Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Physical copies to follow after the album leaked online.
...to make a living? Whilst people steal their livelihood?
You're a dick.
...therefore you're still a dick.
is pussyfags like you whining about how the mean old internet won’t look after their poor little musicians. If they wanted to make a living then maybe they shouldn’t get involved in a “job” where their “work” is easily and routinely procured without payment, and where nobody has any need or desire to do anything else. If they wanted to make a living they should have become a plumber, or a chartered accountant
sure I read that in an interview once.
I, too, would be okay with only listening to music made by the independently wealthy. Can't see a problem with this.
write a song
when you're stacking shelves or flipping burgers.
You don't do those things at the same time, but at different times.
Dragging that piano on the back of my BMX while doing my paper round was particularly vexing me.
while agreeing with your post which stated "You don't need money to write a song".
You may be coming across as an asshole.
If you're not disagreeing, why waste your time?
that conversing with you is a waste of time.
So you're saying that all musicians should expect to be constantly poor because of people's inability to even fork out £7 on Itunes?
I see no difference between musicians and authors or artists or actors - would you just as quickly tell them that they deserve to be poor despite working just as hard as any twat in an office job?
because their output has little economic value. What they deserve is a separate issue.
The 'work' of the marginal musician is not something of much use to society however, so it's not something we ought to lose too much sleep over.
(Not so relevant, but I'm not sure personal hobbies really fare well being compared to conventional jobs).
Whether you value something or not doesn't really matter much...
Security guard; "Excuse me, did you pay for those mushrooms?"
WhiteLightWhiteCity; "Well, of course I didn't. I don't particularly like mushrooms, and they are nutritionally poor anyway."
Value is fundamentally important for assessing the economic viability of an activity. Why should anyone expect remuneration for providing a product/service that isn't demanded by (m)any other people?
Your (attempted) mushroom analogy doesn't work. Materially differing factors include enforcability, need and most importantly of all the fact that mushrooms are not infinitely replicable forms of data. This is really elementary to understanding digital markets.
Perhaps the more interesting discussion is why you'd want Les Savy Fav or anyone else to derive higher income from their recordings than is the case. Self-interest maybe?
your point when it's just that I think your argument itself is ungenerous and pretty grim.
You couldn't have come up with a more diametrically opposed argument against what I'm saying if you tried. So I'm a little confused to be honest.
ANYWAY, leaving aside that I was mostly stating facts rather than making arguments, what have I stated that is ungenerous or grim? Just the notion that musicians aren't entitled to income for writing music, or something else?
is that I could have come up with a far more diametrically opposed argument if I'd have tried.
I was just trying to have a little fun.
I thought this discussion might be going somewhere.
advances, hence in most cases the number of albums sold makes very little difference, for that album at least.
Instead of waiting for the money from the sales to come in, the band gets the money - yep - in advance. But if their share of the actual proceeds is less than the advance, they'll have to pay back the balance, or make the next record while owing money to the label. Who might just decide to cut their losses and drop them anyway.
I'd imagine it's irrelevant in this case, as Les Savy Fav are on an independent label that's run by the guitarist. But the overall point is that the number of albums sold makes plenty of difference if you want to be able to be in a band and have it be your actual job.
A related case, which you might have seen/read about: http://www.tedleo.com/2010/07/07/regarding-the-rumors-of-retirement/
then you don't generally get asked to make another one.
a careers adviser by any chance?
It sounds like you are a careers adviser
Are also careers advisers.
"Pussyfags" - So not only are you a thief, but also homophobic. Yet another reason you're A DICK. An unoriginal dick.
it seems that the tears of pure, indignant rage streaming from your eyes are affecting your ability to write anything meaningful, or worthwhile. And maybe your screen is too caked in spittle to respond to any of my carefully thought out rebuttals
and when you’ve had a nice sit down, maybe think about why angrily calling a stranger on the internet “a dick” might make oneself “a dick as well”. Ta
with a huge grin on my face.
I still can't believe someone used the phase "pussyfags". That's amazing. That's the sort of thing Dappy from N-Dubz says.
Dappy's the same colour as me. I put my face by the screen during the Sunday airing of his reality TV show. We're not related though - I've checked the electoral roll.
to be posting on message boards then. How strange such an idiot has such an intelligent child. Must be from your mothers side.
For calling someone out for casually using overtly homophobic language on a public messageboard, like it means nothing? Like that's acceptable?
Or am I goon for suggesting that paying for someone's artistic work, whether the artist is marginal or not, signed or unsigned, is the right thing to do?
If it's the former then you're A DICK. If it's the later, then you're A CHEAP DICK.
bitch who are you
I got goons like a scary movie
yeah that is true.
everyone's favorite record by a chartered accountant by the way?
by Hot Snakes
Ted Leo and the Chartered Accountants?
Would read again.
*doesn't hold breath*
Easily their weakest album. Lots of reused ideas from previous albums. It feels rushed and watered down and lacking in energy. It has a couple of decent moments but no real stand out tracks. It may just scrape a 6/10 for me but closer to a 5 than a 7.
The album's pretty good. Opening couple of tracks are fantastic, there's a good energy to it, good production, and it *does* have stand out tracks ('Appetites', 'Dirty Knails' for me).
but overall it's not that great. In an already strong year the album's not gonna stand out too much. A solid 6.5 or 7/10