From: owner-alloy-digest@smoe.org (alloy-digest) To: alloy-digest@smoe.org Subject: alloy-digest V11 #137 Reply-To: alloy@smoe.org Sender: owner-alloy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-alloy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "alloy-digest-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. alloy-digest Friday, May 26 2006 Volume 11 : Number 137 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Alloy: Denver Show ["Derek Betts" ] Re: Alloy: Denver Show ["Derek Betts" ] Re: Alloy: Denver Show [Stephen Dick ] Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] [John McJunkin ] Re: Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] ["Kara R. Laidlaw" ] Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] [John McJunkin Subject: Re: Alloy: Denver Show dude - the only alloy emails i get are from you...weird. time to look into my settings. wrote a big email yesterday talking about the sunn O))) show and replying to your previous email. got wiped out accidently when i tried to erase the previous email at the bottom. didn't have time to retype it. short version: not sure what i thought about sunn O))), kinda corny and a little boring, sort of cool (mainly because it was so loud that you needed earplugs outside - literally according to someone who'd been outside during soundcheck; and they managed to fill the entire theater with dry ice). plus they had two moogs - one rogue and couldn't identify the other from the back. same size/shape as the rogue. could see where someone might think the show was mindblowing, life changing etc. if they were really stoned, but i wasn't so i was sort of bored. nice bowling score - how was davinci code? -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Dick Reply-To: alloy@smoe.org To: alloy@smoe.org Subject: Re: Alloy: Denver Show Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:48:10 -0700 (PDT) > >Sweet!!! > > I am so excited to have an official TMDR dvd in the >works!!!! > >Yes!!! >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:29:45 +0000 From: "Derek Betts" Subject: Re: Alloy: Denver Show sorry for the previous email - was supposed to be sent offlist obviously. hope you enjoyed my sunn O))) review... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 06:44:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephen Dick Subject: Re: Alloy: Denver Show Thats some funny shit Derek!!! - --- Derek Betts wrote: > > sorry for the previous email - was supposed to be > sent offlist > obviously. hope you enjoyed my sunn O))) review... Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:17:57 -0700 From: John McJunkin Subject: Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] The transformation of the industry continues. The monopolists known as the record labels still wish to find a way to force consumers to pay a fee every time they hear music. The resentment bred by this greed will ultimately result in the elimination of record labels as the middlemen that exact these tolls. The labels have aimed an automatic weapon squarely at their foot and they continue to fire. Faster, please! jm On May 23, 2006, at 7:19 PM, Elaine wrote: > > An opinion piece that I found interesting & thought some of you > might as > well. It has to do with fair use, recording from broadcast and the > digital age. > > http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/index.blog?entry_id=1485779 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:02:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Elaine Subject: Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] But you know, here's the thing -- "In its lawsuit, RIAA says that XM already has the ability to stop the practice. XM embeds software code in its encrypted satellite transmissions that deletes saved songs if a user stops paying his XM subscription fee." The information I have says that the Pioneer Inno does not record XM content as MP3. It can store and play MP3 files, and it records XM content in XM's encrypted format, which as the article pointed out will cease to play back the content if the subscription ends. You can't transfer XM content to any other device, so, like, what's the problem? Isn't this exactly what the recording industry should want? OR is it that THEY didn't create and market this technology. And satellite companies aren't members of RIAA & want nothing to do with it. I might be dawning on a new understanding, grasshopper... On Thu, 25 May 2006, John McJunkin wrote: > > The transformation of the industry continues. The monopolists known > as the record labels still wish to find a way to force consumers to > pay a fee every time they hear music. The resentment bred by this > greed will ultimately result in the elimination of record labels as > the middlemen that exact these tolls. The labels have aimed an > automatic weapon squarely at their foot and they continue to fire. > Faster, please! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:08:14 -0500 From: "Kara R. Laidlaw" Subject: Re: Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] John put it very well indeed when he wrote, > > From: John McJunkin > Date: 2006/05/25 Thu AM 09:17:57 CDT > To: alloy@smoe.org > Subject: Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] > > > The transformation of the industry continues. The monopolists known > as the record labels still wish to find a way to force consumers to > pay a fee every time they hear music. The resentment bred by this > greed will ultimately result in the elimination of record labels as > the middlemen that exact these tolls. The labels have aimed an > automatic weapon squarely at their foot and they continue to fire. > Faster, please! > > jm ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, What *he* said. :^) The darned RIAA has been too big for its britches, and far too greedy, for a long time. "It" wants complete control. Utter domination. Having raked in unimaginable amounts of money, the RIAA can afford to sue [read: persecute, and/or prosecute] anyone, or any company, that it wants to. The RIAA doesn't want to lose its cash cow: fees for even the tiniest snippet of music. And so often the music isn't worth the money...sigh...if only more artists cared about their music the way TMDR does. - --Kara the frequently thoughtful... "Oh to paint her eyes so red, and her lips so blue...carve her legend on the bow...Caroline four-five-two" :^) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:20:02 -0400 From: Crackers Subject: Re: Alloy: hello I too would like to wish Robin many of the happy birthday styled greetings, particularily those involving "birthday spankings". ^_^ Crackers ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:52:24 -0700 From: John McJunkin Subject: Re: Alloy: RIAA sues XM Satellite [OT] Yabbut while the XM-encrypted files may not be easily transferable (i.e. dragged onto a hard drive from a USB-connected box of some kind) they are indeed transferrable. Any analog electronic signal can be recorded and played back. In this case, you'd simply connect the analog output of your Pioneer unit to any recording device. Granted that you'll suffer the introduction of a certain bit of noise and distortion (not to mention D-to-A conversion at the very least, and possibly yet another conversion---A-to-D---if you're using a digital recorder,) and bearing in mind that the transfer must happen in real time, it can still be accomplished. The noise, distortion, and effects of conversion are not likely to result in sufficiently low quality as to dissuade the party responsible for the transfer. Hell, we settle for crappy mp3 data compression as it is now. A little quantization noise and distortion isn't going to hurt the feelings of most people these days. Kinda reminds me of the good-old/ bad-old 80s, when we recorded songs from FM onto cassette. FM (while it sounds better than AM) is still limited in bandwidth compared to vinyl or two-track 1/4-inch tape or even CD, and introduces noise and distortion. Cassettes are even worse, with a typical signal-to-noise ratio of 60dB or less. And the worst part is that the recording was real-time (my but aren't we spoiled these days!) In my estimation, we have pretty much the precise same situation today as we did 20 years ago, with different technology. The only distinction now is that digital pitch men have sold the RIAA and the labels a bill of goods, telling them that there are "fool-proof" mechanisms that can completely eliminate "piracy." The RIAA are just pissed that there will always be a work-around. Just like radar detector detector detectors, if you get my drift. The one-upsmanship will continue unabated until the market settles a fair price and delivery mechanism for music. "Rental" (i.e. no pay, no play) won't work. I won't pay to "rent" songs. I'll gladly pay a fair price to have a permanent copy of precisely the songs I want (and no "filler" tracks.) I guess you could argue that the 5 or 6 cassette and 2 or 3 CD copies of The Golden Age of Wireless I've bought since 1983 amount to "renting" TMDR's fine work--LOL! Enough--sorry about the lengthy OT polemic everybody! Best, jm On May 25, 2006, at 1:02 PM, Elaine wrote: > > But you know, here's the thing -- > > "In its lawsuit, RIAA says that XM already has the ability to stop the > practice. XM embeds software code in its encrypted satellite > transmissions > that deletes saved songs if a user stops paying his XM subscription > fee." > > The information I have says that the Pioneer Inno does not record XM > content as MP3. It can store and play MP3 files, and it records XM > content in XM's encrypted format, which as the article pointed out > will > cease to play back the content if the subscription ends. You can't > transfer XM content to any other device, so, like, what's the problem? > Isn't this exactly what the recording industry should want? > > OR is it that THEY didn't create and market this technology. And > satellite companies aren't members of RIAA & want nothing to do > with it. > I might be dawning on a new understanding, grasshopper... > > > > On Thu, 25 May 2006, John McJunkin wrote: > >> >> The transformation of the industry continues. The monopolists known >> as the record labels still wish to find a way to force consumers to >> pay a fee every time they hear music. The resentment bred by this >> greed will ultimately result in the elimination of record labels as >> the middlemen that exact these tolls. The labels have aimed an >> automatic weapon squarely at their foot and they continue to fire. >> Faster, please! ------------------------------ End of alloy-digest V11 #137 ****************************