Re: (313) EA afterparty Sunday
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 10:49:20AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi Jodie, > > It was a pretty sweet setup. The graffiti on the wooden fence was still > there, as well as the walls. The "front room" was facing the main door and > in the main room the setup was pointing at the large wall on the south > side. It was strange that the Visuals were displayed over the entire > length of the large wall and a smaller wall. I wish I would have taken > pics now.. :) I'm sure someone did. I did. I'll be posting links once I finish getting all the pictures from last weekend organized and uploaded. Also on the way are pictures from the Kraftwerk show last night at the State Theater. -j -- Rev. Jeffrey Paul-datavibe- [EMAIL PROTECTED] aim:x736e65616b pgp:0x40754B94 phone:877-748-3467 F3F7 FFB7 B966 3675 9170 5265 AD12 0474 4075 4B94
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'SBEENBOOTLEGGED,BURNTHE BOOTLEGGERS
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: i mean ill break your f*cking arms if you try to take something from me. so good luck with that. perfect! bootleggers take something from somebody. so "their fecking arms should be broken". you said it yourself.
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLYIT'SBEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
-- Original Message -- From: "J.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>you havent answered the question! you still have people making >money off of the artists despite not having done anything. i cant > >hahaha what they did is they bought the record!! SO DID THE BOOTLEGGERS. neither is entitled to make money off of the artists IMO. and really, the record dealer is making crazy percent profit getting music into the hands of one person while the bootlegger is making a much lower percentage getting the music into many peoples hands. i find each to be equally wack. >its called an investment! thats funny, i call my music "records" not "investment". that attitude is wack. >many things can appreciate in value! they're not making >money "off the artist" which i take it you mean as cutting the >artist out of money they should be getting. so would you pay a collector $50 for a record you could buy in print for $7? theyre taking potential buyers of the in print record away. >the artist got the >money they were owed. either the seller bought the record while ? >the record was in print, in a manner that the money travelled >down the line from shop to distrib to label to artist -- or >somebody along the line did, if you're buying it used in a record >store. again, so did the bootlegger. >damn is this really that difficult for you? it sure is. >price is justified by supply and demand. thats it. bootleg is >justified by nothing because it is illegal theft. somebody >selling a rare record has something to do with the record -- they >bought it -- if they bought it new, their money even travelled >down the line to the artist (hopefully). and it's legally theirs. honestly, in my eyes none of these people are acting in a pure manner. neither side is defensible. buying a record doesnt entitle you to sell it for crazy $$ or to bootleg it. >you can build a house and sell it to someone; when they sell it >years later, and the house has appreciated in value, it doesnt >mean you are owed anything. the whole thing went down nice and >legal and its all done see. bootleggers have nothing to do with >the record tho, yes -- thay have no legal right to do what they >do. see like laws and property and the bigger economic picture >have a lot to do with this. stop philosophizing you dreamer philosophy and dreaming are much better than gouging someone for rare records. you cant justify that to me, no matter how you try. the way i look at it, if youre down to buy into the capitalist system for the good it can give to you, you have to understand the bad things that come with it. i think YOURE the dreamer for thinking that people care what you think about the "theft" that bootleggers do. even you dont care enough to not buy them yourself which makes your argument hold even less water. tmo andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'SBEENBOOTLEGGED,BURNTHE BOOTLEGGERS
-- Original Message -- From: ha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >2 things come to mind > >1) the dealer provides a (legit) service: legit how? would it be legit for someone to buy up all the energy and water in the world and then sell it at a premium because they had the money to do so in the first place? >lots and lots of time & >labor (diggin) and money (purchase of large quantities of to a great >extend worthless records in bulk) is being spent so the collector can >just walk into the shop take the rare record and walk out. this service >has to be paid for. of course some records seem to cost "too much", >that's the effect of a strong demand with low supply. these records >need very much labor/time/invested money to be found by the dealer. >record dealers don't get rich quick, they work hard for the money. so lemme guess. bootleggers just snap their fingers and have copies of some rare record? no offense, but bootlegging still involves finding a copy of the song and investing time and money into getting them pressed (and in the case of the HTFR joints, making sure they look nice!). >2) the dealer makes a certain sum off of 1 record. he doesn't >"multiply" it. but he's also making much much much less of a profit. neither is really doing anything essential to the music on the record. >the lack of ability of moral judgement with some of you is amazing. >demand justifies appropriation? tell me that the next time you play >some >tracks for me over at your's or the next time i hear you dj somewhere. >haha i mean ill break your f*cking arms if you try to take something from me. so good luck with that. im just struggling to find what dealers do that is worth so much $$$ to them "legitimately" vs what bootleggers actually do that is worth the small profit they might maybe make. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'SBEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: you havent answered the question! you still have people making money off of the artists despite not having done anything. i cant see how this is justified by the demand but bootlegging by demand isnt. either way you have someone who had nothing to do with the record being made making money. just like i dont buy many bootlegs, i dont pay money to collectors for many records either. i want the artists to get my $$$, no one else. 2 things come to mind 1) the dealer provides a (legit) service: lots and lots of time & labor (diggin) and money (purchase of large quantities of to a great extend worthless records in bulk) is being spent so the collector can just walk into the shop take the rare record and walk out. this service has to be paid for. of course some records seem to cost "too much", that's the effect of a strong demand with low supply. these records need very much labor/time/invested money to be found by the dealer. record dealers don't get rich quick, they work hard for the money. 2) the dealer makes a certain sum off of 1 record. he doesn't "multiply" it. this 1 record once brought the artist a certain amount of revenue (when it was bought for the first time). bootleggers offer multiple copies of new records where the artist never gets the money he should get when they are sold for the first time, which they are. the lack of ability of moral judgement with some of you is amazing. demand justifies appropriation? tell me that the next time you play some tracks for me over at your's or the next time i hear you dj somewhere. haha armin
Re: (313) picked up a few records..and some demf 06 babbling
agreed on man-o-war, had to really keep my eyes peeled for whatever reason I just kept missing it. This is one of those releases that I was talking about, some tracks appear on the 12" that don't appear on the 7" and vice versa, man-o-war was such a track. I had the 7" for quite a while and was foaming at the mouth before I got the 12", but yeah I love that one! I wouldn't call the A-side weak either, but definitely man-o-war is the one I wanted. I will say that. J.T. wrote: aquanauts - titanic -- a-side is kinda weak, but man-o-war is GREAT!!! definitely a sound descended from drexciya, i love how the song changes towards the end (nice acid line!)...reminds me back to the quality ur high-tech funk circa interstellar fugitives (as does s2's slide). the b2 beat track aint bad either.
(313) Vault Radio with Funk D'Void, Ben Long, and Matt Nee
News: I have been booked to play at Zenbar in Farmington on Wednesday, June 15th. Last week's show was pre-recorded because I was in Detroit for Fuse-In. The show was a rebroadcast of mixes by Matt Nee (Kompute) & Funk D'Void (Soma). Click the link to hear this show. http://www.antonbanks.com/audio/05-30-05.mp3 I have exclusive material by several guest artists planned for the next few shows. The schedule is... June 6- Jamie Bissmire (50hz/Space Djz/London) June 20- Greg Gow (Restructured Records) June 27- Paul Birken (Tonewrecker Records) The last four programs are always archived online. Visit www.antonbanks.com/show.htm to hear them. Playlist for May 23, 2005 Click the link to listen to the show. http://www.antonbanks.com/audio/05-23-05.mp3 FSOL, Path 5, Lifeforms Remixes, Astralwerks Alexander Robotnic, Viens Chesz Moi, Les Grand Voyages Del Amour Remixes, Hot Banana Vector Lovers, Onsen, Boulevard, Soma (Promotional) Unknown, Untitled, Unknown Joroan Lazaro, Missile Can't Get High Enough, Tuunda Paul Birken, Crawling Home 2 Rest, Don't (Promotional) Miskate, Daydreaming, Microcosm Stephan Braatz, About To Feel, Adapter Louderbach, Forgotten Wax Mix, Wanda's Wig Wax, Underline Alexi Delano, Unknown, The Acid Sessions, Unknown (Promotional) Roman Flugel, Audion Geht's Krand Mix, Geht's Noch, Superstar The Backlash, Alex Smok's Pervy Rub, Sex Games, Suprise Gadgets, Take Me Away, Unleash Maetrik, Utilizame, Casi Profundo, Treibstoff Mix By Ben Long (Potential Recordingz/Space Djz/London) Tracklisting Not Available. --- The Vault airs every Monday night from 10:30 pm until 12:30 am (22:30 to 00:30 US Eastern Time = GMT -5:00) on 88.1 FM WESU. The station's 1500 watt signal can be heard from as far north as Springfield, MA to as far south as Long Island, NY. WESU also broadcasts via the internet. Visit the station's website www.wesufm.org for the details. In addition to hosting this radio program, I am a freelance DJ and occasionally write record reviews. I welcome any questions, suggestions, or comments. Please feel free to reply to this message or visit my website, www.antonbanks.com, for more information. *** I appreciate all promotional music sent to me and will never sell any of it online or anywhere else. All promotional material sent to me is aired on my show as well as used in my DJ sets when I play out. I respect your privacy. Reply to this message with the word "remove" in the subject to stop receiving these mailings.
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'SBEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
>you havent answered the question! you still have people making money off of the artists despite not having done anything. i cant hahaha what they did is they bought the record!! its called an investment! many things can appreciate in value! they're not making money "off the artist" which i take it you mean as cutting the artist out of money they should be getting. the artist got the money they were owed. either the seller bought the record while the record was in print, in a manner that the money travelled down the line from shop to distrib to label to artist -- or somebody along the line did, if you're buying it used in a record store. >see how this is justified by the demand but bootlegging by demand isnt. either way you have someone who had nothing to do with the record being made making money. damn is this really that difficult for you? price is justified by supply and demand. thats it. bootleg is justified by nothing because it is illegal theft. somebody selling a rare record has something to do with the record -- they bought it -- if they bought it new, their money even travelled down the line to the artist (hopefully). and it's legally theirs. you can build a house and sell it to someone; when they sell it years later, and the house has appreciated in value, it doesnt mean you are owed anything. the whole thing went down nice and legal and its all done see. bootleggers have nothing to do with the record tho, yes -- thay have no legal right to do what they do. see like laws and property and the bigger economic picture have a lot to do with this. stop philosophizing you dreamer
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'SBEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
-- Original Message -- From: "J.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >you got it backwards. collectors are who buy the records, and >thus who set the price -- auctions are great for this reason! a >record is worth as much as somebody will pay for it. literally. >that is the market value. if you are buying something flat-out >with a pricetag on it, its worth it to you, that's the value, you >cant complain. if its not worth it to you, dont buy it. you just >dont want it bad enough, tough luck! you havent answered the question! you still have people making money off of the artists despite not having done anything. i cant see how this is justified by the demand but bootlegging by demand isnt. either way you have someone who had nothing to do with the record being made making money. just like i dont buy many bootlegs, i dont pay money to collectors for many records either. i want the artists to get my $$$, no one else. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
>what exactly has a collecter done to deserve the $$$ they charge for "rare" records? you got it backwards. collectors are who buy the records, and thus who set the price -- auctions are great for this reason! a record is worth as much as somebody will pay for it. literally. that is the market value. if you are buying something flat-out with a pricetag on it, its worth it to you, that's the value, you cant complain. if its not worth it to you, dont buy it. you just dont want it bad enough, tough luck!
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
>so here's whats really interesting to me. i know how the economics of pressing records works, it usually requires selling a pretty large amount of records before you break even, and thats even when youre using tracks that you arent paying the artist for. since these guys need to pay for the mastering and plating and sh*t, are they really making much if any money? and if youre bootlegging and not making money, is that as "criminal"? especially if youre going to the lengths that HTFR (if theyre definitely the ones at fault here..) and having color sleeves and whatnot made, you really cant be making too much profit. how much money thay make is pretty irrelevant, and again is more round-about thinking to obscure the basic crime. it's the theft thats criminal, how much money they make just relates to how much compensation might be due the legal owners of this stuff, but its not even that simple. there are all sorts of other concerns you could say are equally important, for instance, the mere fact that these crappy pressings are out there will greatly diminish the commercial viability of a legit repress. case in point -- that secret history comp on new religion. it's beautiful. it's legit. but when it came out, hardly a disco freak i knew got excited, because they'd already gotten boots of most of the tracks.. >a thought occured to me. perhaps these artists/label owners arent aware of the level of demand for certain (especially older) things? a quick glance through discogs would probably help them out, but who knows if they do that? its entirely possible that ohhh 120 people on discogs want this, it's sh:t hot! hahaha!! i think you greatly overestimate the demand. comps, especially comps with big names, are not cheap!! these guys all deserve (and EXPECT) decent paychecks for their involvement. there would have to be pretty huge demand to put out a comp with names that big, and the double vinyl, full color art, i'd say you'd be wanting to shoot for like 5000 copies sold. i bet alex could say a word or two on how easy it is to put together a comp with names like that. speaking of, i am infinitely more excited about the upcoming A.R.T. comp than a virtual sex reissue. >youve used pretty big samples before, id hope you wouldnt even care about things like that. big? like 2 beats long big? sorry to defend my stupid sh:t, but the closest thing i've done to a re-edit is the one that samples jones girls, a voc sample 2 beats long, it's still all rearranged and cutup. i do care about things like that, i consider it a copout/ripoff to use samples any longer than that! not that ripoff's cant be great! >all i know is that im more than happy to pay more money for things from artists i really like. i know some people arent into that, i'm willing to too, rarely, but i'm still like scratching my head like uhh whats the deal man? i think it's a bit of a ego approach, putting the wagon before the horse, whats to stop everybody from doing that..ohh but this is some really special sh:t, 19.99!! eventually all records will cost that, the effect is circular, manufacturing costs will go up, suddenly a whole lot less people will be able to put records out unless they can hype themselves up and compete for those andy j's! there is a standard wholesale cost, let the listener judge the value...set some copies aside for later to sell on eBay/gemm if you are so sure they're gonna be hot...i smell quick bux!
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
-- Original Message -- From: "J.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >geez none of this makes a lick of sense to me tom. >wonkwonkwahwonkwonk charlie brown teacher stylez. selling rare >records that you legally own, where the demanding collector sets >the price, is worse than ripping off somebody's music? huh??? >well, nevermind anyways, i dont even want an explanation, i think >you still got some of last weekend in your system ! what exactly has a collecter done to deserve the $$$ they charge for "rare" records? tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
geez none of this makes a lick of sense to me tom. wonkwonkwahwonkwonk charlie brown teacher stylez. selling rare records that you legally own, where the demanding collector sets the price, is worse than ripping off somebody's music? huh??? well, nevermind anyways, i dont even want an explanation, i think you still got some of last weekend in your system ! -Original Message- From: "Thomas D. Cox, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Jun 4, 2005 12:25 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS - Original Message -- From: robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >a bit strongly put tom but i think you'd be hard pressed to find >anyone, who buys the kind of music we do, that hasn't *ever* bought a >bootleg. (as well as copying the occasional cd, tape etc etc. >everyone's done it.) i know. but thats what i find funny. everyone is up in arms about how bad bootlegging is until something they really want gets booted. and unless youre the most serious hardcore collecter (no one im friends with or that ive talked to!) who only wants originals, theres always going to be some record that someone wants. i feel like most people who would be buying bootlegs are people trying to play them out. and most people deejaying that i know lose crazy money on it already without having to shell out crazy $$$ to collectors for certain very difficult to obtain records. to be entirely honest, i find the people who charge crazy money for second hand records to be as or more vile than the bootleggers. >when you look at the situation without trying to find a side to sit on >it has to be said that it's impossible to justify bootlegs without >pulling the economic excuse, which just isn't a valid one. honestly, if things were available all the time i dont think anyone would ever buy a bootleg! most people inherently want to give the artists their money. >that said, at least there's a positive side to this (from a record >buying point of view). we've seen a lot of legit rereleases from labels >like planet e and artists licensing to properly done compilations that >could have possibly have been encouraged by the fact that demand for >bootlegs exists. and that is why im not entirely against the idea of bootlegging despite the fact that i own very very few bootlegs. tom andythepooh.com
(313) Re: virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED, BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
Ok, I understand what y'all are saying. And I have to conclude that bootlegging is not ok. But still, I don't regret buying the Virtual Sex bootleg. Because, as I said: Carl Craig, Kenny Larkin, Stacey Pullen, Kirk Degiorgio and Derrick May received money from me in the past and will receive money from me in the future. I spend A LOT OF MONEY on these guys. So I don't have to feel sorry for buying a bootleg now and then. Because there are 3 options: 1) Buying a legit copy of Virtual Sex on eBay -> the artists don't get paid 2) Downloading it or putting in on tape -> the artists don't get paid 3) Leave it -> the artists... well... they don't get paid Bootlegging is a reality and downloading is a reality... I did bought a bootleg and yes I DO download. But every freakin' cent that enters my pocket will sure go to their new and legal records... I'm not making up an excuse.
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
- Original Message -- From: robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >a bit strongly put tom but i think you'd be hard pressed to find >anyone, who buys the kind of music we do, that hasn't *ever* bought a >bootleg. (as well as copying the occasional cd, tape etc etc. >everyone's done it.) i know. but thats what i find funny. everyone is up in arms about how bad bootlegging is until something they really want gets booted. and unless youre the most serious hardcore collecter (no one im friends with or that ive talked to!) who only wants originals, theres always going to be some record that someone wants. i feel like most people who would be buying bootlegs are people trying to play them out. and most people deejaying that i know lose crazy money on it already without having to shell out crazy $$$ to collectors for certain very difficult to obtain records. to be entirely honest, i find the people who charge crazy money for second hand records to be as or more vile than the bootleggers. >when you look at the situation without trying to find a side to sit on >it has to be said that it's impossible to justify bootlegs without >pulling the economic excuse, which just isn't a valid one. honestly, if things were available all the time i dont think anyone would ever buy a bootleg! most people inherently want to give the artists their money. >that said, at least there's a positive side to this (from a record >buying point of view). we've seen a lot of legit rereleases from labels >like planet e and artists licensing to properly done compilations that >could have possibly have been encouraged by the fact that demand for >bootlegs exists. and that is why im not entirely against the idea of bootlegging despite the fact that i own very very few bootlegs. tom andythepooh.com
(313) picked up a few records..and some demf 06 babbling
didnt get to shop nearly as much as i wanted to in detroit, didnt even hit submerge, or even the s.i.d. tent, so hectic, but i managed to grab really quick from the recordtime tent... aquanauts - titanic -- a-side is kinda weak, but man-o-war is GREAT!!! definitely a sound descended from drexciya, i love how the song changes towards the end (nice acid line!)...reminds me back to the quality ur high-tech funk circa interstellar fugitives (as does s2's slide). the b2 beat track aint bad either. shake - 5% solution -- hadnt heard this in ages, wow, sounds better than ever!! so fresh and creative and years and years ahead of its time. mindless entertainment is betetr than most current minimal techno, or at least stands alongside the best. and day of reckoning, those dark chords, oh man... los hermanos - on another level 2lp -- havent listened yet, pumped tho...a friend who is pretty picky and hardly buys techno said one of the cuts blew him totally away, that sold me. model 500 - technicolor -- after hearing juan play it live, i had to go buy it, one of those metroplexes i never bought cus its just 3 very similar versions of one track, but yeah must have!! and i bought a couple of my favorite metroplexes for my girl...hehe and as soon as i saw legowelt in detroit he handed me this: living room - room service 2lp -- we were both searching for it awhile ago and now he's found us both copiesbeautiful and eclectic album from orlando voorn, i love it to death, have had it on cd for awhile (thanks to Jason B!!) and craving it on vinyl ever since!! i think its got a few different tracks from the cd version havent been able to properly check yet i am really sad i didnt make it to s.i.d. and pick up all those recent orlando's. i also wish he'd played the festival again, his set last year was white hot, bring him back!! orlando live! i'm already pumped for next year, and putting pennies in a jar labelled "bring a pikey to detroit fund". i wanna see kamal and jason b there next year too! and stu! and now they've done the bunker/clone things stage twice, it'd sure be nice to see a delsin/rh one...i want nwaq and m>o>s and the seamus!! and dynarec! yoav b! shed! aarvdark again! kid sublime! gimme gimme too much sugar in my cheerios sorry jt
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
Yeah... what he said :) I am never said that i couldn't understand why people bought a bootleg. I have bootlegs for the same reason JT has them. I find it just really annoying when people turn the whole thing about bootlegging around and blaming the fact that there are bootlegs on the artists! I understand why people buy bootlegs but don't try and make it a good thing because in the end it is just common theft. On 4-jun-2005, at 17:36, J.T. wrote: yes! hehe i've got a couple bootlegs that i didnt know were bootlegs at the time...and two that i absolutely did (the one with shari vari, cellophane, charlie, patrick richard, and the cloud one album bootleg from a few years back)...boots are never really excusable, but it is at least slightly more respectable when somebody tosses out a boot and doesnt disguise it as a boot (white labels, little or no info..ghetTTttoo stylez)...rather than tossing it out and presenting it like the genuine article as htfr (thats not just bootlegging, that's fraud/counterfeiting!!), or as some sort of official product (automan, etc). my explanation for occasionally buying a boot: none, i am BAD...cloud one bootleg, ohhh i couldnt resist, i am weakbut surely the bootleggers are more to blame than the consumers...it's just all these twisted ethics people are trying to excuse themselves with, or as kamal eloquently put it, these feelings of ENTITLEMENT to somebody else's property, that are shockingface it you are bad...very naughty...but yes, nowhere near as criminal as the bootleggers. i consider illegal re-edits/remixes a slightly different animal...it still aint right, but it's a little less wrong... i still cant get over the price of ugly edits...or understand it... -Original Message- From: "Thomas D. Cox, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Jun 4, 2005 10:52 AM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS i know for a fact that people on here who own small electronic labels have bought bootlegs. how do you explain that? are they just assh*les? tom -- Original Message -- From: Klaas-Jan Jongsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 13:54:40 +0200 No it's not... it is not OK to bootleg records in the first place. The music is the intellectual property of the writer/producer, they have the rights to decide what is going to happen with there music, not someone who has absolutely no involvement in his music whatsoever. Excuses like 'well he released the record once but i can't find it so bootlegs are ok' are not valid...ever. All of the artists on Virtual Sex are still very much alive but guess what... no one asked them and no-one will pay them sh*t. If you think you want to release a track from an artist go and ask his permission to do so, if he says no, respect that choice because it is his music, he made it and it is not some public property. But guess what bootleggers don't do that because a) they are way to lazy for this or b) to greedy or probably a combination of these 2. Also don't come-up with excuses like well they should have taken care that there records are still available but apparentlyyou never tried to run a small independent record label. Most record labels are very short on cash, and taking a gamble on releasing a record is a big one, they might loose lots of money if they sell just 200 instead of 500 or whatever you invested. So picture this you are an artist and you have to choose between releasing some exciting new material or some classic you made 10 years ago... what would you do? So now can we quit this discussion on bootlegs and stop making up excuses to tell that bootlegs are good because they aren't. Bootlegging it just greedy... if you really want to buy them that is fine but don't come to me telling me that bootlegging is a good thing. KJ On 4-jun-2005, at 13:26, Annie Wiggins wrote: Hi This is my first message so go easy on me ;) I think its ok to bootleg tunes as long as they are sold as bootlegs are not made to look like the originals. Supplying to demand is fine - many people didn�t get or weren�t around when gems like virtual sex was released. Therefore giving people the chance to hear / play some of these tracks is fine by me - but blatantly ripping off the artwork or label is wrong. The 'new' pheerce citi 004 which htfr have been selling on their site is one of the examples where bootlegging has gone to new extremes - putting out releases on labels that don�t even exist. -Original Message- From: z66 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 June 2005 03:05 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS different musik, different qualities.. well, at least it makes these producers even with other pr
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEENBOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
- Original Message -- From: "J.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >yes! >hehe ha. as long as we're all on the same page here ;) >boots are never really excusable, but it is at least slightly >more respectable when somebody tosses out a boot and doesnt >disguise it as a boot (white labels, little or no >info..ghetTTttoo stylez)...rather than tossing it out and >presenting it like the genuine article as htfr (thats not just >bootlegging, that's fraud/counterfeiting!!), or as some sort of >official product (automan, etc). this is probably true. what about those ballroom records? they mention weird edit names on the labels but im not sure if theyre really any different. so here's whats really interesting to me. i know how the economics of pressing records works, it usually requires selling a pretty large amount of records before you break even, and thats even when youre using tracks that you arent paying the artist for. since these guys need to pay for the mastering and plating and sh*t, are they really making much if any money? and if youre bootlegging and not making money, is that as "criminal"? especially if youre going to the lengths that HTFR (if theyre definitely the ones at fault here..) and having color sleeves and whatnot made, you really cant be making too much profit. >my explanation for occasionally buying a boot: none, i am >BAD...cloud one bootleg, ohhh i couldnt resist, i am weak yeah, actually thats one that i would buy as well. >but surely the bootleggers are more to blame than the >consumers...it's just all these twisted ethics people are trying >to excuse themselves with, or as kamal eloquently put it, these >feelings of ENTITLEMENT to somebody else's property, that are >shockingface it you are bad...very naughty...but yes, nowhere >near as criminal as the bootleggers. a thought occured to me. perhaps these artists/label owners arent aware of the level of demand for certain (especially older) things? a quick glance through discogs would probably help them out, but who knows if they do that? its entirely possible that they just have no idea what is in demand and thats why theyre not repressing. perhaps the bootleggers have a better ear to the ground and thats why theyre always one step ahead of the legit represses. bootlegging has been around as long as recorded music has, its part of the culture, like it or not. id like to hope at least some good comes of it. >i consider illegal re-edits/remixes a slightly different >animal...it still aint right, but it's a little less wrong... youve used pretty big samples before, id hope you wouldnt even care about things like that. >i still cant get over the price of ugly edits...or understand >it... all i know is that im more than happy to pay more money for things from artists i really like. i know some people arent into that, but for me theres so few modern people consistantly putting out the bomb sh*t that the premium doesnt bother me so much. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
yes! hehe i've got a couple bootlegs that i didnt know were bootlegs at the time...and two that i absolutely did (the one with shari vari, cellophane, charlie, patrick richard, and the cloud one album bootleg from a few years back)...boots are never really excusable, but it is at least slightly more respectable when somebody tosses out a boot and doesnt disguise it as a boot (white labels, little or no info..ghetTTttoo stylez)...rather than tossing it out and presenting it like the genuine article as htfr (thats not just bootlegging, that's fraud/counterfeiting!!), or as some sort of official product (automan, etc). my explanation for occasionally buying a boot: none, i am BAD...cloud one bootleg, ohhh i couldnt resist, i am weakbut surely the bootleggers are more to blame than the consumers...it's just all these twisted ethics people are trying to excuse themselves with, or as kamal eloquently put it, these feelings of ENTITLEMENT to somebody else's property, that are shockingface it you are bad...very naughty...but yes, nowhere near as criminal as the bootleggers. i consider illegal re-edits/remixes a slightly different animal...it still aint right, but it's a little less wrong... i still cant get over the price of ugly edits...or understand it... -Original Message- From: "Thomas D. Cox, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Jun 4, 2005 10:52 AM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS i know for a fact that people on here who own small electronic labels have bought bootlegs. how do you explain that? are they just assh*les? tom -- Original Message -- From: Klaas-Jan Jongsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 13:54:40 +0200 >No it's not... it is not OK to bootleg records in the first place. >The music is the intellectual property of the writer/producer, they >have the rights to decide what is going to happen with there music, >not someone who has absolutely no involvement in his music whatsoever. > >Excuses like 'well he released the record once but i can't find it so >bootlegs are ok' are not valid...ever. All of the artists on Virtual >Sex are still very much alive but guess what... no one asked them and >no-one will pay them sh*t. If you think you want to release a track >from an artist go and ask his permission to do so, if he says no, >respect that choice because it is his music, he made it and it is not >some public property. But guess what bootleggers don't do that >because a) they are way to lazy for this or b) to greedy or probably >a combination of these 2. > >Also don't come-up with excuses like well they should have taken care >that there records are still available but apparentlyyou never tried >to run a small independent record label. Most record labels are very >short on cash, and taking a gamble on releasing a record is a big >one, they might loose lots of money if they sell just 200 instead of >500 or whatever you invested. So picture this you are an artist and >you have to choose between releasing some exciting new material or >some classic you made 10 years ago... what would you do? > >So now can we quit this discussion on bootlegs and stop making up >excuses to tell that bootlegs are good because they aren't. >Bootlegging it just greedy... if you really want to buy them that is >fine but don't come to me telling me that bootlegging is a good thing. > >KJ > > > >On 4-jun-2005, at 13:26, Annie Wiggins wrote: > > > >> Hi >> >> This is my first message so go easy on me ;) >> >> I think its ok to bootleg tunes as long as they are sold as >> bootlegs are not >> made to look like the originals. Supplying to demand is fine - >> many people >> didn�t get or weren�t around when gems like virtual sex was released. >> Therefore giving people the chance to hear / play some of these >> tracks is >> fine by me - but blatantly ripping off the artwork or label is >> wrong. The >> 'new' pheerce citi 004 which htfr have been selling on their site >> is one of >> the examples where bootlegging has gone to new extremes - putting out >> releases on labels that don�t even exist. >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: z66 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 04 June 2005 03:05 >> To: 313@hyperreal.org >> Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN >> BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS >> >> >> different musik, different qualities.. >> >> well, at least it makes these producers even with other producers of >> today [who might not been around that time]. in any case, i'm still >> being amazed, how much of good musik is being released every year.. >> just >> like others, i use labels and names as a reference point, but it >> always >> leads me to new, unknown names + every year i keep discovering gems >> i've >> missed >> >> i can well understand hunting classics which are unique for both that >> and this time, yet what i'
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
a bit strongly put tom but i think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone, who buys the kind of music we do, that hasn't *ever* bought a bootleg. (as well as copying the occasional cd, tape etc etc. everyone's done it.) when you look at the situation without trying to find a side to sit on it has to be said that it's impossible to justify bootlegs without pulling the economic excuse, which just isn't a valid one. that said, at least there's a positive side to this (from a record buying point of view). we've seen a lot of legit rereleases from labels like planet e and artists licensing to properly done compilations that could have possibly have been encouraged by the fact that demand for bootlegs exists. robin... On 4 Jun 2005, at 15:52, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: i know for a fact that people on here who own small electronic labels have bought bootlegs. how do you explain that? are they just assh*les? tom -- Original Message -- From: Klaas-Jan Jongsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 13:54:40 +0200 No it's not... it is not OK to bootleg records in the first place. The music is the intellectual property of the writer/producer, they have the rights to decide what is going to happen with there music, not someone who has absolutely no involvement in his music whatsoever. Excuses like 'well he released the record once but i can't find it so bootlegs are ok' are not valid...ever. All of the artists on Virtual Sex are still very much alive but guess what... no one asked them and no-one will pay them sh*t. If you think you want to release a track from an artist go and ask his permission to do so, if he says no, respect that choice because it is his music, he made it and it is not some public property. But guess what bootleggers don't do that because a) they are way to lazy for this or b) to greedy or probably a combination of these 2. Also don't come-up with excuses like well they should have taken care that there records are still available but apparentlyyou never tried to run a small independent record label. Most record labels are very short on cash, and taking a gamble on releasing a record is a big one, they might loose lots of money if they sell just 200 instead of 500 or whatever you invested. So picture this you are an artist and you have to choose between releasing some exciting new material or some classic you made 10 years ago... what would you do? So now can we quit this discussion on bootlegs and stop making up excuses to tell that bootlegs are good because they aren't. Bootlegging it just greedy... if you really want to buy them that is fine but don't come to me telling me that bootlegging is a good thing.
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
i know for a fact that people on here who own small electronic labels have bought bootlegs. how do you explain that? are they just assh*les? tom -- Original Message -- From: Klaas-Jan Jongsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 13:54:40 +0200 >No it's not... it is not OK to bootleg records in the first place. >The music is the intellectual property of the writer/producer, they >have the rights to decide what is going to happen with there music, >not someone who has absolutely no involvement in his music whatsoever. > >Excuses like 'well he released the record once but i can't find it so >bootlegs are ok' are not valid...ever. All of the artists on Virtual >Sex are still very much alive but guess what... no one asked them and >no-one will pay them sh*t. If you think you want to release a track >from an artist go and ask his permission to do so, if he says no, >respect that choice because it is his music, he made it and it is not >some public property. But guess what bootleggers don't do that >because a) they are way to lazy for this or b) to greedy or probably >a combination of these 2. > >Also don't come-up with excuses like well they should have taken care >that there records are still available but apparentlyyou never tried >to run a small independent record label. Most record labels are very >short on cash, and taking a gamble on releasing a record is a big >one, they might loose lots of money if they sell just 200 instead of >500 or whatever you invested. So picture this you are an artist and >you have to choose between releasing some exciting new material or >some classic you made 10 years ago... what would you do? > >So now can we quit this discussion on bootlegs and stop making up >excuses to tell that bootlegs are good because they aren't. >Bootlegging it just greedy... if you really want to buy them that is >fine but don't come to me telling me that bootlegging is a good thing. > >KJ > > > >On 4-jun-2005, at 13:26, Annie Wiggins wrote: > > > >> Hi >> >> This is my first message so go easy on me ;) >> >> I think its ok to bootleg tunes as long as they are sold as >> bootlegs are not >> made to look like the originals. Supplying to demand is fine - >> many people >> didnt get or werent around when gems like virtual sex was released. >> Therefore giving people the chance to hear / play some of these >> tracks is >> fine by me - but blatantly ripping off the artwork or label is >> wrong. The >> 'new' pheerce citi 004 which htfr have been selling on their site >> is one of >> the examples where bootlegging has gone to new extremes - putting out >> releases on labels that dont even exist. >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: z66 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 04 June 2005 03:05 >> To: 313@hyperreal.org >> Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN >> BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS >> >> >> different musik, different qualities.. >> >> well, at least it makes these producers even with other producers of >> today [who might not been around that time]. in any case, i'm still >> being amazed, how much of good musik is being released every year.. >> just >> like others, i use labels and names as a reference point, but it >> always >> leads me to new, unknown names + every year i keep discovering gems >> i've >> missed >> >> i can well understand hunting classics which are unique for both that >> and this time, yet what i'm trying to say is: there's a supply but the >> demand seems to be lost in time >> >> >> ///Z >> >> >> >> Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: >> >> >> >>> -- Original Message -- >>> From: z66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >>> >>> ..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new musik rather than being stick to your defined classics >>> >>> >>> if thats the case, maybe they should work on making better new music! >>> >>> tom >>> >>> >>> andythepooh.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005 >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005 >> >> >> >> >> > > > > andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
No it's not... it is not OK to bootleg records in the first place. The music is the intellectual property of the writer/producer, they have the rights to decide what is going to happen with there music, not someone who has absolutely no involvement in his music whatsoever. Excuses like 'well he released the record once but i can't find it so bootlegs are ok' are not valid...ever. All of the artists on Virtual Sex are still very much alive but guess what... no one asked them and no-one will pay them sh*t. If you think you want to release a track from an artist go and ask his permission to do so, if he says no, respect that choice because it is his music, he made it and it is not some public property. But guess what bootleggers don't do that because a) they are way to lazy for this or b) to greedy or probably a combination of these 2. Also don't come-up with excuses like well they should have taken care that there records are still available but apparentlyyou never tried to run a small independent record label. Most record labels are very short on cash, and taking a gamble on releasing a record is a big one, they might loose lots of money if they sell just 200 instead of 500 or whatever you invested. So picture this you are an artist and you have to choose between releasing some exciting new material or some classic you made 10 years ago... what would you do? So now can we quit this discussion on bootlegs and stop making up excuses to tell that bootlegs are good because they aren't. Bootlegging it just greedy... if you really want to buy them that is fine but don't come to me telling me that bootlegging is a good thing. KJ On 4-jun-2005, at 13:26, Annie Wiggins wrote: Hi This is my first message so go easy on me ;) I think its ok to bootleg tunes as long as they are sold as bootlegs are not made to look like the originals. Supplying to demand is fine - many people didn’t get or weren’t around when gems like virtual sex was released. Therefore giving people the chance to hear / play some of these tracks is fine by me - but blatantly ripping off the artwork or label is wrong. The 'new' pheerce citi 004 which htfr have been selling on their site is one of the examples where bootlegging has gone to new extremes - putting out releases on labels that don’t even exist. -Original Message- From: z66 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 June 2005 03:05 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS different musik, different qualities.. well, at least it makes these producers even with other producers of today [who might not been around that time]. in any case, i'm still being amazed, how much of good musik is being released every year.. just like others, i use labels and names as a reference point, but it always leads me to new, unknown names + every year i keep discovering gems i've missed i can well understand hunting classics which are unique for both that and this time, yet what i'm trying to say is: there's a supply but the demand seems to be lost in time ///Z Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: -- Original Message -- From: z66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new musik rather than being stick to your defined classics if thats the case, maybe they should work on making better new music! tom andythepooh.com -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005
RE: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
Hi This is my first message so go easy on me ;) I think its ok to bootleg tunes as long as they are sold as bootlegs are not made to look like the originals. Supplying to demand is fine - many people didn’t get or weren’t around when gems like virtual sex was released. Therefore giving people the chance to hear / play some of these tracks is fine by me - but blatantly ripping off the artwork or label is wrong. The 'new' pheerce citi 004 which htfr have been selling on their site is one of the examples where bootlegging has gone to new extremes - putting out releases on labels that don’t even exist. -Original Message- From: z66 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 June 2005 03:05 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS different musik, different qualities.. well, at least it makes these producers even with other producers of today [who might not been around that time]. in any case, i'm still being amazed, how much of good musik is being released every year.. just like others, i use labels and names as a reference point, but it always leads me to new, unknown names + every year i keep discovering gems i've missed i can well understand hunting classics which are unique for both that and this time, yet what i'm trying to say is: there's a supply but the demand seems to be lost in time ///Z Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: > -- Original Message -- > From: z66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new >>musik rather than being stick to your defined classics > > > if thats the case, maybe they should work on making better new music! > > tom > > > andythepooh.com > > > > > > -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005
Re: (313) Any word on the financial situation?
-- Original Message -- From: "Dan Bean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >BTW. have to say how nice it was to meet 313 peeps Fred, Kent, Dennis, Greg and Tom. Sorry >I missed others such as Diana (apparently we were at Foran's at the same time, maybe next >year?). yeah it was good to meet you too, dan, despite my generally high intoxication level the entire weekend which caused me to probably look confused every time i ran into you. the intoxication was the reason i missed the meetup at forans as well ;) hopefully next year theyll be more on the ball and ill get to meet more worldwide cats. im sick of seeing kent, david, and fred all the time ;P seriously though, those dudes are everywhere i am all the time. so obviously theyve got the good taste in music tom andythepooh.com
RE: (313) EA afterparty Sunday
Hi Jodie, It was a pretty sweet setup. The graffiti on the wooden fence was still there, as well as the walls. The "front room" was facing the main door and in the main room the setup was pointing at the large wall on the south side. It was strange that the Visuals were displayed over the entire length of the large wall and a smaller wall. I wish I would have taken pics now.. :) I'm sure someone did. Sound system was ace, but it that concrete warehouse reverb that we all know and love. There were some round tables in the back but no chairs were put out..no one to sit in them. It looked like a ghost town, it was definitely a minimal setup. Having less than 50 people there, well you can imagine.. I have a feeling that this space will be used very soon by someone...would be cool to be there with ton of people in attendance. Peace, Alex "Svagr, Jodie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 06/03/2005 08:28 AM To <313@hyperreal.org> cc Subject RE: (313) EA afterparty Sunday can someone tell me how they did the set-up for the Easterm Market venue this year? A bit curious... heard the sound system was ace, but what else did they do to the place? Can't help my curiostiy... spent my whole summer there last year... aaahh... nostalgia...amazing venue and depending how the set-up is, it can either look really cool, or really empty... last years fest, the place looked cool, interactive with huge games, frisbee discus golf, walls to spray graffiti... even though we had 3000+ people walk through the door, the size of the place still overwhelmed the numbers. Anyways... my LOVE for that venue, my home away from home for a really good summer...makes me REALLY curious to hear how the place looked... how was the set-up done? Design, lights, sound, seating, where did they have people enter, did they open up the back outside area?... anything to form a picture in my head... gosh... I feel like a parent wanting to know how my kid is doing...lol JoD -Original Message- From: /0 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 June 2005 18:54 To: Chana Goodman; 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) EA afterparty Sunday info on this at detroitluv.com - Original Message - From: "Chana Goodman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Chana Goodman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 1:52 PM Subject: (313) EA afterparty Sunday > Maan what a Bumer > > I left when Scan 7 left but had to live through > Ultradyne and DJ digital fleeing, heart wrenching. So > I guess my big question is...did Rob Hood end up > performing. Please say no... > > heard the promoter might have lost thousands, ouch. I > did not ask for my money back. > > chana
Re: (313) Any word on the financial situation?
Yeah in regards to this subject I was bummed--I intended to go to the Foran's GT but decided I should save myself up; I didn't officially have a place to stay & had to drive out from Lansing, plus I had two fairly sizable performances Saturday & Sunday night, both scheduled to go until the sun comes up. As it turns out, the show saturday night ended "early" at 4:30am, which I was happy & unhappy about all at the same time. Beh. Dan Bean wrote: <>BTW. have to say how nice it was to meet 313 peeps Fred, Kent, Dennis, Greg and Tom. Sorry I missed others such as Diana (apparently we were at Foran's at the same time, maybe next year?).
Re: (313) Any word on the financial situation?
According to the official press release it was a success, the festival organisers seem to be pretty pleased with how it's gone. Not much bitching or drama this year either. People seemed to be getting paid without any problems as well. BTW. have to say how nice it was to meet 313 peeps Fred, Kent, Dennis, Greg and Tom. Sorry I missed others such as Diana (apparently we were at Foran's at the same time, maybe next year?). Can't add much to the excellent reports already submitted, but would add that it was my first trip to Detroit (and the USA for that matter) and I was blown away by how friendly and hospitable the people of Detroit are. I'm not going to namedrop anyone in particular, but I met quite a few of the originators and leading figures of Detroit music and was impressed by how friendly and down to earth they were. Can't wait for next year! You wrote: > I was just wondering how they did this year. I haven't heard anything > yet. Did people get paid? >
Re: (313) Any word on the financial situation?
sorry not meant for the list - Original Message - From: "/0" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Thorin Teague" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 10:35 PM Subject: Re: (313) Any word on the financial situation? I got fat paid, foo - Original Message - From: "Thorin Teague" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 10:32 PM Subject: (313) Any word on the financial situation? I was just wondering how they did this year. I haven't heard anything yet. Did people get paid?
Re: (313) Any word on the financial situation?
I got fat paid, foo - Original Message - From: "Thorin Teague" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 10:32 PM Subject: (313) Any word on the financial situation? I was just wondering how they did this year. I haven't heard anything yet. Did people get paid?
(313) Any word on the financial situation?
I was just wondering how they did this year. I haven't heard anything yet. Did people get paid?
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
different musik, different qualities.. well, at least it makes these producers even with other producers of today [who might not been around that time]. in any case, i'm still being amazed, how much of good musik is being released every year.. just like others, i use labels and names as a reference point, but it always leads me to new, unknown names + every year i keep discovering gems i've missed i can well understand hunting classics which are unique for both that and this time, yet what i'm trying to say is: there's a supply but the demand seems to be lost in time ///Z Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: -- Original Message -- From: z66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new musik rather than being stick to your defined classics if thats the case, maybe they should work on making better new music! tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
-- Original Message -- From: z66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new >musik rather than being stick to your defined classics if thats the case, maybe they should work on making better new music! tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) drunk as fuxmix
thx! im no dj:) another mix soon! -Joe - Original Message - From: "Stoddard, Kamal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'/0'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 4:34 PM Subject: RE: (313) drunk as fuxmix Lemme just say that the mix section of my itunes is a very selective place because I rarely find mixes that engage me enough to occupy a small space and really sink deep in for the duration (phenomenally short on time , me). As a result, I've only got maybe 6 that I've kept. This mix has not only kept a spot, but has been in heavy rotation. Dope biz. If you didn't run it the first time you're dum. Do it now. Feel hot like paris hilton while you listen. I did. Didn't last though. Kamal K. Stoddard Turner Broadcasting Systems -Original Message- From: /0 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 2:11 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: (313) drunk as fuxmix www.emmrecords.com/~fux/drunk_as_fuxmix__160.mp3 I posted this here months ago but a few people have asked me to make it available again (have to swap stuff out a lot, as I have only 100 megs of webspace to deal with) so i figured I'd repost it to the list too. Im no dj, but I like the music -Joe
Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN BOOTLEGGED, BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS
J.T. wrote: maybe they arent interested in spending their time re-releasing tracks they did a dozen years and feel they've moved beyond, whatever their reason, it's their prerogative and they dont even need any excuse or reason. ..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new musik rather than being stick to your defined classics ///Z
(313) supply and demand
JT> or. ok. our macho cat record sold out and had another 500 orders at least. we want to repress it someday maybe. but we want to do other sh:t right now. um we own that sh:t. we should feel safe in JT> our ownership of it. we are not going to skip whatever else we have planned just because some people out there want it and are impatient. its ours. nobody else tells us what to do with it. that JT> notion is totally ridiculous i cant believe how thickheaded this counter-argument is. property is a pretty basic concept, you're all a bunch of flower sniffing hippies I will sell my copy of the Macho Cat record for . . . one meeelion dollars. Any takers? -bee pee
