Possible Albums Before Sirens

[Hello Heaven 1,575]

Don't misunderstand. If we raise the money, someone would be able to go and listen to the recordings at the US Copyright Office. I highly doubt that person would be able to make a copy. The whole purpose of the office is to protect copyrighted material. But hopefully whoever we send would be allowed to take copious notes. The most we could hope for is for someone to report back with a track listing, full transcriptions of the lyrics, descriptions of the songs, and perhaps some photos. And one lucky person will have been able to hear it.

Oh yes. Silly me, I didn't think about that. And I guess people would be put off donating money for a different person to listen to these amazing Lana songs which we know next to nothing about. And lyrics are pretty pointless if we don't even know the song. Aww :/

[Guest MissDaytona]

I never have 2 work cus my daddy is rich

jk if i have xtra money it does not go 2 lana not sry 2 say

[Hello Heaven 1,575]

Yeah, well

a) I'm a 13 year old who spends all of my money on bus fares to town to buy tacky hello kitty stuff

and b) my parents aren't exactly going to let me spend $160 (I don't even live in USA) to listen to a few Lana songs.

[RileyThomas 349]

Wow, good find! But I doubt this is going to happen.

[Guest Chloe]

I just don't think it's right to do it. It's not bad like hacking and leaking *cough cough hackmed*, but if lana wanted them released she'd release them

[Sitar 22,172]

ZOMG! It looks like there is a way for someone to hear these (they would not be able to copy them), but it would cost $165.

 

But I don't want to pay money for someone else to hear it.

 

I just don't think it's right to do it. It's not bad like hacking and leaking *cough cough hackmed*, but if lana wanted them released she'd release them

 

We know. Just keep listening to Born to Die and nothing else and we'll carry on

[Guest Chloe]

But I don't want to pay money for someone else to hear it.

 

 

 

We know. Just keep listening to Born to Die and nothing else and we'll carry on

 

I'm fine with BTD and the other songs we have :love:

Of course if other songs were put online I'd listen to (and enjoy) them, but I'd feel guilty going digging for them.

[Guy 976]

 

 

 

Why not Pitchfork? The only bad thing about them is that they don't like Lana, but maybe if someone makes them check out some Lizzy or May stuff.... Who knows?

I'd love to hear those recordings some day

 

 

[Monicker 3,030]

Imma kick back and watch this train run out of steam while people project their guilt onto others, assume Lana's motives and intentions, and pretend to know how the music industry works. All, of course, over a tall glass of maple syrup lemonade, a mountain of spaghetti, and a slice of lemon pie cake.

 

NO, but 4 seriously guyz, this is, uh, insane. Pooling money together so that one person can make a trip to DC to hear some old recordings and then report back with a verbal description of them? There's liking an artist's music and then there's being pathologically obsessive. That said, i'm not trying to stop anyone here. Be merry and carry on.

 

To those who moralistically recoil at the mere thought of tracking down these songs, and cite the "personal" nature of her unreleased music as evidence for leaving it be: these songs are registered at the LOC, not sitting on an old hard drive of hers in oblivion. Throughout the years leading up to getting signed to a major, she has distributed her music, whether at shows, giving physical copies to acquaintances and colleagues, or putting them up online. And now she's a major artist. You think a signed artist has the agency to just release whatever music whenever they desire? What do you think record labels, label executives, and distributors are for? She's under contract, of which we don't know the terms--she can't just "release" her music as she pleases, so the argument that because she hasn't done so yet she must not want to, is meaningless. That is flawed logic and a gross oversimplification.

 

Maybe she doesn't care for that old stuff. Maybe she doesn't even think about it anymore. Maybe she's embarrassed by it given the age at which it was recorded. But again, Sirens was given out to people, and these other unknown songs are registered with the LOC. The fact of the matter is that she is now a public recording artist with a back catalogue of registered music. This business about her old songs being "too personal" is hogwash. The idea being discussed in this thread wouldn't even cause material to leak. Now that is another topic altogether--the moral implications of pirating intellectual property. Why don't we discuss THAT rather than making shit up?

[Sitar 22,172]

NO, but 4 seriously guyz, this is, uh, insane. Pooling money together so that one person can make a trip to DC to hear some old recordings and then report back with a verbal description of them? There's liking an artist's music and then there's being pathologically obsessive. That said, i'm not trying to stop anyone here. Be merry and carry on.

 

Hate on, Monickah!

 

 

But really, you probably wouldn't see my money involved in this. If I had any. But let us dream!

[Eulonzo 76]

This is all confusing.

[Arzi 1,979]

Let's send Dandy Garbage

[Hello Heaven 1,575]

Yeah, this is all a fantasy. And tbh, I think I'd feel a bit sick if I listened to it because

a) the waste of money!

b) I wouldn't be able to enjoy the music - I'd be scribbling down inaccurate lyrics

c) the pressure on me afterwards would be awful. A whole Team Lana army would be shooting questions about it at me and I'd just be like... I dunno.

[Mileena 2,691]

I would, but my money's going on Crystal Castles tickets tomorrow - I must see Alice Glass, sorry priorities here.

Also, I live in England.

Also I'm 14.

Also, I don't want to be hunted down by a fanbase.

[evilentity 13,303]

Wow. Monicker just expressed my own reaction to some of the responses this information has received when posted here and elsewhere. And he expressed it even better than I probably could have:

 

Imma kick back and watch this train run out of steam while people project their guilt onto others, assume Lana's motives and intentions, and pretend to know how the music industry works.

To those who moralistically recoil at the mere thought of tracking down these songs, and cite the "personal" nature of her unreleased music as evidence for leaving it be: these songs are registered at the LOC, not sitting on an old hard drive of hers in oblivion. Throughout the years leading up to getting signed to a major, she has distributed her music, whether at shows, giving physical copies to acquaintances and colleagues, or putting them up online. And now she's a major artist. You think a signed artist has the agency to just release whatever music whenever they desire? What do you think record labels, label executives, and distributors are for? She's under contract, of which we don't know the terms--she can't just "release" her music as she pleases, so the argument that because she hasn't done so yet she must not want to, is meaningless. That is flawed logic and a gross oversimplification.

 

Maybe she doesn't care for that old stuff. Maybe she doesn't even think about it anymore. Maybe she's embarrassed by it given the age at which it was recorded. But again, Sirens was given out to people, and these other unknown songs are registered with the LOC. The fact of the matter is that she is now a public recording artist with a back catalogue of registered music. This business about her old songs being "too personal" is hogwash. The idea being discussed in this thread wouldn't even cause material to leak. Now that is another topic altogether--the moral implications of pirating intellectual property. Why don't we discuss THAT rather than making shit up?

 

 

 

Exactly. The idea being discussed in this thread wouldn't even cause material to leak. But on the subject of leaks...

 

I've always detected a fair amount of disingenuousness in the anti-leak dogmatism adopted lately by much of the fanbase. And I think recent events have demonstrated that. Frankly, I'm tired of hearing people spout as fact what Lana supposedly thinks or feels, especially when it comes second or third hand from sources that are questionable to begin with. As far as I know, Lana hasn't said anything on the record regarding leaks except to say that AKA is widely available online and that she is proud of it. Absent a public statement from Lana regarding leaks, I'm not going to feel bad or conflicted about listening to leaks or wanting things to leak. I'm not sure I would even with a statement. Personally, I don't feel that being a fan ever obligates one to not want to hear new music. (Posting a leak is a separate issue, however, ethically and legally.) As I've said before on another forum, the interests or artists, record companies, and fans are not the same and are often in tension and at cross-purposes with each other, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

 

NO, but 4 seriously guyz, this is, uh, insane. Pooling money together so that one person can make a trip to DC to hear some old recordings and then report back with a verbal description of them?

Yes, this is why I said it was "pretty expensive" and that "I don't think Kickstarter is viable for this" and threw out the still somewhat fantastical idea that maybe a music publication would find it a worthwhile expense for an article because it was the only idea I could think of with even a modicum of practicality. At any rate, I was just surprised to find that listening to the recordings via the Copyright Office is even possible.

 

There's liking an artist's music and then there's being pathologically obsessive.

I plead the fifth.

[Mommy's Mercedes 63]

If i were in the US and I werent a student, I'd donate.

Who would the lucky listener be though?

[ednafrau 831]

Wow. Monicker just expressed my own reaction to some of the responses this information has received when posted here and elsewhere. And he expressed it even better than I probably could have:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exactly. The idea being discussed in this thread wouldn't even cause material to leak. But on the subject of leaks...

 

I've always detected a fair amount of disingenuousness in the anti-leak dogmatism adopted lately by much of the fanbase. And I think recent events have demonstrated that. Frankly, I'm tired of hearing people spout as fact what Lana supposedly thinks or feels, especially when it comes second or third hand from sources that are questionable to begin with. As far as I know, Lana hasn't said anything on the record regarding leaks except to say that AKA is widely available online and that she is proud of it. Absent a public statement from Lana regarding leaks, I'm not going to feel bad or conflicted about listening to leaks or wanting things to leak. I'm not sure I would even with a statement. Personally, I don't feel that being a fan ever obligates one to not want to hear new music. (Posting a leak is a separate issue, however, ethically and legally.) As I've said before on another forum, the interests or artists, record companies, and fans are not the same and are often in tension and at cross-purposes with each other, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

 

 

Yes, this is why I said it was "pretty expensive" and that "I don't think Kickstarter is viable for this" and threw out the still somewhat fantastical idea that maybe a music publication would find it a worthwhile expense for an article because it was the only idea I could think of with even a modicum of practicality. At any rate, I was just surprised to find that listening to the recordings via the Copyright Office is even possible.

 

 

I plead the fifth.

 

THIS. EVERYTHING YOU SAID. i agree. completely.

[Monicker 3,030]

I feel groggy and i'm in a weird mood and i'm just going to ramble and spout out thoughts related to the direction that this discussion has taken. I should probably drink tea and move my body around, but oh well.

 

The subject of leaks is quite complex. There are so many variables and considerations to take into account. I've yet to form a definitive opinion on the matter, and that bothers me because i'd like to neatly wrap my stance on the matter in a pretty little bow, feel certain about it, be done with it and move on to something else. That said, what Baby V Alex said earlier today in another thread is one of the few things i can say i really feel certain about:

 

I love leaks because they are a side of the artist that the labels don't wanna show sometimes

 

I don't think this point can be overstated. In general, a lot of leaked music isn't really "commercially viable" and we'd be unlikely to hear it otherwise. It's unfortunate how often a popular artist isn't fully represented because of what the label deems marketable. So, why not subvert capitalism, right? Sounds good to me.

 

However, that, of course, is not the only thing to consider here. There's the artist's thoughts and feelings about their unreleased material circulating; their financial standing can be a factor (though that can introduce a moral slippery slope); the moral issues of piracy; is intellectual property not property?; should music be free?; a real, tangible, full quality product vs. an inferior copy, and the relative monetary value of each. The list goes on and on, hence why it's so complex.

 

The thing is, the subject seems to be pretty elastic, varying from case to case, depending on an artist's own views and their situation. In Lana's case, leaks have certainly helped her develop a greater fan base. But as evilentity reminded us, we don't know her stance on leaks. It would be a different scenario if there was word from her saying that she's actively opposed to leaks (for whatever reason, be it she is embarrassed by her older stuff and doesn't want it circulating; she doesn't consider it finished and doesn't like the idea of people hearing works in progress, etc.) As i said before though, what we do know is that she hasn't exactly shied away from sharing her music throughout the years. Once an artist becomes a public figure though their back catalog, how it gets handled, and who has and should/shouldn't have access to it becomes a pretty hairy situation. But the control is pretty much out of her hands now. You'll recall that there have been times where even her posting a video to her own YouTube channel lead to WMG pulling it.

 

Being a professional musician/performer is a weird concept. What a luxury to get paid to make music! And how remarkable that we live in a world where it's even an option. I've never fully known what to make of this, and i say this as someone whose entire life revolves around music, whether it's creating it or appreciating it. Now, would i want my demos to slip out of my fingers and get into the public's hands? Ignoring the fact that most people probably wouldn't give a shit about my music, no, probably not. That's because i am very controlling about how i want myself and my work to be represented and heard. There are others, of course, who have a completely different view of the situation. Should the way that we approach leaks vary from artist to artist? Is that realistic or even possible? Really, at the end of the day, someone's demos and unreleased work is none of our fucking business. It's their or some company's property. But that's also not realistic, it's not the world in which we live. The proverbial can of worms or pandora's box has been opened long ago, and as things stand now, there doesn't really seem to be any going back, no? This is the culture now, it has been for a while, and is only moving more and more in a certain direction. I think the game just needs to be reinvented, and i am curious to see where things go in the next decade or so, because something fundamental in the system has to change. Maybe in the future we'll find ourselves purchasing vials of Lana's sweat in an attempt to have something tangible and personal amidst a cultural sea of sameness, all those 1s and 0s. Of course, that'll only be after some company has convinced us with their advertisements that we want and maybe even need Lana's sweat...

 

 

EDIT: I forgot to mention one very important thing--the one undoubtedly positive thing that has resulted from leaking in the internet age: third parties (bootleggers) hardly, if ever, get to profit from other people's music anymore. And that's a really great thing. Why should anyone profit from something they don't own, had no hand in creating, didn't fund, AND obtained illegally?

[Sitar 22,172]

Now, would i want my demos to slip out of my fingers and get into the public's hands? Ignoring the fact that most people probably wouldn't give a shit about my music, no, probably not. That's because i am very controlling about how i want myself and my work to be represented and heard.

 

Once all this Lana stuff dies down, I'm leaking Monicker's secret acoustic album

[evilentity 13,303]

Once all this Lana stuff dies down, I'm leaking Monicker's secret acoustic album

For some reason, I have a hard time imagining a Monicker album with only acoustic elements. Out of all the instruments used on each track, there would have to be at least one that would cause Monicker to protest that it could not technically be considered acoustic. (And you better make damn sure you don't call it a demo, or even worse, an acoustic demo with watermarks.)

 

P.S. Does anyone know Monicker's full name so I can track down his earlier albums at the US Copyright Office?