Book In Kazzaa
if you need fake books, go buy them. you are helping destroy what is a fragile jazz ecosystem by passing/selling fake book bootleg cd's and dvd's around.---------------hi to everyone...
i have found that kazza is a good tool to get a lot of material to improve myself.
i want to know what books can be founded in kazzaa in order to look for them.
i have founded:
hal leonard real book
new real book 1 concert
new real book 2 concert
new real book 3 concert
bass real book (not really a real book)
old real book fifth edition
new real book 1 bb
thanks in advance
keep going
chacky
i have found that kazza is a good tool to get a lot of material to improve myself.
i want to know what books can be founded in kazzaa in order to look for them.
i have founded:
hal leonard real book
new real book 1 concert
new real book 2 concert
new real book 3 concert
bass real book (not really a real book)
old real book fifth edition
new real book 1 bb
thanks in advance
keep going
chacky
There are no comments, leave a comment.
you can find most of those books at the local music store where they can be legally bought. it's important to support those books so that the publishers can keep on making great books...
If I'm not back in 24 hours, call the president.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
by Scot Ranney on 10/11/2004, 19:47
there is a bass real book that is really a real book
you can find all those books and more in pdf format on a single bootleg cd. some people sell it for around $15 others just pass around free cd copies.
as i mentioned before, those books are available legally at most music stores (or click on the search books link, top right).
downloading illegal copies on cd or dvd is a great way to cause the publishers of those books to stop publishing them and/or making new ones.
the jazz community needs the support of listeners and students of jazz, so make sure you get legal copies of books and recordings.
it may not seem like much when "it's only me", but when i talked to chuck sher from sher music (publishes the new real books among many other selections), it was quite apparent that he was working on redesigning his business model because of the bootleg copies of sher music books...
it's unfortunate, really, chuck is a fine musician who one day decided to put together a legal fake book. since then his off-stage business has been steadily growing. in addition to making a living, chuck puts that money into music camps, schools, festivals, you name it (and there's not really a lot to go around).
what about me? i actually have one of those cd's of fake books. but except for the "illegal" fake books from the old days (80's :), i also own a hard copy of every legal one that's on the cd. makes it easier for me since i want to support musicians, not copy centers.
ok, that's my lecture for the day, but keep it in mind- it's important.
downloading illegal copies on cd or dvd is a great way to cause the publishers of those books to stop publishing them and/or making new ones.
the jazz community needs the support of listeners and students of jazz, so make sure you get legal copies of books and recordings.
it may not seem like much when "it's only me", but when i talked to chuck sher from sher music (publishes the new real books among many other selections), it was quite apparent that he was working on redesigning his business model because of the bootleg copies of sher music books...
it's unfortunate, really, chuck is a fine musician who one day decided to put together a legal fake book. since then his off-stage business has been steadily growing. in addition to making a living, chuck puts that money into music camps, schools, festivals, you name it (and there's not really a lot to go around).
what about me? i actually have one of those cd's of fake books. but except for the "illegal" fake books from the old days (80's :), i also own a hard copy of every legal one that's on the cd. makes it easier for me since i want to support musicians, not copy centers.
ok, that's my lecture for the day, but keep it in mind- it's important.
If I'm not back in 24 hours, call the president.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
by Scot Ranney on 10/19/2004, 17:42
i'll second that.
it's a good point. this is something that i've becoming more and more aware of recently. i love this music with a passion but if i'm not prepared to pay for things that i think are really useful and beneficial then why should anyone else? this bodes the question of why anyone should bother to produce these products.
it's a vicious circle. i have always been pleased to be able to get something for nothing but recently i have made the decision that if it's something i want and think is good - whether it's a book or a cd or software then i'm going to buy it, even if i know i can get it for free.
we all want jazz to be more popular and let's face it; nothing will encourage people to promote jazz and jazz-related products like the thought of making money. if people record great albums or write great books then they deserve to be paid for it. i will still copy cds and things from my friends, but only if it's something i wouldn't normally want to buy. in the past, i've discovered new artists this way and have then gone on to buy their albums, so even though i have technically stolen their music initially, they have made money out of me that they never would have done otherwise.
check out this for a theory...
in the long run, if we all made the decision to reward good stuff by buying the products we want then i believe that the profile of jazz would increase. people would make more money from their products so record companies and publishers would be prepared to spend more money promoting jazz. more money spent on promotion would mean that more people would get into the music. if more people got into the music then there would be more of a demand and we'd maybe even get a few more gigs out of it - making back the money that we'd spent on the products that we could just have stolen! simple eh?
i know it's never going to happen but i at least am going to do my bit and i would encourage you all to do the same...
let's face it, as i said at the start of this post, if we as jazz players won't support the music then why the hell should anyone else?
barry.
it's a vicious circle. i have always been pleased to be able to get something for nothing but recently i have made the decision that if it's something i want and think is good - whether it's a book or a cd or software then i'm going to buy it, even if i know i can get it for free.
we all want jazz to be more popular and let's face it; nothing will encourage people to promote jazz and jazz-related products like the thought of making money. if people record great albums or write great books then they deserve to be paid for it. i will still copy cds and things from my friends, but only if it's something i wouldn't normally want to buy. in the past, i've discovered new artists this way and have then gone on to buy their albums, so even though i have technically stolen their music initially, they have made money out of me that they never would have done otherwise.
check out this for a theory...
in the long run, if we all made the decision to reward good stuff by buying the products we want then i believe that the profile of jazz would increase. people would make more money from their products so record companies and publishers would be prepared to spend more money promoting jazz. more money spent on promotion would mean that more people would get into the music. if more people got into the music then there would be more of a demand and we'd maybe even get a few more gigs out of it - making back the money that we'd spent on the products that we could just have stolen! simple eh?
i know it's never going to happen but i at least am going to do my bit and i would encourage you all to do the same...
let's face it, as i said at the start of this post, if we as jazz players won't support the music then why the hell should anyone else?
barry.
exactly- the more we support what's going on in our jazz world, the more healthy it will be and eventually, we'll all get more gigs. i like that train of thought :)
If I'm not back in 24 hours, call the president.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
by Scot Ranney on 10/21/2004, 13:17
sorry everybody, i disagree...
i have no moral compunctions whatsoever about downloading so called "copywrite" protected material from the internet for my own personal use. i certainly don't have the cash to purchase everything that catches my interest. even if i did how do i know what i want until i've used it for a while? if i download a book or some software and i find i'm really using it a lot i will go buy it, but this capitalist dogma of squeezing every last time from the working man is bs. if i'm taking your product for free then using it to make mony, say paid gigs or making an album i then turn around and sell then ok i see your point here's your $20. but if i'm just using the fakebook to learn or jam with friend then what's the problem? almost everything sold commercially is sold with an obscene markup. goods are priced, generally, at the most the market will possibly bear, ie the most the guy selling them can possibly squeeze from you, the consumer. *not* at what would be a reasonable and fair price for said goods. another issue is what you're actually getting for free. things obtained for free online are rarely, if ever, exactly the same as what you'd pay for. software, for example, comes with no manuals. ok for some games and light apps but a huge handicap for anyone attempting to use a truly professional work, say autocad or photoshop. the record companies are suing 12 yr old girls for downloading music, but what do you get when you dl an mp3? aside from the total lack of artwork or professional looking cds the actual mp3s are of much worse quality (compressed) than the uncompressed wav files that make up the cd. it's not the same thing, and it all comes down to greed. greed isn't something that gets a lot of press in this country as it's more or less the basis for the economy, but i personally think it's a vice, and one with wide ranging implications and effects on the world at large. if an artist feels they aren't making enough money due to "illegal" download then maybe it's time to go on tour. is it really ok for one disgustingly rich superstar to make money off some album they wrote 20 years ago? what makes them think they no longer have to put in work? as for jazz, i personally don't care how popular it is. the more popular things become the more watered down and diluted the finished product will be, as allowances will be made for the taste of the general population. also, with something like sheet music, it's not like playing off a screen is the most conveinient way to play. any book i used with anything approaching regularity i would have to buy anyway.
sorry for the ranting tone of this post but this subject sets me off. hope nobody's too offended. :)
i have no moral compunctions whatsoever about downloading so called "copywrite" protected material from the internet for my own personal use. i certainly don't have the cash to purchase everything that catches my interest. even if i did how do i know what i want until i've used it for a while? if i download a book or some software and i find i'm really using it a lot i will go buy it, but this capitalist dogma of squeezing every last time from the working man is bs. if i'm taking your product for free then using it to make mony, say paid gigs or making an album i then turn around and sell then ok i see your point here's your $20. but if i'm just using the fakebook to learn or jam with friend then what's the problem? almost everything sold commercially is sold with an obscene markup. goods are priced, generally, at the most the market will possibly bear, ie the most the guy selling them can possibly squeeze from you, the consumer. *not* at what would be a reasonable and fair price for said goods. another issue is what you're actually getting for free. things obtained for free online are rarely, if ever, exactly the same as what you'd pay for. software, for example, comes with no manuals. ok for some games and light apps but a huge handicap for anyone attempting to use a truly professional work, say autocad or photoshop. the record companies are suing 12 yr old girls for downloading music, but what do you get when you dl an mp3? aside from the total lack of artwork or professional looking cds the actual mp3s are of much worse quality (compressed) than the uncompressed wav files that make up the cd. it's not the same thing, and it all comes down to greed. greed isn't something that gets a lot of press in this country as it's more or less the basis for the economy, but i personally think it's a vice, and one with wide ranging implications and effects on the world at large. if an artist feels they aren't making enough money due to "illegal" download then maybe it's time to go on tour. is it really ok for one disgustingly rich superstar to make money off some album they wrote 20 years ago? what makes them think they no longer have to put in work? as for jazz, i personally don't care how popular it is. the more popular things become the more watered down and diluted the finished product will be, as allowances will be made for the taste of the general population. also, with something like sheet music, it's not like playing off a screen is the most conveinient way to play. any book i used with anything approaching regularity i would have to buy anyway.
sorry for the ranting tone of this post but this subject sets me off. hope nobody's too offended. :)
those are basically the same arguments every pirate uses when stealing copyrighted material.
if you're practicing with your friends on music you didn't pay for, and then some day you start playing professionally, don't you think the practice you did with the pirated material helped in any way? of course it did.
hey, if you're of the opinion that if you can get it for free, then why pay, there's nothing i can say to deter you from being a simple thief, but if you're of the opinion that people should be rewarded for hard work, then it's obvious that if you use the book for anything other than a doorstop, you need to pay for it.
i guarantee you'd change your tune if the shoe was on the other foot and it was your stuff being ripped off.
if you're practicing with your friends on music you didn't pay for, and then some day you start playing professionally, don't you think the practice you did with the pirated material helped in any way? of course it did.
hey, if you're of the opinion that if you can get it for free, then why pay, there's nothing i can say to deter you from being a simple thief, but if you're of the opinion that people should be rewarded for hard work, then it's obvious that if you use the book for anything other than a doorstop, you need to pay for it.
i guarantee you'd change your tune if the shoe was on the other foot and it was your stuff being ripped off.
If I'm not back in 24 hours, call the president.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
by Scot Ranney on 10/24/2004, 19:02
thieves steal things. a sequence of 1's and 0's is not the same as a physical item and you won't convince me it is no matter how self righteous you want to get.
i notice you completely ignored the bulk of my points. slinging slurs while adding nothing new to the converation isn't constructive.
i am not a thief just because some unjust laws try to say i am. until clinton passed the net act it was legal to download pretty much anything you weren't trying to make a profit off, including things you would otherwise have bought, like games.
here's how it works:
1. corporations pay lobbyists to get unjust laws passed.
2. the corporate owned media repeats the corporate viewpoint until 99% of the mass population agrees with it.
3. people with no personal stake in it turn on their fellow man and rush to the defense of the corporations.
again, i'm not trying to be rude, but i dislike arguing points i feel should be obvious and self explanatory.
i notice you completely ignored the bulk of my points. slinging slurs while adding nothing new to the converation isn't constructive.
i am not a thief just because some unjust laws try to say i am. until clinton passed the net act it was legal to download pretty much anything you weren't trying to make a profit off, including things you would otherwise have bought, like games.
here's how it works:
1. corporations pay lobbyists to get unjust laws passed.
2. the corporate owned media repeats the corporate viewpoint until 99% of the mass population agrees with it.
3. people with no personal stake in it turn on their fellow man and rush to the defense of the corporations.
again, i'm not trying to be rude, but i dislike arguing points i feel should be obvious and self explanatory.
that doesn't make any sense at all.
autojosh,
the fact is that piracy is theft. simple. downloading a real book is exactly the same as shoving it under your coat and walking out of a shop with it. you say that "a sequence of 1's and 0's is not the same as a physical item and you won't convince me it is no matter how self righteous you want to get." it' s not a question of being self righteous, it's simple logic.
what is the purpose of a real book? - to allow you to obtain the melody and chord changes to songs without having to transcribe them yourself. the illegal downloaded version provides exactly the same benefits.
"it's not like playing off a screen is the most convenient way to play." - well, you can always print it out so it is just the same in all ways. the only difference is the guy that's spent thousands of hours transcribing these tunes gets no reward for his hard work while you reap the benefits of those labours. that's what you are really stealing - the hard work of those guys who produce the book.
you seem to be under the illusion that the jazz industry is full of multi-millionaires heading faceless conglomerates milking the punter for all they're worth to maintain a hedonistic playboy lifestyle. nothing could be further from the truth. take the sher music company who publishes all the new real books. the guy who owns the company is chuck sher and he is also the guy that edits and publishes the books personally. when you steal a real book, you are stealing directly from him - not a faceless corporate empire. there simply isn't a big enough market in jazz for huge corporations to develop and turn into a company the size of mcdonalds or have an enron-esque scandal.
how many jazz artists do you know who make a living purely from performing? there aren't many. for every herbie hancock or keith jarrett who does, there are thousands of really talented players who have to do other things, teaching or some other day job, just to pay the rent. this is detrimental to the quality of the music because they cannot devote as much time to practicing and developing new music because they are spending most of their time doing the day job. if you steal music, you help maintain that situation.
also, many jazz artists - peter erskine for one example, try and distribute their music on their own label. if you steal his music then you are not denying some some high-flying ceo of emi another ferrari, you are stealing directly from the people whose music you are listening to.
the jazz world often only functions because people like the music enough to do things, not for profit, but for love. take someone like manfred eichmann of ecm records. his company does a fantastic job in promoting, and giving a platform to, artists that are not going to be commercially succesful. this company uses a good deal of the money it makes from some of it's top names - like keith jarrett - to finance the recording and publishing of all kinds of people. so even if you said, 'well i can download some jarrett because he's famous and doesn't need my money', you are still reducing the amount of cash that will be available for the development and promotion of new artists. you say that if the music becomes more popular then it becomes diluted and populist but equally, if there is no money available to finance new music, then the only things that will be published are things that will undoubtedly sell - bilge like kenny g and the 'modern jazz' of norah jones.
furthermore, the idea that you are not stealing unless you are making money from that product is ludicrous. does that mean it's o.k. for me to steal a television as long as i'm the only one that watches it? also, does the fact that i didn't manage to get the remote control and the manual mean that it's o.k. because it's not as good as if i'd bought it? these arguments seem ridiculous when applied to solid 'things'. the fact we are talking about computer files doesn't make them any less so.
finally you talk about greed. the greed of the companies, the greed of the media, the greed of the artist and yet;
"i certainly don't have the cash to purchase everything that catches my interest"
wanting everything that catches your interest sounds a bit avaricious to me.
this post is not a personal attack - rather just a rebuttal of what i believe to be erroneous points you made in your original post. you say that;
"people with no personal stake in it turn on their fellow man and rush to the defense of the corporations."
but you see the thing is, i do have a personal stake in it. i am a jazz musician trying to earn a living. i want to work in jazz and when i do, i want to be paid for that work. i want the music to be as widespread and popular as possible because i will be able to work more. i want people to make money from the fruits of their labours so the music, including my own, will be given more attention and promoted more.
by all means download as much as you like, but don't be under any illusion that what your are doing is not stealing because of unjust laws. what you are doing is ripping-off fellow musicians and jazz lovers.
to my mind there is nothing more unjust than that.
the fact is that piracy is theft. simple. downloading a real book is exactly the same as shoving it under your coat and walking out of a shop with it. you say that "a sequence of 1's and 0's is not the same as a physical item and you won't convince me it is no matter how self righteous you want to get." it' s not a question of being self righteous, it's simple logic.
what is the purpose of a real book? - to allow you to obtain the melody and chord changes to songs without having to transcribe them yourself. the illegal downloaded version provides exactly the same benefits.
"it's not like playing off a screen is the most convenient way to play." - well, you can always print it out so it is just the same in all ways. the only difference is the guy that's spent thousands of hours transcribing these tunes gets no reward for his hard work while you reap the benefits of those labours. that's what you are really stealing - the hard work of those guys who produce the book.
you seem to be under the illusion that the jazz industry is full of multi-millionaires heading faceless conglomerates milking the punter for all they're worth to maintain a hedonistic playboy lifestyle. nothing could be further from the truth. take the sher music company who publishes all the new real books. the guy who owns the company is chuck sher and he is also the guy that edits and publishes the books personally. when you steal a real book, you are stealing directly from him - not a faceless corporate empire. there simply isn't a big enough market in jazz for huge corporations to develop and turn into a company the size of mcdonalds or have an enron-esque scandal.
how many jazz artists do you know who make a living purely from performing? there aren't many. for every herbie hancock or keith jarrett who does, there are thousands of really talented players who have to do other things, teaching or some other day job, just to pay the rent. this is detrimental to the quality of the music because they cannot devote as much time to practicing and developing new music because they are spending most of their time doing the day job. if you steal music, you help maintain that situation.
also, many jazz artists - peter erskine for one example, try and distribute their music on their own label. if you steal his music then you are not denying some some high-flying ceo of emi another ferrari, you are stealing directly from the people whose music you are listening to.
the jazz world often only functions because people like the music enough to do things, not for profit, but for love. take someone like manfred eichmann of ecm records. his company does a fantastic job in promoting, and giving a platform to, artists that are not going to be commercially succesful. this company uses a good deal of the money it makes from some of it's top names - like keith jarrett - to finance the recording and publishing of all kinds of people. so even if you said, 'well i can download some jarrett because he's famous and doesn't need my money', you are still reducing the amount of cash that will be available for the development and promotion of new artists. you say that if the music becomes more popular then it becomes diluted and populist but equally, if there is no money available to finance new music, then the only things that will be published are things that will undoubtedly sell - bilge like kenny g and the 'modern jazz' of norah jones.
furthermore, the idea that you are not stealing unless you are making money from that product is ludicrous. does that mean it's o.k. for me to steal a television as long as i'm the only one that watches it? also, does the fact that i didn't manage to get the remote control and the manual mean that it's o.k. because it's not as good as if i'd bought it? these arguments seem ridiculous when applied to solid 'things'. the fact we are talking about computer files doesn't make them any less so.
finally you talk about greed. the greed of the companies, the greed of the media, the greed of the artist and yet;
"i certainly don't have the cash to purchase everything that catches my interest"
wanting everything that catches your interest sounds a bit avaricious to me.
this post is not a personal attack - rather just a rebuttal of what i believe to be erroneous points you made in your original post. you say that;
"people with no personal stake in it turn on their fellow man and rush to the defense of the corporations."
but you see the thing is, i do have a personal stake in it. i am a jazz musician trying to earn a living. i want to work in jazz and when i do, i want to be paid for that work. i want the music to be as widespread and popular as possible because i will be able to work more. i want people to make money from the fruits of their labours so the music, including my own, will be given more attention and promoted more.
by all means download as much as you like, but don't be under any illusion that what your are doing is not stealing because of unjust laws. what you are doing is ripping-off fellow musicians and jazz lovers.
to my mind there is nothing more unjust than that.
i agree that one should not deprive creative artists of the profits of their work and agree with the original intent of copyright laws to encourage innovation. i sold software long ago before the internet and was basically deprived of any profits by the computer clubs of the day. i found i would sell only one copy per major city to a club member who would then distribute copies at the next club meeting.
however, there is a real difference between stealing and most copyright violations. stealing involves taking a material good and thus depriving the owner of it. the "0's and 1's" violations merely deprive an "owner" of a potential sale. just as i could not realistically have expected every club member that took a copy of my programs to have bought one neither can the record industry expect that mp3 downloaders would have bought their cds. barry even recognizes this difference by noting that he will still copy a friend's music "if it's something he wouldn't normally buy".
additionally copyrights have become ridiculous and violate their original intent. the long extensions of the term to prevent disney from having to some new alternative to mickey mouse make a mockery of the very concept. surely after an artist has been dead for many years the copyright fails to induce further creativity on his part. the disney driven extensions are especially disgusting since the company has made a living producing movies based on public domain works.
and then there's the problem of knowing with today's bizarre music and other copyrighted material ownership laws, whether the artist or any real supporter of the arts is even going to benefit from one's purchase.
using industry arguments libraries would not even be allowed to exist today. recall that industry tried to prevent vcrs and audiotapes.
i'm not sure what the solution is beyond the clear one of reverting copyright to its original term and trying to stick to the intent of encouraging innovation. i know that my personal moral solution is to not copy or download anything that i should have bought (i.e. would have paid for had there been no alternative.) i would hope that most moral people would have a similar precept.
however, there is a real difference between stealing and most copyright violations. stealing involves taking a material good and thus depriving the owner of it. the "0's and 1's" violations merely deprive an "owner" of a potential sale. just as i could not realistically have expected every club member that took a copy of my programs to have bought one neither can the record industry expect that mp3 downloaders would have bought their cds. barry even recognizes this difference by noting that he will still copy a friend's music "if it's something he wouldn't normally buy".
additionally copyrights have become ridiculous and violate their original intent. the long extensions of the term to prevent disney from having to some new alternative to mickey mouse make a mockery of the very concept. surely after an artist has been dead for many years the copyright fails to induce further creativity on his part. the disney driven extensions are especially disgusting since the company has made a living producing movies based on public domain works.
and then there's the problem of knowing with today's bizarre music and other copyrighted material ownership laws, whether the artist or any real supporter of the arts is even going to benefit from one's purchase.
using industry arguments libraries would not even be allowed to exist today. recall that industry tried to prevent vcrs and audiotapes.
i'm not sure what the solution is beyond the clear one of reverting copyright to its original term and trying to stick to the intent of encouraging innovation. i know that my personal moral solution is to not copy or download anything that i should have bought (i.e. would have paid for had there been no alternative.) i would hope that most moral people would have a similar precept.
bottom line is that the real books on cd are hurting chuck sher's business. he's not rich- he's just like any other musician trying to make a living. he sells those books at a very low profit and any musician who uses them to jam, learn, sight read tunes, etc, needs to buy them.
you know, i don't care about someone stealing micro$oft office or windows 2000. i don't care if someone copies a madonna cd and gives it to their friends. but i do care about my community- the jazz community, and it's important to support the jazz community in every way possible.
i think teh solution is a change in how people think about things like this, not more laws. can't cage people in, you can only help them see new ways of thought so that in the end you don't need to cage them in.
you know, i don't care about someone stealing micro$oft office or windows 2000. i don't care if someone copies a madonna cd and gives it to their friends. but i do care about my community- the jazz community, and it's important to support the jazz community in every way possible.
i think teh solution is a change in how people think about things like this, not more laws. can't cage people in, you can only help them see new ways of thought so that in the end you don't need to cage them in.
If I'm not back in 24 hours, call the president.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
by Scot Ranney on 10/25/2004, 15:22
bert: thanks, you just posted for me. i was about to bring up that exact point regarding not depriving anyone of ownership.
anyway i wasn't really meaning to say take money from your friend, man, i was making a general statement about the current absurdity of "intellectual property" laws. theft, as bert noted, is predicated on your depriving someone else of they property, not of cutting into someone's profit. anyway no hard feelings.
let me put in my 2cents if i may.
i used to do a lot of pirating. i used to not feel bad at all for the same reasons you said autojosh. i used to pirate music or software.
now though...
i find if something is good and something is great, i will go out and purchase it, even if i have a 'soft copy'. i think barry mentioned it above, the example of downloading one song, then end up buying the album from a store. the album wouldn'tve been bought without the initial download.
anyways, if i think it's worth it, i will go out and support what i think is a good cause.
supporting the already dying jazz industry is a great cause.
supporting the music community is a great cause.
supporting fellow musicians is a great cause.
you'd want the same wouldn't you?
i used to do a lot of pirating. i used to not feel bad at all for the same reasons you said autojosh. i used to pirate music or software.
now though...
i find if something is good and something is great, i will go out and purchase it, even if i have a 'soft copy'. i think barry mentioned it above, the example of downloading one song, then end up buying the album from a store. the album wouldn'tve been bought without the initial download.
anyways, if i think it's worth it, i will go out and support what i think is a good cause.
supporting the already dying jazz industry is a great cause.
supporting the music community is a great cause.
supporting fellow musicians is a great cause.
you'd want the same wouldn't you?
another example...
we all come here to ljp for our love of music, and sharing with each other what we can and learn from the wisdom of others.
if scot decided to charge (hypothetical) 5$ a person / year... wouldn't you say this is reasonable request? or would you find a way to hack into the system to access free of charge. operations of the site cost money and time, and so does maintenance. scot (and others) put a lot of time, effort, and energy into making this place what it is today. think of it as contributing a bit to a greater cause, and in the process, getting something out of it.
here's my shameless plug:
donate to ljp today! :)
we all come here to ljp for our love of music, and sharing with each other what we can and learn from the wisdom of others.
if scot decided to charge (hypothetical) 5$ a person / year... wouldn't you say this is reasonable request? or would you find a way to hack into the system to access free of charge. operations of the site cost money and time, and so does maintenance. scot (and others) put a lot of time, effort, and energy into making this place what it is today. think of it as contributing a bit to a greater cause, and in the process, getting something out of it.
here's my shameless plug:
donate to ljp today! :)
you're headed down a pretty slippery moral slope when the decision as to whether an act is wrong or not is based on your perception of the person or company whom you are depriving of the potential sale. i too have no use for microsoft or madonna but that doesn't make copying their stuff any more right than copying a work of a jazz artist.
true enough bert, although i don't think scot was making a moral argument, he was arguing for what he thinks would best help the jazz community.
like barry said, i'm not making a moral argument. i'm talking about supporting the global jazz community.
you're absolutely right when you say that as far as right and wrong is concerned, pirating a madonna recording is no different than pirating a monty alexander recording.
but i find it's easier to take a stand and make changes on a smaller level than to fight the entire scope of pirating music, software, books, etc. so helping the global jazz community (gjc :) is where i put my energy, and if we all do our part, it will spread out to other communities.
you're absolutely right when you say that as far as right and wrong is concerned, pirating a madonna recording is no different than pirating a monty alexander recording.
but i find it's easier to take a stand and make changes on a smaller level than to fight the entire scope of pirating music, software, books, etc. so helping the global jazz community (gjc :) is where i put my energy, and if we all do our part, it will spread out to other communities.
If I'm not back in 24 hours, call the president.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
Scot is available for skype jazz piano lessons (and google hangouts, phone call, etc...)
Use the contact link at the top of the page.
by Scot Ranney on 10/26/2004, 18:24
sorry, i must have misunderstood what you meant by branding a downloader as a simple thief or just got caught up in the philosophy of it all. i tend to go for the absolutes, sorry, for example i think of taxes as thievery. but i for one feel my point of view has been expressed and will now drop the subject.
ok, just one more thing. i read that the dna sequencers are making songs of the sequences so they can copyright them because copyrights last so much longer than patents. i can't wait to hear them.
over and out.
peace
ok, just one more thing. i read that the dna sequencers are making songs of the sequences so they can copyright them because copyrights last so much longer than patents. i can't wait to hear them.
over and out.
peace
well, bert, somewhere i have a performance i made of the dna sequence of a gene cloned in the day job a few years ago, using the rhythms of anthropology. i wonder if i can find it again. i remember it sounded pretty freaky. i never thought of copyrighting it - too late now, neat idea though.
sid
sid
Please sign in to post.
Jazz Piano Notebook Series
Volume 1 of this educational jazz piano book contains 15 jazz piano exercises, tricks, and other interesting jazz piano techniques, voicings, grooves, and ideas Scot Ranney enjoys playing.
"Latinesque"
Volume 2 has 14 jazz piano exercises and tricks of the trade, and quite a bit of it is Calypso jazz piano related material, including some Monty Alexander and Michel Camilo style grooves. Jazz piano education is through the ears, but books like this can help.
Volume 3 contains 12 jazz piano exercises and explorations by the acclaimed jazz piano educator, pianist, author, and recording artist Tim Richards.
Tim wrote the well known "Exploring Jazz Piano" and "Improvising Blues Piano" books and has several others to his name.
Volume 4 is by Jeff Brent, a jazz pianist, composer, teacher, and author of "Modalogy" and other acclaimed jazz theory and education books. In this book Jeff shares detailed analysis of transcriptions of live performances. He covers everything from the shape of the songs to the tricks and licks he uses in improvised lines to the ideas behind his lush chord voicings.
Most Recent Discussions
Articles
Piano for Adoption Scam
Aprender Jazz en Piano
BEWARE: FREE BABY GRAND PIANO SCAM
Oh Tannenbaum for Jazz Piano
Volume 5 of the "Jazz Piano Notebook Series" is Available!
LearnJazzPiano.com File Downloads News
more...
Top Sheetmusic Picks
Jazzy Christmas Arrangements
Cocktail Piano
Best Songs Ever, 6th Edition
Christmas Medley
Moana Songbook
Late Night Jazz Piano
Jazz piano education is cool.
Rock on. Follow your passion.
Sign In
privacy policy •
terms of service •
about
•
50,655 messages
63,069 accounts
57,173 logins
LearnJazzPiano.com Copyright © 1995-2024 by Scot Ranney • website software and design by scot's scripts
LearnJazzPiano.com is For Sale - Serious Inquiries Only
LearnJazzPiano.com Copyright © 1995-2024 by Scot Ranney • website software and design by scot's scripts
LearnJazzPiano.com is For Sale - Serious Inquiries Only