Terrence writes;
Paintings are different. They are more like a fabulous concert played only once.
They are one of a kind. (Mp3's are more like cheap posters but better). Packaged
and distributed cd's are the fancy seriographs. But you know the new money making
concept for soft media. Design once sell many times.
I think the artists need to get more from the music but I think it this is more
about money grubbing promoters and distributors then musicians. The artits speaking
against mp3 are acting more as spokespeople for the suits who are just paracitical
creatures who feel threatened by those they seek to exploit.
~Die suits die dun dun dun dun drrrraannggg!mp3 killed the suits mps killed the
suits! yaaaaaaaaaaa! dun dun dun dun dun draaaaang! Die suits die dun dun dun dun
drrrraannggg! dun dun dun dun drrrraannggg! mp3 killed the suits mps killed the
suits! yaaaaaaaaaaa!~
T.
ann klefstad wrote:
> How about we cut out the bits of paintings we don't like, too, and demand our
> money back? How come people who complain about spending their hardearned money
> on art always follow up by criticizing artists for being too desirous of money?
> Like bitching about spending an extra ten bucks isn't materialistic?
>
> Come on. Artists are human beings. They make interesting artifacts, that's what
> they do. They are not responsible for pleasing you, they are responsible for
> making interesting artifacts. You are responsible for finding the flipping inner
> resources to make the most of those artifacts. Of course tomorrow I'll take up
> the other cause. I'm just tired of hearing people say, "I'm too cheap to give
> money to those moneygrubbing musicians."
>
> AK
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Can we ask bands to return cd money for the portion of the cds that aren't
> > any good? Like when you have to buy a whole cd to get two or three songs you
> > really like? Why do we have to pay for all the songs when we don't want em?
