| Author
|
virtual music library for 19.95$/month with all the music in the world
|
Outolintu
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
63
Posts :
1477
Posted : Sep 15, 2007 12:12
|
i read a interesting interview with rick rubin, one of the producer legends of today, and he had a new angle on music sales.
here's the link to the full interview:
http://heavymetalmusic.biz/2007/09/04/interview-rick-rubin-is-the-music-man/
...and for you lazy ass tokers here's the main part i want to discuss with you 
Rubin has a bigger idea. To combat the devastating impact of file sharing, he, like others in the music business (Doug Morris and Jimmy Iovine at Universal, for instance), says that the future of the industry is a subscription model, much like paid cable on a television set. “You would subscribe to music,” Rubin explained, as he settled on the velvet couch in his library. “You’d pay, say, $19.95 a month, and the music will come anywhere you’d like. In this new world, there will be a virtual library that will be accessible from your car, from your cellphone, from your computer, from your television. Anywhere. The iPod will be obsolete, but there would be a Walkman-like device you could plug into speakers at home. You’ll say, ‘Today I want to listen to … Simon and Garfunkel,’ and there they are. The service can have demos, bootlegs, concerts, whatever context the artist wants to put out. And once that model is put into place, the industry will grow 10 times the size it is now.”
From Napster to the iPod, the music business has been wrong about how much it can dictate to its audience. “Steve Jobs understood Napster better than the record business did,” David Geffen told me. “IPods made it easy for people to share music, and Apple took a big percentage of the business that once belonged to the record companies. The subscription model is the only way to save the music business. If music is easily available at a price of five or six dollars a month, then nobody will steal it.”
For this model to be effective, all the record companies will have to agree. “It’s like getting the heads of the five families together,” said Mark DiDia, referencing “The Godfather.” “It will be very difficult, but what else are we going to do?”
Rubin sees no other solution. “Either all the record companies will get together or the industry will fall apart and someone like Microsoft will come in and buy one of the companies at wholesale and do what needs to be done,” he said. “The future technology companies will either wait for the record companies to smarten up, or they’ll let them sink until they can buy them for 10 cents on the dollar and own the whole thing.”
so what do you think?
would it work?
what is the $/month you'd be willing to pay for unlimited access to all the music in the world?
...and don't tell me this has nothing to do with psy trance 
  "no one ever sweats on a plug-in" -moby |
|
|
|
ShivaS
IsraTrance Team
Started Topics :
51
Posts :
861
Posted : Sep 15, 2007 13:15
|
it already exists in iMesh and Bearshare
you pay around $10 and get access to ALL
I may rise, but I won't shine ... |
|
|
|
neuromantik
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
593
Posted : Sep 15, 2007 16:28
|
Bad idea...
For the simple reason that it is very difficult problem of distributing the acquired wealth back to the artists.
There already exist several organizations who shakedown clubs/bars/eateries which play music, and racket these businesses to subscribe to their blanket licenses. It is pretty much the same here scenario that is proposed.
These organisations, BMI/ASCAP/SESAC in the US or SACEM in France use shitty models (most radio play, most crappy sounding, ... etc) to determine which artists gets what and how much, believe me, psytrance isn't even a dot on their map when it comes to redistributing the wealth. |
|
|
|
Chambao
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
19
Posts :
138
Posted : Sep 15, 2007 22:31
|
i dont think i see the point.
if someone is gonna download it anyway, why would he pay for it when he has so many freeware P2P's?
Emule, Kazaa, Soulseek etc.
only if he is talking about WAV formats, then i would gladly subscribe right nowwww.
Love is Life
- www.myspace.com/pinkadelica (Myspace)
- marcio_zimerman9@hotmail.com (Email and MSN contact) |
|
|
|
psysnoopy
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
1331
Posted : Sep 16, 2007 09:17
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-09-15 16:28, neuromantik wrote:
Bad idea...
For the simple reason that it is very difficult problem of distributing the acquired wealth back to the artists.
|
|
I was thinking about the same thing.
Isn't it bad for the artists? 
I always try to buy the original CDs of my favorite artists, but most of the people don't wanna pay and they prefer to download everything for free.
Now if it really becomes like a Subscription to tv channels, then are artists gona get something out of it? or not really? 
|
|
|
|
Outolintu
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
63
Posts :
1477
Posted : Sep 16, 2007 15:18
|
i don't know the details of rubin's idea.
and i'm not pro or con yet. i just thought it was an interesting idea and wanted to see what other peeps think about it. somebody else was also sceptical and doubted that small(er) labels wouldn't profit a dime on this system (let alone the artists of small labels) if they'd get accepted at all... but all in all i think this is the future... erhmm present  it's just about who does it first in a big scale.
"no one ever sweats on a plug-in" -moby |
|
|
|
Magox
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
20
Posts :
2095
Posted : Sep 16, 2007 19:01
|
i think it sounds pretty interesting....
but how would they stop the filesharing programs from doing what they are doing? wouldn't they continue, and wouldn't people still rather fileshare for free instead of pay $20 a month. If there was a way they could regulate the file sharing programs, and allow these other companies i think it could have possibilities.
Another question, how would they distribute the money's to the artists? What i mean is you would have Brittney Spears, getting 1,000,000 downloads a month, and let's say Blisargon Demagargon getting 500 downloads, would they strike a deal with every label? Based on the amount of downloads?
Maybe $10 a month would even be better, i know of a lot of people, that couldnt afford the $20 and prolly not even the $10, and they still would seek the free filesharing programs.
But i think that it sounds interesting, and it would be a solution that would support the artist.
"On the path of spirituality, one ventures to vanquish one’s own faults rather than to judge others" |
|
|
|
deejayridoo
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
309
Posted : Sep 16, 2007 20:34
|
I think that dancefloor orientated music is soo ephemeral (a CD which is more than 6 months old is totally out of interest for all the freaks who are only looking for the very latest or even still unreleased tunez) that one should see it as promotion for the artist to get booked and payed through the bookings rather than by the sheer selling of music.
In ambient music it´s quite different and there I think that it can be possible to earn some bucks or even make a living cause they are long-living.
So... why even try to make big bucks by selling music.
Isn´t it enough to know that your lovely produced baby is listened to and enjoyed by many people???
Is it only money you´re running after when fulfilling your dreams?
I don´t need pseudo-artist, I want real ones who do it only for the love of the music and the whole thing. |
|
|
|
|
