how stupid is an eSub!?!

[alphajerk]

man, i had sound on sound in my hand the other week but put it down... there was just one article that i wanted to read and didnt have the time to just sit in the bookstore and read it... i ended up going back a week later and the issue had been replaced by the new one... so i go to their site to try to read it and DAMMIT! you need to PAY them to read an OLD ISSUE!?! how stupid is this? who the hell is going to pay to read an old issue? this is the most god damn moronic thing i have ever seen on the net!!!!!!!!! i now have a new opinion of Sound on Sound, they SUCK sweaty donkey balls. i will never buy another issue EVER AGAIN!

[Philip OKeefe]

I know what you mean. They had a review of the AW4416 a while back that I was interested in reading, but I couldn't get to it and wasn't about to pay them for it. Maybe if I lived in England I'd subscribe, but all the vendors are UK based and I would never buy anything from the UK if I had a stateside alternative - so their ads are useless to them and to me - it's all about content, and I can usually get that somewhere else. Sure, publishers are in business, and you have to make a profit to stay in business, but while (maybe) someday the internet will replace traditional publishing formats like books and magazines with e-books and e-mags, today isn't that day - and there's a huge expectation that people have for getting "free" content via the net. I'm not so sure yet that this will ever change. Phil O'Keefe Sound Sanctuary Recording Riverside CA http://members.aol.com/ssanctuary/index.html pokeefe777@msn.com

[remo]

Do you think anyone would buy the mag if it was possible to acces the esub for free a month later? Everyone's got to make a livin somehow. G.

[Marc Cooreman]

It's only 5 months back you cannot read on the net . May 2001 and earlier you have access to all articles for years . Good search machine too

[AliAlexandre]

"so their ads are useless to them and to me" .... Your comment is quite interesting : we, overseas, are all used to purchasing US magazines even if "YOUR ads are useless to you and to us" ;) simply because content is interesting, and I personally like to compare you ads and products to what is available here and compare how ads are designed for EU magazines and consumers. For me, just a cheap way for travelling abroad.. Again, how could a magazine survive if all its current articles where available for free on the web? What would we say if the same was done with our music? Friendly, Alex [ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: AliAlexandre ]

[aeon]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]so i go to their site to try to read it and DAMMIT! you need to PAY them to read an OLD ISSUE!?! how stupid is this? who the hell is going to pay to read an old issue? this is the most god damn moronic thing i have ever seen on the net!!!!!!!!! i now have a new opinion of Sound on Sound, they SUCK sweaty donkey balls. i will never buy another issue EVER AGAIN![/b][/quote] So, alphajerk, by that logic, seeing that you can’t read old issues online [i]for any price[/i] if they come from United Entertainment Media, does that mean you will never buy another issue of Gig, Bass Player, EQ, Keyboard, Surround Professional or MusicPlayer magazines? What kind of sweaty balls does United Entertainment Media suck? :D Heck, UEM is [i]removing[/i] web content that was there before!! http://www.musicplayer.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=18&t=002385&p= [quote]Originally posted by pokeefe777: [b]I know what you mean. They had a review of the AW4416 a while back that I was interested in reading, but I couldn't get to it and wasn't about to pay them for it. Maybe if I lived in England I'd subscribe, but all the vendors are UK based and I would never buy anything from the UK if I had a stateside alternative - so their ads are useless to them and to me - it's all about content, and I can usually get that somewhere else.[/b][/quote] If you subscribe to the International edition, which is what you get in the US, there are no ads...it is nothing but pure content. Also, if you subscribe to the magazine you get a free eSub subscription.

[vintagevibe]

alphajerk, Since you weren't willing to buy the magazine to read the story and you aren't willing to pay pay online it seems you arent' willing to pay at all and just want to whine about it. It's so unfair that you can't have everything you want for free.

[Trash Monkey]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b] they SUCK sweaty donkey balls. i will never buy another issue EVER AGAIN![/b][/quote] Alphadude, you sure as hell have a way with words :D

[Anderton]

<> The old sites are still available for your viewing as archives. New material is going on MP.com. As to SOS, like UEM they are in the business of selling information. That's how they make their living. Also, you can buy back issues, fully searchable in PDF format, for 1998, 1999, and 2000 on CD-ROM.

[alphajerk]

no, they are in the business of selling ADS. so SoS doesnt sell ads anymore in their international edition... there just isnt enough GOOD content to warrant $9.95 for a issue of the mag. one freaking article in the whole mag i want to read... THATS IT. the rest is amateur drivel. like i said, i dont have to buy it and i wont buy it anymore until they open PAST issues online. like phil said, the net hasnt progressed far enough to warrant a charge. so you think that UEM should charge for this forum??? i know i would stop being here if they did. and if i dont get a free sub next time on EQ, i wont be getting it any longer.. Mix i get free subs.

[Anderton]

<> I know I'm going to get in trouble here, but frankly, yes I think they should. Not much -- maybe $2 or $3 a month to post, free to lurk. The problem is that it costs money to run this, and I'd love it if the forums could support themselves independently. Otherwise, they'll always be the first item to come under scrutiny when budget numbers have to be met. The question isn't really do you want these forums to be free, or do you want them to cost something. The real question is: Would you rather pay for something and make sure it continues to exist, or get it for free knowing it will disappear someday?

[inadequate.com]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]so you think that UEM should charge for this forum?[/b][/quote] SOS doesn't charge for their forum either. Personally I'm quite happy to pay a fee to have access to information 6 months earlier. By the time some computer articles are penned, published & posted to Australia they are largely out of date. It's far less expensive than buying the paper version & I get to save the little trees & feel all fuzzy inside. I also don't have to have back issues lying around in case an article becomes useful to me at some stage. Peace

[soapbox]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Anderton:[/i] The real question is: Would you rather pay for something and make sure it continues to exist, or get it for free knowing it will disappear someday?[/quote] Okay, I'm going to veer off topic here, because this point is a good one - not just when it comes to these forums, but when it comes to cracked software. I had a long talk with a representative of Line 6 at Music Technology Day LA 2001, a couple of days ago. I asked him about RTAS, MAS, or VST versions of Amp Farm; and he said there would be none. He said that it's not worth it for them to make software anymore because of piracy. So, if you've got RTAS, MAS, or VST based software, your only choice is to buy a Pod Pro and lose a generation, if you wait to make a choice until mixdown. When BT gave the keynote address at Music Technology Day LA 2001, he finished with a plea not to use cracks because many of these companies will go out of business. I think we are on the precipice of a monumental shift. The first wave of companies that gave us a free ride on the Internet have gone out of business. Now that we are in an economic downturn, I won't be surprised to see another wave of Internet cutbacks, as well as a new trend of plug-in based companies going under or moving to hardware. Many of you know from other threads I've started that I hate copy protection, but I also hate piracy. The only solution I see is for the public to behave with integrity and businesses to behave with trust. That requires another monumental shift; but then, these are extraordinary times.

[aeon]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]like i said, i dont have to buy it and i wont buy it anymore until they open PAST issues online.[/b][/quote] Start buying. Past issues and articles are online. All but the last six months are free. It's funny, you express something is worth something to you, but then you state you have neither the time or money, or the willingness thereof, to spend on it. So how much is it really worth? A tantrum, I guess. I hope your logic doesn’t apply to the music you record. I feel people should be paid for the work they do if the consumer deems it worthwhile. [quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]there just isnt enough GOOD content to warrant $9.95 for a issue of the mag. one freaking article in the whole mag i want to read... THATS IT. the rest is amateur drivel.[/b][/quote] Then either subscribe for $60/yr. and bring the cost per issue down to nearly half, or quit your bitching. You started this thread because the mag had something you wanted, but you don’t want to pay for it. Those kind of ethics are the same ones that lead people to justify the use of cracked software. [quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]so you think that UEM should charge for this forum???[/b][/quote] If that would ensure its continued existence then I would be willing to pay a reasonable fee to participate in it. It is worth something to me. I pay for the things I want to use because they are worth my trade of time or money for them. [quote]Originally posted by Craig Anderton: [b]The old sites are still available for your viewing as archives. New material is going on MP.com.[/b][/quote] Thanks for the tip, Craig!

[gchildpblutah.com]

One positive vote for my Esub. I feel it's just like shareware. If it becomes one of your workaday tools, you pay the author/designer for their hard work. I also like the fact I don't have to throw away something at the end of the day.

[alphajerk]

nope, wouldnt pay for this... sorry. in fact, I should be getting paid ;) there are other free avenues that will always exist, they too might die out but then another will pop up. right now there are more than 10 music BB sites in action.... more sprouting up every month it seems. its not like kracked software... its like paying for a whole freaking CD with ONE good song on it. i'd rather just "steal" it yes. why should i pay for 1 thing with a lot of FILLER around it? and the subscription still comes to $10 an issue for america... at least thats what i was told when i inquired about it about a year ago being sick of paying $10 for the rag back then. i havent bought any issues since. but in reality its not even like napster, i can easily sit in the store and read the article. in fact some bookstores ENCOURAGE people to do that [why i have no idea], i even have a coffee shop right in there with tables and chairs to relax and read, now if i could only take it outside for a smoke while perusing the pages. i think the LA times is pay per article too, i wouldnt pay for that either... too many other news places to go and get it for free. information WANTS to be FREE. to tell you the truth, i would bag the moderators salaries before i would expect to pay for a forum [no offense craig]

[soapbox]

[quote][i]Originally posted by alphajerk:[/i] and the subscription still comes to $10 an issue for america... at least thats what i was told when i inquired about it about a year ago being sick of paying $10 for the rag back then.[/quote] [b]alphajerk[/b], your information is out of date. SOS now offers a relatively inexpensive subscription (without ads): "INTERNATIONAL EDITION: USA/Canada 12 issues US $60."

[karmadude]

I'm sure alphajerk is gainfully employed and derives remuneration for his services. I'm wondering what his reaction to a 'client' is when asked if he will work for gratis on a project when the mortgage and utility bills need attending to? Alpha, I have enjoyed your levity until now, but this request of 'something for nothing' makes no sense to me. Jim

[vintagevibe]

alphajerk, I need some mixing done but I agree with you that I shouldn't have to pay for it. Where do I sign up for your free services? I really think you have something here. Since writers shouldn't be paid maybe we can stop paying songwriters and musicians too. We could have the whole industry become a free service and everyone could be amatures. Wouldn't that be fine. Great idea!

[Anderton]

<> They do it because coffee is a higher-profit item than books.

[alphajerk]

maybe so, but the coffee is so much better than the crap in rags these days. they have become quite complacent with little to no useful information. i know the past year has been a bore, reviews absolutely suck, editorials borderline on pathetic... this is part 2 to my 'what the hell is wrong with magazines' thread i guess. and payment of services rendered and past issues online are apples and oranges. dont even try to make the connection. it doesnt exist. my point is why should i PAY money for one article? just the same as why should i pay money for one song [and when did the musicians really get paid... most dont] and why subscribe, i flipped through the new SoS issue... this one didnt have ANY articles of interest. im patient however, 6 months... ill read it then. try to charge me then and i probably wont even care to read it by that point.

[Super 8]

[quote]Originally posted by Anderton: [b]<> I know I'm going to get in trouble here, but frankly, yes I think they should. Not much -- maybe $2 or $3 a month to post, free to lurk.[/b][/quote] I would be willing to subscribe for say $15 - $20 a year to have my magazines delivered online. It would do away with the expense of having it printed and mailed to me. It would save a bunch of trees. It would also solve the problem of where to store them (since I never throw them out). Plus, it would make research much easier. Just send me an email when the new issue is released, and give me access to all of the back issues 24/7 for the duration of my subscription and I'll be happy.

[alphajerk]

yeah, online rags... what use would i have for that? what is everyone going to read on the john?

[soapbox]

[quote][i]Originally posted by alphajerk:[/i] i flipped through the new SoS issue... this one didnt have ANY articles of interest.[/quote] Then you flipped too quickly! [b]Melodyne[/b] looks like it's going to be one of the coolest pieces of software to come down the pike in a long while! Dude, you've [b]GOT[/b] to [url=http://www.celemony.com/]check it out[/url] ! BTW, the eSub has online MP3s of Melodyne in action. Cool! :D [ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: soapbox ]

[aeon]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]and payment of services rendered and past issues online are apples and oranges. dont even try to make the connection. it doesnt exist.[/b][/quote] Based on your publicly demonstrated lack of perception as it regards the mechanics of trade, perhaps this is true for you. That said, it isn’t the way the world works. It is waiting here for you to participate in, and if you do so based on a set of communcal values concerning work, worth and renumeration as opposed to a set of abstractions you might actually enjoy it instead of having a fit over a magazine you say is crap anyway. [quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]my point is why should i PAY money for one article?[/b][/quote] Because that one article has worth, a point proven by the fact you want it. alphajerk, if you didn’t grasp it above, please go back and reread people’s posts here - you [i]pay for[/i] the things you [i]wish to have[/i] in this culture. What part of that do you not understand?

[Felix_dup1]

[quote]I know I'm going to get in trouble here, but frankly, yes I think they should. Not much -- maybe $2 or $3 a month to post, free to lurk.[/quote] Funny, I'd think it would be the other way around. $2 or $3 to lurk, free if you post - seeing as how those who are posting are creating the content that people frequent the forums for.

[Anderton]

<> Which is why most professionally-run, high-profile sites are gone. << If a site has a large mindshare and it reaches a very targeted audience/demographic, it allows those who are running the site to charge more for advertising space... Which is probably the only way free sites that are run like a business can realistically survive.>> Advertising on web sites has taken a nosedive due to ever-decreasing click-throughs. Advertisers don't care about "eyeballs," they want results...leads, information, sales. << But a subscription to information...? I wouldn't pay money for it as long as there are similar resources available elsewhere on the net for free.>> You get what you pay for. A lot of the opinions on the web range from somewhat inaccurate to total misinformation. I think it's worth something to get opinions from Roger Nichols or George Massenburg than from some newbie with a limited frame of reference. This mindset of "the net must be free" is why sites are closing up shop left and right, and a Gresham's Law ("bad money drives out good") of information in coming into effect. Until the people providing groceries and electricity to those who run web sites do it for free, web sites will find it increasingly difficult to survive.

[alphajerk]

my fit is NOT directly over the magazine being crap. its about paying for BACK ISSUES [even a month old] ON THE NET! a hard copy is one thing, if the last issue was in the store, i would of bought it anyways but they throw them away after the new issue comes out... so whats the difference of throwing something away and it not being free on the net? same goes with music, downloaded off the net, not product REALLY exists and is as temporary as the stench of my fart... but a packaged CD is tangable product [and the service industry is quite a different thing... but even studios there is a tangable product... no payment, no masters] i think the writers should get paid, the people who layout the rag and put it together... but being AD BASED, THAT IS WHAT PAYS FOR THOSE PEOPLE... not the information itself. and the melodyne review can be found many other places with basically the SAME INFORMATION [the big problem with magazines these days. same products, same reviews.... whats the point? as for click throughs... well maybe advetisers should offer something we NEED instead of putting up another bullshit banner... i DO click on things that perk my interest. lack of click through isnt a gauge of lack of banner effectiveness but lack of comany worth... if they arent getting click throughs, THEY are doing something that isnt interesting to enough people. you could sure as hell bet if whilrwind put up their current lazer engraved rack plate on a banner, they would get a shitload of clickthoughs. so what is the gauge for television.. no click throughs to judge effectiveness there but they pour MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS into these ads...

[soapbox]

[quote][i]Originally posted by alphajerk:[/i] the melodyne review can be found many other places with basically the SAME INFORMATION [the big problem with magazines these days. same products, same reviews.... whats the point?[/quote] My point was in response to "this one didnt have ANY articles of interest." The Melodyne review is an article of great interest to me, and I imagine to many others as well. As to whether or not the Melodyne review can be found elsewhere, I have two points: 1) I subscribe to fourteen music and/or computer magazines and it can't be found in any of the rest yet. Personally I find value in whatever source gets me the information first. 2) If I can get a jacket at Macy's, but a similar jacket appears at Target, and then another similar jacket can be found at Sears, should I not buy a jacket anywhere because it's "basically the SAME" jacket? [quote][i]Originally posted by alphajerk:[/i] so what is the gauge for television.. no click throughs to judge effectiveness there but they pour MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS into these ads...[/quote] Yeah, it seems like a double standard to me too. Of course, it's easier to ignore banner ads than it is to ignore TV commercials (unless you tape everything you watch). I think we're watching the pendulum swing the other way right now. First, people overestimated the profitability of the Internet. Now that companies are paying for that mistake, people are underestimating the profitability of Internet. As with radio and television, eventually standards will be set. [ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: soapbox ]

[soapbox]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Anderton:[/i] You get what you pay for. A lot of the opinions on the web range from somewhat inaccurate to total misinformation. I think it's worth something to get opinions from Roger Nichols or George Massenburg than from some newbie with a limited frame of reference. This mindset of "the net must be free" is why sites are closing up shop left and right, and a Gresham's Law ("bad money drives out good") of information in coming into effect. Until the people providing groceries and electricity to those who run web sites do it for free, web sites will find it increasingly difficult to survive.[/quote] [b]Craig[/b], are you "floating a balloon" here; or is there something you're trying to tell us?