BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

Never mind the poll, and just reply:

If you got offered an excelent song (in your opinion) for free, with an option to "donate" to the artist, and assuming you had the money/means, would you donate?

Does the fact that that song may be multi-channel/stereo compatible ads any value to your considering "donating"?

If the rights allows you to broadcast and use the song any way you want (including copy) for non commercial purposes, does that encourage donating?

Is donating a fantasy and what's best is to just provide a 20 secs preview and force people to pay?

Last, but not least, if not donating, would you be willing to download a 100 Mb plus linear non-lossy multi-channel high-definition version of that song, if paying?

If read between the lines, you'll understand I'm about to make a serious move... bottom line is, would you EVER donate? And if so, what?

Kind Regards,
AMR
http://www.alvaromrocha.com

AMR wrote:If you got offered an excelent song (in your opinion) for free, with an option to "donate" to the artist, and assuming you had the money/means, would you donate?

If I like the song, definately, yes.

AMR wrote:Does the fact that that song may be multi-channel/stereo compatible ads any value to your considering "donating"?

I would pay more to have it in stereo, but for multi-channel I'm not so sure, possibly because I have no means to listen to that properly. It also depends on what the difference with the regular price would be...

AMR wrote:If the rights allows you to broadcast and use the song any way you want (including copy) for non commercial purposes, does that encourage donating?

Erm... that's getting tricky. Being allowed to broadcast it sounds pretty neat, but that copying thing, I don't agree with. The broadcast permission would encourage me, yes, if I would have a way to broadcast it properly.

AMR wrote:Is donating a fantasy and what's best is to just provide a 20 secs preview and force people to pay?

Donating out of free will is a dream, yes, that's unfortunately not how most people think. The majority grabs what they can have for free. And besides, donating is not the good word, in my opinion. The royalties thing doesn't work, I guess, so a better solution would be to be able to buy it only from the artist directly. A preview should be provided for free or for a one or two-time stream only per IP, or something like that.

AMR wrote:Last, but not least, if not donating, would you be willing to download a 100 Mb plus linear non-lossy multi-channel high-definition version of that song, if paying?

If I would need that for a cover or remix and if the price was reasonable, yes. But it shouldn't be available to the masses, I think some sort of permission straight from the artist should be involved here.

AMR wrote:If read between the lines, you'll understand I'm about to make a serious move... bottom line is, would you EVER donate? And if so, what?

Donate, no, not like that. Yeah, maybe once. But I don't think artists should be considered as charity. Maybe I would donate if the song is really really awesome, but if I only like it a little, I wouldn't donate and I wouldn't take the trouble to pay only 20 cents or something like that, yeah, maybe the first 10 times, but after that, nah...

Hope that helps

Listen for free, download for free, and allow you to donate, which you WILL

That actually sounds like a dream-come-true to me. Albeit some part of me would prefer the "which you WONT" option but I guess donating 1 dollar per song could suit my greedy needs

I download music when I don't know what it exactly is. If I like it, I will buy the CD. I see the internet as a big, big library of music.
And... I download things when they are not or hardly to get on cd/dvd, or when they are too expensive for me.

A good on-line allows you to download songs for free, and if you like it, you could donate to the artist, or buy the cd online. I will do that, but unfortunately, not everybody is like that.
For me counts: There is nothing above a hardware cd-shop, where you could listen to a cd, and than decide if you want to buy it or not.

The iTunes recipe works for me, though I would like more than 30 sec snippets.

AnDrOiD wrote:The iTunes recipe works for me, though I would like more than 30 sec snippets.

Hum,

What about a hybrid (er, sort of)?...

http://files.alvaromrocha.com/demos/AMR_Vastness.html



(What would you do after checking the page and the song?)

BTW, "Vastness" is an electronic pure tune, steady, and produced just with digital "virtual" instruments

It's part (start) of my new aproach to music production, after Beyond Piano, which is "doing what I feel like, when I feel like it" - and I happened to feel analog, and was alone with a computer and a soundless keyboard in a remote island (really!).

This music tries to provide the analog warmth, magic and hugeness and it really pulled heavy steam of my CPU. There's a surround version but, I agree, is probably to soon to demo it... or is it?

I'm playing (played) the in yer-face sequences (bass and staccato-pads) to add humanity, sequenced parts are all in the background and blend in as just... sounds.. er.... texture.

http://files.alvaromrocha.com/demos/AMR_Vastness.html

If not for more, enjoy... 22 secs of it, that is, following your sugestions.

Kind Regards,
AMR
http://www.alvaromrocha.com

AMR wrote:Never mind the poll, and just reply:

Does the fact that that song may be multi-channel/stereo compatible ads any value to your considering "donating"?

Is donating a fantasy and what's best is to just provide a 20 secs preview and force people to pay?

Last, but not least, if not donating, would you be willing to download a 100 Mb plus linear non-lossy multi-channel high-definition version of that song, if paying?

If read between the lines, you'll understand I'm about to make a serious move... bottom line is, would you EVER donate? And if so, what?

Kind Regards,
AMR
http://www.alvaromrocha.com

Absolutely "yes" to these questions.
But generally donations sounds more like donuts to me.
I want musicians to get paid as any worker does.
I would love to download BIG multi channel files of music that I like
and I'm willing to pay for it...not in "enormous" amounts but for a fare price. If I somehow knew for sure that my money goes to the composer, it would encourage me to buy more often.

This is a question I can't even answer, haha...the whole downloading thing makes me kinda nerwous. Some say I am too politically correct and some say that I am dull. But so tome extent I never think this will work out in the way that everyone is happy!

Love Leelene

AMR wrote:Never mind the poll, and just reply:
If you got offered an excelent song (in your opinion) for free, with an option to "donate" to the artist, and assuming you had the money/means, would you donate?

Depends, if the donation is a pain in the A hole to make, join this and that complete forms and answer a lot of questions, never. If it would be just a donation through paypal, yes. If you´re Madona or some other famous artist I would not pay at all.

Does the fact that that song may be multi-channel/stereo compatible ads any value to your considering "donating"?

Nope.

If the rights allows you to broadcast and use the song any way you want (including copy) for non commercial purposes, does that encourage donating?

Nope.

Is donating a fantasy and what's best is to just provide a 20 secs preview and force people to pay?

I like the system that Warp records and sublight records have, you can listen for 30 seconds, after that the music fades but you can still go fast forward or back in the song if you like, you can not download the music to your computer, that makes me want to buy the entire CD. I also like the fact that you can not always listen to the whole album online, as then it would become booring to own what you´ve already heard. A few songs should only be available by buying the product. And I do not like the buy mp3´s scheme at all, I want to own something physical and not something virtual.

Last, but not least, if not donating, would you be willing to download a 100 Mb plus linear non-lossy multi-channel high-definition version of that song, if paying?

Downloading something to my computer would not seem as "real" as owning a real CD. I would not pay more for an ultra high quality download.

If read between the lines, you'll understand I'm about to make a serious move... bottom line is, would you EVER donate? And if so, what?

I would rather preview for free and if I am interested buy a physical disc of the music. I do not care about the "If-I-Buy-Music-From-An-Unknown-Artist-I-Wont-Be-Hip" factor, I like discovering new music for my self rather than being pushed in one or other direction by "the masses". In other words if I like something, then I like it and there is a chance I will buy it.

If I put it this way. The downloaders always say they download in the spirit of a Robin-Hood-menthality. But when it comes to the real fact, no one is really into that either. Because the poor artist out there will probobly never get it as good as Rolling Stones and Rolling Stones fans are too likely to pay whatever the prize is on all things related to Rolling Stones.

So the money that goes into the pocket of the allready rich people never gets out to those who are poor and so this question will never work itself out. And to my surprize people are still thinking that people like me are too politically correct and to be looked upon as boring.

I never say that downloading is 100% bad. But lets just say one thing clear. Why not try out sites like www.allofmp3.com first because they are cheap and there you can go. Because the prizes that are in the rich countries of Sweden and USA and such are redicioulus. No students will ever be able to pay for such prizes. And I think it is fair to try out the pay sites first. Then go on to sites that are non-pay afterwords.

Love Leelene