udo said:

FunkyDissCo said:

OK, since you're having such a hard time understanding, here's another attempt:

You could've already downloaded the set months and (in parts) even years ago, technically, just as it is.

It consists of stolen material from other people. It's a rip-off.

I don't think you get it well enough yet.
Why is something that the market (mr Prince) did not provide suddenly a rip off?

The material was in circulation nevertheless.

The b00tleggar just made stuff sound nicer, pressed it onto a CD and added a booklet.

They provided a service. Contrary to mr P not providing a service.

You have a choice to buy, to download or to ignore.

Stolen is not an issue. It's even an exaggeration. Why did these recordings exist when they intended them not to get out? Why weren't they destroyed? Why is making a copy theft? `Copying isn't theft`. Search that phrase on youtube.

Lyrics

Copying is not theft. Stealing a thing leaves one less left Copying it makes one thing more; that's what copying's for. Copying is not theft. If I copy yours you have it too One for me and one for you That's what copies can do If I steal your bicycle you have to take the bus, but if I just copy it there's one for each of us! Making more of a thing, that is what we call "copying" Sharing ideas with everyone That's why copying is FUN!

Now that we made that clear I do hope your point of view has changed to a less radical form.

the recordings exist as prince would record his shows to play back afterwards (as well as keep for mementos etc) so he could improve his shows

as to why he hasn't released them, he's mentioned before words to the effect that he makes money from live shows, so if people can get the shows on cd/dvd/etc they might not be as interested in going to the show. why go to the concert when you can watch a live dvd instead. regardless of your own view on it, that's princes view, and the answer to your question

in these any many other cases, someone else got their hands on a copy of the show and leaked it out. prince used to leave stuff lying around a lot and lose stuff

FunkyDissCo said:

Naw, you got me wrong there. Sabotage

The story I wrote was VERY general. Not just Sabotage.

didn't steal the stuff from Prince, they stole the stuff from free labels, stole their work.

I see that you don't know the history of the core set of the CL recordings.

Most of these came from videos, long before `free labels` were popping up everywhere like in these times.

They're ripping off customers and other labels, selling they're genuine work which is free in its original form.

Why is providing a service a rip-off?

You are so hardheaded here. Everyone knows where the stuff comes from.

Some people download it. Some people buy it. Others ignore it.

Nobody is ripped off.

"The b00tleggar just made stuff sound nicer, pressed it onto a CD and added a booklet."

Well, that's a matter of debate - remember i posted like "let me TRY something" in the first place. My argument rather was that Sabotage DID NOT make stuff nicer, DID NOT add anything, but just took others' work and sell it.

Did you ever listen to the old CL and then the new one?

Did you compare them?

If so: how can you stand by your argument?

All that said, i could be proven wrong of course. But if I'm not, this is a major rip-off of both the customers who could get the same stuff for free AND the free labels who put hard work into the stuff other folks are making a buck with now.

You don't get that when you buy a bootleg, which you can also download, you pay for the service of getting the audio on a factory pressed disc, some artwork and a booklet.

That is a service.

If you choose not to enjoy that service that is OK; you download the audio and put it on your ipod or onto some CD-R's. Your choice.

Nobody forces you.

unique said:

udo said:

Now that we made that clear I do hope your point of view has changed to a less radical form.

the recordings exist as prince would record his shows to play back afterwards (as well as keep for mementos etc) so he could improve his shows

as to why he hasn't released them, he's mentioned before words to the effect that he makes money from live shows, so if people can get the shows on cd/dvd/etc they might not be as interested in going to the show. why go to the concert when you can watch a live dvd instead. regardless of your own view on it, that's princes view, and the answer to your question

in these any many other cases, someone else got their hands on a copy of the show and leaked it out. prince used to leave stuff lying around a lot and lose stuff

That is a weird argument.

If that was even P's idea after all, why then would he record the 2009 Montreux show? Twice?

That shows was apparently intended for a live DVD.

And why then does the fanbase ask for live albums, live DVD's, etc?

Why is the existence of a market being denied by whoever argues against it?

So it is even a false argument: people will not stop going to shows.

And doesn't just make money from his live shows.

See the PE and 20ten releases of the past few years: newspaper deals pay out very nicely.

2+ million CD's in a weekend in the UK alone last july.

So that is also slightly incorrect at least.

So yes, business models are shifting, but P earns on all fronts (both shows and media) and would earn more if he were to release some of this live stuff.

udo said:

unique said:

the recordings exist as prince would record his shows to play back afterwards (as well as keep for mementos etc) so he could improve his shows

as to why he hasn't released them, he's mentioned before words to the effect that he makes money from live shows, so if people can get the shows on cd/dvd/etc they might not be as interested in going to the show. why go to the concert when you can watch a live dvd instead. regardless of your own view on it, that's princes view, and the answer to your question

in these any many other cases, someone else got their hands on a copy of the show and leaked it out. prince used to leave stuff lying around a lot and lose stuff

That is a weird argument.

If that was even P's idea after all, why then would he record the 2009 Montreux show? Twice?

That shows was apparently intended for a live DVD.

And why then does the fanbase ask for live albums, live DVD's, etc?

Why is the existence of a market being denied by whoever argues against it?

So it is even a false argument: people will not stop going to shows.

And doesn't just make money from his live shows.

See the PE and 20ten releases of the past few years: newspaper deals pay out very nicely.

2+ million CD's in a weekend in the UK alone last july.

So that is also slightly incorrect at least.

So yes, business models are shifting, but P earns on all fronts (both shows and media) and would earn more if he were to release some of this live stuff.

your problem is you are trying to make sense of prince. just stop it. now

udo said:

FunkyDissCo said:

Naw, you got me wrong there. Sabotage

The story I wrote was VERY general. Not just Sabotage.

Did you ever listen to the old CL and then the new one?

Did you compare them?

If so: how can you stand by your argument?

All that said, i could be proven wrong of course. But if I'm not, this is a major rip-off of both the customers who could get the same stuff for free AND the free labels who put hard work into the stuff other folks are making a buck with now.

You don't get that when you buy a bootleg, which you can also download, you pay for the service of getting the audio on a factory pressed disc, some artwork and a booklet.

That is a service.

If you choose not to enjoy that service that is OK; you download the audio and put it on your ipod or onto some CD-R's. Your choice.

Nobody forces you.

90% of your arguments are askew because you fail to see the most important thing in the

whole story: Between the CL set and the latest Sabotage releases there is the series of releases that 4DaFunk has done. And THEY worked on the sound. Sabotage - i still may be proven wrong - did NOT take the CityLight stuff and "remaster" it. Do you get that? OK... They took the "remastered" stuff that 4DaFunk made and pressed it to disc. So the difference you're quoting between the SAB set and CL is NOT Sabotage's merit. That's what "selling other people's work" means.

On a sidenote: They're charging money for the set. If people download the SAB set for free doesn't matter whatsoever.

FunkyDissCo said:

udo said:

You don't get that when you buy a bootleg, which you can also download, you pay for the service of getting the audio on a factory pressed disc, some artwork and a booklet.

That is a service.

If you choose not to enjoy that service that is OK; you download the audio and put it on your ipod or onto some CD-R's. Your choice.

Nobody forces you.

90% of your arguments are askew because you fail to see the most important thing in the

whole story: Between the CL set and the latest Sabotage releases there is the series of releases that 4DaFunk has done. And THEY worked on the sound. Sabotage - i still may be proven wrong - did NOT take the CityLight stuff and "remaster" it.

The important thing is: did you listen? Did you listen carefully? Did you listen well? Did you use other methods to assess the truth?
How else can you say that someone took whoevers work and blatantly copied it?

Even if so - and it ain't - they still provide a service: pressed discs, artwork, booklet. No denying in that.

So listen to whatever you claim as copied. Listen to the new CL. Do compare. Back up your claims.

They took the "remastered" stuff that 4DaFunk made and pressed it to disc. So the difference you're quoting between the SAB set and CL is NOT Sabotage's merit. That's what "selling other people's work" means.

On a sidenote: They're charging money for the set. If people download the SAB set for free doesn't matter whatsoever.

Again: if you don't spot any differences, did you listen at all? Listen to them both.

Back to back. And again.

Then say again they did nothing.

Fuck Sabotage and Eye and all those who support them.

Some day (especially for newer concerts) fan labels will get tired of being ripped with no thanks or acknowledgements and their new sets might be shared only within small groups until Sab or Eye put their lame works out.

And for the newbies, wake up. There's nothing new here. There is no sense in getting the original CL series because they were VASTLY improved by fans afterwards.

On the same token, there's no need to wait for the sacred Sabotage to do this since they've been out as fan-made improvements for years. So, wake up!

funny but live recordings have never done much for me.....unless its video as a big part of concerts is visual so live recordings of prince concerts have never been of much interest to me...maybe i am alone on this....

Just want to add that I downloaded this set just because I suffer from being a fucking completist, but I don't see myself wasting my time listening to it.

vitriol said:

Some day (especially for newer concerts) fan labels will get tired of being ripped with no thanks or acknowledgements and their new sets might be shared only within small groups until Sab or Eye put their lame works out.

Which is already the case.

What a service!!

Let me put it this way:

Pressed labels serve their wallet

Free labels serve the fans.

udo said:

they still provide a service: pressed discs, artwork, booklet. No denying in that.

[Edited 8/27/10 1:39am]

zobilamouche said:

unless free labels open up the option of distributing in another way, charging just for sending of a CD-R

That's what we call trading...... has been done for ages....

I got the stuff for free, i don't give a fuck who puts it out or otherwise.

I am not going to apologize for thinking that the music is the important thing here.

zobilamouche said:

Frankly, I wouldn't even know where to begin to find suh things on the web.

There's that impressive new site called "Google". You can throw in terms like "bootleg" and your favourite artist and get directly transported to free download links. Try it, I guess it's really cool for a start!

zobilamouche said:

I hardly have the skill to work from rar or other files and puzzle everything together again to make it in a CD for myself.

Somebody call a doctor, please!

MikeyB71 said:

I got the stuff for free, i don't give a fuck who puts it out or otherwise.

I am not going to apologize for thinking that the music is the important thing here.

That, plus you're doing an amazingly good job at showing how little you know about the stuff you brought up with this thread.

FunkyDissCo said:

MikeyB71 said:

I got the stuff for free, i don't give a fuck who puts it out or otherwise.

I am not going to apologize for thinking that the music is the important thing here.

That, plus you're doing an amazingly good job at showing how little you know about the stuff you brought up with this thread.

Are you going to be buying this set? No.

Are you going to be downloading this set? I'm guessing no.

Did it not occur to you that some people, myself included may not have had this material before?

Some of us have only been collecting bootleg material for a short while.

And since some of us may not be fantastically knowledgeable about remastering and such, is it not possible that some people might be just a little excited at the prospect of a remastered set? Whether it is or not?

Maybe you should take the time to listen to this set and then come back and educate us on the fact of whether it has been bettered or not.

FunkyDissCo said:

zobilamouche said:

Frankly, I wouldn't even know where to begin to find suh things on the web.

There's that impressive new site called "Google". You can throw in terms like "bootleg" and your favourite artist and get directly transported to free download links. Try it, I guess it's really cool for a start!

zobilamouche said:

I hardly have the skill to work from rar or other files and puzzle everything together again to make it in a CD for myself.

Somebody call a doctor, please!

haha...

Yes I know google and, yes I'll probably hit on some stuff but as I'm not familiar with that world I don't know about the reputation of some sites, whether they're good files, complete files or not.

And I work on a computer all day for my job, and know all the ins and outs I need to know about, but no, I'm not a geekl that indulges in all the technical aspects of computers, software etc. And rar doesn't do a thing on my computer (Mac).

vc40 said:

What a service!!

Let me put it this way:

Pressed labels serve their wallet

Free labels serve the fans.

No service?
So you have a CD-press in your backyard?
Or you fail to see that an ipod is no storage medium?
Same for other storage.
Even though the medium's standard is 30 years old, pressed CD's are still the standard for audio.

Please convince me of an other storage method.

Who said anything about earning? You mean to say that providing a service makes it verboten to monetize on that? That is false and not capitalistic as is our society. So it won't work well.

Money has to be made some way. See open source software. (yes I use OSS!)

Why do you paint a black & white picture (`you're either with us or against us`, as Mr Bush jr said) when the world is a bit more subtle, especially in this internate age?

Even though our surroundings are filled with pervasive bandwidth and connectivity some people still want discs.

So why see downloads as the opposite?

Did you ever consider that?

MikeyB71 said:

I got the stuff for free, i don't give a fuck who puts it out or otherwise.

You should.

In that case you could tell a labour of love from a hunger from money.

Plus you'd enjoy the stuff earlier.

vc40 said:

vitriol said:

Some day (especially for newer concerts) fan labels will get tired of being ripped with no thanks or acknowledgements and their new sets might be shared only within small groups until Sab or Eye put their lame works out.

Which is already the case.

Love to read that. About time!

udo said:

vc40 said:

What a service!!

Let me put it this way:

Pressed labels serve their wallet

Free labels serve the fans.

No service?
So you have a CD-press in your backyard?
Or you fail to see that an ipod is no storage medium?
Same for other storage.
Even though the medium's standard is 30 years old, pressed CD's are still the standard for audio.

Please convince me of an other storage method.

Who said anything about earning? You mean to say that providing a service makes it verboten to monetize on that? That is false and not capitalistic as is our society. So it won't work well.

Money has to be made some way. See open source software. (yes I use OSS!)

Why do you paint a black & white picture (`you're either with us or against us`, as Mr Bush jr said) when the world is a bit more subtle, especially in this internate age?

Even though our surroundings are filled with pervasive bandwidth and connectivity some people still want discs.

So why see downloads as the opposite?

Did you ever consider that?

I could tell you what I'd do about that service, but there could be children listening...

At the end of the day, what free labels ask for is just that those who have the guts to take their work (made for free) and put it out there again (but for a profit) is that Sab or Eye or whomever have also the guts to say that the stuff has been pressed from insert your favourite fan brand here's reworked or improved version.

Is THAT so hard to do?

vitriol said:

MikeyB71 said:

I got the stuff for free, i don't give a fuck who puts it out or otherwise.

You should.

In that case you could tell a labour of love from a hunger from money.

Plus you'd enjoy the stuff earlier.

Cool, i will do in future.

udo said:

Or you fail to see that an ipod is no storage medium?
Same for other storage.

Storage is storage. (and no, I don't have or care for an Ipod)

Do your beloved pressed cd's sound better then cd-r's??

vc40 said:

udo said:

Or you fail to see that an ipod is no storage medium?
Same for other storage.

Storage is storage. (and no, I don't have or care for an Ipod)

Do your beloved pressed cd's sound better then cd-r's??

Not so.

Storage isn't storage Even you know that...

Or would you rather store your music on paper as printer 1's and 0's?

CD's play best, last longer, look better.

No, this is no audiophile rant, so don't get into that territory.

So do explain how you store the music.

udo said:

CD's play best,

CD-R's sound exactly the same.

I don't need that extra "service" for pressed cd's. I only buy OFFICIAL pressed cd's.

I refuse to pay for unauthorised recordings and sponsor those labels for something they ripped in 50% of the cases from the hard work from some dedicated fans.

I know we could go on and on about this and I'm no fool: I know this situation will always remain the same. Fans will continu to put out stuff for free (minus the very exclusive stuff), labels will continu to profit. (yes, I know, sometimes they deliver something from their own sources, but that still doesn't justify the profit part in my book)

zobilamouche said:

FunkyDissCo said:

Somebody call a doctor, please!

haha...

Yes I know google and, yes I'll probably hit on some stuff but as I'm not familiar with that world I don't know about the reputation of some sites, whether they're good files, complete files or not.

And I work on a computer all day for my job, and know all the ins and outs I need to know about, but no, I'm not a geekl that indulges in all the technical aspects of computers, software etc. And rar doesn't do a thing on my computer (Mac).

http://download.cnet.com/RAR-Expander/3000-2072_4-55074.html

http://www.ehow.com/how_2091902_open-rar-files-mac.html

http://www.simplehelp.net/2006/09/23/how-to-burn-an-audio-cd-from-flac-files-in-os-x/

that's the thing, mac's are shit for playing media files as everything is so much based around itunes and quicktime, which are utter shite. there's nothing like winamp or foobar that plays any file and lets you queue them nicely, play them gapless, etc, or like mediaplayer classic for video, it has VLC but just doesn't work the same as on the pc, it's just horrible using it as the mac isn't based around using full screen. you then don't have something like nero that can just burn anything to cd or dvd and convert on the fly. and when you start to get into piracy/bootlegging and filesharing it's just even worse. it's all show and can't do with osx. if you have bootcamp or paralells you would be better using an xp install to manipulate the files, but if you can't figure out how to use rar files with the power of google i don't hold out much hope for you doing it on xp

it's funny as most if not all the people i know who still buy boots are those who aren't computer savvy, and most of them have mac's. as you can see from the links above, you can download, unrar, play, convert and burn the files, but it's not so nice as on windows. i think most people don't bother with burning files anymore and just play then on the pc or mp3/ipod type device. i don't bother with burning stuff to discs, the most savvy collectors and audiophiles are moving towards streaming devices and ripping their collections of cds and dvds and blurays to the pc as a media jukebox, instead of having to fart around keeping discs filed in order to find and trying to find stuff, you just run a search on the pc or you can play random tracks more easily. unforunately there's no decent mac solution, but you can store files on the mac and access them with a streamer

anyways the above links are just some solutions to do what others do. you have to ask yourself is it worth paying £10 to £15 for a disc when you can download it and having it burning to cd in 5 minutes, then multiply that by all the other releases you might want

vc40 said:

udo said:

CD's play best,

CD-R's sound exactly the same.

Playing is not the same as sounding.

I don't need that extra "service" for pressed cd's. I only buy OFFICIAL pressed cd's.

I refuse to pay for unauthorised recordings and sponsor those labels for something they ripped in 50% of the cases from the hard work from some dedicated fans.

The 'rip' argument again. So you mean the 'dedicated fans' should be compensated?

Probably not. So why the outrage?

I won't mention the service mantra and won't say that some labels try to avoid ripping.

I know we could go on and on about this and I'm no fool: I know this situation will always remain the same. Fans will continu to put out stuff for free (minus the very exclusive stuff), labels will continu to profit. (yes, I know, sometimes they deliver something from their own sources, but that still doesn't justify the profit part in my book)

What is justified? Music comes out some way or the other without approval of the source. Via a free label or a non-free one. Same ethical case.

Only difference is the media: roll your own or buy.

And yes, buying costs money.

If we just agree that you can choose and that you are not forced to buy in this internet age, then we can leave the choice to the crowd.

This perfectly illustrates you don't read what we say, you only focus on what you belief...

Try to look a few posts up.

Of course they shouldn't be compensated, that's not their goal. That's why they differ from the profit-labels.

udo said:

So you mean the 'dedicated fans' should be compensated?