Having grown up in Los Angeles (I was born in the early 1950s), my family and friends used to go to music stores (like Wallach's Music City) to hear albums before purchasing them. We were allowed, in many music stores, to sample albums. This practice continued up until a couple of years ago (at least in my neck of the woods, except for only one store left that still does this). We could hear the different tracks of an album or cd and decide if we liked it enough to spend our money to buy it. The music industry today is not giving us much choice anymore, is it? I don't know why this feature has been closed down in most stores (even those who do allow you to preview an album only have the most recent top hits). Perhaps the music industry saw that many people just didn't like what they were hearing and lost money? They should take the hint - why do you think Norah Jones won big at the Grammys this year? People are tired of drek, AND not having enough quality music stations on the air. In Los Angeles there is really only ONE jazz station, and that is public supported! I found that the internet allows us to listen to some music samples before buying them. Quite often I only liked one cut on an album and therefore didn't feel I wanted to invest so much on a cd just for one song - and the internet allowed me to get the single the music industry wouldn't.

Which brings me to another complaint about the music industry. When a new song or album is released tons of them are sent to music stores. However, that supply generally lasts two months, maximum. After that supply is gone the stores say they most likely won't be able to get them anymore. So, if you're not one of the first to grab a new single or cd album in the first few weeks of its release, chances are you won't have much luck finding it in a store near you. Which leaves a few alternatives: If you have a friend who got the album and you can make a copy of it for your own use, you do/did so. OR, you could go on the internet and download a song or album - which is no different from sharing the actual physical cd except that it can reach many more people through the internet. OR, you could scour the internet shops or specialty record stores to find the music you want. It's very hard to find oldies, except on music share programs. But, did any of this stop me from buying ALL cds? No way. I have given the music industry thousands upon thousands of dollars to buy their music even if I downloaded a song or two from the internet.

The music industry cracked down on internet groups demanding a fee in order to download songs. I am all in favor of paying royalties, and would not want the songwriter to be cheated of what is legally theirs. I am less sympathetic, I admit, to the music industry who takes its own big slice out of royalties and each piece of plastic or whatever it sells, but I'm not trying to cheat them out of anything by downloading music for my own enjoyment. I don't think of this as stealing. I would like to ask every single person in the music industry if they ever taped a song they heard right off the radio? Is that stealing? Would videotaping a program off the television now be considered stealing, too? My intent is to get the song I want and if the music industry has limited our options and removed these albums from shelves, and no one I know has the song, there is no other way to get it. After the Napster case, I rarely downloaded anything from any of those sites and have removed all programs from my computer. Not a good feeling seeing more and more of our freedoms go down the drain.

I think if the music industry has any interest in attempting to satisfy its consumers, artists, and industry, it's going to have to come up with better solutions than suing online users to make a buck and cop out of taking responsibility for what they helped to create. They can do this by:
1) allowing us more easy access to older albums, and to music from around the world.
2) letting us preview albums in stores and on their artists' sites (and I don't mean just one or two, ten second cuts from an album heard in crappy quality).
3) producing more singles and albums and not cutting off production so quickly.
4) bringing back more quality music radio stations.
5) keep music costs affordable for all ages and stop trying to sell so much to teens (who really can't afford your prices, anyway).
6) not punishing online users for sharing what the music industry hasn't cared a damn about providing for us any other way. Punishing us will only create boycotts of their products and create more resentment all the way around.

In reply to the above, a friend of mine wrote me his comments and gave me his permission to share them with all of you. He raises some great issues - like, how many of us have copies of the same album in every media possible? Here is his response:

While I support the notion that the artists get ripped off enough by the industry itself and that we, as fans, should be willing to put our $$$ where our hearts are... the fact is that I am currently on my 4th copy of Abbey Road by the Beatles, and this last copy was burned off the net... how much more of my $$$ does Sir Paul McCartney need, anyway????

Next... if they want to nail me for downloading and burning music of my own choice, then will the industry step forward and admit that they tend to ignore certain artists? I have yet to find some of my favorite bands that I've found from the web in Media Play, Best Buy, or any of the internet sales sites... will the industry admit that they have been manipulating the market to such an extent that for some of us the down and burn philosophy is the ONLY means by which we can find the music that we desire?

Lastly... I have Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd... on vinyl, on cassette, on 8 track and CD... that means that due to the industry being unable to come up with one means (by which I CAN pay the amount that they want me to pay) of reproducing music, I may end up with other copies...

Vinyl dies, cassette tape stretches and warps, and the 8 tracks just plain sucked... will the industry be willing to grant me a credit for all of the music that I did indeed pay for (in good faith) so that I can replace it on the current technology? No?

Then F*CK 'EM!!!

Then:
I have a major problem with all of this...

As the internet will allow, as well as brick and mortar library searches, anyone that is interested in this can look back to the release of the CD technology to track what the real issue re: down and burn is all about...

When the music industry trots out the Newest and Best technology, like, for example, the long playing record, it is well documented that they will target a small, but loyal, group of audiophiles when marketing the new stuff. While the attempt is made to get everyone to transfer over to the new tech, the Classical music lover is specifically targeted, as it is known that these specific music fans tend to be not only fans of their chosen music, but audiophiles as well. They want the best, cleanest renditions of the music they listen to.

When the industry targets them, they charge enough per unit to make a profit, of course, but the barest minimum. See, when an audiophile buys something really well done, they usually stop, while people like me, music junkys, will keep on buying more and more product.

Ever notice that there was little to no classical music available on 8 track?

The cassette revolution raised an ugly issue back in the early 80's: People (like me) began making mix tapes, or flat out bootlegging copies of music that we liked, and could not find elsewhere... The industry then was all up in arms about it... If you can find one, seek out the first few albums by the 80's band, The Fixx. You will find, at first, a little note under a glyph of a cassette: Bootlegging destroys artists. Later on, though, the same message appears, but the word "artists" is crossed out, and the word PROFITS scrawled over the top.

So... why didn't the industry want to crack down on this particular practice? They couldn't, pure and simple.

With the CD technology, however, at first things changed... we as the buying public didn't have the capacity to record our own CD's... again, look into this, check it out... the industry was telling us that the new technology was a wonder, primarily due to the fact that it was so cheap to produce. Less plastic is used, less weight for shipping, and the companies were rejoicing... they would be able to put more money into artist research and development! We, the buying public, would be able to find a whole new source of music, and they of course would also profit... everybody wins...

Except...

We were also told that the cost of a new artist, including tour support, sales, marketing, distribution, the whole nine yards was such that in order to pull a profit for someone/thing new, a CD would cost around...

ready?

$5.00 US...

Classical music CD's were originally priced at $3.00 per...

The only reason they want to jump on Jim Allard (me!) is that by hitting on iMesh, KaZaa or whatever, they can back track to my computer, and/or my ISP, and run a charge on me, making $$$$$... nothing more, nothing less...

Fine. Tell ya what, industry bozos... you just go ahead and do that little thing... I'll uninstall my P2P music... okay?

I'll just come to places like this, or any public forum, and tell everyone what kind of music I like, and I can zip the file down and e mail it for free to anyone that wants it... Want to try and start monitoring all of my mail? Want to try and invade my privacy? Take on my 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment rights? For no other reason other than $$$$????

Face it, corporate scum... your days are numbered. We have the technology, and every time you even THINK of stopping us, we will find a hundred new ways to do what we want... and we will rub your noses in it...

Have a nice day...