DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads - Forums: P2P - Peer To Peer: Should DMusic get involved in peer to peer

Forums > Music Business: P2P - Peer To Peer

Should DMusic get involved in peer to peer

leflaw	Date: January 27, 2004 @ 8:17 PM for promotion, for example? how?
N-C-S-Angel	Date: January 27, 2004 @ 9:40 PM I think so. I think it might help more artists get more exposure too.
victorsskull	Date: January 27, 2004 @ 10:56 PM hell I dont know Im such a bone head
woodhead	Date: January 27, 2004 @ 11:27 PM It would be cool, my band uses it, so if there was a data type base would def be cool, p2p rocks for sure for the indie artist.
sinai	Date: January 27, 2004 @ 11:33 PM absolutly
Bill43	Date: January 27, 2004 @ 11:40 PM
SpicoliInc	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 2:01 AM You betcha.
Woof	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 3:03 AM How would people find the artists though, unless they knew to search for them? Covers would show up, though... along with the original artists' version. But then the artist who did the cover is leaving themselves wide open for a lawsuit, unless they keep their band anonymous...
Little-Nemo	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 4:25 AM Perhaps if Dm offered a playlist of artists and from time to time that playlist would rotate. Then the user could chose from that list. Just a thought, not sure how it could be implemeted. One that is less complicated than the charts ie: Genre name - # of tunes name - # of tunes Genre name - # of tunes Then when you search the p2p with the name chosen the tunes come up. Or if you search the list using genre it brings up all artists available.
withering	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 6:50 AM Just some lunch hour brainstorming: First things first. Being realistic, I don't think it's practically possible for DMusic by itself to host artist's music on p2p in order to effectively promote them. Why? Bandwidth costs, bandwidth costs, bandwidth costs, and server cost. Most p2p protocols have no considerations for bandwith efficiency. Then there is the issue of the 'p2p horizon', and how to overcome it to provide sufficient network saturation. Most p2p clients only see x numbers of nearby nodes. As far as I know, companies that try to saturate or monitor p2p networks today run huge server parks with servers that appear to be on entirely different networks, so that their nodes are visible to as many clients as possible. So more down the drain for you, lef . But instead, what about a collaborative p2p concept, in the true spirit= 192kbps) versions of their music, pictures or even band videos, to a 'master' ftp server hosted by DMusic. Maybe DMusic could provide a simple client script to check for new files at the DMusic ftp master, and automatically download them to the user's 'shared folder'. Given that many end users/artists have only low bandwidth/modem connections, here's a possible way to up the bandwidth; DMusic could approach universities and other entities to get them to host p2p supernodes, touting the 'DMusic alternative' as a free, idealistic, "music distribution of the future" alternative to the RIAA deals we've seen signed lately. The idea of p2p, especially maybe in combination with students/universities is still relatively fresh in public memory. So if you play your cards right, something like this could be a tremendously effective PR stunt for both DMusic, DMusic artists, independent music in general, and 'legal' uses of p2p technology.
withering	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 6:58 AM To clarify; The p2p nodes I'm talking about would be your ordinary KaZaA, WinMX, qtella, gtkgnutella client, only difference being that the node's owner has agreed to share a certain set of DMusic files, to ensure that these files are readily available in every corner of the p2p world. Maybe the files should be tagged with a DMusic mark to show where they originated, and maybe DMusic could even monitor p2p downloads to provide a rough 'hit list' of which DMusic files were the most popular.
torndownunit	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 7:13 AM As someone else said, unless someone is looking for the bands name on a P2P app they won't find it. You can tag the files with a bunch of 'similar artists' info, but that is basically just a form of Spam. I think sites like this do more Independant bands then any P2P app does because they allow people so find info on what they are listening to which leads them to download music. It's better to make sure the site is at the top of search rankings. For example, when mp3.com was up if you typed "Orangeville, Ontario Punk" or something similar in a search engine my bands mp3.com page would popup in the first 10 search results. That is pretty impressive. And more people will find out about my band that way then are likely to stumble on it on Kazaa. It wouldn't hurt to get the files on P2P apps, but I don't think it would be a huge benefit either.
Arthen	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 12:14 PM Spicoli Inc - your reply perfectly fits George's expression like a glove
mawcs	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 12:19 PM I think community would be lost if DMusic moved towards p2p. :twocents: That's part of what makes DMusic special. Any artist here is perfectly free to share his/her music/videos etc. on existing p2p (although none are really set up for indies).
mawcs	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 12:20 PM err: (must... have... edit... function...)
ebarbarella	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 7:48 PM I like the idea but I dont know how...
Thaspian	Date: January 28, 2004 @ 8:31 PM Can you be more specific? How so? Should DM throw its songs onto P2P, should DM advertize certain P2P?
Woof	Date: January 29, 2004 @ 12:12 AM Well... here's something, maybe... If DMusic were to affiliate itself with a software developer, then it could offer its' own media player/ripper. It would be freeware. Then folks could share the software, and filesharers could download the "DMusic Media Controller" or something like that... gets the name out there, without the hassles of copyright infringement or similar problems... as a matter of fact, it could include a jukebox already set up to hook into DMusic... and LAME (one of the best mp3 encoders available) is already open source...
ronnie71	Date: January 29, 2004 @ 2:30 AM and then put that on every Gateway Hp, or whoever else make PC's.. Just think RIAA wouldnt allow Gateway to do that but we can...
Woof	Date: January 29, 2004 @ 4:31 AM All too true, Ronnie... but a good thought, nonetheless
mtekk	Date: January 30, 2004 @ 6:51 PM we should support magnet links for all the downloadable songs on the site, and once I have a really good internet connection (cable modem, plus multi site p2p nodes sharing everything that i can get from Dmusic) Then make all donloads only avalible via p2p via magnet links and/or ed2k links (ah also only use on ED2K/G2/Gnutella networks, or at least thoes are the only ones i'll ever support other than my own) DM should support the open network and open source community, such as Gnutella, G2, and Ed2k, and stay away from KaZaA, NeoNet, ect. DM should ack as the link between fans/customers and Independent artists, dmusic should be promting them, and make them known, DM should have magnet links and ED2K links to link content from the site to p2p networks, and DM wouldn't actually host any of the songs, the users will, have it in the policy that they agree apon when visiting the site that if they download anything off of a p2p network that is from DMusic, then they have to share it. with a few computers that share only DM content over a network such as G2 all the time, such as what i am setting up, then there would always be reliable nodes sharing the files and no need to worry about not being able to find anything. also in the metadata tages of the mp3 put in the 'distributer' category type in DMusic for all files from DMusic. I've got allot more ideas too just not enough time
ronnie71	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 3:15 AM that sounds awesome.. what are magnet link? so you are working on a independent P2P?.. that freaking awesome..
Woof	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 6:12 AM http://www.magnetlink.org/ Hopr This Helps, Mike.
Woof	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 6:12 AM Damn typos...
musicpicks	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 7:23 AM Voice chat programs are a great way to hear music without downloading, without bandwidth issues, and it's FREE!!! No need to chain yourself to digitally primitive minute men file transfers when you can play your music through your ISP's connection or voice server. Better yet, PERFORM instead of just playing a pre-existing rewhoring.
CrescentShadow	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 10:58 AM would it really help promote our music? how would we set up the promoting and things? it would make it easier to download songs i think, but would it really benefit anyone that much? it seems like it would just be us dmusic members downloading... you know? but in a sense, that would promote interaction, you could stumble accross a band you really like and then go comment on their dmusic page. it would make browsing genres easier. those are the only real advantages i can think of, unless there is some advartising campaign thats going to be launched to get outsiders to listen to our music.
jmweirick	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 6:25 PM First, the major benefit to dmusic would not be promotion but bandwidth. If dmusic members shared the bandwidth, the cost to the site is much less. The downside is that it will possible take a long time for the full benefits of P2P use to be seen. Overall I think the idea is good, as I have before stated in different threads. Implementing the system would first require that the site decide what they want out of P2P. The most odvious is downloading. There are two download systems for P2P that I know of. The traditional system is a search and retrive system that most P2P apps use. The only other system that I know of is the one used by kast, which is more of a broadcast download sytem where the user sends out files on a schedual to subscibers to his/her channel. The first system gives the user the most control and is the one that I would recomend using in this situation. Following with the traditional sytem the site will have to decide what methods of track discovery will be used. The most odvious song discovery method is to create a link database, either on a seperate page from the individual artists' pages or alongside of the normal download links on the artists' pages. We could also just offer software and allow the people to search for artists on their own. We could also use various ways to promote artist thourgh the networks, such as dmusic playlists distributed on the network (this system would be most effective though in the kast broadcast system rather than a traditional method). My personal preference would be to offer the links alonside the traditional download links on the artists' pages. The next big choice is what network. There are far too many already in existence to go through them all here, but sites like zeropaid.com offer descriptions of many of them. We could use one of these existing networks, or we could create our own. Both methods have their benifits. On the one hand you get exposure to a larger audience than just visitors to the site, but on the other hand you get a specially crafted network to meat you needs. The choice depends mostly on the sites needs from the network. Once these decisions have been made, the developers must decide if they want to write there own P2P, or borrow one from sombody else. If the decision is made to write our own network than there is no decision here. Otherwise it depends on what the site needs from the software. The finall decison depends on how much the site intends to be involved in the network. We could host a P2P server that acts as a back-up node for sources, we could allow the network to function completely autonimously from the site (except for the provision of links), or some compromise between the two. Needless to say the use of a P2P will require some work on the part of the site administration, but I believe that it will be profitable in the long run.
mtekk	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 7:10 PM On all meta tages for dmusic song content, type in the discription as 'DMusic content http://www.dmusic.com' that's what I'm doing to evey song that I download form DM, it's a start, then all we have to do is search DMusic and all those files will show up if they thave DMusic in the description. Yeah I've my own project working on a p2p model that would benifit DMusic, which I was planning to use for the development of it (testing of different things that are part of G^3, GASSPS, and G^2) I say we use G2 to start, is far superior over all other alternatives , it's scalibilty is much better, plus we can have peerweb help with magnet links for downloadable content. and once i get my lazy aries in gear and start working of Gramps more often then We can migrate to a G^2 platform with the G^3 promotion layer.
mtekk	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 7:13 PM plus G2 doesn't have crappy clients that have spyware like KaZaA, Shareaza and Gnucleus both now support it and morpheus will too, shareaza nodes should be the main ones that we concentrait on using, It has features that the other g2 clients don't have yet, and is the most reliable client
Thaspian	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 8:24 PM Shareaza is garbage. Pure, garbage. And G2 only works on Windows, outside the horrible linux clients. And the damn magnet links for gnutella are a rip off of ed2k links for eDonkey2000/Overnet/eMule... continue.
TameasDust	Date: January 31, 2004 @ 9:31 PM a few questions would this slow down DMusic downloads and such would the bandwidth go to hell what form of promotion are we talkin of here ... would all the songs uploaded to dmusic be put on the listings of the P2P site would they come with a special note that they are legal to download just wondering
Attuidechick	Date: February 1, 2004 @ 8:32 AM Hey yall what is poppen? Yea I am a newbe but I know what to do sorta. The thing though is I like to post me raps. Do yall know where I could do that at? holla Tammy
jmweirick	Date: February 1, 2004 @ 5:22 PM Trameas, for the first two questions, when done properly the downloads would speed up and it would save on bandwith. Promotion would depend on the network and the implementation method. The last two would be up to the site administration. I don't think that G2/ED2K or the like would be best for the site. I think something like BitTorrent would be a better alternative. BT has already been used by many Linux Distro sites to save on bandwidth and is very easily implemented.
mtekk	Date: February 1, 2004 @ 8:07 PM The only 'issues' about bittorrent is that you need to 1. reseed when they stop downloading it 2. works best with big files (full cds) 3. little to no benifit with small individual 3-5mb mp3s Thaspain, explain more indept, I know it's not opensource, I know it doesn't run in linux, jut give it time, also I know ed2k links were here first, I know.
jmweirick	Date: February 1, 2004 @ 9:05 PM good point mtekk. next...
pog	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 6:23 AM To synchronize a peer network amd dmusic servers may be a tall order, however I was thinking if we started a tagging method to get the word out, it may be a good approach. We could start a universal method of tagging mp3s such as "songname-artist-dmusic.com.mp3" via word of mouth in our community.
leflaw	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 9:55 AM tell me more... how many servers would we need? bandwidth? etc?
mtekk	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 4:08 PM pog, yeah I'm kinda thinking on the lines taht you are, but we shouldn't use that type (of tagging) because it interfeers with the "artist - songname.mp3" type that is standard. Instead in the 'metadata' of the song (accessed via your p2p client' in the 'discription' line type(without the quotes ): 'DMusic content http://www.dmusic.com' all good p2p networks will search through the metadata for each file too. leflaw: If you could get lets say all the active members on Dmusic to share every DMusic song that they have on their hard drive, when they are on line, on the network of choice (preferably not KaZaA/FastTrack) ofcourse, then some should compensate for others not always being on. then we need let's say atleast 1 to 3 always on nodes that are syncronised with the DM server, so that all new songs that are uploaded get to the network right away, then as I am, setting up other 24-7 nodes (err servers) with a selected variaty of nodes would be bennificial. Now as for the synchronization, if let's say the main server that hostes the content for DM, which is the one that gets the content uploaded to from the artists where to share the folder(s) in which the content is stored in, on the selected network (oh crap, the servers are linux (that's not the bad part..), now we must use Gnutella as our network) then have two other servers that mirror (somehow) the content in thoes folders on that server, they really don't have to be very powerfull, maybe only 700MHZ with 256MB ram, the internet connection it the important thing, need some speed for the main content providers. but also the more nodes sharing content, the less bandwidth is required for the 'releasing' nodes.
withering	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 6:23 PM - modem users - offline time - isp firewalling. And I would guess that DMusic "officially" supporting kazaa/fasttrack is not an option?" id="84169">I think leflaw, if you are to pull this off, you need guys like that ^^^^. ...setting up other 24-7 nodes (err servers) with a selected variaty of nodes . And you obviously need to give them some incentive to do just that. You cannot saturate the p2p networks on the globe alone, and in the end I'm not really sure how much effect DMusic artists/users will have in the big picture. Think; Active, willing users - users not running p2p - users running "popular" p2p (kazaa/fasttrack) - modem users - offline time - isp firewalling. And I would guess that DMusic "officially" supporting kazaa/fasttrack is not an option?
Thaspian	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 7:01 PM Newsgroups. Definately do newsgroups. You can upload as much as you want, and it goes at full speed, and anyone with an ISP that supports newsgroups can download from them, and lastly, the only flaw is stuff only stays up for two weeks or so.. it's still good.
jmweirick	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 7:21 PM mtekk: your sceme seems OK to me, but if we are to go with the standard 'artist - title.mp3' naming method, then either the site must use this file naming also, or they will have to be renamed once the syncronization is completed, which would require a standard ID3 tag system.
pog	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 10:07 PM Maybe someone can make an automated mp3 tagger can be downloaded from the dmusic homepage. We could encourage other members to use the system if they use a peer to peer network. Then we could have a universal standard "artist - trackname - dmusic.mp3" as the filename, and ID3 stuff that lets say winamp has scrolling when the song's playing would have summick like "dmusic.com - your independant online artist community" This will allow us to simply type "dmusic" and it will return all mp3's available sortable into individual artist groupings (just make it alphabetically ascend) The beauty of going this way is that as more ppl download dmusic mp3's, the less an artists will need to host their songs. Eventually, a few people will stumble across the songs in in a search for a song with a similar name, or browsing someones mp3 list... the rest would (in theory) distribute naturally, and a chain reaction would occur. (People would start telling each other about it and so on.) If dmusic had enough songs freely distributed across any given network, then wouldn't it give the network extra ammo in a future law preceding(s) - a good argument could be "riaa, you are no longer the only people in the world... some people are using the networks for a legit. purpose" That would be a nice Fk you ! For them, wouldn't it ?
ronnie71	Date: February 2, 2004 @ 11:20 PM if you build it will they come? My only concern is just cause its there how will folks know ... can we have a radio show on satellite radio, run ads, artist promoting DMusic through shirts and CDs(we had our Dmusic site on all of our demos), festival, infomercial.
mtekk	Date: February 3, 2004 @ 6:28 PM well I do believe that the ID3 tage / metadata thing is quite simple, and requires a bit of php codeing, when a user uploads a song, they should have to specify their name for it and the file to upload, then the php coding would find the name of the band that the user is part of (band page lists band member's usernames, it's on the database) and put [Band Name] - [User specified title] . mp3 as the name of the file, then add in [DMusic content - dmusic.com] in the ID3 tag under the description field. and then it's a standard. then have a converter to dl for the rest of the users that have already dl'd a songto convers the ID3 tage to what it should be.
jmweirick	Date: February 4, 2004 @ 9:04 PM ya, what he said ^
CrescentShadow	Date: February 5, 2004 @ 6:46 AM The genre is sorta important to the meta data.. i would go through and download random songs and I would at least want to know what im getting into.. maybe we could throw in the genre at the front like Metal - Ofwitheringashes - Of Wintry Nights [dmusic.com or whatever].mp3 thats a little long, but i would want to know what genre I'm looking at if you build it, i will come. and im sure lots others will.
MickeyBreezy	Date: February 5, 2004 @ 11:42 PM way 2 much 2 read so i'll just answer the ? YES
TameasDust	Date: February 21, 2004 @ 8:51 AM boo
tomkerswill	Date: February 25, 2004 @ 4:39 AM Re: jmweirick's post... about saving bandwidth. Maybe one way to do this would be to use bittorrent - so in addition to straight mp3s dmusic could offer links to bittorrent downloads. You'd preserve the excellent navigation and layout of the site, but the files would be downloaded from multiple peers, rather than a central dmusic server. So downloads for people like me in the UK would be faster and use less cross-atlantic bandwidth, etc.
tomkerswill	Date: February 25, 2004 @ 4:41 AM Sorry, while I was posting this last message, I looked up the link on magnet. It looks great - similar idea to bittorrent in that it eases downloads from the central server.
teledyn	Date: March 7, 2004 @ 3:42 PM On the subject of meta-data (which was once upon a time known as "index information") let me reassure everyone that your filename does not matter, it will get changed a thousand times, and also reassure everyone that the artist themselves does not need to choose to be on P2P networks; like the internet itself, like websites like DMusic, you do not need permission to post to Kazaa (regardless what the RIAA/CRIA might think). So it is the responsibility of all artists to ensure the track they release has correct and useful index information built into the file --- if you don't do it, some fan is going to rip your CD and do it for you, only you'll end up like this amazing "Fiddle Tune" I have that is definately not by Seventh Fire ... only I sure wish I did know either the tune or the artist. To answer ebarbarella, how do you get your track into P2P? By being good. By being amazing. It's not a place, it's a network defined by the people who want the stuff, and that makes it very different from a place like DMusic where anybody can upload anything they like (provided they own it of course) --- on P2P, the item is only on the network so long as people are looking to find it, and providing those that found it liked it enough they are willing to help promote it by donating their own bandwidth to serve it. That's a pretty tall order. That said, there are some tricks to getting your amazing thing noticed --- the basic rule is "Think like a fan": When you name your track, both the index information inside the file and the actual file name, the words you use are your fish-net to catch a passing query. My advice to artists wanting to leverage Kazaa/Gnutella is to watch the queries that pass through their machine, and think in terms of general patterns --- on my own machine, the most popular song for Gnutella download is a Karen Holgate tune; I don't really know why, but my best theory is she gets more hits because of the general-interest word "Angel" in the title. Do keep in mind that the horrific nature of P2P search methods is highly biased to the big-name artists so it may not be that useful for independent artists (unless you've just had some major press coverage or have a techno-proficient mailing list of fans) --- my own approach is to keep our files in the search path when I'm on Gnutella, but mostly to just be totally upfront and explicit on our recording-redistribution policy so people know it's OK by us if they trade our files.
OrryBreaker	Date: March 9, 2004 @ 5:05 PM I think People should start to get on p2p files and put there songs of for download But it will be hard to do it there is not alot of people putting songs from this web site in there share list.
shinkaide	Date: March 13, 2004 @ 5:37 AM Umm... forgive me for asking... But on the part of the file naming arguments... having the same metadata on the files, regardless of the filename format (that will probably be mutated in lotsa different ways), will cause the search result on a p2p network to be the same regardless of the dirfferent filename, right? I mean like... Three users with the same song (same metadata): u1: shinkaide - sumsong. mp3 u2: shinkaide_-_sumsong_128. mp3 u3: sumsong-shinkaide. mp3 If some1 searches for shinkaide - sumsong, will it appear as: shinkaide - sumsong (available from 3 users) Acc. to the metadata? Just wanted to know... It's could be a future concern and it's kinda confusing me.
shinkaide	Date: March 13, 2004 @ 9:32 PM Whatever, anyways. I've started sharing some indie mp3's on limewire and kazaa just fyi. I got some chillinbuzz, popdolls, the littlest man band, ephesus, dunny, flagship mile, everything taken... and some of my own stuff. Cheers.
nc2127	Date: March 14, 2004 @ 11:34 PM Hey everyone, Here's a great way to send and share your music files. I recently stumbled upon this service called YouSendIt (www.yousendit.com) You can transfer ansd share files up to 1GBfor free. It's awesome! I've used it to share MP3s and to host some music videos. Basically you can send any large file up to 1GB. Anyway, hope this helps out. Bye!
shinkaide	Date: March 15, 2004 @ 2:36 AM Uh... okay.
azhazhellfire	Date: March 15, 2004 @ 4:06 AM i'm sure you did "recently stumble" upon that service.
Thaspian	Date: March 15, 2004 @ 10:20 AM I concur with az. fuck yousendit.
mental-torture	Date: March 15, 2004 @ 10:24 AM I dont really pay attention to P2P anyways i just get anything i want through my dad who uses a newsgroup

Post A Reply
From:	guest	(Icons - Linking)
Post: