just to clarify....

I hate the RIAA too; I'd love to see them crash and burn..... my main arguments were A. even if they do fall, there will simply be a new breed of label to come and replace them, and B. I seriously doubt the price raise on internet radio will make the fees even close to the bandwidth costs :/ that's all....

May all pig wearing suits die a fitting death

As per usual I take the middle ground on this issue.

Is the recording industry as a whole going to die? no

Will the RIAA or current "big dogs" go down? probably

People tend to forget that besides the 4 or 5 major labels (as well as all their sub-labels) there are thousands upon thousands of other labels out there, and some of them actually know how to treat their customers right. If the RIAA can't figure out how to make the internet work for them, and I'm seriously doubting they ever will, then some of the smaller labels that are will blow up. Unfortunately, this only means that eventually they will become the new big bad guys because the bigger a company gets the harder it is to maintain any sort of morals and ethics.

As while there are numerous bands self producing and using the internet to the fullest these days, they still do not find nearly as much exposure as the big machine will give them. It's sad, I don't like it, but it's still true.

So yes, the old archaic giants are very likely to fall, but new ones will eventually rise up to replace them. Our best case scenario is for a compromise to happen because neither an elite oligopoly nor millions of individual outfits are going to make things work.

Now............back to the original topic. I haven't seen the exact new pricing systems that are going into place, but I think everyone has forgotten that the cost of bandwidth is still going to be way higher than the cost of paying Soundscan, BMI, ASCAP, etc...

Just to allow a maximum of 1000 listeners at once with 128kbit audio means you need about 125 megabit upload capacity which could cost 10's of thousands of dollars per month.

Like I said before, I don't know the new rates, but if I recall correctly, the old rates were about $0.01 per song, per every hundred listeners....you do the math.

Honestly (like I've been saying for over a year), the easiest way to save Wazee money would be to switch to a 64kbit Ogg Vorbis stream and use a swarming/piggy-back transfer method like Peercast or something....

It depends on the band... I've seen many a band change out or drop a member and have their sound completely change, as while I've known some local bands that changed their name everytime they switched a bass player or drummer, but always sounded the same.

I'd say as long as none of the song writers nor the singer leaves the band they can survive the change. But if the band gets a different song writer or singer, they might as well change their name. And this isn't set in stone as it's still going to vary from band to band.

How do you rate songs on Wazee?  I've never seen a FAQ anywhere so I've always wondered if everyone rated the songs on the same scale as I did. I think if we all tried to follow the same practices ratings might mean more....then again, we might all already be on the same page

Here's how I see 'em:

6 - The song is awesome, play it as often as possible! (use sparingly)
5 - I like this song alot, keep it in heavy rotation
4 - This song is pretty good, play it an average amount
3 - This song is okay..., play it occationaly
2 - I don't like it, but I can tolerate it every once in a while
1 - I hate this song, never play it again!

I also make it a point to rate songs a little lower when I'm tired of hearing them too, even if I love the song.

PS: Hey everybody...long time no see. I'm glad to see the forums are back.

For any Celldweller fans out there who don't already know... There's a new Celldweller CD coming out this fall ...the couple of songs we put on Wazee seem to have been well liked, and I'm trying to get the new single on here I haven't heard back from his promotions manager yet, so Howard may have to aquire it the old fashion way, or well at least off iTunes or something like that.

A first single from the forthcoming CD has been released, and it's a cover of the classic BeeGee's song "Tragedy." You can go ahead and listen to it at http://myspace.com/celldweller and it's available for download from a bunch of online music stores.

Me personally, it's not my favorite song he's ever done...but definitely not too shabby

-Zeph
(your resident Celldweller fan)

Well, it looks like another live show's happening right now

Since I still can't get in the chat room... do you take requests Howard? If so I'd like to hear something by Mindless Self Indulgence. I searched, and there's nothing rateable in the playlist, but who knows  If that's not possible, maybe "Stay With Me (unlikely)" by Celldweller

I listen to Wazee using VLC on Ubuntu Linux

Non SSL chat is still not working

I tried the java client at wazee.mozor.net, no dice. I tried XChat on it's default port of 9999, and port 6667 as advised in another thread. Niether connect.

I seem to be able to connect to port 7000 (SSL), but I get this error message:

"* Connecting to irc.mozor.net (24.24.186.88) port 7000...
* * Certification info:
*   Subject:
*     C=US
*     ST=Michigan
*     L=Troy
*     O=Mozor Networks
*     OU=IRCd
*     CN=west.mozor.net
*   Issuer:
*     C=US
*     ST=Michigan
*     L=Troy
*     O=Mozor Networks
*     OU=IRCd
*     CN=west.mozor.net
*   Public key algorithm: rsaEncryption (1024 bits)
*   Public key algorithm uses ephemeral key with 923 bits
*   Sign algorithm md5WithRSAEncryption (0 bits)
*   Valid since Apr  1 07:34:47 2006 GMT to Apr  1 07:34:47 2007 GMT
* * Cipher info:
*   Version: TLSv1/SSLv3, cipher AES256-SHA (256 bits)
* Connection failed. Error: self signed certificate.? (18)"

I should already have a key on my system as I use SSH on a regular basis, although I guess I've never gotten it signed by anyone. I'm not sure what the problem is

I'm using XChat 2.6.1 on Ubuntu 6.06 (Dapper)

Just for reference. I first tried using the embedded java chat. When that failed I fired up XChat and still couldn't get on. I was using the regular port, because I couldn't figure out how to get XChat to generate me a key or something. It gave me an error of "self signed key?" or something to that extent... Anyway, hopefully it'll work next time Howard does the live thing

It'd be cool if we could chat with ya during this, but it looks like the mozor.net chat server's down.... anyone know a good alternate place?

Awesome... is this gonna be a regular event? or a one time only?

Well it looks like the whole thing's down today (Thursday 2006-4-27)

Right at the top of the page it says: [stream is down]

From the look of the banners on top of the site and other things I've seen recently, it looks like Wazee is not bringing in enough money to pay for all the bandwidth we listeners are constantly using up.

I've made these suggestions before, but I'd just like reiterate that I think if Wazee was offered at a lower bitrate in Ogg Vorbis format and/or via the Peercast P2P Radio broadcasting system that it could drop the bandwidth needs of the site in half if not more!

Of course, I've also noticed that the numer of listeners "currently listening" has seemed to drop dramatically over the last couple months. We used to see around 1000 listeners during the day, but now we rarely see over 500 (only 300 currently as I write this). You'd think that that would be good in a way, because it means less bandwidth Wazee has to pay for, but it also means less potential donators as well as less people bring up hits on the ads and such.

To run a site as bandwidth intensive as Wazee off of just donations and a couple ads is amazing, but apparently the current methods of income aren't quite cutting it, so perhaps you should try cutting the bandwidth needed to run the site instead, with the methods I suggested.

"Actually having to goto Wazee's website" is better because you get them more hits on advertising, ie...more money to keep them on the air.

Well that and they're already nominated in the most interactive category, so wasn't much point to renominate there...