CD player to Sonos speakers?

OK - I'll bite :-)
How does buying a CD not support the artist?

Because a CD can be ripped and file shared to hundreds of thousands of others. Not saying you would do that, but the bottom fell out of the CD sales model because hundreds of thousands of others did it.

Come on man that is a ridiculous reply ?

Who on Earth does that? Disgusting behaviour..

An entire generation of music listeners who grew up in the era of Napster, and there is no putting the cork back in the bottle now. Hence why streaming services are actually the only viable model to compensate artists in the digital age (and there are problems with that model too).

And what about streaming precludes you from playing whole albums? I play whole albums all the time. And there are streaming services on Sonos that offer CD quality. Deezer is one. Tidal is another.

I used Napster when it was illegal, I also used to buy a lot of music and still do. Sorry but your attitude stinks. If you love music buy it. End of.

Come on man that is a ridiculous reply ?

Are you saying file sharing of music doesn't exist?


I used Napster when it was illegal, I also used to buy a lot of music and still do. Sorry but your attitude stinks. If you love music buy it. End of.

Artists are finally making money from the streaming model after 2 decades of losing income from file sharing and I'm the bad guy? I don't get it.

I used Napster when it was illegal, I also used to buy a lot of music and still do. Sorry but your attitude stinks. If you love music buy it. End of.

Huh? You just said you used to steal music, but you're happy to judge others because you think they aren't paying enough for their music? Do you know how much an artist gets when you buy a CD from retail, vs directly from the artist at a show, vs ad driven free radio, vs as part of a subscription plan, vs digital streaming rights, vs buying t-shirts and such from the artist sites, vs buying tickets to a live show, vs royalties from any other way? How does how much you love an artist/song translate to how much money the artist should get? Should regular consumers factor in what cut retail and distributors get before an artist is paid?

If you like the CD format and feel like it adequately pays the artist, that's great. Not sure how that then because the standard of how others should support an artist.

As far as CDs not supporting artist because there is no DRM, I can't agree with that. Buying a CD doesn't mean you are going to illegally share it with others. It's only those who are using illegal copies of music that are hurting the artist, or perhaps using a personal license for commercial reasons, etc.

It's going off in the weeds a bit, but even illegal sharing isn't always as damaging as it may appear on the surface. In many cases, the consumer choice was not between getting an illegal copy or a legal copy, but between an illegal copy or nothing at all. I think that's rather evident in the fact that illegal sharing dropped when the price of buying a single dropped from around $3 to $1 (or maybe it was just me).

Come on man that is a ridiculous reply ?

Are you saying file sharing of music doesn't exist?


I used Napster when it was illegal, I also used to buy a lot of music and still do. Sorry but your attitude stinks. If you love music buy it. End of.

Artists are finally making money from the streaming model after 2 decades of losing income from file sharing and I'm the bad guy? I don't get it.
The only artists who profit from streaming are huge pop stars. How are young, less commercial artists supposed to forge a career in music with the streaming model? It leads to bland music.

I used Napster when it was illegal, I also used to buy a lot of music and still do. Sorry but your attitude stinks. If you love music buy it. End of.

Huh? You just said you used to steal music, but you're happy to judge others because you think they aren't paying enough for their music? Do you know how much an artist gets when you buy a CD from retail, vs directly from the artist at a show, vs ad driven free radio, vs as part of a subscription plan, vs digital streaming rights, vs buying t-shirts and such from the artist sites, vs buying tickets to a live show, vs royalties from any other way? How does how much you love an artist/song translate to how much money the artist should get? Should regular consumers factor in what cut retail and distributors get before an artist is paid?

If you like the CD format and feel like it adequately pays the artist, that's great. Not sure how that then because the standard of how others should support an artist.

As far as CDs not supporting artist because there is no DRM, I can't agree with that. Buying a CD doesn't mean you are going to illegally share it with others. It's only those who are using illegal copies of music that are hurting the artist, or perhaps using a personal license for commercial reasons, etc.

It's going off in the weeds a bit, but even illegal sharing isn't always as damaging as it may appear on the surface. In many cases, the consumer choice was not between getting an illegal copy or a legal copy, but between an illegal copy or nothing at all. I think that's rather evident in the fact that illegal sharing dropped when the price of buying a single dropped from around $3 to $1 (or maybe it was just me).

I used Napster 20 years ago to road test music in the same way I use Apple Music now. But if I like an album I buy it, minimum two albums a week. I also go to lots of gigs. But live music beyond the grass roots level is dominated by huge companies like LiveNation who are almost as bad as Spotify. I don’t care what format you buy music in, mp3,wav, flac, cd or vinyl but don’t believe you’re a music fan if you just stream and buy the odd T-shirt.

As far as CDs not supporting artist because there is no DRM, I can't agree with that. Buying a CD doesn't mean you are going to illegally share it with others. It's only those who are using illegal copies of music that are hurting the artist, or perhaps using a personal license for commercial reasons, etc.

It's going off in the weeds a bit, but even illegal sharing isn't always as damaging as it may appear on the surface. In many cases, the consumer choice was not between getting an illegal copy or a legal copy, but between an illegal copy or nothing at all. I think that's rather evident in the fact that illegal sharing dropped when the price of buying a single dropped from around $3 to $1 (or maybe it was just me).
Yes, I've always considered these arguments rather specious, too... I've never been convinced of the claimed extent of harm to artists.

don’t believe you’re a music fan if you just stream
I don't see who gave you the right to decide this for me.

... don’t believe you’re a music fan if you just stream ...
Absolute nonsense. Paid streaming saved the music industry from widespread and rapidly growing illegal music piracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/apr/24/weve-got-more-money-swirling-around-how-streaming-saved-the-music-industry

Yes, I've always considered these arguments rather specious, too... I've never been convinced of the claimed extent of harm to artists.

See the post linked to by pwt above. The income from CD's dropped like a stone after Napster. All those "I wouldn't have bought that CD anyway" and "Napster allows me to sample music that I will then go buy" arguments were nothing but a justification for theft. Very few bought music when they could get it for free, and the sales numbers proved it.