Liliy Allen has a go at older artists

[RichCowell]

Just to throw my opinion in to the mix... She's not as bad as some, at least her tracks are kinda varied... and her voice is bearable... But as for her being talented? How many kids in our schools have got amazing voices but are likely to go unnoticed?

 

Someone mentioned Norah Jones - now there's a talented artist... and Katie Melua... and much to my surprise, the Noisettes have recently managed to separate themselves from the rest of the junk in the charts...

 

I think Lilly's got a point... just not about her own stuff

[john]

@john yes that would me being half a sleep when I wrote that post I read the whole thread as Amy winehouse please ignore me normal service will resume

Don't worry Russ, I was thinking I had been living under my rock again, although I don't confess to be a big music buff anyway tbh.

 

As for the comment about was I joking, no I don't find her music that bad, I've heard FAR worse and much better.

[Friez]

I hate the whinging cow with a passion. Her latest is to 'squeeze' the filesharers... LOL?

 

Who are the music industry to decide that they should be judge of who does and who doesn't have an Internet connection anyway? If it can be proved in a court beyond reasonable doubt then that is fair enough but these days with wireless and the like it is not so provable.

 

Coupled with the fact that these guys are pretty unscrupulous, the proposed laws by Lord Mandleson must be put to a stop before they actually happen. Consider earlier this year they were sending out letters to the tune of "Pay us X thousands for your illegal file sharing or go to court".

 

The music biz knows full well that they wouldn't have a case that would hold up in court so they resorted to blackmail. Even some OAP's who didn't even HAVE an Internet connection got such threatening letters, these people in charge of our Internet connections? I sincerely hope not.

[localzuk]

No, the group of people at that meeting agreed that the filesharers should be 'squeezed'. Please don't misrepresent things like that.

[browolf]

haha she's certainly made a mess of the filesharing stuff.

Lily Allen Deletes Pro-Copyright Blog and Ends Career | TorrentFreak

Lily Allen Pirates Music, Is Clueless About Copyright | TorrentFreak

[TheFopp]

I'll pop my oar in the debate about file-sharing (not Lily Allen) as a former professional musician and now someone who works and teaches at a specialist music school.

 

Whilst I understand the argument that CDs/Downloads can be seen just as promotional material to get people to go and see the artists live (which is I believe FACs point of view) that only works for the large established bands and not for groups trying to break into the business - they still need to earn a living.

 

The problem with FAC is that are trying to push their beliefs out to all CD/Downloads.... the problem is they only see it from the point of view of pop/rock/chart music. What about the guys who slug it out every day, the jazz guys performing gigs in small venues, the orchestral players who are rehearsing during the day, performing at night and in the run of things make a small wage (most orchestral players - even the principal players - teach in their spare time to make a wage that is equal to the skill and talent they possess). What about the composer, he deserves a cut of the money - That would be like saying 'insert famous modern authors name' should only get paid for selling one book as the other 2 million copies will just be copied illegally and given away. What about the sound engineers and producers who give the artist the sound they are after (ever heard some of your favourite bands live and found them to be a disapointment and not as good as the recording - thats probably because the engineer and producer have spent a hell of a lot of time recording, re-recording, mixing etc to get them to sound perfect). There is the cost of the production of the CD - the guy who designs the cover booklet needs paying... the costs go on.

 

People file-sharing their CDs for nothing is depriving the small guys (or real musicians as I prefer to call them) of a small but important income.

 

And for those who say well, I downloaded it but didn't buy it because I wouldn't have listened to it normally anyway.... well if you wouldn't listen to it normally, why listen to it because you're getting it for free?!

 

Rant Over.... but it does get my back up, especially when working in a school surrounded by some seriously talented musicians who, by the time they are professionals they may not get recording contracts because no-one is willing to pay to hear them on a CD... and that would be a real shame.

[localzuk]

haha she's certainly made a mess of the filesharing stuff.

Lily Allen Deletes Pro-Copyright Blog and Ends Career | TorrentFreak

Lily Allen Pirates Music, Is Clueless About Copyright | TorrentFreak

 

Ok, so both your sources of her having messed up are from a single site...

 

TheFopp]I'll pop my oar in the debate about file-sharing (not Lily Allen) as a former professional musician and now someone who works and teaches at a specialist music school.

 

Whilst I understand the argument that CDs/Downloads can be seen just as promotional material to get people to go and see the artists live (which is I believe FACs point of view) that only works for the large established bands and not for groups trying to break into the business - they still need to earn a living.

 

The problem with FAC is that are trying to push their beliefs out to all CD/Downloads.... the problem is they only see it from the point of view of pop/rock/chart music. What about the guys who slug it out every day, the jazz guys performing gigs in small venues, the orchestral players who are rehearsing during the day, performing at night and in the run of things make a small wage (most orchestral players - even the principal players - teach in their spare time to make a wage that is equal to the skill and talent they possess). What about the composer, he deserves a cut of the money - That would be like saying 'insert famous modern authors name' should only get paid for selling one book as the other 2 million copies will just be copied illegally and given away. What about the sound engineers and producers who give the artist the sound they are after (ever heard some of your favourite bands live and found them to be a disapointment and not as good as the recording - thats probably because the engineer and producer have spent a hell of a lot of time recording, re-recording, mixing etc to get them to sound perfect). There is the cost of the production of the CD - the guy who designs the cover booklet needs paying... the costs go on.

 

People file-sharing their CDs for nothing is depriving the small guys (or real musicians as I prefer to call them) of a small but important income.

 

And for those who say well, I downloaded it but didn't buy it because I wouldn't have listened to it normally anyway.... well if you wouldn't listen to it normally, why listen to it because you're getting it for free?!

 

Rant Over.... but it does get my back up, especially when working in a school surrounded by some seriously talented musicians who, by the time they are professionals they may not get recording contracts because no-one is willing to pay to hear them on a CD... and that would be a real shame.

 

The thing is - the current model does not work. 'Record contracts' don't work, they provide bucket loads of money to people who do nothing, and end up paying the artists pittence. Just look at the recent articles about the Australian guy who won a contract only to find that they get nothing out of it as the company took their original winning songs and used them as 'promo' work and put them on compilation cds. The only people making money there were the managers. Not the talent.

 

What I think FAC were saying is that artists need to stop using the old system and start doing things themselves. This doesn't mean they have to go it alone though. Look at the kid 'Matt Rach' on Youtube. He is now pretty famous in France, as he put his stuff on Youtube, got a following, got sponsorship from a company for his equipment and sells his music on itunes and other online sites. And he's only 18. He's been on French national TV several times, performing live etc...

 

All without a 'record deal'.

[Nausey]

I think my personal distaste for the girl came from that horrible BBC three show she had. She's got no talent and the only reason she's where she is, is because her Daddy got her there. There are a lot of people in the industry like that but at least they don't make personal attacks against the public and feel proud for doing things like shortchanging a cabbie; when they make so much money.

[Guest Guest]

The problem with FAC is that are trying to push their beliefs out to all CD/Downloads.... the problem is they only see it from the point of view of pop/rock/chart music. What about the guys who slug it out every day, the jazz guys performing gigs in small venues, the orchestral players who are rehearsing during the day, performing at night and in the run of things make a small wage (most orchestral players - even the principal players - teach in their spare time to make a wage that is equal to the skill and talent they possess).

 

You've just countered your own arguement. The people you are talking about make their money from live performances and merchandice, not from record sales from a major label.

[TheFopp]

You've just countered your own arguement. The people you are talking about make their money from live performances and merchandice, not from record sales from a major label.

 

No .. I'm saying they don't actually get paid that much for their live performances which is why so many have to teach and do other work during the day in order to make enough for a living... hence why money from royalties is in important part of their income.

[Guest Guest]

No .. I'm saying they don't actually get paid that much for their live performances which is why so many have to teach and do other work during the day in order to make enough for a living... hence why money from royalties is in important part of their income.

 

But lets be right about it here, the royalties is going to be a tiny amount of money in comparison to what it would have cost for the publicity that the digital age gives artists for free. 15 years ago the only way to get your name heard was to rely on a record label, radio and word of mouth.

 

Personally i would rather have my name heard by millions the world over than get a poxy 10p from the sale of a track on iTunes (because lets be clear here, your loyal music lovers are still going to buy your CDs regardless of whether its free on isohunt and 69p on iTunes)

Edited September 25, 2009 by Guest

[Friez]

No, the group of people at that meeting agreed that the filesharers should be 'squeezed'. Please don't misrepresent things like that.

 

I'm not trying to mis-represent anyone. I'm just saying she's one of the pack of baying artists that complain that 'filesharers' aka naughty internet users should get some serious hassle. And I agree, real filesharers really do deserve to get shot. I produce dance music of which some is enjoyed by a niche group in Japan, it's sadenning to see my work pirated but that's just a reality of the current times, at least my music is enjoyed by people.

 

However, the music industry is trying to deal with these filesharers a bit like a bull in a china shop. Have a good look at what steps the industry big wigs (no, not Lily Allen) are taking in order to damage our civil liberties so that they can remain using their outdated business models that do not work.

 

To really understand what the heck I'm whinging about, have a good read of this excellent article by Rob Fahey.

 

People like Lily Allen already have quite a bit of dosh and just add fuel to the stupid and quite frankly ridiculous proposals the industry bigwigs want to see for our country. People like her help push such proposals through, and in the short term it won't help even the small artists (like myself). The government will see statements like hers as 'yep, real artists out there want this, lets do it!' whereas there is little of a strong voice to retaliate, of which that voice is the end-user (us) who do not have quite the same strength of voice as people in the media do.

 

Those artists that take the opposite stance, these guys are heroes.

 

The sheer absurdity of the proposals that we can be directly booted off the Internet at the click of a fingers from someone at Sony or Geffen or whatever are things that shouldn't be ignored.

 

This is something we should all be shouting about and if you're not then don't complain to me when you get cut off for file sharing, even if you wern't! Yes, something has to be done about filesharers but putting the record companies in charge of our Internet connections? That's just a bad idea for everyone involved.

Edited September 25, 2009 by Friez

[TheFopp]

But lets be right about it here, the royalties is going to be a tiny amount of money in comparison to what it would have cost for the publicity that the digital age gives artists for free. 15 years ago the only way to get your name heard was to rely on a record label, radio and word of mouth.

 

Personally i would rather have my name heard by millions the world over than get a poxy 10p from the sale of a track on iTunes (because lets be clear here, your loyal music lovers are still going to buy your CDs regardless of whether its free on isohunt and 69p on iTunes)

 

Thats fine if you are a headline act or famous chart singer....

 

If you are a 2nd violin in the Hallé then you won't be getting your name known across the world, you just want to be paid for your job.

[localzuk]

The sheer absurdity of the proposals that we can be directly booted off the Internet at the click of a fingers from someone at Sony or Geffen or whatever are things that shouldn't be ignored.

 

This is something we should all be shouting about and if you're not then don't complain to me when you get cut off for file sharing, even if you wern't! Yes, something has to be done about filesharers but putting the record companies in charge of our Internet connections? That's just a bad idea for everyone involved.

 

You'll find that all the parties at that meeting agreed that cutting someone off is not the way to go. So why bring that up here? It has also been shown to be illegal by the EU and France was stopped from enacting a similar law. If we tried it here, the EU would step in again...

[jamesb]

But lets be right about it here, the royalties is going to be a tiny amount of money in comparison to what it would have cost for the publicity that the digital age gives artists for free. 15 years ago the only way to get your name heard was to rely on a record label, radio and word of mouth.

 

Personally i would rather have my name heard by millions the world over than get a poxy 10p from the sale of a track on iTunes (because lets be clear here, your loyal music lovers are still going to buy your CDs regardless of whether its free on isohunt and 69p on iTunes)

 

The radio pays in order to play songs. Word of mouth leads to people buying albums in order to listen to songs.

 

Someone downloading your product, regardless of what it is, illegally and free in no way profits you. I've heard all sorts of excuses, ranging from 'well its only the fat cats at the top who make any money from it really, so I'm standing up for the artist' to 'I wouldn't be able to afford to listen to music if I didn't steal it, so they're not losing any money because of me'.

 

Self-justifications, all of them. I still don't understand when theft became acceptable, and how people can feel justified in defending it.

[Jiser]

Lilly allan makes bad music. They make enough music as it is. Should be charging way less specially on Itunes. End of the day due to file sharing they made more money than they wud have without it.

[nsherin]

The other issue that is more likely to push people towards file sharing is choice of music!

 

I'm sure most of us who have been visiting the likes of HMV for years have noticed the continuous down-sizing of their selection of CDs. This, coupled with the demise of other high-street retailers (Virgin -> Zavvi, Woolies), plus the independants, basically only leaves us with one music retalier on the high-street.

 

I've had to resort to downloading music from iTunes at times, as the CD is simply not available to buy. I have no objections or issues buying music legally - over 600 CDs and 100 LPs are in my collection. I also enjoy the pleasure of browsing in a record store, as well as actually owning a physical CD or LP with the artwork etc. than a bunch of files that sit on my NAS.

 

However, if the retailers and record companies (who also have a habit of deleting albums from their catalogues - or only providing them as expensive imports) effectively reduce choice and availabilty, it is ineveitable that people are going to look to other means of obtaining music. In the past it was cassette, MiniDisc or CD-R - MP3 is simply the latest way of doing this.

 

I also wish artists would release more of their bonus/unreleased tracks which can sometimes only be found on P2P sites or via YouTube - if released officially, there are plenty who would buy.

 

What I do disagree with is the current copyright law regarding fair use. If i've bought music legally - either on CD, Vinyl or in a downloaded format, then one should have the right (for their own personal use only) to legally use this in any format they like - be it a compilation from CDs owned or a recording of a cassette or vinyl on CD-R, MiniDisc or MP3. It isn't really practical to walk down the street with your turntable and listen to your favourite album - which may not have been ever released or be easily available on CD!

[Guest Guest]

Self-justifications, all of them. I still don't understand when theft became acceptable, and how people can feel justified in defending it.

 

So you have never recorded a CD/record/radio to tape, ripped a CD to MP3, or borrowed a mates album to have a listen before you buy it?

[torledo]

can we get back to lilly allen bashing please ?

 

It's much more interesting than retreading, for the umpteenth time, this tedious 'debate' about filesharing where the same old arguments are always made, across far more pages than is strictly necessary.

[localzuk]

can we get back to lilly allen bashing please ?

 

It's much more interesting than retreading, for the umpteenth time, this tedious 'debate' about filesharing where the same old arguments are always made, across far more pages than is strictly necessary.

 

Well, Lilly Allen is talented and gorgeous... So no, the bashing shouldn't continue!

[Guest Guest]

Well, Lilly Allen is talented and gorgeous... So no, the bashing shouldn't continue!

 

Aye, if you dont mid a lass with a bigger gut than breasts

 

NSFW

[localzuk]

Aye, if you dont mid a lass with a bigger gut than breasts

 

NSFW

 

First, she is bending over, second, I happen to think a small belly is attractive - it shows the woman is real and not just a photoshopped model... So, yes, I still think she's gorgeous

[Guest Guest]

First, she is bending over, second, I happen to think a small belly is attractive - it shows the woman is real and not just a photoshopped model... So, yes, I still think she's gorgeous

 

Small?

[witch]

Oh for goodness sake shut up you lot - the OP wasnt talking about the way she looks and frankly I don't want to hear this sort of juvenile rubbish.

[localzuk]

Oh for goodness sake shut up you lot - the OP wasnt talking about the way she looks and frankly I don't want to hear this sort of juvenile rubbish.

 

The only response to such a comment has been repeated many times on this site - if you don't want to hear such things, don't read them. Simple really. None of us have to justify ourselves for our comments, if you don't like them, so be it. A discussion has been had about copyright, the same old arguments are brought out about it and we end up in the same non-conclusion as has happened on every site across the web that has similar discussions - both sides can't come to any agreement.

 

What some of us try to do is segway the conversation into something else simply to prevent the discussion becoming the inevitable flamewar. So people lose interest rather than people getting upset.