View Full Version : Napster
bassman
12-23-2003, 10:50 PM
Okee Dokee,
Did a search here for "Napster" and came up with a couple of recent threads, but nothing along the lines of what I am looking for.
I may be a bit behind the times but I just recently noticed that Napster is back and on the legit trail. I see they are getting 99¢ for singles and $9.95 for whole albums. Check it out here (http://www.napster.com/). I know there are several music specialists here. Does anyone have feedback on the new Napster or maybe another service??
Thanks
Frank:cool:
PrntRhd
12-23-2003, 11:41 PM
Not personally, but I know Apple is selling music downloads for Windows and Macintosh.
Fruss Tray Ted
12-24-2003, 12:28 AM
Nothing directly to your request but I was listening to the radio a few days ago and the station had Rick Derringer on air with the DJ and they were accepting calls from outside lines.
Some woman called in and argued that she should be able to D/L music with shareware P2P's and that it was no different than recording FM brodcasts onto cassetes of the old days.
No matter how much either the DJ or Rick D tried to explain that allowing a stranger to D/L music you just ripped onto your pc was different than catching random ordered songs played on the radio went sooo far over her head that it didn't even wave her hair with the breeze!
Rick D was agreeing that 99 cents a song was a fair substitute than relying on over the counter sales for a musicians livelyhood and felt it should be instituted. The DJ (and I) agreed wholeheartedly that there needs to be some way to bring the piracy under control and this seems to be a very viable way to accomplish just that.
One of the things that are lousy about it is, you no longer get the folder with a storebought CD (or album), the list of credits, thanks to coproducers, so on and so forth. It used to be nice to doublecheck when the music was marketed versus when it was written, who the guest artists were on different cuts,, All of this lost now unless YOU take the time to make all the jackets and labels yourself. That is if you can find all the info anyway without going to Starbucks and forking over the dough like the old days.
I'm glad that it is at least some type of happy medium. Fine, stick it to the RIAA if you want but inadvertently you are sticking it to the artist also. This newer way hopefully you may be able to get the record companies to rerelease some material you have had to throw out long ago due to the condition of the old vinyl platters. I know there's some stuff WITH Rick Derringer on it that I would LOVE to get my hands on again because what I have is too scratchy to tolerate :( Namely Edgar Winters Roadwork album 2 record live set with 2 great guitar players, Johnny Winters and Rick Derringer) If anyone can find me a link to a copy of that... it would make my Christmas! :D
Flick
12-24-2003, 12:59 AM
Napster is a premium service under Windows Media Player!:)
Paleo Pete
12-24-2003, 06:35 AM
Namely Edgar Winters Roadwork album 2 record live set with 2 great guitar players, Johnny Winters and Rick Derringer)
Winter....no "s"...
It's already available on CD, I've had it for 7 or 8 years, one of my old favorites. But I like Rick's version of "Rock and Roll Hootchie Koo" on his first solo album lots better..."Tobacco Road", however is a different story. One of the best live tracks ever as far as I'm concerned...OK maybe Jethro Tull's "Bursting Out" had some nice tracks too... :cool: And Pink Floyd's "Delicate Sound of Thunder" might just have a good song here and there... OK, OK I'll quit... :D
$.99 per song....Let's see, the average CD with 15-17 tracks is around $14.99-16.99, so let's go click on "Calculator"... 17 X .99 = $16.83. Very close to the same as the CD or more and the artist still doesn't make enough to pay for the recording of it...not much of a deal is it? Same price as the CD and you don't get the cover art or lyrics/credits printed in the insert...and you have to buy your own recordable CD to put it on to play in the car...or office...or ghetto blaster...(Do they still use that term any more ? hehe) $9.95 for the entire CD is not bad, but $.99 per song can actually add up to more than the off-the-shelf CD by far.
As far as music downloading, I still have to refer back to Janis Ian's article Internet Debacle (http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.html) which takes a close, thoughtful look at it from an artist's point of view. Also check out the link to the "Fallout" article, a very interesting followup.
The RIAA and recording companies are not and never have been interested in the artist's welfare, but filling their own pockets instead. More often than not the artist completes a recording owing them lots of money and record/CD sales quite often don't come close to paying it. Touring is how they make a living, not recording, all recording does is get their name out there. Getting it played on radio is horrendously expensive.
Also, Ms Ian keeps a song or three on her website for downloading, since she saw her sales jump 300% (I think that's the number she posted) in a few weeks after the first trial song was posted. It works the same as radio or live shows. You hear a song or artist you like, you go find the CD...or and older one.
The artist, on average, makes something like $0.80 at best per CD. Who gets the other $16.00 or so? Or more? That is the biggest problem I have with the RIAA drivel, they and the record companies have been ripping off musicians for years, at least since the Beatles were around, and the record companies long before then. They were almost totally broke when they disbanded in the early '70s. Ask Chuck Berry if he made much money on recordings in 1958..Or Hank Williams years before that, etc.
This Article (http://www.negativland.com/albini.html) takes a good look at the typical recording scenario, with a list of what everybody makes (or owes) on an album. The prices are abit off, it's been a while since I saw an album or CD for $6.50, but it's still a good representation of what really happens. I also spotted another article with numbers from a survey, which I can't find again, indicating that the people who were downloading the most music were the very same ones purchasing the most CDs...The ones downloading little or none usually also purchased little or none...
I am not, of course, trying to justify indiscriminate downloading of zillions of songs, I feel basically the same way as Janis Ian so I'll use a quote from here article here, since she puts it in words lots better than I can:
-From "Internet Debacle"-
Please note that I am not advocating indiscriminate downloading without the artist's permission. I am not saying copyrights are meaningless. I am objecting to the RIAA spin that they are doing this to protect "the artists", and make us more money. I am annoyed that so many records I once owned are out of print, and the only place I could find them was Napster. Most of all, I'd like to see an end to the hysteria that causes a group like RIAA to spend over 45 million dollars in 2001 lobbying "on our behalf", when every record company out there is complaining that they have no money.
End rant...
bassman
12-24-2003, 12:02 PM
:D Gotta love ya Pete, but a bit off track. I can certainly see your point of view though. What I would like to see out of all of this is that the artists learn to not "Take the deal" that record companies are offering. The late fifties and early sixties were a boon for record companies as they learned how to control the artists and money. They developed the system that put platers on our turntables.
The late seventies and early eighties, they got away with it more because the kids that were starting Rap were naive and the industry really took advantage of them.
I think the internet will give the artist (in many different venues) the opportunity to control their own fate better then ever before.
I will have to check out Apple and see what they have to offer.
Thanks to all
Fruss Tray Ted
12-24-2003, 02:07 PM
Even though I've been battling the flu for several days now,
Pete you just made my Christmas! A simple mispelling and I was getting nowhere with Google. Amazon is going to get my order here in a few minutes (after this post) and may have a few of the others you mentioned with it too! Oh, and I'm buying the whole enchilada (cd, cover, credits & all) via snailmail
Bassman,
I agree that it is the advent of the pc more than the internet that will finally loosen the stranglehold on the neck of the musician from the RIAA's grip. If the artists/bands can find smaller independent studios in more areas, it might even bring the costs of retail purchases down.
I'm sure they'll still need managers and other outside help but hopefully it will all be for the good, not the greed.
Merry Christmas!
Flick
12-24-2003, 09:18 PM
You might also want to check out http://www.walmart.com/ They're selling music downloads for $0.88 per cut. All you need is a credit card or a Wal*Mart shopping card.
bassvax
12-25-2003, 01:44 AM
I use MusicMatch Jukebox and it's service to download at $0.99 a pop. For me this is great...when I find I want maybe one or two songs off of an album. The choices are not as large as I thought, but everyday more is added.
I so wanted to do the iTunes thing, but their requirement is Windows XP or 2000...I'm still chugging along on 98 SE.
I've always believed in paying for music.....BUT, I do see the enormous shafting that the RIAA and others do to the artists! It would be ultimately sweet if the artists could just make money by having us patrons download from their service.....yada!!!
Fruss Tray Ted
12-25-2003, 12:11 PM
Well before i even finished my last post, I got paged and couldn't get back to ordering what I wanted to right away. So I tried WalMart and found most of the material I was immediately after. Used my debit card and purchased about $20 worth of songs.
Downloaded 1 of them (they give you 90 days to do this) and tried to play it. Here's my problems, none of which I was aware of prior to the purchase (I did not read the lengthy agreement before going ahead :o ).
1: They want you to use Windows Media Player 9.
I do not want to install it and I want to be able to play the songs in a car so what good is .WMA files? I want to burn them to CD-r's. Also they only allow them to be D/Led onto 2 other pc's. What good is that? I don't HAVE a pc in my truck!
2: They want you to use IE6 which at this time I do not have.
What does it actually matter anyway?
3: The file I D/Led would not play. This is the error page that pops up:
A license for the track you are attempting to play cannot be found on your machine. If you have already purchased this product and are experiencing difficulties, please contact Customer Support.
If you have not purchased this product, please click here.
They said it was because I had JAVA disabled so I enabled it, rebooted and redownloaded the song but still no go. I am positive that I have been able to view/listen to WMA files in the past.
I've emailed them requesting a refund and stating that because I want .cda or mp3 tracks that I will purchase the full cd's via snail mail. We'll see what unfolds when they return to work after the holidays.
What format do the other sites offer their tracks as?
Well at least I didn't have to stand in line at the mall to return this Christmas present... :rolleyes:
bassman
12-25-2003, 11:17 PM
Flick, thanks for the tip on WalMart. Logged on looked for a tune to get, found Moody Blues/Nights in white satin, selected payment type, went thru the registration stuff, downloaded and started listening, all in under 5 minutes. God I love the internet:D
Fruss, not sure what the hangup about Media Player 9 is but I have found it quite nice. I know there is always the security issues or not wanting to promote MS any more than necessary, but that was one of the easiest and now more enjoyable things I have ever done on the internet. Listening to this song again. Man I miss this music. All my wife wants to listen to is the "Hit List" crap:p
Napster requires XP/2000. I d/l it on one of the desktops but have not used it yet.
As easy as WalMarts site was to use, and 11 cents cheaper, I think I will stick with that.
Thanks to all who gave :cool:
Frank
PrntRhd
12-26-2003, 12:56 AM
not sure what the hangup about Media Player 9 is but I have found it quite nice
Actually, it is the damn Digital Rights Management in 9 that causes people get mad about Microsoft, it is a good media player but if you use it you have to play by their rules and they force content providers to play by their rules too.
By the way my first date with my new wife was to see Moody Blues in Concord CA 3 years ago. The Moody Blues with the New World Philharmonic Orchestra.......wow, a great show and wonderful music.
bassman
12-26-2003, 11:14 AM
OKAAAA, so if I can listen to these songs on another media player, am I getting away from DRM?
And if so, why not make that player my default for all the music I d/l?
Is'nt DRM what verifies to the copywrite gods that I have legitimately accquired a license for this music?
Please don't take me a smarta*# PrntRhd. People around here who are familiar with me know I have issues with people who have issues with using their computers. There is usualy a simple solution to the problem that causes the fears that prevent people from using their computers for anything they want.
The files I d/l from WalMart are in .wma format. I can play these on many different media players. I can even convert and burn this music to a CD in a different format with a product like THIS (http://www.roxio.com/en/products/ecdc/features.jhtml).
Like with anything in our lives, there are certain costs, considerations, and compromises to get what we desire. If you are not willing to accept these compromises, then I guess you need to change your desires.;)
jeeza
12-26-2003, 01:21 PM
An article :
"Your 99c belong to the RIAA - Steve Jobs"
http://theregister.com/content/6/33850.html
This is a tricky one :
"Media Companies quietly using p2p networks"
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5101550.html
It only stays a few seconds in your browser window, after that you are redirected to a page listing general news :
http://zdnn.search.com/search?q=Media+or+companies+or+CCU&message=expired
The trick is to save the page before you get redirected, as "HTML only" as this goes faster. When you open this saved html file in your browser, you get redirected again, which means that it's a script residing in the html file. You will have to search for it and edit it out to be able to read the article.
PrntRhd
12-26-2003, 01:49 PM
I was going to go into a rant about Trusted Computing Alliance, but Jeeza's link said more about it.
TCA will get MS a piece of that $ each time you download too. Content providers will have to pay to get on the approved list. It is the same business model MS used for driver signing already. 3 guesses who pays.
We who are users are learning how to make computers work, Bill Gates is learning how to make money while we do that.
jeeza
12-26-2003, 02:02 PM
PrntRhd,
Were you able to read that article on ZDnet ?
I saved the page and extracted the text of the article out it.
I saved it as an html file which you find here :
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
<body>
<b>Even as entertainment companies remain locked in legal battles against file-sharing services, some are quietly experimenting with ways to use the networks to their advantage. </b>
<p>
One company, called BigChampagne, is tracking music downloads for radio giant Clear Channel. Another, Jun Group, is deliberately releasing music to Web file sharers in order to generate buzz. </p><p>
Jun Group's Mitchell Reichgut, a former advertising executive, said his service provides record labels with the means to transform their decades-old model for selling music. </p>
<p>
"Basically, the labels have a choice. They can fight and continue losing money or try to tweak this 100-year-old model and get immediate results for artists, consumers and sponsors," Reichgut said. </p><p>
Jun Group recently reached agreements with a songwriter, a beverage company and a TV network--entities that would normally be very careful to protect their products--to release their content onto peer-to-peer networks. </p><p>
BigChampagne also tracks song-swapping networks such as Kazaa and Morpheus for record labels, which in turn use the data to persuade radio stations to play their songs. </p><p>
Tracking downloading activity can predict a hit before a song gets radio airplay. If a particular song is heavily downloaded, a record label could use that as a selling point to ask radio stations to put the song in a heavier rotation. </p><p>
"At any particular moment, we're working with most of the labels. This is an industry that relies on immediate data on consumer reaction," said Eric Garland, BigChampagne's chief executive officer. </p><p>
Label executives say BigChampagne provides both a gauge of consumer tastes and an indication of piracy trends. </p><p>
"We're definitely using it as a tool. It's just part of a bigger trend of the labels using real data to figure out marketing plans--as opposed to radio charts that are not tied directly to consumer information," said Jeremy Welt, head of new media at Maverick Records, a Time Warner label. </p><p>
<b>Undercutting the legal battle</b><br />
Many labels are hesitant to admit that they are talking with Jun Group or using BigChampagne, due to the industry's antipiracy fight. The industry's argument in court battles against file sharing hinges in large part on the argument that file-sharing networks serve no purpose other than to foster copyright infringement. </p><p>
Record labels' use of file-sharing networks for market research or promotion purposes could undercut that legal claim. </p><p>
"It's remarkable, the disparity between the labels' legal battle and their understanding that product is moving online and a desire to be at the fore of the movement," Garland said. </p><p>
While BigChampagne uses music download data for market research, Jun's promotion method is more direct. It distributes material to the top levels of the file-sharing universe--the more technical users who trade files on Internet Relay Chat and Usenet. </p><p>
"Known as the Internet arbiters of cool, they get the content first and distribute it through the rest of the community, creating a buzz. That is why it is such a powerful vehicle for marketing," Reichgut said. </p><p>
From this top tier of Internet hipsters, the content potentially trickles down to millions of people on networks like Kazaa. </p><p>
Reichgut said Jun used this method to boost ratings for a daytime program on a TV network that wished to remain anonymous. </p><p>
"The show had a spike in ratings after Jun made a clip available on file-sharing networks," said Reichgut, who formed Jun with a former Harvard University physics professor, Mitch Golden, and antipiracy consultant Bruce Forest. </p><p>
Jun detailed another deal with chocolate drink maker Yoo-hoo, which is owned by Cadbury Schweppes, and Kevin Martin, former front man for the rock band Candlebox. </p><p>
Under the deal, Yoo-hoo sponsored a five-song release by Martin's new band, Kevin Martin & the HiWatts, which involved giving the songs away online. Unlike typical record deals, the songs carry no restrictions and can be freely copied. The catch is that, when played, they display a message on listeners' computers that credits Yoo-hoo. </p><p>
Under the deal, Martin got a fee from Yoo-hoo and financial support for his tour, while Yoo-hoo gained access to millions of file sharers. </p><p>
Jun and Yoo-hoo now have a patent that's pending on Jun's proprietary method for distributing content. </p><p>
Jun expects to announce more deals with recording artists and movie companies, while BigChampagne recently signed a deal to provide data to Clear Channel Communications' Premiere Radio Networks, which runs the airplay-tracking system Mediabase. </p><p>
Maverick Records' Welt said there were still mixed feelings about using the services. </p><p>
"It's unfortunate that all this file sharing is happening, and we have to see all the music that is being taken, but at the same time, we have to look at it from every angle. We'd rather get this data from legitimate digital sales and stores, but we're in a transition phase right now," he said. </p><p>
<p>
<a href="/2106-1099-0.html">Story Copyright</a>
© 2003 <a href="/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com&edId=3&siteId=3&oId=2001-12-0&ontId=12&lop=reut_copy_ni">Reuters Limited</a>.
All rights reserved.
</p>
</body>
<html>
PrntRhd
12-26-2003, 02:53 PM
Jeeza,
No I wasn't able to open it. Thanks for the article.
I found TCA has changed their name, they now have morphed into Trusted Computing Group:link (http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-996032.html)
Sylvander
12-26-2003, 03:53 PM
I'm very interested in this topic, particularly the link given by Pete.
My son is in a band seen here http://www.redbeesociety.co.uk/
I have advised him to go it alone without the help of the record companies.
He formed his own record company [Gantry Records] and released through that.
He produced a CD with two tracks on it and sent out copies to journalists and radio stations.
To his pleased surprise it was played UK wide on BBC UK radio 1 and BBC radio 1 Scotland.
It cost nothing to have it played on radio.
In fact they are paid about £150 per play.
They paid 4 x £100 for lifetime membership of the UK Performing Rights Society so that the royalties will be collected.
I was given a copy and have just listened to it.
[B]The second track is a STUNNER.
I had heard this before and thought it a rather depressing dirge, but they have transformed it into something very special [I think].
This kind of music has to be brought to the world.
It would be a crime against nature to fail to exploit such talents.
The Scottish Arts Council have given him a grant of £5,000 to help him make their first full CD.
Anyone interested can buy it online at their site for £2 plus postage etc.
Fruss Tray Ted
12-26-2003, 08:39 PM
Fearing an all caps reply if i post this, I will nonetheless. I have more than 1 pc that has 'issues' with using Windows Media Player 7 and above. But they have no trouble with earlier versions or the standard cd-player in W98SE or earlier. But they fail to play the music tracks fluently or smoothly. That in itself should be an excuse in preferring NOT to use WMP9 or the need to use it just to listen to the WalMart tracks I purchased.
Reading an above post had me assuming if I tried another media player that I could play the one file I have downloaded already. At this point though I have only tried "WMA Converter". When I opened it and went to the track I D/Led last night (15+megs), in properties of the file it says it's a WMA file, but the program stated that it was not. So as I am still awaiting a return email from WalMart, my frustration mounts.
It sounds to me like once WMP9 is on your system, it can be played/manipulated as you wish but I still prefer not to though the system I am on at this moment is capable of it. I suppose I can install it, convert all the tracks then remove it or reformat the OS partition but I don't want to do that either. I will send another email about a refund in hopes of avoiding all the DRM and propietary system preferrence BS!
I'm a busy enough person as is and the need to 'finagle' a way to listen to the tracks is ridiculous! I payed for them, why can't I use my current equipment? This is just another forceful hand that M$ is putting upon us as consumers to upgrade our system in order to enjoy the convenience of storeless purchases. Crap I say! As soon as my card is credited I'll get the CD instead! Even if I have to walk!
[/rant]
bassman
12-26-2003, 11:52 PM
:D :D :cool:
No "ALL CAPS" from me Ted, was only making a suggestion if you wanted to continue with the "Purchase tracks online" scenario.
Well, it seems this one has gotten a bit off track so I will now bow out and say "Thank you" to all comments.;)
Frank:cool:
Fruss Tray Ted
12-27-2003, 06:19 AM
Does anyone have feedback on the new Napster or maybe another service??
If any of my posts were offtrack even microscopically, I apologise. I seems to me at least that I was entirely on the beaten path.
I DO intend to continue to purchase tracks online but I refuse to accept such a narrow, biased and limited use contract as from Wally World. I will look into some of the others shortly. Thanks for the heads up on Napster. So far, reading their contract, there's nothing as limiting as the experience I've had thus far.
I have used this thread as an eye opener for those who I know still use older systems such as P233's with bus speeds incapable of handling the newer WMP's and trying to avoid their encountering problems such as I have at times in the past.
Has anyone used any of the other services and what format is it offered? Also, with that service, was there a catch or limiting usage clause?
Sylvander
12-27-2003, 07:58 AM
The magnificent Clydesdale horse [a UK breed], originally bred to carry Knights in full armour into battle, was eventually used as a beast of burden pulling wagons.
To keep it “ON TRACK” it was fitted with blinkers so it could only see the track ahead and would not be “distracted” by what it saw around it.
Anyone who desires to be [ab]used as a “Beast of Burden” can help their usurers and usurpers [the record companies for example] by blinkering themselves to stay “On Track”.
They will then not notice the existence of any of the issues of the day [such as file sharing on the Internet] that might free them from abuse and exploitation.
It would be an entirely different matter if someone started discussing matters that did not relate in any way to the topic under discussion.
Broadening a discussion can and usually does lead to a more balanced view.
Narrowing your view is likely to lead to completely missing the most important point of all.
bassman
12-27-2003, 01:26 PM
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The fault is all mine, please excuse my lack of clarity in my initial request. What I was asking was if anyone had any experience with using an online service to pay for and download audio/video tracks (music, comedy, movies,… ) namely “Napster” as I had just recently realized that Napster was back.
What I failed to exclude from my request was a desire for further information on the woes of record industry/artist relations, Microsoft’s strangle hold on the world, or the concerns of upgrading software due to hardware limitations or personal beliefs.
This forum, at times, has a tendency to lean toward the argumentative and that is perfectly fine. It IS an open discussion forum. What I would like to avoid is another thread tuning into a lengthy discussion about issues already covered in other threads.
Or am I just taking all of this the wrong way???:confused: .
If anyone has something more they would like to say to me directly, my e-mail is available and I accept PM’s.
Again, I have received the information I asked for. Thank you all.
PrntRhd
12-27-2003, 02:41 PM
Lol, you sometimes get more than you expect here.
:)
jeeza
12-28-2003, 05:47 PM
Yes, but not always.
PrntRhd
12-28-2003, 10:18 PM
Napster also has a premium service with unlimited downloads for $9.95/month.
BuyMusic.com has 99 cent downloads.
Real Networks Rhapsody is 79 cents per track after $9.95/mo or $24.95/quarter.
Apple iTunes only work played in iPod devices.
Steve
12-28-2003, 10:40 PM
Not to stray from the original topic, ;) but if you are interested in paying for music online, a guy I used to know was a big fan of emusic.com (http://www.emusic.com/pitch.html) . It's a pay site for mp3's. Good selection. Unlimited downloads. Legal/legitimate. They offer a free download of 50 songs, of your choice, as an incentive.
Budfred
12-28-2003, 10:56 PM
According to what I have read about Itunes recently, it is now also able to be used on PC systems on other MP3 players than IPod... as suggested at Itunes.... (http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/)
PrntRhd
12-28-2003, 11:54 PM
I will check it out, thanks.:)
wiltrot
01-02-2004, 09:10 PM
For $9.95 a month, unlimited listening of entire albums. And for $.79 you can burn it to a CDR.
16,326 artists
32,523 albums
438,612 tracks
and more are added daily.
RealOne RHAPSODY (http://www.listen.com/)
Okay, I didn't realize there was a page 2.
vBulletin v3.6.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.