icefire9
2x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2011
Posts: 2,071
|
Post by icefire9 on Jun 21, 2015 12:51:02 GMT -5
|
|
lyhom
Diamond Member
CAPSLOCK-PHOBE
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 11,065
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by lyhom on Jun 21, 2015 13:22:03 GMT -5
wow how surprising
(also yay won't have to deal with taylor swift's mediocre music on the apple service either :) )
|
|
Kurt
Administrator
#1: Jacob Collier f/John Legend & Tori Kelly – "Bridge Over Troubled Water"
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 22,614
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him
Staff
|
Post by Kurt on Jun 21, 2015 23:12:46 GMT -5
All in a day's work:
Can Taylor write an open letter about, like, student loans next?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 0:42:08 GMT -5
|
|
Anticonformity
Platinum Member
Dancing My F*ck Off
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 1,526
|
Post by Anticonformity on Jun 22, 2015 4:53:19 GMT -5
This is all PR 101 Apple looks good, Taylor looks like Jesus Christ,everyone wins (except the consumer) There is no way the team at Apple didn't realize that "hmmm, free trial = not paying artists... derp" This was calculated and the masses believe it... I love her music but every year her personality gets worse and worse, I hate telling people I like her music cause then they assume I endorse her ego, which I do not... Inb4 "Taylor is GENWINE UR A JELOUS HATTERRR!11!!!!!" No just know PR/can read peeps intentions very well...
|
|
¤ Matthea ¤
Gold Member
Joined: September 2009
Posts: 803
|
Post by ¤ Matthea ¤ on Jun 22, 2015 4:59:02 GMT -5
|
|
Anticonformity
Platinum Member
Dancing My F*ck Off
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 1,526
|
Post by Anticonformity on Jun 22, 2015 5:05:51 GMT -5
Yeah, I mean I sense there was some planning months ago over this between the two, cause look at all the praising she gets for "standing up" :eyeroll: and then Apple gets "Awww I'm so happy Apple listened to Taylor" so they both mutually recieve good PR, good promo for 1989/AppleMusic... It also gets more artists on board since "Taylor stood up" for "them" :eyeroll: and Apple is "generously giving them them money" Like I know not all artists/writers/producers/ etc are all getting millions but when the average person in the world is living paycheck to paycheck and all these people are whining about THOUSANDS/MILLIONS it's like wake up and get a fucking minimum wage job... I can't take the brainwashing that they both have on peeps...
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jun 22, 2015 6:10:23 GMT -5
Like I know not all artists/writers/producers/ etc are all getting millions but when the average person in the world is living paycheck to paycheck and all these people are whining about THOUSANDS/MILLIONS it's like wake up and get a f**king minimum wage job... Who's whining about thousands and millions? Most artists, as in 99.5% wouldn't be making anywhere near those numbers from this.
|
|
kanimal
3x Platinum Member
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,043
|
Post by kanimal on Jun 22, 2015 9:36:35 GMT -5
I have absolutely no idea what this article is on about. And whatever wacky anti-trust argument it was trying to make seemingly didn't cross the mind of Apple, which indeed agreed to pay royalties during the streaming period. The only way there would be merit to the rant was if Apple was requiring labels to be exclusive to Apple Music. It's not. -- The deal here is simple: Apple is Apple, and it didn't have to do anything to court the majority of labels/artists. It had the leverage, and it could get away with a seemingly sleazy policy of not paying during the trial period. This public firestorm made that impossible. -- Despite perhaps having pure intentions, Taylor Swift's Spotify rant came off poorly in certain music circles. A lot of artists actually LIKE Spotify - both for the royalties and for the exposure - and she was applying *her* unique situation to those who aren't in her unique situation. Here, she recalibrated herself with other artists. No one's going to disagree with the notion that artists should get paid when people stream their songs. -- Still unanswered: if the free trial period was the only sticking point for Apple Music, why isn't 1989 already on Google Play? -- Misconstrued: While people are painting the free trial period as APPLE's doing, note that the labels themselves have been pushing for this - and were thus being hoisted by their own petard. Labels are the ones truly after premium-only, and since free trials are the way to familiarize people with premium-only, labels are just as invested in these trials as the streaming providers are. If I'm Apple, therefore, I don't know that it's completely ridiculous to expect the labels to endure some of the cost. But I also know that streaming companies have come under fire for not being artist-centric, and paying the royalties seems like a clear way to prove that you are committed to the people who make the music.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 10:23:51 GMT -5
I really don't like the way that so many artists have this "streaming is evil" mentality, honestly.
I DO know people who don't own Ipods or music players, and just use Spotify, Rdio, or other streaming services to consume music.
Not everybody in the world is a hardcore music buff with the money/interest to buy a hard copy of every single album they enjoy listening to.
There are a handful of artists I like, but I don't necessarily like them enough to go out and buy every album they've made.
I don't see a problem with streaming, as long as the consumer is willing to pay for it.
In Taylor's case, it seems likely that the people who want her album have already bought it, and those who don't aren't going to, no matter if it's available to stream or not.
I'd be willing to give her album a listen if it was available to stream, but there's no way she'd force me into buying it because I can't stream it.
I listen to albums before I can buy them, because frankly, there aren't many full-length albums that are worth my money.
Sometimes I'd be perfectly fine just streaming an album, and maybe if I enjoyed it, I WOULD be willing to buy it.
Multimillionaires preaching about streaming being bad for business is BS; they don't care about the industry, they care about ACTING like they care about the "little guys" while doing everything they can to line their own pockets.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jun 22, 2015 11:35:40 GMT -5
Multimillionaires preaching about streaming being bad for business is BS; they don't care about the industry, they care about ACTING like they care about the "little guys" while doing everything they can to line their own pockets. So you're saying because of the messenger, the message is bs? Because multimillionaires make up an incredibly small portion of musicians and artists whose music would be on these streaming sites. Taylor specifically said the letter wasn't for her benefit and even if it was, it wouldn't be any less true.
|
|
bat1990
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2004
Posts: 12,979
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by bat1990 on Jun 22, 2015 12:29:23 GMT -5
It's getting toasty in this thread
*fans self*
|
|
BDGeek
2x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2013
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by BDGeek on Jun 22, 2015 12:46:07 GMT -5
|
|
Rican@
8x Platinum Member
[Only dry eyes, I would love on you for years]
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,974
|
Post by Rican@ on Jun 22, 2015 17:25:38 GMT -5
I was grandfathered on AT&T because I've had unlimited since my teen years when they were Cingular. I got the 4G LTE plan the week before they dropped the option forever. Yas! Me too!
|
|
Rurry
Diamond Member
The Generalissimo
Careful, they're ruffled!
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 14,418
|
Post by Rurry on Jun 23, 2015 1:20:00 GMT -5
I really don't like the way that so many artists have this "streaming is evil" mentality, honestly. I DO know people who don't own Ipods or music players, and just use Spotify, Rdio, or other streaming services to consume music. Not everybody in the world is a hardcore music buff with the money/interest to buy a hard copy of every single album they enjoy listening to. There are a handful of artists I like, but I don't necessarily like them enough to go out and buy every album they've made. I don't see a problem with streaming, as long as the consumer is willing to pay for it. In Taylor's case, it seems likely that the people who want her album have already bought it, and those who don't aren't going to, no matter if it's available to stream or not. I'd be willing to give her album a listen if it was available to stream, but there's no way she'd force me into buying it because I can't stream it. I listen to albums before I can buy them, because frankly, there aren't many full-length albums that are worth my money. Sometimes I'd be perfectly fine just streaming an album, and maybe if I enjoyed it, I WOULD be willing to buy it. Multimillionaires preaching about streaming being bad for business is BS; they don't care about the industry, they care about ACTING like they care about the "little guys" while doing everything they can to line their own pockets. No one is angry about the concept of streaming, they're angry that artists receive basically no compensation from it while record labels and the corporations that own these streaming service make millions. Everyone realizes streaming is the future of music, their argument is that the industry needs to find a way to make this financially beneficial for the people actually making the music. Whether or not Taylor Swift is being genuine in her concern seems pretty irrelevant to me. She brings up a good point regardless. The majority of the people making music out there are not rich pop stars and if they're not profiting from their music, then they can't, you know...make it anymore.
|
|
Anticonformity
Platinum Member
Dancing My F*ck Off
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 1,526
|
Post by Anticonformity on Jun 23, 2015 1:54:58 GMT -5
Like I know not all artists/writers/producers/ etc are all getting millions but when the average person in the world is living paycheck to paycheck and all these people are whining about THOUSANDS/MILLIONS it's like wake up and get a f**king minimum wage job... Who's whining about thousands and millions? Most artists, as in 99.5% wouldn't be making anywhere near those numbers from this. I think you'd be surprised how much most make... especially compared to the average American...
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jun 23, 2015 6:14:22 GMT -5
Who's whining about thousands and millions? Most artists, as in 99.5% wouldn't be making anywhere near those numbers from this. I think you'd be surprised how much most make... especially compared to the average American... Are you considering only acts who get top 40 hits and have albums in the top 100 sales charts or also taking into account the hundreds or thousands of local and regional acts trying to make it big somewhere? For every Taylor you have a few dozen Tove Lo's and for every Tove you have dozens of lesser known acts who have a minor following somewhere. Then you have those even lesser known than that. I would be curious to know how much those in Tove Lo's bracket of success make. Also keeping in mind how fickle being in the industry is. Fame is fleeting.
|
|
Mack
7x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2010
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by Mack on Jun 23, 2015 8:46:09 GMT -5
wow how surprising(also yay won't have to deal with taylor swift's mediocre music on the apple service either :) )Yes, because it's so hard to just not listen to her music.
|
|
lyhom
Diamond Member
CAPSLOCK-PHOBE
Joined: January 2014
Posts: 11,065
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by lyhom on Jun 23, 2015 10:11:01 GMT -5
wow how surprising(also yay won't have to deal with taylor swift's mediocre music on the apple service either :) )Yes, because it's so hard to just not listen to her music. you think I don't do that anyway? I get that it's hard to tell sarcasm from the internet but I'd think that most people could tell that it wasn't that serious lol (anyways dropping this because I've already started too much shit this week so)
|
|
Anticonformity
Platinum Member
Dancing My F*ck Off
Joined: January 2007
Posts: 1,526
|
Post by Anticonformity on Jun 24, 2015 2:51:07 GMT -5
I think you'd be surprised how much most make... especially compared to the average American... Are you considering only acts who get top 40 hits and have albums in the top 100 sales charts or also taking into account the hundreds or thousands of local and regional acts trying to make it big somewhere? For every Taylor you have a few dozen Tove Lo's and for every Tove you have dozens of lesser known acts who have a minor following somewhere. Then you have those even lesser known than that. I would be curious to know how much those in Tove Lo's bracket of success make. Also keeping in mind how fickle being in the industry is. Fame is fleeting. No, i'm saying pretty much anyone who makes it on the hot 100 etc. isnt poor, per se... sure compared to Britney Spears, Kelly Clarkson is gonna look poor lol... If u look into it all a bit, you'll see that it's not as "bad" as it sounds for artists that have at least a BIT of success, I aint talking about the person who uploaded their garage made album to iTunes... TL;DR - The average American is way more poor than MOST artists and the ones bitching about money are the ones who actually make WAY more than MOST artists...
|
|
DJ General
5x Platinum Member
Dupe
Joined: March 2010
Posts: 5,932
|
Post by DJ General on Jun 24, 2015 13:29:08 GMT -5
What even? Taylor is a genius. She is an extremely smart person. No matter what the actual intentions were behind all of this, the fact she was able to execute it so flawlessly speaks miles about her character and strengths. I'm not some obsessive, delusional stan for Taylor, but I respect everything she has done recently regardless of the intentions behind it. I personally do not believe this was some calculated event though by any means.
|
|
Chelsea Press 2
Diamond Member
#LiteralLegender
I will beach both of you off at the same time!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 69,066
|
Post by Chelsea Press 2 on Jun 24, 2015 18:14:40 GMT -5
Breaking: Apple Paying Just $0.002 Per Stream During Its Free Trial Period… Tuesday, June 23, 2015 by Paul Resnikoff Yesterday, Apple reversed course and announced that artists would be paid during the free trial phase of its upcoming streaming service, Apple Music. Just one problem: Apple will only be paying a severely-discounted rate during the trial. And that rate looks to be $0.002, or 1/5th of a penny per stream. The warning signs on this appeared over the weekend, moments after Apple head of iTunes Eddy Cue announced that Apple would indeed pay artists during its three-month free trial, a reversal from plans to pay nothing. “#AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming,” Cue tweeted. Which led to the next question, ‘how much would they pay’? The $0.002 figure seems to be the magic lowball, at least for indies. One of our sources is an independent getting distributed through Sony (and received an email update this morning); the other is also an indie with a fairly substantial catalog. Even before whisper numbers trickled into DMN this morning, the Wall Street Journal pointed to early warning signs. “Apple declined to say how much it plans to pay during the trial period, though it said the rate will increase once customers start paying for subscriptions,” the Journal reported, confirming the discount. “In the first three months of the service’s life there will be no subscriber royalty rate on which to base the rates. The company could find other ways to calculate a rate and is expected to share its plans with music companies soon.” Whether the $0.002 per-stream payout is a first offer or a take-it-or-leave-it figure remains to be seen. But the sources that revealed that number to DMN were careful to note that major labels could receive an entirely different payout, and may already have elevated free-trial rates in place. More as this develops… Source
I found these diagrams detailing how much other sites pay.
|
|
Linnethia Monique
Diamond Member
Still 100% Snackable
🗣 NOW GET YOUR BOOTS AND YOUR COAT FOR THIS...
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 24,208
|
Post by Linnethia Monique on Jun 25, 2015 14:09:48 GMT -5
Now she's allowing them to stream 1989 on Apple Music...chile I'm tired of this album's streaming saga.
|
|
bat1990
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2004
Posts: 12,979
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by bat1990 on Jun 25, 2015 14:56:57 GMT -5
Suddenly, I want to switch to X-Box Music for streaming.
|
|
Caviar
Diamond Member
Queen X
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 30,913
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his
|
Post by Caviar on Jun 25, 2015 15:15:44 GMT -5
I don't care where I stream as long as the selection is there.
|
|
chillpill
Gold Member
Joined: November 2009
Posts: 738
|
Post by chillpill on Jun 25, 2015 16:43:02 GMT -5
I don't care where I stream as long as the selection is there. Yep, if this means I can listen to Ayumi Hamasaki on Apple Music then I'm gonna try it.
|
|
Relaxing Cup
Diamond Member
Joined: March 2014
Posts: 14,673
|
Post by Relaxing Cup on Jun 25, 2015 20:49:31 GMT -5
Suddenly, I want to switch to X-Box Music for streaming. I recommend it, I love it and it has every song I've ever wanted, domestic & foreign!
|
|
14887fan
Diamond Member
Joined: November 2013
Posts: 11,256
|
Post by 14887fan on Jun 26, 2015 8:25:44 GMT -5
What even? Taylor is a genius. She is an extremely smart person. No matter what the actual intentions were behind all of this, the fact she was able to execute it so flawlessly speaks miles about her character and strengths. I'm not some obsessive, delusional stan for Taylor, but I respect everything she has done recently regardless of the intentions behind it. I personally do not believe this was some calculated event though by any means. Couldn't agree more. I don't get the sense that this was a PR stunt in the slightest.
|
|
Wolfy
5x Platinum Member
She Wolf
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 5,986
|
Post by Wolfy on Jun 26, 2015 15:27:44 GMT -5
Source
I found these diagrams detailing how much other sites pay. Google just added free radio streaming, well it's ad supported but you hardly notice the ads. I wonder if that will affect how much they pay. Right now, they pay a lot better than the others. Free radio, plus the 50,000 songs you're allowed to upload and their high pay makes them a great choice. I love google play.
|
|
samz2
New Member
Joined: March 2015
Posts: 27
|
Post by samz2 on Jun 26, 2015 16:15:01 GMT -5
The idea that this was a PR stunt is beyond insane.
There's no way Apple would want so much negative attention by being made to look like a bully that needs to be persuaded to do the right thing. Never mind the fact they needed to put out a press release at 11pm EST on a Sunday to mitigate the damage.
If they wanted good PR, they would've paid Taylor Swift to appear onstage at their keynote. But you don't generate backlash as a PR stunt; that's just reckless.
|
|