“Piracy is the New Radio”

Canadian superstar Neil Young on piracy:

It doesn’t affect me because I look at the internet as the new radio. I look at the radio as gone. […] Piracy is the new radio. That’s how music gets around. […] That’s the radio. If you really want to hear it, let’s make it available, let them hear it, let them hear the 95 percent of it.


  1. Yay!
    Way to go Mr. Young, keep on rockin’ in the free wwworld… I’m betting that, in the American music industry today, there are a lot more certain men that don’t need him around.

    I’ve been pitching this for a while now, but in this context, it bears repeating : The new economic reality for musicians is earning their income through live shows, and digitized recordings are no longer a “product”, but a draw to get people out to the tour. Saturating the public with a copy of the music is the easiest path to selling out shows. You *want* everyone to have a copy, and you want them to know that seeing you live is the best way to experience your music.

    The new economic reality for movies makers is a retreat out of the home market, back into the theatres *only*. Technology has changed the distribution and reproduction methods so as to be undesirable to suppliers. Insisting that their wonderfully profitable home market be maintained through criminalization of exploiting new technology is just absurd. Market niches dry up some times; it’s supposed to happen in a healthy market. Go back to hawking flicks the way you did before the “home market” ever existed.

    Each of these circumstances preserves the income of the supplier, and leaves citizen’s rights in tact, and costs taxpayers NOTHING; we have no need to create new laws/criminals, or invest in a Ministry of Digital Surveillance to maintain 400% ROIs of a non-competitive market niche. If our government told these two primary forces behind the new copyright laws to cope with their new market realities (like all of us are expected do), a far less criminalizing set of restrictions would be draughted into our copyright laws.

    Gotta get down to it…

  2. “Young is primarily concerned about whether the MP3 files we’re all listening to actually are pretty poor from an audio-quality standpoint. He says that your average MP3 file only contains about five percent of the audio from an original recording and he says Apple Lossless only offers “10.3 percent.”

    I find .mp3 files created using today’s psycho-acoustic models and at a sufficiently high bit rate (192 vbr and up) can only be distinguished from the unmodified source (CD) by a small group among audiophiles (excluding certain ‘known problematic’ tracks that have tell-tale signs of mp3 compression).

    Apple LOSSLESS is just like FLAC: it reproduces the source material 100% accurately since it isn’t lossy. There *is* no difference.

    What Mr. Young should concern himself with, and maybe can effect some change, is the so-called “Loudness Wars” where source material gets compressed and brickwalled to death just so it sounds louder. This is the reason quite a lot of people prefer vinyl: it’s a lot harder to murder. They don’t actually listen to the vinyl itself, but a high-quality digital rip.

    What IS interesting is that we indeed should move to 24/96 (mono/stereo/surround) and optionally 24/192 (mono/stereo) lossless playback, preferably using an open standard like FLAC (not something like MLP). I remember owning a 512MB mp3 player. Size was an issue. Soon we will have 64GB players and I’d prefer have 20 albums in great quality than 200 albums “OK”. As for headphones, yes you’d probably be better off with a pair of Sennheisers but those are prohibitively expensive, certainly for everyday outdoor use.

  3. like
    This is great! I love listening to your Internet radio. I also like how your website looks, but you should be careful of your network security. You can use some good firewalls from