mp3.com news...kinda interesting...
Home > Home Recording Forum > Talkin' Smack > mp3.com news...kinda interesting...
WaltChief Cook and Bottle WasherMember
Since: May 10, 2002
Dec 19, 2002 10:19 pm Yes, very interesting. However me thinks our author is a tad bit nieve. The answer to when this all started is the begining of time! He does have insite, however in wondering what happens when the "small" (less financed) guy can no longer pay. What happens when you win at monopoly? Everybody quits playing. Game over! Suck your market dry and get a mouth full of sand!
En ron ron ron oh En ron ron
WaltChief Cook and Bottle WasherMember
Since: May 10, 2002
Dec 19, 2002 10:33 pm Ok,
I'm hooked. One of my secret little resentments. Big money band syndrom. People want to be entertained. What that seems to mean over the last 30 years has little to do with music. Look at Rolling Stone. It's a sudo People / Teenie bop / T&A soft porn mag. My point is not to emphesize the ethics of the above entertainment venues, but to note that music is pretty much missing. Many friends and aquantences have asked me "wouldn't you love to be in the mother floor scrubing nuget sucking woopie finger (ficticious big money band) band? They continue to point out the parties, sexual availability, conspicious consumption that accompanies membership. No music there either. People talk about the concert they went to. Wow you should have seen her tits! Wow did you see him jump up and sneer! Too cool, he wears a glove and grabs his crotch! Obvously these people are not musicians. They never heard the music.
Actually, I kinda like the whole scheam. This way I don't have to work like a dog to earn a lot of money to hear good musicians. I do have to look a little harder than the FM radio or MTV however.
Dec 20, 2002 04:57 am Actually, I know the author a little bit, and yes young and naive, BUT his argument does carry wait for the crowd he serves, the people not willing to pay to promote their stuff.
I see what you are saying Walt, and I personally agree as far as people looking at bands for things beside their music (like the big boobs and such), but thats business, it's mass appeal by whatever tools necessary, if you best tools are your boobs, well, use 'em I guess. That drives me nuts but it is a fact of business, but then, you know that.
What drives me nuts in this case is that the interent has so conditioned peopel to think that everything should be offered for free by someone, somewhere and now that a lot of these free services are folding because people are not supporting them by the few methods they can (such as advertising revenue or donations), like HRC almost did, they think they are getting ripped of, and then start justifying stealing these things...software is a good example, there are lots of freeware out there, as soon as that happened it became easier to justify piracy of the big apps, mp3.com lets artists freely distribute their music, now Napster comes along and people say "well labels make too much anyway" to justify their starting to take non-free music...
I dunno, people are funny...people have to once again learn that nothing is free and we all pay for everything somehow though maybe indirectly, we do. And all these free services just can't support themselves as the interent advertising revenue scheme is becoming less and less effective. mp3.com is a small analogy to what HRC did and continues to go through to stay online.
Think about it.
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Dec 20, 2002 09:23 am In my opinion mp3.com isn't THAT big of a promotional tool. If you need mp3's for people to hear then put them on you own site... My old band has over 7,000 downloads...which lead to 2 sales...no concerts, no serious lable intrest, no real reason to worry that membership benifits get cut.
You get promoted by playing shows...
WaltChief Cook and Bottle WasherMember
Since: May 10, 2002
Dec 20, 2002 10:21 am Db,
I agree with your perspective. In the analogy of a road, there a lot of people in the ditches. And yes idealy, when contribution and benifit reach balance, there is order and stability. Those expecting everything for free are no better than those gouging. And yes, we, in the middle pay for both ends.
Now I'm depressed!
Oh well, back to work. Tons of folks that want there car fixed for free to entertain!
Dec 28, 2002 06:43 am while i understand the desire for a website to turn a profit.. i do not think this move will really benefit them. the whole function of the website was to allow for independent artists to promote themselves and maybe even get a little something for their work.
at this point, it appears that they are taking away the benefits of the original site and coasting on its name. why bother with a website that is only going to give you space for 3 songs? i can get a domain of my own and host a hell of a lot more songs. not only this, but your tracks will be buried in the charts by bands that are already signed and representing the labels. everything they are changing is a move to strip benefits from current members.
i personally do not use their services, but i have found a few good groups on there over the years. these changes will make finding quality music on there even harder than it already is. itll be like listening to the radio all over again. hearing the same 10 songs on random shuffle all day long. why? because the labels are dumping the money into the system to push those 10 songs on us.
i think this is a horrid move on the part of mp3.com/Universal. with any luck, perhaps it will die and disappear. Universal is on the brink of that itself. so who knows, it just might happen.
Dec 28, 2002 09:42 am Thanks to labels dumping that money into their pockets mp3.com was able to offer anything to indies for free...
It's hard for me to get very worked up in either direction being a song writer and a web developer/businessman I can easily see both sides of the proverbial coin.
I still think the interent, during it's heyday, got far too many people far too accostumed to free services and such, so much so they now get mad if something isn't free.
Nothing is free in the real world, why should it be on the internet? Everything worth anything costs money, we all know that.
Dec 28, 2002 01:13 pm everything does cost money. but one thing i refuse to do is to pay to view content. i already pay enough for my broadband connection thank you. and there are plenty of free sites out there that will provide me with the entertainment i need.
ie. The New York Times online paper is a subscription. why would anyone pay for that sort of content online? that sort of stuff should be free. if the majority of sites start charging for content the web will die.
products should cost money, viewing a website should not.
as far as mp3.com is concerned. their service is not THAT good. the only way people will actually pay for the service is if its dirt cheap. otherwise people will start going elsewhere.
i still frown upon the direction that site is going in.
Posted on 