Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: protective encoding. (AKA The New Digital Realm)

(I thought this germain to the digital realm so I copied the LD list on 
reply, hope not too OT)

Well, Jeff..

It means setting up a web site, marketing your product - and giving away
free samples at a lower sample rate than a CD.. That's a good start... 22k
MP3's sound good enough to give people a taste of the music's flavor..
(Think about it - that's radio quality, not CD quality..  People have been
taping off the radio since personal recorders came about - did it hinder
tapes from being bought?!  I argue it advanced their distribution by
creating a needy market..)

Now, say you sell the CD's (44k) on your site, and stream the 22k MP3's as
samples.   If you market well you can make a living off of the digital
front.  It won't stop people from making real MP3's from your CD's, but it
will at least give them an avenue to purchase your work.

You guys (i've been in music 27 years, programming for 20) are just 
to feel the burn that software programmers have been feeling forever.
People have been copying and distributing pirated copies of software since
it was possible to duplicate.  Does this mean that software companies went
out of business?  No! - it means they had to change their 1:1 product:money
ratio mentality.  Now companies offer crippled versions of software (IE:
lower sample rates)  Free trials of their software, that expire (not yet
implemented for music).  And simply GIVING away the software, (MP3 
/ RADIO / etc.) knowing full well that 80% of the copies that are on the
market are going to be pirated, but the fact that their product is being
distributed, talked about, and wanted by those who are in the know means
that those who can't/won't copy/steal will get caught up in the frenzy and
BUY a copy.  These companies SUBSIST on the other 20% of the populace who
buy the product, causing income to actually be generated by a pirate
distribution methodology.  These are the companies that will survive in the

Nothing is stacked against anybody.. The biggest hurdle in any artistic 
is to be the one with the biggest audience, right?  The bigger the 
the bigger the revenue - no matter WHAT.. If you get caught thinking that
the only way to survive is to sell each and every CD you press for $10.00,
then you've lost the game already.  Giving away art is the best way to get
it heard.  Once you're heard, you're known.  Once you're known, you're
gigging.  Once you're gigging, you're generating REAL revenue based on REAL
effort, not a snapshot of art (CD's), which is always pale in comparison to
the true stage of the artform.

Now imagine that your MP3's are distributed (pirated) across the world, and
millions of people (who you think unfortunate because they didn't pay for
the initial recording) liked your work.  Now some of these people WILL pay
to go see your gig.  WILL pay to buy your t-shirts.. WILL pay to get a copy
of the limited edition release with your signiature, and have a much higher
probability of buying your next CD to own a real copy etc etc etc...

We can't allow ourselves to be boxed in by the feeding frenzy of the modern
capitalist world.  We must allow music to flow freely, and as the artist 
is creating these ever changing realms of music and altering the mood and
minds of the listeners - we must not throw spite at those who can't afford
to buy.  We must focus on those who CAN.

That's just my .02 on the matter.. (please keep the flames private)


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Yost <yostie@ezworks.net>
To: Ken M <wgold@mecasw.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: protective encoding...

>Hi Ken-
> So what does this do to those of us who would like to make a living by
>selling our creations via digital media?
> Other people seem to be able to make a living by practicing their
>trades, why is it the artistic folks always have so much stacked against
>Ken Melms wrote:
>> You can't.
>> The fact is - once something is played on a computer, the person playing
>> can simply setup a sound recorder to dump it back to a .wav file, and
>> encode it again to MP3 without the protection blocks.  Anything that
>> advertises as a "copy protection" scheme for MP3's is preying on the
>> uninformed.
>> Welcome to the powerful world of FREE FLOWING information.  People have
>> get over the thought of personal ownership of data, and begin doing the
>> to copyright and legally protect the ideas, not the media it's printed
>> K
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jeff Yost <yostie@ezworks.net>
>> To: jeff_yost@musician.org <jeff_yost@musician.org>
>> Date: Sunday, April 16, 2000 3:43 PM
>> Subject: protective encoding...
>> >I hope this isn't too off topic, but I am curious if anyone may know 
>> >best (and most economical) route to take to get one's MP3s encoded with
>> >copy protection.
>> >
>> >(Please cc me or write my personal e-mail)
>> >
>> >thank you,
>> >jeff yost
>> >yostie@ezworks.net
>> >