Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Music, Computers and Copyright
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3945
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 8 of 29 (144111)
09-23-2004 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Percy
09-23-2004 11:17 AM


Copying other peoples cd's
I copy cd's I don't own, have exchanged cd copies with an internet friend in Texas, and expect to do so again.
I would love to support the deserving artists by buying their product, but...
I am currently poor.
CD's are overpriced.
I have spent a lot of money on cd's in the past - I have done plenty to support the recording industry.
The ratio of "free cd's" to "purchased cd's" for me is pretty small.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Percy, posted 09-23-2004 11:17 AM Percy has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3945
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 10 of 29 (144119)
09-23-2004 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Rei
09-23-2004 2:34 PM


High speed vs. low speed burns
I am under the impression that burning an audio cd at lower speeds can have an advantage. In talking to an "expert" once, the opinion was that the higher speed burns will work fine on home systems, but may have problems in automobile players (which, by the way, are cd ROM players).
I had borrowed a home burned cd from a friend. It apparently had been burned at a high speed. It was next to impossible to get to play in my car deck, but played fine in the home unit, or in the computer. The copy I made played fine in the car deck.
I wonder if the slower burn rates might also be good for increasing the cd's durability?
BTW, I burn most at 8x. I did burn some at (I think) 16x. I should see if those 16x burns tend to have play problems in the car (which, unfortunately, is currently broke down at a different location).
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Rei, posted 09-23-2004 2:34 PM Rei has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3945
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 22 of 29 (144453)
09-24-2004 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Percy
09-24-2004 11:54 AM


quote:
As I was thinking about this I recalled that commercial radio pays for the music they play...
Not only that, but I think non-commercial public radio stations also make some sort of payments.
There has also been "pay to play" methodology used, in which someone pays the radio station to play a song. This is legal, as long as the station is up front with the information that it is being done. In effect, the song is presented as a paid advertisement.
Personally, I'm inclined to think that stations should not have to pay royalities on music they play. They are actually doing the producer of the song a service, by giving the song advertisement. The producer of the music wants airplay, not (so much) to earn airplay royalties, but to give the music exposure to sell recordings.
All in all, radio (at least in the U.S.) is badly screwed up. Clear Channel is the most prominent example. A radio station should be licienced because they provide a quality service, not because some mega-corporation has the money to buy up the licences. A commercial radio licence should not be worth millions of dollars, for sale to the wealthy.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Percy, posted 09-24-2004 11:54 AM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024