The National: May 3, 2009 Radio City - Flac and MP3 Downloads [Removed]
Posted by nyctaper - 05/05/09 at 10:05 pmThis recording was removed at the demand of Beggar’s Group, who then proceeded to insult the site and requested that we lie about the reason why it was removed.
Direct download of MP3 files [removed at label demand]
Email nyctaper with a request for the download location of the FLAC files. [removed at label demand]
Firefox users can can’t Down Them All! at once (here).
The National
2009-05-03
Radio City Music Hall
Dark Was the Night Benefit Concert
New York, NY USA
Setlist:
[Total Time 26:11]
01 Slow Show
02 England
03 So Far Around The Bend
04 Vanderlylle Cry Baby
Bonus:
05 Big Red Machine (Matt + Bon Iver)
May 6th, 2009 at 9:41 am
do you have the full recording of the show? i was there and it was incredible.
May 6th, 2009 at 9:52 am
I had to miss this show because it was the night before an exam. Thrilled to see you’ve posted the mp3s of the National’s set!
May 7th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Heh.. what fake reason did they tell you to give, out of curiosity?
May 7th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
“and be cool about it…”taken down due to the charity nature of the event”. “
May 7th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
My god. If I donate some money to their cause, can I still download it?
May 7th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
The songs are all over the web, should be pretty easy to find if you google.
I would sincerely encourage you to donate to the cause through either:
Housing Works
http://www.housingworks.org/
or GMHC:
http://www.gmhc.org/
Both of these groups are long-standing grassroots organizations who actually do something on the ground for the cause.
May 7th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
hey dan.
it’s cool if you make this whole thing public.
but you can’t distort what i wrote you.
the reality is… at some point, it might be really nice to release some parts of the show as another charity album or an expanded edition of Dark Was The Night, which is trying to raise money and awareness for AIDS. we simply don’t want the concert out there. we don’t want people to say, “i already downloaded that live album from NYCTaper and so i don’t need to buy it to give money to AIDS RESEARCH.”
does that make sense?
my “be cool about it… ‘taken down due to the charity nature of the event’” was actually directed (after a new salutation in the email…sorry if that wasn’t clear) at the editor of Stereogum who was copied on the email and who have graciously donated a lot of banner space and time in helping promote this event and this album.
MEANING… i didn’t want him to think that we weren’t appreciative of all those efforts and i didn’t want the takedown request from the label to be perceived as bad vibes between us and them to the readers.
as for insulting your site, i’m sure a lot of folks who don’t get to see these bands live love it. i was just saying i don’t think you do much that i can quantifiably see to “promote” bands as you claimed in your email. that’s just a personal opinion and not one of “The Beggars Group”. sorry if you found that insulting… i guess you really think you do.
thanks for removing the links. we appreciate it.
-@
May 7th, 2009 at 11:09 pm
Here’s the entire email:
“hey dan
i see you’ve posted some tracks from DWTN Live at Radio City.
we did not grant any permission for this and all parties involved do
not want these songs out there for a number of reasons including
future releases associated with the evening’s festivities.
can you please remove?
amrit - can you take down your link too? (and be cool about
it…”taken down due to the charity nature of the event”)
you guys should always seek permission….
-@ ”
Sorry I missed that an email addressed to me, with my name at the top, and ending with “you guys” included separate clauses for each participant. Or that Stereogum and NYCTaper were somehow under a different instruction about how to take down the recordings.
About the posting of the recording:
The National have always in the past agreed to permit taping of their shows. They have even allowed video (Sasquatch Festival) and soundboard patches on occasion (Vancouver ‘07 and a Europe show that I can’t recall offhand). I didn’t post “the concert” but five National tracks. The only other band that I planned to post was Dirty Projectors, who also permit recording. Bon Iver and Sharon Jones have occasionally in the past, but I was unsure about their present policy.
The entire concert wasn’t going to be posted, and the rationalization that somehow people wouldn’t buy the next CD because they got a few audience-recorded tracks from here is ridiculous, and proven time and again to be completely wrong. This site has a ton of comments from readers to the effect “thanks for the recording, I just bought the album”. Jagjaguwar actually wrote me thank you email and commented on how many link-through hits from this site resulted in purchases of the artist’s CD. That artist was Bon Iver, who is a guest on track 5 of this download.
As much as you feel the need to ridicule a free site providing free exposure to a band, I can’t help think that your heavy-handedness in one day has caused more bad will and harm to this charitable cause than any download of five tracks from a audience recording could ever do.
Oh yeah, add the General Manager and Director of Production of Matador Records as fans of this site. I’m sure you know them.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:30 am
thanks for approving the comment, Dan.
i think this is a good debate and i’m happy to discuss because i think the issues are larger than just you posting 5 songs.
a couple of points.
it’s hard to prove either way if you posting the live tracks would cannibalize sales. i do however know that digital stores do often check to see what is “out there” already and are less siked about remixes, live shows, bonus tracks etc that are “everywhere” on the Internet.
this has an impact on the amount of promotion they give a particular release which certainly does impact sales. this is a fact.
and about “free exposure” on blogs and stuff. we’re not picking on you. we might just differ in opinion on a more salient point about the value of music. we’re apply the same logic to all sites/companies/etc big and small. we’re unfailingly consistent here….
some examples.
MySpace Music launched last September offering major labels a revenue deal for streaming music and videos. they offered all the independents an inferior deal basically saying “well, you’re getting a lot of free promotion and that makes up the gap in the financial terms.” we have not worked with MySpace on a single promotion in almost a year now and we won’t until we get parity. we foresake free promotion because we feel our music is worth as much on the market as any major label’s artists.
we’ve taken a similar stand with Last.fm, Buzznet, YouTube…etc. millions of eyeballs of free promotion foresaken for these principles.
we apply the same exact logic when Nike offers a free slot on a CD sampler, a radio station asks for a free song for a podcast, MTV asks for free music for their commercials or a TV show asks for a free song in exchange for tagging an album at the end of the show. all these folks think that “free promotion” is an equitable value exchange for “free music”. and we say “no” every time. not all labels share our views and simply go for the free promotion.
we’ll be fine without it and i don’t think that is “draconian or short-sighted” as you said in your email.
if we create a business where our only job is working hard to “promote music” but not make money from because we’ve given it all away for free, then we’re kind of dead in the water, right? and i’m not sure our artists would be too siked on that either. they (despite what everyone says about touring and merch sales) like to sell music, too.
so i don’t know where this leaves us other than you say potato and I say it another way.
best,
@
(ps: i’m sure the GM at Matador is a fan of the site as he likes the discussion of using Neumann KM-150s and compressors and etc., but i’m very sure hat he shares my opinions on free promotion and the value of music)
May 8th, 2009 at 7:00 am
Jeez. This Adam-Guy is the perfect example for Label guys who just don’t get it… Know What? I’ve downloaded the Dark Was The Night-Compilation about a month in advance and bought it on the release date (on vinyl). I would do the same thing with live recordings of this show but hey… They’re not available legally… anywhere. But I still want to LISTEN to this songs because i’m an absolute fan of the project and the bands involved with.
But hey, just proceed with deleting everything freely available so NO ONE can listen to this stuff. That’s totally the right thing *rolleyes*
May 8th, 2009 at 9:06 am
we cant blame the label guys for sweating, their industry is evaporating. But “not getting it” as you put it is ignorance. They should be clearly aware of how fans are expecting much more access to music and samples, and the freedom to promote those bands they are excited about.
If i buy one more friggin album that sucks because there was one good song the label promoted, im going to cut my ears off!!! I wouldnt buy ARTWORK/paintings sight unseen. i wouldnt buy art after only seeing 1/12th of the canvas in a low res jpeg….
count the number of music blogs, then count the number of failing labels.
May 8th, 2009 at 9:56 am
dan/adam:
very interesting and informative debate/exchange.
from a personal perspective, i will say this: i do not usually use nyctaper as a resource to ‘discover’ bands i have never heard of. it is typically a band whom i am already familiar with. but if they play a cool set, it could be the driving factor in my decision to go see them live (i don’t make it out to concerts all the time).
hopefully that doesn’t come off badly but sometimes if you’re lukewarm on a band, it can be beneficial to get a taste of their live shows in advance so you know what to expect.
- ari
May 8th, 2009 at 11:25 am
I hope the label guys know, that by making a big deal out this , they will only entice people who weren’t initally going to download, to go look for it elsewhere. There will be more copies of this particular show on computers now that the dispute has been made.
It’s almost a catch 22..
People will still buy albums, even if they have leaks, and the ones who don’t purchase them , probably wouldn’t have anyway.
May 8th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Very good news to report. After some excellent discussions, this recording will return to the site tomorrow with the common goal of having all of readers/downloaders support the charity behind the whole event.
August 29th, 2009 at 4:23 am
I realize I’m late to this debate, but here are a couple of points for Adam and the Beggar’s guys:
1) I bought Dark Was the Night specifically because of this debate, and the request to support the cause, rather than buying the three songs I wanted off iTunes.
2) On the value of live music as a stimulus to studio releases, I’ve purchased both Bon Iver releases, plus Justin Vernon’s side projects, based on the quality of his live shows. The first one I downloaded was from nyctaper.
3) I bought the last three releases from The National due to a live show I downloaded in August.
4) As to promoting music on TV shows, I never would have heard of Bon Iver or The National if it wasn’t for NBC’s “Chuck” series. I’ve also bought both seasons on DVD or iTunes.
My point in all of this is that despite Adam’s statements to the contrary, I have the Mastercard bills to back up the statment that live recordings on the internet, and “free” music on TV, can and do generate money for the label, and more important, the artists.