I think this is pretty good. It is like buying 5 songs at the lowest price possible, plus you get a pandora, with the ability to actually choose what you want to hear. If you are going to buy 5 songs a month anyways, there is no downside to this offer. How this is "douchy", as some have claimed, I do not understand
@cbandes: Well, the 5 "free" songs makes it a wash (and cheaper than iTunes), but hopefully unlike the free streaming services, maybe you can actually rewind, click next infinitely, and pick the songs you want to hear next?
@dsh: Please to be reading the first part of the sentence: "strip off the DRM". Napster has unlimited downloads but they are DRMed .wma files....Strip that off and you get way more than 5 songs for $5
@djfoxx64: If you really believe your music is art, you'd want to be able to afford to produce it. if you think it's worth nothing, and don't want to use your time making music, and it's of no interest or value to anyone else, then go ahead and keep not getting paid for it.
@djfoxx64: Agreed. I have musician friends who give music away. They do the music cause they love it. Record companies come in and steal their IP, make millions off them, give them a pittance and force some to change their music style and conform to what's "cool". If you want to make money, be generic, but be the best generic you can be. If you want to do it for art's sake, make good music and more power to you, just don't expect to make money.
@EqualOpportunityCrasher: I've never met a musician who wouldn't love to make a living getting paid to make music.
Record companies don't steal IP. Artists eagerly seek out record deals because labels do things artists can't and don't want to do themselves (although obviously the role of labels is changing as the industry collapses and transforms). Artists essentially hire labels to promote, distribute, support, and produce the artist, and in return pay the label by giving them a percentage of their profits, if they ever get them. It's similar to filmmakers who make deals with studios or authors who make deals with publishers.
It's cool to say labels are evil, and there's a lot of terrible record contracts that turn artists into indentured servants, but why do people think that every profession in the world should be paid except music? If you make computers all day and you happen to love what you do, should you not get paid? Only an idiot wouldn't want to get paid for their work just because they enjoy doing it.
As for the generic thing, it turns out that the richest artists are the ones who rejected the urge to be like everyone else. The public is what makes musicians rich, not record labels. If you are an amazing musician and not like everyone else, the public rewards you by buying your shit. That is, when they're not stealing it.
There will always be musicians complaining about how the music industry sucks and record labels suck and making money doing music sucks and just give it away and play out every now and then at a coffee house. And hey, all the power to them. But those are the things that musicians typically say to lick their wounds because they aren't good enough to get the fans, record deals, and money from making music that they desperately, secretly crave.
The truth is is that if you are an amazing musician and an original and compelling artist, you have every reason in the world to expect to get rich. If you aren't an amazing and original musician, then, when you talk about it with your friends... the record industry sucks, labels suck, the system sucks, etc.
I don't care what you think of Apple, that's pretty damn awesome. Now I can comfortably purchase iTunes stuff without caring about authorization when transferring to another system of mine.
@Brendan Byrne: That idea is around since iTunes Music Store was introduced. For starters it would be great to get unknown new musicians into the mix. Bypassing completely the greedy record companies, the artists would have more freedom and more income.
Record companies have lost their function, their reason of existence and will eventually all close down anyway... but they try to hold to their power, especially Warner Music with their extremely lame policies regarding youtube.
It would sure be a shame for you to lose all your music. Of course, if you pay us a little bit more, maybe you won't have to worry about DRM comin' in and smashing up the place.
@ripfire: You mean live in a world where all your music is still at a lower bitrate with some DRM? Unthinkable! Horrors! People literally died from that in the Olden Days.
Part of it might also be that they didn't really think it through.
I still think that they just rolled out with the same system they used when EMI when DRM free. Obviously that was cheaper so people didn't really have a problem with paying for it all at once. Here (at least for me) you're talking hundreds of dollars. I think they probably listened to the uproar and made it an option.
@tande04: I bet they knew. And they probably knew there was going to be an uproar and they probably planned to make the individual upgrade option eventually. They just wanted to see who will bite the bait of upgrading all their songs at once.
So, I take it, if you write a book and try and sell it in as an audio book, you and your family are cool with readers stealing it since some unrelated fruited 3rd party company charged them to upgrade their files in early 2009?
/musician who has nothing to do with iTunes upgrade fees, and RIAA douche-baggery, and still doesn't like to be stolen from.
@spider2544: Technically, they paid for a 128K DRM copy, not a DRM-free version. To "steal" (not technically the right term) the music would still be copyright violation, and the fact you paid for a crappy version of it earlier does not diminish the "crime".
05/18/09
Today is the 18th, isn't it? *checks calendar*
05/18/09
05/18/09
05/18/09
05/18/09
05/18/09
05/18/09
and what consequence will it have, for your songs, when this "cheap" service is gone in a year or two ?
05/18/09
05/18/09
I mean, sure, if you manage to find some of iTunes' mythical $.69 tracks you could get... ya know... 6 songs instead of 5.
A buck a song is the industry standard, and these songs are DRM free.
05/18/09
05/18/09
02/02/09
Fuck Jobs and fuck the labels, both are blood sucking pieces of shit.
02/02/09
02/02/09
02/02/09
Record companies don't steal IP. Artists eagerly seek out record deals because labels do things artists can't and don't want to do themselves (although obviously the role of labels is changing as the industry collapses and transforms). Artists essentially hire labels to promote, distribute, support, and produce the artist, and in return pay the label by giving them a percentage of their profits, if they ever get them. It's similar to filmmakers who make deals with studios or authors who make deals with publishers.
It's cool to say labels are evil, and there's a lot of terrible record contracts that turn artists into indentured servants, but why do people think that every profession in the world should be paid except music? If you make computers all day and you happen to love what you do, should you not get paid? Only an idiot wouldn't want to get paid for their work just because they enjoy doing it.
As for the generic thing, it turns out that the richest artists are the ones who rejected the urge to be like everyone else. The public is what makes musicians rich, not record labels. If you are an amazing musician and not like everyone else, the public rewards you by buying your shit. That is, when they're not stealing it.
There will always be musicians complaining about how the music industry sucks and record labels suck and making money doing music sucks and just give it away and play out every now and then at a coffee house. And hey, all the power to them. But those are the things that musicians typically say to lick their wounds because they aren't good enough to get the fans, record deals, and money from making music that they desperately, secretly crave.
The truth is is that if you are an amazing musician and an original and compelling artist, you have every reason in the world to expect to get rich. If you aren't an amazing and original musician, then, when you talk about it with your friends... the record industry sucks, labels suck, the system sucks, etc.
02/02/09
02/02/09
02/02/09
I'd be surprised if it didn't happen at some point in the near future.
02/02/09
Record companies have lost their function, their reason of existence and will eventually all close down anyway... but they try to hold to their power, especially Warner Music with their extremely lame policies regarding youtube.
01/29/09
WTF?
WHY APPLE, WHY DO YOU STILL CONDONE HUMAN MORTALITY???
01/29/09
It would sure be a shame for you to lose all your music. Of course, if you pay us a little bit more, maybe you won't have to worry about DRM comin' in and smashing up the place.
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/29/09
So they can charge you more.
01/29/09
01/29/09
Part of it might also be that they didn't really think it through.
I still think that they just rolled out with the same system they used when EMI when DRM free. Obviously that was cheaper so people didn't really have a problem with paying for it all at once. Here (at least for me) you're talking hundreds of dollars. I think they probably listened to the uproar and made it an option.
01/29/09
01/29/09
01/14/09
/musician who has nothing to do with iTunes upgrade fees, and RIAA douche-baggery, and still doesn't like to be stolen from.
01/14/09
01/14/09
01/14/09
01/14/09