Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Adam9, Aug 10, 2019.
I don’t hate the Eagles, but my admiration of Don Felder’s work has grown exponentially.
No it's not. It's a standard jokey response in the USA and nobody takes offense to it. I've heard mothers apologize to their grown children for "dropping them on their head as infants" after they've said something daft.
schnitzerphilip has posted 170 times on this thread arguing a couple of strident points. He can't conceive of anyone wanting to continue listening to music in the manner that they've enjoyed for decades (...for more than half a century, in my case). He can't imagine any of us living in the year 2025 without streaming being our primary, if not sole source of music-listening. He has three relatively expensive cars and scoffs at the notion that a family man might have a dedicated music room. That's silly, an office/study has never been a stretch in America... homes get pretty damned big.
I have no impulse to argue against his point of view. I have no problem with his personal priorities, family is a good thing. Music has become background entertainment that follows him through a hectic life. He loves the convenience of streaming and gets off on the tech magic of voice commands. That's cool. He listens exclusively on portable speakers, TVs or automobile systems. That's fine too, I enjoy listening to music in the car and from my harman/kardon portable out on the balcony. I thoroughly enjoy music under sub-audiophile conditions.
But the ability to understand other perspectives eludes him. He presumes that none of us have gotten THE MEMO and he continues to rant in snarky disbelief. It's amusing, but... a bit scary. I'd sure hate to work with the guy.
I stream a lot of music I already own simply for convenience. At work I can skip between whatever takes my fancy.
Either some playlists or just spend a day going through an artists back catalogue.
Some of which may already be on my phone but I like to think Van Halen/ACDC etc appreciate the micro payments, but for a lot of newer artists or less popular artists I listen to I'm not sure the micropayments add to anything worthwhile.
You make some good points and put things in perspective, to some degree. I view Modern Dad as a caricature sketched out toward the goal of a pilot for a sitcom television show. A snobby Maxwell Smart. But nuevo rich. Teased as a child and now seeking vengeance as an adult via "if they only could see me now". Reactive and hyper-concerned with a certain social media image and an "I'll show them who won in the long run." posture. Where others are just props to impress and possessions and experiences are also props meant to impress and create a certain image.
Get Smart Trailer Starring Don Adams!
This has been discussed. Even if it were true, 10,000 people streaming pays an artists far more than 10,000 people buying used CDs.
It isn't really any of my business, but I think you're reading him totally wrong. He throws out irrelevant details like "three BMW's" as bait, to see if you can willfully miss the point one more time. And a bunch of people never fail to take the bait.
No, the remarks really are in bad taste an in a slightly different context they could get posts deleted and threads shut down. I live in the USA, you can trust me.
It's clear he is just baiting and having some fun as his point has been made again and again and again in this thread. I don't think he is trolling, just having a bit of fun, and he takes some effort to address others and try and sway them towards his way of thinking -all good IMO.
Well, schnitzerphilip certainly did. And I would too.
When the dearest person in the world - your mother - tells you that, it's one thing. When a complete stranger does it, it's a different thing altogether (IMO).
Some good points made above. Especially on the 'best' case scenarios on the income.
A 25 million streamed song being that popular I assume would have some radio play, as well as some physical/download sales, maybe some licencing, advertising?
I like to think overall as a package that the writer would have got some 'decent' income from this track. With all these stories it's rare to get timeframe, all streaming sources bundled together. It's just I got a cheque for X Y or Z. Don't get me wrong it's not a decent amount, but is this income for just one streaming source, for 1 month, 1 quarter or a year?
Are the writing credits split between 2/3/4 or more people as the case tends to be these days?
Just too many unknowns for me to say one way or the other.
Yes. It's funny caricature and spouted stridently in a way meant to be ridiculous and extreme satire. Poking fun by putting forth "Modern Dad". Who should never be taken literally or seriously. Sitcom material.
The joke is on Modern Dad. All that posturing. But not to be taken seriously. A bare bones caricature but still a potential comedic sitcom.
It all depends on your perspective.
LOL. They're always running from "The Man".
Steve Jobs was, and Apple continues to be, vigilant about the rights and privacy of the individual. Unlike Google, Apple is out to protect freedoms and that includes an uncensored library and complete restrictions on the sharing of information, rock solid privacy.
I thought this forum was one place I could avoid vegan bashing. I guess it's just universal.
The atheist bashing was not called for either.
No industry has embraced the concept of technology like the music industry. So as a fan of music it's rather puzzling when someone keeps holding onto the past when the industry keeps moving forward.
While some of you have great memories of taking the shrinkwrap off of a Frank Zappa album, for me it's the time my dad bought me my first stereo, when I worked all summer and sold my uncle's baseball card collection at 13 to purchase a Pioneer SX780, when on afterschool money at age 15 I could flippantly afford the very first Sony Walkman, when I had the very first CD player in my entire college as a sophomore, the day I discovered Winamp and eventually rippers and CDR's, the unveiling of the iPod Nano. These were absolute watershed days for me.
You ask me to respect your love for music; you should respect my love for technology.
That's cool, definitely. For me it was just a lot of work as I'm still a mixtape kinda guy and the vast majority of listening to my personal library has always been through carefully curated Playlists and it was just too much work to maintain it all.
When I'm disconnected from the internet I just use my iPhone as I do store 10,000 songs on there for those instances.
The math from earlier in this thread, and other threads on the topic, says that a streamed album needs to be played only 17 times to equal an artists revenue from a physical CD of the same album.
You CD zealots think time stands still. You think that the math only counts on the day of purchase. "Joe Bonaroso just got $1.50 from me today because I bought his CD and you just streamed the 10 songs and he only got $0.07 cents". News Flash: People listen to albums for years. Decades, in fact.
I paid $15 for Hotel California on CD in 1995. I listen to it 4x a year. Had I been streaming it for the last 25 years instead of listening to that physical purchase the Eagles would have made $7.20 instead of $1.50.
So some of us have bought the vinyl, cassette, CD, CD remaster, CD Deluxe Edition, CD Audiophile edition, etc.
So streaming will never catch up to what we've paid the artist.
Not really bashing, just saying they talk more than I listen.
Nah! He's a doughnut.
Thank you. I found the remarks in very bad taste.
"Hey Siri, play Born This Way by Lady Gaga"
Again, it depends on one's perspective. My impression of all the anti-streamers pulling their heads off about "3 BMW's" is not a positive one. The few people who admit he's got a point say, "OK, he's got a point." The many who refuse to recognize the point say, "Duh huh huh, he said he has 3 BMW's! What a doughnut!"
Separate names with a comma.