±«Óãtv

I'm suprised you don't mention last.fm in the article at all. It's on the iphone and google's android, it's service is ad free and it's made me buy more new music than ever. I can listen to it whereever there's a wifi over my ipod and it keeps track of what i listen to and recommends new things occasionally.

Last.fm doesn't let the me listen to a specific track by a specific artist on demand - not a concern to me as I'm more interested in listening to new music (and buying it if I like it - two clicks away with itunes) but within a genre, e.g. artists sounding like John Coltrane. I often discover great new music through stating a radio station with artists sounding like someone I already like.

I wouldn't choose Spotify as it's ad driven and not on a mobile platform.

Rory:
Maybe Spotify will changed the music biz...
~Dennis Junior~

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I've tried Spotify as a result of this report. I think it has been modelled on iTunes - which isn't a bad thing.
It seems at first like a glorified internet radio which last.fm provides as does 181.fm of which I'm a huge fan.
It has lots of tracks/albums missing, even at first glance, such as Coldplay's latest which it claims it can't play in the UK.
A big positive is that I am able to listen to for example, the new U2 album and the King's of Leon that I was after, in a try before you buy kind of way. I'll probably use it alongside iTunes et al.

Joined Spotify last month, its a great idea and much better than the last.fm experience, that site is just not user friendly and the iPhone app is terrible.

I use Spotify quite often alongside iTunes and if I find an album I really like on Spotify and want to own it, i'll go ahead and buy it on iTunes.

To listen to such a vast catalogue of music for free and have to put up with one short advert every 20/30 mins as a compromise is a good deal for the user as far as i'm concerned.

I'm looking forward to how Spotify develops.

spotify is a great music streamer but very easy to copy onto your itunes to keep ( lets you copy full albums ) then play them on your ipod or burn to cd and strip out the adds

As long as they keep charging extortionate prices for albums, the industry will keep losing money.

I can order albums for under £10, including shipping, that come from America - but to buy the same thing in a store here they're expecting me to hand over up to £25 for it!

I think one of the big things that keeps illegal downloads going is the "exclusive" releases that certain retailers get, where you wind up with 4 or 5 different versions of the album with extra songs or extra content, leaving the completist to either fork out over £100 just to have ONE album, or going online and getting it all for free - it's not hard to see why people do that.

i admit that i quite often download music though file sharing programs. The quality can be poor and its not entirly safe, but until record companies lower the prices of their product i will continue to use file sharing.

Last.fm, although not mentioned here is good for discovering new music, and im sure spotify (although i havent used it) has its advantages, but i would like full contol over the music i listen to, partically on what i listen to it on. Untill a service becomes available where i am free to do what i want with the music (even is ad supported) i am staying put. and im sure many others will too.

Goodness knows how you can be ignorant of Last.FM and if you're not then how you could have decided that it didn't warrant a mention in this article.

HEAR ME OUT PLEASE

The problem with the music industry is that 3 companies own around 4/5ths of the entire industry. Everyone is too busy debating how cool they are for listening to it in a certain way rather than the music itself. The major labels are incredibly worried about their entire infrastructure. Historically powerful and controlling they are now seeing themselves diminish.
Their are many points of debate for my reasoning but don't worry i'll mention them all.

Point 1. The technology for producing music (Or any digital entertainment) is easily accessible and becoming easier to use. People effectively have studios at home by using a computer (Up until recently I have been using a G4 wit around 500mghz to record 4 channels simultaneously for around the price of a playstation 3). Fair enough this isn't cheap but bearing in mind how expensive and limited the technology (Beatles did albums on two track tape) was until recently, today is a helluva different. So I probably over stated this point. But you get the drift. 7 digit record deals really don't need to cost this much. Which brings me onto my next point quite nicely.

Point 2- The record contract.
The media has been filled in modern times with famous spats between labels, artists and more recently these new internet based music providers.

A big issue to explain, but the recording contract with labels and artists is a frail one. The 7 digit advance that the band receive gets spent on the making of the album. What is left at the end, they can keep. However things specified in the contract usually involve; The producer, the studio, marketing ect. Usually what the band will actually keep is a fraction of that 7 digit number, with the record label bagging some of that money by routing the band through their studios, marketting ect.

This essentially means that the record labels have complete control over where the money is spent and how things are played(marketed) After this the band make their money in royalties(PRS and separate companies) but may make more if record sales are high(contractual).
Now sorry if I lost you, but to me the systems major record labels adopt are dated, unfair and have a string of problems in economics in general.

Point 3.
The internet has not only given people the feeling music is free but also the freedom to find and educate themselves with what they like.
Gone are the days of people waiting at the Liverpool docks to get the new vinyl from America. Gone are the days people used to tune in to pirate radio to hear the new sound. I'd like to think, gone of the days people watching MTV to find good music. RIP TOTP. LOL. I don't think the record labels can deal with this. The days of marketing making commercial music successful are coming to an end. It is difficult to market to an audience with so much freedom.

SO i guess my point is, people are not really hurting artistic talent or freedom by downloading as this was already happening.

Now after getting all that off my shoulders we're on the more crucial part of what's gone wrong. Recently apple were taken to the high court in the EU for failing to sell products on
Itunes at an equal price across the EU because of the £ -E conversion. Apple tried to comply but were forced to sell the music like this by the record labels who have probably been guilty of over charging the Brits for years. Another annoying point with itunes and Spotify is that their is a split between the American and EU markets.

Meanwhile there is the on going battle of DRM which has nearly been won. But to me it's a no brainer.
Why is it still so expensive to buy modern music ? It's made for cheaper. Imagine the costs of vinyl compared to today. Don't need to transport it ? It takes a small number of people to keep the server alive and the database working. Seems like madness to me. Annoyingly as well the quality is worse than CD quality. The fact I can join a porn site for £20 a month and D/L as much HiDef porn as my connection can handle shows my reasoning for the over pricing and gives them no excuse to not sell WAV quality music.

It mentions in the article about the person who has his big speakers. Well if he cares about the quality of the music he listens to he must surely be able to hear the difference between a downloaded file and a CD. Music is still way behind when it comes to better definition.

The music industry made a lot of money the first times around when industry standards changed. They sold all The Beatles on vinyl, on tape and then on CD.( Talk about keeping products fresh...) So why does it have to happen again ??
Why can I not buy full collections of blues/jazz (older music) for a cheap price ?? Artists, who were ripped off anyway(Some of whom I would deliberately not buy purely because morally they were given a raw deal by the very people who are selling it to me.)

Why do bands need record labels and anything like Itunes to sell their music if they can sell directly, on their own terms through their own website to the fans ???

I think Itunes is great but it cannot keep up with the changing world around it. It will do it's best to please but I doubt the record labels will submit their power to apple.

I love Spotify while the adverts remain morally correct and government or whatever. I would stop if it turned like TV. I also think artists would complain but maybe not. They are with the labels in losing what they have. Secondly it is easy to rip things off Spotify. So if needs be... And the way labels re-act could see its repotoire disappear over night, so be warned. Plus they might sell what you are listening to for marketing ect.

Meanwhile though their are numerous ways to download music. Some of which are not effectively illegal. Torrents, Limewire and things like mega upload and Rapidshare all supply free entertainment. Some of which can not be traced easily. Unless you share the music it is also legal to D/L .(Unless there has been secret legislation? Someone enlighten me.)
So I guess that brings us up to where we stand today. Far too many older bands re uniting for tours, killing new music.
Too many pop bands re-uniting because the labels have ran out of ideas and are capitalizing on the older audience reminiscing. Goddamn killing new music.
Music that is too expensive, not good enough quality and controlled; killing new music.

The live side of music is just as depressing (The recent merger between ticket master and Live Nation is worrying considering Live nation was setup because Clear Channel were effectively running a monopoly and had to split the company). I just know at some point things are going to change...

Cheers if you read it all the rant, but does anyone see what I mean ???

I'd like to know why my post has been removed?

@11 Melodymaker

I get the drift..music production doesn't cost the heavens, music distribution doesn't cost heavens either. Artists and marketing do cost something. But an industry born with a silver spoon in its mouth needs to get to terms with this fact. Also, audio quality has clearly been overrated (by technophiles, and especially IP holders).

So, change is on it's way. last.fm and spotify, amongst others are ushering it in, in the western world. Certain other parts of the world are less worried about legalities and payment structures etc for their entertainment. And why not.

Hopefully, I will wake up one fine morning to a world of free entertainment - free as in beer and as in freedom. Of course I would need to pay if I seek a premium (such as ad free, high quality, portability etc etc). The internet is to entertainment what a tap is to water. And a bit more. Because, for the discerning audience, the internet can offer the premium bit too...So, one can go ahead, get her evian. I'm happy with the tap water.

I don't really get what your trying to say... That if you could watch a film in black and white instead of colour for cheaper that you would ? Or that if you wanted to buy your favourite album you'd buy it for cheaper in mono ?

Water is a pretty basic thing. Everyones opinion on water is going to be pretty much the same, unfortunately the world round. (Errm I need it to survive) Where as entertainment is an opinion.

I see some of your points but I think you missed some of my more crucial points. It ain't about the internet being a tap of entertainment. It's about the industry having an infrastructure. If you can't deduce some of the major failings within the major music industry from my post then I doubt you ever will...

I think you have to admire and commend Spotify , its already hit the million mark for usurs. Why would someone pay to download music from iTunes when they have the same service sitting there for free.
LastFM is also a great service, as is www.we7.com who have the same programme but its web based and probably hasnt caught on as well as Spotify as they have an actual programme.
You also have www.dittomusic.com who are now uploading unsigned artists onto Spotify for free, giving more than just major label content and a great way to promote your music to a massive audience if your an unsigned artist.
Whatever happens, we are in a great position , the power is back in the hands of the audience and the major labels have very little control .