RobK

Signals and beyond feel! Love the Kid!

Thanks man, he's like Rain Man or something. I'll ask him if he practiced and he's like "Relax pops, listened to it a few times" or "yeah watched it on youtube". Then in a few takes (while not perfect) he does a better performance than most of the supposedly PRO drummers I've ever played with. Somehow he visualizes how to play it from hearing it.

I keep harping on him (in vain) to practice for muscle memory. At some point the kids who are REALLY working hard will pass his ass (like they did his old man). Gotta stay ahead of the curve. These videos are secondary thoughts, it's all about "the Kid".

My dreams are dead. LOL.

It must be very hard for someone who isn't a fan of the music to take part in this. Your bass player is to be commended for doing it.

Thanks. I absolutely give him a lot of credit. I almost crapped my pants when he said he'd never heard "Limelight" or "The Spirit of Radio"… ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!!?!?! (there's vids of both on my channel)

He's donating his time to jam with my kid and me, and he really stepped up to learn the RUSH. He's not the best bassist in the world, but he gives 110% and that is huge in my book.

Tried. Doesn't seem to do it. But thanks.

If you delete the URL and start again and then remove the S before you save it it should be ok.

 

Already tried that too.

 

Is this hard to play? It seems to drag a bit.

What about another cover?

 

http://www.everythingkiss.com/Hello%20Kitty/files/bed_hk-mexico1.jpg

Oooh KISS, totally! We do have another cover up. "Lights" by Journey. On the same Youtube channel.

Tried. Doesn't seem to do it. But thanks.

If you delete the URL and start again and then remove the S before you save it it should be ok.

 

Already tried that too.

 

Is this hard to play? It seems to drag a bit.

It's the least hard for me I think. Considering Ryan is 14 and the bass player isn't a RUSH fan we may have played it slow, we definitely did those intro runs slower for sure… absolutely. The Spirit of Radio has actual meter changes as well… which is "odd" for most music that isn't prog. :)

We did it live so I defer to your analysis.

RobK, "Dickish?" Not sure by what you meant by "not nailing it" either. Video sync and internet transfer issues make these projects a total nightmare sometimes, but we continue to retake til its right. Every attempt to recreate these note for note is made, painstakingly. I guess I should have hit the clam like Goddy does at 2:46 (3:31 on the studio track) Anyway, thanks for listening and have a super sparkly day!

I hope you read the whole thread, because I have the utmost respect for your tone and bass playing. I've said it repeatedly.

You've got a good voice, Rob. Your guitar playing is a bit sloppy (mine too), but given how challenging the piece is, some sloppiness can be forgiven. :)

 

Thanks! Agreed. I really could have put a lot more work into getting it down and comfortable, but in the context of what we're doing I was like "meh, good enough." If the kid does a good take and Rick or I don't majorly screw up, out it goes. :)

I started playing drums when I was 13. I'm 48 now and yor son is still better than I am :laughing guy:

I did break my back and leg, but I sucked before that, so...

 

It's cool you play with your kid. I hate the word envy as it sounds petty, but it's all I can think of.I never had kids and would have loved sharing music with them the way my father did with their terrible 50s music :)

Good for you bud. That's not something you see much of right now.

It's all good. We all have our stuff to bear. I unfortunately had NO relationship with my Dad. For me and my younger brother growing up it was like we had an older brother 24yrs older than us. Everything was a competition and an opportunity to put us down and kick our asses (which didn't change until we were like 16+yrs old and stood a chance… and got bigger than him). He was like Chet from the movie "Weird Science". When my wife was pregnant with our first child (Ryan the drummer) I had an epiphany that I would NEVER make my kids feel as if they we're in competition with me. The ONLY REASON my father is still in my life is I didn't want to deprive him of seeing his grandkids. Grandparents spoil their grandchildren, and he does. My children have never experienced the shitbag I grew up with (for the most part).

You've got a good voice, Rob. Your guitar playing is a bit sloppy (mine too), but given how challenging the piece is, some sloppiness can be forgiven. :)

Thanks! Agreed. I really could have put a lot more work into getting it down and comfortable, but in the context of what we're doing I was like "meh, good enough." If the kid does a good take and Rick or I don't majorly screw up, out it goes. :)

Still kind of dickish man. Not sure why YOU need to be that way.

YOU put it out there. So YOU are open to public critique. Don't recall asking for your reply. Thank YOU for playing...

Almost all people have a hard time with change.

Genesis was genius. Phil reinvented his own genius in a whole new genre in the 80s. You can bet that mofo made some serious bank.

One goes where one is called.

Awesome. I love that Cygnus X-1 riff! And the piano behind it. Beautiful!

Thanks, the song was primarily dedicated to the 9/11 responders… but it could apply to all our armed forces, police, EMTs and firefighters.

So I've been getting pretty into guitar, after playing bass for something like 2 years, I decided a few months ago to pick up an acoustic and learn some folky songs. And I really really love it.

 

My issue is, when I go to social gatherings, like camping, or the beach, (not house parties that'd be weird) I would like to play a bit, since it's one of my favorite things to do.But I'm afraid I'm going to be seen as a douche who tries to look cool with a guitar, and I don't want to annoy people, so what should I do in this case? Just leave it at home?

 

Also general thoughts on guys who do this?

I think as long as you sport a man-bun or a slouch-knitted hat you'll be just fine. :D

https://youtu.be/ddDV23P3nWM

 

Really nice job (as usual). You may want to re-shoot your part, though -- at the end of the wah solo you break the illusion that you're playing the solo live.

Yeah I'll get right on that. Dude, these are recreations. No one ever said it's live. Like 90% of it is vid capture of a take of the tune. And yeah a lot of production added later, punches and some overdubs occasionally. So what. You think those Rush 'live' albums aren't doctored? Most people seem to enjoy these,. Maybe they're just not for you, that's cool just move along.

It's kind of surprising to me that as good as you are, that you're so defensive. I'd have thought you'd have made your bones by now.

When you present these videos in the way you do, it kind of implies that these are videos of the actual takes. I think that's all JARG meant. It detracts from the illusion that you guys are nailing it (which I guess we now know you're not). In the context of your presentation I think it matters. It doesn't make your efforts worthless or make any of us appreciate them less. Heck, I do this stuff all the time. Models are photoshopped everyday… us large-browed, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals aren't supposed to be able to tell the difference. That's what sells it as beyond just regular awesome.

BTW, according to Alex, for some time now RUSH's 'live' albums aren't doctored quite as much as they used to be (Exit Stage Left was a studio album basically), but they preserve the illusion which is important to the product. I think that's all that was meant there.

Maybe you just meant "DUDE, SSSHHHHSHSHHSHhshshshsshs… shut up"?

Well god damn... this is MY thread right here. Never developed a taste for beer or wine.

I've been drinking Jack Daniel's for 28yrs. Usually neat. I REALLY wanted to like Macallan 12+ because of Neil but it really just tastes like vomit to me, along with Jim Beam and all the others. Love my Jack. I can take or leave Gentleman Jack but the Single Barrel Jack Daniel's is to die for IMHO. Again, I drink it straight at room temp... usually to excess. :)

Cheers!

Unsung Heroes is the 3rd track from my 2002 CD release "Rob Kosinski - i". This song was totally inspired by 80s era RUSH. This rehearsal from Feb 16, 2016 features myself on guitar and vocals, Rick Harris on bass, and my 13-year old son Ryan on drums. He's playing along with a click track that's driving the keyboard sequences. He did a great job! Didn't have to kill him. ;)

If you want to hear the original track, you can for FREE on my website: http://www.robkmusic...b-kosinski-i-2/ It's track #3. On the studio track I played all the instruments.

C'mon Mr. JD, it's time to evolve into the digital age. "SOMEONE" should have just reached into their own pocket, pulled out $306 MILLION dollars, and "commissioned" Star Wars The Force Awakens... then the rest of us could see it for free. Christ, it's a pretty simple concept man.

 

No, but someone would've made some passion project out of pocket for a few grand, streamed it freely to raise attention, proved that they can do less for more, and then been able to crowdfund the funds to do something bigger. It's been done, and the dinosaur middlemen power-brokers hate it.

 

The old fashioned model doesn't work in the digital age. It stands in the way of fair and open competition. It makes art about profit. It need to me phased out, and digital piracy is doing that legwork.

This is not what you said before. You said artwork should be "commissioned" and "the work" be paid for upfront so the end product is not a commodity and FREE for everyone.

But OK, I'm a big enough guy to give you a mulligan on that one.

Now you're saying people should invest their OWN money on some kind of demo to "…proved that they can do less for more". To whom? The big industry you just took down? The government? Jesus? "The people?" Whatever… there's nothing stopping ANYBODY from doing this right now, not a single thing.

So as you yourself said "it's been done", please cite one single FULL-LENGTH, crowd-sourced, COMPLETED, feature film that can compete with "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" in scope, cgi, location shoots, compositing and desirable casting… oh, and somebody besides Google has to have heard of it.

Copyright law needs to be updated for the digital age. Media distributors can not expect their content not to be shared and distributed freely on the internet. They need to evolve with the times, and governments need to stop enabling their entitlement.

 

Paying for music is an old model... something that harkens back to an era when music was manufactured and mechanical. Now, the flow of digits is free and unlimited, and if music wants to be an industry in modern times, it needs to evolve to accept that.

 

How do you expect them to make money? I suppose you feel the same way about photography. I'm a photographer and people lifting my images without paying for them led me to not post anything on line anymore. I feel that people need to respect the artist and the laws.

 

The fundamental model needs to change. Artwork needs to be commissioned. Someone should be paying for work up front, the final product should generally not be the commodity to be sold, the work should be.

 

If that's the way it worked, no one would work as a musician. There wouldn't be any money in it. The product hasn't changed. Just the way it's delivered. Besides that, in general, people don't respect things near as much if it's free.

C'mon Mr. JD, it's time to evolve into the digital age. "SOMEONE" should have just reached into their own pocket, pulled out $306 MILLION dollars, and "commissioned" Star Wars The Force Awakens... then the rest of us could see it for free. Christ, it's a pretty simple concept man.

Taking down videos of commercially available material is one thing, but if they start to false DMCA covers of Rush songs, amateur footage and old bootlegs, then you know what? That is more than enough reason to be pissed off in my book. There is such thing as "fair use".

Posting covers, amateur footage and old bootlegs does not fall under "fair use".

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. In other words, fair use is a defense against a claim of copyright infringement. If your use qualifies as a fair use, then it would not be considered an illegal infringement."

 

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/

"Fair Use" primarily covers commentary/criticism (like a news report or a review) and parodies (like Weird Al Yankovic… although he always tries to get permission he sometimes does not, but he doesn't need it).

It does NOT cover "well I feel it's unfair because I want to do it" although you could try and litigate if you have the resources. There is definitely wiggle room in interpretation.

Great data Rob K.....I found this article which tries to simplify matters, but makes it even more murky.

Thoughts....agree, disagree ...either way a good read for us novices

https://www.theguard...oyalties-battle

Give me some time to process that article.

What an A-list celeb already making millions of dollars considers to be fair doesn't necessarily transfer, or filter down to those of us ALSO working full-time in the industry but living basically paycheck to paycheck.

Do you think this push back from Ole is because they are planning some big roll outs of Rush related merchandise in the near future? So that the only (legally) available sources are through the label's official releases? Or could it just be Ole being vigilant in its job? I am not in any way knowledgeable of how all the inner workings of the industry operate, but it was something that crossed my mind?

I definitely think it's just them being vigilant regarding their newly acquired property.

Actually you no longer need big industry clout. I'm not famous by ANY means and all my stuff was basically recorded in a bedroom. I have three albums and a single out and YouTube has flagged ME for copyright infringement for posting MY OWN songs! I simply contested it and said "uuuhhhh hey… I AM HIM" (and jumped through some other minor hoops to clear it). So I know the company I published through and assigned to monitor my own paltry, pathetically small musical rights is doing their job.

I have a question here about covers. (I don't suppose anyone here is a copyright attorney, eh?) I know it is legal for bands to record and release cover songs so long as they don't also publish the lyrics (unless they have a separate agreement which includes that). I know it is also legal for bands to perform cover songs live without prior authorization from the copyright holder. So why wouldn't it be legal for a band to post a video of themselves covering a song? I know with YouTube there is some sort of automatic thing that detects copyrighted songs and disallows you from uploading them (although considering the preponderance of lyric videos and such I suspect this only applies to music which the band/copyright holder has previously complained about) so it is theoretically possible that a cover song which is very close to the original could be disallowed because the auto-detection thought it was the original.

It's definitely NOT legal for bands to record and release cover songs, lyrics or not. It falls under a derivative work (you can't take someone else's song, artwork, photo etc, change something, and then call it your work). It is also NOT legal for them to perform the songs live. Example, if a club/venue employs bands that play covers, the VENUE must have some kind of royalty agreement and be paying BMI/ASCAP and the like their fee. Just because people do it all the time and get away with it doesn't make it legal. When you see a band like Foo Fighters or Dream Theater etc cover songs live, I guarantee you they either have their ducks in a row, pay a fine, or just don't care and hope they get away with it (not so much now in the iPhone age).

I was the bassist for a band called Betty's Not a Vitamin back in 2005 and we did an Alt-Rock/Americana remake of Kenny Rogers' "Ruby, Don't Take Your Love to Town" (you can hear a clip on the iTunes if interested). We were going to press 5000 CDs initially and we had to pay $2500 to the Harry Fox agency (they handle song licensing for most of the big artists - https://www.harryfox.com/) in order to officially release the song on our album. This $2500 ONLY covered those 5000 CDs. When we ended up pressing another 10K, we had to pay again. Now most deals include hard copies (CDs, records, etc) and a certain amount of digital downloads as sales (iTunes mostly). Once you burn through them, you pay for more and on and on.

Auto-detection on Youtube (per your example) does not need to think it's the original, it just needs match it to someone else work. When I uploaded my band's cover of The Spirit of Radio a few weeks ago (and we certainly don't sound exactly like RUSH LOL) it was detected in like 30 minutes as copyright infringement, but Ole allowed it if they could put ads on it and make money (and share a tiny bit with me).

'I filmed 8 songs at R40 in New Orleans'....The songs are still copyrighted, but not on any album. A couple years after Michael Jacksons death, this purge happened, but they are back on there....so all people have to do is upload again. Rush or Rush's label is not going to pay constantly to have stuff removed.

If you check your ticket materials you are prohibited from recording/filming. By purchasing and using the ticket you agreed to be bound by that. That fact that you DID it and nobody stopped you at the venue is irrelevant. You violated the contract. So that's how they can pull those down. Yeah, you can keep re-uploading it until you get banned (3 unresolved violations does it these days I think), or keep creating new channels and uploading them again... I see it all the time. For now, the chances of legal repercussions are quite low… for now.

I was concerned myself when I heard about the sale because I've performed a few RUSH covers on my YouTube channel and while flagged, Anthem allowed it with profit-shared ads. Now it's changed to :

• You're monetizing this video and sharing revenue with the copyright owner.
  
• OleMediaManagement
  
• Monetized by copyright owner
  

However, I must agree with takedowns of DVD ripped content or any other "officially" released RUSH material. People uploading published concert footage and or "lyric videos" with the actual released music tracks is just theft. It's the definition of copyright infringement. They may also be coming down harder on more recent audience video uploads (such as R40) because there's still a significant chunk of money for them to make there?

"in the end" :) …they're within they're rights to have it ALL taken down, people uploading covers, all of it. They could also be suing us. I'm remaining thankful for what I'm allowed. We're all so used to passing around other people's intellectual property that it's desensitized us to the value it may or may not have for those who created it… and that it's THEY, not us, who have the final word.

Awesome! But, dang, why didn't you say you've got such good pitch?! :ebert: :ebert: :ebert:

Tried. Doesn't seem to do it. But thanks.

If you delete the URL and start again and then remove the S before you save it it should be ok.

OK, I got it. I need to remove the "s" AND manually add the BBcode for the media tag (for some reason). Thanks for your help!