SlipLive

putty wrote:

• Kings of Leon - Because of the Times
  
  This is pretty good, but I'm getting somewhat sick of this genre of music. But after listening to band after band that seemingly sound the same, these guys stick out.

That doesn't come out until April.......Oink?

you got me.

i actually just quit oink too. for serious.

putty wrote:you got me.

i actually just quit oink too. for serious.

Why?

That might be the best website evah.

i found myself not supporting one of the few things i truly love.

i don't really find anything wrong with it, especially for major label bands, and i'll probably get back on it eventually, but i decided to take a break for a little while.

if you guys are into the whole post-rock thing with explosions in the sky, mogwai etc., you might like The Album Leaf. pick up their album "In a Safe Place."

oh my god! i love in a safe place!! such a good album.
"twentytwofourteen" and "over the pond" are the best

putty wrote:i found myself not supporting one of the few things i truly love.

my suggestion- invest in a record player and buy the albums you enjoy on vinyl.

headnugg wrote:

putty wrote:you got me.

i actually just quit oink too. for serious.

Why?

That might be the best website evah.

That might be the most insipid comment evah.

Can we ease up on the oink blather? I'm not a big fan of stealing music, and less a big fan of hearing someone rave about how it's the best site. How do you think it makes artists/musicians feel? And maybe putty is a musician.

I'm all for try before you buy, but most people don't buy what they listen to over and over again. So bragging about it or extolling the virtues is completely inane. Music is not free for the taking.

Rhapsody is much better than Oink because it supports the artists. So I'm pro Rhapsody and very much anti-Oink. If you are pro-oink, then you had better keep your virus definitions up to date (also same reason why Bit Torrent is also a big security risk).

-Phrazz

P.S.: Headnugg, please explain why Oink is so great.

Phrazz wrote:

headnugg wrote:

putty wrote:you got me.

i actually just quit oink too. for serious.

Why?

That might be the best website evah.

That might be the most insipid comment evah.

Can we ease up on the oink blather? I'm not a big fan of stealing music, and less a big fan of hearing someone rave about how it's the best site. How do you think it makes artists/musicians feel? And maybe putty is a musician.

I'm all for try before you buy, but most people don't buy what they listen to over and over again. So bragging about it or extolling the virtues is completely inane. Music is not free for the taking.

Rhapsody is much better than Oink because it supports the artists. So I'm pro Rhapsody and very much anti-Oink. If you are pro-oink, then you had better keep your virus definitions up to date (also same reason why Bit Torrent is also a big security risk).

-Phrazz

P.S.: Headnugg, please explain why Oink is so great.

Well excuse me Mr. Holier Than Thou Phrazz. Sorry I'm being so insipid.

When I want to get some instrumental rap shit to spin/cut to, I go to OINK. When I want to get a CD that I can't find at the library, I OINK that shit. When I need a music program, like Logic Express, Recycle, etc., holy shit, guess who has it? OINK. And I don't have to pay hundreds for it. And I don't feel bad about ripping Apple off either. They have anything and everything. It's easy, it's free. What could be better? Well, I guess it would be better if you didn't have to keep your ratio up....

I would have to completely disagree with you. In this day and age, music is totally free for the taking. It's up to you if you want to do it or not. Preaching on internet message boards doesn't help anyone.

I may not buy any CD's but I sure as hell support artists by purchasing concert tickets and merch. And in this day and age, THAT is how the artist makes money. No one except the HUGE stars make money off CD sales these days, and that's even debatable.

I'm a musician and Putty may well be one too.....but aren't you forgetting who started this thread and already said he used OINK?.......I also understood that this is a DISCUSSION forum. If people want to discuss OINK, if it bothers you so much, simply don't enter the thread. There's no reason people can't talk about OINK here because you don't approve.....

headnugg wrote: When I want to get some instrumental rap shit to spin/cut to, I go to OINK. When I want to get a CD that I can't find at the library, I OINK that shit. When I need a music program, like Logic Express, Recycle, etc., holy shit, guess who has it? OINK. And I don't have to pay hundreds for it. And I don't feel bad about ripping Apple off either. They have anything and everything. It's easy, it's free. What could be better? Well, I guess it would be better if you didn't have to keep your ratio up....

This may be one of the things that most disturbs me about the behavior of our leaders. After watching people in power steal, lie, and commit whatever other crimes and get to walk just by saying "sorry" or not suffering any consequences at all, people start to believe that they can justify any behavior at all, such as THEFT, just by saying "I can if I want to."

In this day and age, music is totally free for the taking. It's up to you if you want to do it or not.

Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean it's right.

Preaching on internet message boards doesn't help anyone.

By extension, having any conversation whatsoever on message boards doesn't help anyone. Unless, of course it does.

I may not buy any CD's but I sure as hell support artists by purchasing concert tickets and merch.

Prove to me that you buy concert tickets and t-shirts for every artist whose music you steal.

And in this day and age, THAT is how the artist makes money.

Unfortunately, this is true. Because people don't buy music anymore.

No one except the HUGE stars make money off CD sales these days, and that's even debatable.

That's true. It is debatable. Independent musicians who sell their own CDs without a middleperson and keep all the profits might make some $$ off CDs. If anyone bought them instead of stealing them.

I'm a musician

Maybe you are. But you're not a very sensitive one, judging from this thread. Do you try and feed yourself with your art? You're someone who is involved with artistic expression and you gladly steal art from others and extol the virtues of such behavior?

.....but aren't you forgetting who started this thread and already said he used OINK?.......

Um, what the f*ck does that have to do with anything?

There's no reason people can't talk about OINK here because you don't approve.....

This is just plain absurd.

Already regretting hitting "Submit" but just can't stop myself.

artists deserve to get paid. they work fucking hard. to me, forking over 8 bucks on iTunes or Rhapsody doesn't seem like a huge deal. people burn me music all the time. mostly in the form of mixes that cause me to go out and purchase something that really catches my ear. sharing music in good faith is one thing, but i totally understand why advocates for intellectual property rights feel the need to fight all-out piracy. i've definitly pirated shit off limewire or what have you in the past, but i try to avoid it at all costs these days.

Rhapsody fucking rules. It's worth every penny.

new music... Tim Segreto. Just discovered him through reapandsow. marc friedman appears on some tracks from his new record 'boton sessions I & II', which was produced by none ather than matthew ellard at q division.

http://www.purevolume.com/timsegreto

warning: the following message contains paragraphs that may be considered rambling and aimless. read at your own risk.

I don't think there's anything to be ashamed of for using oink, which is how y'all are phrasing your attacks.

I've heard (read on the internet) oinkers justify why they do what they do in many different ways, but it's obvious that everyone is just taking, taking, taking. I took a ton of music from oink. Most of the stuff I got off there was old stuff (Etta James, David Bowie, James Brown, etc.), but I also got a lot of new music I'd never heard. I used it to discover music, and it served me well.

Now, for the next step. What do we do with me, and the rest of us thieves? Round us up and make us pay big fines to teach us a lesson? Should I go to a class similar to a defensive driving/DUI class, where I'll learn to be a better music fan?

Before oink, I admit I had no problem burning a cd for a friend, or burning one of their cds for myself. I bought a bunch of cds. It was an addiction. Since oink and the internet, i've bought fewer. And that's why I'm not doing it anymore. Although I do think it can be used as as a great tool for discovering music you'd never hear otherwise, the truth of the matter is that I won't spend any money on most of the bands I snatch from oink. Most bands aren't touring through my city, and my drawers aren't big enough to hold all those tshirts.

What about used cd stores? Are they wrong too?

Yes, the musician has it tough. But so do all of us. The music industry is in a huge transition right now. people like percy boyd and labels like www.thrilljockey.com have it figured out by letting the listener hear what they do.

otherwise, i don't know the answer, but adults are just grown up children, and what do children do when a big bowl of candy is put in front of their face? they pig out. then they get sick. and that's what happened when i listened to that TV On The Radio cd. too much oink i guess.

the bridge, to me, seems to be sites that offer a way to listen to the music first before deciding whether or not to buy it. then you get the taste... whet the appetite so to speak. you're not jumping in headfirst into the unknown. i'd like to see more of that sort of thing, and it seems that most bands are onto that concept by now. it's a win/win.

there's got to be a way to get turned on to music before forking over the dough. and unfortunately, sharing music amongst friends seems to be a thing of the past, in this day and age of instant communication/gratification. connections are to a large degree meaningless. we're all anonymous in the world wide web.

still, recommendations, as was the original point of this thread, are a great starting point...

hoby wrote:

In this day and age, music is totally free for the taking. It's up to you if you want to do it or not.

Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean it's right.

I agree.

hoby wrote:

I may not buy any CD's but I sure as hell support artists by purchasing concert tickets and merch.

Prove to me that you buy concert tickets and t-shirts for every artist whose music you steal.

The only people I have to prove something to is myself and Jah. You best believe I've dropped THOUSANDS over the years on shows alone.

hoby wrote:

No one except the HUGE stars make money off CD sales these days, and that's even debatable.

That's true. It is debatable. Independent musicians who sell their own CDs without a middleperson and keep all the profits might make some $$ off CDs. If anyone bought them instead of stealing them.

The only people making any money off CD sales today are the DIY artists. People like Ani Difranco. The Decemberists before they sold out to the man. Dispatch. etc. But even they make most, or at least a great chunk, off touring. Touring and merch is how bands stay alive today.

hoby wrote:

I'm a musician

Maybe you are. But you're not a very sensitive one, judging from this thread. Do you try and feed yourself with your art? You're someone who is involved with artistic expression and you gladly steal art from others and extol the virtues of such behavior?

To each his own man. I guarantee there are plenty of bands out there that would be thrilled to know that anyone cared enough about their music to actually steal it. Why do you think so many bands give away their music for free? Stream their album on their website/myspace before it's even released? Leak their music....The music business today is unlike it's ever been. It takes radical, wild, out of the box ideas to sell today. No one builds bands anymore, it's about instant gratification. If a band can generate a buzz by giving away it's music, that's more valuable then not generating a buzz and selling 50,000 albums. Are you really telling me that if you were in a band and 100,000 people stole your album, but in doing that all of a sudden you're playing arenas, that's not a good thing?!

And yes, it is stealing and I steal music. And so does everyone reading this thread, whether they choose to admit it or not. And I was asked to "extol the virtues" of OINK. And no, I don't feed myself w/my art. I wish I was that talented. We can argue this all day. There's no right or wrong. There are only opinions.

hoby wrote:

.....but aren't you forgetting who started this thread and already said he used OINK?.......

Um, what the f*ck does that have to do with anything?

Whoa! An uncharacteristic swear from Hoby! Go back and read Phrazz' post that I initially responded to and you'll get your answer......

hoby wrote:

There's no reason people can't talk about OINK here because you don't approve.....

This is just plain absurd.

I'm not sure I follow you here. Because there's nothing absurd about my statement. Phrazz asked us to curtail the OINK talk. THAT is absurd.

hi. my name is diesel and im an oinkaholic. before oink, i barely rarely downloaded music. after i got an ipod, i found oink and jumped to the dark side. i downloaded all the albums that i used to have and lost or were stolen and got all the 'classic' albums that i wanted. through oink, ive heard about bands like akron/family, arcade fire, the shins, and a number of others. all which i have supported by going to see live. yes, i probably havent kept the ratio of download to merch/ticket purchases as high as it should be so yes, i do feel like im stealing and do feel morally responsible. but i just dont need cd's anymore. its the digital age. i know its wrong, but it just feels too good.

putty wrote:What about used cd stores? Are they wrong too?

this is an interesting question. b/c when i used to buy a lot of albums, i would
head straight to the used bin, which was always stacked. the artists dont get a dime from that. the bands that l liked and i would go see live or tell a friend about. is there a difference?

Prove to me that you buy concert tickets and t-shirts for every artist whose music you steal.

The only people I have to prove something to is myself and Jah.

That's funny, you don't look Rastafarian. (That was a joke. See, here's my smiley ) Anyway, would Jah approve of stealing someone else's art?

You best believe I've dropped THOUSANDS over the years on shows alone.

That's not what I asked. Do you go to shows and buy merch for EVERY aertist you steal from. Buying 6 Slip tickets, Eisenhower, and a t-shirt is good for BAM but doesn't help the artist you steal from whose gig you don't attend.

The Decemberists before they sold out to the man.

That's so cute, so '70s. (I was there, BTW, the '70s. Hated the man.) But what does that mean in this context, "selling out to the man"? Seriously. I don't know much about the Decemberists, so what constitutes their selling out?

Touring and merch is how bands stay alive today.

This is true for the large majority of musicians, yes.

To each his own man.

This is your defense for theft and bragging about it? The prosecution rests.

I guarantee there are plenty of bands out there that would be thrilled to know that anyone cared enough about their music to actually steal it.

Not the ones who try to feed their kids and pay for health insurance through their music.

Why do you think so many bands give away their music for free? Stream their album on their website/myspace before it's even released? Leak their music....

I can think of a couple of reasons:

-They're just starting out and still have the safety net of an alternate income stream (read: "day job"). Giving it away is a strategy for building to the next level.

-They're already so well established they can afford to offer up a loss leader (ex. Neil Young and Living With War)

Just to be clear, BTW, streaming sample cuts is not the same as saying "Go ahead and make bit-for-bit copies of my official release and give it away."

If a band can generate a buzz by giving away it's music,

That's an incorrect use of the apostrophe there; -2 points. You lose credibility if you can't spell. "Sorry, I'm old school."

that's more valuable then not generating a buzz and selling 50,000 albums.

Selling 50,000 units as a fledgling band isn't generating a buzz?? I'm pretty sure those are the kind of numbers that get interest from labels.

Are you really telling me that if you were in a band and 100,000 people stole your album, but in doing that all of a sudden you're playing arenas, that's not a good thing?!

Lots in this one sentence.

First, I am in a "band" (a duo, actually) and we just entered into an agreement with a netlabel to offer up some of our stuff as free MP3 downloads. We both have day jobs. Neither of us depend on making music to feed our family.

But if I was trying to sell an album as an income stream, you're damn right I'd be pissed if 100,000 people stole it. If I release it myself and I'm selling the record for $10, how much money have I lost? My kid's college education? My retirement? People are welcome to download and copy the stuff we offer for free until they pass out from the effort, but to then also steal the "official release" I'm asking to get paid for? Where's my baseball bat with the spike through one end? (Of course, this is all hypothetical. We're not self-releasing a CD and if we did, it's not the kind of stuff 100,000 people would be interested in, and I don't own a baseball bat with a spike through one end.)

Finally, I don't believe anyone tours arenas without label support and labels don't sign bands that are good at getting ripped off. Labels sign bands that make money by moving units and filling rooms. Remember your comment about instant gratification and no one building bands?

And yes, it is stealing and I steal music.

And so does everyone reading this thread, whether they choose to admit it or not.

'Nugg, you're the absolute master of the unprovable absolute. EVERYONE?

And I was asked to "extol the virtues" of OINK.

Which you still haven't done, I don't think. You've rationalized your use of it, but you haven't explained why OINK is good.

We can argue this all day.

Yes, we've proven that before. I'm guessing other members cringe when they see our two avatars in the same thread. Wanna smoke?

There's no right or wrong. There are only opinions.

That's an enormous pile of poop, but that's also a discussion for another time and not online. I can't afford the carpal tunnel.

Um, what the f*ck does that have to do with anything?

Whoa! An uncharacteristic swear from Hoby! Go back and read Phrazz' post that I initially responded to and you'll get your answer......

Yeah, I'm sorry. I've had a couple of weeks of really stressfull days at work and was pretty low on tact by last night.

But I did go back and find Phrazz's first post and your reply and I'm still confused. He wasn't the first to mention Oink, I think you were. At least I didn't see it mentioned before that.

hoby wrote:

There's no reason people can't talk about OINK here because you don't approve.....

This is just plain absurd.

I'm not sure I follow you here. Because there's nothing absurd about my statement. Phrazz asked us to curtail the OINK talk. THAT is absurd.

Well, let's see, Phrazz is a moderator of the forum and I'm pretty sure he OWNS THE D*MN BOARD!!! (I'm not angry, I'm laughing. See? )

It's not absurd. It's his perogative.

You or someone else may find it unreasonable, unfair, or funny, but it's his party and he can cry if he wants to. (Name the artist, please.) I find Phrazz to be the epitome of a reasonable moderator and don't believe he would censor on a whim, but the fact is, Phrazz could "not approve" with extreme prejudice and that would be the end of discussion about OINK. It would be quite the brouhaha and I'm sure some members would bail on the board, but he could do it.

Hence, my statement of absurdity. For you to say something that amounts to "We can talk about OINK whether you like it or not" to the owner of the board just doesn't compute.

As with my swearing, using "absurd" was my stress talking. Absurd wasn't a constructive way to phrase it. Sorry.