File sharing threat for mt music is already be real;-)

I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.

So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
paid for the copies.

I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.

On 10 Nov 2006, at 12:49, MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> I await the day that P2P filesharing is seen as a threat to microtonal
> music.

Charles Lucy - lucy@... ------------ Promoting global
harmony through LucyTuning ------- for information on LucyTuning go to:
http://www.lucytune.com
for LucyTuned Lullabies, go to:
http://www.lullabies.co.uk

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

P2P is not threatening music. Viewing the world through the eyes of
economics is an ultimately flawed endeavor, because you can have the
world without money (and I do have citations) but you cannot have
money without the world. P2P allows people to disseminate music, and
find music that was threatened by the recording industry. If anything,
it is saving music from zombification through economic hijacking.
Sure, the kind of music that can be made in a P2P world is very
different from the music that is made by people who can afford a large
studio, but we managed to get by for millions of years without
recording technology of any kind. People will continue to make music,
whether or not it is economically viable.

On 11/10/06, Charles Lucy <makemicro@...> wrote:
> I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
> around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
> appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.
>
> So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
> paid for the copies.
>
> I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
> spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.

--TRISTAN
Dreaming of Eden is a Comic with no Pictures
http://dreamingofeden.smackjeeves.com

At 05:48 PM 11/10/2006, you wrote:
>P2P is not threatening music. Viewing the world through the eyes of
>economics is an ultimately flawed endeavor, because you can have the
>world without money (and I do have citations)

I would be interested if you sent them to me off-list.

-Carl

>I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
>around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
>appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.
>
>So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
>paid for the copies.
>
>I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
>spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.

And probably more sales of your CD. It's hard to establish the
effects of file trading on CD sales, but the evidence seems to
indicate it does harm very popular artists slightly (like the
top 0.01%, which is you'll remember the type that sued Napster),
while helping small artists considerably more.

-Carl

Aren't you on yahoo music? Granted they'd have to crack the drm on it...

Joe

----- Original Message ----
From: Charles Lucy <makemicro@...>
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 7:45:54 PM
Subject: [MMM] File sharing threat for mt music is already be real;-)

I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.

So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
paid for the copies.

I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.

On 10 Nov 2006, at 12:49, MakeMicroMusic@ yahoogroups. com wrote:

> I await the day that P2P filesharing is seen as a threat to microtonal
> music.

Charles Lucy - lucy@lucytune. com ------------ Promoting global
harmony through LucyTuning ------- for information on LucyTuning go to:
http://www.lucytune .com
for LucyTuned Lullabies, go to:
http://www.lullabie s.co.uk

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>Aren't you on yahoo music? Granted they'd have to crack the
>drm on it...
>
>Joe

Interestingly, yahoo music is one of the few services
experimenting with DRMless downloads (emusic and magnatune
are the only ones that have entirely DRM-free catalogs).

Another interesting idea (a variant of which a friend and
I were working on a business plan for, back in 2002), is
Weed (www.weedshare.com).

-Carl

>Another interesting idea (a variant of which a friend and
>I were working on a business plan for, back in 2002), is
>Weed (www.weedshare.com).

Note, Weed is DRM-based. Ours wasn't (going to be).

-Carl

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Rozencrantz the Sane"
<rozencrantz@...> wrote:
>
> P2P is not threatening music. Viewing the world through the eyes of
> economics is an ultimately flawed endeavor, because you can have the
> world without money (and I do have citations) but you cannot have
> money without the world. P2P allows people to disseminate music, and
> find music that was threatened by the recording industry. If anything,
> it is saving music from zombification through economic hijacking.

I agree!

> Sure, the kind of music that can be made in a P2P world is very
> different from the music that is made by people who can afford a large
> studio, but we managed to get by for millions of years without
> recording technology of any kind. People will continue to make music,
> whether or not it is economically viable.

And I want to mention that lo-fi experiences can be moving. But on top
of that, if one wants to, nowadays there is nothing stopping one from
making very nice sounding hi-fi music on a laptop. Very nice mikes and
mixers exist for ~$200.00 per item or less, and I assure you, although
there is some truth to the idea that a lot of money buys the very best
sound, I have had very dissapointing recording sessions done by
engineers with no taste or ears on top of the line equipment. The
finest recording artist/technician on a laptop home studio setup will
blow away the sound of an idiot at a $10,000 console.

I was on the session of a group that shall remain nameless where the
mix came out so badly (on top of the line equipment) that I can't bear
to put it in my proper discography. The engineer was a noted Chicago
professional, too. Go figure. To be fair, part of the problem was the
wall-of-sound-barf production values of the composer of the music, but
still....

-A.

> On 11/10/06, Charles Lucy <makemicro@...> wrote:
> > I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
> > around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
> > appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.
> >
> > So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
> > paid for the copies.
> >
> > I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
> > spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.
>
> --TRISTAN
> Dreaming of Eden is a Comic with no Pictures
> http://dreamingofeden.smackjeeves.com
>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> >I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
> >around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
> >appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.
> >
> >So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
> >paid for the copies.
> >
> >I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
> >spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.
>
> And probably more sales of your CD. It's hard to establish the
> effects of file trading on CD sales, but the evidence seems to
> indicate it does harm very popular artists slightly (like the
> top 0.01%, which is you'll remember the type that sued Napster),
> while helping small artists considerably more.

Speaking for myself, I know I'm less likely to pay for what I can get
free in file trading, and I haven't seen the majority of folks in this
list behaving much differently.

As a listener, file trading is great. As an artist, ego-wise, I guess
it's ok to have more listeners, but it really puts the economics of
making a living as a composer of sorts more in the "pipe-dream" category.

-A.

Charles,
It is likely that the files you saw weren't actually of your music. I
believe that sometimes unscrupulous applications are run that will create a
file to match any search term. It's probably either obscenitys or viruses.

Of course, if they are your music, well--how flattering!

On 11/10/06, Charles Lucy <makemicro@...> wrote:
>
> I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
> around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
> appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.
>
> So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
> paid for the copies.
>
> I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
> spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.
>
> On 10 Nov 2006, at 12:49, MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com<MakeMicroMusic%40yahoogroups.com>wrote:
>
> > I await the day that P2P filesharing is seen as a threat to microtonal
> > music.
>
> Charles Lucy - lucy@... <lucy%40lucytune.com> ------------
> Promoting global
> harmony through LucyTuning ------- for information on LucyTuning go to:
> http://www.lucytune.com
> for LucyTuned Lullabies, go to:
> http://www.lullabies.co.uk
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>> >I have never made any .wma versions of LucyTuned Lullabies (from
>> >around the world) yet already there are M$ copies out there which
>> >appear if I ego-search on LimeWire.
>> >
>> >So although people seem to be using them via P2P, we are not getting
>> >paid for the copies.
>> >
>> >I just view it philosophically, and assume optimistically, that it is
>> >spreading, opening ears, and will produce a more harmonious planet.
>>
>> And probably more sales of your CD. It's hard to establish the
>> effects of file trading on CD sales, but the evidence seems to
>> indicate it does harm very popular artists slightly (like the
>> top 0.01%, which is you'll remember the type that sued Napster),
>> while helping small artists considerably more.
>
>Speaking for myself, I know I'm less likely to pay for what I can get
>free in file trading, and I haven't seen the majority of folks in this
>list behaving much differently.

In my case I usually obtain the music I'm after in whatever format
it's available -- CD or download -- the kind of stuff I'm into at
this point usually isn't available in both. But sometimes it is,
like in the case of your music. And by letting me listen to pieces
like the Juggler, you created a customer for your DivideByPi
CDs (then you gave me the CDs too! go figure :).

When I worked for Keyboard, I got about 6 CDs in the mail every day,
from real record labels. They paid to mail them to me on the off
chance I'd write about them in the magazine. But every listener is
in fact a critic, and word of mouth is incredibly valuable. So
why not send every listener some music for free?

The 'download vs. CD purchase' thinking also discounts other ways
of monetizing popularity. The ultimate capital of musicians is
popularity. To say the CD or the LP is their ultimate capital is,
well, wrong. Popularity can always be monetized. If DivideByPi
ever plays live, your downloaders will be there, and they'll
probably bring friends. At the very worse you can do product
endorsements. :)

-Carl

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:

> >Speaking for myself, I know I'm less likely to pay for what I can get
> >free in file trading, and I haven't seen the majority of folks in this
> >list behaving much differently.
>
> In my case I usually obtain the music I'm after in whatever format
> it's available -- CD or download -- the kind of stuff I'm into at
> this point usually isn't available in both. But sometimes it is,
> like in the case of your music. And by letting me listen to pieces
> like the Juggler, you created a customer for your DivideByPi
> CDs (then you gave me the CDs too! go figure :).
>
> When I worked for Keyboard, I got about 6 CDs in the mail every day,
> from real record labels. They paid to mail them to me on the off
> chance I'd write about them in the magazine. But every listener is
> in fact a critic, and word of mouth is incredibly valuable. So
> why not send every listener some music for free?
>
> The 'download vs. CD purchase' thinking also discounts other ways
> of monetizing popularity. The ultimate capital of musicians is
> popularity. To say the CD or the LP is their ultimate capital is,
> well, wrong. Popularity can always be monetized. If DivideByPi
> ever plays live, your downloaders will be there, and they'll
> probably bring friends. At the very worse you can do product
> endorsements. :)

We've (DBP) done a few live shows, maybe 4 total, in Chicago over our
existence. We made a bunce of sales of 'Ice Ritual' at our last show,
which was a while ago, and a couple of months ago, Andy moved to
Pennsylvania near Pittsburgh. He's in the "sticks", but his job has
good health benefits. Our future is uncertain at this point.

It's ok, because right now I'm focussing on being a Dad, and when I
have the time, writing my own stuff here and there, and for the
theatre (I want to break into the Dance company scene---more exposure
in an obvious way). Andy is going to be a Dad in December, too...

Parenthood takes a lot of energy and time away from music--and
everything else for that matter--but it has its own rewards.

Anyway, you may be right FAIK, Carl, about all this music distribution
evolution.

-Aaron.

>> In my case I usually obtain the music I'm after in whatever format
>> it's available -- CD or download -- the kind of stuff I'm into at
>> this point usually isn't available in both. But sometimes it is,
>> like in the case of your music. And by letting me listen to pieces
>> like the Juggler, you created a customer for your DivideByPi
>> CDs (then you gave me the CDs too! go figure :).
>>
>> When I worked for Keyboard, I got about 6 CDs in the mail every day,
>> from real record labels. They paid to mail them to me on the off
>> chance I'd write about them in the magazine. But every listener is
>> in fact a critic, and word of mouth is incredibly valuable. So
>> why not send every listener some music for free?
>>
>> The 'download vs. CD purchase' thinking also discounts other ways
>> of monetizing popularity. The ultimate capital of musicians is
>> popularity. To say the CD or the LP is their ultimate capital is,
>> well, wrong. Popularity can always be monetized. If DivideByPi
>> ever plays live, your downloaders will be there, and they'll
>> probably bring friends. At the very worse you can do product
>> endorsements. :)
>
>We've (DBP) done a few live shows, maybe 4 total, in Chicago over our
>existence. We made a bunce of sales of 'Ice Ritual' at our last show,

Not only merch, but hopefully ticket sales will eventually pay
an act at some point in their career.

>which was a while ago, and a couple of months ago, Andy moved to
>Pennsylvania near Pittsburgh. He's in the "sticks", but his job has
>good health benefits. Our future is uncertain at this point.

I don't know if you'd told me that.

>It's ok, because right now I'm focussing on being a Dad, and when I
>have the time, writing my own stuff here and there, and for the
>theatre (I want to break into the Dance company scene---more exposure
>in an obvious way). Andy is going to be a Dad in December, too...

Wow, cool!

>Parenthood takes a lot of energy and time away from music--and
>everything else for that matter--but it has its own rewards.

Uh-huh.

-Carl

I used to use P2P file sharing, but it's really hard
to find obscure music...
Lately I've been filling out request forms like madman
at my local library, then ripping the cd's to my
computer. The artist gets exposure and still gets
compensation (though not as much as if everyone who
borrowed it from the library bought it), more people
can hear the music, it comes in its original package
with liner notes, I can finally afford my listening
habits, and it's paid for with my tax dollars (a
better place for them to go than most).
I encourage others to use library resources in this
way. Even though it technically breaks copyright law
to copy the music, it's mostly a matter of
convenience: to be able to listen to the music
whenever, instead of having to constantly recheck it
from the library.
My library has a lot more
microtonal/experimental/international music than
before I started doing this.

--- Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>
wrote:

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma
> <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> > >Speaking for myself, I know I'm less likely to
> pay for what I can get
> > >free in file trading, and I haven't seen the
> majority of folks in this
> > >list behaving much differently.
> >
> > In my case I usually obtain the music I'm after in
> whatever format
> > it's available -- CD or download -- the kind of
> stuff I'm into at
> > this point usually isn't available in both. But
> sometimes it is,
> > like in the case of your music. And by letting me
> listen to pieces
> > like the Juggler, you created a customer for your
> DivideByPi
> > CDs (then you gave me the CDs too! go figure :).
> >
> > When I worked for Keyboard, I got about 6 CDs in
> the mail every day,
> > from real record labels. They paid to mail them
> to me on the off
> > chance I'd write about them in the magazine. But
> every listener is
> > in fact a critic, and word of mouth is incredibly
> valuable. So
> > why not send every listener some music for free?
> >
> > The 'download vs. CD purchase' thinking also
> discounts other ways
> > of monetizing popularity. The ultimate capital of
> musicians is
> > popularity. To say the CD or the LP is their
> ultimate capital is,
> > well, wrong. Popularity can always be monetized.
> If DivideByPi
> > ever plays live, your downloaders will be there,
> and they'll
> > probably bring friends. At the very worse you can
> do product
> > endorsements. :)
>
> We've (DBP) done a few live shows, maybe 4 total, in
> Chicago over our
> existence. We made a bunce of sales of 'Ice Ritual'
> at our last show,
> which was a while ago, and a couple of months ago,
> Andy moved to
> Pennsylvania near Pittsburgh. He's in the "sticks",
> but his job has
> good health benefits. Our future is uncertain at
> this point.
>
> It's ok, because right now I'm focussing on being a
> Dad, and when I
> have the time, writing my own stuff here and there,
> and for the
> theatre (I want to break into the Dance company
> scene---more exposure
> in an obvious way). Andy is going to be a Dad in
> December, too...
>
> Parenthood takes a lot of energy and time away from
> music--and
> everything else for that matter--but it has its own
> rewards.
>
> Anyway, you may be right FAIK, Carl, about all this
> music distribution
> evolution.
>
> -Aaron.
>
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com

Kevin,

{you wrote...}
>The artist gets exposure and still gets compensation (though not as much as if everyone who borrowed it from the library bought it)

Duh ("though not as much"). Just out of curiosity: if there was a composer/performer on a list like this, or even more to the point, if you could meet and talk with them in person - would you be perfectly comfortable telling them directly that you ripped their CD instead of buying it?

Microtonal music, as with any very niche music, seems as deserving of as much support as any of us can possibly muster. I admit to buying virtually every recording that anyone from the various tuning lists has ever had for sale, and many times not because I would probably listen to it a lot but because I believed it was an important thing to support an artist with something more tangible than lip service.

As for an artist getting more exposure, I think I've heard this phrase enough that I might puke next time I hear it. If it isn't obvious, your "exposing" this artist to other people simply means they are going to rip the stuff or share the file, not that they are going to break a sweat and buy a recording.

One of the difficult aspects of our transition in the dissemination of our musics is that commercial models hardly apply. Carl's various monologues about going to live shows, merchandise, etc, are noteworthy, but certainly apply much more so to popular acts, not the fringe element that most microtonal music (currently) occupies.

Just some thoughts.

Cheers,
Jon

On 11/13/06, Jon Szanto <jszanto@...> wrote:

> Microtonal music, as with any very niche music, seems as deserving of as much support as any of us can possibly muster. I admit to buying virtually every recording that anyone from the various tuning lists has ever had for sale, and many times not because I would probably listen to it a lot but because I believed it was an important thing to support an artist with something more tangible than lip service.

It is nice to be able to do that, isn't it? I certainly would like to.

--TRISTAN
Dreaming of Eden is a Comic with no Pictures
http://dreamingofeden.smackjeeves.com

I wrote a lengthy response, but timed out and lost it
all, here's the gist of it.

--- Jon Szanto <jszanto@...> wrote:

> Kevin,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >The artist gets exposure and still gets
> compensation (though not as much as if everyone who
> borrowed it from the library bought it)
>
> Duh ("though not as much").

The artist still ends up with more money than if I
only bought it for myself. Some people use the
library to audition music and then actually buy the
music they want to own. (They're behind the times,
but hey...) However, people don't buy music (or
merchandise) they've never heard of.

Just out of curiosity:
> if there was a composer/performer on a list like
> this, or even more to the point, if you could meet
> and talk with them in person - would you be
> perfectly comfortable telling them directly that you
> ripped their CD instead of buying it?

1. I am a composer/performer
2. I have talked to many people, artists and
otherwise, about the implications of filesharing,
sampling, copyright, copyleft, creative commons,
plunderphonics, etc. These are some of the most
important influences changing music today.
3. I would be very comfortable telling an artist that
I requested my library buy their music so that I could
enjoy it and my community could be enriched by it.
I'll do so righ now:
Wendy Carlos: My city will be a much better place
because of your music. Thank you for creating such
beautiful, inspiring works of art. I love your solar
eclipses as well.

> Microtonal music, as with any very niche music,
> seems as deserving of as much support as any of us
> can possibly muster. I admit to buying virtually
> every recording that anyone from the various tuning
> lists has ever had for sale, and many times not
> because I would probably listen to it a lot but
> because I believed it was an important thing to
> support an artist with something more tangible than
> lip service.

I'm honestly glad you can afford such lofty morals.
"With music, after it's over, it's gone in the air,
and you can never capture it again." - Eric Dolphy.
Music is ephemereal and it's about time we started
questioning why it was ever turned into a commodity in
the first place.

> As for an artist getting more exposure, I think I've
> heard this phrase enough that I might puke next time
> I hear it. If it isn't obvious, your "exposing" this
> artist to other people simply means they are going
> to rip the stuff or share the file, not that they
> are going to break a sweat and buy a recording.

When I put a CD into my computer (which I use in place
of a stereo) Itunes asks me if I want to import it.
We're in the middle of an information revolution.

> One of the difficult aspects of our transition in
> the dissemination of our musics is that commercial
> models hardly apply. Carl's various monologues about
> going to live shows, merchandise, etc, are
> noteworthy, but certainly apply much more so to
> popular acts, not the fringe element that most
> microtonal music (currently) occupies.

The fringe element is exactly where this stuff applies
the most! How do you think Indy rockers get trendy?
Not only will we see a rebirth of live music, but also
an increase of music that can't be recorded (sound
sculptures, site specific works, process pieces),
increased collaboration between artists, more
intermedia and mixed media works, ... anarchy, chaos,
and a complete breakdown between the distinction of
art and life... ;)

related reading: "Haunted Weather," by David Toop;
Copyleftmedia (the book or the website); "Rhythm
Science," by Paul D. Miller; "The Society of the
Spectacle," by Guy Debord.

Cheers!
K

____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com

Kevin,

{you wrote...}
>I wrote a lengthy response, but timed out and lost it all, here's the gist of it.

I'm not going to be able to devote the time tonight for an appropriate response, but I will in a day or so. I'm not calling you out specifically or personally, but these are matters that not only need discussion, but aren't decided yet. I realize, as much as anyone, how the world is changing, for commerce and for art. I do believe there are many paths and options as well.

Lastly, I am sorry if my posting came off self-serving, which I didn't intend. I honestly do find it a positive activity to support, to the best of my ability, my fellow artists.

Cheers,
Jon

>Just out of curiosity: if there was a composer/performer on
>a list like this, or even more to the point, if you could
>meet and talk with them in person - would you be perfectly
>comfortable telling them directly that you ripped their CD
>instead of buying it?

No more than they should, telling me they're selling CDs.
The Earth is littered with them, they're completely obsolete.

I've spent well over $20,000 on recorded music in my life.
Was in a class-action suit against the RIAA, in which they
were found guilty of price fixing for a period of almost a
decade (the problem was in fact much more widespread). I
got a voucher for $10. Unclaimed settlement money was
supposed to go to libraries. The labels dumped dozens of
identical copies of failed pop albums on libraries in
payment -- effectively writing off their dead inventory.

They've also been found guilty of radio payola (and the
problem is much more widespread than was acknowledged).

Anyone who's been buying $15 CDs for the last 20 years
should get a voucher to get them digitized from the RIAA.

Anyone who's had to put up with the "public" EM bandwidth
being locked down with the audio equivalent of water torture
for the last two decades should get $100 check in the mail.

The RIAA shut down Napster. The other day I wanted to
introduce a friend to A-ha's Take On Me (he lives under a
rock). I knew right where to find the song to share with
him -- in the audio track of its music video, on YouTube.
There were at least four versions. Why is music sharing
shut down while Warner makes deals with YouTube?

I'm proud to say that well over 100 of my CDs were purchased
directly from artists associated with these lists.

-Carl