• 0x4E4F@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    FOSS only applies to code, you can’t change the source of art. It’s art, you can either own it or just enjoy it (like when you go to museums). You can’t actually change it to the way you like it. You’d have to have and own the DAW’s working mastered project files to make it FOSS compatible. No one does that.

    • Hawke@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      While it’s not entirely “source” and it’s not common, a few albums have been released with stem files.

      Nine Inch Nails is notable for being progressive in this area.

      • 0x4E4F@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I know that NIN does release the stem files with their releases, but it’s just 1 or 2 bands worldwide, most don’t do that.

        • Hawke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Still it is a thing though.

          I was just making the point that conceptually “open source music” exists and has even been commercially released by notable artists.

    • ghostermonster@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Now I understand. So the problem with the root comment is that there can be FOSS software to play media you bought, but it still could be streamed and illegal to save or modify, so you don’t “own” the media in some sense.

      True that software and media are different things.