This just seems like a waste of time to me. I have 10,000 plus songs on iTunes. I have Amazon prime, which gives me music. I have lots of records to listen to as well as CDs. Why would I pay monthly, adding more to my monthly bill, just to listen to music and not have to buy? I said that about movies and I have Prime Instant Video, Hulu Plus and Netflix. I've not used any of them in a year or so. But, movies and shows are fine for that. Music though, I just can't see it.
Most people probably listen to the same set of songs or artists. They may not realize it, but they do. So, say in a week, you listen to ten artists. Ok, now, say you can get their CDs, which you can get for SUCH a low price now, for $9.99. So say that artist had 5 albums out. That would be $50. Ok, now you pay $15.99 a month, to listen to those albums. Over time, you will be paying so much more than you would to just buy the hard or digital copies. I would never pay monthly to listen to music. My God, it's called the radio.
I can only hope that Apple does not go as far as to stop selling albums digitally. It would be a shame. I do not buy many albums, movies or shows right now. But, I like having the choice.
If I didn't use a service for a year, I would cancel it...
What I'd like to see in a music streaming service is one of the reason I used to love owning vinyl albums back in the 70's as a kid was a lot of the info they'd put on the album, such as what studios was the album recorded and mixed at, who was the mixing engineer, producer & song writers. Give some back ground and history of the artist and especially the particular album your listening to, photo's from the album. Now being a old guy maybe no one cares about this stuff anymore, but I would and I've been holding off on getting a spotify account to see what Apple offers.
You're right. No one cares about that stuff anymore. And IMO, that's one of the many reasons that the music business is in the dumps. While one can search the interwebs to find out anything about an artists, I think the immediacy of reading the liner notes, finding out who the musicians and writers were generated tremendous interest in music and resulted in tons of sales. In Europe and Japan, music geeks used to know such information down to the master numbers (and sometimes down to the stamper numbers), which were frequently part of the liner notes for compilations.
If you calculate for equal dollars, the U.S. music industry is at about 35% of its former peak, even including all streaming, subscription and licensing revenue.
But...IMO, just like much else in our society, the music industry has dumbed down the audience and few give a crap about the information that used to be contained in liner notes. I forget what it was called, but didn't Apple try to provide such info on iTunes some years ago and no one cared?
Frankly, I don't think this new Apple service is going to do well. Why would people sign up at $10 a month when they can use Spotify and Pandora for free (albeit, with some commercials). The only way is if Apple provides far more intelligent music selection, but just picking a Genre isn't going to cut it. One thing I do find on Pandora for the stations I've programmed is that in spite of the fact that Pandora claims over a million tracks, I hear tremendous repetition.
How do you realistically expect THAT to work? Each service would have to create an Export Playlist feature, which I seriously doubt they will EVER do...
You can already transfer playlists from one online streaming service to another using www.soundliz.com They would just need to add Apple Music to their site. Interestingly enough is they don't already have Beats on it. But I have tried it for transferring Spotify to Tidal and works pretty well. Just drop and drag. Not 100% match since different catalogs for each service. You can also use your own iTunes playlists as well but didn't get very good matchup.
hahaha The animated face was funny. Well, how many artist do you listen to? When I am at the gym, writing or doing art, I have the same bands either on a playlist or I just go to one band and play all of their albums.
What I wrote was what I was thinking. I read the thing about people only listening to a said amount of music.
I thought about that. Here is why I did not. One, I have a cell phone bill and that is it. The service for two of the three streaming things I listed, is $7.99. If it went over, say $10, I could cancel it. I also have the service for my mom and step father. So, there is a bigger picture. Then, once I wrote this online and someone asked me this. "What about all of the movies you own hard copies of? Do you watch all of them right away?" That is what made me realize that, I do not have to watch movies or shows on these services every day. They are simply a convince. Any time I choose, I can turn one of my decides on, go to any of the services and have a lot of great stuff to watch.
It is interesting. I really have not gotten into the streaming thing. If I lived on my own, I would not have cable at all. Using a service like Net-Flix would save me money.
As someone who tried Beats Music during two extended trials (I was a fairly happy MOG subscriber when Beats bought it and scuttled it), I was flabbergasted when Apple was rumored to be and then announced they were buying Beats Electronics. I figured it was for the bassy, glow-in-the-dark fashion headphones, but the Apple leadership kept going on and on about how Beats was the future. Speculation was that Beats would steal away a substantial number of Spotify's then-9 million paid subscribers.
Having been a stream subscriber for about 10 years, having been on 6 services (beside Beats) and having done those two trials of Beats Music, I really didn't think that was going to happen.
When Beats bought MOG, that largely unadvertised, unhyped service had about 300,000 paying customers.
After Beats much-touted entry into the market, after the big promo boost of having no less than the gleaming white 800 pound gorilla of tech, Apple, pony up 3 BILLION dollars to buy Beats, after much advertising and oceans of hype, how many subscribers does Beats Music reportedly have (according to USA Today)?
300,000.
Let's hope that Apple has done a MUCH better job. But with the key people behind the Beats Launch, Ian Rogers, Dre, Jimmy Iovine, et al, in place at Apple now... one wonders how much they've learned.
One thing, from the sneak preview screen caps, it appears they have finally realized that a music player needs a play queue -- something every subscription service or music player I ever used -- beside Beats, anyhow -- has had, but that, utterly bizarrely, Beats lacked.
What I'd like to see in a music streaming service is one of the reason I used to love owning vinyl albums back in the 70's as a kid was a lot of the info they'd put on the album, such as what studios was the album recorded and mixed at, who was the mixing engineer, producer & song writers. Give some back ground and history of the artist and especially the particular album your listening to, photo's from the album. Now being a old guy maybe no one cares about this stuff anymore, but I would and I've been holding off on getting a spotify account to see what Apple offers.
FYI... ...I??Radio offers pop-up detailed artist bios in general when you're listening - as well as song lyrics - and both can be kept up after another song starts until you can get through as much as you like....
You're right. No one cares about that stuff anymore. And IMO, that's one of the many reasons that the music business is in the dumps. While one can search the interwebs to find out anything about an artists, I think the immediacy of reading the liner notes, finding out who the musicians and writers were generated tremendous interest in music and resulted in tons of sales. In Europe and Japan, music geeks used to know such information down to the master numbers (and sometimes down to the stamper numbers), which were frequently part of the liner notes for compilations.
If you calculate for equal dollars, the U.S. music industry is at about 35% of its former peak, even including all streaming, subscription and licensing revenue.
But...IMO, just like much else in our society, the music industry has dumbed down the audience and few give a crap about the information that used to be contained in liner notes. I forget what it was called, but didn't Apple try to provide such info on iTunes some years ago and no one cared?
Frankly, I don't think this new Apple service is going to do well. Why would people sign up at $10 a month when they can use Spotify and Pandora for free (albeit, with some commercials). The only way is if Apple provides far more intelligent music selection, but just picking a Genre isn't going to cut it. One thing I do find on Pandora for the stations I've programmed is that in spite of the fact that Pandora claims over a million tracks, I hear tremendous repetition.
Maybe because those "free" services are basically unsustainable (for the artists and the streamer sites). That's why Spotify is trying to push everyone towards paid. Eventually one or both in this equation will be fed up and you won't get those services.
I hope Apple Music will offer complete albums to listen to like Spotify does. I'd like to listen to older albums by artists I never listened to much in the 1960's through the 1980's. Anyway, as long as Apple doesn't put Spotify out of business, I'll be satisfied. If I don't care that much for Apple Music I can go back to Spotify as long as it exists. I like having a choice of services. I don't believe in this "if you're not #1, you're no good" attitude. I don't understand why people always talk like that. I think there's enough people on the planet to be able to profitably support several streaming music services.
Spotify is nearly out of business already (like most Android OEM's... ) since it is not really making money at all, wouldn't take much to push it over. I think Apple could in fact scuttle it if its successful; especially if artists can make more money going there.
Comments
If I didn't use a service for a year, I would cancel it...
Because only Apple needs competition, right?
What I'd like to see in a music streaming service is one of the reason I used to love owning vinyl albums back in the 70's as a kid was a lot of the info they'd put on the album, such as what studios was the album recorded and mixed at, who was the mixing engineer, producer & song writers. Give some back ground and history of the artist and especially the particular album your listening to, photo's from the album. Now being a old guy maybe no one cares about this stuff anymore, but I would and I've been holding off on getting a spotify account to see what Apple offers.
You're right. No one cares about that stuff anymore. And IMO, that's one of the many reasons that the music business is in the dumps. While one can search the interwebs to find out anything about an artists, I think the immediacy of reading the liner notes, finding out who the musicians and writers were generated tremendous interest in music and resulted in tons of sales. In Europe and Japan, music geeks used to know such information down to the master numbers (and sometimes down to the stamper numbers), which were frequently part of the liner notes for compilations.
If you calculate for equal dollars, the U.S. music industry is at about 35% of its former peak, even including all streaming, subscription and licensing revenue.
But...IMO, just like much else in our society, the music industry has dumbed down the audience and few give a crap about the information that used to be contained in liner notes. I forget what it was called, but didn't Apple try to provide such info on iTunes some years ago and no one cared?
Frankly, I don't think this new Apple service is going to do well. Why would people sign up at $10 a month when they can use Spotify and Pandora for free (albeit, with some commercials). The only way is if Apple provides far more intelligent music selection, but just picking a Genre isn't going to cut it. One thing I do find on Pandora for the stations I've programmed is that in spite of the fact that Pandora claims over a million tracks, I hear tremendous repetition.
How do you realistically expect THAT to work? Each service would have to create an Export Playlist feature, which I seriously doubt they will EVER do...
You can already transfer playlists from one online streaming service to another using www.soundliz.com They would just need to add Apple Music to their site. Interestingly enough is they don't already have Beats on it. But I have tried it for transferring Spotify to Tidal and works pretty well. Just drop and drag. Not 100% match since different catalogs for each service. You can also use your own iTunes playlists as well but didn't get very good matchup.
hahaha The animated face was funny. Well, how many artist do you listen to? When I am at the gym, writing or doing art, I have the same bands either on a playlist or I just go to one band and play all of their albums.
What I wrote was what I was thinking. I read the thing about people only listening to a said amount of music.
Peace.
I thought about that. Here is why I did not. One, I have a cell phone bill and that is it. The service for two of the three streaming things I listed, is $7.99. If it went over, say $10, I could cancel it. I also have the service for my mom and step father. So, there is a bigger picture. Then, once I wrote this online and someone asked me this. "What about all of the movies you own hard copies of? Do you watch all of them right away?" That is what made me realize that, I do not have to watch movies or shows on these services every day. They are simply a convince. Any time I choose, I can turn one of my decides on, go to any of the services and have a lot of great stuff to watch.
It is interesting. I really have not gotten into the streaming thing. If I lived on my own, I would not have cable at all. Using a service like Net-Flix would save me money.
Having been a stream subscriber for about 10 years, having been on 6 services (beside Beats) and having done those two trials of Beats Music, I really didn't think that was going to happen.
When Beats bought MOG, that largely unadvertised, unhyped service had about 300,000 paying customers.
After Beats much-touted entry into the market, after the big promo boost of having no less than the gleaming white 800 pound gorilla of tech, Apple, pony up 3 BILLION dollars to buy Beats, after much advertising and oceans of hype, how many subscribers does Beats Music reportedly have (according to USA Today)?
300,000.
Let's hope that Apple has done a MUCH better job. But with the key people behind the Beats Launch, Ian Rogers, Dre, Jimmy Iovine, et al, in place at Apple now... one wonders how much they've learned.
One thing, from the sneak preview screen caps, it appears they have finally realized that a music player needs a play queue -- something every subscription service or music player I ever used -- beside Beats, anyhow -- has had, but that, utterly bizarrely, Beats lacked.
What I'd like to see in a music streaming service is one of the reason I used to love owning vinyl albums back in the 70's as a kid was a lot of the info they'd put on the album, such as what studios was the album recorded and mixed at, who was the mixing engineer, producer & song writers. Give some back ground and history of the artist and especially the particular album your listening to, photo's from the album. Now being a old guy maybe no one cares about this stuff anymore, but I would and I've been holding off on getting a spotify account to see what Apple offers.
FYI... ...I??Radio offers pop-up detailed artist bios in general when you're listening - as well as song lyrics - and both can be kept up after another song starts until you can get through as much as you like....
You're right. No one cares about that stuff anymore. And IMO, that's one of the many reasons that the music business is in the dumps. While one can search the interwebs to find out anything about an artists, I think the immediacy of reading the liner notes, finding out who the musicians and writers were generated tremendous interest in music and resulted in tons of sales. In Europe and Japan, music geeks used to know such information down to the master numbers (and sometimes down to the stamper numbers), which were frequently part of the liner notes for compilations.
If you calculate for equal dollars, the U.S. music industry is at about 35% of its former peak, even including all streaming, subscription and licensing revenue.
But...IMO, just like much else in our society, the music industry has dumbed down the audience and few give a crap about the information that used to be contained in liner notes. I forget what it was called, but didn't Apple try to provide such info on iTunes some years ago and no one cared?
Frankly, I don't think this new Apple service is going to do well. Why would people sign up at $10 a month when they can use Spotify and Pandora for free (albeit, with some commercials). The only way is if Apple provides far more intelligent music selection, but just picking a Genre isn't going to cut it. One thing I do find on Pandora for the stations I've programmed is that in spite of the fact that Pandora claims over a million tracks, I hear tremendous repetition.
Maybe because those "free" services are basically unsustainable (for the artists and the streamer sites). That's why Spotify is trying to push everyone towards paid. Eventually one or both in this equation will be fed up and you won't get those services.
I hope Apple Music will offer complete albums to listen to like Spotify does. I'd like to listen to older albums by artists I never listened to much in the 1960's through the 1980's. Anyway, as long as Apple doesn't put Spotify out of business, I'll be satisfied. If I don't care that much for Apple Music I can go back to Spotify as long as it exists. I like having a choice of services. I don't believe in this "if you're not #1, you're no good" attitude. I don't understand why people always talk like that. I think there's enough people on the planet to be able to profitably support several streaming music services.
Spotify is nearly out of business already (like most Android OEM's... ) since it is not really making money at all, wouldn't take much to push it over. I think Apple could in fact scuttle it if its successful; especially if artists can make more money going there.