Limewire...

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!
When I tried Kaaza years ago, I had nothing but BIG time problems. I had to really put a lot of work into restoring the computer.

But honestly, since I've been using Limewire Pro I haven't had one problem, but I'm also running a lot of security on the computer too. It scans the files before they get a chance to infect the computer, but it hasn't picked up on anything. I also use iTunes and get really good quality music, I've only run accross 1 piece of music that was 128 bit, everything else has been 190 bit.

Believe me, I used to be 100% against downloading, but I just couldn't get the music that I needed fast enough and the DJ Associations (DJ Pool) just wasn't getting the stuff I need too. I can't always afford to put out $10.00 & up for vinyl and cd singles all the time and also pay a DJ Pool membership of $75 a month to get music I would never play.

Being in a club and playing to a VERY demanding crowd, I need music as fast as I can get it. At the moment I am now 6 to 8 months ahead of the radio stations.

So I do what I need to do. Also I respect everyone's opinion to this subject. If you don't believe in burning from Limewire, iTunes, or others, I admire your stand as I hope you understand my opinion.

Thanx!
 
I just found this little paragraph that was in an article about Britney Spears:

Spears, by the way, is not the only artist to use Internet "leaks" to kindle interest in new recordings. Alicia Keys' new song, "No One," can be found on zSHARE, while Bruce Springsteen's "Radio Nowhere" is also floating around — officially on iTunes and unofficially elsewhere. Each of them is a solid pop effort and seem to use actual instruments.


How can the artists or labels scream and hollar about those who download & burn songs when the artists are leaking them????

Patrick, you were right!
 
the dogman said:
So Patrick you seem to have an understanding that some of us lack. And I mean that in a nice way since you deal with bands and all. If the RIAA isnt looking out for the bands and the artist, its really sounds like they are looking out for the recording labels. Would that be fair to say.

Its always been my impression that the artist doesnt make anything off record sales but they do make money off touring. Would that be save to say.

Do the artist not belong to a union or something, and if not wouldnt this be something that they could do, so that a proposal like I mentioned before would give them some leverage. Or do the recording labels own the rights to the song.

Just trying to clear up the fog Im in. There seems to be to much he said she said type of stuff, know what I mean.
Click to expand...

If you want to know what hypocrites the RIAA and labels are, read this book:

Amazon.com: All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning's Napster (9780609610930): Joseph Menn: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41AKlhC3twL.@@AMEPARAM@@41AKlhC3twL

You will learn that 2 high ranking RIAA officials, as well as a Sony official, were actually initial investors in Napster, and even gave Fanning suggestions to tweak the site to make it easier to find files.

It was not until the Metallica incident that the RIAA flipped its position and went after Napster. In Fannings own words:

"I was in complete shock to one day be told of improvements to the site, and the next, being served with a lawsuit by the same guy. It made no sense to me, and when I tried to reach him on the phone, suddenly he was unavailable to take my calls...."

and another segment:

"...when we took the initial plans to the executives at (Sony), they indicated their willingness to contribute because, in their words, this would be a perfect platform to expose hundreds of artists to the market without a high profit / loss risk. We reminded them over and over that Napster would be a free service, and everyone in the room agreed that this would be for the best..."


On average, a non-star artist makes $0.37 per cd sold.

The labels make $6.17.

The average cost to produce a cd in todays market (this includes production/mixing/studio rental and marketing): $2.28

So tell me, whose pockets are the RIAA really protecting?
 
DJ Sue said:
When I tried Kaaza years ago, I had nothing but BIG time problems. I had to really put a lot of work into restoring the computer.

But honestly, since I've been using Limewire Pro I haven't had one problem, but I'm also running a lot of security on the computer too. It scans the files before they get a chance to infect the computer, but it hasn't picked up on anything. I also use iTunes and get really good quality music, I've only run accross 1 piece of music that was 128 bit, everything else has been 190 bit.

Believe me, I used to be 100% against downloading, but I just couldn't get the music that I needed fast enough and the DJ Associations (DJ Pool) just wasn't getting the stuff I need too. I can't always afford to put out $10.00 & up for vinyl and cd singles all the time and also pay a DJ Pool membership of $75 a month to get music I would never play.

Being in a club and playing to a VERY demanding crowd, I need music as fast as I can get it. At the moment I am now 6 to 8 months ahead of the radio stations.

So I do what I need to do. Also I respect everyone's opinion to this subject. If you don't believe in burning from Limewire, iTunes, or others, I admire your stand as I hope you understand my opinion.

Thanx!
Click to expand...

Hi Sue,

I am with you, all across the board. Pretty much in the same boat that you are, when it comes to music.

In my case, with so many mixes and remixes, I want to have the right music at the tip of my finger.

I spend roughly about $200 mo. in music, that includes my dj pool, the downloads from iTunes and the CDs I buy at the store.

You get what you pay for, and as an old say goes, "you can't make chicken soup out of chicken ****" (please excuse the expression ya'll)

I know many "dj's" download from limewire. I would do it on an extreme case, after I have exhausted all the other means. To find an specific track I need, for an event.

I've lost entire collections, in the past because of shareware, trojans and spyware embeded on some of the data that runs through Limewire.

Great reading you.
 
Not to get off topic, but how did the original napster make any money? There was never any advertising, no cost to download, and no revenue source that I can see. Just curious.
 
Brian Martin said:
Not to get off topic, but how did the original napster make any money? There was never any advertising, no cost to download, and no revenue source that I can see. Just curious.
Click to expand...

It didn't....It was back in the day of the soaring dot coms when money meant nothing just stock prices
 
BTW: I checked out both limewire and imesh and guess what without even downloading more than the interface software provided by the companies I get two trojens and one spyware that my virus protection software picked up on....

I quickly hit the UNINSTALL STUPID MALWARE button as fast as I could...

Never again I don't care how desparately I want that new song "Opps, I showed my woman parts again" by Britney
 
And herein lie the issues with P2P sites. :(

They're like the badlands of the old West ~ no law nor order. It is very easy to hack these sites. If you go there, be prepared to deal with the territory.
 
Looks like a cross between Winmx and Ares
 
I checked it out also. Ran way too slow and it just seemed like a "free" version of Limewire. I uninstalled it, not because of viruses or malware, just because it didn't offer anything more than what I have.

But thanks for the info. :)
 
lol thats cos using limewire shareware version you get what you paid for (spyware) using portable limewire - portable itunes and say bit comet etc I dont have to install them at all

I can search and use it on any computer anytime
 
DeeJayRig said:
Hi Sue,

I am with you, all across the board. Pretty much in the same boat that you are, when it comes to music.

In my case, with so many mixes and remixes, I want to have the right music at the tip of my finger.

I spend roughly about $200 mo. in music, that includes my dj pool, the downloads from iTunes and the CDs I buy at the store.

You get what you pay for, and as an old say goes, "you can't make chicken soup out of chicken ****" (please excuse the expression ya'll)

I know many "dj's" download from limewire. I would do it on an extreme case, after I have exhausted all the other means. To find an specific track I need, for an event.

I've lost entire collections, in the past because of shareware, trojans and spyware embeded on some of the data that runs through Limewire.

Great reading you.
Click to expand...

Hey Rig! Which DJ pool do you belong to?? And what club are you at in the City?? I may have to come up & visit you sometime!!
 
jtnichol said:
7.5 cents per song per cd to the songwriter.
7.5 cents per song per cd to the publisher.

Thats what the going rate for my band was as far as royalties in 2003.
Click to expand...

That was a self produced indie CD and not through a major label right?
 
patrickrlewis said:
That was a self produced indie CD and not through a major label right?
Click to expand...

Yes that is correct.

They fronted the studio time as well and we never saw a dime of profit. Total studio cost was $12,000.00
We barely made back $3000.00 for them.
Our "label" did nothing to promote or get distribution. So they got what they deserved and we never made it out of KS.
 
WOW This could not have been timed better to prove my point...

Gigs & Bytes:
Born To Leak
Updated 03:21 PDT Fri, Sep 14 2007

Bruce Springsteen's upcoming album, Magic, won't be released until October 2nd, but the entire song-set, plus a bonus track, appeared on the Internet on Friday, September 7th.

Usually, those responsible for leaking such a high-profile upcoming album on the Net almost a full month before its release would be tracked down, beaten, killed, buried and then dug up and beaten again.

But the album was still available on one particular Web site six days after the tracks first appeared on the Net, leading to speculation that the leak might have been intentional, and that the files either came from the label itself or someone in the Springsteen camp.

The reason for this thinking is that the album's release date is the first date of the tour. Since Springsteen's fans are a rather vocal bunch, it's hard to imagine them going to a concert by their hero without already knowing the words and melodies to all the new songs.

Whether the leak will impact sales is anyone's guess. If sales are less than expected, Sony BMG could claim the leak was responsible. But if CD sales go through the roof, Springsteen's people can take credit for a brilliant viral marketing maneuver.

Most online discussions about the download included messages from fans saying that even though they downloaded the album, they would still buy the CD.

"I'm gonna hold out & not download the full CD. Call me old-fashioned or whatever but I'd rather wait for the official release," wrote one fan on the rec.music.artists.springsteen newsgroup, adding, "However . . . I wouldn't mind treating myself to maybe another couple of tracks. Anyone know of a link where I could get any MP3 versions?"
 
I wish Steve Earles camp would do the same with his new album Ive been hearing cuts on Satellite Radio and have the itch now :sqwink:
 
Herein lies the gotcha with promotional releases. Once something has been recorded it's just a matter of time before it gets bootlegged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back