Just stumbled on this site and i am amazed at the northern soul downloads. Give it a try its pure quality.

https://northern-soul-records.com/sounds01.htm

Craig W.

What about

https://www.ktfdownload.co.uk/soul/?inc=home

Cheers DWMick

What about

https://www.ktfdownload.co.uk/soul/?inc=home

Cheers  DWMick

interesting post dwmick

have a policy on here that don't post up illegal sites, no probs as said in past try and avoid having lengthy list of rules that no one reads, rather just point out as it happens

So bits below are not aimed at you in any way, but as link was posted on here thought might as well comment, as in past such links as the last one were deleted

Downloading soul tracks is bit grey area at times but the two sites posted show just what the extremes are

first one has few interesting tracks that maybe couldn't hear elsewhere at the time of pushing them up

interesting and enjoyable

second one has 10,000 tracks..yep 10,000 tracks, no words, no choice, no category, all available for direct downloading, the majority seem to be of high quality mp3s and real audio and already available on offical cds

spot the difference ?

end of day - second site will kill it for all of us, soul fans online, websites and so on as far as online audio is concerned,open public direct downloading of 10000 high quality music tracks ???

bottom line is its illegal, it's cheating the artists out of royalites (sure the current system is not perfect but its better than nought), it hurts the soul record/cd labels such as grapevine kent etc etc, and .........ok could rant on, but can't be arsed

have heard all the tired old arguments such as "spreading the faith" " good research" and they still dont cut it

Anyway as posted thought throw up recent news read other day as well (see below) for food for thought

how many of our soul artist legends will benefit from this now ?

The official download chart has been launched, the new chart will drawn from legal download sites such as Mycokemusic Napster and iTunes and will be launched officially on 1 September.

Test charts start this week, with the Pixies' Bam Thwok heading the chart.

Today the BPI said that it would not be a competitor to the singles charts, because the new chart had a "much broader range" that included exclusive songs and non-single tracks from albums.

"It's very difficult to say at this stage if and when downloads are going to take over from physical formats like CDs," he said. "When Steve Jobs launched iTunes two weeks ago he said he expected downloads to have five per cent share of the US singles market in two years time," he said.

It is thought the download chart will be broadcast midweek, although a Radio One spokeswoman said the corporation has yet to clarify details.

The launch of the offical download chart is part of a two-year sponsorship deal between OCC and Coca-Cola, which sponsors of the official UK singles and albums charts, broadcast on Radio 1.

post edited a few times as too hasty with that submit button -

Mike,

My apologies. Your comments noted and understood.

DWMick

Mike,

My apologies. Your comments noted and understood.

DWMick

DWMick

no need to apoligise, hopefully I got over the point that in no way was aimed at yourself

was a "late nite/long day" post and as have been told in past that sometimes my style (?) of writing can be took the wrong way, just thought better emphasis

There are very few soul artistes of the sixties who receive royalties from the record companies who issued their work. If they wrote the song and held on to their publishing they will receive royalties as songwriters.

Just the facts.

FrankM

Mike-, what's your opinion on soulclub.org?

"Mike-, what's your opinion on soulclub.org?"

And what exactly is the position of supplying a full download of a song a soulclub does opposed to a part sample of a song as John Manship does are there different rules for part samples. And do the (internet) northern soul radio stations playing the songs cop for loyalties. And then there are then the downloads on ebay listings. Very complicated , can anybody clarify this?

"Mike-, what's your opinion on soulclub.org?"

And what exactly is the position of supplying a full download of a song a soulclub does opposed to a part sample of a song as John Manship does are there different rules for part samples. And do the (internet) northern soul radio stations playing the songs cop for loyalties. And then there are then the downloads on ebay listings. Very complicated , can anybody clarify this?

Yes, it's easy to clarify. They are all illegal. Unless the site owns the rights to put that music on the net, they are illegal.

Of course it would be an impossible job to police with Soul music because I'm sure the big companies that eventually swallowed up all the independents don't even know what they own the rights to, so it's down to the individual site owners sense of responsibility and morals as to whether they host sound on their site.

I'd also agree that it's very unlikely that the artist would ever see any money from royalties either even if the sites were paying to use sound unless they owned the publishing rights, and very few Sixties artists even knew what publishing rights were unless they were rather astute.

More to the point though, and this will have a direct impact on making Soul music available, if people download tracks that are available on legitimate CDs, it's a sale lost to the record company that put the legitimate CD out. Simple logic dictates that if the record company sell less CDs, they will have less money available to invest in their next release, so it might not happen. Which would be a crying shame because UK companies have led the way in making a huge amount of Soul music available on CD.

Dave,

from a personal perspective I was brought in the NW of England and lived on the fringes of Northern Soul for many years - always preferring obscure soul tracks - not understanding Northern Soul and worried about the stigma attached (its tough being a teenager!!). Recently I rediscovered Soul/Rare Soul/Northern Soul and spent some time downloading a lot of Soul. in the end I got fed up with tracks that were incomplete or recorded at inconsistent bit rates , threw them all away and spent some money on ebay, amazon and several other websites.

Without the downloads (Shareaza, KTF) I would have struggled to rediscover my love of obscure/rare soul and consequently the artistes would have lost their share of a couple of grand (a lot of CDs!!).

So it may be illegal, people may abuse it but it dos serve some purpose

Dave Morley

Dave Rimmer: "down to the individual site owners sense of responsibility and morals as to whether they host sound on their site."

Do you think I should stop doing the radio shows at deepfunk.org? Well, alot of people think i should stop doing them anyway, but that's not the point;-/

Surely soulclub.org should be encouraged because it is a vital educational tool?

IMO sharing high quality MP3's of tracks ripped off legal CDs is totally different to a low quality radio stream or sound file on a non profit (should read loss making) site.

Agree with James, there's a massive difference between downloadable MP3 sites and those that allow you to listen to full tracks online, like Soulclub.org and Deepfunk.org.

lets put this to sleep

have a policy on this site that links for websites offering mass downloading of full music tracks are not welcome

feel free to post up any reason why you think this policy should change

totally agree with you mike, however arent sites like soulclub.org just merely sites to listen to a track without being able to copy onto cd or whatever? i've certainly found it useful if i see a record on a list for sale and not quite sure what it is - then gone onto soulclub.org and found it on there to listen to, many a record i have purchased from lists, ebay etc on the back of this.

grant

You're all right and you're all wrong!!!!

in the nicest posible way;o)))

As usual there are two sides to every story in this case i suspect the key is whether the music is available for download and subsequent home ripping or whether it is only available for on line listening only.

John

Dave Rimmer: "down to the individual site owners sense of responsibility and morals as to whether they host sound on their site."

Do you think I should stop doing the radio shows at deepfunk.org? Well, alot of people think i should stop doing them anyway, but that's not the point;-/

Surely soulclub.org should be encouraged because it is a vital educational tool?

IMO sharing high quality MP3's of tracks ripped off legal CDs is totally different to a low quality radio stream or sound file on a non profit (should read loss making)  site.

I answered the question as to whether the hosting of sound on websites is illegal, and added that it is up to the individual website owner's own sense of responsibility and morals.

I find it rather strange that YOU are then asking ME whether you should host sound on your site. I have no opinion on whether you should host sound, I tried to make that perfectly clear by saying it's up to YOUR own sense of responsibility and morals, and I'm not in a position to judge that.

You might view Soulclub as an educational tool (I've used it myself to listen to tracks I didn't know or remember), but under the laws of this country, it is still illegal, whatever you view it as, and that's the question I answered.

Without the downloads (Shareaza, KTF) I would have struggled to rediscover my love of obscure/rare soul and consequently the artistes would have lost their share of a couple of grand (a lot of CDs!!). So it may be illegal, people may abuse it but it dos serve some purpose

Agree with you 100% on this point . Can some one tell me who gets the royalties if the artist is dead? How long do publishing rights /songwriting rights last on any song or piece of music. What about taping and tape swoping the only thing that kept me saine in the wilderness years while the family were growing up, wasnt that the same thing. Also the trend with sales CDs you get now from record dealers, Another point that just crossed my mind is if i pay say £100 for a record how does that benefit the artist / songwriter in anyway, the only person making money there is the dealer, is the record dealer worse for he is making money and the web sites are free. I am not having ago at anybody here, Its been a long nite shift and i had to much time to think about this subject so ime going to bed

nite nite and have a nice day

As a collector of vinyl and to a lesser extent Cd it is essential to me that i have a legitamate copy of either format, i can't settle with faux recordings and will not tolerate them.

Record companies hold the copyright in the recordings for Fifty years in Europe which is why Indigo can issue Atlantic and other companies' early 1950's material in their R&B Hits of 1940/50's series. It's also partly why BMG have done a comprehensive re issue of ELvis's Sun material. To pre empt other companies. Just check out the number of labels who issue Robert Johnson CD's.

Songwriting publishing lasts a lot longer check the current South African case of the family of the guy who came up with the tune for Wimoweh versus Disney over its use in the Lion King.

Check here for more details on Royalties

https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/music-royalties1.htm

BTW radiomagnetic pays its dues.

[Moderator message: Frank , I've moved the rest of your post into a new topic, cheers Kolla]