---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 01-15-2009 at15:23:

 

i have a bai cassette and an M8 LRRH CD. i listened to the cassette a lot. short of listening to them one right after the other, i can't tell much difference. i'm very glad i got the M8 version from radrockers (which also came with pray where you are CD) instead of paying collectors' prices to get BAI LRRH CD and pray where you are separately.

i think you should only have to pay once for music anyway. if you have a cassette or LP that is mangled, as long as it is recognizable you should be able to get replacement music for a very low fee (likely MP3 these days). if you have proof of purchase you bought MP3 files, you should be able to get them replaced if you lost them.

---

Posted by audiori on 01-15-2009 at15:51:

 

While theres no desire to make fans buy the same thing over and over, cutting out reissues (or even a part of their sales) as a revenue source would really put the sqeeze on new material for bands like DA.

---

Posted by dennis on 01-20-2009 at20:11:

 

On CD there is quite a change between the LRRH on Bai and M8.
I have compared them side by side and it's pretty dramatic.

The Bai CD is worth hunting out.
I did not spend a fortune on mine... in fact, I spent more on the M8 version!


Bai version: less than 5 bucks.
M8 version: right around 20 dollars.

---

Posted by dennis on 01-20-2009 at20:16:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Mountain Fan i think you should only have to pay once for music anyway. if you have a cassette or LP that is mangled, as long as it is recognizable you should be able to get replacement music for a very low fee (likely MP3 these days). if you have proof of purchase you bought MP3 files, you should be able to get them replaced if you lost them.

What wworld do you live in? Buy another copy yeah cheap cheapie!!!

I have bought the same music over and over on LP, CD, and Cassette.
(with all my copies working)

Some call it an "obsessive compulsive disorder!"


I call it a "hobby."

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 01-23-2009 at13:57:

 

for my hobbies, i always try to maximize my investments

i'm trying to remember but i think the only thing i own 2 copies of at the moment is Phil Keaggy's 220 on both cassette and CD. oh, i think i also have cassette and CD of Kalhoun because a kind soul gave us a CD of that.

i like it now where you can often find samples of music so you can hear for yourself first what you're buying instead of buying it on reputation or based on some review you read or even what some friend told you

---

Posted by Audiori J on 01-23-2009 at15:14:

 

The 'fair use' clause of the copyright laws says you have a right to make a backup of the music you purchased for yourself, in case of manglization. It doesn't allow you to distribute copies in any way without permission. And actually it stipulates that if you sell the original, you are supposed to either give the copy to the buyer as well or destroy the copy. That is the way it is written.

Essentially, the music no matter what form it is in is a product that someone had to produce. If money is put into its production, the person that produced the product should be compensated if a person wishes to own a copy.

Think of it as any other product, if it was a chair and you wanted another chair like the one you purchased, you would have to buy it. That keeps the guy making chairs in business. The issue becomes complicated with digital media because you can make exact duplicates of a product and give them away potentially to millions of people effortlessly. Having the ability to do that, doesn't make it right in doing it. And in fact, will put people out of work.

Terry makes his product a CD (chair) and sells it via his website (furniture store), if you like his work buy one that will keep him in business.

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 01-23-2009 at16:09:

 

SAMPLES are those 30-second snippets that are available on amazon for many CDs or that bands have on their own sites or myspace etc.

"RESEARCH" is when people get into copying whole works for free. i find it interesting the RIAA recently decided it was bad business to keep pursuing individual users for this activity.

and no, i don't have any DFBB "research" copies

---

Posted by dennis on 01-24-2009 at02:39:

  Right...

What are you talking about???

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 01-24-2009 at09:38:

 

well ... i was talking about samples and the we-bro jumped in with the same old copyright crap ... not sure why the need for that again unless they thought samples meant illegal copies?!

or maybe he was still referring to earlier posts about not having to buy more than 1 copy? or maybe he thought my CD copy of the referenced 220 and Kalhoun was illegal (they're not, are original CDs)? i dunno.

either way i wouldn't feel guilty if i own at least 1 copy legally getting a backup copy in a technically illegal way if the first copy was mangled before i made a backup. for me, it's the whole letter vs intent of the law thing. i don't believe i have any DA-TST-LD that falls into this category of looking for any "replacements". the only 2 things that come to mind are phil keaggy's true believer cassette and rich mullins' songs cassettes, but I would probably just bite the bullet and buy more of their stuff of CD quality if and when i decided to replace it. it would be hard to find someone with a cassette copy anyways.

getting "research" or "evaluation" copies is a bit trickier and i understand the merits of both sides and was not referring to this type of activity nor wishing to start yet another debate on it.

---

Posted by Ritchie_az on 01-24-2009 at16:55:

 

Somebody like MusicPro should offer an insurance policy for your music collection: $10 a month and a $50 deductible and your CD's are covered should they scratch, cassettes should they wear out and records should they break. Then you wouldn't have to worry about it.

---

Posted by dennis on 01-26-2009 at15:22:

 

There is home owner's and renters insurance of your collection gets stolen, etc...

I don't think anyone insures for ordinary wear and tear, of anything.

---

Posted by dennis on 01-26-2009 at15:24:

 

quote:

Originally posted by Mountain Fan well ... i was talking about samples and the we-bro jumped in with the same old copyright crap ... not sure why the need for that again unless they thought samples meant illegal copies?! or maybe he was still referring to earlier posts about not having to buy more than 1 copy? or maybe he thought my CD copy of the referenced 220 and Kalhoun was illegal (they're not, are original CDs)? i dunno. either way i wouldn't feel guilty if i own at least 1 copy legally getting a backup copy in a technically illegal way if the first copy was mangled before i made a backup. for me, it's the whole letter vs intent of the law thing. i don't believe i have any DA-TST-LD that falls into this category of looking for any "replacements". the only 2 things that come to mind are phil keaggy's true believer cassette and rich mullins' songs cassettes, but I would probably just bite the bullet and buy more of their stuff of CD quality if and when i decided to replace it. it would be hard to find someone with a cassette copy anyways. getting "research" or "evaluation" copies is a bit trickier and i understand the merits of both sides and was not referring to this type of activity nor wishing to start yet another debate on it.

He was talking about your "for my hobbies, i always try to maximize my investments" comment, I think.

---

Posted by Jevon the Tall on 01-26-2009 at17:49:

 

Ah, the ever popular "insurance for my collection". Let me tell you, it's ugly. Speaking from personal experience, many years ago I "lost" my vinyl collection which was appraised at about $15,000. I had all of the items in a database with a the condition etc. When my collection was destroyed I figured, oh well (but it sounded a lot like firetruck) I have it all documented. I took my list to a few places and they returned my list to me with what they valued my collection at. They were less than my appraisal, but they were both over $10K. So I took this to my insurance agent. Who said, "Hmmm" and then asked for a clean copy of my database. A week later he returned saying he'd found a used shop that valued the collection at about $350 bucks, and that's what I'd be getting. I tried to negotiate, and got him to $500. I cried. But to make matters worse, I lost my accordion too, and I had one quote for about $500 and he took that one. So life goes on.

If I ever lose my CD collection I'll just stop collecting all together as I would be hooped. However, over the last two years I've burned it all to an external drive, and have about a half terrabyte of music. Makes for fun on shuffle. lol

Why tell you all this?

Why not.

I don't post all that often. Consider it a gift.

PS, I still think that FS is one of the most beautifully cool DA albums of all. Even if it is dated, it's merged with my younger self, and through the power of nostalgia has taken on a life of it's own. It's bookended with DFBB it's weirder cooler cousin. Can't think of one, without the other.

---

Posted by Ritchie_az on 01-26-2009 at18:07:

 

Wow, $500 for a $15,000 collection. I bet you paid over $500 in premiums and deductibles to the insurance company.





I wish I had some encouraging words for you....


Sorry.

---

Posted by Jevon the Tall on 01-26-2009 at18:31:

 

Loooong time ago, lol.

Besides, who listens to vinyl anyway!

---

Posted by joey on 01-26-2009 at18:47:



dennis does!

---

Posted by dennis on 01-27-2009 at11:32:

 

Yeah, I know a guy who got his CDs stolen and he replaced them with the money he got from the insurance.

I think it was George/Will.

What's the story George? How did that work out?

---

Posted by dennis on 01-27-2009 at11:33:

 

I think if you go in ahead of time you should be able to insure them for what they are worth.

---

Posted by Mountain Fan on 01-27-2009 at16:10:

 

good article about DRM the music biz:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/01/27/pirillo.digital.music/index.html

Digital-music buyer, don't be a fool

* Services that limit when and how you play digital music are ripping off consumers
* Digital rights management, or DRM, means you don't really own the music you buy
* Pirillo: It's hard to buy a song when I'm told I can only play it X times, on X devices
* Pirillo: I prefer subscription music services like Rhapsody or XM satellite radio


By Chris Pirillo

(CNN) -- Back in my day (a day not long ago, as it turns out), you could go down to the local record shop and plunk down your paper-route money for little disks of plastic that were embedded with the latest sounds of your favorite musical performers.
A self-admitted tech geek, Chris Pirillo is president of Lockergnome.com, a blogging network.

Whether your tastes ran from Al Jarreau to "Weird Al" Yankovic, you could be assured that those purchased disks were yours -- for keeps.

You could play 'em over and over until they were scratched beyond repair, you could lend 'em to friends, you could amplify 'em at illicit Charleston dancing parties, you could sell 'em to used record stores or you could store 'em away in a safe deposit box in hopes they'd gain value as collector's items.

You could even make precious mix tapes for your soda-sharing sweetheart with songs copied from 'em, though this made recording industry executives more than a little nervous. And it wasn't long before their weaselly whimpers of protest began.

As the digital age arrived to usher in more perfect ways to copy and distribute (aka "pirate") what these executives saw as their property, those whimpers turned to howls. They've only grown louder since.

So the recording industry has had a good gig going. It's easy to see why its upper crust is miffed at lowly hoi polloi tampering with its bread and butter (or pizza. Or pie. Whatever crust suits your fancy).
Don't Miss

* www.ChrisPirillo.com

One can imagine some mad scientist under the employ of said recording industry locked away in an underground bunker somewhere cooking up a scheme so dark, so evil, that its repercussions would completely remap the way media would be controlled -- with consumers being suckered into paying much, much more for much, much less.

This scheme would come to be known as DRM. Digital rights management or devious rental misappropriation? That's right. Rental. You see, you don't really buy music for keeps anymore. I mean, how can you when this is the sort of thing that can happen?

It's a bit like buying your dream car, driving it around for a while, then being told it's got to be given back to the factory because the dealership where it was purchased no longer has a legal association with the factory.

Sorry if you thought you could drive it around until it was worn out beyond repair, if you thought you could lend it to your friends, if you thought you could drive it to the illicit Charleston dancing party, if you thought you could sell it to a used car dealer or if you thought you could store it under a tarp in your garage for the next couple of decades in hopes it would gain value as a collector's item.

Being used to the old, tangible business model, you were under the impression that you'd actually bought something. No one told you that you were merely borrowing someone else's property for a while (and paying for the privilege to do so). Like a sharecropper. Like a serf. Like a sucker.

And most people do feel like suckers when DRM locks them out of something that they feel they have every right to use, often to the point of attempting to circumnavigate this crappy, unfair system by means that might lead to trouble.

I can only conclude that, like bootleggers at the repealing of Prohibition, viruses and spyware acquired in pursuit of overcoming content restrictions wouldn't prosper in a DRM-free world. Really, it's hard to take alarm from DRM-happy organizations such as the MPAA as anything but a double dose of dookie when you find out that 2007 was a record box office year in spite of all the pirates and ne'er-do-wells and whatnot!

Who, exactly, is getting plundered? It's no wonder blogger Cory Doctorow finds DRM to be one of the most offensive digital constructs on the planet. It's inevitable. It'll go away or change dramatically. Let's hope sooner rather than later.

I subscribe to Rhapsody, so I can listen to just about anything from my desktop, and subscriptions are my preferred method of content consumption. I have an XM satellite radio subscription, I pay for just about every channel on digital cable and I have been known to purchase hard copies of content in the past (DVDs, CDs, 8-track tapes, etc.)

But DRM? It's no good. It's downright evil. I find it very difficult to purchase something outright when I'm told that I can only play it X times, only on X devices or for X long. That's counter-intuitive and consumer unfriendly. There are certainly exceptions to the rule, but not when the content is a commodity.

I once found four different versions of the same song on my wife's system. One had been purchased on Rhapsody, another on iTunes, another on Napster and the fourth was an MP3! Quadruple madness! I don't care how good a song is, she doesn't need to have four copies of it (three of which are completely useless without the proper systems in place).

The MP3? It's as perfect as it needs to be, playable on just about anything these days. That's consumer friendly.

---

Posted by audiori on 01-27-2009 at18:26:

 

Aside from repeating the standard falsehood about how evil corporations and wealthy CEOs are the only ones hurt from piracy, the writer fails to remember a once commonly used phrase... "buyer beware."

If you buy a download from someone that has all kinds of restrictions and limits connected to the file.. you shouldn't be shocked if it does expire. People should always read the fine print.

Having said that, I have never downloaded anything from anyone that has expired. Ever. I have every download I've ever purchased and can play them any time I want. That includes iTunes, etc. So, who exactly is this author renting music from? While we're at it, who is stopping him from making mix tapes?

Yes, copy protection stinks. It always did - even when it was on VHS tapes and computer software in the 80s. Who is to blame? The pirate - not the seller. The thieves and selfish scumbags ruin it for the rest of us. Just like how we have traffic laws thanks to speeders, murder laws thanks to murderers, and tax laws thanks to tax cheaters. Sometimes things will be harder for the rest of us because of those laws and the investigations and restrictions that go with them... Its a pain in the butt for anyone doing things the right way. We have no one to blame but the people who break them.

Its also another reason I like to have the actual CD.