What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
53 Comments
- t0x2c, on 03/29/2009, -0/+26Did anyone else get the extremely cute SnorgTees girl on the right?
http://ec.atdmt.com/b/APAPMDRIVDBT/WithAShirt_160b ...
Not that I'm going to buy any T-shirts now, but I just think she's really ***** attractive. And ***** the RIAA - Phasmorphage, on 03/29/2009, -2/+18***** the RIAA?
- waaan, on 03/29/2009, -2/+15Major music labels will never get it. Online streaming stations should be treated as a marketing tool for their artists so they can either sell more CDs or digital music. They're just going to discourage people from listening to mainstream stuff and going indie and artists-direct, which I guess is a good thing
- wipis, on 03/29/2009, -0/+11I think lastfm.com had it right. Upload my collection list. Play me songs I like. If I like it I'll click the link to go buy it.
- Kflo, on 03/29/2009, -0/+10This is horrible for musicians. Last.fm is the only service that has succeeded AT ALL in getting my band's name out there and now even it is being forced to stop streaming for free to international listeners.
http://deltarasa.bandcamp.com to download for free BTW. - MrRedneck, on 03/29/2009, -0/+9To quote Rob Sheridan:
"For the major labels, it's over. It's ***** over. You're going to burn to the ***** ground, and we're all going to dance around the fire. And it's your own fault. Surely, somewhere deep inside, you had to know this day was coming, right? Your very industry is founded on an unfair business model of owning art you didn't create in exchange for the services you provide."
I think it fits. A cent a song? Come on now. - cypherus, on 03/29/2009, -2/+9This is a very important issue to me and I wish that others would find it just as important, but unfortunately in this day and age everyone thinks that it's an obligation to download music illegally. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the RIAA suing people for downloading music, but the effects of doing so go deeper than one might think. Sure there are plenty of people who download an album from a torrent site and go out and buy the cd, but even with that the whole market is skewed. Even buying the cd doesn't get the artist the money that is deserved. I think we are moving in the right direction in finally compensating the artist properly, but it is taking time.
In the meantime, companies like last.fm, di.fm, imeem, bassdrive, etc. are all offering streaming music and are getting screwed by the music labels. We have to stand up and do something now or the music/services that are offered by these companies won't exist. Please, I urge you to take some time and think about how much these companies mean to you and think about donating or subscribing to their services. - widgetmaker, on 03/29/2009, -0/+6Well you can white list certain adverts if you miss her..
- WoollyMittens, on 03/29/2009, -0/+5Why would you even want to play the RIAA's music at this point? Play indie music and let the labels die the death they demand for themselves.
- billricardi, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4What a misleading title (which is NOT the submitter's fault, that was the default title from TechCrunch). The NON-streaming music startups are making money hand over fist. I was just talking to my friends who own TuneCore, and they had a record year last year.
Title SHOULD read: The Sorry State of Streaming Music Startups
Which, if they had done their homework, the owners should have known what they were getting into before they finished writing their business plan. - inactive, on 03/29/2009, -1/+5Oh, yeah! I used to see her ads all the time before I installed ABP. It's a trade-off I guess...
- reddikilowatt, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4"streaming music startups don’t want more people using their service, because they lose money from every one of them..."
See, that's the problem. They assume that someone listening to a stream is someone who isn't buying CDs. Maybe no one's buying CDs because the value isn't there. They've spend the last 25 years killing off the album as a complete thought (IE Pink Floyd, Yes, etc), yet they're upset when people only want to buy singles, or don't think the other songs on an album are worth anything (which many times aren't).
And that's just pop music. Look at what happened to country over the last few years. The country music industry is modeled after the 1950s pop industry. Find a good looking woman who may or may not have a good voice, throw her in the studio with a bunch of producers and studio musicians. Have her perform a few original songs and a bunch of covers from the catalog. She gets a flat fee for the session, no residuals from the songs, and after her first 2 albums, no promotion. Repeat. - inactive, on 03/29/2009, -0/+4Hang on a minute, sell more CDs? What happened to "there's no point buying albums cos artists don't make any money from them anyway, just pay to go to gigs instead"?
- prettyawesome, on 03/29/2009, -5/+8But when I stream a song, it generates interest in the artist, and I go spend money on their album and concerts.
- yaosio, on 03/29/2009, -0/+3Perhaps they could stream music from independent sources only.
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -1/+3So now it's all "I spend money on albums" is it? Funny, whenever we're talking about albums around here it's "I don't pay for albums because I support bands by paying to see gigs and buying t-shirts"
- cheezemunkey45, on 03/29/2009, -0/+2SiriusXM probably not considered an online startup, but you can't go wrong with their 7.99 per month music service in my opinion.
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -2/+4It's a bit rich to consider it an ad when most people insist that the product be given to them for free anyway.
Why don't you just admit that you don't want to pay artists for their work? - Travelsonic, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1So you can't understand copyright law and disagree with the RIAA's tactics?
Dumb assertion. - inactive, on 04/04/2009, -0/+1"only a very small percentage of the artists I listen to have got a cent of me. But why they should? They haven't done anything to deserve it."
Except provide you with entertainment, enjoyment, a soundtrack to your life. These things have no value to you, apparently.
"And I repeat it, I don't think I should pay for songs or CDs or albums, I should only pay for concerts. Fortunately for me, here in Spain what you call "piracy" IS LEGAL."
Good for you. So why don't you just get over yourself and admit out loud that you don't give a ***** about the artists whose work you enjoy? Your hypocrisy is staggering. - Kflo, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1I know! I'm so glad it exists. I hope it takes off.
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1I would replace her finger...
- writie, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1Who said the indie labels want the deal either?
- enantiodromia, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1i prefer the girl with the betty page hair :)
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -2/+3Still you I'm afraid - 50,000 people means you're only talking about a tiny elite of artists who are ALREADY extremely successful.
So if we all behave like you do and ONLY support artists who are already hugely successful then how is a new artist ever to emerge? Most artists have never made much money playing gigs OR selling albums and they need every cent they can get just to keep going. - Findeton, on 03/29/2009, -1/+2Nonsense? You are the one writting nonsense FelixDeluxe. So it costs more to come and play at a concert to 50,000 people than what they get from the concert? Let's see, $50 per person and 50,000 people makes 2.5million dollars. Let's assume they just get 10% of it: So you're telling me it costs more than 250,000 dollars to come to Spain and stay for a week? who's writting nonsense now?
- smacksaw, on 03/29/2009, -3/+4Which is a bigger portion of worldwide internet traffic?
A. The Apple Store
B. Torrents
Answer: B - thelastcivilian, on 03/29/2009, -1/+2You buy the album for EVERY song you stream?
- Findeton, on 03/30/2009, -0/+1I didn't bitch ot moan about the price of the tickets. And only a very small percentage of the artists I listen to have got a cent of me. But why they should? They haven't done anything to deserve it. Let me put it on my terms: I pay for concerts, not for songs, not for albums, not for CDs.
This year I'm going to see Depeche Mode, Ska-P, AC/DC and I'm going to FIB Benicasim (which is a music festival). I'm also going to many concerts of local groups. And I repeat it, I don't think I should pay for songs or CDs or albums, I should only pay for concerts. Fortunately for me, here in Spain what you call "piracy" IS LEGAL. - ArthurSucks, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1Bandcamp is probably the smartest on line record store I've seen in years. Free Download FTW!
- ArthurSucks, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1Bandcamp.com whips iTunes ass.
Artist gets paid directly, customer can stream the entire album before purchase, and no ***** RIAA executives to get in the way. - inactive, on 03/30/2009, -0/+1A bit of a "whoosh" there, objektiv1.
I also like how you say "started" to take money from gigs and merch. I loled. - Ne007, on 03/29/2009, -1/+2***** the RIAA
- ArthurSucks, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1You clearly did not read the article.
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -0/+1Yes of course, but in your version NO-ONE GETS PAID until they're at the very top level - that's what it means when you NEVER pay for music and only support established artists.
I'm starting to think you have a learning disability. - rebelcontent, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1Yes, yaosio they could. A business could be built with willing partners in independent music, who account for 80% of music released and 28% of market share under the existing, fading physical product-based model.
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -0/+1I'll try to explain this very, very simply:
You said you never buy music but you pay to go to concerts. So the only way an artist gets a cent from you is by travelling to wherever you are and playing live, right?
You might not understand this if you've never moved a pile of heavy black boxes and a group of people around and fed them and housed them but his is a very, very expensive thing to do. The cost of travelling is getting higher all the time as the price of fuel goes up and most artists will NEVER be able to afford to visit you.
Go and have a look through your "hard drive full of music" and answer honestly: What percentage of those artists have got a single cent from you? How many have played in your town? How many did you go and see?
And did you bitch and moan about the price of the tickets? - blakespoorbrain, on 03/29/2009, -0/+1Long live Blip.fm!
- rebelcontent, on 03/29/2009, -0/+0"streaming music startups don’t want more people using their service, because they lose money from every one of them..."
And yet, they once focused on amassing users and just a year ago engaged in competitive boasting about who had 20, 25, 30 million. Notice that those tickers with user counts have been turned off or have disappeared. Ultimately the numbers were meaningless where they needed to count most-with advertisers.
The model for advertising-based interactive streaming depends on an unrealistically high CPM that the market doesn't support. It's math. They should have done it before they launched products that they had to go back and make deals to support.
I don't think the future of online streaming that effectively promotes music and artists is dead. Just these companies are. They'll be replaced with ones who figure out how to actually run a business that makes a profit. - Findeton, on 03/29/2009, -2/+2". Sure there are plenty of people who download an album from a torrent site and go out and buy the cd, but even with that the whole market is skewed."
I have NEVER EVER IN MY LIFE bought a music album, and have my drive full of music (hint: here in Spain it's legal). But good artists receive money from me... when I go to their concerts. - writie, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1If the value isn't there, why would people stream it?
- objektiv1, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1Labels and services like TicketMaster are starting to take money from gigs and merch sales so this isn't true at all. Also, labels don't get it because they have understood marketing is no longer a one way street where you just flash images everywhere and make people buy. It is now more in depth because of social networking. Labels need to recognize it is now a two way conversation with interaction that sells albums in the marketing department.
- Findeton, on 03/29/2009, -1/+1FelixDeluxe: It is THE OPPOSITE: Only if you are a successful artist he will get anything from his records. 99% of the musicians ONLY get money from Live Concerts. And they get people to live concerts by spreading their music in any way possible. For example, The Artic Monkeys started that way, and, actually, every band starts that way: spreading their music in any way possible (including giving it for free)
- Findeton, on 03/30/2009, -1/+1FelixDeluxe Everyone starts from scrap. Everyone starts playing at clubs and pubs. The Beatles started that way, so did The Ramones, so did steve Ray Vaughan, so did The Clash, so did everyone. First you play for 10 people, then for 40, then for 100 then it's 1000 and so on.
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -2/+1No, most get very little from recordings OR concerts. Jesus, it's like you can't read.
What you're saying is that only rich people should ever even think about a career in music because until you can play to 50,000 people you're not worthy of payment.
Not one of the bands who come to spain and play to 50,000 people have built a career this way. Not one.
That you use Arctic Monkeys as an example just shows how little actual knowledge and experience in music - in fact I'm going to guess that you've NEVER done any work in any music related area. Your ignorance of extremely basic truths gives you away as someone who just repeats what they hear on the internet as fact. - smacksaw, on 03/29/2009, -2/+1imeem.com here I come whether you like it or not! I'm gonna stream 24/7!
On a serious note, why can't there be the same arrangement that Sirius/XM has where it's just a flat rate? And isn't it possibly racketeering or a monopoly when sat radio has one set of rules, terrestrial/FM radio has one set and then internet has a totally different set?
This whole thing reminds me of late-night TV. As in we pay money for cable channels and they show us infomercials. Radio is advertising. People should pay for the privilege of broadcasting ads for the record industry in their musical product? Really? - inactive, on 03/29/2009, -4/+3It costs most of those artists more money to come and play for you than they make. Stop repeating this nonsense.
- inactive, on 03/29/2009, -5/+3Are you an ignorant child?.
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 