All recordings of Django in mp3 on the web

Submissions for tune chords and licks

Moderators: Zoot, Teddy Dupont

Would you like an mp3 database with all Django records on this website

yes
14
56%
no
11
44%
 
Total votes : 25

Re: Don't worry

Postby fmason » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:35 pm

TedGottsegen wrote:Than listen to clips at towerrecords.com, towerrecords.co.uk, fnac.com, amazon.fr, amazon.de, amazon.com or any number of online retail outlets - some people don't care about quality...the fact that they are available at all is wrong.


How odd... An independent artist telling me go to any number of faceless corporate music vending factories to listen to small independent artists. I listen to it on amazon, enter in my credit card number and buy the CD, now the world is a better place?

The internet is a great place to buy, sell, trade, and steal "intellectual property". We can't really change that, so I guess we'd better go along with it. For example, I'm sure that hotclub.co.uk users would love to pay royalties to whoever, in exchange for the chance to download any obscure Django song they wanted. And who knows, maybe the RIAA/ASCAP/leeches wouldn't even have to get their cut...

Or, perhaps the site offers Django music for free, interest in this genre of music increases dramatically as a result of its availability, and every gypsy artist gets rich overnight.
fmason
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:19 am

Re: Don't worry

Postby TedGottsegen » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:56 pm

fmason wrote:How odd... An independent artist telling me go to any number of faceless corporate music vending factories to listen to small independent artists.


What is so odd about that? I'm an artist and I also appreciate art and I want to support that art by paying to enjoy it. Doesn't come off as odd to me at all.

It wasn't so long ago when Amazon didn't carry any Gypsy Jazz CD's, except Django. Now you can order any number of CD's from them - Debarre, Rosenberg Trio, Tchavolo, Moreno, etc. Moreno doesn't have a website...so where are we supposed to get the music that we want to hear? If you pay for it, and the places with the means are making it available, than buy it so that MORE can become available.

fmason wrote:I listen to it on amazon, enter in my credit card number and buy the CD, now the world is a better place?


This has nothing to do with making the world a better place. It has to do with supporting the artists who create the music by buying it.

Let's just make this plain and simple - Musicians are eeking out a living playing this music. Django's family is supported by the sales of Django's CD's - shouldn't they be allowed to garner income from their art? So do the corporate fat cats, but that's life. I suppose they aren't entitled to that? Maybe you want to take money out of their pockets because you feel the buying a CD is being too much of a corporate sell out? What a naive position...

fmason wrote:The internet is a great place to buy, sell, trade, and steal "intellectual property". We can't really change that, so I guess we'd better go along with it.


We can't really change car-jackings, either, so why should we stop them? After all, it's a free society, right? Who has the right to tell someone to not take something that they want, especially if they can't afford it? :roll:

fmason wrote:For example, I'm sure that hotclub.co.uk users would love to pay royalties to whoever, in exchange for the chance to download any obscure Django song they wanted. And who knows, maybe the RIAA/ASCAP/leeches wouldn't even have to get their cut...


What?! You're still paying for the music! You're not paying the middle man, but you're still paying. I thought you wanted it all for free? Is corporate American (or whereever) what you're making a stand against?

fmason wrote:Or, perhaps the site offers Django music for free, interest in this genre of music increases dramatically as a result of its availability, and every gypsy artist gets rich overnight.


Well, since interest has been growing steadily around the world over the last 10 years, I don't think it has much to do with anything. More product would move, but would it increase interest? I don't think so.
TedGottsegen
Moderator
 
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 7:51 am
Location: Pioneer Square

Postby nwilkins » Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:21 am

I agree with Ted here - fmason you don't need to worry too much about the extra money that amazon et al will make off jazz manouche since no matter how much interest in it grows there will not be enough sales to affect their business significantly. In the meantime, it is worth buying the music not just so that the people who made it can make a living, but also so that its availability increases.

Yes, in a perfect world the profits would all go directly to the artist without the need for a middle man, but for now it's better than the artist getting nothing :)
User avatar
nwilkins
 
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:02 am

Postby nwilkins » Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:24 am

ps - not that anyone really cares about the poll statistics, but for accuracy's sake I want to mention that I hit "yes" instead of "no" and now I can't undo it. So there are only four people in favour.
User avatar
nwilkins
 
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:02 am

Postby justjack » Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:36 am

TedGottsegen wrote:It wasn't so long ago when Amazon didn't carry any Gypsy Jazz CD's, except Django. Now you can order any number of CD's from them - Debarre, Rosenberg Trio, Tchavolo, Moreno, etc. Moreno doesn't have a website...so where are we supposed to get the music that we want to hear? If you pay for it, and the places with the means are making it available, than buy it so that MORE can become available.


Spot on-I recently ordered a bunch of stuff I know I could copy for just this reason.

nwilkins wrote:In the meantime, it is worth buying the music not just so that the people who made it can make a living, but also so that its availability increases.


Again, agreed, but this brings up a point that has gotten lost, I think: the continual lengthening (and widening) of copyright. By all means, an artist should be able to control the work ('...so that the people who made it can make a living...') but to extend that right to generation after generation of descendants seems, to me, excessive. Art has always built on what's come before, and by limiting usage, I think we're sometimes shooting ourselves in the foot. An extreme example: What if the Gershwins' heirs had been able to stop all the tunes using Rhythm changes?
User avatar
justjack
Mad For It
 
Posts: 1855
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 10:40 pm
Location: Western Mass

Postby Lmntry » Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:18 am

Hmmmmm...interesting perspectives.

However I never see any mention Public performance fee's.

I first joined American federation of musicians in 1972. ( I assume Europe has an equivelent ?)
The gigs we played at "union" clubs .... were required to pay these fee's to all ascap/bmi songs.
I checked , and as I thought , these fee's are still solidly in place.

Here is a snip from the ascap site...


Federal copyright law provides that one may not publicly perform a copyrighted musical composition without the permission of the copyright owner. ?Public performances? encompass a variety of things, such as:


1. Radio stations playing music.
2. Television stations playing music.
3. Live concerts.
4. Night clubs/bars with live or recorded music. (This includes jukeboxes!)
5. Stores playing music over a central sound system. (Home stereo size -- two speaker systems -- played in stores are excluded.)
6. Music on hold on telephone systems.
7. Music in elevators.


The recorded CD/album income of an artist is only a fraction of what they can and do earn.....

Just as there are questionable practices concerning duplication of CD's etc.
There are also laws to doing gigs with songs other than originals.
It is also clear that if we truley want to support our craft , we should pay all fee's associated with that art.....and performance fee's are a part of a professional musicians job and responsibility.



David
User avatar
Lmntry
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Portland,Oregon

Postby nwilkins » Tue Apr 27, 2004 1:48 pm

I thought that paying those fees was the responsibility of the venue owners.
User avatar
nwilkins
 
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:02 am

Postby djangology » Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:46 pm

out of curiousity, if you did want to pay these fees, where would you send the money? im not sure if i would want to send the money to the artist through the conduit of the record company. sending the money direct would be far cooler. its too bad that Djangos heirs dont have a PayPal donate button somewhere. i would be really interested in being able to put money directly into the bloodline where it belongs. we should all donate AT LEAST 1 Euro for every gig we play. :-)

i see people sharing entire catalogs of artists musical work all the time on Bit Torrent... its sad to see. its evident that the internet changed the musical world... using Teds carjacking analogy, its almost as if with the advent of the internet everyone in the world was required to start driving Jeeps... all the sudden artist property is easily taken...
User avatar
djangology
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 7:52 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Postby Meshugy » Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:25 pm

[quote="djangology"]out of curiousity, if you did want to pay these fees, where would you send the money?

The venue is responsible for paying these fees. My guess is django gets very little in the way of performance rights revenue. BMI, ASACAP, and SESAC (Europe) don't send a rep. out to every gig. Its based on random sampling....did they ever send a guy out to Chez Ferdinand, Le Chope, or the Rijswik club house? Doubt it....

-Michael

DjangoBooks.com
Meshugy
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 8:02 pm
Location: The Emerald City

Postby garydude » Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:37 am

Is nothing sacred?? What's next mp3in' your Mom?? Django's gift to the planet should be treated with the utmost respect.
User avatar
garydude
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 9:26 am
Location: Venice, CA

Postby Teddy Dupont » Thu Apr 29, 2004 2:01 pm

garydude wrote:Django's gift to the planet should be treated with the utmost respect.

Absolutely right.
User avatar
Teddy Dupont
Moderator
 
Posts: 2036
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 11:27 am
Location: Dupont Towers

Missing the Point

Postby fmason » Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:43 am

I'm sorry if I ruffled some feathers. My intention was to make a few points about positive directions which could be taken regarding this "putting every Django song on a web site" idea. I doubt that anyone here will dispute that artists have to work hard for their peanuts. Or that Django's descendants should get a small chunk of the millions that record labels made and continue to make off of his recordings.

We can't stop somebody from putting recordings of music somewhere on the web or on some file sharing network. No ifs, ands, or buts, it's simply not possible. We can yell at someone who voices their intent to do it, and tell 'em it's like carjacking, but not much beyond that. So let's not get our undies in a bunch.

The internet is a massive distribution network which is at our fingertips. We possess the technology to share thoughts(this forum), music, videos, etc... for the cost of our computers and our monthly internet provider bills. I'm sure that 95% of people on this forum would love to share whatever media they own with others, in a manner which is judged to be FAIR to the artist who performed it, and FAIR to the label who engineered and produced it.

Say a bunch of people download a Moreno album from a special hotclub website. I doubt Moreno will be that mad if he has to cash a bunch of checks for 10 euros from us, and then write a check for a percentage to his label. It's so much easier than Credit Card to Paypal to Amazon, paying shipping out the ass, they each take their cut (VISA, Paypal, Amazon, UPS) and send the rest on to the label, Moreno gets crumbs and we get our music product a week later.

In my scenario, nobody loses except the tax collector and the megacorporations who try to monopolize the music distribution game. OK, what if somebody doesn't pay? Well, they don't get the special, one-time password to access the music until the money is in Moreno's bank account. What if somebody shares the music after they download it? It carries the same risk as if they bought the CD and made mp3s from it (a trivial task).

As several people have pointed out, there are crazy laws regarding copyrights. My personal favorite is the law that you have to pay royalties to a corporation for any public performances of "Happy Birthday" since they own the "rights". I don't think laws like these are the reason that artists are able to eat. I think they represent an unseen hand which seeks to control artistic expression. So let's not talk about laws like they should regulate how we go about this, let's talk about what would be a simple and fair way of spreading this music far and wide, and let's not get mired in fears that things won't ever be the same.

Waiting to get flamed... Thanks.
fmason
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:19 am

Postby devinci » Fri Apr 30, 2004 10:53 am

Whilst I do not think there should be a database of MP3s of all Djangos music I do think it is a good idea, and one that could be instrumental in aliviating some of the symptoms of sales loss the record companies (and thus the artists) are having due to free MP3s and CD burning, to artists to make their music avaliable via a pay-for-download type of scheme. Especially in the feild of jazz, where much is unavailable to so many, it could well increase sales. This system should be controled by the legal owners of the music copyright and therefore should benefit whoever was bold enough to strike a good deal. Hopefully in this respect the musicians and artists involved would get a good cut.

Are there any such schemes in existance?

What are the main ways people aquire free or pirate MP3s?
devinci
 
Posts: 396
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 8:56 pm
Location: West London

Postby nwilkins » Fri Apr 30, 2004 1:09 pm

you can download the newer Jimmy Rosenberg stuff in MP3 form for a per song price.
User avatar
nwilkins
 
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:02 am

Postby Plowboy » Fri Apr 30, 2004 3:16 pm

devinci wrote:Are there any such schemes in existance?


With the advent of any new technology in recording, these fears from artists, producers and record companies always come up--and rightfully so. When cassette tapes first came to the fore, all these arguments about possible piracy were hashed and re-hashed then as well.
The solution/compromise then?:
A small percentage of each cassette sold is distributed among all the artists who record music on a professional level. (Not sure how but I imagine ASCAP, BMI and/or the RIAA are involved somehow.)
While not perfect (and what is), it seems to have been successful in asuaging the fears of piracy for all involved.
Maybe there is another similar scheme that can be implemented to do the same for the new recording/copying/file sharing technologies brought about by computers and the internet.
Your own muck is good muck!
User avatar
Plowboy
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 4:23 am
Location: Tennessee

PreviousNext

Return to Tunes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests