Cinny said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Cyber high five, my friend.

And cyber... other stuff!

Fresh.

domainator said:

TrivialPursuit said

DON'T take that tone with me.

I am in INDIA. In INDIA, we have already shifted to streaming. CDs never *happened* in India, an English language CD (shipped from overseas, more likely than not) costs, or should I say costED more than 5 to 6 HUNDRED rupees - nobody can afford that. All that was needed for the shift was cheap internet, and now, thanks to Jio (cheap Indian ISP who revolutionised India), we have it. So I just wanted to tell all of you abroad to come to your senses and follow suit. Indian artists now make whatever they *can* from streaming, and that's it. There are no other options (although FM radio still exists - yeah, you know, FM radio!). And that, btw, means Youtube, cause no one, I would imagine pays for Spotify or Amazon Music or whatever, though of course I don't have figures.

We ARE all going to shift online, you know. If YOU/your generation doesn't do it, your kids' will. So why run backwards?
And btw, I didn't mean (for the guy who's talking about plastic) the cost of only MAKING the CDs, but also TRANSPORTING them from the factory to the store/or your house; and in the case of India, TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY. That's a lot of oil being burnt for nothing. Using a computer may not be the perfect solution (ie. it still uses electricity), but from where I'm standing, it's Better.

Do it. It Makes Sense.

I've already pointed out that the streaming argument doesn't make sense in regards the environment.

Besides which, streaming has already won, what are you whining about? CD sales have been dropping for years, we're back to mid 80s levels at this point.

Yeah ok let me get right on this nonsense. Better yet when the criminal streaming services start paying the artists that make the music and write the music 100% for their work then let's talk, till then paying a fraction of a penny for a stream is a new kind of slave labor. Also I don't rent music sorry and that's all streaming is a stupid rental service that is convenient blah blah blah, which is fine, but there are still many that want the album the cd or whatever, sorry I want to see and know about the artist, that's how artists are made not by a small square on your phone. Also you talk about cds and physical product like it's manufactured like cars or cell phones, do you realize in comparison to just a decade ago, physical product is manufactured 80% less now. So how about we stop using gas and oil and pumping that into the atmosphere if you are real about the environment, how about you cut your cell phone and online use 80% because that's doing more damage, how about we stop the slaughter of animals and eating meat cause that has more to do it with it, and the biggest one, how about we chill on the growth of population, more people means more usage of all these things and more food and more building of housing etc...so let's start with the real things and not plastic bags and a new cd that has two hundred copies, my guess is that we will hear crickets and see that never happen.

Oh hell naw! Internet isn't free. It is a monthly fee. Streaming isn't free either unless you go on youtube so streaming is yet another monthly fee. Hell, I'm trying to cut monthly fees, not obtain more of them. And what if I come across hard times and have to eliminate my internet? What am I supposed to do for music, listen to the radio? Hell naw, there's nothing good on the radio. And what happens when that particular streaming site goes out of business? You have no music then. And I guarantee you, I probably have a lot of jams in my physical collection that aren't available on streaming services because they probably only carry music that was the most popular. I guarantee you, these youngsters who prefer streaming don't think about those things because they are constantly listening to new music and not listening to much of their old music. But when old music gets old enough and goes out of print, if you haven't already bought it, good luck in finding it in the future because it is hard. They think they will like new music forever. Hell, I thought the same thing when I was young too and the 1990s came along, ruined things musically, and I started pulling out my old records. If I hadn't kept them, I would be in a mess right now.

.

Also, how the hell are you supposed to mix, overlap, and blend songs with youtube videos? Hell, there's no pitch control buttons to speed or slow down the songs to match the beat. And you sure as hell can't cue the songs because ads play before the songs start. Even if you managed to half-ass mix some songs, how are you supposed to record your mix so you can save it and play it for yourself or share with others? Hell naw! Physical music is the only way to go if you are extremely heavy into music.

domainator said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Also, what happens when you'r enot near internet and can't stream?

What happens when a streaming service starts charging more per month or year than you may spend on music?

And what happens to the artist who is making 1¢ per stream? People are supposed to live on that, after taxes???

Sit down and be quiet with that bullshit. It's unreasonable and unsustainable.

DON'T take that tone with me.

I am in INDIA. In INDIA, we have already shifted to streaming. CDs never *happened* in India, an English language CD (shipped from overseas, more likely than not) costs, or should I say costED more than 5 to 6 HUNDRED rupees - nobody can afford that. All that was needed for the shift was cheap internet, and now, thanks to Jio (cheap Indian ISP who revolutionised India), we have it. So I just wanted to tell all of you abroad to come to your senses and follow suit. Indian artists now make whatever they *can* from streaming, and that's it. There are no other options (although FM radio still exists - yeah, you know, FM radio!). And that, btw, means Youtube, cause no one, I would imagine pays for Spotify or Amazon Music or whatever, though of course I don't have figures.

We ARE all going to shift online, you know. If YOU/your generation doesn't do it, your kids' will. So why run backwards?
And btw, I didn't mean (for the guy who's talking about plastic) the cost of only MAKING the CDs, but also TRANSPORTING them from the factory to the store/or your house; and in the case of India, TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY. That's a lot of oil being burnt for nothing. Using a computer may not be the perfect solution (ie. it still uses electricity), but from where I'm standing, it's Better.

Do it. It Makes Sense.

Oh so you are from India? I love some sexy Indians. I've seen many of them that just turn me on! The solution isn't streaming, the solution is leaving India and coming to America. If you are a male and are sexy, you can stay with me. I'll turn you out so good, the last thing on your mind will be the environment.

domainator said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Also, what happens when you're not near internet and can't stream?

What happens when a streaming service starts charging more per month or year than you may spend on music?

And what happens to the artist who is making 1¢ per stream? People are supposed to live on that, after taxes???

Sit down and be quiet with that bullshit. It's unreasonable and unsustainable.

DON'T take that tone with me.

I did, and I will again. When your people learn to handle their shit like grown people, you can maybe say something. Until then, pull up some dirt and have a seat.

Lemme go over here and wait on my PHYSICAL COPY OF WELCOME 2 AMERICA SPECIAL EDITION PLUS THE 7" VINYL SINGLE WITH LOTS OF CARDBOARD PACKAGING AND INSERTS while you huff n' puff yourself to sleep.

[Edited 7/30/21 16:31pm]

vainandy said:

domainator said:

Oh so you are from India? I love some sexy Indians. I've seen many of them that just turn me on! The solution isn't streaming, the solution is leaving India and coming to America. If you are a male and are sexy, you can stay with me. I'll turn you out so good, the last thing on your mind will be the environment.

Best post of 2021!


Vainandy has been consistent with this message since I've been on the Org.

lastdecember said:

till then paying a fraction of a penny for a stream is a new kind of slave labor.

Well, a lot of singers/bands only made that from record sales long before there was an internet. Even a Michael Jackson made a small percentage compared to what CBS/Sony made off of his records. Some didn't even get royalties, they got paid in cars, furs, drugs, women, etc. In the 1950s & 1960s John Lee Hooker got paid a flat fee for each song he recorded. That's why he recorded for different labels under different names. The guys who ran B.B. King's label would add their names to songs King wrote and they had nothing to do with it. If you see the name Taub on the songwriting credits, that's them. TLC sold multiplatinum, but were in the hole to LaFace/Arista. All those music videos & promotion are part of the advance (really just a loan). Labels have also known to release records to fail on purpose, or refuse to let them out of contracts.

kygermo said:

jjhunsecker said:

If it’s something I really enjoy and love, I want a hard copy that I can have forever- whether it’s music on CD, a movie on Blu-ray, or a book... That way I’m not subjected to the whims of whoever holds the rights to the work who can pull it anytime they want

This is what it comes down to. In some cases it's my backup for stuff I really like. Most of the "new" (post 90's) music I buy is digital partly because I don't treasure it as much and if I can't access it-- oh well.

MickyDolenz said:

lastdecember said:

till then paying a fraction of a penny for a stream is a new kind of slave labor.

Well, a lot of singers/bands only made that from record sales long before there was an internet. Even a Michael Jackson made a small percentage compared to what CBS/Sony made off of his records. Some didn't even get royalties, they got paid in cars, furs, drugs, women, etc. In the 1950s & 1960s John Lee Hooker got paid a flat fee for each song he recorded. That's why he recorded for different labels under different names. The guys who ran B.B. King's label would add their names to songs King wrote and they had nothing to do with it. If you see the name Taub on the songwriting credits, that's them. TLC sold multiplatinum, but were in the hole to LaFace/Arista. All those music videos & promotion are part of the advance (really just a loan). Labels have also known to release records to fail on purpose, or refuse to let them out of contracts.

The streaming royalities are far lower than the contracts that artists signed with a label, there is no signing with streaming, I dont think people realize the unfair way that money is divided and also some that have a label there stuff just gets licensed to streaming without them knowing, this is why for years the Beatles catalog was not available on any digital platform they didnt want some lower rate, Def Leppard fought it for years till they got a good amount and percentage. But most artists are not the Beatles or Taylor Swift or own streaming services like a Jay Z. Most now are just trying to get in this is why there are milllions just dropping singles here and there and hoping for a bite from mainstream, if you are an artist just breaking in, no push, your own music, even if you can get to 100,000 streams that wont even pay one weeks of your monthly rent, and then factor in if you have a band and if you didnt write the song you are really coming away with nothing for that 100,000, and when you factor in oeople only need to listen to thirty seconds of you and that counts as a stream, unless the streamer has a free service, how into an artist are you getting with a thirty second sample of their song. A lot of artists are fighiting this with different tactics but one is that there is pressure for more money to be paid so streaming services for MUSIC may have to look into raising fees or dropping FREE members, someone noted how music services have almost never had a hike in price while Netflix seems to go up every year or so because MOVIE companies pressure them. Labels dont pressure because they got their cut, its the struggling artist who does it on their own that for almost two years hasnt been able to do shows that feels it.

while I believe I understand the intent/spirit of the initial post,

in reality.. it's simply not possible

for the myriad reasons already given

.

I think I have bought maybe 5 cd's

since 2010 ; not for any "environmental" (for lack of a better word) reason

but because for the music I like & want

it's easier to get those "1-off" songs

however they present themselves

Sorry I haven't responded. I'm enjoying the deluxe edition of Welcome 2 America. I even still have the box and packaging it came in.


Mmm, there's nothing like the smell of fresh cardboard in the morning.

domainator said:

I know there are some people amongst you that still buy physical music like CDs. Please stop. The environmental cost involved in MAKING them and then TRANSPORTING them to your store and then to your house, in the internet age is simply ridiculous. We've all put fiber optic cable under the ground and cellphone towers in the sky for a reason. Let's Use it/them. Thank you.

I'm sure all that power for all the servers, routers, hard drives etc. that are running 24/7 for eternity just waiting for you to press play take less energy than printing on a little bit of plastic and delivering it to my house.

domainator said:

I know there are some people amongst you that still buy physical music like CDs. Please stop. The environmental cost involved in MAKING them and then TRANSPORTING them to your store and then to your house, in the internet age is simply ridiculous. We've all put fiber optic cable under the ground and cellphone towers in the sky for a reason. Let's Use it/them. Thank you.

The piss and shit you take everyday, where does it go?

[Edited 8/6/21 17:51pm]

MotownSubdivision said:

No. Physical media has never been more valuable than now; I don't have a physical record collection yet but I got stockpiles of books, DVDs and video games and I'm not gonna stop piling on any time soon in this intangible rent everything world we live in now.

The stuff is already made anyway. Even if it doesn't get transported, it'll be sittlng in a warehouse somewhere.

whodknee said:

jjhunsecker said:

If it’s something I really enjoy and love, I want a hard copy that I can have forever- whether it’s music on CD, a movie on Blu-ray, or a book... That way I’m not subjected to the whims of whoever holds the rights to the work who can pull it anytime they want

This is what it comes down to. In some cases it's my backup for stuff I really like. Most of the "new" (post 90's) music I buy is digital partly because I don't treasure it as much and if I can't access it-- oh well.

Same here. If my newer stuff were to come up missing, I'd be like.... Oh well, I'll just get someone who has it to email me a link to download it again. But if my older records or CDs were to come up missing, I'd be ready to tear the house up trying to find them.

.

However, I will never pay for a download though because I come from the days of recording a song off of the radio. Having a recording off of the radio, no matter how good the sound quality may have been, never felt as good as having the official product in my collection because you couldn't see it or hold it in your hand. You didn't have the artwork that you had with the physical product. Yeah, you could hold the tape in your hand but it was simply a generic blank tape that looked like all other blank tapes. It was homemade so it didn't feel as good as having a professionally made physical product. Having a download reminds me of having something "homemade" so the only money I'm going to spend on something homemade is the blank CD in order to burn it onto. Newer music isn't a fraction as good as old music so I'm content with having it on a homemade format. But if it is something I really love, I don't feel like I actually own it unless I have a professionally made physical product in my hand.

.

.

.

[Edited 8/7/21 9:02am]

MickyDolenz said:

MotownSubdivision said:

No. Physical media has never been more valuable than now; I don't have a physical record collection yet but I got stockpiles of books, DVDs and video games and I'm not gonna stop piling on any time soon in this intangible rent everything world we live in now.

The stuff is already made anyway. Even if it doesn't get transported, it'll be sittlng in a warehouse somewhere.

things are still made but they don't make the quantity even close to what they did, and also if those of you still go buy cds or sets they are scarce in stores for the most part, labels will also print way less unless your Taylor or Billie Or Adele or someone that people still buy physical product in good numbers but when you look at debuts of albums and they tell you oh so and so sold 70,000 albums this week 5,000 we're physical he rest we're digital and streaming well that's a a label will not print tons of physical stuff for, a Taylor swift will sell a million and it's a fifty fifty split so you,l see a rack of cds or vinyl for her where the new prince will have a few cds and some vinyl

lastdecember said:
things are still made but they don't make the quantity even close to what they did, and also if those of you still go buy cds or sets they are scarce in stores for the most part, labels will also print way less unless your Taylor or Billie Or Adele or someone that people still buy physical product in good numbers but when you look at debuts of albums and they tell you oh so and so sold 70,000 albums this week 5,000 we're physical he rest we're digital and streaming well that's a a label will not print tons of physical stuff for, a Taylor swift will sell a million and it's a fifty fifty split so you,l see a rack of cds or vinyl for her where the new prince will have a few cds and some vinyl

But I was talking about the OP post, which was this "The environmental cost involved in MAKING them and then TRANSPORTING them to your store and then to your house, in the internet age is simply ridiculous.". Not how many CDs are made or who sells. There's still new CDs, records, tube TVs, furniture, toys, VHS tapes, etc. from decades ago still in warehouses. Sometimes thrift stores or people on Ebay get it and sell it as "new old stock". A lot of brand new Atari ET games from the 1980s were buried in a landfill because they didn't sell well. A few years ago a documentary came out about a guy having them dug up. They were still in new perfect condition, they weren't dirty or deteriorated or smashed.

domainator said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Also, what happens when you'r enot near internet and can't stream?

What happens when a streaming service starts charging more per month or year than you may spend on music?

And what happens to the artist who is making 1¢ per stream? People are supposed to live on that, after taxes???

Sit down and be quiet with that bullshit. It's unreasonable and unsustainable.

DON'T take that tone with me.

I am in INDIA. In INDIA, we have already shifted to streaming. CDs never *happened* in India, an English language CD (shipped from overseas, more likely than not) costs, or should I say costED more than 5 to 6 HUNDRED rupees - nobody can afford that. All that was needed for the shift was cheap internet, and now, thanks to Jio (cheap Indian ISP who revolutionised India), we have it. So I just wanted to tell all of you abroad to come to your senses and follow suit. Indian artists now make whatever they *can* from streaming, and that's it. There are no other options (although FM radio still exists - yeah, you know, FM radio!). And that, btw, means Youtube, cause no one, I would imagine pays for Spotify or Amazon Music or whatever, though of course I don't have figures.

We ARE all going to shift online, you know. If YOU/your generation doesn't do it, your kids' will. So why run backwards?
And btw, I didn't mean (for the guy who's talking about plastic) the cost of only MAKING the CDs, but also TRANSPORTING them from the factory to the store/or your house; and in the case of India, TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY. That's a lot of oil being burnt for nothing. Using a computer may not be the perfect solution (ie. it still uses electricity), but from where I'm standing, it's Better.

Do it. It Makes Sense.

Y'all stopped dumping covid victims in the rivers yet? Shut up and do something useful. Free some child slaves there. Something!

.

[Edited 8/9/21 1:45am]

Marrk said:

Y'all stopped dumping covid victims in the rivers yet? Shut up and do something useful. Free some child slaves there. Something!

Or shit in a toilet.

vainandy said:

whodknee said:

This is what it comes down to. In some cases it's my backup for stuff I really like. Most of the "new" (post 90's) music I buy is digital partly because I don't treasure it as much and if I can't access it-- oh well.

Same here. If my newer stuff were to come up missing, I'd be like.... Oh well, I'll just get someone who has it to email me a link to download it again. But if my older records or CDs were to come up missing, I'd be ready to tear the house up trying to find them.

.

However, I will never pay for a download though because I come from the days of recording a song off of the radio. Having a recording off of the radio, no matter how good the sound quality may have been, never felt as good as having the official product in my collection because you couldn't see it or hold it in your hand. You didn't have the artwork that you had with the physical product. Yeah, you could hold the tape in your hand but it was simply a generic blank tape that looked like all other blank tapes. It was homemade so it didn't feel as good as having a professionally made physical product. Having a download reminds me of having something "homemade" so the only money I'm going to spend on something homemade is the blank CD in order to burn it onto. Newer music isn't a fraction as good as old music so I'm content with having it on a homemade format. But if it is something I really love, I don't feel like I actually own it unless I have a professionally made physical product in my hand.

.

.

.

[Edited 8/7/21 9:02am]

I guess we're just old heads.

I was one of the last holdouts in my group of friends. They moved on to only digital a long time ago, but I still bought CDs until probably 3 years ago.

What I found was -- once I ripped the CD, I no longer needed the CD . . . my cars don't have CD players, my computers don't have CD drives (I have to use an external CD drive) . . . and in cases where I bought the CD from Amazon, I got the AutoRip MP3s and didn't even open the CD anyway.

I still buy Prince stuff (although didn't buy SOTT) because I keep all of that on a USB stick in my car on random. Otherwise, no more CDs for me . . .

Vinyl, I have maybe a dozen LPs at most. It's a novelty that people like to buy me for holidays.

OP, maybe you should stop buying clothes too

domainator said:

I know there are some people amongst you that still buy physical music like CDs. Please stop. The environmental cost involved in MAKING them and then TRANSPORTING them to your store and then to your house, in the internet age is simply ridiculous. We've all put fiber optic cable under the ground and cellphone towers in the sky for a reason. Let's Use it/them. Thank you.

Albums Still Matter -Prince

You can still go to record stores and buy cds and albums (used or new)

I prefer listening to cds and records

.

.

How about stop buying bottled water. There are so many cool individual canisters people can buy and refill water for free.