Least surprising thing to happen all week: P4K lists their top tracks of ’07, everybody starts the chants for “Zip!”s. Some even started asking for last year’s benefactor by name. Well, it’s a Christmas miracle! That shit worked. He writes:
Hey hey Stereogum. Last year I compiled and sent you P4k’s top 100 tracks, and it seemed to please your readers. So I decided to do it again.As many as I could find are high quality mp3s, though there are a few that aren’t quite 192+ / VBR.
Feel free to share them, and Happy Holidays.
- adam from Madison
PART 1|PART 2|PART 3
Our gratitude, Adam from Madison, for once again spreading the holiday cheer in a compressed file format. Kids, say thanks to Adam, and remember to wish him warmth. It’s really cold in Wisconsin this time of year! Just ask Bon Iver.
WHERE’D THE LINKS GO?: Is it better to spread these single tracks far and wide to give the artists involved maximum exposure, and are we breaking more than a few hearts by posting these? One commenter pointed out that they personally knew Pitchfork had tried to clear every single track for downloads, or streams, or not at all, so by posting the streaming or not-at-all tracks here, we’re going against the wishes of the artists and labels involved. Which we should have concluded from the get-go, but how could we not share Adam From Madison’s Christmas miracle? Anyway, our minds changed, we’re apologetically taking away the punchbowl. Check out P4K for some streaming goodies.
 |
 |
santa’s bringing adam from madison crazy mcdollars this xmas. thank you very much, adam/’gum.
Cheers and more power to the Stereogum community for making this happen by demanding it–but most especially to Adam for taking the time to collect and upload. A Merry Christmas indeed!
Thanks, Adam. Stay warm, man. Nice to see the list of great things from my home state growing: beer, Feingold, Adam the mp3 guy…
do we know which end this starts from? top down or bottom up? THANKS!! way cool
Adam is on my nice list.
Whoa, thanks so much. Good boy!
ADAM = THE MAN!!!
At least now I’ll have a killer soundtrack to listen to through all the holiday boredom to come to me at my parents’ house for the next couple of weeks…
Adam, u sure aint going to hell
merry xmas, indeed!
ADAM GOOD LUCK WITH FINALS
can anyone repost these? sendmax has reached its hourly limit…
adam b.??????? you are AWWEEESOMMEEE.
adam, the only way i can repay you for this graciousness is to offer you my body. (i make natasha khan look like kim thayil, btw.)
Uhhhh but whats on the list? Im not downloading it if I dont know whats on the list first.
it’s a christmas miracle!
thanks adam
Thank you Adam and Stereogum -you guys are maxing your karma points! Free drinks on me if you ever hit LA.
thanks Adam!
Another Wisconsin reader! Hello, Adam.
That’s so sweet of ya Adam! Thanks!
Aak. So slow. Can someone who has this please make and seed a torrent file and post the tracker link?
torrent! torrent! torrent!
sednspace is full
however thank you adam! you still rule!
i’m sure all the artists will thank you, stereogum. hey adam from madison, what’s your address? perhaps some touring bands might like to help themselves to the contents of your refrigerator next time they’re passing through town.
oh philip chill the fuck out
Phillip, the people here go to more concerts and buy more cds than the general public. Previewing songs is likely to bring more business for the artists.
if stereogum readers need somebody to bundle pitchfork’s top 100 tracks of the year for them — which by definition are going to be well known within the indie world, if they’ve charted in the first place — then i’d have to wonder what, in fact, stereogum’s readers are buying.
philip: by definition, us pretentious stereogum readers all listen to stuff that’s even more obscure, why the fuck would we have more than a handful of those albums?
The people here live music – and that is where a large part of their/our time and disposable income goes. There is really nothing to wonder about.
@phillip: You see those links under every song in the Pitchfork feature? You see how many of them are labeled “mp3″ or “stream”? I’d say these artists are trying to put this music out there for people to hear.
right, but there’s a difference between offering up a massive payload of MP3s (at 192kbps), via sendspace, and including links (with the labels’ permission) or streams as a part of the original review. but clearly we fall on opposite sides of this argument so forget it, y’all can enjoy your self-justifications.
tk., enjoy your venture into the indie mainstream. i’d forgotten how very challenging stereogum’s coverage is.
philip: We will enjoy our self-justifications while I encourage you to continue to enjoy your snobby self-righteousness.
Thanks again Adam/Stereogum.
I know for a fact Pitchfork asked each one of these 100 labels/artists if they wanted their music for available download, stream, or not at all. That is responsible nettiqute. Sorry music lovers, it’s not what you feel entitled to, it’s what the artist wants to give. When Stereogum posts mp3s they ALWAYS ask, or are given, permission first. Until right now. This is entering unethical waters. I hope the Stereogum staff and their investors take a good hard look at what is being done here. This is crossing the line and it’s wrong.
I respectfully disagree with you, Justin, and I work in the entertainment industry. Since radio no longer provides adequate coverage, its music communities like this one and Pitchfork that are filling the void and providing the necessary exposure for the artists. People like to sample today, share their discoveries and pass the word on (it’s not about hordeing–most people will discard the bulk). This is why websites like IMeem and Youtube allow their users to embed their favorites on other websites. If anything, Stereogum’s post compliments Pitchfork’s and brings more exposure to the artists, which translates into more sales and concert tickets.
nah, it’s not about exposure. it’s definitely about whether or not the artists have given PERMISSION to have these mp3s posted. Streaming music, embedded videos and web chatter are definitely legitimate forms of exposure that don’t necessarily require any sort of clearance with the powers that be (labels, artists, etc.). HOWEVER, an mp3 is an actual owned and distrubuted artistic commodity often sold for a profit. I agree with Justin, there’s no way all those bands/artits have given permission to have their songs distributed for free. Exposure without a free mp3 is probably more desirable for the creators fo the music (hence all the streams), and this zip is probably unethical, given the lack of permission. On the other hand, if the artist has given pfork or gum permission then that be gravy.
the question now… did the the permission or the lack thereof of posting these mp3′s had an influence on the choice of the top 100 songs? hrmmmm
The real question is why is there so much dance music on the list? I feel like I’m back in some horrible boutique in South Beach.
“dudeasincool” i love that you used the “i’m in the entertainment industry” card.
maybe this fleeting “exposure” you speak of might translate to a few extra concert tickets here and there, but i think the current state of the record industry (both major and indie) proves that this exposure leads to no album sales. stop trying to justify your stealing.
ah shiaaat, why didn’t you guys wait a couple of hours before taking the files downs… thanks to the asshole posting they shouldn’t share this, yeah fuck you.
WHERE’S THE MENORAH? ALL I SEE ARE CHRISTMAS TREES!
IT WONT WORK
damn
ok so now someone repost a link to the zip so we can keep this going. i discovered so many new artists last year because of that zip…
All of you who are questioning the ethics of releasing this zip package are out of your damn skulls. These are single tracks! It’s not like Stereogum and Adam are releasing entire albums. The vast majority of the readers here are going to use these as a resource to discover more music that they enjoy. After listening to a number of the streaming songs directly from the Pitchfork site, I’ve got a pretty good list going of cds that I’m going to go out and buy.
I was too late to get the zip file but I can still appreciate it.
“dudeasincool” was spot fucking on.
I could only make it to the part 2, and sucks for me; I’m a completist.
anyone have new redirects to these zip files?
Obviously the artists and labels have the final say-so in what goes, but for what it’s worth, I will really only listen to what I can put on my ipod. I’m not going to sit at my computer and stream tracks. And while it may be wrong that I never buy an album until I’ve heard it and I like it, it is true.
and philip, you used to be about the music, maaan
Nick, Phillip, Justin and everyone else who have called Adam’s zip file unethical are 100% correct. I am so sick of people thinking that they are entitled to music – especially when they play the “but I buy so much music, anyway” card. I buy a lot of food… it doesn’t mean that I feel justified stealing it every once in a while.
It reminds me of all the hippies back in the days of Woodstock and the original Isle Of Wight Festival who thought music festivals should be free. You see them in the documentaries, with their long hair, ratty beards and smelly clothes, pissing and moaning about how you can’t put a price on music. It was bullshit then and it is bullshit now.
Well done Stereogum on removing the links – though they shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
It reminds me of all the hippies back in the days of Woodstock and the original Isle Of Wight Festival who thought music festivals should be free. You see them in the documentaries, with their long hair, ratty beards and smelly clothes, pissing and moaning about how you can’t put a price on music. It was bullshit then and it is bullshit now.
Posted by: Ben at December 19, 2007 11:53 AM
Ben, terribly good points. Clear and concise. With ample facts and arguments to back it up. Plus you didn’t even resort to name calling or irrelevant details.
Idiot.
Yer, I like watching old documentaries in smell-o-vision too…
thanks Adam and stereogum for the download.
http://pandatoes.blogspot.com/2007/12/download-pitchforks-top-100-tracks-of.html
ah thanks RIAA, u rule!!! LOL
here is the clearest, most concise argument i can give you chad.
man man vs. band of horses in 2006. both bands got blogged about quite a bit (man man even moreso, maybe.), got coverage in the same magazines, played the same venues and festivals and such. but band of horses also got “mainstream” (read: non-blog) attention too. they licensed their songs, they got on tv shows and movies, and broke out of the blog world. man man never quite did that, so we can assume that their core fanbase is the blog-set who are so convinced that they deserve free music.
so this basically comes down to “blog success” and “mainstream success”
lets compare numbers now, shall we?
six demon bag has sold about 18,000 copies.
…..
everything all of the time has sold 90,000.
i’m sure the dudes in man man are making a decent living off of touring (i use decent loosely, bands dont make nearly as much as you think on tour)..but you know who are getting the short end of the stick here? the people who:
a) put up the money for man man to record.
b) promoted them (dont fool yourself, every time you read about a band on a blog its because of label PR)
c) paid them tour support
those are the people you guys are hurting with your “support them live and get the word out” philosophy.
and before you come back with a “good! record labels should go away! radiohead showed that a band can self-release a record and still function succesfully” lets consider the four big example people have been using to defend this statement:
1. Radiohead.
Established their loyal following while on Capitol.
2. Prince
Established his loyal following while he was on Warner Brothers.
3. Mike Patton
Established Faith No More’s loyal following while on Rhino & Reprise.
4. Saul Williams
Experienced exposure from his first record that came out (shocking!) on American records.
all of these major labels poured a ton of marketing money into each of these acts, and while i’m not trying to argue that that is the ONLY reason why these acts are now successful (the music might have a little to do with it*)… they definitely wouldn’t be getting the kind of sales they are now independently without that initial marketing push of their labels.
without major label marketing money you would have never heard “Creep” on the radio, you would have never seen the Paranoid Android video on mtv.
face it. blog readers’ sense of entitlement has put a ton of people out of work (at both major and independent labels). and if anyone here actually does “work in the entertainment industry” and still supports things like these zip files filled with illegal, stolen music..you must really hate your peers, co-workers, and the company you work for, because you are helping to destroy the music industry. not the bands, but the people who support those bands when nobody knows about them.
..sorry, didn’t mean to get all RIAA in the last paragraph.
* – of course, a joke, oh humorless stereogum commenter.
well, so much for concise… here’s the short version:
band of horses and man man got the same amount of blog buzz, yet band of horses also got a fair amount of mainstream attention, resulting in them selling almost 5x what man man sold. They didn’t get 5x the exposure, so one can only assume that bloggers (and their respective readers) do not help a band sell records at nearly the level that you people seem to think.
Nick, I’m really not sure how your man man vs band of horses example has ANYTHING to do with giving away a single track for free. The only point you may have proven is that signing your music away to commercials and hiring a PR rep leads to more exposure and more financial success. No shit.
In absolutely none of my statements have I advocated downloading entire albums for free. I’m arguing that giving away what is essentially a mix-tape does nothing but increase a fan base. Giving away a single track for free is like getting a free cocktail wienie at the grocery store and then going to the frozen foods section and buying a box. I’m absolutely for buying hard copy cds and records.
Nick, it’s a shame that you can’t have a rationale discussion without resorting to name-calling and false accusations at that.
The indie music scene is thriving, in part because people share their musical discoveries with each other–it’s no longer about what they hear on the radio, it’s about what the hear on the music blogs, or myspace or facebook, or Stereogum and other social communities.
That said, it is my opinion that ‘listening’ to music’ is not stealing, no matter what format you listen to it in, whether it be the radio, streaming, videos or downloading, or whether a friend or acquaintance plays it for you. If you keep something you would have bought, that is another story, but for most people, sampling something new, isn’t the same as ‘stealing.’ How else are you going to hear something to make an intelligent decision that it is something you should own and want buy?
Nick, have you ever worked with new artists. Do you now hard it is for them to get traction? I can’t tell you how many calls I get to try and help promote someone, and what kind of uphill battle that is. Getting heard is what it is all about and Sterogum and others ought to be saluted for the work they do in helping promote these artists.
By the way, anyone could easily download all those cuts at Pitchfork. But the zips would have been a convenient way to review the material for new artist discoveries, etc (which I post about every day – for free). Alas, I’m sorry to say, Nick, the server wasn’t working efficiently for me, so there is nothing to justify.
While you are mostly right Rick, I quibble on a couple of points. Yes, Band of Horses got more mainstream success, but they also got way more blog success. Maybe not on Stereogum, but I saw BOH around the interweb much more than I saw Man Man. So they both got pretty big because of blogs. Then, I think BOH made the decision to try to push for mainstream success where Man Man didn’t, and that is hardly Adam from Madison’s fault. And so now lets take their fanbases, since BOH made it big, probably 300,000 people saw them somewhere. Because Man Man didn’t, only the poor blog-set knew of them. This is a considerably smaller audience. So maybe its not entirely the fact that the blog-set refuses to pay for music. Its just that there are less people!
Finally, I don’t know if you can say that the incredible upsurge in exposure these bands are experiencing on the internet “put a ton of people out of work.” 15 years ago, where could you go to listen to a band like Man Man? Possibly a really good local record store where they are on a shelf with 150 other bands you don’t know. Possibly in a music magazine. But small bands now can build a following easier (if they are good). Tapes N’ Tapes tried the old fashioned way, and they sold less that 2,000 copies until blogs got ahold of them, and then they sold ten times as much.
But I agree people do too much, “It’s okay cause I’m giving them exposure and I buy music sometimes anyway.”
The difference of sales between Band of Horses and Man Man couldn’t *possibly* be because Band of Horses has a more accessible sound, could it?
That said, thanks for this. There’s a lot of bands I’d heard about, but never actually heard (or would have) without this. This will definitely result in a few CDs being bought that I would have ignored otherwise.
I’m arguing that giving away what is essentially a mix-tape does nothing but increase a fan base.
Posted by: chad at December 19, 2007 1:12 PM
How can you equate this to a mix-tape? Obviously, you care little for the art that is traditional mix-tape making. Putting together a proper mix-tape takes a keen ear, an imagination for how songs from disparate sources can be melded together, and a purpose in mind for the intended listener. A true mix-tape is a personal statement from one person to another.
What Adam has done involves no skill for music whatsoever. He has merely taken a list that someone else has put together and distributed it to the masses. There is nothing mix-tape about it.
Chad, your already weak arguments just nose-dived.
No Mix-Tapes For The Masses, your statement is absolutely absurd. By your definition of a mix-tape, my mix of Nirvana, Soundgarden etc that I made off the radio when I was a child doesn’t qualify. What exactly was I making then? I am absolutely confused as to how a group of songs provided in one package doesn’t qualify as “essentially a mix-tape”. Maybe I just don’t live up to your expectations of music snobbery in regards to the “mix-tape art form”.
I also am confused as to how my “already weak arguments just nose-dived” when you did not respond to the vast majority of the statements I was making. You chose to single out a statement and critique it on the most picky of definitions. I can get behind and appreciate a mix-tape that was put together with thought and personal consideration, but to disqualify anything that doesn’t fall into those widely undefinable terms is absurd
hey No Mix-Tapes crapper… do you have a band? do you know how the business goes? I doubt it, you may have your opinion (heard freedom of speach before?), but you’re comparing 2 bands, and that is not the point wether music should be thrown away for free or not. So stick to the point and discuss, you know that 2 minds are 2 different worlds, so try convincing all these lads posting in stereogum. If you don’t want to be a part of this, then don’t download the zip files, if you ask me it’s a great way of discovering some bands, more when you share it with people like me outside the US.
To throw my 2 cents in here…
I see no problem in being able to listen to a “sampler”. I won’t hear most of these bands on radio, and I certainly am not going to blindly buy an album just because I read about the band, sound unheard.
I do appreciate the opportunity to listen before I decide I actually want to buy the album.
Is that a crime? Apparently, for some people here, it is.
After all is said and done, is it not the artist and the record label, who should have the right to decide the manner in which their music is disseminated?
The fact that Pitchfork were not legitimately able to clear the songs should be an immediate red-flag that these zip files are not legitimate.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!!!
http://www.sendspace.com/file/d3yrog
http://www.sendspace.com/file/qop5fi
http://www.sendspace.com/file/sk9z69
Free mp3s means people are more likely to buy the vinyl. That’s where the industry is headed and for good reason. CDs are extinct, viva la Vinyl!
crap I only got A1 and A2. This blows.
Does anybody happen to have a list of the songs that artists would *not* consent to have downloaded? I’m not one to assault others over stolen music, but I like to avoid taking music illegally, so I’d like to know which ones I “can” keep.
Mr. Zips, your awesome, I only got part one before work this morning, working on 2 and hopefully 3 right now
I think putting the top 50 albums on zip files would be illegal and absolutely terrible but 100 songs isn’t going to hurt any one.
This download site isn’t doing it for me. How about torrenting it?
single songs are still artistic property; they can be sold and owned… and taken without permission. i’m not here to say that giving an mp3 to your buddy is bad, but a zip on a major online publication of 100 songs that didn’t get 100% clearance is simply unethical, and the difference should be clear. i
t’s also not a matter of album vs. song. go listen to a stream and find out if you’ll buy the album. listen to thirty second clips, go to the record store and put on some headphones, read a few reviews, but don’t try to justify this crap. 100 songs in a giant highly accesible and well advertised “take all for free jar” is hurting the artists who would actually like to make money off their tunes. anyone in the record industry knows that these days you probably won’t go out and buy the album anyway, you’ll just torrent it or whatever. and someone clearly knows nothing about music if they’re saying vinyl is the future (you just like the texture of the sound, it’s not technically better than digital).
you’re not “listening” to a sampler. you fucking own it, and without the consent of the artist or label (for some). WRONG.
Sonokrug, you may be right. But to be honest, the vast majority of people downloading these songs don’t care, and trying to guilt them into thinking otherwise won’t make a lick of difference.
Music has been available “free” via the net for almost a decade. Putting the genie back in the bottle is impossible.
i dont really even have a problem with these zip files, the thing i have a problem with is the sense of entitlement that comes across from the blog-commenting set when it comes to music downloading. they think they’re being revolutionary and all this, when the fact is they’re scrambling to justify stealing.
Whooa I wasn’t trying to justify the downloading of these songs and I also don’t think I’m entitled to them. I’m just saying that I feel that it’s not as evil as every one is trying to make it out to be. Also I wish there were stores around I could just go to and listen to songs but all I see around me are a best buy, target, and barnes and noble. The closest “indie” record store carries mostly metal and punk.
I don’t feel entitled really. But if it is there for the taking, I’m going to download it, listen to it, and likely delete 80% of it within a few days. What I wind up keeping, I’ll typically buy the album, and become a long-term fan.
That’s exactly how I discovered Spoon in 03. Since then, I’ve bought their latest 2 albums and seen them live twice. I think the net effect for the band is positive.
Face it, it’s the new reality. You can fight it, or try to adapt.
People will get their music via the easiest mode possible.
If people have a choice of downloading all 100 songs via a convenient Zip file, vs. hunting down various streams on the net, visiting each artists’ Myspace page, trying to hear them at Best Buy, and so on, which option do you think the majority of people will pick?
Now, if the labels could get their act together and make it simple and easy for me to stream all of the songs via one site, then it’s a different story.
Like the previous poster…don’t fight it, adapt to what listeners WANT.
you guys can’t even figure out how to steal music efficiently??
cough cough sharebee.com
I just created this one — enjoy
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3941575
thanks to the guy who fixed A3 before that and merry christmas to you generously zip file sharing stereogum community
i actually think we’re moving towards an age where it will be harder and harder to sell music. consider how many people paid nothing for radiohead. we are in an age where we really don’t know the value of music and it’s complicated.
anyway, i don’t buy all my music, i rip a lot from friends and my radio station. stereogum made the right move by taking the zip down because it’s different than a person to person exchange. it’s like throwing someone else’s cash to the masses. i do think artists and labels should have given permission because it probably does help in the end, but when they say “no” you simply have to respect it.
labels shouldn’t exist the way they do now. the new direction is one in which the artist own their music and hires people to simply promote it for a fee. the price on itunes and maybe even in record stores needs to drop. quality needs to go up. and touring might have to be a necessity for bands now.
please do support the artist you like by buying merchandise and attending concerts especially if you don’t buy their music. that money goes directly to them and not the label.
Lekman, Jens. National, The. Sayer, Yea. Who tags like this?
i posted this one yesterday on mininova if you’re looking for another tidy torrent. the formatting was a bitch though.
hello? hello? no dappled cities fly?
David Pogue of The NY Times suggests attitudes about downloading and morality are split between generations. Interesting reading and on topic with the discussion here.
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/the-generational-divide-in-copyright-morality/?em&ex=1198472400&en=5a999a77ea83c7ba&ei=5087
need song ID not on pitchfork top 100 – sounds like a mates of state song, recent, has a chorus line of “this is how…in/to the end” and also had phrase “playground animal” or something like that in it? thx.