Solve real business challenges on Google Cloud and run workloads for free. For Slashdot users: Get $300 in free credits to fully explore Google Cloud. Get started for free today.
One big hurdle you'd have to jump through first is the "take micropayments."
From a merchant perspective, micropayments SUCKS ASS because the cost of processing such a payment is more expensive than the amount being paid. You end up with the same problem you describe, except now you are forking all the dough to the payment companies.
besides, even if we grant what you imply, that Apple is merely the lesser of two evils - I must remind you that up until now, almost all major distribution channels for music wants to screw you both ways - pump the artists dry AND limit the consumer's rights to their stuff. Apple, if not given any other credit, must be commended on their effort to make sure you can do (for the most part) whatever you want with the music you bought.
not only that, having a central place where your stuff is catalogued and easily purchased is a good thing. It's much less likely somebody will stumble upon your little corner of a website - but much more likely if you show up when they browse through the genre that they like on a major catalogued site. Don't underestimate the necessity of advertising channels, and the distribution / payment channels as outlined in paragraph 2.
I think right now there are two battles - one between the consumers and the labels / distribution / retail channels, and one between the bands and the same. Apple mostly allowed the first battle to be won in favor of consumers - the bands are another battle altogether - and i am sorry to say, unless there are some serious reason why the consumers would care to get involved, the vast majority of them probably wouldn't.
According to this article [theregister.co.uk] from The Register, Apple is giving 65 cents out of the 99 cents to the music industry so effectively they look already thin on margin.
Bands don't get salaries from the big labels -- just as the parent post stated, the usual arrangement is for the label to advance the band a certain amount on signing, and then deduct royalties that would be owed them from that initial amount. In order to start collecting any money after that first payment, a band usually has to go gold within their first two albums released on the contract.
Even worse, most of the promotional and support services you talk about are actaully paid for by the band, again out of their future royalties. Many groups actually end up *owing* the label money after their first album and tour, which only further binds them to the label's "artistic direction" for them.
The only thing you get from a major label by signing with them is a temporary invitation to ride their distribution network to promote your work. Artists pay their own way, and lose all rights to their work in the process. Of course, that's often better than the alternative, since independent groups and labels have effectively no leverage with radio stations and major venue owners, esp. given the current trend of media consolidation
You just have to look at the likely outcome from this week's news about the new FCC relaxation of ownership rules for a chilling view of where we're going. I don't think that Apple is going to turn things around overnight, but any arrangement which gives the indies more opportunity to reach a paying audience is fine by me.
A former coworker, who was making great money during the day, more than doubled his income as an unsigned artist on MP3.com. I've found and purchased music from unknown bands I've found on MP3.com. This doesn't exactly qualify as "failed completely".
My two cents.
Emusic [emusic.com]? Multi-platform support (including Linux), VBR mp3s at 192kb/s average (encoded with LAME [sourceforge.net], no less), subscription based (all you can eat for $10 or $15). The only thing they DON'T have is the records of the big ones (unless you think Yo La Tengo and Modest Mouse are big).
Does Apple or anyone else post iTunes' best selling tracks and albums on a website?
Yes, both the top ten tracks and the top ten albums are listed on the iTMS "front page" (the page you go to when you select the iTMS in iTunes). As of this writing, they are:
Top Ten Tracks:
"Clocks" - Coldplay
"One I Love" - Coldplay
"Miss Independent" - Kelly Clarkson
"Hole In The World" - The Eagles
"Intuition" - Jewel
"Get The Party Started" - Pink
"Unwell (Live Acoustic)" - Matchbox Twenty
"Crazy In Love" - Beyonce & Jay-Z
"Calling All Angels" - Train
"Lose Yourself" - Eminem
Top Ten Albums:
"0304" - Jewel
"On And On" - Jack Johnson
"One Quiet Night" - Pat Methany
"A Rush Of Blood To The Head" - Coldplay
"Birds Of Pray" - Live
"Paper Monsters" - Dave Gahan
"These Are The Vistas" - The Bad Plus
"Greatest Hits" - The Doors
"The Very Best Of Sting & The Police" - Sting & The Police
"The Diva Series: Astrud Gilberto" - Astrud Gilberto
Of course, North American Mac users make for a serious skewed sample group, but, well... you can draw your own conclusions.
Top Songs
1 Clocks - Coldplay
2 One I Love - Coldplay
3 Miss Independent - Kelly Clarkson
4 Hole in the World - Eagles
5 Intuition - Jewel
6 Get the Party Started - Pink
7 Unwell (Live Acoustic Version) - Matchbox 20
8 Crazy in Love - Beyonce and Jay-Z
9 Calling all Angels - Train
10 Lose Yourself - Eminem
Top Albums
1 0304 - Jewel
2 On and On - Jack Johnson
3 One Quiet Night - Pat Metheny
4 A Rush of Blood to the Head - Coldplay
5 Birds of Pray - Live
6 Paper Monsters - Dave Gahan
7 These are the Vistas - The Bad Plus
8 Greatest Hits - The Doors
9 The Very Best of Sting - Sting and the Police
10 The Diva Series: Astrund Gilberto - Astrund Gilberto
I currently use both emusic and Apple's store. I like them both. Emusic's great appeal is that, once you've paid your $20, you can just download anything. So with a fast broadband connection, there's no reason NOT to get anything that sounds even remotely interesting. Furthermore, they have a lot of music that's pretty much impossible to get anywhere...I'm thinking of Edan's full length album, a gem of Boston underground hip-hop which I ordered at two local record shops, neither of which ever got it in.
Of course, I've got pretty much every song I want on emusic at this point, so the pricetag is starting to weigh pretty heavy on me. Being able to download those tracks from Apple at comparable to higher quality, for $.99 or maybe a little less by album, is a viable and exciting alternative. Plus you get the cool album art, and just maybe they'll have the correct track names for Jiker's "An Eh for an Eh, a Toque for a Toque."
CDBaby is fine and well for the listener, but it sucks for the artist-
The artist has to invest in a huge amount of CD manufacturing to send off to CDBaby in the hopes that they'll sell.
At LuluMUSIC [lulu.com] the artist uploads their work for free, sets the royalty and price they want to recieve, and are done. No upfront costs to them, and they have control over pricing and licensing. Want to use the Founder's Copyright [creativecommons.org] instead of the traditional current copyright? Go right ahead.
The issue I have with $.99 per song is that it is in most cases above the threshold of value to me. If, for instance, I would like to purchase all 12 tracks from an artist's album I would be required to pay Apple $12.
RTFA, MF. If you want all the tracks, Apple sells complete albums for $9.99. Not as cheap as a used disk (when you can find one), but certainly cheaper than retail CD's.
The issue I have with $.99 per song is that it is in most cases above the threshold of value to me. If, for instance, I would like to purchase all 12 tracks from an artist's album I would be required to pay Apple $12. However, I could most likely find the CD on Amazon marketplace or Half.com for $5-6. What is my incentive to purchase these tracks from Apple, considering the alternative of having the CD and the ability to convert the tracks into the format of my choice for half the price?
First of all, Apple has a flat-rate price of $10 per album for most albums, no matter how many songs they have. I've gotten a few albums with 16 or 18 songs for $10.
Second, buying a CD on Amazon or Half.com is not the same as buying on the iTunes Music Store (iTMS). You get your song instantly on iTMS, you have to wait for the other stores. Apple's music comes pre-encoded from original masters, the CD you get from the other stores might be scratched and scuffed up. With iTMS you can still convert the AAC file to another format by either burning the song to a CD and then re-encoding or by using Audio Hijack Pro [rogueamoeba.com] to grab the song from iTunes.
Third, you might also only want a song or two from an album. With iTMS you would only spend $1-$2 for that, with the other stores you would still spend $5-6. iTMS also does not have shipping costs, whereas the other stores you need to pay to have the items shipped to you on top of whatever you paid for them.
Overall, I'd say it is closer than most people think. Sure Amazon or Half.com might be a bit cheaper than iTMS, but you trade off ease-of-use and instant gratification for a dollar or two of savings. It's up to the individual to determine if it's worth it or not, but I definitely feel that iTMS is a service that is worth it.
I went and dug around on the site, and the FAQ states pretty explicitly that you have to already be paying their subscription fee to buy tracks to download. Stated explicitly:
8. Do I have to be subscribed to the All Access subscription plan to burn CDs?
Yes. Only subscribers to the RHAPSODY All Access subscription plan at $9.95 per month, will get the ability to burn tracks for an additional fee per track, on a pay-as-you-go basis.
Plus, what you can buy to burn is a limited subset of what they have available to listen to. Overall, it doesn't sound like a good deal to me. Think about how much you'd have to download to beat Apple's price, you break even at about 50 tracks a month ((50 * $.79) + $10 = $49.5; 50 * $.99 = $49.5), that's a lot of music I'm not going to buy every month. I mean, if you had a bunch of songs you wanted to buy (more than 50), and you could sign up for only a month (I couldn't find a minimum subscription time limitation, but I didn't look particularly hard), then maybe it would be a good thing to use, but it seems like a big hassle to me.
They also offer a $4.95/month plan that only allows you access to the streaming library. But, still, I take CDs I burn into my car, to friend's -- a lot of places where I'm not going to listen to music through my computer, so it's not right for me. Obviously, there'll be some people who'll be satisfied by Real's service, but I'm betting that most will be like me. I guess Apple is, too.
Um, there's a "radio" selection that has several hundred shoutcast stations directly above the music store in the playlist pane like so [akamai.net]. It's not tied into the music store or sponsored by labels or anything and it has some great stuff. It's had this feature since version 1 IIRC.
I think their selection is tolerable. I have been able to find a little bit of most things, i.e., they might only have two of Jane's Addiction's 4+ CDs, but they do have something. I am only on my third day of this trial period, but I am actually extremely pleased with the service.
The software is typical Real bloat, and it is unconfigurable to an annoyting degree. It not unattractive, and it is fairly easy to use. It can definitely be improved, but it's tolerable.
What I have started to fall in love with are Real's streaming channels. Here are the categories of channels: Rock/Pop Alternative/Punk Rap/Hip-Hop Soul/R&B Country Jazz Electronica/Dance Worl d/Reggae Classical Oldies Vocal New Age Sacred/Gospel Blues Folk Easy Listening Soundtracks/Musicals Children/Holiday
Each category has somewhere between 1 (Children/Holiday) and 19 (Rock/Pop) channels. I have been listening to the Indie Rock and the Ambient channels a lot at work, and I've been surprised and delighted with Real's quality of song selection. Not only do they play songs by some of my favorite artists in these genres, but they have introduced me to some really wonderful new artists. I've already bought two CDs of artists I discovered on this service. Also, a small box displays interesting tidbits of information about each song/artist as the song is being played.
I don't care if I can't copy the songs to my mp3 player of burn a cd. That's not why I want an MP3 service really. If am going to buy music, I am just going to buy a cd. I have a good backup that truly can sound better than any mp3 version (on the right equipment), and I can do anything I want with the mp3s I rip from it. If I am paying for music, I don't want restrictions.
With the Real service, I am not really paying for music. I am paying for a very high quality, on-demand, highly configurable Internet radio station.
For $10/month (only $5 for first three months), I get unlimited streaming access to over 325,000 songs. I can't listen to those songs without a computer and broadband connection. That kind of sucks, but it's only $10/month.
Also, you can burn certain songs to CD for $.79, as has been pointed out elsewhere, but I haven't really explored this much, as I have had no desire.
Anyhow, I highly recommend this service to people who feel similar to me. I really just want a badass Internet radio station, and Real's Rhapsody service is the best attempt I have seen so far.
it's not so simple (Score:5, Informative)
From a merchant perspective, micropayments SUCKS ASS because the cost of processing such a payment is more expensive than the amount being paid. You end up with the same problem you describe, except now you are forking all the dough to the payment companies.
besides, even if we grant what you imply, that Apple is merely the lesser of two evils - I must remind you that up until now, almost all major distribution channels for music wants to screw you both ways - pump the artists dry AND limit the consumer's rights to their stuff. Apple, if not given any other credit, must be commended on their effort to make sure you can do (for the most part) whatever you want with the music you bought.
not only that, having a central place where your stuff is catalogued and easily purchased is a good thing. It's much less likely somebody will stumble upon your little corner of a website - but much more likely if you show up when they browse through the genre that they like on a major catalogued site. Don't underestimate the necessity of advertising channels, and the distribution / payment channels as outlined in paragraph 2.
I think right now there are two battles - one between the consumers and the labels / distribution / retail channels, and one between the bands and the same. Apple mostly allowed the first battle to be won in favor of consumers - the bands are another battle altogether - and i am sorry to say, unless there are some serious reason why the consumers would care to get involved, the vast majority of them probably wouldn't.
Re:Think Different, Think Nirvana (Score:5, Informative)
Re:making money from music (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Death to Big Labels (Score:5, Informative)
Even worse, most of the promotional and support services you talk about are actaully paid for by the band, again out of their future royalties. Many groups actually end up *owing* the label money after their first album and tour, which only further binds them to the label's "artistic direction" for them.
The only thing you get from a major label by signing with them is a temporary invitation to ride their distribution network to promote your work. Artists pay their own way, and lose all rights to their work in the process. Of course, that's often better than the alternative, since independent groups and labels have effectively no leverage with radio stations and major venue owners, esp. given the current trend of media consolidation
You just have to look at the likely outcome from this week's news about the new FCC relaxation of ownership rules for a chilling view of where we're going. I don't think that Apple is going to turn things around overnight, but any arrangement which gives the indies more opportunity to reach a paying audience is fine by me.
Re:Finally! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Informative)
Re:iTunes best sellers? (Score:5, Informative)
Blockquoth the poster:
Yes, both the top ten tracks and the top ten albums are listed on the iTMS "front page" (the page you go to when you select the iTMS in iTunes). As of this writing, they are:
Of course, North American Mac users make for a serious skewed sample group, but, well... you can draw your own conclusions.
Re:Excellent (Score:4, Informative)
I U M A [iuma.org]
Nuff said....
Re:iTunes best sellers? (Score:2, Informative)
Top Songs
1 Clocks - Coldplay
2 One I Love - Coldplay
3 Miss Independent - Kelly Clarkson
4 Hole in the World - Eagles
5 Intuition - Jewel
6 Get the Party Started - Pink
7 Unwell (Live Acoustic Version) - Matchbox 20
8 Crazy in Love - Beyonce and Jay-Z
9 Calling all Angels - Train
10 Lose Yourself - Eminem
Top Albums
1 0304 - Jewel
2 On and On - Jack Johnson
3 One Quiet Night - Pat Metheny
4 A Rush of Blood to the Head - Coldplay
5 Birds of Pray - Live
6 Paper Monsters - Dave Gahan
7 These are the Vistas - The Bad Plus
8 Greatest Hits - The Doors
9 The Very Best of Sting - Sting and the Police
10 The Diva Series: Astrund Gilberto - Astrund Gilberto
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, I've got pretty much every song I want on emusic at this point, so the pricetag is starting to weigh pretty heavy on me. Being able to download those tracks from Apple at comparable to higher quality, for $.99 or maybe a little less by album, is a viable and exciting alternative. Plus you get the cool album art, and just maybe they'll have the correct track names for Jiker's "An Eh for an Eh, a Toque for a Toque."
Re:Let me put on my hip waders (Score:3, Informative)
The artist has to invest in a huge amount of CD manufacturing to send off to CDBaby in the hopes that they'll sell.
At LuluMUSIC [lulu.com] the artist uploads their work for free, sets the royalty and price they want to recieve, and are done. No upfront costs to them, and they have control over pricing and licensing. Want to use the Founder's Copyright [creativecommons.org] instead of the traditional current copyright? Go right ahead.
Re:Death to Big Labels (Score:2, Informative)
RTFA, MF. If you want all the tracks, Apple sells complete albums for $9.99. Not as cheap as a used disk (when you can find one), but certainly cheaper than retail CD's.
Re:Death to Big Labels (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, Apple has a flat-rate price of $10 per album for most albums, no matter how many songs they have. I've gotten a few albums with 16 or 18 songs for $10.
Second, buying a CD on Amazon or Half.com is not the same as buying on the iTunes Music Store (iTMS). You get your song instantly on iTMS, you have to wait for the other stores. Apple's music comes pre-encoded from original masters, the CD you get from the other stores might be scratched and scuffed up. With iTMS you can still convert the AAC file to another format by either burning the song to a CD and then re-encoding or by using Audio Hijack Pro [rogueamoeba.com] to grab the song from iTunes.
Third, you might also only want a song or two from an album. With iTMS you would only spend $1-$2 for that, with the other stores you would still spend $5-6. iTMS also does not have shipping costs, whereas the other stores you need to pay to have the items shipped to you on top of whatever you paid for them.
Overall, I'd say it is closer than most people think. Sure Amazon or Half.com might be a bit cheaper than iTMS, but you trade off ease-of-use and instant gratification for a dollar or two of savings. It's up to the individual to determine if it's worth it or not, but I definitely feel that iTMS is a service that is worth it.
Re:Two obstacles: subscriptions and licenses (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Death to Big Labels (Score:4, Informative)
As somebody who is now in Real's 14-day trial (Score:4, Informative)
The software is typical Real bloat, and it is unconfigurable to an annoyting degree. It not unattractive, and it is fairly easy to use. It can definitely be improved, but it's tolerable.
What I have started to fall in love with are Real's streaming channels. Here are the categories of channels:
Rock/Pop
Alternative/Punk
Rap/Hip-Ho
Soul/R&B
Country
Jazz
Electronica/Dance
Wor
Classical
Oldies
Vocal
New Age
Sacred/Gospel
Blues
Folk
Easy Listening
Soundtracks/Musicals
Children/Holiday
Each category has somewhere between 1 (Children/Holiday) and 19 (Rock/Pop) channels. I have been listening to the Indie Rock and the Ambient channels a lot at work, and I've been surprised and delighted with Real's quality of song selection. Not only do they play songs by some of my favorite artists in these genres, but they have introduced me to some really wonderful new artists. I've already bought two CDs of artists I discovered on this service. Also, a small box displays interesting tidbits of information about each song/artist as the song is being played.
I don't care if I can't copy the songs to my mp3 player of burn a cd. That's not why I want an MP3 service really. If am going to buy music, I am just going to buy a cd. I have a good backup that truly can sound better than any mp3 version (on the right equipment), and I can do anything I want with the mp3s I rip from it. If I am paying for music, I don't want restrictions.
With the Real service, I am not really paying for music. I am paying for a very high quality, on-demand, highly configurable Internet radio station.
For $10/month (only $5 for first three months), I get unlimited streaming access to over 325,000 songs. I can't listen to those songs without a computer and broadband connection. That kind of sucks, but it's only $10/month.
Also, you can burn certain songs to CD for $.79, as has been pointed out elsewhere, but I haven't really explored this much, as I have had no desire.
Anyhow, I highly recommend this service to people who feel similar to me. I really just want a badass Internet radio station, and Real's Rhapsody service is the best attempt I have seen so far.
Re:Excellent (Score:1, Informative)