independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Fri 20th Sep 2019 1:11pm
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 1 of 6 123456>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 03/30/15 2:15pm

TheGoldStandar
d

Jay-Z's epic, game-changing, $20/monthly not Spotify

Anyone bold/dumb/rich enough to try this mess out? I can't tell from the articles if they are promising exclusive tracks or if its just baloney wrapped in cheese. It sounds like a fucking mess though. I'd love to hear a review.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 03/30/15 2:30pm

Militant

avatar

moderator

If Beats Music couldn't pull it off despite having Dre and Trent Reznor running things, what makes Jay-Z think he can? Or is he just hoping to get just enough traction and brand awareness to sell to a major tech company, like Beats did?

Anyway - they're offering a 30 day trial, so I'll probably try it. But I already pay £7.99/month to Google for my Google Play Music subscription, and I'm very happy with the service.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 03/30/15 3:48pm

mjscarousal

He changed the price to $10. lol He knew good and well nobody was going to pay $20 for that ish. Anyone who purchases this is insane OR a major Jay Z stan. lol They have much cheaper music stream outlets e.g. Rhapsody, Spotify, itunes etc. Why pay $10 for the same service you can get for free or for a much cheaper price? He is trying to get money from loyal fans based on something they can get for free because their favorite artists are signed up on the deal. Marketing 101. Its a stupid move when you have youtube, google etc all these other free and less expensive services.

[Edited 3/30/15 16:03pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 03/30/15 4:17pm

terrig

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

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 03/30/15 4:35pm

CandaceS

avatar

Militant said:

Or is he just hoping to get just enough traction and brand awareness to sell to a major tech company, like Beats did?

.

Pump and dump!!

.

Can't imagine this will still be around in two years, but we'll see...

"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 #5 posted 03/30/15 5:10pm

Identity



Beyoncé, Rihanna, Nicki Minaj, Madonna, Usher, Calvin Harris @ Tidal Press Conference 2015.

'‘The first ever artist-owned global music and entertainment platform''. Say what?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 03/30/15 5:12pm

lastdecember

avatar

Not to defend Jay in any way, but this is something artists need to get behind. I knew the average person is LIKE why i should care if Taylor Swift or Madonna or Beyonce's record sales suffer because of things like Spotify. But sorry that is just DUMB to say or think, and here is the big picture. Taylor and Beyonce and Katy Perry are about 1% of the recording industry, and even less of the artists that put out music. So to think that every artist that has a contract or an album is a millionare and paid again is stupid thinking. Look at some of the ORG's faves here, Van Hunt dude is collecting and fund raising to do a record, he my friends is the motherfucking majority of artists not the minority. And please dont give me that shit, oh make your money on your touring. Really, you think Van Hunt or Elle Varner or some other low key artists are making money on tours? Sorry, unless you are madonna or Elton or Jovi etc.. with a huge sponsorship and corporate behind you, you are not making money on your tour, you are counting every fucking $$ plain and simple. Spotify and some other streaming outlets pay an average of 4 cents for a track to an artist, do the math people. Now again Im not a Jay Z fan at all, an this is pure EGO driven for sure, BUT artists need to start getting the fucking hands out their pockets, between labels, spotify, iTunes etc....its worse than it ever was.

And also people who bitch and moan about quality, well the reason you arent seeing it is because there is no revenue in Music, so choose your side, stop bitching music sucks and talent sucks and this and that and get behind something that needs to change for the majority of artists. No other form of work lets you get work for free, now with streams basically ripped just as easily as downloading files from napster was in the day, shit has to change


"We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 03/30/15 5:19pm

terrig

CandaceS said:

Militant said:

Or is he just hoping to get just enough traction and brand awareness to sell to a major tech company, like Beats did?

.

Pump and dump!!

.

Can't imagine this will still be around in two years, but we'll see...



I think you hit the nail on the head, pump & dump - if they get that far. They have only 540,000 subscribers compared to the subscriber base of the other two major services thats nothing.

I pay spotify, but mainly use itunes podcasts - im not really a pop music customer anymore but i do buy some albums.

It makes no sense if they fdon't al lpull their music fromt he other services though. Taylor has some real balls in pulling her music from Spotify, interesting she's not involved here.

Also the problem is still the cut the artists gets from the service - and thats not the consumers problem. Thats the record label>artist>streaming service problem....just jacking the price up makes them come off very very badly.

If music is to only be an 'upscale' product now ....I mean REALLY?

Prince is STILL the one to have really put his actions where his mouth was years ago, and I bet you none of this tribe w Tidal will pull their music from the other services.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 03/30/15 5:21pm

terrig

lastdecember said:

Not to defend Jay in any way, but this is something artists need to get behind. I knew the average person is LIKE why i should care if Taylor Swift or Madonna or Beyonce's record sales suffer because of things like Spotify. But sorry that is just DUMB to say or think, and here is the big picture. Taylor and Beyonce and Katy Perry are about 1% of the recording industry, and even less of the artists that put out music. So to think that every artist that has a contract or an album is a millionare and paid again is stupid thinking. Look at some of the ORG's faves here, Van Hunt dude is collecting and fund raising to do a record, he my friends is the motherfucking majority of artists not the minority. And please dont give me that shit, oh make your money on your touring. Really, you think Van Hunt or Elle Varner or some other low key artists are making money on tours? Sorry, unless you are madonna or Elton or Jovi etc.. with a huge sponsorship and corporate behind you, you are not making money on your tour, you are counting every fucking $$ plain and simple. Spotify and some other streaming outlets pay an average of 4 cents for a track to an artist, do the math people. Now again Im not a Jay Z fan at all, an this is pure EGO driven for sure, BUT artists need to start getting the fucking hands out their pockets, between labels, spotify, iTunes etc....its worse than it ever was.

And also people who bitch and moan about quality, well the reason you arent seeing it is because there is no revenue in Music, so choose your side, stop bitching music sucks and talent sucks and this and that and get behind something that needs to change for the majority of artists. No other form of work lets you get work for free, now with streams basically ripped just as easily as downloading files from napster was in the day, shit has to change



You're RIGHT, but it has to change from the record label > streaming service side. let the customer pay the 4.95/month...and maybe $2 more for the high-def

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 03/30/15 5:30pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

Identity said:

'‘The first ever artist-owned global music and entertainment platform''.

What about Garth Brooks' GhostTunes & Neil Young's Pono?

[Edited 3/30/15 17:30pm]

For 65 years straight, the #1 genre in music, selling wise, was rock n' roll worldwide. Last year (2017) in June, it got de-crowned by hip hop. Hip hop is the #1 genre. It's hip hop - rock - country - pop or pop - country. ~ Pras
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 03/30/15 5:39pm

SoulAlive

hmmm I think I'm gonna stick with Spotify,for now
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 03/30/15 5:47pm

Identity

mjscarousal said:

He changed the price to $10. lol He knew good and well nobody was going to pay $20 for that ish.



Tidal offers two pricing options: $9.99 for for standard sound quality, HD videos and $19.99 for lossless High Fidelity music files and HD videos.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 03/30/15 6:00pm

lowkey

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

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 03/30/15 6:04pm

MotownSubdivis
ion

avatar

The art of the record collection is dying.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 03/30/15 6:06pm

Identity

MickyDolenz said:

Identity said:

'‘The first ever artist-owned global music and entertainment platform''.

What about Garth Brooks' GhostTunes & Neil Young's Pono?



Overshadowed in the international news by Jay'-Z Tidal , apparently.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 03/30/15 6:09pm

mjscarousal

lastdecember said:

Not to defend Jay in any way, but this is something artists need to get behind. I knew the average person is LIKE why i should care if Taylor Swift or Madonna or Beyonce's record sales suffer because of things like Spotify. But sorry that is just DUMB to say or think, and here is the big picture. Taylor and Beyonce and Katy Perry are about 1% of the recording industry, and even less of the artists that put out music. So to think that every artist that has a contract or an album is a millionare and paid again is stupid thinking. Look at some of the ORG's faves here, Van Hunt dude is collecting and fund raising to do a record, he my friends is the motherfucking majority of artists not the minority. And please dont give me that shit, oh make your money on your touring. Really, you think Van Hunt or Elle Varner or some other low key artists are making money on tours? Sorry, unless you are madonna or Elton or Jovi etc.. with a huge sponsorship and corporate behind you, you are not making money on your tour, you are counting every fucking $$ plain and simple. Spotify and some other streaming outlets pay an average of 4 cents for a track to an artist, do the math people. Now again Im not a Jay Z fan at all, an this is pure EGO driven for sure, BUT artists need to start getting the fucking hands out their pockets, between labels, spotify, iTunes etc....its worse than it ever was.

And also people who bitch and moan about quality, well the reason you arent seeing it is because there is no revenue in Music, so choose your side, stop bitching music sucks and talent sucks and this and that and get behind something that needs to change for the majority of artists. No other form of work lets you get work for free, now with streams basically ripped just as easily as downloading files from napster was in the day, shit has to change

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.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 03/30/15 6:11pm

terrig

lowkey said:

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

this! itunes is amazing - radio stations - podcasts - theres so many ways that are free.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 03/30/15 6:18pm

Identity

lowkey said:

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



Some benefits of joining Tidal should includes a free t-shirt, access to advance concert tickets, special offers, exclusive contests, etc. Otherwise, it seems like a waste of cash.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 03/30/15 6:18pm

mjscarousal

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

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 03/30/15 6:50pm

terrig

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



Had they added what identity said about special access for concerts special merch/gear or perks...it could make some sense...but instead they have to involve us in their 'revolution' of making them richer. And for the record....Im a business person who likes making money....I dont begrudge anyone their right to become a millionaire.

But it's REALLY HARD to sit here and look at all lthese people with more money than i'l ever see try get fans to pay them $20/month because they feel they are being cheated. THE REORD COMPANIES AND SPOTIFY IS CHEATING THEM. NOT THE CUSTOMERS. Their pricing will sink them. They should have made it the same price as spotify so people can easily swith their alliance.

ps: i have no idea what happened to this text when i saved it lololol

[Edited 3/30/15 18:51pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 03/30/15 6:51pm

KingSausage

avatar

I've been a paying Rhapsody subscriber for 6 years now. It's amazing. Paying a small monthly fee for nearly unlimited music is a great deal.
"Drop that stereo before I blow your Goddamn nuts off, asshole!"
-Eugene Tackleberry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 03/30/15 7:16pm

mjscarousal

terrig 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



Had they added what identity said about special access for concerts special merch/gear or perks...it could make some sense...but instead they have to involve us in their 'revolution' of making them richer. And for the record....Im a business person who likes making money....I dont begrudge anyone their right to become a millionaire.

But it's REALLY HARD to sit here and look at all lthese people with more money than i'l ever see try get fans to pay them $20/month because they feel they are being cheated. THE REORD COMPANIES AND SPOTIFY IS CHEATING THEM. NOT THE CUSTOMERS. Their pricing will sink them. They should have made it the same price as spotify so people can easily swith their alliance.

ps: i have no idea what happened to this text when i saved it lololol

[Edited 3/30/15 18:51pm]

nod

But even without perks, lets say they just wanted to start their own stream music service. Why not price the service lower to around 3.99 or 4.99? Why price it 10 or 20 dollars when there are much cheaper services? What does this service have that the other services don't have? Either they are money hungry greedy pop stars or they are simply out of touch with the socioeconomics of their consumers. I am all for celebrities trying to make money as well but like you pointed out its hard to take these rich pop stars seriously when they do shady stuff like this.

They want to bamboozle their fans into buying their music because they think they are being cheated. It also leaves a bad taste in my mouth when these same pop stars did not utter one word on any of the social issues around innocent victims (consumers) that have been killed over the last several months by police but yet they want my money? They only seem to care about consumers when they can get money out of you otherwise they could give a damn if you get shot at in the street. I don't see how anybody could put money in any of these peoples pockets especially The Carters.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 03/30/15 7:22pm

terrig

mjscarousal said:

terrig said:



Had they added what identity said about special access for concerts special merch/gear or perks...it could make some sense...but instead they have to involve us in their 'revolution' of making them richer. And for the record....Im a business person who likes making money....I dont begrudge anyone their right to become a millionaire.

But it's REALLY HARD to sit here and look at all lthese people with more money than i'l ever see try get fans to pay them $20/month because they feel they are being cheated. THE REORD COMPANIES AND SPOTIFY IS CHEATING THEM. NOT THE CUSTOMERS. Their pricing will sink them. They should have made it the same price as spotify so people can easily swith their alliance.

ps: i have no idea what happened to this text when i saved it lololol

[Edited 3/30/15 18:51pm]

nod

But even without perks, lets say they just wanted to start their own stream music service. Why not price the service lower to around 3.99 or 4.99? Why price it 10 or 20 dollars when there are much cheaper services? What does this service have that the other services don't have? Either they are money hungry greedy pop stars or they are simply out of touch with the socioeconomics of their consumers. I am all for celebrities trying to make money as well but like you pointed out its hard to take these rich pop stars seriously when they do shady stuff like this.

They want to bamboozle their fans into buying their music because they think they are being cheated. It also leaves a bad taste in my mouth when these same pop stars did not utter one word on any of the social issues around innocent victims (consumers) that have been killed over the last several months by police but yet they want my money? They only seem to care about consumers when they can get money out of you otherwise they could give a damn if you get shot at in the street. I don't see how anybody could put money in any of these peoples pockets especially The Carters.


I agree! At least when I spend my money on Prince I know the man is keeping paisley park afloat and feeding some starving proteges smile

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 03/30/15 7:28pm

lastdecember

avatar

mjscarousal said:



lastdecember said:


Not to defend Jay in any way, but this is something artists need to get behind. I knew the average person is LIKE why i should care if Taylor Swift or Madonna or Beyonce's record sales suffer because of things like Spotify. But sorry that is just DUMB to say or think, and here is the big picture. Taylor and Beyonce and Katy Perry are about 1% of the recording industry, and even less of the artists that put out music. So to think that every artist that has a contract or an album is a millionare and paid again is stupid thinking. Look at some of the ORG's faves here, Van Hunt dude is collecting and fund raising to do a record, he my friends is the motherfucking majority of artists not the minority. And please dont give me that shit, oh make your money on your touring. Really, you think Van Hunt or Elle Varner or some other low key artists are making money on tours? Sorry, unless you are madonna or Elton or Jovi etc.. with a huge sponsorship and corporate behind you, you are not making money on your tour, you are counting every fucking $$ plain and simple. Spotify and some other streaming outlets pay an average of 4 cents for a track to an artist, do the math people. Now again Im not a Jay Z fan at all, an this is pure EGO driven for sure, BUT artists need to start getting the fucking hands out their pockets, between labels, spotify, iTunes etc....its worse than it ever was.



And also people who bitch and moan about quality, well the reason you arent seeing it is because there is no revenue in Music, so choose your side, stop bitching music sucks and talent sucks and this and that and get behind something that needs to change for the majority of artists. No other form of work lets you get work for free, now with streams basically ripped just as easily as downloading files from napster was in the day, shit has to change





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.

"We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 03/30/15 7:32pm

SoulAlive

terrig said:

But it's REALLY HARD to sit here and look at all these people with more money than i'l ever see try get fans to pay them $20/month because they feel they are being cheated.

I have to agree.These artists are filthy rich.Madonna is damn near a billionaire lol Don't get me wrong,I support the artists that I like by buying their CDs and going to their concerts.But I'm not gonna lose any sleep just because they're losing a little money and feel that they're being cheated.At the end of the day,they're still extremely wealthy.I'm not crying any tears for them,lol.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 03/30/15 7:36pm

terrig

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.



The other thing I can't figure out whats different for the artist (outside of the stakeholders) whats the difference in the artists payout? No ones talking about that.


  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 03/30/15 7:48pm

SoulAlive

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

10985341_1425173667794307_92149315656579

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 03/30/15 8:16pm

Graycap23

avatar

Clueless is.....as clueless does.
FOOLS multiply when WISE Men & Women are silent.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 03/30/15 8:18pm

SoulAlive

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.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 03/30/15 8:42pm

SoulAlive

I wonder what Prince thinks of this service hmmm The fact that it's artist-owned,should appeal to him.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 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