If you spin and use youtube-dl to build a crate, we all know, and we don’t respect you. You might win the crowd, but the people who actually bought into their profession and contributed to the community are also in attendance, and are very aware of your intrusion. You will quietly lose gigs without any explanation, and assume promoters simply can’t see your genius until you’re furiously working on 100 precious listens on SoundCloud. Fair use sampling? Go nuts and clean it up after youtube-dl. Five minute record? Make a Beatport account and get it overwith.
I’d simply offer it but this thread thinks I’m an angry ranter so I’m making you not cower in fear out of respect.
In my personal case, it tends to be relatively obscure classical music. Due to the "nature of the genre" there are quite a number of pieces that have never been studio recorded and exist only in OTA radio recordings, or are only available on long out-of-print vinyl, sometimes from foreign sources.
I honestly tend to prefer other sources other than Youtube personally and will only plunk from there as a last resort (Youtube is a place that is more "perishable" than others, which is why I Youtube-DL instead of just relying on the stream), but Youtube has attracted some curators of recordings of this sort.
It’s called “expanding a conversation with additional perspective that most of this audience is probably unfamiliar with,” including watching it happen to a close friend who thought she could get away with it, but sure, interpret me as angrily ranting at absolutely nobody in this audience because you skipped the “if” that qualifies my pronouns in the part that made this thread upset and would rather talk about your much more interesting obscure classical collection instead.
I love how stupid Hacker News thinks I am, and it’s telling me I’m on the right track in the conduct of my life. Feeling’s mutual, rest assured.
from this thread and other similar to it, it is becoming clear that a vocal segment of HN readers are not concerned with copyright.