Downloading is killing the music - pretty soon there will be no music - just a matter of time.

If a musician can't feed himself fom his art - he will stop being an artists.

martinprog77 wrote: the good side is that you can check the band for free and if is a good albun you gonna buy it.[you can have the whole collection of yes but you are a prog fan so you going to by everithing,you need the cover ,you need the lirics you need the whole thing.or you can check it outon progarchives].

I can listen to the whole discography of Rush, Yes and Camel on Napster and Staytuned.de. And eventually I'll end up buying some of these albums, but only my absolute favorite ones.

As long as the artists are getting their fair share, then I think that downloading music is fine.  And for lesser known bands, putting free mp3s on their web site is a great marketing tool.  In other words, I support the legal services.

The biggest problem with downloading is the lack of back catalog.  Sure, you can get most albums by the biggest artists, but the smaller artists are not as well supported.  For example, the California Guitar Trio is not available at all from iTunes.  I haven't checked the other services, but there's a limit to how many songs / albums / artists any given service can offer.

Personally, I'd love to see an mp3 download site which supported Progressive Rock.  A good start would be to have available (yes, for a fee) the top 500 albums on ProgArchives.  Until then, I'll still be sending Amazon and CDBaby money on a regular basis.

(As a side note, if you're going to put mp3s on your web site, use the mp3 tags!  Sure, the person who downloads from you site knows who you are.  But when they share the file with someone else, the second person might not.  And so on....  If the mp3 includes the band name, the name of the album, the album art (or other pictures...), lyrics, and (most importantly) contact information, then you've created a viable marketing tool.  If you're putting out an mp3, then you've created another flyer.  Would you advertise a gig without mentioning the date and location?)

fcoulter wrote: The biggest problem with downloading is the lack of back catalog.  Sure, you can get most albums by the biggest artists, but the smaller artists are not as well supported.  For example, the California Guitar Trio is not available at all from iTunes.  I haven't checked the other services, but there's a limit to how many songs / albums / artists any given service can offer. Personally, I'd love to see an mp3 download site which supported Progressive Rock.  A good start would be to have available (yes, for a fee) the top 500 albums on ProgArchives.  Until then, I'll still be sending Amazon and CDBaby money on a regular basis.

Have a look here:

http://www.mikeenregalia.com/home/collection/napster.xhtml - http://www.mikeenregalia.com/home/collection/napster.xhtml

A small excerpt of what's available ...

Jazzis wrote: Downloading is killing the music - pretty soon there will be no music - just a matter of time. If a musician can't feed himself fom his art - he will stop being an artists.

Considering that studies have shown that the people who do the majority of the downloading are also the people who purchase the majority of the albums, this appears to not be the case.

The music industry is changing due to technololgy.  The monopoly of the record companies is being broken.  Downloading of music has the potential of making more music available to the market, and having more bands' music being accessible.

Also, there was music long before there was a mass medium.  Music is hardly dependent on the traditional marketing methods.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: fcoulter wrote: The biggest problem with downloading is the lack of back catalog.  Sure, you can get most albums by the biggest artists, but the smaller artists are not as well supported.  For example, the California Guitar Trio is not available at all from iTunes.  I haven't checked the other services, but there's a limit to how many songs / albums / artists any given service can offer. Personally, I'd love to see an mp3 download site which supported Progressive Rock.  A good start would be to have available (yes, for a fee) the top 500 albums on ProgArchives.  Until then, I'll still be sending Amazon and CDBaby money on a regular basis. Have a look here: http://www.mikeenregalia.com/home/collection/napster.xhtml - http://www.mikeenregalia.com/home/collection/napster.xhtml A small excerpt of what's available ...

It's easy (as I did) to use information I compiled a while ago and continue to think that it's still true.  But with technology, what's true one month may not be true later.  So my earlier statement that the music isn't available may not be true.

I've just downloaded the entire Top 500 album chart and will see how much of it is available on Napster.  This may take more than a day or two.  Once I've checked out all 500 albums, I'll post the information on ProgArchives.

If someone else wants to do the same with some other service, I'd be very interested in the results.  If you want the entire list as of 9:00 am on January 30, 2006, formatted as an Excel File, just send me a private message.

Topographic Oce wrote: Jazzis wrote: Downloading is killing the music - pretty soon there will be no music - just a matter of time. If a musician can't feed himself fom his art - he will stop being an artists. In the last 3 months I have downloaded and listened to a number of the bands mentioned here,this has resulted in me buying CD's by Pallas,Pendragon and Mostly Autumn.Had I not heard the downloads  would never have bought the CD's

I do the Same-

My daughter is sick, so I stayed home today.  Having nothing better to do, I installed Napster on my computer and signed up for a free Napster Light account.  Then I looked for every one of the top 500 albums.  Here are the results of my search.

Of the top 100 albums, 52% (or 52 for the mathematically challenged) are listed on the Napster database.

Of the top 200 albums, 39% are listed on the Napster database.  Only 26 of albums 101 to 200 are listed.

Of the top 300 albums, 35% are listed on the Napster database.  Only 27 of albums 201 to 300 are listed.

Of the top 400 albums, 32.75% are listed on the Napster database.  Only 26 of albums 301 to 400 are listed.

And of the top 500 albums, 29% are listed on the Napster database.  Only 14 of albums 401 to 500 are listed.

To make life a bit more complicated, not all of the albums listed are actually downloadable.  And if the album is available, you might not be able to download each song individually.  One example of this is YES Fragile (listed for some reason on their website as We Have Heaven).  You can download every song individually except for Heart of the Sunrise.  If you want that song, you have to get the entire album.

Lastly, the earlier comment that Napster downloads songs in 128 meg WMA is correct.  The decision as to the acceptability of that format will be different for each person.  The days when I had audiophile level equipment is long gone.  But my listening environments are also noisier than they were in the past.  So the extra quality will be wasted in my normal listening environment.  Other's will come to other decisions.

WMA is used so that a cheap digital rights management (DRM) can be in place.  If you subscribe to Napster (as opposed to buying single items), you can download anything and everything you want.  They'll play as long as you keep paying Napster.  Once you stop paying, the songs stop playing.  The only way to set this up is using some sort of DRM.  This should also (theoretically) address the issue of one person buying a song and then passing it out to all of their friends, as can be done with mp3s.

Apple iTunes also uses a DRM.  But unlike Microsoft which will license their DRM to anyone, Apple's keeping theirs for their own use on iTunes and iPods only.  I think that in the long run this will start to seriously cut into their market.  But that's a different thread.

The bottom line is that while some Prog is available for download from Napster, there's an awful lot that's not available.  So Amazon will continue to make a lot of money from me.  I'm still waiting for a dedicated download service that seriously supports Prog.  (If I had the money...)

Please, will someone check out the other download services and see how they compare?  I'd be interested in all of the other services, even iTunes.

If you want a copy of the Excel spreadsheet that has all of this data, please PM me.

^ most of what you said is true, however:

• songs which have been added to Napster more recently are in 192kbps WMA. 80% of the songs that I downloaded (subscription) are in that format. However, all streaming is in 128kbps, and I cannot comment on the format of the purchased songs - I don't purchase songs online.
• The availability of the songs varies from country to country, so my results will be different from yours.

I think that the most reasonable aopproach for us music enthusiasts is to subscribe to Napster and other services, and to use them as a nice tool for listening to the albums which they provide. But for all other stuff - and for the albums we really want to buy, most of us (including me) will prefer the good old CD/vinyl.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ most of what you said is true, however: songs which have been added to Napster more recently are in 192kbps WMA. 80% of the songs that I downloaded (subscription) are in that format. However, all streaming is in 128kbps, and I cannot comment on the format of the purchased songs - I don't purchase songs online. The availability of the songs varies from country to country, so my results will be different from yours. I think that the most reasonable aopproach for us music enthusiasts is to subscribe to Napster and other services, and to use them as a nice tool for listening to the albums which they provide. But for all other stuff - and for the albums we really want to buy, most of us (including me) will prefer the good old CD/vinyl.

I got my information about the 128kbps from the Napster FAQ, which also seems to trail their own technology.  I think you summarized the best use of a subscription service best.  I still want to know how the other services stack up prior to giving anyone my money.

I'm sorry to say this but you people have no idea what you are talking about.

I am a music industry veteran (over 40 years of experience) and I have access to all the information (including inside information) from record companies, IFPI, RIAA, etc, etc.

For every person, who downloads to listen to buy there are 10,000 at least who just download, never ever even considering buying! In some countries 95% of people ONLY download.

Music sales have been going down consistently in the last 10 years and are now 50% lower then 10 years ago. Same is true for movies.

The worst is that the young generation, that was born into internet and into downloading does not comprehend at all the basic notion of intellectual property / copyrights / etc. It will take years to educate - if at all possible - these people.

Jazzis wrote: I'm sorry to say this but you people have no idea what you are talking about. I am a music industry veteran (over 40 years of experience) and I have access to all the information (including inside information) from record companies, IFPI, RIAA, etc, etc. For every person, who downloads to listen to buy there are 10,000 at least who just download, never ever even considering buying! In some countries 95% of people ONLY download. Music sales have been going down consistently in the last 10 years and are now 50% lower then 10 years ago. Same is true for movies. The worst is that the young generation, that was born into internet and into downloading does not comprehend at all the basic notion of intellectual property / copyrights / etc. It will take years to educate - if at all possible - these people.

Do you even know Napster?

Edit: Actually I agree with most of what you're saying about the illegal downloading ... but the better part of the previous page of this thread was discussing *legal* downloads.

Downloading is all right when you use it to discover music. If you download something you like, then you should buy the album. I used to do that, but now I use other sources to hear new music that don't require me to illegally download anything. There have been only a small number of instances where I haven't been able to find certain albums to buy, so I have resorted to downloading them until I can find real copies.

Also, as far as legal downloading goes, I would much rather own the albums, with the artwork, booklets, etc. than just having files on my computer and/or a burned disc.

I am torn about downloading;

My feeling is that there is so much music out there, people cannot buy it all.  As a musician I think it is great that people can access music for free, especially young children who could down load Bob Marley and the Beatles, etc and be exposed to some good music.  But it is up to people to take the responsibility to support the bands and artists that they like.  Such has always been the case.  Music is not a profitable art.  Hayden, Wagner and Stavinsky all had patrons who payed for the music so others could hear it free or at low cost. Of course, the cultures were different then. 

What really irks me is that people think music should be free.  I have many computer geek friends who are making in the six figures and download music for free.  They rarely buy CDs. I buy 2-3 CDs a week at an avertage cost of about 13.00 each and as a musician I make about a tenth of what they do.  But downloaded music sounds like crap anyway. 

Jazzis wrote: I'm sorry to say this but you people have no idea what you are talking about. I am a music industry veteran (over 40 years of experience) and I have access to all the information (including inside information) from record companies, IFPI, RIAA, etc, etc. For every person, who downloads to listen to buy there are 10,000 at least who just download, never ever even considering buying! In some countries 95% of people ONLY download. Music sales have been going down consistently in the last 10 years and are now 50% lower then 10 years ago. Same is true for movies. The worst is that the young generation, that was born into internet and into downloading does not comprehend at all the basic notion of intellectual property / copyrights / etc. It will take years to educate - if at all possible - these people.

In the early (free) days of Napster, I made it a point to only download music that was unavailable for purchase.  If (to my knowledge) it bacame available, I've always made a point to purchase, because I believe the artist does deserve to get paid. 

Regarding the problem with the younger generation, you may be on to something there.  My neices and nephews aren't prone to shoplifting but don't seem to have the same inhibition or moral objection with regard to illegal downloading.  I must say, they would if they were my kids ... they've had enough of my bitching  about it that not one of them will bring it up around me.

I spent 12 years in music retail, and jumped when things started to get bad ... back in 2000.  But in my view, the music industry has created a lot of their own problems and most of them aren't related to downloading.  How many times has the next big thing come around, only to followed by sound-alike bands with ever-diminishing levels of talent?  What about the payola? My neices and nephews look at me with an absolutely blank stare when I try to explain that a lot of music that gets played on the radio stations they prefer is bought and paid for by the labels.  They think I'm some kind of geezer conspiracy freak. 

I enjoy a wide variety of music, and it's a shame that a lot of the older music that I like is difficult of impossible to find on CD.  I know that it's not financially sound to just throw the vaults open and start pressing discs. but with music in general and prog in particular, it can be spectacularly difficult to find some music.  I spend around $50 a week on music, but I really feel as though I'm not able to buy a lot of stuff I really want.  The majors (and the indies, in a way) are so focused on a younger demographic that my money doesn't speak to them.  And most bricks and mortar retailers are very careful about what they stock, because if it ain't sellin' it's taking up space. I've been doing a lot of on-line buying, but even when I find an obscure piece I want, there are quite a few instances where it's listed on their site but not in stock, and I face an endless cycle of backordering.  Most recently, for example, I tried to purchase "Strange Behaviour" by Karnataka.  I placed the order in August.  It's still on backorder. 

I see I've gotten pretty far afield here.  but I guess my point is this ... I'm not in favor of illegal downloading, but when I hear the problems of the music industry blamed largely on downloading, I see an industry looking to lay the blame elsewhere...

Like I've alway's said,why would I want to pay for a sh*tty MP3

Not only that,the majority of places are DRM now,which means you only borrow the songs,but never own it.

Artists never made money by record sales anyway's. They alway's made money by touring.

And I'm in full agreement with those that say P2P is a great way (The only Way) to expand your musical tastes. Ever since I've had the internet,I've discovered at least 10 bands that I've fallen in love with,and bought "ALMOST" all of their albums because of my exposure to them by P2P.

Also,the music industry itself has alot of blame towards this also. Like siging up BAD artists and dishing out shoddy material.

ambriz wrote: I'm going to be honest here. I have 20 GB of Progressive Metal music in my computer right now, as a matter of fact, I own an album from each band progarchives has in the prog. metal catalog. Unfortunately, living in the United States in a relatively small city, it is impossible for me to get an album by those artist, so I have to download them via E-mule. There have been a lot of progressive albums I loved and looking for an opportunity in the future to purchase them in a store, if they become available.

I don't understand - you're saying that you OWN an album by each artist. That would mean that you bought it, but you're saying that you downloaded them. So - did you buy them or not?

Jazzis wrote: Downloading is killing the music - pretty soon there will be no music - just a matter of time. If a musician can't feed himself fom his art - he will stop being an artists.

On the other hand, this does allow upcoming bands to spread their music without the support of record labels  (bit like The Marillion Principle)

ChadFromCanada wrote: ambriz wrote: I'm going to be honest here. I have 20 GB of Progressive Metal music in my computer right now, as a matter of fact, I own an album from each band progarchives has in the prog. metal catalog. Unfortunately, living in the United States in a relatively small city, it is impossible for me to get an album by those artist, so I have to download them via E-mule. There have been a lot of progressive albums I loved and looking for an opportunity in the future to purchase them in a store, if they become available. Online shopping is alll the rage.  I hear that in the next few years they'll have the technology to ship to relatively small cities too.

, but yea, you should consider online shopping.

Jazzis wrote: Downloading is killing the music - pretty soon there will be no music - just a matter of time. If a musician can't feed himself fom his art - he will stop being an artists.

If the artists are doing it for the love of music, I don't think they will quit if they can't make a living off of their art. I know of bands that have day jobs, and spend their nights together writing, rehearsing, etc. Sure, it would be stressful, among other things, but unfortunately, sometimes artists have to resort to doing that. If they love making music, they will make music regardless of circumstance.