Doonesbury

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Yeah, you're right.

I'm not "worth losing this man over".

Bye.


David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> "atlasrecrd" <atlasrecrd@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > Yahoo, huh? What's your expertise on this issue?
>
>
> Oooh boy.... this will either be interesting or ignored.
>
> You see Atlas, the last time some ass asked Dave a question like this
> without simply doing his homework first, we lost Dave for half a
year,
> and we've lost him before because of similar issues.
>
> You see, some folks don't have the time to wipe other people's asses.
> And you really aren't worth losing this man over because you're too
lazy
> to find out the readily available answers to that question on your
own.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Oooh boy indeed. Piling on, anyone?

Yes, I looked up Dave on AMG earlier when I saw his reply to my post .

There's a lot of Dave Martins on there. Are you angry I asked someone
that should know what records he done? It's not a secret is it?

Y'know, I've been visiting this group for over ten years now. I know
all the names that have responded to these posts. I find it really sad
that you have to resort to calling people asses and insulting them and
their family. My guess is that things aren't going well for you. Sorry,
but that's not my, or anyone else's fault.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

play_on wrote:

> What I mean by this, is that some of the biggest money-makers in pop
> music do not require a conventional studio that is set up to record
> conventional live instruments, since they don't use any.

But from what I've read Eminem, for instance, does use a regular fancy
big studio to do his work.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Roger W. Norman wrote:

> But if my musical idea is talking about how much I wanted that doggie in
> the window and I'm laying out my innermost feelings about this one
> particular moment in my life in E-A-B-E, then no, you can't have it.

Imagine that song sung in Korean, b/w "Wokking the Dog".

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> If you can't make a CD on sixty cents worth of flat picks, you need to
> revise your picking technique. Or have they gone up to a dollar these
> days?

Flatpicks run $0.10 to $50.00, depending on what they're made of, but
you've given me a great idea about how to make money in the music
bizness: make a little wedge-shaped cookie cutter thingie, hook it to my
soldering iron, and use it to make six dollars worth of flatpicks out of
a sixty cent CDR. Now, I'd call that beloved patriot ingenuity.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Some of the kids call it a "revolution." But a revolution that destroys an
> industry but then doesn't provide any replacement is not a good revolution
> by any means. An effective revolution would be one that actually improves
> matters, and music theft doesn't improve anything.

Hmmmm... wonder if it helps keep those kids off the streets? <g>

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> "play_on" wrote...
> > (Mike Rivers) wrote:

> >>> While it might be sad, music has been a commodity for a long time now.

> >>Will you please go back to your kiddie newsgroup where you're in like
> >>company? I don't think you'll find much sympathy for that belief here
> >>at this time.

> > Come on Mike. The entire music "industry" totally revolves around the
> > concept that music, especially recorded copies of music, is a
> > commodity that is bought and sold. That's exactly how money is made
> > from music.

Music is my religion. I try to worship daily, by making music. Pieces of
plastic can be a commodity. Content may or may not be such.

> Rivers deserves to be ripped a new one for his obviously condescending
> comment.
> I think you hit the nail on the head without doing this though.

> Rivers, your worldview is becoming antiquated. It happens to the best of em'
> ;0)
> Enjoy retirement.

Actually I see this as deep appreciation of commodity music, suitable
for the commode. What is going to be interesting is how these futuristic
worldviews are going to focus a new reality without petroleum to run on.
This situation is much closer than most folks want to accept.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:13:50 GMT, walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich)
wrote:

>Hev wrote:
>
>> "play_on" wrote...
>> > (Mike Rivers) wrote:
>
>> >>> While it might be sad, music has been a commodity for a long time now.
>
>> >>Will you please go back to your kiddie newsgroup where you're in like
>> >>company? I don't think you'll find much sympathy for that belief here
>> >>at this time.
>
>> > Come on Mike. The entire music "industry" totally revolves around the
>> > concept that music, especially recorded copies of music, is a
>> > commodity that is bought and sold. That's exactly how money is made
>> > from music.
>
>Music is my religion. I try to worship daily, by making music. Pieces of
>plastic can be a commodity. Content may or may not be such.
>
>> Rivers deserves to be ripped a new one for his obviously condescending
>> comment.
>> I think you hit the nail on the head without doing this though.
>
>> Rivers, your worldview is becoming antiquated. It happens to the best of em'
>> ;0)
>> Enjoy retirement.
>
>Actually I see this as deep appreciation of commodity music, suitable
>for the commode. What is going to be interesting is how these futuristic
>worldviews are going to focus a new reality without petroleum to run on.
>This situation is much closer than most folks want to accept.

It bet it takes a lot more petroleum to make a CD than an MP3.

Al

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> Mike rivers wrote:

> > Perhaps then your generation should seek out music created by computer
> > that doesn't involve any human interaction. Then nobody would need to
> > be paid - except the computer manufacturers. The fact that computers
> > are involved in just about any musical production these days doesn't
> > mean that they replace the talent, however. But they don't have to
> > eat and they don't take up much room.

> If you aren't going to say anything why don't you keep it to yourself?

He said something, and you obviously don't get it.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2005-02-27 walkinay@thegrid.net(hankalrich) said:
>play_on wrote:
>> What I mean by this, is that some of the biggest money-makers in
>>pop music do not require a conventional studio that is set up to
>>record conventional live instruments, since they don't use any.
>But from what I've read Eminem, for instance, does use a regular
>fancy big studio to do his work.
sOmething to be said for atmosphere. Big studios have runners to go
for refreshments; tech staff to keep everything humming so that the
session can continue. Then there are the times that he might want a
group of musos to actually get together and <gasp> all play at the
same time to work out an idea for him to rap on top of. Can't get
that going on with a loop factory on a computer in some guy's cramped
back room.

I've read a bit on the way Eminem likes to work and he actually likes
to have some musos getting together to jam on ideas. Dre or his
producer might use a loop of part of it in the end but he wants that
creative vibe and the only place where everybody's got elbow room is
an actual studio.





Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



the only good spammer or telemarketer is a dead one!!!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> I would make a copy of the materials and give back the original.

Let's run that theft-of-groceries by you again. What will you give back?

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Troy wrote:

> Mike Rivers wrote...

> > Trevor wrote

> > > As far as books go, I can just go to the library and check them out for
> > > free. It's great! Who "rents" books?

> > But can you plug that book into your computer, make a copy of it, and
> > send it to someone else?

> Actually.....Yes you can.You can digitize almost anything and share it
> accross the internet.There are no boundries anymore.

Here is Mike's point: in order to do with a book what you can do with a
CD you must have the word processing document to copy. Otherwise, you
must sit at your keyboard and type your ass off for a long time
recreating that document before you can post it. But once you have
didital media in hand, there is little work to be done to offer it to a
digitally interconnected world.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:30:52 GMT, walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich)
wrote:

>Troy wrote:
>
>> Mike Rivers wrote...
>
>> > Trevor wrote
>
>> > > As far as books go, I can just go to the library and check them out for
>> > > free. It's great! Who "rents" books?
>
>> > But can you plug that book into your computer, make a copy of it, and
>> > send it to someone else?
>
>> Actually.....Yes you can.You can digitize almost anything and share it
>> accross the internet.There are no boundries anymore.
>
>Here is Mike's point: in order to do with a book what you can do with a
>CD you must have the word processing document to copy. Otherwise, you
>must sit at your keyboard and type your ass off for a long time
>recreating that document before you can post it.

I believe they have software that can do that now, it's called
text-recognition. It can convert an image of the text into word
processing application.

Al

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Trevor de Clercq wrote:

> I still feel it's a crime
> not to release Zeppelin IV in multi-track form on ProTools discs.
> That's one of the things about working in a big studio for awhile.
> After doing a couple of transfers (I did Bowie's Ziggy from the original
> 2" 16-track tapes to 3348 once!) your mind is blown as to the amount of
> amazing music still out there by those artists, lost within the mix. We
> deserve to hear it before those tapes all die!!!! The 2-track masters
> are not enough!

What about the creating artist's right to deliver an intended creation?
Do you not support that? You should have access to all the lyrics Dylan
has thrown away?

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
> Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?
>
> Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.
>
> http/www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

John Phillip Souza made much more than a good living
touring on railroad cars. They made records when
records came to be, but they were primarily about
touring.

This being said, venues are scarcer and scarcer.

--
Les Cargill

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> In article <ZkKTd.5431$MY6.3@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> sturvNOSPAM@earthlink.net writes:
>
>
>>I am very ignorant when it comes to the music business. I head a local
>>band that's met with (what I consider) moderate success. We play gigs,
>>we sell (moderately priced) CDs and a little merchandise. I know
>>*nothing* about the "real" music business. With that being said:
>>
>>Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record?
>
>
> That's the way it is in today's model. It used to be that the record
> promoted the artist.
>
>
>>Aren't the rising ticket costs, merchandising, etc., methods to
>>meliorate the cost of (and perhaps from) this particular aspect of
>>marketing?
>
>
> I'm amazed at how affluent certain audiences are. The Birchmere (which
> used to be a grubby restaurant that on Tuesday nights hosted The
> Seldom Scene, arguably the top rated bluegrass band in the US for
> no cover charge) recently held a four-songwriters show headlined by
> Guy Clark. The ticket price for this show was $100, and they sold out
> three nights, for a $180,000 take. In addition, there's a bar area
> outside the music room, while they didn't charge a cover for that
> room, they passed the hat and collected another $29,000. And it was
> just four people on stage with their guitars. OK, the restaurant has
> relocated twice, now seats 600 and has an excellent sound system (but
> still has lousy food that you just about gotta come for if you want to
> get a decent table) so it's classier than it used to be, but that's
> mighty big bucks. I didn't go because I can't conceive of paying that
> much money for a concert, but 1800 people did. I think there's some
> potential here.
>
>

I paid $70 to see Mark Knopfler at the Bronco Bowl, and I'd
do it again. A good dinner check is about $100 for
a handful of people.

>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
--
Les Cargill

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

gordon@sigmasound.com wrote:

> Just caught those strips this morning; I'm really not sure what to
> think.
>
> The musician (in the sense that when I am playing I wish to be an
> instrument of music) in me believes that what Thudpucker proposes would
> give rise to a lot more *good* music.
>
> However, doesn't his model leave not only the dinosaur
> recording/publishing industry but also the pro audio industry (that's
> US) out in the cold, starving to death?
>

Cranesong and Mark McQ's RNC/RNP seem to indicate that pro
audio might just move into a lifestyle/niche industry.

> I imagine that I could fairly easily find a gig playing again, but I
> began concentrating more on engineering than musicking fifteen years
> ago precisely because the life of a wandering minstrel had lost its
> luster. Furthermore, are populations really going to be kinder to
> traveling musicians than the last couple of generations of clubowners?
>

If the draw is there, the money follows.

> Hev suggests that music and information are the same thing; I'm not at
> all sure I agree. I'll give you the point that music is free now but I
> continue to question whether that's the way it *should* be.
>
> Your mileage will, of course, vary--I'm not trying to start a war here,
> just thinking out loud and bemoaning what appears to be my own
> unemployability . . .
>
> --Gordon Rice
>
--
Les Cargill

 

[Troy]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Not to be arguementative but I can scan a book and digitize it in minutes
thanks to new technologies such as word recognition on a printed page and
high speed auto scanners.

The point I was trying to make is that with the advaces of technology the
software and hardware apps are making it very easy to digitize media and put
it online for free downloads

This type of activity can't be policed (as of yet) as the internet is to
vast a land.


hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1gsnk6r.9mas101tr23jjN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> Troy wrote:
>
> > Mike Rivers wrote...
>
> > > Trevor wrote
>
> > > > As far as books go, I can just go to the library and check them out
for
> > > > free. It's great! Who "rents" books?
>
> > > But can you plug that book into your computer, make a copy of it, and
> > > send it to someone else?
>
> > Actually.....Yes you can.You can digitize almost anything and share it
> > accross the internet.There are no boundries anymore.
>
> Here is Mike's point: in order to do with a book what you can do with a
> CD you must have the word processing document to copy. Otherwise, you
> must sit at your keyboard and type your ass off for a long time
> recreating that document before you can post it. But once you have
> didital media in hand, there is little work to be done to offer it to a
> digitally interconnected world.
>
> --
> ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> It doesn't matter if you have it all available in a centralized location.
> The resources it would take to host such a large volume of files would be
> beyond even a hackers reach.

I recently read a nice article about the folks, many of them kids, who
right now are getting the movies spread around. For all your
appreciation of this technical so-called revolution you are overlooking
that computers working together in parallel can manifest exactly the
same storage that the centralized location can, and for nowhere near the
layout of resources required for your centralized affair. Try and keep
up, will ya? <g>

For that matter, after railing about the big labels, which in essence
represent the conglomerationally centralized affair of a former
technology, you now tout a similar affair in new emperor's clothes. Meet
the new boss...

As Scott said, we cannot fix social problems with technical solutions.
That is what is so exasperating about watching so many of you justify
theft. You think you're talking about somebody else's backyard. But that
dog will bite you in the ass, too, once it find the hole in your fence.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

atlasrecrd wrote:

> Yahoo, huh? What's your expertise on this issue?

> I've been making records consumed by the 16-30 group for years. I know
> exactly where the money comes from and where it goes with labels. So I
> don't need some anonymous dick telling me I don't know the reality of
> record making.

> That's great you can afford to buy your Ella Fitzgerald records. Go
> talk to kids that like music and ask them if they can just "go out and
> buy it" when it costs 18.99. Newsflash, blowhard - kids don't have that
> kind of change lying around. Especially in this shitty economy. If you
> don't believe me, go find some kids and ask them.

1. Before you call Dave Martin anonymous, you might engage your brain.

2. Before you call him a blowhard, you might check out Java Jive
Studios.

3. If you've been making the garbage that's been selling to a market
that would prefer to steal it, you are part of the problem, not part of
the solution. Apparently your market has figured out what your product
is worth.

4. If your testicles were fully descended you wouldn't be the one
posting anonymously. But you are that one.

5. Those kids never did have that kind of money, unless they also had
jobs, and most of the kids buying the music aren't going to get jobs
until their parents boot them out of the crib. The kids buying the
records are buying with their parent's money.

--
ha