creative content that can be digitized.
This translates into young people, historically the biggest purchasers of music, who never knew a pre-Internet world expecting creative content to simply be free, because that's how it's always been for them.
Yeah, great. Free! Ramifications of that, though, is industry death. Rampant piracy also hurts the "underground bands," more than it punishes the "evil music industry."
The megastars can always profit off touring, which has now become the biggest source of revenue for musicians (and the only musicians really profiting are the big stars). An underground band's biggest source of revenue will usually be album sales, since they can't afford to put on a multi-city tour.
Piracy is parasitic, and every self proclaimed "music lover" should be against it.
>>65854730
why can't the megastars donate money to the underground?
>>65854730
>biggest source of revenue
Adding a chart.
shit nigga what happened to jack white
I only saw him in concert like 2 years ago and he looked fine
>>65854740
Some do, in the form of starting labels with favorable contract terms that doesn't screw over the artist.
Think Trent with Nothing Records, Aphex Twin with Rephlex, Jack White with Third Man, etc.
That's a better way to help struggling/underground artists than just charity.
>>65854746
Even though I believe the graph could you provide a source for it please? Image search comes up with "paper".
>>65854787
yes but why can't these guys pick an underground album/artist they like and give them $1,000
That wouldn't hurt their pockets at all.
especially taylor swift
once a month pick an artist they like and share them on social media
instead of whining. they have the fanbase to promote underground artist with a click of button social media
>>65854800
http://pigeonsandplanes.com/2013/10/piracy-isnt-bad-thought/
Funny thing is, it's from an article defending piracy, but the author didn't adjust for inflation and didn't examine who is exactly profiting off touring (which are the Kanye's, Swift's, Adele's of the world and not the underground or even middle-of-the-road "stars," (like a Chvrches or something).
>>65854816
>instead of whining. they have the fanbase to promote underground artist with a click of button social media
Yes. That would be neat. If Taylor shouted out [underground band here], they would see a boon in exposure.
But as we've established, since no one wants to pay for anything, would Taylor's fans purchase that band's album or just pirate it?
>>65854896
I'd say some would purchase which is better than 0
diehard fans support anything the artist backs even shitty t-shirts or perfume.
I just think it's kinda rude of these guys whining about money they already made. but haven't made an effort to take the matter in their own hands.
If i was a rich megastar I'd surely promote and share the music that inspired me daily.
thats what michael gira does on his fb which is neat IMO
>>65854896
Yeah. Most here have no idea of the work it takes to learn how to play instruments, write, sing and record songs.
Piracy has destroyed smaller/mid level bands who for me usually made the most interesting music.
>>65854730
>The megastars can always profit off touring, which has now become the biggest source of revenue for musicians
Touring has always been the main source of revenue for musicians, on all levels. From small bands begging you to buy a shirt from the merch table so they can buy gas to the next gig to the larger acts like madonna who snowballs and takes the profits from her last tour to help fund the next one just like george lucas did with the first three star wars films, each one paying for the next.
>Piracy is parasitic, and every self proclaimed "music lover" should be against it.
nobody's saying it isn't. as a person who's purchased more than 600 albums with my own money that i earned at my shit job i can say that there should be a model that compensates artists fairly but provides the listener with something worth purchasing as well. that's not mp3's. i can remember the last time i purchased an mp3 file. it was from amazon. i stopped because it was shitty 256 VBR. at this point the better way to support your favorite artist is to buy a shirt from them, especially at a concert where you can be sure that there's no label head lurking in the shadows to take a cut.
the music industry has had every opportunity to adapt and create a YT like platform of their own and yet here we are again having these same debates about money and who has it and how to get some of it. You don't see this shit happening on /lit/ or /v/ or /tv/. it's becoming more and more clear with every failed business model that the biggest thing hampering progress in that respect is greed.
not some dozen or so /mu/tants pirating an obscure import only release from before they were born or some kids on YT who don't know any better, it's music industry greed. rich white dudes battling each other for bigger slices of the pie. same old story. people clinging to power. rich shits hanging onto their money and not spending it.
>>65854923
I wonder if artists ever have clauses in their contracts that dictate what they can post on social media. I'd imagine promoting competitors would be frowned upon by business-minded labels.
>>65854923
>I just think it's kinda rude of these guys whining about money they already made. but haven't made an effort to take the matter in their own hands.
Even though they are probably doing it out of greed (the optimist in me hopes they're doing it out of protecting not only their own content, but the "little guy's" content, as well), I think their point is valid. You can find tons of full length albums from indie artists on youtube, which weren't uploaded by the artist themselves.
>thats what michael gira does on his fb which is neat IMO
Indeed. Gira has got a lot younger people into the blues.
>>65854260
>all of you could have been in shitty bands and made enough money to pay rent and eat
Absolutely not.
A large majority of bands could not go anywhere because labels, even small labels were tied to release schedules since releasing something meand a physical release, manufactoring costs, promotion and marketing etc, even for small and indemendant labels.
And the bands could sustain themselves by touring because you actually need a smaller personnal income during the tour. And guess what, bands still do that today.
The reason why it seems like more artists can't make a living from their music is because more artists are releasing shit recorded on their phones. of course they are not going to make minimum wage from that, just like the crappy band who couldn't get on any label wouldn't have 20 years ago. And both are just as good in terms of music. The situation hasn't changed that much the only difference is that every artist is now visible.
>>65855046
>You can find tons of full length albums from indie artists on youtube, which weren't uploaded by the artist themselves.
thats true I've asked some of the uploaders in situations in that and alot of have told me that don't monetize the videos
tho maybe some artist should do what dg does and upload the full album themselves on yt.
But I agree the situation is mess but I have loads of friends in punk bands who just wish people could even hear their music.getting promoted IMO is even harder now. unless you somehow make friends with p4k,rolling stone writers
>Vince Staples
>David Byrne
>Bootsy Collins
really?
>>65855159
thank god no one I like is on there
this year's model is overrated
>two egomaniacs and a scientologist
>>65854495
lol how?
>>65854989
>Touring has always been the main source of revenue for musicians, on all levels. From small bands begging you to buy a shirt from the merch table
You saw the graph I posted? Concert revenue was a small piece of the pie before the Internet killed record sales revenue.
A good insight into this is the Twisted Sister documentary (on Netlfix). They were killing themselves touring the East Coast, and didn't really start to make any real money until they decided to release a single through their own indie label. Yes, they also profited off merch, but their first single selling well is what helped them stay financially afloat.
>provides the listener with something worth purchasing as well.
I would say an LP fits that description. You can even do neat things with them like etching holograms into the dead wax.
I don't know how a YT type platform would work, since music fans will just opt to go to the free version rather than pay a monthly fee for Tidal Video or something like that.
I'm not really sure how the industry can adapt. Streaming is probably their best bet. 9.99 month to have millions of albums at the click of a button is a small price to pay for that convenience, but we know artists don't make anything from streaming.
I don't think there's an easy solution other than music buyers being "conscience" consumers.
>hurr why do they want money for their work they should work for free
good thing i don't listen to any of these faggots. my taste is obscure enough to not worry about any of this
>>65855242
>I don't think there's an easy solution other than music buyers being "conscience" consumers.
it doesn't need to have an ethical dimension at all
i invest in artists i like so they'll be able to make more music
pretty selfish really but that's the free market
Vince staples is already a hack to begin with. No surprise there.
>>65855128
>thats true I've asked some of the uploaders in situations in that and alot of have told me that don't monetize the videos
Here's the thing YOU CAN'T
YOU CAN'T MONETIZE A SONG IF YOUTUBE DETECTS IF WITH THEIR AUTOMATIC SYSTEM
AND THEY WILL DETECT IT MAJORITY OF THE TIME.
The problem for new artists isn't just money, it's mostly getting NOTICED, most of them go unnoticed and die, Youtube is a place for them where they can at least try and get some audience, some have succeded
There is TOO MUCH music today and it is much harder for people to come on top especially for those who are small, that is impossible, this isn't YouTube's fault, if anything YouTube gives them some kind of platform to share their songs on.
>>65855280
>i invest in artists i like so they'll be able to make more music
Yes. That qualifies as a conscience consumer to me. You're paying for something you got entertainment value out of and rewarding the content creator for their "service," just like any other business transaction.
>>65855273
>forgetting the part about every artist on that list already being loaded
They just want to keep living pretending they are jet-setters and don't want to adapt to the next form of the music industry with less overall revenue for everybody.
That's why nobody is taking that shit seriously. Nobody is going to feel bad for Elton John, Dave Grohl or Kenny G. ll the musicians complaining are either filthy rich already and want to remain that rich without too much work, aspiring to be pop stars in that same vein, or one-hit wonder who want to live of one or two songs forever.
>>65854044
Shut up you pirating fat nerd.
>>65855315
yeah you can frame it that way if you like, but i'm not doing it for any moral reasons
i'm doing it so i can get some more of that lovely music
>>65855300
>The problem for new artists isn't just money, it's mostly getting NOTICED, most of them go unnoticed and die, Youtube is a place for them where they can at least try and get some audience, some have succeded
The argument isn't centered around unnoticed and unsigned artists who can do as they please with their music since they aren't under any contract.
This is what the argument boils down to:
- You're an unsigned artist who release a two song EP on youtube.
- It somehow gets exposure.
- Based on that exposure, this unsigned artist either gets a record deal or just decides to really a full length album independenty.
- He releases his album.
- The next day, he discovers some pirate uploaded his entire album to Youtube. It has 50K hits compared to the 50 or so legitimate album sales he got on his website.
Anyone would be pissed. Maybe those 50K viewers wouldn't have bought the album anyway, but that can never be proven. Even if he lost out on 500 album sales due to that piracy, it's worth being angry about.
>>65855195
Burn all instruments, imprison all known musicians, criminalize production, possession and use of music, program computers to report musical software, monitor the public through mobile phones. It would solve the problem of people trying to make money from music.
>>65855400
>to really
*to release
>making music is "work"
>>65855428
making good music is work
>>65854044
Imagine if there's Denuvo for music.the shitstorm would be glorious. plus these guys should learn from the vidya industry. denuvo kills both piracy and sales.
>>65855428
only for the producers 2bh and label owners. listen to macs demos vs the actual album.
>>65854090
Damn, this is a good point desu
You never hear film makers complain about this shit
When you see Taylor Swift, Trent Reznor, and Jack White claiming that they make valuable art...BE VERY WARY.
>>65855740
no but you might have noticed a lot of shitty remakes coming out
so what?
they want payola now?
>>65855758
Refer to the post above yours.
>>65855412
According to the Koran all music that is made for monetary gain is haram. The only truly acceptable music is played as a hobby for family in a calm setting. Music with the inent of delivering a strong emotional response is seen as dangerous.
The policy isn't strictly enforced but the sentiment is present in some parts of the middle east.
The comparison of music to heroine isn't that illegitimate to some people and there is potential for it to catch on.
If we went to a fundamental communist ideology, it could be argued that since the contributions of the artist to the collective are not objectively quantifiable that they are not worth the collectives resources.
Some food for thought on this topic.
>>65855766
And "sequels" of films from 10,20, and 30 years ago is a big trend right now.
>>65855789
Don't tell me you think any of the people in the P4k article made anything of value.
Paul McCartney was the only one and even he was surpassed by Lennon.
>>65855159
>Deadmau5
Remember he said he didn't cared about any of this when he came here?
>>65855813
Jack White is one of the most talented guitarists of the 21st century. Are you ignorant?
Why do musicians think they are important people? I am genuinely curious why they think they matter as people not even being edgy. I wonder what kind of yes man environment you need to be in to be that delusional
>>65854494
>not wanting college to be free
>heavily indebting people for existing
alt-children, everybody
>>65855858
lol
They're not really wrong; Youtube directly profits from the fact that people illegally upload shit tons of copyrighted music and the only way to deal with it is by sitting around filing DMCA requests all day. (Also, most bands aren't rich.)
It's always the mega rich artists that complain about money. I thought music was a passion.
Small time artists ask you to buy their album or some merch so they can continue living their dream, playing shows and recording music. Taylor Swift does not need any more money.
>take out music off youtube and spotify
>people just start torrenting again
Face it music fags, you're fucked.
Go make money giving blowjobs near the highway or something.
Should we really listen to trent "steal and steal some more " reznor, beck aka HAIL LORD XENU and jack "get me some more donuts meg" white?
>>65855879
An internet acronym isn't a valid argument. Stop being a contrarian for the sake of it and back yourself up with a valid response.
5 classic albums with the white stripes, two great solo albums, in several other musical groups. Denying any of this would be the ultimate contrarian bullshit.
>>65855858
holy kek
>>65854560
The vast majority of recorded music
>>65855891
Rich artists have the money, voice and reach to make companies and people more aware. Who's going to listen to someone small like Jeff Rosenstock?
>>65855858
Talented songwriter, yes.
One of the most talented guitarists? Ha no.
The only music left on youtube will be obscure and unfamouse people bringing in the new patrician era of music
>>65855934
>>65855917
Not a valid argument or defence.
>>65855942
He is though. Not even a fan boy by any means but he's definitely up there. You don't need to shred to be talented as hell.
>>65855919
mucians existed before the record was invented, there is a famous story of john philip sousa shitting on the invention of the record because people wont go out to see live music anymore.
>>65855954
this will be a win-win for everyone
these chucklefucks will receive less exposure and actual good music will stand out and be supported in yt
>>65855988
Live music will never die out. In fact with piracy it's more relevant than ever.
god, do musicians even realize how uncool they look when they do shit like this, hurrr give me more money durrr you wouldn't download a car.
Like fuck off, there are holes in my walls and i saw a rat yesterday.
Fuckers wont to have a poverty battle.
>>65855999
>reznor isn't good
>beck isn't good
>vince staples isn't good
>jack white isn't good
I can only handle so much contrarianism
>>65855999
>and actual good music will stand out and be supported in yt
great, i look forward to everyone playing the new bashur single
>>65856024
>all of that "music"
>good
kekekekekekek
>>65854516
to be fair paul mccartney was in his prime of fame when you were still swimming in your daddy's nutsack
>>65856024
jack white is godawful
the rest are decent though
>>65855960
Like I said, he's good but you can't put him in the top tier of guitarists of the last 15-20 years.
seems like some of you are treating this as some rich artists complaining about piracy
but it's more that a huge corporation is stealing their money, and there's a bit of a difference there
maybe not to you as the content is still free, but that ad revenue is going to google and not to the artist, and you're happy to support the corporation
not defending any of these idiots btw i think their statement is highly retarded
but google are getting rich as fuck and you're supporting that by saying 'it's bad to be rich'
which makes no sense at all
>as "artists" we are a vital contributing force to america
>meghan trainor
>englebert humperdink
>yoko ono lennon
>fall out boy
>>65854044
The only really respectable names on that list are:
David Byrne
Elvis Costello
Mick Jones
Paul McCartney
Pete Townshend
Trent Reznor
Beck
Queens of the Stone Age
Everyone else on that list is either a hack or washed up.
>>65856156
Nigger do you think we care if some top 40 pop bitch or fuck you like an animal gets fleeced, nigger we cant pay our bills and are in debt, we are going to dowNload your shit for free foreeveerrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
>>65856191
well yeah that's a valid response to some top 40 idiots making a stupid statement
but the situation affects all musicians, and most of them are not top 40
>>65856191
retard
this episode has to be like 10 years old by now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0wXeN6_FY
>>65856024
all of them are trash execept reznor, but his best work is literally a video game soundtrack lol
>>65856180
None of them are
Even David Byrne sucks, Eno was the reason their one good album was so amazing
Paul McCartney is a hack and the Beatles fucking sucked
>people I like are on that list
yikes
>>65856282
>I don't want to support the artists I like
yikes
>>65856272
>Even David Byrne sucks, Eno was the reason their one good album was so amazing
Fuck off, the Talking Heads made a few great albums.
>>65856282
I only like three artists on that list. Am I saved?
>>65854476
who are these two desu
"Music itself is going to become like running water or electricity. So it's like, just take advantage of these last few years because none of this is ever going to happen again. You'd better be prepared for doing a lot of touring because that's really the only unique situation that's going to be left." -David Bowie
That feel when bowie shaking his fucking head from english man heaven at reznor
>>65854044
OH NO NOT BECK
>>65856337
I buy their music, this is stupid tho. Youtube is a platform to share music, this is gay desu
>>65856410
>Youtube is a platform to share music
it's a business, it makes millions of dollars
it's not there for your convenience, it's there to make money
>>65854367
post more
>>65856431
Yes? and? It still is a platform to share music.
>>65856442
they would deny that if you tried to sue them
>>65855159
>Kenny G
>>65856470
They have given over 3 billion to the music industry in the past year. The people on that petition are already rich as fuck and you don't see non-wealthy or obscure bands complaining. Go out and perform.
>>65854989
>the music industry has had every opportunity to adapt and create a YT like platform of their own and yet here we are again having these same debates about money and who has it and how to get some of it.
fucking this, if indie labels or artists offerred streaming, downloading and unique perks directly through their own websites then they could make money through a decent sized cult fanbase. It could have ad revenue and set prices for media and even back up your purchases for different devices. As for artists signed to a major label, fuck them they can afford to do their own thing as soon as they finish their contract.
Each of the artists who signed the petition has more than enough money to stop working for the rest of their lives. This whole ordeal is just the old South Park gag of Lars Ulrich having to settle for a slightly less luxurious golden swimming pool in his backyard all over again.
People will always keep going to concerts. If you are young, relevant and talented you will always be able to make money with music.
>>65855159
I don't even listen to any of these fuckers.
I'm actually kind of sad David Byrne signed it
I guess he truly is a government man
Music, movies, tv, porn,anything you can name, have all been disrupted by the invention of the internet.
Capitalism is being warped by the internet.
The internet is the most important invention in human history, more important than the printing press.
People will upload and share info and ideas for free, and if not free you can find them for free on shadier areas of the internet.
And this will just keep growing, eventually the internet will connect the whole of humanity, the internet will be in everything, your phone, your refrigerator, everything will be powered by the internet, this will lead to the next industrial revolution
>>65856534
he's taking a look at his hands
>>65856558
I had no idea his morals were so thin
>>65855893
Honestly not sure normies are smart enough to download music. Music sales didn't go down for real until streaming services started.
>>65856549
idk if this is a copypasta but I agree.
>>65856496
i'm just curious as to why you think you're helping anyone by defending this fucking MAMMOTH corporation
if it was actual filesharing then maybe you would have a point, but it isn't, there is money being made off ads and the draw is the content
and yeah recently google have started paying for content, due to a number of very long class-action lawsuits, because their position was untenable
>>65855159
A lot of these bands and musicians are just washed up and drooling for money.
>>65856585
The music industry is a mammoth corp as well, it's all monopoly rich people bullshit.
see >>65856521
>>65856380
Bowie chan knew where it was at.
>>65856607
google >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what's left of the music 'industry'
>>65856603
yeah true lol
>>65856620
What is left are huge corporation's just as big as google and probably integrated as well.
case and point: sony
>>65856574
not copypasta, something i have been thinking about for a while, plus watching videos about the possible future on youtube
>>65856633
there are way more artists now than 30 years ago, most of them have nothing to do with sony warner or universal
>>65856585
hey guess what music faggot, you ever hear of ad block?
Well more and more people are going to be using adblock as time goes on, i havent seen a fucking advertisement in years.
Not only are musicians fucked, so are the corporations, the purpose of the internet was to share info not make money.
>>65856649
>theres more ____ now than in the past
WOW!
>>65856678
i agree with you completely, as i said this isn't about piracy or information being free because hurr durr internet liberation
google are not about liberation
>>65855159
>the only people openly against shit like this are already filthy rich from music
You can't take Metallica seriously when they preach about piracy while they sold out like crazy and sit on their piles of money.
>>65856713
i know but unfortunately metallica are not the only act to be featured on youtube
everyone is
>>65856709
google is just one of the massive megacorporations that will own everything in our increasingly cyberpunk present/future
>>65856762
it just pains me to see people defend them over artists, but i guess i have to blame the artists or whoever organised this shitshow of a statement for not picking the right artists to make their point
if they had all been 15 year old kids maybe everyone would see the situation for what it is
>using YouTube for music in the first place
Oh no, we won't have shit-tier compressed audio anymore.
>>65856781
It doesnt matter who signed the list, you look like fucking greedy pieces of shit, and it makes the fans think differently of you.
Put yourself in the shoes of an avrage human being who isnt famous or rich, why should is pend money on music, when i can get it for free in an instant and use the rest of the money to pay bills or waste on other stupid shit.
These musicians are millionaire crying to us about how they arent making even more money while the avarge folk cant even find a job.
TLDR: cry more bitch nigga.jpg
>>65856869
yeah that's more or less what i was saying, they fucked it up by using rich people, but the situation is the same for all artists, rich or poor, and there are a LOT more poor ones
>>65854377
>religious fanatics
shut up, islamophobe
>>65854730
>since they can't afford to put on a multi-city tour
Yes, they can, and they do it all the time. They get with other small bands, rent a bus, and they tour together for months at a time.
You haven't the slightest fucking clue what you're talking about.
>>65854260
>before the internet, all of you could have been in shitty bands and made enough money to pay rent and eat
Some of the most delusional shit I've heard all year.
>>65854248
What I don't get is that they are petitioning on making Youtube giving them more money. When Google Play Music already fulfills the best bang for their money when it comes to streams. And also there are so many ways to buy music that this should be a non-issue unless your a completely retarded artist that only uploads on Youtube and nowhere else like Bandcamp and the such.
>i'm rich
>pay me more
Not a single good artist on the list either
>be amateur film maker
>see this thread
>see all the ways a musician can make money; streams, merch, shows, cds
>only way i make money is if someone buys my film
fuck them
>i make art
>therefore I should be rich
They should kill themselves. No joke. yes, we should value art, but wealth has nothing to do with entertainment. Art has nothing to do with wealth.
I have no respect for any artists that feels that society OWES them something to expressing themselves. How egotistical can you get?
>>65854730
We need a universal basic income to guarantee artists can still be artists and create without the burden of having to make money from their art. This is the only positive future. Art should be free but to do that we need to do away with the urgency of making profit. Better art will be made this way as well. If we can't demolish the entire system and replace it with something new then we need to keep the current system and release people from the burden of having to work shitty meaningless jobs just to eat and pay rent.
>>65854494
your illiterate
>>65855797
wtf... im a #shillforhill now
Notice how everyone on the list is already an established artist with lots of money.
>"We want to protect future artists."
Yeah right. Youtube and other free streaming websites are how future artists get popular in this day and age. What a load of shit. Good thing everyone on this list is a talentless hack.
>>65857411
So stop doing it. No one cares.
>>65854044
Why does it always seem like the only musicians who criticize YouTube are the ones who are already massively wealthy?
artists never made good money off of music.
literally the only people that are hit in any meaningful way by the death of the music industry as we knew it are the labels, and the biggest 1% of artists. before the internet, labels would always fuck bands for every dime they could get, and expect them to be grateful for the privilege.
these record label fuckers that bitch and moan about lost profits aren't worried about artists, or the value of music, they're worried that they won't be able to make millions by exploiting the vast majority of bands or artists that sign onto their label.
>>65854260
spoken like someone that has no idea what they're talking about.
Just read this article written by Steve Albini in the 90's to see where being in a band got you.
http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=17
>>65854367
livin' the high life I see
Link to it btw?
>U2
OH NO HOW WILL I LISTEN TO SONGS OF EXPERIENCE FAGGOTRY NOW?????
>>65857600
no one will pay attention to anyone else.
>>65856175
>implying they care about 'art' at all
they mean financial contribution to the economy.
>>65854317
>homo sex
don't lie you'd fuck a twink too
>>65854277
nu /mu/
>Ying Yang Twins
>The Chainsmokers
>Meghan Trainor
>Maroon 5
>Kenny G
>Bon Jovi
How will we ever recover from this...
>>65857680
reminder that we have, in fact, progressed past neo /mu/ and into post-neo /mu/
We need a hero.
>>65854426
kek
>>65855120
are you really that stupid to think they didnt money coz "its recorded on phones"? get real it has nothing to do with the nature of business in 2016
>>65855862
justin bieber has 200 millions and is the voice of the people who everyone listens to, if he does shit you all will know. So IMO they are important people coz 10 000 people went to their show and wanna go again and again.
You´re fucking stupid for even asking this
>>65857851
Guess where Justin Bieber started
On. Fucking. YouTube.
>>65857746
hhh is such a qt unff :3
>>65857851
>and is the voice of the people
>>65857851
If you think Justin Bieber is more important than someone like Elon Musk because of instagram followers you are a literal braindead child
>>65857455
its a field of work. any field of work should come with a respective pay that matches the amount of work that went into creating it
or do you wanna go jobbing to construction yard only to receive a warm handshake after year´s worth dedicated time and effort? that´s what you´re saying
>>65857710
>insulting Kenny "Saxual Predator" G
plen
>>65857851
good god you are dumb
>>65858014
instagram is for faggots. then again, so is 4chan
>>65856897
true, though I don't think any regular artist would be able to make shit off of youtube ad money even if their video gets a million hits. I mean, they could get a check in the mail for whatever, a couple thousand. But they aren't going to be living off of it. Even if all their songs on their newest album got a million hits (unlikely for anybody but the buzzbands and big stars) they'd be looking at a pretty middling payday by most youtube partnership contracts. You need hundreds of thousands of hits a day into the millions a day to make any sort of living off of youtube.
That isn't to say that they shouldn't get the money, but I don't think it's the solution to their problems or anything. I figure this is still more of a rich person's game. The stars and their labels just want YouTube to cut them a sweet deal, probably far above the market price for the average popular youtuber because they have an industry behind them that might be able to put more legal pressure on youtube. And of course if it worked out that the labels got really nice licensing deals from youtube the company and its best talent would probably see the lion's share of it. Any middling band is going to get the crap deal where the label takes everything and they probably end up in debt, like the past.
>>65858266
this is more or less right, and it's why the initial takedowns were all major label recordings
it took almost 10 years for the indie labels to be able to achieve the same thing, because who wants to go into litigation against google
middling artists tend to be on profit share deals rather than points deals so they don't end up giving all their income away (what there is of it)
i think saying that it's small amounts (it is, tiny) is a bit meaningless though when the platform is so huge, it all adds up, and as far as i know all these artists are saying is that they deserve a share of that, and they do (exactly how much obviously depends on their deals etc)
i don't see a problem with artists requesting they get a share, if someone's making money then artists should come first, regardless of how small the amounts actually are
Part of me feels that if you're involved in the music business, you should automatically expect to not make money. Music is a transparent commodity, and unlike other art forms, it takes shape in many different formats. All in all, it's just sound, and it's pretty naive to think you could regulate sound.
Nowadays, literally anybody can make music and have it be heard by millions of people without an inbetween, and that's incredible. Society judges whether or not someone's music deserves a price, and that's the whole basis of capitalism.
The artists who signed the petition need to adapt to the current market. If not, then they should at least be infinitely thankful they're making money doing what they love. They're the select few out of all artists who make money in music. They've had their share, so fuck 'em.
>>65857411
>product placement
>commission work
>ad revenue
Fuck off.
>>65858015
>or do you wanna go jobbing to construction yard only to receive a warm handshake after year´s worth dedicated time and effort? that´s what you´re saying
Grimes is both the producer, singer-songwriter and editor of her own music videos, and she even has enough time to make new stuff and tour. I don't see Grimes on that list of these dad rockers, so I guess she is fine with getting exposure from youtube and money from other sources, instead of signing these bullshit petitions getting a larger cut at the expense of youtube making free streaming near-impossible.
What I am trying to say is that needing a big bunch of people, social media gurus and loads of middlemen each craving for their cut is kafkaesque bureaucracy and has very little to do with the actual value of music in this time and age where internet exists.
All you people thinking, that this "fuck you like an animal" guy and the Bono-faggot thinking that it's super edgy to one-up the "big bad youtube-google corporation" should turn off the computer and go back masturbating to your vinyl music bullshit, because for the average joe, it will be that if somebody fucks with DMCA and the way Youtube operates right now, it will result in a pressure for Google to give up on youtube's free service, additionally fucking up the remaining free streaming sites, turning internet into what TV is right now - exclusively commercial entertainment medium.
1/2
>Boo hoo landfill indie sucks anyway, when they hit big and get talent they deserve what they can get
Internet can not turn into television, where big-shots choose what gets exposure and what does not. Internet is supposed to be a chance for any basement-dwelling-FL-Studio-DJ to upload their stuff and at least have a shot at making it big. Vibrant, colourful world of diverse small-time musicians and indie labels is absolutely vital ground for much-needed influences for future artists and other music-appreciators, we must not sufficate it because Trent thinks it's edgy to rape youtube for being a big corporation while owning a private jet himself.
2/2
>>65858424
I agree, they should definitely get their money. YouTube isn't any better than any other middle man. As far as I understand their business, they're basically rent-seeking content producers because the infrastructure is owned by them. I guess the "ethics" of this could be argued, but it's hardly any better than labels exploiting their power position over most of their talent.
But I just can't help but feel the whole thing is a bit sleezy because it is trying to posture as this "support the artists" kind of thing, when it's really going to majorly benefit only the labels and the stars that are already rich. It's as if SeaWorld made a charity to "support the whales" and the money gave shamu a bigger pool, the executives a fat bonus, and a handful of people got employed to go harass people hunting whales with water canons or something.
Why don't they start their own youtube channels, post their music there, and make bank off the ad revenue?
>>65854044
>Paul McCartney, Taylor Swift, U2, Vince Staples, Kings of Leon, and Carole King. Now, the full list is here, and it includes Beck, Jack White, Trent Reznor, David Byrne, the Black Keys, U2, Spoon, Pusha T, Miguel, Nirvana’s Krist Novoselic, Pearl Jam, Pharrell, Yoko Ono, Ryan Adams, TV on the Radio, Roy Ayers, Mark Ronson, Fleetwood Mac’s Lindsey Buckingham, Lady Gaga, Guns N’ Roses’ Duff McKagan and Slash, Elvis Costello, Desiigner, Kacey Musgraves, Sade, Ronnie Spector, Rod Stewart, the Who’s Pete Townshend
Bunch of corpses formerly known as artists. Who the fuck cares.
>>65858702
because vevo rules all
>>65855858
>>65855914
>>65855960
I had no idea there were actual Jack White stans on /mu/
>>65858702
They do, but it's not enough money for them. They probably even have nice partnership deals with YouTube. But even YouTube's nice partner contracts probably don't resemble the kinds of paydays that the music industry in the past could get from broadcasting their music. They want as much money as they can pressure out of YouTube. They want to value their music at what it used to be valued, and the new distribution models really don't value it THAT much.
Didn't Trent Reznor release one of his albums on the Internet for free and tell people not to give money to the big label industry?
Why the fuck is he going back on his word?
>>65858682
yeah you're right it's sketchy as fuck, almost like it's intentionally faulty
reminds me a bit of tidal, same thing happened there
i even feel weird posting on their behalf, i'm not at all, i think most of them are greedy for attention, too rich, all that, but i also know there are a ton (the majority) of lesser-known content producers who are getting gradually worn down by this policy
and now YT themselves are making it worse by prioritising 'popular' videos from cretins like bashur over everyone else's stuff
some of >>65858551 's points are salient - YT is going to eventually just be corporate shite with a veneer of 'internet democracy'
>>65858784
or this:
>>65858750
How the fuck does vevo even work though? Isn't there like, specific channels for artists and labels? Why even play ball with vevo? Why not make your own channel for your label and just tell Vevo to fuck off? It's not like people go to Vevo because they like it. They just like the music.
>>65857498
unironically this
>>65854059
For rizzy-realz.
>it's another Millennials feel entitled to the fruits of another persons labor episode
>>65859264
>it's another "idiot using a shitty /tv/ meme and likely misusing the term millennials while being one themselves" episode
>>65859264
How does it feel being an old fart who thinks that dad rock is still relevant and any music that is not pre-internet is bleeps and bloops?
Stop ruining this thread with your bait bullshit and understanding of a music market from the 70's.
>>65859334
>>65859394
>No, I don't have an argument to refute your point!
>Let me attempt to buzzword browbeat you with my ad hominems in a futile attempt to evade and deflect your claim!
>>65859264
>fruits of labor
>modern popular music
go blow a cactus, you mong
>>65854044
Yeah what a bunch of whiny bitches. They are all literally millionares yet they feel entitled to continue to profit from their work! Fucking greedy bunch of fucks
>>65859483
*They are all literally millionaires yet they feel entitled to try and bruteforce platforms to try and milk them for as much money as possible to the detriment of smaller artists!
>>65859483
If you're a millionaire you literally don't need more money.
>>65859503
Shove your adhominems and your modern music up your ass, noone is arguing with you, only laughing at.
>>65858814
He himself pirated music from oink's pink palace while it was still up
>>65854248
>implying indie artists don't get 100% of that jewed away from them
I suppose its still a reasonable argument against super wealthy musicians (which all of them are)
>>65859264
>>65859471
the funny thing is that what you said isn't really refutable. you just kinda made a blanket statement about everyone that doesn't agree with the artists in the op. it's less of a point that you're making, and more just you spouting a meme because you disagree with other people's opinions.
>>65856175
Now, now Meghan Trainor contributes shitloads to America. That figure requires specialist nutrition and costs a lot to maintain.
>>65859637
indie artists are usually on profit-share, not points
points deals are what major labels use to screw you out of all your money, if you're on profit share they can't do that
>>65859541
Exactly my point fambruhgini. Those fucking millionares dont need more any more money, they should just keep their fucking mouth shut and settle with what they have.
I dont understand why rich people always feel so entitled to get richer
>>65859558
>>65859647
>what you said isn't really refutable
What a nuanced and thoughtful replies. It's almost like you're desperately trying to avoid and sidestep the argument or something.
>>65859724
What's your argument? I didn't see any
>>65859745
See, just like that.
>>65859686
>I dont understand why rich people always feel so entitled to get richer
like google you mean?
>>65859783
See, just like >>65859558
>>65859724
there isn't an argument though. all i have to say to refute your "point" is that i don't feel entitled to the fruit of other people's labor.
>>65854044
fuck this shit
>>65859802
Yep, that's what I thought.
>>65859819
Then you have no problem with an artist deciding how they conduct their personal business and how they want to regulate/control the fruits of their labor.
>>65859935
>Then you have no problem with an artist deciding how they conduct their personal business and how they want to regulate/control the fruits of their labor.
i have a problem with "artists" attempting to create strengthen already draconian copyright law. i don't think that makes me entitled.
considering that artists have been fucked over for years by labels, i think it's very telling that people only speak up about "artists" losing profits when the labels stand to lose capital.
>>65860066
That's the literal definition of entitled. They want to protect the fruits of their labor how they see fit and you don't want them to? Why? Because it means you might not have free access to their work or the work of other artists?
If an artist wants to give you their work for free they can do so if they see fit. You're only upset because you feel you have the right to something you didn't create and don't own.
>>65855893
>beck aka HAIL LORD XENU
>>65860152
i don't use youtube for music at all, but keep going on about how i feel entitled to have access to music on a platform i don't even listen to music on.
i just find the idea of a group of millionaires banding together to demand more money in the name of people they have fucked out of profits for years to be fucking stupid. also, copyright holders already hold ridiculous amounts of power over their intellectual property for years after their death.
but whatever, i get that no matter what i say you will characterize me as an entitled millennial just because i disagree with you, despite you not knowing a damn thing about me, or anyone else in this thread.
>>65854494
stop posting oogle scum
>>65860066
Draconian? Are you kidding? 99.9% of people who infringe on other people's copyright never get punished for it, it's one of the least enforced laws out there.
>>65860441
>copyright holders already hold ridiculous amounts of power over their intellectual property for years after their death.
Yep, there it is. Pure unadulterated Millennial entitlement.
You're *explicitly* stating you have a problem with the way these artists are choosing to conduct their personal business regarding control of *THEIR* property (*NOT YOURS*). You think you (or anybody) should be entitled to make decisions regarding something someone else owns.
>>65854044
What a bunch of idiots, if people don't want to pay for music they can just download it. Going nazi mode on youtube videos isn't going to increase their profit margins
>>65855858
dude I certainly agree. I don't know why there is so much hate on him in this thread. He's a musical genius really.
>>65860833
>he buys into the idea of intellectual property
no wonder your posts are so retarded
>>65861673
>ideas don't have any value
>it's been decided my ideas are valueless so all your ideas must be equally valueless
>I'll just take your valueless ideas, thanks
>t.millennial
An entire generation that believes laws don't apply to them, right? If no one's looking just do whatever you want, right? Lie, cheat, steal, kill, whatever, ..right?
Baby boomers have got nothing on you entitled brats. lol, you guys can't figure out why your entire generation failed to launch though, right?
>>65861990
Is this the most buttblasted boomer of our times?
>>65862032
>boomer
Wew, retard. Nice argument by the way.
>>65861990
I didn't say that all you nincompoop, I just implied the idea of intellectual property is retarded and you're just spilling your strawman spaghetti everywhere.
What I would say is that it's impossible to own an idea. The whole concept is just retarded.
>>65862071
>What I would say is that it's impossible to own an idea.
>the law doesn't apply to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Of course, you precious snowflake.
>>65862116
>the law defines what is and isn't possible
wew. could you maybe consider that the law is retarded and based off an absurd idea rather than it somehow making said idea not fucking insane?
>>65861990
Now, anon, you see you've found yourself in a deadlock by ranting this much on the millennials.
If:
>You yourself is a millennial, you're a hypocrite.
>You're gen X or older, you're a 35+ years old man arguing with kids on 4chan.
>You're actually gen Z, you're underage.
In any case, you're at a loss.
>>65862141
>the law defines what is and isn't possible
>so I've given myself permission to murder if i want
>the law is retarded and based off an absurd idea of human value
>I've decided this for myself, I'm entitled to kill if I want to
>>65862172
So another Millennial with no argument, huh? I'm shocked as you can tell.
>>65862254
you're baiting is just getting too obvious fampai
have a (You) tho
>>65862254
you can't own music you can only create it
