a music subscription service at 20 a month is too much

[ljwales]

Why is jay z launching his own service? Its expensive and doesn't he have enough. I pay 1/3 of that for Spotify, will be annoyed if artists pull their music and force you into paying three times as much

Tinkly

Thinking about books some more, I have been buying old books that have gone out of print, Things that I haven't seen in 20 to 30 yrs. I suspect that one of the main differences is that those that publish books have been a lot more adaptable than those in the music industry that are still trying to prevent the future from happening.

lj

Not sure about google and amazon, but apple are another company that only lease you the music that you listen too. There was a high profile case a while back brought about by Bruce Willis as to who would own the music that he had purchased off itunes (I think).

Doesn't surprise me, as I said apple are difficult cunts. They seam to screw everyone but still get away with it.

I've never bought anything digital that was double digits.

Sorry Boney that wasn't aimed directly at you! That was more of a general question for people who disagree with me, or who are reading the thread without posting. I wasn't trying to start a spat with you at all!

In order to sell music through iTunes, you either have to be signed or you have to use an aggregator. This means the artist has to sign a 'non-exclusive' contract (although looking at the contracts may prove otherwise!) and agree to pay the website 15% commission on sales.

I would comment that writing an e-book only requires you to have a computer. Producing music to a high quality takes a lot of expensive equipment.

Equipment is a lot cheaper in this digital age. I'm sure a bedroom setup with a few k could get decent enough results to release. Bjork recorded an album track in some loos 20 years ago.

You still haven't commented after I called you up on the untruths said.

Anyway I'm off to delete all my Nicki manji downloads as the quality is so substandard compared to the new service when playing though my phone speakers.

Nicki Minaj - Anaconda - YouTube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDZX4ooRsWs

Artist:Nicki Minaj

"a hit song will earn more just in spotify than the average nmw makes in their lifetime".

What a weird, irrelevant comparison OP. Anyway, why shouldn't people earn big money for creative goods? Other goods with market value aren't free.

How is that not relevant? Its all about the money! That was in response to the music industry person that claimed gaga would only make tens of pounds from Spotify, when actually she's probably made millions - as have many big stars.

Jayz and Madonna are business people more than artists. How much money money do these millionaires want?

Most artists don't make much money at all, especially now. Well done to the few that do. music is a business, and successful artists (and people working in the industry) should be able to make money like in any other business.

If you think it's so easy and should be done on a shoestring so people can have it for lower prices or free, go right ahead!

Does anybody know what Tidal will be paying artists at all? Would be an interesting comparison, I think.

New Yorker reflects what I think, I think.

Duckdeamon

How will Tidal be good for for the lower end musicians? All that is happening is that those that have made money are going to be screwing those that haven't, all that has changed is the piper.

Exactly boney. They may make double a stream on tidal but seeing as tidal is unlikely to even get 10% of the streams Spotify does it makes nok difference.

Rianna is like the anti artist, just gets people to pick other peoples songs that theyve worked hard over then pops in to record them and spends the rest of her time dressing up like a hooker.

Its already happening, beconce has released a new single that is only on tidal.

"I owe it to all my fans" ...

and then they wonder why someone will leak it to a torrent site.

It would always be torrented anyway Boney. In fact, you could give music away for free and people would STILL torrent it!

inabeautifulplace

I should have put more detail in my post, to flesh it out a bit.

"I owe it to my fans"

Does she really owe it to her fans to put it behind a firewall and force them to pay a subscription for a piece of music they they will never own a copy of?

To me it shows how little she values her fans.

Jay z is just doing this all as he's pissed that dre is a billionaire from some overpriced bassey headphones.

Hope they carry okn sinking millions into this project and it falls too bits.

Just seen that rhianna is releasing her new stuff on tidal (no real surprise) so on the bright side, if all of these artists are going to keep their work on tidal at least we won't be subjected to it.

I hope her cold play and Madonna aslo ban their songs from the radio.

Rianna is the worst, she does 1% of the work on the singles under her name.

This stuck out for me:

People do not make money from recorded music anymore. Tomorrow night I'm having a drink with a friend whose last album was No 1. You'll have heard of him, especially if you have teenage daughters. How much did he make from his last album, on which he wrote all the songs? Enough to buy a one bedroomed flat on a main road in one of London's less lovely districts.

So from a few months work, he made enough to buy a flat in London? That's not bad, tbh. And i say this as someone with a background in music, who retrained in favour of something less fun, but more lucrative.

Sorry if this sounds ignorant but I don't listen to pop music.
If you like this sort of thing can't you just listen to it on one of the hundreds of radio stations that play it all day long?