Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #justcantgetenough more →
Apple and EMI Roll Out iTunes Pass Mini-Subscription For...Depeche Mode?
| posts about #justcantgetenough more → |
Apple and EMI Roll Out iTunes Pass Mini-Subscription For...Depeche Mode? |
02/24/09
02/24/09
Oh, wait ..
Joking aside, the fast-fashion goth fest that happens at every DM concert may not be gay, but it never fails to take me back to my awkward childhood roots. Is that worse? Hard to say. Not that there is anything wrong with being gay, mind you -- just that .. Oh, hell, I give up. Why am I even typing anymore? Someone ban me, please.
02/24/09
02/24/09
02/24/09
Then again, there are only so many times you can listen to "Daughter" before you want to hurl a brick at Eddie Vedder.
02/24/09
02/24/09
@ReginaPhalange: Google: You can uses it.
02/24/09
A) Either I misread your initial statement, or it is completely wrong. What I read is that with the pass, you get to download everything by the artist for the flat rate. With 12 albums under their belt, that would be a hell of a deal. So, i am assuming that you only get what is included with that album, and the various and sundry crap that comes out afterwards. If the first were true, I would buy this in a heartbeat, as Depeche Mode is a great band.
B: I really hope that you were being humorous when you said John Mayer. Actually, never mind, if you like the guy, then go on liking him, and don't mind me. I hate music snobs, so I don't want to sound like one. Besides, he wrote "Your Body is a Wonderland" about me, so I should be nicer to him.
02/24/09
02/24/09
02/24/09
02/24/09
02/24/09
Shaking down the common idiot for more money is just frosting on the cake for the overpaid "artists" making the crap you people buy.
02/24/09
02/24/09
Anything is free to the average person if they're not paying for it.
Computers would be free to the average person if they could download one on the dl. But that wouldn't make computers "free."
Music isn't free to the musician who makes it. It costs money to make music, and above expenses, like anything else, there's a need to profit to keep at it. We're not talking about bad musicians here, but ones whose music you like enough to listen to. Shouldn't they be paid? Or are musicians honeybees who should spend all their time, energy, and resources making honey only to have some guy with his face behind a mask come and steal it all away?
02/24/09
Yeah, they were called servants of the king, or church employees. The king's servants made music for small rooms of elite listeners who danced around in powdered wigs after dinner. Church musicians produced music for Mass.
When musicians finally got rights to their own music and could profit from it, popular music in the 20th century exploded. The ability to sell songs fueled popular music, and emancipated musicians from a system of elite patronage.
If you want musicians you like to be able to produce music you like for people like you, musicians have to be paid. To revert to a time when musicians weren't paid for their songs means that unless you go to Church on Sunday or are the King's squeeze, no music for you.
Oh, and you realize of course that music produced in studios with microphones, preamps, analog to digital converters, DAWs, computers, speakers, engineers, producers, and all that, cost a bit more than wandering the countryside dressed as a clown playing little tunes on a wood flute or viol.