seeline

Remarks about "virtual duct tape" sure aren't helping much, though. I honestly believe that some recent actions and words would be understandable if all the participants were second graders who'd gotten into a playground brawl, but... that's not the case. I wish Marc Meyers were still alive, for all kinds of reasons, the board being a very small part of that... even so. And someone from that board brought the fight over here, to this thread, pretty recently. That was also uncalled-for.

Aggie, I have a lot of sympathy for your views, as I've wrestled with them myself, and am not at all 100% sure where I stand on the issue right now, except for this - I think intent is crucial. Like many people here, I resisted downloading for a long time, and then found that i could legally download rare and o.p. music from sources like eMusic.com I still didn't like the idea of low-bitrate files (and that hasn't changed), but the opportunity to be able to hear (and, sometimes, study) music that had been absolutely n/a in any form (inn the US, at least) lured me in. Would I like to have liner notes, even now? The answer is yes - but the tradeoff has been, for the most part, positive and painless. As Bev's mentioned re. labels like Chandos making back catalogue available, they stand to gain far more than they might lose in potential illegal file-sharing - customer loyalty is one of them, and that's a *huge* factor in itself. (One of the single most important, I think.) And on eMusic alone, you can now get an incredible amount of stuff that's been confined to "local" markets since forever. One of the areas that's surging ahead on that site: locally-produced music from all over Africa. In the jazz and classical categories, you can see much the same... and in others as well. CD Baby is now giving artists the option of selling both CDs and downloads (includes liners). A lot of artists are opting into that, and I've got more than a sneaking suspicion that they're gaining airplay as a result - along with exposure on music blogs, which is where "niche" music has had a home for quite some time. yes, a lot of people are greedy, a lot of people could care less about whether the artist gets any money or not, but I'm not sure that that's the case for the folks who really *care* about the music in question. I'm seeing - increasingly - artists sending copies of their CDs to MP3 bloggers, so that those bloggers can (if they choose) promote their stuff. I've also seen respected artists going the next step, in making copies of rare, o.p. material (that majors are sitting on and refusing to reissue) available via music blogs. In several cases this has resulted in reissues of the actual recordings, for people to actually buy. (The cases I'm citing have mostly been occurring on Brazilian-focused blogs, and the recordings in question have been reissued by Brazilian majors - small labels, too.) There are times when I feel that people go too far with this and take it into questionable territory, but for those who really love good music, that's seldom the case. I've been burned by pirates myself, through legit outlets - and it makes me angry that anyone would have the gall to steal everything (even the artwork and logos!) to rip off artists who don't even own the rights to the recordings in question. (It's happened to me - and at least one other person I know - in the course of buying rare Brazilian discs.) I would actually like to be able to give a couple of artists some kind of compensation for the losses they've incurred through what the pirates did. I have no sympathy at all for that kind of activity. but now we're dealing with new media, and trying to impose the same laws used for the "old" media (along with the older business models) is simply not working. What we've got on the books now, via the DMCA, is mostly unrealistic. That whole act - and all its provisions - needs to be gone over very carefully and amended so that artists benefit - and so that the default stance toward consumers isn't one that views them all as potential pirates (or worse). but I think I'd better get off my soapbox for now, eh?

Indeed, it's Friday. Let's think about it on monday morning. Sounds like a great idea to me!

I think something that's missing from this discussion (though I've raised it several times, as have others) is that *internet distribution is a reality now.* an awful lot of what the RIAA is trying to do is self-defeating because they're ignoring new business models that they should be using instead of scorning. Even Maria Schneider sells high-bitrate downloadable files on her portion of the ArtistShare site, along with PDFs of the liners to her CDs. The industry's infrastructure has been in the process of collapsing - and being reinvented via other means/media - for some years now. But they keep insisting that everyone has to play by their rules, even if the way in which they do business is entirely outmoded. People might not like the fact that things have changed, but there's no way to turn back the clock. if the majors act in a creative way, to get their stuff out there to the people who want it, then ... things will be different, and hopefully, better, for lots of people. Individual artists (and not just artists under 30!) have been moving to new, internet-based models for sales and the majors are apparently loath to follow. That's undercutting their profits, in a pretty substantial way - as are the growing number of artists and labels that are opting out of RIAA membership. Oh well. We won't solve the world's problems today, will we?!

Aggies, how can this be dealt with in a reasonable way, other than charging people twice for the same new item? (Again, I'm not being facetious or intending to be provocative in any way at all.) What if the thing you ripped is o.p. and rare anyway? What if the label's out of business, and hasn't had its catalogue bought up by another label? There are so many "what ifs" that I'm not sure it's possible to make some sort of boilerplate ruling - except in our private lives.

I still really don't see how ripping audio files from a CD is cheating anyone - if you don't pirate the material, or "share" copyrighted stuff. If it sits on your HD or iPod and you listen to it, but don't reproduce it *for sale* (or generally flout the law in some way or other) then how...? Honestly. Piracy is a whole different matter. (I think, but that's just me.)

I'm not sure the used market can be policed, though... Major labels would certainly be very, very happy if they could derive revenue from the sale of used material! If I purchase a CD, used or new, the actual object belongs to me, and I can dispose of it as I wish. if i give it away, or throw it in the trash, are people being cheated? (I'm not saying this to be contentious; I'm 100% serious.)

Exactly.

Aggie, I used to be firmly in the same camp as you, before I started doing legal internet broadcasts - and being directly affected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the RIAA and the Copyright Royalty Board. A lot of my idealism about copyright and ownership went right out the window after seeing these big organizations being greedy for profit - for themselves, not the artists. it changed my entire way of thinking, especially because of the way in which a *very* low-quality audio file or stream is being - in the DMCA - equated with the actual audio on a physical CD. there's simply no comparison between a 32 or 64k "stream" and a CD, at all. I also saw (very quickly) that royalties were being collected on o.p. recordings issued by labels that have long since died - who, exactly, was getting the money? I seriously doubt any of the artists - or people who owned those labels - got one cent. yet I had to do certain kinds of tagging to enable the RIAA and CRB to collect monies that should, in many cases, have been paid to people in Africa, South America, Cuba, and... I could go on, but won't. There's something very, very fishy about all of this, and I don't believe the right people are seeing those royalty checks. I also don't see anyone talking here about the sale of used books - the authors don't see any profits from used material. the only time they (might) get anything is when the book is sold new. To my mind, there's a lot of flim-flamming written into US law re. copyright, royalties and digital files. (Also about what is legally considered "publication" and what isn't.) did you know that it's illegal for anyone here in the US to post a transcription of a solo on a BB or web site - even if it's been incorrectly transcribed - without paying royalties/licensing fees/etc.? That's written into the DMCA. It's very unfortunate that the industry and their lawyers refuse to acknowledge how musicians actually work, in real life! Posting chords and tablature is also illegal by default, unless you own the copyright on the material - even if the chords and/or tablature are incorrect. The law is an ass, in this case, i think.

Like king ubu, I have a number of external HDs where I store music. I'm not sure how keeping MP3 copies of files from a CD that you've sold can be truly illegal - it's not as if you've got the same audio quality in those files, for one. And it's also not as if, in selling a used CD, the record companies, artists and/or copyright holders are seeing 1 cent of profit from the sale of those CDs. *That* happens only when someone buys a new, factory shrink-wrapped CD. One of the realities of the internet is that specialist audio/MP3 blogs are supplanting radio - do a bit of Googling and you'll see what I mean. Speaking only for myself, I can tell you that listening to music on some of those blogs has actually spurred me to buy many CDs - and avoid others that I'd end up selling because I didn't like them. If the industry as a whole would embrace the notion of allowing people to listen before they buy (to more than a 30-second sample, that is), I think they'd be doing themselves - and the artists - a big favor. Lots of independent artists are selling their new releases as downloads (in addition to "hard copy" releases on CD or vinyl). This actually makes their "product" more saleable - with far less overhead! And some record labels have been making their new releases available to the press/radio as downloads with PDF files (liners) for a while now. (In the cases I'm thiking of, they use file formats that aren't nearly as compressed as MP3s.) This saves the labels a *lot* of money - and yet, the complete release is there. It's a concept that works very well for all concerned, minimizes waste, and still allows for the presentation of the music and liner notes. I'm all for it, and not just for the press/media in general...

This is absurd! When I sell my old Mustang, should I pay some copyright to Ford? When I sell my used Apple laptop should I pay the copyright for the software on it? Used stuff is beyond copyright's laws. I paided once, that's all. Well, music copyrights are complex - unlike author's rights on published material, music copyrights all too often belong to someone other than the creator of the material (i.e., composer, lyricist or group). I'm sure there are others here who could explain the minutiae of recording contracts - especially major-label contracts - far better than I could hope to do. The fact is that until recently - and now, only in certain cases - does any composer or lyricist or group or individual artist have anything like the same rights and privileges as authors. And the Digital Millennium Copyright Act has, if anything, muddied the waters even further, in that the claims made about "CD quality" internet broadcasting are pretty specious. (64k is NOT "CD quality," no matter how many lawyers try to dance on the head of a the proverbial pin to demonstrate that somehow, it really *is* the same as a CD.) Who was it that said "The law is an ass"? It certainly can be, and in the matter of copyrights on recorded and broadcast music, that saying is particularly true. There's a whole lot I could go into here regarding the DMCA and internet broadcasting, but I'll refrain, except to say that there are explicit rules that forbid internet broadcasters to play more than a minimal number of tracks by the same artist in any given 3-hour period of time; ditto for albums and cuts by several artists that come from the same compilation. Artist "sets" are basically illegal under the DMCA, even if/when the broadcaster is using music from diverse sources. the legal machinations involved (in terms of the RIAA and the Copyright Royalty Board trying to alter the state of internet broadcasting) began to affect independent/small broadcasters in a very negative way a little over a year ago. I quit at that point, since there was no way I could continue to cooperate with these restrictions and be able to afford to pay licensing fees and permissions. It would be nice if copyright law changed to reflect the realities of what musicians actually *do,* but I doubt that's going to happen anytime soon, so... There is equal madness going on with the RIAA's relentless pursuit of illegal downloading and the "test cases" they've tried to railroad through courts. If only musicians actually *saw* some of the money the RIAA and Copright Royalty Board are demanding, it might be justifiable. But it's far more like an industry lobby that exists to perpetuate itself, as opposed to being an advocacy group for artists. Very sad, on the whole - not to mention unrealistic.

Yes - it's really good! Andy Palacio (leader of the group) died last month... I've got a small tribute to him on my blog. (Click on the link in my signature to get there, then scroll down a bit...)

There are other file formats - Ogg Vorbis and FLAC, for example - that seem to be popular in many audiophile circles, FLAC especially. (Stands for "free lossless audio codec.") Some of those formats sound better to me than MP3s ripped at 256-320 kbps, but I've done double-blind tests on supposedly "lossless" formats vs. 256k (or above) MP3s using the (not inexpensive) headphones that I use with both my iPod and CD player - and my ears couldn't tell the difference between the two. (MP3s ripped at significantly lower bitrates are another story altogether, though...) For a little over a year, I had a digital "radio" station on Live365.com, and I have to say that there really are advantages to storing audio files on dedicated hard drives. it was far easier for me to upload a new playlist using already-ripped files than to sit here ripping a track here, a track there from who knows how many different CDs to try and set up a playlist and... I'm seeing a number of labels that are moving toward vinyl/320 k MP3 releases only, and think that's the beginning of the future staring us in the face. I've also seen a fair number of posts (not on music boards) written by younger people who didn't grow up hearing vinyl - but they've fallen in love with it, as much for the pleasure of looking at the LP cover and owning an object as for the sound itself. Like Bev, I feel far less tied to physical discs (of any kind) these days - even knowing that most MP3s are encoded at a pretty low bitrate (though not all - there are *some* 320k files available on Emusic and other download services). yes, it's a pain to back things up, but... I can slip a small USB HD in my bag or laptop case, and I've got who knows how many hours of music available? It's very convenient, just as iPods are. i also love using my iPod to do things like comparing different versions of the same piece - whether it's classical, samba, jazz, whatever. You can't do that with vinyl or CD, at least not as easily as you can using some of the iPod's basic menus. As for sales of used CDs and LPs, the artists and labels don't see 1 cent of profit from resale - which is, I think, one of the things that irks the RIAA and the Copyright Royalty Board the most. (I no longer have a digital broadcast due to untenable restrictions posed by both the RIAA and CRB in the wake of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's not having netted either body as much income as they'd like to see - and what they *do* get is generally not seen by the artists or composers.) Rant over (for now )!

The thing about brass band music is this - the Europeans might have introduced the instruments, but they were quickly taken up by Africans, South and East Asians, etc. (I'm nuts about Indian brass bands, for example.) The guy who runs the Boot Sale Sounds blog has posted vinyl rips of brass-band highlife, though that was a long time ago -0 he might re-up if he gets requests, I'm thinking. (Am not sure of his URL offhand, but you should easily be able to find it via Google.) Now I'm waiting for the next installment of your Ghanian purchases!

I'll 'fess up to having heard quite a few Congolese tracks that have turned me off, too - and I'm not sure what it is about those tracks, as I've heard others (by the same artists!) that I really like. Might just be a case of needing to give something another chance? There are things in music that I love now but which made absolutely no sense to me 10 years ago - or even 3 months ago, in some cases. And back when I was writing reviews I noticed that I'd just get a bit overloaded and good albums and artists started to sound alike - dull, predictable, etc. In some cases, that was true, but in others, it was because I was tired or had listened to too much of X style and needed a break... or maybe I just wasn't in the right mood to listen to whatever and be able to appreciate it. Even now, I find that some things strike me as brilliant when I'm wide awake, boring when I'm feeling drowsy. (And I'm talking about the same albums/cuts, etc.) So - for me, at least - there's a ton of subjectivity involved, much of it having nothing to do with music per se.

But the guitar style has been hugely influential throughout the whole continent, including Senegal, Guinea and Mali. It's there in a lot of Orchestra Baobab's recordings, for example... So maybe it's just a question of taste, MG? I like the ties to Cuban music that I hear in Congolese music (melodies, rhythms, harmonies, the works) and think there's much more going on than "voicings" per se. But that's neither here nor there in terms of why one person likes something and another doesn't. And maybe whatever it is that you've heard might not do much for me, either!

Lately I've been listening to this (issued by Stern's in the US), and would recommend it highly to anyone interested in African guitar (and more) -

Stern's also has some presence in the US, albeit on the small side, as both a label and as a distributor... So I'd suggest checking prices on sites like CD Universe and Amazon.com for starters.

Well hey, the book MG mentioned is news to me - and so is the upcoming disc by Toumani Diabate. I think it takes a bit of conferring to stay in the loop, y'know? So - thanks to Bev and MG both! [::scrawls more titles on shopping list::]

Stern's used to have some nice releases. There's also a soundtrack disc for the documentary on him, "Je chanterai pour tois." And I think some of his songs are on one of the Golden Afrique sets, but I'm not 100% sure. (Though you really can't go wrong with those!) this is nice, too -

Following up on Debra's post... Memo to Eicher: "German weather depressing, Please use some color."

I bet you're right - with maybe a touch of soca, too? (Just a guess - I spent a lot of time recently watching soca and chutney-soca videos...) Edit - Shurwayne Winchester is an award-winning chutney-soca artist. Here's one of his videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNe_Jq_3HR4

The ban was (apparently) about my posting in the M2M and theory forums, but I was never told why, by MR or anyone else. Per yesterday's posts on the "conference call re. the state of the board" thread, that was still an issue, and I've yet to receive any communication as to why. No answers have been offered to anyone, really. So then, best to move on. And i am deeply appreciative of your efforts - and those of many others - on my behalf. I just simply don't think this is resolvable in a way that's satisfactory to all parties, including those who might have complained about my posts in M2M.

Well, the gent who runs The Hiplife Complex hasn't posted to the blog in over a year, so... I have to wonder if Castro Destroyer is a calypso fan - put "Lord" in front of his other names and he'd be ready for this year's Carnival in Port-of-Spain! There's also a fellow named King Ayisoba who's got an album available on eMusic.com, iTunes and MySpace... I like it a lot, though one of the vocalists is a bit grating (to my ears, anyway). Here's a direct link to his label's (or producer's) MySpace page. Link to King Ayisoba's MySpace page.

thanks for the link and tip - I've been dropping by your blog (off and on) for quite a few months now... but somehow didn't make the connection. D'oh! Again, thanks so much for all the links above plus other info. (including the new release on Intakt) - it's greatly appreciated.