Slashdot Mirror

For more varied musical interests see also:
Jamendo for royalty free music, often CC licensed.
Magnatune for decent licensed music usually listenable non-commercially for free.

Try Roger Subirana
The lady sings but it's no language. They just like the sound of voice so they use it as instrument and sing phonemes without attempting any meaning in any language.

Sorry, you know the programming habit of generalising solutions. If you like it, it will work even if you ever learn Japanese.
Languages can be learnt, you know. Japanese illiteracy is not a weak enough precondition. Better implement something that works even if you learnt all languages.

This whole argument is late to the party. The software industry has been slowly killing the concept of sharing for years. Now that music is simply a set of digital values like software, the music industry is in a position to apply the same unfair restrictions and have you eat it. Its your own fault. For listening to the music industry marketing. Break free. Start listening to music under the creative commons license and start sharing it with your friends and family. If you want to leave a legacy for your children and friends after your dead... show them that you were the generation that began to reject these horrible license shackles. Just because something is "free" does not mean it has no value. Your music selection passed on should be a reflection of who you are not what you bought. Show future generations that you were a person who choose not to be enslaved by corporations through marketing.

The first site you should visit is http://jamendo.com./ Support the concept of sharing and let this be your legacy

Let them price themselves to death. There are other ways to produce music that do not involve the RIAA. You should know that there are other ways to produce and deliver music that do not involve the RIAA. Musicians can now deliver direct to customers and there are distribution companies that do not involve the RIAA. If you are still listening to commercial music under this Union then it is your own fault that you are paying outrageous prices that often (usually) benefit the distribution companies at the expense of the artist. The ones who benefit from the RIAA are the mega stars of music. But is there music really that good? Or are you convinced that you like them through a barrage of marketing and advertising? The answer is: they are not that good and you are conditioned to like what you think you naturally like. In reality there is a lot of great music out there and it is totally free. Why? Because the artist is more interested in marketing themselves then making money off every single listener.

The future of music distribution is dead. The reason is that you the consumer pay the bulk of distribution costs already. You pay for bandwidth through your ISP and this is how the music travels from the producer to the listener. Since the cost of physical distribution is approaching $0, the value of the distribution company is also reaching $0. So the distribution companies and the RIAA are working hard to convince you that alternate channels are evil and wrong... such as the illegal closing of MegaUpload.

You should look at http://jamendo.com/ for a large list of free music. Start downloading your own list of free music under the creative commons or similar licenses. Then share your favourite songs with ur friends. Then someday soon, your friends will share new free music with you. When that day arrives, you can forget about RIAA and the distributors marketing attempts to convince you that what you want is what they sell.

The same goes for many 1970s prog rock acts like Emerson, Lake and Palmer and Yes. Some of the progressive rock musicians, like Robert Fripp, Chris Squire, Bill Bruford, Neil Peart, Tony Banks, David Gilmour and Rick Wakeman are considered some of the most talented musicians to play "popular" music. .... But also keep in mind here that most popular musicians from the post-war period onward did not receive any kind of formal training.

Keith Emerson and Wakeman were classically trained, I'm not sure about the others. I do have to wonder if the dearth of that is what's contributed to the relative lack of experimentation recently.

For my part, I'm hopeless - no music theory, can't even play. Have to sequence everything in SONAR, though I've got good enough at it that most people can't easily tell and assume just the drums and the bass guitar are programmed. And the whole thing of not really knowing what I'm doing musically does allow for some interesting accidents and unusual chord changes made from scrawling notes in the piano roll and tweaking them until they 'work'.

e.g. the brief organ segment around 2:48 on http://www.jamendo.com/en/track/914355/baklawa-doom-part-ii-at-the-chippy
or again, on the organ: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vkB7i-bS4Mc#t=340s

...The fact that I work this way does make me wonder what chords I'm actually using when I do some of that weirder stuff.

You have format shift. Buy a DVD and rip it. It's really easy. Yeah, the studios don't like it, but at least you're putting some money in the pockets of the people who are entertaining you.

You are supporting increasing crime in society by doing this. In other words; it's pretty obvious that people will copy the content. The content industry pushed for this to be illegal. Buying DVDs is pushing up crime by putting money into the pockets of companies which push for things normal people will do to be illegal.

If you want to give money to an artist; do one of the following:

• give money to the next decent busker/street artist you see
• send a cheque to a non RIAA / non MPAA artist
• look up a random artist on Jamendo.com and give them a donation

There can be no moral justification for giving money to an MPAA or RIAA member when you can easily avoid it.

Music: http://www.jamendo.com/

Films: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Films

Remember to donate to any artist you really enjoy!

I would love to pay an artist for his work. Maybe they could print an email address I could Paypal some money to?

Have a look at Jamendo - the music there is all creative commons of some sort, and there is often a "support this artist" link. I think the last time I paid money for music was because I really liked something I got from Jamendo and went back to the artist's page to support them.

Plenty of good, free (as in freedom) community music from the likes of sites like Jamendo.

What proof do you have that game developers who want to add DRM also want 70+ years of IP protection? I'm a game developer who doesn't want people to pirate my stuff but don't give a fuck about the 70+ years crap - which BTW is irrelevant here because that only applies to music/movies/books and such 'literary' stuff and not games specifically. http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html

If you make a digital copy of the exact order of 0s and 1s on your computer, you are enjoying the fruits of someone elses labor while denying them just compensation. Stealing is denying someone just compensation. It doesn't have to by physical goods.

You might say why are they entitled to just compensation? Because society has decided to allow artists to choose how they get compensated. Artists choose to create works before they get paid to do so. Or they might get commissioned to create and paid before. Its THEIR choice.

You are free to not support these Artists because you disagree with their business model by supporting other alternatives.

http://www.jamendo.com/en/

http://www.spotify.com/

https://mog.com/

etc, etc

Just stop buying those worthless pieces of crap altogether, Downloading? Go ahead, instill the fear of even touching a "legit" product from said names.

And then start actually to take note on the alternatives, such as Jamendo and the likes. Go to concerts to support the authors you do enjoy and search good music instead that being popularized by outlets such as MTV.

Only then can true copyright reform begin, and prices drop to affordable levels.

Hmm, no not really. It is easy to find samples where the mp3 codec will fail (produce audible enough artifact), even at 320kbps. In that regard, other lossy formats such as ogg vorbis fare much better (if even because it doesn't have that 320kbps ceiling limit, and some more tricks).

Of course, a lossless format such as flac makes sure a 44.1khz@16bit CD stays the same, for about half the size. If you compared that to 96khz/24bit audio then your comment would apply.

But, lossy can decode to higher bitrate, and that helps a tiny little bit (no puns :)). Also higher samplerates makes it easier to do filters (lowpass). Humans can't hear above 20khz (remember you need twice to reproduce, ie. 40Khz samplerate) and thats where most lowpass filters start in CDs.

As for downloading songs, try http://www.jamendo.com/
The Recording Industry (and its slavery) is obsolete.

The original score implies something dramatic with plot twists.

Naive? I don't think so... I didn't want to say it straight out, but artists should not get the free ride that the RIAA promises them (and few get). Basically, it's a gamble for the artists and like in all gambling, most lose. Below in the comments you'll find one where the poster says what has to be done to be an independent musician and live from it and it has a great sarcastic reply. The point is, being a profitable independent musician is hard work, but it is possible to make a living off it. Not like a rockstar, but like most people who -go figure- also work hard but aren't artists (like us IT people, or a carpenter...)

And BTW, why the hell does the world have to just suck for everyone but the top 1% anyway?

You could argue that if you love what you do, and work your butt off to achieve it, you are in the top 1% who don't have a sucky life because... well, you've got the luxury of doing what you love. Go talk with the average man, doing what you love is a luxury, no doubt about it.

That's a bit twisting it, but while I agree that it would be more fair that the world didn't suck for everyone.... the reality is that the world is not fair. You either accept that and make the best out of it, or you think you are entitled to something and complain. You see, the world is not fair and can and will never be fair. If it were fair, my brother would have been able to learn more and make the same kind of living I do. He doesn't, he's unemployed because school simply wasn't his thing (large difficulties to learn), and I had the genetic advantage on him actually having it easy to learn. He's unemployed and I'm earning a honest wage (nothing fancy, believe me, I'm not in those 1%... Assuming you don't mean 1% of the world population, because other whise we're both in those 1% simply because we have access to a computer and probably even own it!). Is that fair? No! Of course not... Is there a solution? Unless you adhere to hardcore socialism (everyone, doctor or janitor earns the same - which comes with lots of other problems) there is no solution.

mp3.com is an oddball. Thing is they did things that were doubtful legally (What Amazon, iTunes and Google want to do now, but those are large and have competent lawyer teams... they could get away with it) and that put them in the visor of the RIAA. If you host music that is owned by the labels, that's what happens. Once under RIAA control, they were free to ditch independent musicians. Imagine Microsoft would buy up a Mac Game company, do you really think they would still make Mac games? That is exactly the same.... Now, what happens if you avoid everything RIAA related? That works, and that's why Jamendo exists, and I'm sure there are others. (CDBaby too, I think)

I'm not pro-RIAA, I'm pro-honest work. Musicians blinded by RIAA contracts, try to skip the "work" part.

As for music, I started to hear nothing but the greed, lies and narcissism and it put me right off. Every now and again I,ll listen to some out of copyright oldies.

Anyone who's interested in public domain and creative commons licensed music should check out archive.org and Jamendo. Others have listed other services in past discussions, but those are the two that come to my mind.

http://www.jamendo.com/

Seriously. It's even free, and if your conscious gets the best of you there is a donate directly to the artist mechanism.

The combination of free and legal music, streaming music, and increasing mobile bandwidth has caused increased competition in the consumer music market. In my humble opinion, the $12 to $18 cd has been replaced with unlimited legal music for cheap to free. Also recording technology has decreased in price and increasing options for self recording. This change in self recording options has greatly increased the amount of indi music on the web. It is so easy to record your own album, I have made 2 so far this year. http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/84829 http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/87181

The combination of free and legal music, streaming music, and increasing mobile bandwidth has caused increased competition in the consumer music market. In my humble opinion, the $12 to $18 cd has been replaced with unlimited legal music for cheap to free. Also recording technology has decreased in price and increasing options for self recording. This change in self recording options has greatly increased the amount of indi music on the web. It is so easy to record your own album, I have made 2 so far this year. http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/84829 http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/87181

I will hide here: http://www.jamendo.com/
Or here: http://listen.grooveshark.com/
And here: http://www.fsf.org/
And definitely here: http://creativecommons.org/
And why not here: http://www.fanfiction.net/
Or here: http://www.openculture.com/free_ebooks
... and a myriad of other places on the Internet, including those where I publish my own works.

That being said, I don't think abolishing copyright will mean the end of commercial media, since there are many other ways to make money from them. For example, most blockbuster movies make most of their profit in the first one or two weeks, and people are willing to pay a premium to see the film early, with high quality, and added value features like 3D and advanced sound systems. TV productions are almost entirely financed by advertisements, not future DVD sales. Most artists already earn most of their income from concerts, not from CD/downloadable music sales. And so on.

See Jamendo. Almost 300,000 tracks, under Creative Commons licensing, and it's your choice whether to donate.

The real reason for long copyright terms is to prevent these works from entering in the public domain. Imagine copyright on musical recordings was 50 years from publication (and that's LONG on my personal scale). It's 2011 now, that means that EVERY recording (c) 1960 and earlier is public domain, and on January 1st, 2012 we'd get EVERYTHIING (c) 1961 etc.

The amount of music that would be public domain and available for everyone (!) to freely explore and experiment with would be huge. No one (well, just the kiddies) would care about the latest Lady Gaga anymore. There would be too much available to enjoy.

The flipside is that currently 'public domain music' is a non-issue (and the Big 4/5 are lovin' it). Kindle and other e-book readers are slowly putting public domain books in mainstream (as 'free ebooks!!"), but ask anyone about public domain music and you get a blank stare back.

Shameless shout-out: great creative commons (very different from public domain but also free-as-in-beer) music can be found on Jamendo.com.

The post I responded to was talking about recordings being 100% free. No copyright, no protection whatsoever. But free music does not make money for bands, which is why it is very rarely "given away" on the internet -- where it's free, it's free for streaming only so that you have to buy it if you want to listen to it without visiting the band's website.

Decidedly not true. Check out Jamendo, for example, which offers complete albums for free download in MP3 or Ogg format. Some of the bands there are great - I'm partial to Diablo Swing Orchestra myself.

How about "I really love Jamendo"?

Because I do. Just putting it out there in case anybody wants some nice, freely-available indie music to replace the RIAA trash and stop giving those bloodsuckers free advertisement and/or money.

I'd have to second this. Sure, you have to sort through a lot of not so good stuff sometimes, but there are some real gems in there. Some I've found that I like:

• Boom Boom Beckett
• Mud&Dust
• VaÃan Olmes
• Jimmy the Hideous Penguin

Even better, just install rhythmbox, turn on the Jamendo plugin if it's not on, and load up Jamendo on random. With 281517 songs you should eventually be able to find something you like.

How about "I really love Jamendo"?

Because I do. Just putting it out there in case anybody wants some nice, freely-available indie music to replace the RIAA trash and stop giving those bloodsuckers free advertisement and/or money.

I'd have to second this. Sure, you have to sort through a lot of not so good stuff sometimes, but there are some real gems in there. Some I've found that I like:

• Boom Boom Beckett
• Mud&Dust
• VaÃan Olmes
• Jimmy the Hideous Penguin

Even better, just install rhythmbox, turn on the Jamendo plugin if it's not on, and load up Jamendo on random. With 281517 songs you should eventually be able to find something you like.

How about "I really love Jamendo"?

Because I do. Just putting it out there in case anybody wants some nice, freely-available indie music to replace the RIAA trash and stop giving those bloodsuckers free advertisement and/or money.

I'd have to second this. Sure, you have to sort through a lot of not so good stuff sometimes, but there are some real gems in there. Some I've found that I like:

• Boom Boom Beckett
• Mud&Dust
• VaÃan Olmes
• Jimmy the Hideous Penguin

Even better, just install rhythmbox, turn on the Jamendo plugin if it's not on, and load up Jamendo on random. With 281517 songs you should eventually be able to find something you like.

How about "I really love Jamendo"?

Because I do. Just putting it out there in case anybody wants some nice, freely-available indie music to replace the RIAA trash and stop giving those bloodsuckers free advertisement and/or money.

I'd have to second this. Sure, you have to sort through a lot of not so good stuff sometimes, but there are some real gems in there. Some I've found that I like:

• Boom Boom Beckett
• Mud&Dust
• VaÃan Olmes
• Jimmy the Hideous Penguin

Even better, just install rhythmbox, turn on the Jamendo plugin if it's not on, and load up Jamendo on random. With 281517 songs you should eventually be able to find something you like.

How about "I really love Jamendo"?

Because I do. Just putting it out there in case anybody wants some nice, freely-available indie music to replace the RIAA trash and stop giving those bloodsuckers free advertisement and/or money.

Every time one of these articles about the music industry comes up, I remind everybody that there are alternatives to giving the weasels money. There are some fantastic artists there, and they *want* you to listen to their music and share it with others.

I do mostly agree. However at least for music there are places like jamendo. I have found some good stuff lately and its not garage band quality recordings either. Like TenPenny Joke ...

I've switched to Jamendo and other such independent music sites. Completely free, and there's a lot of good music. You get the added bonus of searching for what you like yourself, rather than having what the record companies deem "popular" pushed at you all day.

It is still the law, though. The reason governments exist in the first place is because man cannot live in a vacuum of moral absolutes. Murder is wrong. Theft is wrong. Rape is wrong. Without government telling everyone that there are specific punishments for specific crimes, anything can and will happen. No laws on rape? Watch men and women be violated even more than they are now. No laws on murder? Watch the spread of fear as roving gangs of vigilantes and sociopaths start killing not only each other but everyone else they encounter. No laws on theft? Watch everyone drop into the poor house except for those good enough not to get caught by their victim.

Don't get me wrong. I think current copyright law is immeasurably wrong. It does nothing for promoting the arts and is all about making every last corrupt dime out of a work as they possibly can. It's not about protecting the pseudo property known as IP. It's about power and money and who does and does not have it.

By widespread breaking of the law you are only proving the point that current laws need better enforcement and bigger punishments. I really don't like the alternative (indy bands and groups at places like Vodo, ClearBits, and Jamendo (and the like) or, you know, actually paying the RIAA for their artists' stuff (I'd rather pay the artist directly, thanks)), but if we are going to claim the moral high-ground of law abiding citizen and have a chance of being taken seriously, what is the choice?

No one sees copyright infringement as anything near revolutionary. To most people, those who willfully infringe are indeed nothing more than common criminals. Step up above that and walk the higher ground while lobbying your state and federal politicians. Otherwise, I don't want to hear about how unfair the system is. I know how unfair it is.

And society loses by losing an artist.

No disrespect intended to artists, but (largely due to copyright) we already have far more "art" than we need—quite a bit of which barely qualifies as mediocre entertainment just a way to stave off boredom for a while. Certainly the end of copyright would lead to fewer artists, full-time or part-time. Those who remain will do so because (a) they want to, regardless of the degree of compensation; or (b) because they are good enough to attract the notice of individuals or organizations both desiring the creation of original work and having the means to pay for its production; old-fashioned patronage, essentially, but to membership- or donation-based groups (e.g. cultural societies, endowments for the arts, private libraries, fan clubs) rather than just a few wealthy individuals. I imagine (b) would be the dominant factor, but one need only look to sites like Magnatune and Jamendo to see that free distribution of copies is not an impediment to creativity.

if some indie online music finding service ever becomes both popular and legal - the RIAA is even more screwed. www.jamendo.com

there are endless variations of limitations on CC licensing

Every commercial track has a different separate license. CC is much simpler since there are only a few main variants with version numbers. You can simply say "CC-SA and CC-BY-SA are allowed CC-NC is not". Your claim is fairly simple FUD.

and it would be a nightmare for the CBC to track down and clarify the status of every single piece of CC music they wanted to use.

Wherever you download it from normally has the status. If it doesn't, that version isn't CC licensed and you don't have anything to track down.

It seems like you are making very weak excuses for some reason. Why?

As for of the claims by some uninformed people that a simple search on the internetz would provide unencumbered music, well, citation needed.

• jamendo.com
• creative commons search
• google

Would you bet your job on those results?

Guess what; there have been lots of cases where it was decided, after long court cases, that proprietary songs were copied from other proprietary songs without license. Would you bet your job on that? No, because you don't have to. If you had a good reason to believe the song was okay, for example the CC license attached to it, then you will not likely have a problem and if you do have a problem, the license the song claims to be under will not make any difference.

Finally, I'm seeing a lot of ant-Harper spam on Slashdot as of late, seems those poor anarchists and jackboot radicals are still smarting from their bad press after the Toronto G20 summit debacle.

Ahh. maybe we have the explanation; American style "two team" politics is creeping into Canada. This is not a "football" thing. You do not have to believe something just because it might be convenient to your team. Most of us on slashdot have barely heard of your "Harper" whatever he/she/it is and we do not form our views according to what might be most likely to damage "Harper".

To see why this is too good to be true, try actually restricting yourself freely distributed media, and derivative works thereon.

This is not hard. I run Ubuntu on both my computers. I get my music from Jamendo, a website that hosts CC-licensed music. I play Nexuiz, a free FPS roughly based off Quake (and I'm not a big gamer). The biggest exception would be movies, as it's harder to find copylefted films, but many of those that I download are old enough that they shouldn't qualify for copyright anymore.

Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer buying recordings of music made by my favourite bands to buying T-shirts and mugs with their faces on them.

Nothing is stopping you from doing so. Nothing is stopping your favorite bands from selling recordings. Weakened or abolished copyright law will not do this either.

Many people (including myself, hint hint) wish that their work was popular enough to show up on torrent networks.

You aren't anyone unless your stuff is available in a torrent.

I see your music is available for download on last.fm but I couldn't find you on Jamendo. If you want exposure I highly recommend setting up an account there. As a bonus, you can also take donations if people like your music.

We do need front companies, bands like Radiohead already have thousands of fans reading their website daily but Google isn't good enough for finding new music to listen to.

However, as Magnatune and Jamendo prove, there's no need for that company to be evil either.

Dunno how that'd extrapolate to the videogame market, however. The thing about copyright is that it covers such drastically different areas that a "one size fits all" solution would necessarily be as flawed as copyright itself already is.

Personally, I don't see any problem with the existing music business model.

Fundamentally it's based on artificial scarcity of something that can be endlessly copied for virtually no cost. You do not see a problem with this?

If you make a decision to try to make a living from your music then as far as I'm concerned it's a case of getting a good lawyer & negotiating your record company contract.

So let's see. Joe Startup Artist is supposed to try to negotiate with Big Music Corporation, which has dozens of new artists just like him lined up outside the door for the chance to throw themselves at the very contract he's trying to negotiate. Big Music Corporation has every reason to tell Joe Startup Artist to piss off if he doesn't like the abusive terms of the contract. Considering that a lawyer good enough to solve this problem would likely cost more than Joe Startup Artist makes in six months at Wal-Mart, how exactly do you suggest that he gain some leverage against Big Music Corporation?

After that, if you still feel you're being screwed by the record companies, then maybe you're not good enough to be making money from your music - so go train to do something else.

Dude, if I were a musician, I'd be extremely pissed at you for saying that. You're saying that the only people who are good enough to make money from their music are those that manage to wrestle it from their predatory record label. Never mind the fact that that particular attribute cannot be used to judge music quality.

Thirdly, people that justify music piracy are too stupid to realise that the music is there to be had in the first place because enough honest people like me go out and buy it the first place. Therefore, people like me subsidise their music habits and if we all chose to pirate music, then none of it would be made and they'd have nothing to download. Which is where the whole piracy argument falls flat on its face.

Bull fucking shit. You're asserting that without copyright protection everyone would just download music and therefore no music would ever be made. Bull, fucking, shit.

The bottom line is that when I buy the CD, the musician *may* be getting something whereas when you pirate the music, the musician is *definitely* getting nothing for their work.

When you buy the CD, the vast majority of what you pay goes towards the record labels and lets them fund continued multi-thousand-dollar lawsuits against casual music sharers, as well as continued lobbying of governments for harsher copyright law and more invasive enforcement. Kind of cuts away your moral high ground.

Yes, they do. YMMV and all that but even my grandma uses Ares from time to time.

In fact, I'd say the geek and the yuppie crowd are the only ones that care about *paying* for your music online, or if not pay per se at least download it legitimately through sites such as Jamendo. Myself included, before all the idiot "stfu u pirate n stop pirateing" trolls.

You might want to try Jamendo these days.

Jamendo would be a good place to start if you are a new artist. The best new heavy metal artist I have seen in the last 20 years (Holy Pain) I found on Jamendo. Given that Jameno is the default music "store" in Ubuntu/Rhythmbox, it gives you a lot of exposure.

Spread the word

It would be great if the schools responded by setting up a massive file sharing system loaded with public domain, Creative Commons, GPL, and other legal content. There could easily fill it with hundreds of gigs of free legal music. I think pushing free legal non-RIAA music would be an AWESOME way to comply with RIAA demands to combat downloads of their stuff.

Just a few links to get them started:
http://www.dance-industries.com/
http://ccmixter.org/view/media/remix
http://phlow-magazine.com/free-mp3-music-download
http://www.clearbits.net/torrents
http://www.jamendo.com/en/
http://www.archive.org/details/audio
http://newteevee.com/2007/03/03/ten-sites-for-free-and-legal-torrents/
http://newteevee.com/2010/02/05/ten-more-sites-for-free-and-legal-torrents/

and another four or five hundred links:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Content_Directories

-

If only there was a way that you could listen to a song before buying it, or read someone else's opinion about a movie before watching it. And if only there were free sources of music and movies to watch...

The two industries start from different premises, so that's why software can be free whereas media cannot.

Your opinion is belied by the fact that there is plenty of free media out there.

Such as http://www.jamendo.com/ free, Creative Commons released/protected music, and lots of it! Totally legal, much of it can even be remixed! Just check the license.

Or just support independent/creative commons artists. I was living in and out of the box for a while until in the last week I discovered tons of free music here http://www.ektoplazm.com/section/free-music/ and here http://www.jamendo.com/en/ and metlabels http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&ei=nsrJS5TbF4jMsgOJr4XxAg&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAwQBSgA&q=netlabels&spell=1

If you want a place to look,Jamendo has some pretty awesome music, and it's all free, but you can buy extra stuff, and also send donations.

I was just listening to Scenes from a Memory by Dream Theater yesterday. Although I guess that was made 11 years ago.
The Dreamer's Paradox by JT Bruce fits together pretty well as well.

Know any good sites that of course will have samples of the music to help guide me?

Jamendo, Magnatune, Bandcamp, Amie Street, TheSixtyOne and Zunior; to name a few.