[Go to page: 1,...15,16,17]

[Buleriachk]

I remember lots of interviews from classic artists from my part of the world, they always say, it was easy back then, nobody was making music, you just needed a guitar...

Nobody still makes music, but you need a lot more equipment to not make it....

[eyeknow]

Bitch has all the money she needs. NBC cash alone has her set for life. Quit whining.

Now excuse me, I need to go stream kant"yay" worsts latest combination of 3 phrases.

she has to keep the water flowing because one day it will all run dry. ask scott stapp

For real? I don't keep up with gossip in the entertainment industry.

Couldn't he ask fred durst for a loan (since they are best mates and all)

[ohigetbywithalittlehelpfrommyfriends]

.
.
.







.











.


































.




















.


















.



























.










.




































































































.

[TomViolenz]

I always find it puzzling how people's envy of some other persons success, is greater than their interest in self preservation.

"NO, no, no! I refuse to be supported in my interests by someone more successful than me!!! That rich bitch needs to stop whining on my (and her) behalf!"

Well that, or the people posting such drivel here, are in fact not actually artists, who make music themselves, but rather just consumers, happy about getting their music for bargain basement prices, and they are just here on the forum as a general nuisance to us artists. (i.e. Trolls)

[eyeknow]

I always find it puzzling how people's envy of some other persons success, is greater than their interest in self preservation.

"NO, no, no! I refuse to be supported in my interests by someone more successful than me!!! That rich bitch needs to stop whining on my (and her) behalf!"

Well that, or the people posting such drivel here, are in fact not actually artists, who make music themselves, but rather just consumers, happy about getting their music for bargain basement prices, and they are just here on the forum as a general nuisance to us artists. (i.e. Trolls)

Speak for yourself.

[ohigetbywithalittlehelpfrommyfriends]

.
.
.







.











.


































.




















.


















.



























.










.




































































































.

[TomViolenz]

It would have made an impact if other artist followed Taylor's move. No one else I know of has followed. This could be a mistake on their part.

t,ftfy

[BaronVonAbelDong]

It would have made an impact if other artist followed Taylor's move. No one else I know of has followed. This could be a mistake on their part.

t,ftfy

It's pissing in the wind mate. A mass boycott is highly unlikely. Not every artist on Spotify can even control that about their own music. I doubt many have the balls to end their label deal also.

Spotify exists and if it stops existing, it won't be because of some romantic revolution. It'll be because a 'preferred' streaming service takes over (Facebook vs. MySpace) or the majors/investors decide to squash it... but why would they right now?

Use it for what it is. A brilliant way of connecting. I still don't understand why Spotify is the bad wolf and not Google/YouTube for people out there. They're both great services for the listener and as long as you have your own business in order, what is wrong with having a couple of tracks up on the services? So people can find you, play the music, decide they want more and visit your own sales funnel... not via iTunes, not anywhere else. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. Use Spotify/YouTube/Wherever for leads > convert them on your own site/service. Best of both worlds.

Don't sign deals with other labels, do it all yourself... or if you can't/won't, then swallow the choices that the label make to survive.

Spotify are going to be around for a good few years... even if every single independent artist that can pull their own tracks off the service do so.

No other artist has followed her initiative probably because Spotify is either working out for them (for whatever way they want it to), they're in a contract and have no voice to get out, or they aren't in the position to use the same publicity she created to cash in hard copy sales. It worked for her, for where she is in her 'career'. We have to do what works for us... and it's different in most cases.

[s0nspark]

I read (most of) this thread with interest...

As a music consumer I do still very much want to "own" the music I love. That used to mean cassettes, then CDs... now it is lossless downloads, preferably 24-bit. I love services like Bleep, Addictech and Beatport ... and of course Bandcamp! I expect unrestricted, offline access to whatever music I am currently absorbing so I can listen whenever and however I like.

Streaming just feels so empty :) I also prefer a higher quality experience than streaming can reasonably provide. I do think it serves a purpose and can be leveraged in some small way to attract new fans though.

The glory days when the industry had production and distribution locked up and made insane profits are surely over but I'd say that there will always be a core group of music lovers that actively support their favorite artists and labels.

As a musician, I do mourn the loss of the glory days - I grew up with those dreams, after all - but it is what it is. No sense in thinking the genie goes back in the bottle. The trick, it seems, is to find creative and exciting (and cost-effective) ways to appeal to those who are passionate about music. It helps to know your fans (or those you want to court with your music) and give them incentives to support you. The music is certainly part of that... just not the whole product anymore. You do have to work harder to find and engage the fans but that just means you have more opportunity to be creative and let your "brand" develop beyond the music.

Interesting times, for sure.

[BaronVonAbelDong]

I read (most of) this thread with interest...

As a music consumer I do still very much want to "own" the music I love. That used to mean cassettes, then CDs... now it is lossless downloads, preferably 24-bit. I love services like Bleep, Addictech and Beatport ... and of course Bandcamp! I expect unrestricted, offline access to whatever music I am currently absorbing so I can listen whenever and however I like.

Streaming just feels so empty I also prefer a higher quality experience than streaming can reasonably provide. I do think it serves a purpose and can be leveraged in some small way to attract new fans though.

The glory days when the industry had production and distribution locked up and made insane profits are surely over but I'd say that there will always be a core group of music lovers that actively support their favorite artists and labels.

As a musician, I do mourn the loss of the glory days - I grew up with those dreams, after all - but it is what it is. No sense in thinking the genie goes back in the bottle. The trick, it seems, is to find creative and exciting (and cost-effective) ways to appeal to those who are passionate about music. It helps to know your fans (or those you want to court with your music) and give them incentives to support you. The music is certainly part of that... just not the whole product anymore. You do have to work harder to find and engage the fans but that just means you have more opportunity to be creative and let your "brand" develop beyond the music.

Interesting times, for sure.

+1

My streaming is mostly over laptop speakers while I'm working... researching and digging around, then buy tracks I 'need' to own or use.

I'm midway through selling 25 years worth of vinyl collecting though... (something I never thought would happen ) so maybe the ownership boat has set sail in my case.

Anyone wanna buy some vinyl?... Pops and clicks thrown in for free...

[TomViolenz]

It would have made an impact if other artist followed Taylor's move. No one else I know of has followed. This could be a mistake on their part.

t,ftfy

It's pissing in the wind mate. A mass boycott is highly unlikely. Not every artist on Spotify can even control that about their own music. I doubt many have the balls to end their label deal also.

You may be quite right. Especially since Google is entering that market for half the price and Apple wants to turn Beats into something similar, probably for free with an iDevice.

That still doesn't change my fix though, or how and why would other artists not joining in be her failing and not theirs?!

If Apple really turns Beats into Spotify for free, then at least it's really out in the open and any delusion of "10 bucks a month pays for all the music in the world" is brought to its logical conclusion:
Music is nothing but another marketing tool to sell more product. (At least in this case the product is an iDevice and not the privacy of your fans)

As they say: The revolution eats its children

[s0nspark]

I'm midway through selling 25 years worth of vinyl collecting though... (something I never thought would happen ) so maybe the ownership boat has set sail in my case.

I was a bit unsettled when I switched from CDs to lossless downloads... but I find it liberating now. It is reassuring to me to be able to keep a safety copy of my collection at work, etc on a second hard drive. I don't have to worry about someone walking off with or damaging a disc.

Now that I have equipment that allows me to appreciate higher bit depth releases I don't even consider CDs anymore unless purchasing lossless isn't an option.

[s0nspark]

Music is nothing but another marketing tool to sell more product.

So true, but difficult for some to accept when music used to be *the* product.

[BaronVonAbelDong]

You may be quite right. Especially since Google is entering that market for half the price and Apple wants to turn Beats into something similar, probably for free with an iDevice.

That still doesn't change my fix though, or how and why would other artists not joining in be her failing and not theirs?!

If Apple really turns Beats into Spotify for free, then at least it's really out in the open and any delusion of "10 bucks a month pays for all the music in the world" is brought to its logical conclusion:
Music is nothing but another marketing tool to sell more product. (At least in this case the product is an iDevice and not the privacy of your fans)

As they say: The revolution eats its children

iPhone 7 + free everything for ever!

[TomViolenz]

You may be quite right. Especially since Google is entering that market for half the price and Apple wants to turn Beats into something similar, probably for free with an iDevice.

That still doesn't change my fix though, or how and why would other artists not joining in be her failing and not theirs?!

If Apple really turns Beats into Spotify for free, then at least it's really out in the open and any delusion of "10 bucks a month pays for all the music in the world" is brought to its logical conclusion:
Music is nothing but another marketing tool to sell more product. (At least in this case the product is an iDevice and not the privacy of your fans)

As they say: The revolution eats its children

iPhone 7 + free everything for ever!

This reminds me of a scene from the book I read atm. (The Circle - Dave Eggers: It's pretty good)

This girl starts her new job at the new super Google/Apple/Facebook combination and in the cafeteria plays some singer/songwriter during lunch for an eating and inattentive audience and she asks her handler shocked: Is that really.......?!
And the handler answers: Yeah, we like to help out the artists this way to get them some publicity. They have it hard enough nowadays. The list of well known people, who want to play here is long and very selective.

So she expresses awe and says: Wow, that must be hugely expensive!
And the handler says: Oh no! We don't pay them.


It's a brave new world we live in, indeed!