independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Jay-Z's epic, game-changing, $20/monthly not Spotify
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 6 <123456>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 03/30/15 9:11pm

mjscarousal

SoulAlive said:

at Jay Z.s press conference today:Rihanna,Alicia Keyes,Madonna,Beyonce

10985341_1425173667794307_92149315656579

There trying to get their fans on board. The whole press conference was a marketing ploy. "Hey look at all your favorite artists hanging out now buy all our music because we say so" and of course some easily led people will buy it. The photo is cute though razz

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 03/30/15 9:15pm

mjscarousal

lastdecember said:

mjscarousal said:

I would agree with this post if there were indie and independent artists included in this deal but there not. Its the same elite group mainstream artists that are benefiting from this. Also, I am still confused with how this streaming service is any different from some of the less expensive ones. How is this service distinct? How is this stream benefiting the consumer? I don't get that from the conference presentation. All I see are a bunch of pop stars trying to take advantage of their hard core fans by fooling them into buying a service that they can get for free else where. Most of the artists that were in the presentation make a ton of money touring so I am not sure what the point of this whole "revolution stream" shit they are trying to market lol

Streaming music services are meant to accomodate the consumer not the other way around. If these pop stars pull their songs/catalogs from those other services... I think it will back fire. Nobody is not going to pay $10 or 20 dollars a month for this when they can go on youtube for free or other less expensive services to get music and watch music videos. lol The hard cores might put our but the average listener is not going to.

Thing is though you aren't gonna launch an idea with no names, I mean I dig Van Hunt but who the hell would be batting an eyelash to him doing this? He is known by about 0.000001% of the music listeners, and that's not slighting him that's realism, u can't launch anything without a name or names so yes it's gonna look like oh the fucking elite want money for shit. I mean the fact is that 90% doc the music consumers about who worked on a record what it cost what studio who played on it, album art. We can all champion things like Reocrd Store day and shit like that but that type of consumer is dead and buried, because of the simplicity of the way music is made treated and distributed.

Agree with all of this but once again there aren't any independent artists on the Tidal stream. Its just mainstream stars so regardless they are the only ones profitting. There are a ton of unknown acts and indie artists that stream on other popular music services so why can't they stream on this one? If they are trying to promote "artists taking control and getting all their profits" shouldn't that include indie/independent artists as well and not just pop stars? There seems to be an agenda here.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 03/30/15 9:34pm

SoulAlive

mjscarousal said:

SoulAlive said:

at Jay Z.s press conference today:Rihanna,Alicia Keyes,Madonna,Beyonce

10985341_1425173667794307_92149315656579

There trying to get their fans on board. The whole press conference was a marketing ploy. "Hey look at all your favorite artists hanging out now buy all our music because we say so" and of course some easily led people will buy it. The photo is cute though razz

lol...you're absolutely right lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 03/30/15 9:34pm

MotownSubdivis
ion

mjscarousal said:



lastdecember said:


mjscarousal said:




I would agree with this post if there were indie and independent artists included in this deal but there not. Its the same elite group mainstream artists that are benefiting from this. Also, I am still confused with how this streaming service is any different from some of the less expensive ones. How is this service distinct? How is this stream benefiting the consumer? I don't get that from the conference presentation. All I see are a bunch of pop stars trying to take advantage of their hard core fans by fooling them into buying a service that they can get for free else where. Most of the artists that were in the presentation make a ton of money touring so I am not sure what the point of this whole "revolution stream" shit they are trying to market lol



Streaming music services are meant to accomodate the consumer not the other way around. If these pop stars pull their songs/catalogs from those other services... I think it will back fire. Nobody is not going to pay $10 or 20 dollars a month for this when they can go on youtube for free or other less expensive services to get music and watch music videos. lol The hard cores might put our but the average listener is not going to.



Thing is though you aren't gonna launch an idea with no names, I mean I dig Van Hunt but who the hell would be batting an eyelash to him doing this? He is known by about 0.000001% of the music listeners, and that's not slighting him that's realism, u can't launch anything without a name or names so yes it's gonna look like oh the fucking elite want money for shit. I mean the fact is that 90% doc the music consumers about who worked on a record what it cost what studio who played on it, album art. We can all champion things like Reocrd Store day and shit like that but that type of consumer is dead and buried, because of the simplicity of the way music is made treated and distributed.


Agree with all of this but once again there aren't any independent artists on the Tidal stream. Its just mainstream stars so regardless they are the only ones profitting. There are a ton of unknown acts and indie artists that stream on other popular music services so why can't they stream on this one? If they are trying to promote "artists taking control and getting all their profits" shouldn't that include indie/independent artists as well and not just pop stars? There seems to be an agenda here.


Exactly. For all the crap Jay, Bey, and other artists were spouing about "art" and it being all about the music and making it more accessible for the listener andhow this service is such a revolutionary new thing, you'd think that getting underground/ indie artists a platform would be one of their main objectives but nope, this is yet another greedy, vanity project.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 03/31/15 4:25am

KingSausage

avatar

Tidal apparently has 25 million songs. Unless Beyoncé and Madonna have way more albums than I know of, there must be many artists on Tidal. I'm interested in how much (if at all) their royalties differ on Tidal vs Spotify. If those small artists don't benefit, then this whole thing is just a cynical ploy to make fat cats even fatter.
"Drop that stereo before I blow your Goddamn nuts off, asshole!"
-Eugene Tackleberry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 03/31/15 4:33am

Ellie

avatar

I still can't get on board with paying to use Spotify or similar services. All the people I know that use it generally don't even like music that much and just useit to listen to random things that might be popular right now. Not to mention a few have been charged twice every month for it and bugs in the app have rendered it useless for weeks on end. Also every time I've personally done a search for something on it, what I'm looking for isn't available.

I just still believe in buying music outright for some crazy reason.

[Edited 3/31/15 4:34am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 03/31/15 4:51am

blackbob

avatar

cant believe some people dont understand why you would pay for music ?.....i paid ten pounds a month for spotify in 320 mp3 quality until sonos had a deal with deezer elite in which i paid 35 pounds for a whole year of lossless streaming music which i thought was a great deal...i will happily pay for good quality streaming music...i think the problem here is that 20 pounds a month is unrealistic and people aint going to pay that for good quality music....not when spotify have a free option with adverts...spotify have 60 million customers but 45 million of them use the free option and they are finding it difficult to get them to move to the paid option.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 03/31/15 5:54am

Linn4days

mjscarousal said:

Thanks identity for clarification

terrig said:

One of the most pretentious displays of clueless cognitive dissonace EVER. Could they be douchier? As if kids breathlessly waiting for beyonces album have 9.99/month? They hare SO out of touch with their customer, and have zero connection to understanding the psychology of the customer. And on top of that...because its revolutionary that we should worry about Madonna losing money.

Had they included a line-up of unknowns and indies and on the verge artists WITH A STAKE they could be seen as crusaders, but no. They decided to be ass-y and pretend victims.


http://gawker.com/the-wor...socialflow

Such a GREAT post, thanks! wink

Madonna makes a ton of money through touring and other ventures, why is she apart of this? lol Same with Beyonce, Jay Z, Nikki, Rihanna etc they ALL make most of their money from other avenues non related to music so there reasons for doing this are pretty self serving. None of them tweeted one thing on Ferguson, Black Live Matters or "I Can't Breathe" hashtag but they want me to buy their music and watch their videos that I can get for free?

They won't see a dime from me. I will stick to youtube razz

Youtube is next.... It has to be.

Once they get rid the site of all of the fan-uploads of songs..

I think The Carters appreared at a Trayvon Martin rally with his parents. The others, I do not know about.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 03/31/15 6:00am

mjscarousal

Linn4days said:

mjscarousal said:

Thanks identity for clarification

Such a GREAT post, thanks! wink

Madonna makes a ton of money through touring and other ventures, why is she apart of this? lol Same with Beyonce, Jay Z, Nikki, Rihanna etc they ALL make most of their money from other avenues non related to music so there reasons for doing this are pretty self serving. None of them tweeted one thing on Ferguson, Black Live Matters or "I Can't Breathe" hashtag but they want me to buy their music and watch their videos that I can get for free?

They won't see a dime from me. I will stick to youtube razz

Youtube is next.... It has to be.

Once they get rid the site of all of the fan-uploads of songs..

I think The Carters appreared at a Trayvon Martin rally with his parents. The others, I do not know about.

They attended one rally and that was AFTER the trial... ya know when it was safe to come out and choose a side neutral Those Carters did not utter one word on Ferguson or any of the black social issues that has taken place over the last several months. Thats disgusting being they are the biggest black stars out right now and they didnt say not ONE thing about any of the issues affecting black people? Black people need to stop putting money in the Carters pockets because its clear they don't care about them.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 03/31/15 6:11am

Graycap23

avatar

mjscarousal said:

Linn4days said:

Youtube is next.... It has to be.

Once they get rid the site of all of the fan-uploads of songs..

I think The Carters appreared at a Trayvon Martin rally with his parents. The others, I do not know about.

They attended one rally and that was AFTER the trial... ya know when it was safe to come out and choose a side neutral Those Carters did not utter one word on Ferguson or any of the black social issues that has taken place over the last several months. Thats disgusting being they are the biggest black stars out right now and they didnt say not ONE thing about any of the issues affecting black people? Black people need to stop putting money in the Carters pockets because its clear they don't care about them.

hmmm

FOOLS multiply when WISE Men & Women are silent.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 03/31/15 6:27am

Linn4days

mjscarousal said:

SoulAlive said:

at Jay Z.s press conference today:Rihanna,Alicia Keyes,Madonna,Beyonce

10985341_1425173667794307_92149315656579

There trying to get their fans on board. The whole press conference was a marketing ploy. "Hey look at all your favorite artists hanging out now buy all our music because we say so" and of course some easily led people will buy it. The photo is cute though razz

It's all marketing.. The new "hip to youngsters" is the latest site or tech..So, the conference may be a way to keep your music relevent, and to sell more concert seats..I think most at the conference are signed to LiveNation or RocNation.

[Edited 3/31/15 6:27am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 03/31/15 6:59am

Militant

avatar

moderator

Why would you pay for streaming music? Simple - the same reason you pay your water bill. For access to water when you need or want it.

I pay 7.99/month for Google Play Music, which IMO is the best service out there.

What Google provide with their service is:

- access to some 30million+ songs

- a "cloud locker" of 50,000 songs where you can upload your music.

What does this mean? It means I have access to my ENTIRE music collection, anywhere I go. All the rare funk and hip-hop stuff, single releases, b-sides, outtakes, etc. All that's in my cloud locker. And on top of that - all the music in their library of over 30 million. All the music I could ever want, plus all the music I already own, plus curated playlists, PLUS YouTube content (recently became part of Google Music via the YouTube Key merge). All in one place, accessible, from all my devices (desktop, three laptops, tablet, smart TV, phone, etc).

I love the service, but despite all the benefits, I think this price is probably too high as well, and if they'd get it down to 4.99 I'd shout from the rooftops about it even more than I already do.

Now, I believe Apple's purchase of Beats is to create a similar service within iTunes (they still don't have a streaming platform) that is said to launch this summer.

Between Google (some 80% of the mobile market with Android) and Apple (10-15%) they have the smart device market sown up, and both Google Play Music and iTunes obviously ship on these devices out of the box. Spotify has been around long enough to have developed serious partnerships, so it comes preinstalled on some devices like HTC devices, and you get a free 6 month premium subscription with a lot of cellphone service plans these days like with Vodafone here in the UK.

Tidal doesn't have the advantage of shipping on any devices, and it doesn't have the advantage of being around long enough to develop strategic partnerships like Spotify and even Deezer have done.

Even Beats Music, with it's huge brand name, was struggling in the marketplace before Apple bought the company.

I predict Tidal will crash and burn within a year.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 03/31/15 7:03am

Graycap23

avatar

Militant said:

Why would you pay for streaming music? Simple - the same reason you pay your water bill. For access to water when you need or want it.

I pay 7.99/month for Google Play Music, which IMO is the best service out there.

What Google provide with their service is:

- access to some 30million+ songs

- a "cloud locker" of 50,000 songs where you can upload your music.

What does this mean? It means I have access to my ENTIRE music collection, anywhere I go. All the rare funk and hip-hop stuff, single releases, b-sides, outtakes, etc. All that's in my cloud locker. And on top of that - all the music in their library of over 30 million. All the music I could ever want, plus all the music I already own, plus curated playlists, PLUS YouTube content (recently became part of Google Music via the YouTube Key merge). All in one place, accessible, from all my devices (desktop, three laptops, tablet, smart TV, phone, etc).

I love the service, but despite all the benefits, I think this price is probably too high as well, and if they'd get it down to 4.99 I'd shout from the rooftops about it even more than I already do.

Now, I believe Apple's purchase of Beats is to create a similar service within iTunes (they still don't have a streaming platform) that is said to launch this summer.

Between Google (some 80% of the mobile market with Android) and Apple (10-15%) they have the smart device market sown up, and both Google Play Music and iTunes obviously ship on these devices out of the box. Spotify has been around long enough to have developed serious partnerships, so it comes preinstalled on some devices like HTC devices, and you get a free 6 month premium subscription with a lot of cellphone service plans these days like with Vodafone here in the UK.

Tidal doesn't have the advantage of shipping on any devices, and it doesn't have the advantage of being around long enough to develop strategic partnerships like Spotify and even Deezer have done.

Even Beats Music, with it's huge brand name, was struggling in the marketplace before Apple bought the company.

I predict Tidal will crash and burn within a year.

.......or less.

FOOLS multiply when WISE Men & Women are silent.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 03/31/15 7:04am

mjscarousal

Graycap23 said:

mjscarousal said:

They attended one rally and that was AFTER the trial... ya know when it was safe to come out and choose a side neutral Those Carters did not utter one word on Ferguson or any of the black social issues that has taken place over the last several months. Thats disgusting being they are the biggest black stars out right now and they didnt say not ONE thing about any of the issues affecting black people? Black people need to stop putting money in the Carters pockets because its clear they don't care about them.

hmmm

Whatcha thinking Gray? lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 03/31/15 7:12am

Graycap23

avatar

mjscarousal said:

Graycap23 said:

hmmm

Whatcha thinking Gray? lol

I'm thinking u may be correct.

FOOLS multiply when WISE Men & Women are silent.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 03/31/15 7:24am

phunkdaddy

avatar

lowkey said:

can somebody please explain why you would pay a monthly fee to listen to music?



This is the org. Some people here spend 25% of their income on music
re-masters and box sets which amazes me when they already have the original
album,cd, or cassette. lol I don't even buy cd's like I used to. There is no way in hell I'm paying for a monthly music service I may not even use very often but if it's less than 10 bucks it can't be that bad.
Don't laugh at my funk
This funk is a serious joint
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 03/31/15 7:24am

TheGoldStandar
d

Thought: This is the Columbia House of online-streaming services. "Music like water" has been debated since the start of the 2000s. IMO the free water on YouTube often tastes better than Perrier.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 03/31/15 7:28am

Cinny

avatar

Militant said:

I pay 7.99/month for Google Play Music, which IMO is the best service out there.

What Google provide with their service is:

- access to some 30million+ songs

- a "cloud locker" of 50,000 songs where you can upload your music.

What does this mean? It means I have access to my ENTIRE music collection, anywhere I go. All the rare funk and hip-hop stuff, single releases, b-sides, outtakes, etc. All that's in my cloud locker.

The main thing selling it is to have my own "cloud locker" because I like to access my exact versions of stuff, so the album versions in their 30 million+ catalog simply never got my attention.

They simply never had the stuff I would be listening to on the ol' iPod classic, or worse: re-recorded versions by the original artist! eek

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 03/31/15 7:30am

SchlomoThaHomo

avatar

I think the "owned by artists" tagline is a bit of a ruse. Someone asked on Twitter where the monthly subscription fee goes, and Tidal replied that 75% of it goes back to the music labels who then distribute it to the artists, producers, songwriters, etc. So it seems the artists aren't really getting a bigger piece of the pie, they're becoming their own accountants.


Also, I took the hi-def test on their website, and while I could hear the difference on hi-def headphones via my laptop, the difference on the same headphones via my iPhone 6 was bascially non-existent.

[Edited 3/31/15 7:32am]

"That's when stars collide. When there's space for what u want, and ur heart is open wide."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 03/31/15 7:32am

phunkdaddy

avatar

TheGoldStandard said:

Thought: This is the Columbia House of online-streaming services. "Music like water" has been debated since the start of the 2000s. IMO the free water on YouTube often tastes better than Perrier.



All the access I need and you'll more than likely find more volume of
hard to find music than anywhere else. Free of charge!
[Edited 3/31/15 7:33am]
Don't laugh at my funk
This funk is a serious joint
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 03/31/15 7:36am

KingSausage

avatar

I had no idea Google Play offered that 50K song locker. iTunes Match tops out at 25K, which isn't enough. Amazon gives you 250K, but their streaming library is ridiculous.
"Drop that stereo before I blow your Goddamn nuts off, asshole!"
-Eugene Tackleberry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #51 posted 03/31/15 7:52am

TheGoldStandar
d

KingSausage said:

I had no idea Google Play offered that 50K song locker. iTunes Match tops out at 25K, which isn't enough. Amazon gives you 250K, but their streaming library is ridiculous.

.

I like Amazon's streaming library, its like going to a weird record store in an unfamiliar land.

.

Amazon: "Well, we don't have the indie electronic producer's ALBUM but we have several of their rare remixes and compilation tracks you might have never even known existed." The jazz library on Amazon is absurd.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #52 posted 03/31/15 7:58am

Militant

avatar

moderator

Cinny said:

Militant said:

I pay 7.99/month for Google Play Music, which IMO is the best service out there.

What Google provide with their service is:

- access to some 30million+ songs

- a "cloud locker" of 50,000 songs where you can upload your music.

What does this mean? It means I have access to my ENTIRE music collection, anywhere I go. All the rare funk and hip-hop stuff, single releases, b-sides, outtakes, etc. All that's in my cloud locker.

The main thing selling it is to have my own "cloud locker" because I like to access my exact versions of stuff, so the album versions in their 30 million+ catalog simply never got my attention.

They simply never had the stuff I would be listening to on the ol' iPod classic, or worse: re-recorded versions by the original artist! eek

Try it out. I think the cloud locker part is free, it's only their library that you pay for.

play.google.com/music

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #53 posted 03/31/15 8:06am

Cinny

avatar

SoulAlive said:

MotownSubdivision said:

The art of the record collection is dying.

Not for me,it isn't lol I still buy vinyl records,and CDs too.Young kids love to download music,but I'm old school...lol...It's important for me to have the physical copy.

Darn it, I'm old school. lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #54 posted 03/31/15 9:26am

CandaceS

avatar

SoulAlive said:

Not for me,it isn't lol I still buy vinyl records,and CDs too.Young kids love to download music,but I'm old school...lol...It's important for me to have the physical copy.

Rebel Heart (SD version) is the first album I've purely bought as a download...still ended up burning it on a CD too for other listening options! lol In the past, though, I've bought many individual songs from various artists.

"I would say that Prince's top thirty percent is great. Of that thirty percent, I'll bet the public has heard twenty percent of it." - Susan Rogers, "Hunting for Prince's Vault", BBC, 2015
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #55 posted 03/31/15 11:07am

terrig

Militant said:

I predict Tidal will crash and burn within a year.

This. I agree. For all JayZ's business acumen he should have thought the rollout through better, but no one there has had to think about how they spend money since 1990 lolololol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #56 posted 03/31/15 11:22am

purplethunder3
121

avatar

I need that 20 bucks to pay for internet access. lol

"Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything." --Plato

https://youtu.be/CVwv9LZMah0
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #57 posted 03/31/15 11:52am

luvsexy4all

so the point of this is for the artist to actully not get ripped off?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #58 posted 03/31/15 12:14pm

terrig

luvsexy4all said:

so the point of this is for the artist to actully not get ripped off?

well they'e been really really quiet about that part. amazing rt?

i'm sure the stakeholders wil ldo very well if it ever gets to IPO stage.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #59 posted 03/31/15 12:16pm

luvsexy4all

terrig said:

luvsexy4all said:

so the point of this is for the artist to actully not get ripped off?

well they'e been really really quiet about that part. amazing rt?

i'm sure the stakeholders wil ldo very well if it ever gets to IPO stage.

isnt it becasue not only is it miniscule but theres room for theft also?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 6 <123456>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Jay-Z's epic, game-changing, $20/monthly not Spotify