Posted by Wombles on 12/07/06 13:07

This is a very thought provoking post. I, for one, buy the CD once I've
heard the music firsthand. In this group I've been exposed to IQ, Flower
Kings, Ark and bands like that... plus music that I owned on LP (or
cassette) that never saw the light on CD. I'm not good on converting LP
to digital. So this was a convenient way to get this music in digital
format.
The only problem that I have, is getting the music I discover on CD. The
local big box stores don't carry them and won't bring them in... and
Amazon seems to be the only other alternative. The local mom and pop
stores are closing down because they are competing with the big box
stores item for item. Now I am hearing the noise that Best Buy may be
discontinuing carrying CDs as well in 2007 (not a confirmed news piece,
but interesting none the less).
I want to buy CDs. I've been exposed to tons of great music that I would
have never plunked down the hard earned cash for before I actually heard
the music. (this was something that radio did for us back in the 70's
and 80's, even though it was singles driven)... but I want to own the CD
of the music I like (artwork, liner notes... all of it), but I can't buy
it if the local guys don't or won't carry it.
Great post, nonetheless!
Wombles Roy!

Aegothis <Aegothis@z-cultfm@comics.com> wrote in
news:12neu76q7k74i36@corp.supernews.com:

> (This does not take a stand for or against file sharing, it is an open
> question) I had an album on a record label, which now has many Prog
> Rock and Experimental artists who are booked all the time now. The
> first thing we had to take care of before even releasing an album was
> to copyright it so someone wouldn't steal anything from it and use it
> to make money off. Without the copyright, our material could become
> theirs. Now even with a copyright, the material gets distributed.
> Does this hurt us? Since we are not million sellers, no. It is
> actually good for exposure. And we can't speak for the million
> sellers, but we do know that to recover the initial investment, you
> have to move physical inventory. For the big name record companies,
> that is simple. Wal Mart buys 100,000 cds per artist right off the
> bat (just an estimate) and all costs are recovered and profits are
> made. But to pay for the big houses and cars, they need to move more.
> The artists are touring more and releasing videos (hopefully because
> they enjoy it but) to make up for the lack of sales. Can we blame the
> internet though? I still wonder because I think there is a lack of
> interest in buying a genre verses buying your favorite bands music.
> I know I have discovered a lot of bands through the internet and I'm
> being honest here. I always say I will buy the albums, but I haven't.
> I have the mentality that I already have the music, but I don't
> really have the albums. But I have the superior portable format. The
> MP3. The MP3 is selling hardware and MP3 players, which I wouldn't
> have bought if not for all the free music out there. There are media
> players for PCs, cars, home stereos, sporty portables, etc.
> Technology is catching up to where you can buy MP3s, movies, games,
> etc; right off the internet. And I still am not buying it. It's
> still cheaper to get it from Usenet, Bit Torrent, etc. The only thing
> I have bought is programs that nag or need to keep getting cracked.
> So..would it work to somehow lock MP3s in the future after a trial
> period? Or what is the solution. I think maybe even links that pop up
> (like in Jet Audio's lyric box) where you can choose to donate to the
> band or record label anonymously? What do you think the future holds
> for the hard working musician who invests their time, money, and most
> of their life working on? And I mean the good ones who haven't got
> the large fan base before broadband internet and file sharing.

[Back to original message]