'Shit' New Music Is To Blame For Illegal Downloading

[Holymagica]

SLIPKNOT/STONE SOUR singer Corey Taylor has once again spoken out in defense of illegal music downloading, insisting that no one wants to pay for "crap" new music. He tells Britain's Kerrang! magazine, “I have a completely different take on this from a lot of other people. A lot of people in the industry want to blame downloading for the state of [the music business], but I think that if most music wasn't shit to begin with people wouldn't be downloading this stuff for free."

He continues, "Seriously, who the fuck wants to risk hard-earned money on music that's maybe 98 percent crap? I'm not going to. And I still buy new albums. People ask what my favorite new album is and nine times out of 10, I don't fucking have one. Music is garbage."

Taylor's latest comments echo those he made back in 2008 when he told Kerrang!, "Why would you blame [people who download music]? Half the fucking albums that are out there are shit. I don't download, but at the same time, I don't buy new music 'cause it all sucks. Okay, there's a handful of bands that I buy, but other than that, I just buy old shit because old shit is good. Sorry!"

"People wanna blame the decline of album sales on downloading, I think it's actually the record companies' fault," he added. "I think it's the quality of the product. If record companies would stop giving any fucking mook on the street with a fringe a record deal or their own record label, maybe you would sell more fucking albums, dipshits."


Corey Taylor is right, there is a huge dumbing down of Metal music.
Look at David 'Rock' Feinstein, Bitten By The Beast its not very good, fans of DIO want to buy the download of the track, Metal Will Never Die but you can't Niji want you to buy the whole cd and won't sell it as a downloadable single,
Its only 79p per download on Amazon UK,its a shame when the actions of a record company force you to seek an illegal download.
But I am holding back, there is loads of illegal downloads of the song on Google, my search gave me 35,700 results in 0.27 seconds I will wait another monthfor the the track to be added to downloads in Amazon

[olivious the drummer]

Surely the record labels must realise that money is money. I only want the one song and I sure aint parting with my hard earned cash for an albums worth of material I am not interested in......Come on Dean sort it out!
_________________
Stand up and Shout!!!!!

[Jeffrey]

I guess gone are the days when we , the faithful metal heads, had our favorite bands, waited for our favorite bands to tour, write more good material and record our next album to buy. And withouth needing to sample the songs, we knew we would buy the entire album and enjoy it. Because the songs were good. The concept of an album means that you have to listen to all of the songs, at least on one side.

But the format of CD and mp3 lets you pick and choose songs. So I dont' think artists try as hard to please us. It is a shame. Dio was one of the bands I would buy the release as soon as I knew it was released. Judas Priest, Maiden, those bands usually put out consistently good music. Today's artists would learn a lot by what they paved the road by doing. Because people will buy good music.

Jeffrey
_________________
Ronnie James Dio is a legend

[DioInfinitum]

I've given much thought to this topic.

I am so not sad for big labels that their business models have been ruined.

Everyone must change with the times. Instead of whining, they should all have been thinking about how to establish their business models under the new paradigm.

I believe that artists and people should get paid for their work.

However, something that is digital and intellectual property in digital form is clearly different from something physical and tangible.

I am sympathetic, but they need to find out how they're going to make things work. They're sorely mistaken if they think they can freeze progress in the world just because their business model stopped working due to technological advances.

I for one would be thrilled if I could play anything on my internet radio show which I cannot. Why not? I'm only promoting people. I don't buy the licensing argument b/c it's really about big industry keeping control over small individuals. If you know anything about me personally, know that I will never favor a big corporation over individual liberty.

Not that playing a song is individual liberty, but that a large industry wants to forbid playing songs when in actuality it is in their favor, I don't really get it.

I have paid for the vast majority of music that I own. I'm not even into downloading music b/c I prefer to buy cds...always.

I'm sympathetic that they don't want to lose their gravy train business model, but I also say, be ahead of the curve with changes. Adapt your business model to work in the environment.

What that dude from slipknot bemoans has made others successful who have embraced it and approached things differently.

I'm a musician and frankly the art is only art to me. If you apply business sense to writing a song then it's possibly not a real song with artistic integrity to me, but that's not to say that a commercially viable song can't be written with such integrity. I'm just saying that I feel a need to piss on it as an artist if money is the only motivator behind the form. I guess what I'm saying is that if it has artistic integrity then it deserves a giant reward. If it was made with the reward in mind, I deny it any artistic integrity.

I know, I'm seriously testardo(stubborn).
_________________
"Too many flames, with too much to burn, and life's only made of paper." - RJD

[Hamalane]

It's just sad that business and money have somehow taken over music, i.e. Art.

But there is something that I think is not really logical in what Corey says here. Shit music is to blame for illegal downloading. That would mean that surfers think: "Well, this is crap, there's no way I'm going to pay for this. So I download it." Well, if "this is crap," then why do you listen to it?

I tend not to like "new music" that much (although there are plenty of new, young bands that are doing a great job!), and I hardly ever listen to the radio because all we have (here) is soulless stuff, with no originality whatsoever, produced by those big companies.. They could take the most un-talented person and make it the next big star by some "miracle" which doesn't even have anything to do with Art itself. But that's another story. I guess it's all a matter of tastes.

If "new music" was not "crap," would people stop downloading and go back to record stores (or at least buy a digital version)? I'm not that sure, for some reason.

The whole thing is quite complex, and there are many sides to it. I've been thinking about it for a long time and I can't make up my mind. I know that I don't support stealing music, but what are the reasons and solutions behind it, I don't know. There are some good arguments in favor of downloading, and there are good arguments against it.

Ah, my mind's all messed up again!
_________________
Carry high the torch given by the Angel
Deep within the soul lies the key to the truth
Burn again, don't let down, you know you can be strong
Spread your wings and fly!

[DioInfinitum]

Imagine if cars were illegal to transport b/c the original predominant mode of transport was the horse and buggy. Imagine also if we decided to impose the horse and buggy as the indefinite business model. There may be a liability to progress by solidifying business models indefinitely.

I think digital music has created just such a situation.

My grandfather had to stop carting people around with his horse and buggy when the cars came. The improvement of the car over the horse and buggy in most ways is obvious, but it isn't obvious also that there are many undesirable negatives and dangers that came with cars. It was a negative that my grandpa couldn't compete with cars. There's also always a real danger and risk when riding in cars.

Should we not be able to download music for free b/c it interferes with the business of an outdated horse and buggy? And in this case, the horse and buggy is so rich and powerful that it can influence this outcome well beyond the scope of a normal person with normal liberty. Perhaps if individual rights are deemed most important, people should have this right to download as an individual be more important than the outdated business model that threatens the behemoth with big money.

Perhaps it is 'stealing' to download music and not pay, but I still maintain honestly that it is not quite the same thing as stealing something tangible. We can't copy tangible things like the cd case that is also part of the art and package we get with music. It is a totally different experience in the tangible package to me. When it is digital, it doesn't feel like the same kind of ownership as having a hard cd in my hand.

My grandpa should have been thinking about how to get a car to move to the next phase of his business getting people around. Just like many of the big labels didn't see the onset of illegal downloading, he didn't have the understanding or foresight to get a car and start competing in the new way.

It is an ironic paradox. On one hand it is sure promotion when someone downloads a song, on the other it is viewed as stealing that in many cases must be punished?

I think 'punishing' for downloads is in fact worse morally than 'downloading' a song you didn't pay for. You have to weight the cost/benefit to all of society for the crime. Is it really worth going after downloaders if the state has to set up an enforcement regime and prison cells?

PRISON FOR DOWNLOADING MUSIC? NO!

I might concede it's different with films b/c they have a shelf life in theaters and many other different considerations.

Anyhow, this topic is food for major deep thought to me.

What is stealing if stealing is a digital copy that is so easy to copy and disseminate? It means on some level that committing something so trivial, simple and non serious is treated by the state like a grave and serious crime.

For me, I favor individuals over big money almost always.

If we are in serious business, we must always look forward to the new things coming b/c all will certainly wind up the obsolete horse and buggy at some point.

It may be a great argument that making downloads illegal is a hindrance to progress and potential better business models. In that reality, one where the consumer has far more control than big money, perhaps it's better for individual liberty, b/c big money will always seek to impose the eternal existence of their gravy train at the peril of the individual.
_________________
"Too many flames, with too much to burn, and life's only made of paper." - RJD

[LindaJeanne]

When a band I've been following and really like comes out with a new album, I'll generally buy the whole album on principal, rather than picking and choosing songs, even though I do by most of my music electronically rather than in physical format these days.

I love Rhapsody for exploring new music. For the price of one album a month, I can download as many albums as I can listen to. Then I'll generally pick and choose my favorite tracks to buy off of iTunes, except when I discover a new band (or album) that I like enough to give the just-buy-the-whole-album treatment to.

I know a lot of people treat illegal music downloading the way I treat my Rhapsody subscription: download it to listen and see if they like it, then buy properly the things they really like and are going to keep listening to. I think most people want to support the artists they enjoy. (Though I did see on one board some kid insist that "anyone who pays for music is a faggot". I responded that in that case, the world needed more faggots. Didn't get an answer back.)

Electronic music distribution (legal as well as illegal) removes a lot of the power that the big record labels used to have. They determined who got heard and who didn't. They could screw over both the artist and the customer, and make a tidy profit doing so, because where else were the customer or the artist going to go?

Electronic distribution turns them into something more like a marketing service for artists. They pick the artists they like, and work to help them get heard. But they are no longer gatekeepers. Unsigned or tiny-label artists can get their music up on Pandora, Rhapsody, Last.fm, or several other online radio services that will play it for people listening to similar kinds of music. (And any kid with a computer can get their music up on MySpace).

Thus, with electronic music distribution, a label that tries to screw over both the artist and the customer can no longer make a handsome profit, but instead will find themselves bereft of both artists and customers. The big labels don't like this, and so paint themselves as advocates for the artists, and try to legislate their old model into working for as long as they can milk it before it goes belly-up.

[D-Man]

He kind of has a point. It's these kids listening to crap music doing a lot of the illegal downloading too, giving the industry a bad name.
_________________
Bass guitarists hold it all together.