Do you think....

[rugen]

Any form of loyalty is dangerous, it can lead to obsession, delusion and so on.... It can ruin your capability to see things objectively. I know that many people are comfortable in that situation until the day, the one they love turn the back on them. No bands, humans, musicians are bigger than the music or even of the art they have created...

[Lorraine]

Any form of loyalty is dangerous, it can lead to obsession, delusion and so on.... It can ruin your capability to see things objectively. I know that many people are comfortable in that situation until the day, the one they love turn the back on them. No bands, humans, musicians are bigger than the music or even of the art they have created...

I know what you mean, but I don't think that loyalty to someone you know and love - spouse, friend, relative - is bad.

Edited November 29, 2016 by Lorraine

[goose]

hasnt been a truly great band since Radiohead. is like something wrong with the kids these days. in 70s & 80s great new bands were poppin up every few seconds

 

While I do agree that the 70s and 80s were extremely fertile periods for bands and music, I disagree with the notion of there being no great bands nowadays ..

 

It is different now, yes - but much of that has to do with the fact that record companies can no longer nurture and support bands and develop them ..

 

Anyone who ever downloaded songs for nothing is to blame

 

 

.

 

.

A few quotes from some friends of mine in their early 30s...

 

"Who buys music these days anyways?"

 

"Why would I buy a cd?!"

 

"I'm never buying another album again."

 

"They might as well get rid of all record shops."

 

"I don't remember the last time I've been in a record shop."

 

You can feel a sense of entitlement or arrogance in those words. Not evil or anything but definitely a bit of greed.

Not greed, from my perspective, but common sense. And I'm one of those people. Why pay when everything from Bach to Basie to Boston to Beck is at my fingers for free on YouTube?

 

Goose, you can't be serious

 

That's like going into a supermarket and just walking out with a cart full of food when you know you can get away with it

More like choosing to legally pick some apples from the tree at a park instead of paying $2.50/lb for the same thing at a supermarket. Nothing illegal going on.

But if everyone did what you do then there wouldn't be any new stuff coming in the future.

There are plenty of people paying $1 per song, or more, and that's just for the digital download. The artists are doing fine.

[Disembodied Spirit]

hasnt been a truly great band since Radiohead. is like something wrong with the kids these days. in 70s & 80s great new bands were poppin up every few seconds

 

While I do agree that the 70s and 80s were extremely fertile periods for bands and music, I disagree with the notion of there being no great bands nowadays ..

 

It is different now, yes - but much of that has to do with the fact that record companies can no longer nurture and support bands and develop them ..

 

Anyone who ever downloaded songs for nothing is to blame

 

 

.

 

.

A few quotes from some friends of mine in their early 30s...

 

"Who buys music these days anyways?"

 

"Why would I buy a cd?!"

 

"I'm never buying another album again."

 

"They might as well get rid of all record shops."

 

"I don't remember the last time I've been in a record shop."

 

You can feel a sense of entitlement or arrogance in those words. Not evil or anything but definitely a bit of greed.

Not greed, from my perspective, but common sense. And I'm one of those people. Why pay when everything from Bach to Basie to Boston to Beck is at my fingers for free on YouTube?

 

Goose, you can't be serious

 

That's like going into a supermarket and just walking out with a cart full of food when you know you can get away with it

How is streaming music on YouTube akin to shoplifting?

 

My comment was directed at Goose's "why pay" comment

 

I love youtube - it is an absolute goldmine - for both me, and the artists that I have discovered there .. I have bought literally hundreds of CDs because of youtube since its inception ..

 

That does not fall under the "why pay" banner though

I think what you're saying is you like to support artists you discover by buying their work. My questions till stands because if YouTube is akin to stealing then the artists are the ones that need to put a stop to it. I don't think it's up to us to voluntarily try to stop it because the artist needs money.

 

I think there might be some confusion here, and I probably didn't make myself clear, as I never meant to include youtube in this discussion ....

 

YouTube in my view is sort of a modern day radio station that takes requests ...... What I was replying to was the "Why pay ?" comment .....

 

The quality coming from youtube or from radio is not what you're going to get when you buy what the artist took time, money, and heart to create . . .

 

If someone really enjoys and appreciates what an artist has to offer, the fan should pay for that - that also insures that the artist can and will continue .... Fans support the performer, and that means financially ..

 

This becomes a problem with new music because if everyone has the opinion of "why pay ?", then, there is going to be no new music ....

 

With this in mind, it is baffling when some of the same people complain that music isn't the same anymore, and how they used to love looking at the artwork and album covers, etc ..

 

All that was only possible because why ?? ... Because people would pay for it

This is where my thought was when I first posted. I wasn't thinking of YouTube. I was thinking of those that never buy anything THEN look down on those that actually DO.

What about those of us who never buy anything and have no opinion on those that actually DO?

[Rod in Toronto]

YouTube isn´t stealing - the artist gets paid for views on his/her music. Why do you guys think Metallica released videos for ALL their songs off the new, DOUBLE album?

[Tick]

What are the parameters of "loyalty"?

I'm probably still going to say 'no' regardless of the definition.

 

If you watch Time Stand Still, that's the kind of loyalty I'm talking about.

Some of the fans in the film are quite disturbing to me. I don't get that level of fandom at all. I have been a fan of Rush nearly 40 years but I'm not going to cry because they retired. The dude in the basement with all the mag clippings and memorabilia needs to get a grip.

I can't wrap my brain around it. The film had too much of that over the top nonsense which is why I have no desire to own the film. I liked the film in a sense but have no desire to view it again.

 

Plenty of Rush fans love the band in a sane and rational way. Its a great band, but its not life and its not a religion.

 

Just this guys point of view...

[Rod in Toronto]

What are the parameters of "loyalty"?

I'm probably still going to say 'no' regardless of the definition.

 

If you watch Time Stand Still, that's the kind of loyalty I'm talking about.

Some of the fans in the film are quite disturbing to me. I don't get that level of fandom at all. I have been a fan of Rush nearly 40 years but I'm not going to cry because they retired. The dude in the basement with all the mag clippings and memorabilia needs to get a grip.

I can't wrap my brain around it. The film had too much of that over the top nonsense which is why I have no desire to own the film. I liked the film in a sense but have no desire to view it again.

 

Plenty of Rush fans love the band in a sane and rational way. Its a great band, but its not life and its not a religion.

 

Just this guys point of view...

 

:goodone:

 

Nothing like a well balanced opinion.

[JARG]

What are the parameters of "loyalty"?

I'm probably still going to say 'no' regardless of the definition.

 

If you watch Time Stand Still, that's the kind of loyalty I'm talking about.

Some of the fans in the film are quite disturbing to me. I don't get that level of fandom at all. I have been a fan of Rush nearly 40 years but I'm not going to cry because they retired. The dude in the basement with all the mag clippings and memorabilia needs to get a grip.

I can't wrap my brain around it. The film had too much of that over the top nonsense which is why I have no desire to own the film. I liked the film in a sense but have no desire to view it again.

 

Plenty of Rush fans love the band in a sane and rational way. Its a great band, but its not life and its not a religion.

 

Just this guys point of view...

 

Oh man. I haven't seen it yet, but the wife ordered it for me as a Christmas gift. Your comments, along with others about fans crying, makes me think I'm in for a cringe fest.

Edited November 30, 2016 by JARG

[goose]

hasnt been a truly great band since Radiohead. is like something wrong with the kids these days. in 70s & 80s great new bands were poppin up every few seconds

 

While I do agree that the 70s and 80s were extremely fertile periods for bands and music, I disagree with the notion of there being no great bands nowadays ..

 

It is different now, yes - but much of that has to do with the fact that record companies can no longer nurture and support bands and develop them ..

 

Anyone who ever downloaded songs for nothing is to blame

 

 

.

 

.

A few quotes from some friends of mine in their early 30s...

 

"Who buys music these days anyways?"

 

"Why would I buy a cd?!"

 

"I'm never buying another album again."

 

"They might as well get rid of all record shops."

 

"I don't remember the last time I've been in a record shop."

 

You can feel a sense of entitlement or arrogance in those words. Not evil or anything but definitely a bit of greed.

Not greed, from my perspective, but common sense. And I'm one of those people. Why pay when everything from Bach to Basie to Boston to Beck is at my fingers for free on YouTube?

 

Goose, you can't be serious

 

That's like going into a supermarket and just walking out with a cart full of food when you know you can get away with it

How is streaming music on YouTube akin to shoplifting?

 

My comment was directed at Goose's "why pay" comment

 

I love youtube - it is an absolute goldmine - for both me, and the artists that I have discovered there .. I have bought literally hundreds of CDs because of youtube since its inception ..

 

That does not fall under the "why pay" banner though

I think what you're saying is you like to support artists you discover by buying their work. My questions till stands because if YouTube is akin to stealing then the artists are the ones that need to put a stop to it. I don't think it's up to us to voluntarily try to stop it because the artist needs money.

 

I think there might be some confusion here, and I probably didn't make myself clear, as I never meant to include youtube in this discussion ....

 

YouTube in my view is sort of a modern day radio station that takes requests ...... What I was replying to was the "Why pay ?" comment .....

 

The quality coming from youtube or from radio is not what you're going to get when you buy what the artist took time, money, and heart to create . . .

 

If someone really enjoys and appreciates what an artist has to offer, the fan should pay for that - that also insures that the artist can and will continue .... Fans support the performer, and that means financially ..

 

This becomes a problem with new music because if everyone has the opinion of "why pay ?", then, there is going to be no new music ....

 

With this in mind, it is baffling when some of the same people complain that music isn't the same anymore, and how they used to love looking at the artwork and album covers, etc ..

 

All that was only possible because why ?? ... Because people would pay for it

This is where my thought was when I first posted. I wasn't thinking of YouTube. I was thinking of those that never buy anything THEN look down on those that actually DO.

What about those of us who never buy anything and have no opinion on those that actually DO?

Why do you have to judge!?!?!

[Syrinx]

That is what I meant in my earlier post. I am a long time fan, have seen them live since 1975 numerous times and they are a big part of my life. BUT I am perfectly OK with them "retiring". I have not shed a tear, and I have certainly never been obsessed with them like some.

[JARG]

Hell, I've been wanting them to retire since VT came out.

[Tick]

What are the parameters of "loyalty"?

I'm probably still going to say 'no' regardless of the definition.

 

If you watch Time Stand Still, that's the kind of loyalty I'm talking about.

Some of the fans in the film are quite disturbing to me. I don't get that level of fandom at all. I have been a fan of Rush nearly 40 years but I'm not going to cry because they retired. The dude in the basement with all the mag clippings and memorabilia needs to get a grip.

I can't wrap my brain around it. The film had too much of that over the top nonsense which is why I have no desire to own the film. I liked the film in a sense but have no desire to view it again.

 

Plenty of Rush fans love the band in a sane and rational way. Its a great band, but its not life and its not a religion.

 

Just this guys point of view...

 

Oh man. I haven't seen it yet, but the wife ordered it for me as a Christmas gift. Your comments, along with others about fans crying, makes me think I'm in for a cringe fest.

It's too much for me. I'm sorry Rush chose to highlight this side of the fan base so much in the film.

[treeduck]

hasnt been a truly great band since Radiohead. is like something wrong with the kids these days. in 70s & 80s great new bands were poppin up every few seconds

 

While I do agree that the 70s and 80s were extremely fertile periods for bands and music, I disagree with the notion of there being no great bands nowadays ..

 

It is different now, yes - but much of that has to do with the fact that record companies can no longer nurture and support bands and develop them ..

 

Anyone who ever downloaded songs for nothing is to blame

 

 

.

 

.

A few quotes from some friends of mine in their early 30s...

 

"Who buys music these days anyways?"

 

"Why would I buy a cd?!"

 

"I'm never buying another album again."

 

"They might as well get rid of all record shops."

 

"I don't remember the last time I've been in a record shop."

 

You can feel a sense of entitlement or arrogance in those words. Not evil or anything but definitely a bit of greed.

Not greed, from my perspective, but common sense. And I'm one of those people. Why pay when everything from Bach to Basie to Boston to Beck is at my fingers for free on YouTube?

 

Goose, you can't be serious

 

That's like going into a supermarket and just walking out with a cart full of food when you know you can get away with it

More like choosing to legally pick some apples from the tree at a park instead of paying $2.50/lb for the same thing at a supermarket. Nothing illegal going on.

But if everyone did what you do then there wouldn't be any new stuff coming in the future.

There are plenty of people paying $1 per song, or more, and that's just for the digital download. The artists are doing fine.

Digital music just doesn't interest me at all. Thousands of files on a computer is not how I like my music. If that was all there was I think I'd stop buying and quit.

[Lorraine]

What are the parameters of "loyalty"?

I'm probably still going to say 'no' regardless of the definition.

 

If you watch Time Stand Still, that's the kind of loyalty I'm talking about.

Some of the fans in the film are quite disturbing to me. I don't get that level of fandom at all. I have been a fan of Rush nearly 40 years but I'm not going to cry because they retired. The dude in the basement with all the mag clippings and memorabilia needs to get a grip.

I can't wrap my brain around it. The film had too much of that over the top nonsense which is why I have no desire to own the film. I liked the film in a sense but have no desire to view it again.

 

Plenty of Rush fans love the band in a sane and rational way. Its a great band, but its not life and its not a religion.

 

Just this guys point of view...

 

The one with all the Rush memorabilia in his basement is not unique. I know women/men who have as much Moody Blues memorabilia. And they vie with one another for how many times they've seen them in concert, some of whom have seen them hundreds of times - they go to Europe to catch their tours too.

 

I do agree with you. It's not part of my personality to be like that. But it is for others. As I said, if I went to see someone once in concert, that was enough for me. It never occurred to me back then to catch a band on tour after they released every new album.

 

As for crying at the last concert in L.A., I can understand the emotion of that moment. I think it is important to keep in mind that some fans are heavily invested emotionally in Rush. The truth is that Rush has saved more than one life. If any band had ever done that for me, I'd be indebted heavily to them too.

[JARG]

What are the parameters of "loyalty"?

I'm probably still going to say 'no' regardless of the definition.

 

If you watch Time Stand Still, that's the kind of loyalty I'm talking about.

Some of the fans in the film are quite disturbing to me. I don't get that level of fandom at all. I have been a fan of Rush nearly 40 years but I'm not going to cry because they retired. The dude in the basement with all the mag clippings and memorabilia needs to get a grip.

I can't wrap my brain around it. The film had too much of that over the top nonsense which is why I have no desire to own the film. I liked the film in a sense but have no desire to view it again.

 

Plenty of Rush fans love the band in a sane and rational way. Its a great band, but its not life and its not a religion.

 

Just this guys point of view...

 

Oh man. I haven't seen it yet, but the wife ordered it for me as a Christmas gift. Your comments, along with others about fans crying, makes me think I'm in for a cringe fest.

It's too much for me. I'm sorry Rush chose to highlight this side of the fan base so much in the film.

 

I think I'll have to have the wife watch it. She thinks I'm already too fanatical about the band -- it sounds like I'll be able to say to her, "look how bad it could really be".

[Ancient Ways]

hasnt been a truly great band since Radiohead. is like something wrong with the kids these days. in 70s & 80s great new bands were poppin up every few seconds

 

While I do agree that the 70s and 80s were extremely fertile periods for bands and music, I disagree with the notion of there being no great bands nowadays ..

 

It is different now, yes - but much of that has to do with the fact that record companies can no longer nurture and support bands and develop them ..

 

Anyone who ever downloaded songs for nothing is to blame

 

 

.

 

.

A few quotes from some friends of mine in their early 30s...

 

"Who buys music these days anyways?"

 

"Why would I buy a cd?!"

 

"I'm never buying another album again."

 

"They might as well get rid of all record shops."

 

"I don't remember the last time I've been in a record shop."

 

You can feel a sense of entitlement or arrogance in those words. Not evil or anything but definitely a bit of greed.

Not greed, from my perspective, but common sense. And I'm one of those people. Why pay when everything from Bach to Basie to Boston to Beck is at my fingers for free on YouTube?

 

Goose, you can't be serious

 

That's like going into a supermarket and just walking out with a cart full of food when you know you can get away with it

More like choosing to legally pick some apples from the tree at a park instead of paying $2.50/lb for the same thing at a supermarket. Nothing illegal going on.

But if everyone did what you do then there wouldn't be any new stuff coming in the future.

This type of response is why I'm not a fan of the analogy goose made. There are a finite amount of apples in earth. You can download any one song an infinite amount of times so increased downloading has no effect on supply.

[Chicken hawk]

I'll still buy the yearly calender's if they make them after this year. I hope they do. Im a forever fan.

[Irenicus]

You can download any one song an infinite amount of times so increased downloading has no effect on supply.

For the time being basically not, yeah. But if too many people do this and not enough people pay for the music, then bands will not be able to record new albums or go touring anymore, because there won't be money to support that. So if you want your favourite bands to continue to release albums and play concerts, then buy the music. It's especially crucial to do so for smaller acts. Funny how it's even necessary to explain this...

Edited November 30, 2016 by Irenicus

[lifeson90]

too many kids these days into adele and simon cowell sh*t.

 

nothin wrong with adele she can clearly sing, my grandad would definitely have had a cassette of hers among his perry como and matt monro collection

 

i'm just really really happy to have lived my youth in the punk/new wave era.

 

i mean they're still RAPPING ffs

[Ancient Ways]

You can download any one song an infinite amount of times so increased downloading has no effect on supply.

For the time being basically not, yeah. But if too many people do this and not enough people pay for the music, then bands will not be able to record new albums or go touring anymore, because there won't be money to support that. So if you want your favourite bands to continue to release albums and play concerts, then buy the music. It's especially crucial to do so for smaller acts. Funny how it's even necessary to explain this...

Uh, the industry has changed from that plan. Now you release music at a potential loss to incite people to come to your shows and buy t shirts, etc... Concert tix have gone through the roof and they've added perks like meet and greets and VIP benefits to make money. Only a small fraction of artists make any real money from songs. Btw, the money from downloads is shit so if you really do want to help them then buy the disc.

[Verena]

I don't think it would be a reflection on the quality of bands today. I just think people are different.

Attention span?

Never underestimate the power of obsession

I don't know. If I saw a band once in concert, I thought it was enough. Some of these fans have seen Rush over 100 times.

I'd like to have seen Rush at least seven times.

 

But I couldn't... for this reason I compensate on collecting their stuff more than I usually collect.

Special things.

RushBackstage Club awaits me! :D

[Verena]

...that the days of a band being able to engender the loyalty of fans for decades as Rush has is over?

 

If so, why?

 

If not, why not?

I'm sure not.

There's always someone loving and following a band around and perpetuating music/ musical knowledge and appreciation.

 

For Rush and for other bands too.

These things are unlimited.

 

There are other bands keeping their flame alive for generations and generations. Not exactly like Rush.

Each band is a band: their public and audience maintance is different.

[Mr. JD]

hasnt been a truly great band since Radiohead. is like something wrong with the kids these days. in 70s & 80s great new bands were poppin up every few seconds

 

While I do agree that the 70s and 80s were extremely fertile periods for bands and music, I disagree with the notion of there being no great bands nowadays ..

 

It is different now, yes - but much of that has to do with the fact that record companies can no longer nurture and support bands and develop them ..

 

Anyone who ever downloaded songs for nothing is to blame

 

 

.

 

.

A few quotes from some friends of mine in their early 30s...

 

"Who buys music these days anyways?"

 

"Why would I buy a cd?!"

 

"I'm never buying another album again."

 

"They might as well get rid of all record shops."

 

"I don't remember the last time I've been in a record shop."

 

You can feel a sense of entitlement or arrogance in those words. Not evil or anything but definitely a bit of greed. It's a bit sad not only because they truly believe they're right (and agree with one another) but also because they sort of look down on those that don't download everything for free and DO buy CDs still.

 

Exactly the point I was making when I mentioned technology changing music.

 

The same thing (sort of) has happened to photography.

[Lucas]

You can download any one song an infinite amount of times so increased downloading has no effect on supply.

For the time being basically not, yeah. But if too many people do this and not enough people pay for the music, then bands will not be able to record new albums or go touring anymore, because there won't be money to support that. So if you want your favourite bands to continue to release albums and play concerts, then buy the music. It's especially crucial to do so for smaller acts. Funny how it's even necessary to explain this...

Uh, the industry has changed from that plan. Now you release music at a potential loss to incite people to come to your shows and buy t shirts, etc... Concert tix have gone through the roof and they've added perks like meet and greets and VIP benefits to make money. Only a small fraction of artists make any real money from songs. Btw, the money from downloads is shit so if you really do want to help them then buy the disc.

 

What young, relatively unknown band is going to be able to make money from VIP Meet And Greets ??

 

 

[Irenicus]

Uh, the industry has changed from that plan. Now you release music at a potential loss to incite people to come to your shows and buy t shirts, etc... Concert tix have gone through the roof and they've added perks like meet and greets and VIP benefits to make money. Only a small fraction of artists make any real money from songs. Btw, the money from downloads is shit so if you really do want to help them then buy the disc.

No, that's not how it works. Artists are only even allowed to tour or release new albums based on how an album has sold. Nothing has changed about that. No record company is gonna risk paying lots of money for a tour when the supported album hasn't even sold well, so that the tour may flop as well. That would be bad business. At least this applies to bands on record labels, of course it may be like you said with independent artists.