930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: azaghal1981 on July 11, 2009, 02:53:06 pm
-
This may have been posted here before but just in case it hasn't:
"My long experience with bands and musicians has taught me that they understand their place in the world pretty well. They also understand that music is (always has been) free to consume. If you play your radio, it costs nothing to listen. If you walk by an open window while someone is playing an album, it costs nothing. If you stand outside a club and listen, it costs nothing. Music is free. Musicians often sing and play informally (get this!) just for fun.
Records, concert tickets and the use of music in commerce -- those things cost money.
The primary relationship that drives all parts of the music business is the relationship between a band and its audience. Record retailers, labels, producers, managers, lawyers, promoters and other parasitic professionals all subsist on whatever money they can siphon off of this fundamental relationship. Mechanical and broadcast royalties (the royalties supposedly "lost" through file sharing) are the part of this transaction that is least efficient in getting money to the artist because most of it is siphoned-off by the rest of the music industry. Of a $15 sale, the average band stuck on a major label may not receive a single penny, and amortized over the life of a release may receive (after all the other players take their rake) a buck or so.
I should note that entrepreneurial independent labels that operate on a profit-sharing model can be an order of magnitude more efficient, and that one of the efficiencies is the lack of promotional outlay required because fan file sharing does the promotion for free
In short, these "lost" royalties are a huge part of the revenue stream of the institutional part of the mainstream music business, but a miniscule part of the income of a band.
Almost universally, bands and musicians are happy anyone is interested in their music enough to become a fan, and they know there are many opportunities to do some business with such a person that may or may not involve selling him a particular record.
They also recognize that a download by someone unwilling to buy a record is not a "lost sale," because that person has made it clear that he is unwilling to buy a record. You haven't lost a sale, you've made a fan for free. Fans eventually want to buy records, concert tickets and other things.
A single sale = a small bet.
A lifetime fan = a huge pot."
Thoughts?
-
My old neighbor makes a good point. My sister is the perfect example: loves music, listens to it, and still goes to concerts and buys stuff like shirts, even the occasional poster. But when it comes to buying music, she just says "oh, I don't have it yet...burn me a copy". I'll make her mix CD's, but typically I say "well, you know, that LP is SO good, you'll really want to own the whole thing...why not support the band and buy it?" The issue nowadays that I see is the sheer availability of a CD. Thank God for iTunes. The day that the new Fischerspooner and Peaches discs dropped, I went to a Borders to pick them up. What can I say, I like the artwork and having the actual CD in case (God forbid) my computer AND my backdrive die somehow. But at the store, they apparently had copies of both, but I had to search some random bins to find the Peaches one. I never did find the Fischerspooner. So in my sister's defense, she doesn't like to download music, and likewise she won't always find the CD, hence she relies on me for availability, as well as discovering new stuff.
-
So many errors in that statement it is hardly worth commenting, but I'll list a few of the very obvious ones.
Fallacy of Equivocation
Fallacy of Presumption
Appeal to Pity
Ad Hominem Abusive
Faulty Premise
Need I go on? It is so clear!
-
I definitely struggle with this a bit, in that I want to consume more music than space or money allows while still wanting a band that I enjoy makes enough money to see the benefit in continuing to make music. I find these sentences pretty interesting though. I mean, it's pretty universally known that bands make their money from selling merch and touring, no? If you're hooking a band through a free download, at least enough to come to shows, buy shirts, etc., isn't that a better pay off in the long run?
This may have been posted here before but just in case it hasn't:
They also recognize that a download by someone unwilling to buy a record is not a "lost sale," because that person has made it clear that he is unwilling to buy a record. You haven't lost a sale, you've made a fan for free. Fans eventually want to buy records, concert tickets and other things.
-
Does anyone really care what Steve Albini thinks?
-
I don't know...while his musical heyday might be past him, I doubt there's anyone else out there with such an uncompromising view from the artist's standpoint. Despite what you might think of him, I'd say he puts music and the musician first.
Does anyone really care what Steve Albini thinks?
-
my general philosophy now is that i don't pay for anything digital but buy the vinyl if i like the album enough and pay for shows ... i still spend the same if not more on music than i always have
-
my chicken mcnuggets today were just so tasty, and the woman at the drive thru was funny and in such a good mood . . . . oops, wrong thread.
-
Here's a rebuttal from someone who isn't an idiot, and isn't wrong on every aspect of this issue.
The Myth of DIY
Toward a Common Ethic on Piracy
In 2000, Napster?s Shawn Fanning stood on stage at the MTV Video Music Awards, projecting every ounce of his fratty, everyman dude-ness. Sporting a ratty baseball cap and a befuddled smirk on his face, he stood center stage next to a grinning Carson Daly. Metallica were in the midst of their infamous lawsuit against Napster. Fanning, taunting the band, wore a black Metallica t-shirt out under the hot stage lights. MTV?s producers took apparent glee in cutting back and forth between Fanning and the members of Metallica stewing in the audience. MTV basked in the controversy.
To most people I knew at the time, Metallica looked like assholes. For all their talk of ?Artist Rights,? they were actually Millionaires filing suit against a helpless college kid trying to share music with his friends. Not very punk rock. Fanning, wearing the t-shirt and fighting the powers that be, played the part of rebel. A pop culture revolutionary. Metallica, Dr. Dre, Madonna and a slew of other successful artists were mired in the role of good guys turned money hungry, corporate entities.
At the time, I was just another Clash and Portishead fan coming out of a privileged suburban high school, taking great pains to separate ?real,? ?authentic? music from the commodified and supposedly tainted crap filling up my radio dial. It seemed perfectly rational that small, emerging bands and labels needed the internet?s file-sharing exposure more than Metallica needed another few million dollars. In spirit, I sided with the internet and the barrage of basement-toiling artists it would subsequently promote. Metallica and their ilk could go fuck themselves.
I began downloading free songs in earnest during my sophomore year of college. I never used Napster ? my preferred peer-to-peer was Audiogalaxy. Armed with little in the way of funds, Audiogalaxy fed my ample appetite for new sounds. If I couldn?t afford to buy the albums legally, I reasoned, the artist at least would want me to hear the music.
Right?
I found track listings online and burned full albums for myself. This means of discovery had its moments, but it was a sorry substitute for the joy of going to a local record shop, walking away with some mysterious document, and engaging with the ensuing disappointment or surprise. When pirating albums, I noticed that I cared less and less about the music. If the sounds didn?t hit me over the head immediately, I rarely gave a new artist that third or fourth listen any rewarding ?grower? requires. Worse, downloading music turned into a compulsive behavior. If I found myself with little to do, or little I felt like doing, I?d dick around on Audiogalaxy and download a few tracks without thinking.
When Audiogalaxy was taken down, I took that as a cue to cease my file-sharing days. I became happier for it.
But I didn?t want to become some holier-than-thou critic of my friends who pirated music regularly. I still associated that critical position with Metallica, and few artists I respected complained about the changing shape of the music business. Big labels, ones I still held disdain for, were being ravaged, and I figured they deserved it on some level.
I held fast to my meaningful relationship with music ? music I paid for. I kept my opinions to myself. This seemed perfectly appropriate. But my position on downloading shifted somewhat over the past year, initially for the most selfish of reasons.
I began to record music of my own. Secluded for two months in rural Minnesota last summer, I planned to begin a novel but ended up with an album of demos. When I returned to Brooklyn in the Fall, I did the basic things I imagined one does with a batch of demos: send them to indie labels, pass them out to friends, make a MySpace page, try finding other musicians to play with, etc.
My mind naturally wandered and fantasized about my music someday being appreciated or noticed ? that easy fantasy of someone at a small, respected label hearing it and putting it out. It was a nice daydream. It still is.
I?ve worked part-time at a Brooklyn cafe for a couple of years, and I?ve gotten to know quite a few musicians as a result. Some of these musicians are from very well-established, Pitchfork-promoted bands. Others are in the emerging groups we?ve all read and written dozens of blog posts about over the last couple of years. Upon my return, I saw something more clearly than before ? they were all broke.
I?m broke, but I have good reason to be. Trying to break through with various projects is one thing, but these musicians had ?broken? already. I?d assumed, falsely, that if I regularly read about a band or artist, if they put out records, toured successfully, garnered loads of great press, then they must be making a decent living ? at least by Brooklyn standards.
Nope.
The most successful ones were doing okay, but toured constantly, still lived in your standard crappy Brooklyn apartment, and had little-to-no savings. And those ?breaking through? were just trying to eat, getting virtually no money from their records and lucky to break even on touring. Dispiriting as this was for my not-too-serious music ambitions, more upsetting was turning around to see friends supposedly sensitive to the music scene downloading leaked albums, professing to ?love? them, and freely burning them for others. I imagined communities of young, artsy, low-to-middle-to-high income people across the country doing the same thing. Then I imagined today?s high school and college students who probably see no reason whatsoever to pay for their music. Why would they?
I noticed how rarely, in all the music journalism I read online, anyone treats the basic responsibility of paying for the music you love as anything but a farce. I think this remains partly due to the stubborn, symbolic association with Metallica (i.e., rich people/major labels) along with the understandable reticence smaller artists have to take a stand.
We all know they?d be tarred and feathered for it, and are in the rare occurrence when true emotions come to the fore (David Sitek, Bradford Cox). And since everyone seems to download illegally, it appears unrealistic to imagine a movement for responsibility and respect coming from anywhere else, namely consumers who are getting whatever they want for free.
* * *
DIY culture is one of the more beautiful ideas to spawn from the artistic world. It?s an attempt at Direct Democracy, compensating for lack of resources, empowerment for honest and organic ideas and creations. It?s about artists/people getting a fair shake and pursuing personally meaningful ends. The ?indie rock? scene has certainly seen itself in the context of that folk-garage-punk-DIY tradition. But the title, ?Do-It-Yourself,? is insufficient. It reflects the personal empowerment aspect while masking something just as critical: mutual support and empowerment of a community.
Those older bands we revere were artists who lacked ?skill,? but had overflowing amounts of talent and ambition. They got their thing together, put out records, toured. But to keep going, they needed folks at their shows. They needed fans to buy their records. Otherwise, today CBGB wouldn?t matter for shit ? I repeat ? it wouldn?t matter for shit.
There?s a point of view, sometimes peddled by flaccid rock critics who apparently stand for nothing, that says everything will be fine. ?Artists just need to tour more... The model has changed!? Yes, the model has changed. Artists and labels once made most of their money from selling records. Now consumers download said records for free. For every one song legally downloaded, eight songs are supposedly stolen. Those are not fighting chances, my friends.
Some argue that increased vinyl sales will make up for this. Indeed, vinyl sales jumped 89% in 2008. It has been uplifting to see the resurgence of vinyl and 7-inch culture, but here?s the bad news: vinyl accounts for a miniscule percentage of all record sales. To be exact: 0.1% of all record sales in 2008 came from vinyl.
Others argue that bands simply need to forgo the hope of selling records and accept touring as their only realistic money-making option. Some bands may be able to cultivate a following large enough to make a good living through touring, but for how long? Not everyone is Radiohead. The chances of any band being able to survive, much less flourish, by that standard is a fraction of an impossibility.
It bears the question, do you really want your favorite band (you?ve pirated their last three albums) touring nine months out of the year? Their music will get worse, and the members will end up hating each other. Or you?ll be seeing them star in the next Best Buy commercial... if they?re very lucky. That?s how these things go.
There?s a romanticization of that image of the starving artist, someone willing to sacrifice their own well-being in order to live out a higher ideal via their work. But as a music fan, I don?t see anything artful or transcendent in our favorite record stores closing, Touch and Go going out of business, talented musicians saying ?fuck it? to enroll in law school because they?re sick of stressing about rent, or a generation adapted to hearing an infinite shuffle of newly-pirated tracks blaring from an iPod dock or tinny computer speakers.
* * *
Living in New York, every so often you?re broadsided by a particularly shitty day. Before it can end, you?re forced to weather multiple, abhorrent subway transfers before getting home. Maybe it?s raining outside and the train is traveling at the pace of a baby?s crawl... until the train stops completely, and all you can do is wait. It feels like you?re living in some compounded Hell.
You finally transfer into your next train and fortunately see an open seat... nope, someone just took it from you. You find a place to stand as the doors close and begin zoning out as soon as you pull away from the station. Too fazed from exhaustion to notice, two men with guitars enter your train car through a sliding exit door. It slams closed and they begin strumming their guitars, singing in Spanish ? some forlorn love song. Surprisingly, it?s achingly beautiful, and their music lifts you out of your hellish day. Reminds you why you live where you do, why you?re pursuing whatever sort of life you?re pursuing. Maybe it even inspires you to make a change ? be less negative, look for more fulfilling work, or foster a more appreciative perspective of life. Your fellow passengers crane their necks to listen, in that rarest and most magical of metropolitan phenomena: spontaneous communal enjoyment.
But thankful as you may be, you had better give the guitarists your wrinkled dollar bill at the end. There?s no reason to assume someone else will. And if no one gives up their cash, you won?t be hearing any music on your packed train cars for very long. The musicians will be too busy picking up hours at a grocery store to make rent, no matter how badly they feel the ?need? to play. And your day will remain as it was: unfulfilled and shitty.
If you find meaning and beauty from a musician?s work and you want them to continue creating it ? then you are obliged to support them. If you like the idea of record stores, the people they employ, the values and spirit they promote ? then you also are obliged to support them. If you?re consistently doing one without the other, then on some level you, not Metallica, are the asshole. Out of basic politeness, I (probably) won?t say any of this to your face and neither will your friends, your record store clerk, or your favorite band.
But it is the truth.
by Chris Ruen
-
Doesn't anyone find Albini's stance a bit suspect considering he gets paid up front for his services as a producer.
I certainly don't buy this argument that all artists are able to make money via touring, etc. Artists who have reached a certainly level of popularity MAY benefit, but those IMHO are few and far between.
One can't honestly believe the bands touring around playing venues like the Black Cat Backstage and the Velvet Lounge are making much more than enough to cover the expenses of being on the road. I'm sure that all that touring is done with the hopes of one day getting to the say the 9:30 Club and above where an decent income can be made.
What about an artist in the UK without the financial support to tour the US?
What about the artist that just wants to put out an album, which doesn't have the means to hire publicists, manager, tour bookers, etc. Maybe the fans of niche artists are more likely to buy an album verses illegally download it.
And one certainly isn't doing a favor to the labels who are doing reissues of bands now longer together, by downloading illegally.
Bottom line is there are a lot of so called experts who know nothing about the music industry, continuing to make unresearched claims.
-
While no one will mourn the passing of a system that benefitted record labels and the so-called parasites more than artists, an outgrowth of that system was the label's willingness to sink tons of money into the recording process and, as has often been discussed, 'artist development'. Without labels ponying the cash for these endeavors we appear to see fewer bands with the means or motivation to create albums as artistic statements. I may just be getting old, but i find that most of my favorite albums of this decade came out prior to 2005, around when people stopped buying music in earnest.
-
Read that TMT piece last night; was going to post it in here as well.
-
http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/home-taping-didnt-kill-music/
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/708F20CD-E67D-45C7-AF95-3E1A6AC07C37.html
boy, my head is spinning after all that . . . i need nore mcnuggets.
-
I buy vinyl.. I get a huge kick out of LPs.. out of listening to music on LP.. watching them turn.. opening the gatefold... Today I bought the Dead Weather one..
When I own the LP I invest more time and attention in listening to it.. I get more out of it..
When I download MP3s I often don't even bother playing them.. I hate the sound of digital music...
There are exceptions...some bands don't put their stuff out on LP
generally I buy records...I don't care about CDs..
Luckily people are moving in my direction..every day there are more and more issues on LP.. compared to the late 90s these are good times.
I think music should pretty much be free and artists should support themselves with touring...thats the way its been for thousands of years..
-
Ben Chasny's take (http://thequietus.com/articles/01318-six-organs-of-admittance-s-ben-chasny-reflects-on-music-and-technology-in-a-singular-time)
One of the more thought-provoking ones I've read.
-
I agree about this comment (Ben C) about hard drives full of music one has never heard.. I've amassed certainly over a terrabyte of MP3s.. probably 2 or 3... I couldn't care less..
I've stopped amassing mp3s
-
Yeah, I definitely got a "holy shit that sounds like me and he's so right" feeling upon reading it. I'm pretty sure I've heard 99% of what I've downloaded at least once but in many cases, that's all. And I very rarely delete something. It has to be horrible in order for me to do so. He does a much better and more convincing job at getting his point across than the guy who wrote the TMT piece (who used the all too familiar and rarely successful guilt trip approach).
-
Doesn't anyone find Albini's stance a bit suspect considering he gets paid up front for his services as a producer.
It's not like we're talking about some guy who's only input to this equation is taking money from bands to record them. This guy started off where most of these bands did...getting the word out by showing up and playing shows.
Just playing devil's advocate, Julian, but doesn't this paragraph sorta speak to exactly what Albini is saying?
The Myth of DIY
Toward a Common Ethic on Piracy
The most successful ones were doing okay, but toured constantly, still lived in your standard crappy Brooklyn apartment, and had little-to-no savings. And those ?breaking through? were just trying to eat, getting virtually no money from their records and lucky to break even on touring.
I certainly don't know exactly where I fall on this issue. I still amass MP3s at a large rate, with probably around 95% being legal downloads (and the rest being things that are either out of print or one off tracks), but that entire article seemed to be focused on band's that are trying to break. These guys probably have no shot at commercial radio play (at least not yet), so what are their options other than getting on the road and getting their name out? And if they're strong enough of a band to hook a handful of people in a room, and those people either buy a record at the show or some other merch, than those bands are getting 100% of the money right there, where they wouldn't have gotten any cash by sitting around wishing someone would pick up their record in a store.
Like I said, just playing devil's advocate a bit, but it seems really hollow to say that these bands are losing money from downloads when no one knows them to even be interesting in buying an album.
-
oh by the way . . . after eating at mcdonalds the other day, my tummy felt like it full of lead and i got a sick like sensation the rest of the evening. is that stuff food anymore, or am i just old now and my body can't handle it?
-
Trent Reznor's thoughts on this are worth reading.
http://forum.nin.com/bb/read.php?30,767183,767183#msg-767183
-
Trent used to have an Oink account. I wonder if he's gotten on one of the replacement sites.
-
I am not a musician but do have certain talents that relate. About a year ago I had a friend in Boston tell me that a larger size, hipster clothing store were using my posters as a backdrop and wallpaper in their displays and around the store. They never asked permission to use my design work nor did they get the bands permission to use their name which are two forms of copyright violation. When I called the store (after getting proof from a good natured Uncle who lives down the street from them) the manager said how they got it off the internet (because a 600 x 800 jpg blown up to poster size looks real swanky) and I should be grateful as it was great promotion for me.
The idea that someone could take my work that is hand done and screen printed and do a crappy print it out for their business bothered me. The idea that they thought it was okay disturbed me as well. I understand as an designer people sometime take my work without paying (I have a lot of people tell me how they rip my posters down when they see them so they can frame them at home) but to be so cavalier about it shocked me. I did not get an extra rush of sales from the Boston area, that poster did not sell any more (it was already sold out), and my work looked like garbage because it was pixilated.
I do posters on a tight budget often just recouping costs and sometimes being able to make a small profit to help defray the cost of the next project - much like most indie bands. If everyone just decided to hit PRINT and no longer purchase my posters then I would stop doing them (to the joy of my wife I suppose). Much like some of the bands I have met, they get dropped from labels or have to tour all the time to make a living because people see the music as free and open to taking. Just my two cents.
-
Andy Falkous of Future of the Left on filesharing
It's difficult to express exactly what I felt when I found out, last
wednesday, that the album had made it's way onto the internet. 22nd
april - approximately eight and a half weeks before release and only
three since the fucking thing was mastered and whilst members of the
band don't have shiny little embossed copies there is a promotional cd
of the record on sale at ebay for twenty five quid.
I drank a bottle of Jamesons and began to lecture the cat on copyright
control. To her credit, she simply fell asleep as Law and Order went
about its business in the background.
Myself, Kelson and a couple of the guys at Beggars spent 72 hours or
so pissing around, sending angry emails to proud bloggers (and oh, the
fucking pride of the feckless thief) and, amongst others, a Russian
website that was already charging people for the songs. Motherfuckers.
I guess that since the bottom has fallen out of the arms trade, any
collection of notes, however obscure, is a legitimate income source.
So, anyway, the fucking thing has leaked despite our desperate
delaying tactics and you may have listened to it / be dowloading it
this second / have taken the position that you'd rather wait for the
actual release - regardless, it feels that getting annoyed about
downloading in this valueless modern age is like taking issue with
water for being wet or night for gradually turning into day because
ultimately the entitlement that most people feel for free music
completely overshadows any moral or legal issues and conflicts that
may arise in the hearts and minds of better people, people who
understand that actions, on both an individual and group level, have
consequences far beyond that moment of instant gratification.
There's so much to say with so little effect on this issue, so many
well-intentioned but wasted words devoted to it ... but anyway,
thankyou for downloading in barely a minute something that we poured a
year of our lives into, attempting (successfully, I believe) with a
great and furious pride to better our previous low-selling (and leaked
three months early) album, a record which flew under the radar for
many reasons but mostly because most of the goodwill poured on it
happened and had dwindled several months before it was available to
buy.
Yes, buy. Such a dirty fucking word. Currency exchanged for goods and
services. Food, Clothing, Butt-plugs and fucking H2O. How far, I
wonder does this entitlement for free music go? My guitars, should
they be free? Petrol to get us to shows? Perhaps I should come to an
arrangement with my landlord, through the musician-rent-waiver
programme.
Perhaps he should pay me, for his ninth-division indie-cred through association.
You will have to excuse me, people of the internet. It turns out that
I just wanted a big party with balloons and streamers to celebrate
everything we put into this thing, released into the physical world
with a fanfare and fuss befitting its status. I'm not angry (in fact I
don't blame you, unless you leaked it, in which case I WILL KILL YOU),
just a little worried that the record we made will get lost amongst
the debris and leave us playing shows like we just weathered at the
laughably bad Camden Crawl this last weekend - fifteen people and a
world of disillusion.*
Anyway - please be careful, or we'll get the world we all deserve.
Hobby bands who can tour once every few years if they're lucky, and
the superstars, freed from such inconvenient baggage as integrity and
conscience, running the corporate sponsored marathon of £80-a-ticket
arena tours and television adverts til their loveless hearts explode
in an orgy of oppressive branding and self-regard. Some of us, in all
honestly, just want to make the music we love and play it around the
world without living in poverty.
We'll be announcing some deal involving pre-orders of the cd/lp with
an immediate download in the next few days.
Do consult your surroundings before proceeding.
falco
*Next time somebody tells me that i can't drink my rider in the
building I'm playing in I'm going to fuck them with their own shoes.
-
The old model of promoting an album for six weeks between when mastering is finished and when the album is actually released has GOT TO GO. CDs can wait but if you want to sell a record, don't give it the chance to leak! Put it on iTunes as soon as it's finished!
-
Yeah, the best way to combat leaks is to do away with the idea of promotional copies of an album as a whole.
Either go the Itunes route or offer free and/or cheap downloads of it on your site ass soon as it's mastered.
-
hey, el jefe . . . i'm curious, is there anything you can do legally about your situation? or is it because the fact "they got it off the internet" make it somehow seem ok in the eyes of the law? i would do something just based on the "rude" response you got.
-
could he do something? sure, call in the lawyers.
will it be worth the money, effort, time, aggravation? probably not.
-
My lawyer said he could pursue it and win but it would take time and effort. Was not worth it and it would be hard to prove damages outside of what they would have had to pay for the posters (couple hundred plus damages). I think the manager got in trouble but the place store has a long history ripping off artists and getting away with it. Oh well. I take it as a compliment in a way.
-
I'm sorry but there has to be a better electronic distribution model than iTunes.... Whats the point of spending money on recording an album, having it mastered only to have it turned into lousy sounding compressed files. Haven't listened to a lot of FLAC encoded material but the difference in sound quality over even LAME VBR encoded MP3s is very noticeable. Guess people have gotten use to listening to crappily encoded songs on their shitty earbuds they don't care anymore...
-
I'm sorry but there has to be a better electronic distribution model than iTunes.... Whats the point of spending money on recording an album, having it mastered only to have it turned into lousy sounding compressed files. Haven't listened to a lot of FLAC encoded material but the difference in sound quality over even LAME VBR encoded MP3s is very noticeable. Guess people have gotten use to listening to crappily encoded songs on their shitty earbuds they don't care anymore...
you might be amazed how many people violently defend the 'good enough' nature of mp3s and act like the only things that can hear the frequency differences between flac and mp3 are woodland creatures.
"enjoy your half a gig albums", etc. people are really fucking stupid.
-
Compressed files are fine for listening at low to medium volume in noisy environments or as background, as long as they're not overly or badly compressed. What's truly dismaying, however, is that Young People Prefer "Sizzle Sounds" of MP3 Format (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/11/153205). Fortunately, I use AAC, with which the sizzle problem is far less pronounced.
Anyway, I believe that file compression as a standard practice is temporary. As download speeds and storage capacities increase, the need for compression declines. A 1TB drive can hold upwards of 2,000 average-length rock CDs in standard 16/44.1 CD WAV form. Many people now have download speeds that can allow for WAV streaming. A 25Mbps connection can download a 50 minute CD-quality WAV in three minutes.