3 ms·
> Allegedly artists are missing out when you purchase a song from some service, and then copy that song to a media player somewhere. I don't know much about co
by skydhash 2y ago
> Allegedly artists are missing out when you purchase a song from some service, and then copy that song to a media player somewhere.
I don't know much about copyright law for media, but wasn't the core issue commercial usage and distribution? I believe once I buy something, I'm entitled to consume it however I see fit, whether it's from a CD player, or a file on my computer. I love CDs as a physical artifact, but the convenience of digital files is superior.
> hard copies of music doesn’t look like it’s a thriving business.
Most people I know only do ambient music or party music. Focused listening is a rare thing. For the first two option, streaming is great, as you don't need to worry about where the files comes from and if you've synced them to the player. But once you've got a collection albums you really do like, the current state of streaming software makes it difficult to manage them there.
As for me, the albums I do like to listen to, I already have them in my collection. For anything else, I go to youtube.
- 8fingerlouie 2y agoDon’t get me wrong, i think streaming is great, and it has allowed a lot of artists to publish music that probably wouldn’t have made it otherwise. Some only have one or two songs in them, and with streaming that’s fine. With record labels they’d have been forced into a record deal producing one or two good songs, and 3-5 mediocre albums. Likewise, for pop music, streaming is great. Pop usually has a very short lifespan where a song is popular, and after that the majority thankfully fades into oblivion. I would hesitate to purchase pop music even on iTunes despite most tunes being $0.99, but with streaming i don’t think about it.