Apple's rebranded Beats Music service won't have free subscription tier - report

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 47
    wdowellwdowell Posts: 213member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    Alternative to what? Theft?

     

    I am not an expert, but Apple's argument to the music industry was precisely turning theft into 99 cent iTunes purchases.. So they've got a record for coming up with a solution to this problem years back.

     

    Except in more recent years this very success has probably hindered them - a philosophical revulsion for subscription services, at least with Steve Jobs, or perhaps even protecting their iTunes Store revenues.. has delayed them until the Store started seeing sales slump amidst a world of Spotify and others and Cook wisely bought Beats to play catch up.. 

     

    ALl i know is that Apple has done virtually nothing to iTunes Radio - It never came to the UK, even though it said "Coming Soon" on the website. Meanwhile i've been paying the full whack for iTunes Match and not had all the promised benefits. Did they pass that 'excess' money on to any artists? They certainly didnt give it back to me. 

     

    (YouTube isn't theft - it's not a crime to watch stuff on youtube! Most of it, it seems, goes via that third party thing -VEVO - artists /labels get royalties, and they've got some of the most aggressive (matching technology around to comply with DMCA  takedowns and, more so than so, removing stuff before that even. They're, as others have noted, are also pushing for their music subscription stuff for YouTube.)

  • Reply 22 of 47
    wdowellwdowell Posts: 213member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

     

     

    Artists, not labels. They should form a mega-union, pool millions of dollars for lawyers, and strike.


     

     

    It's an aside from Google, but generally the Artists seem all too happy to sign up to these labels, get chauffeured around and have their promotion work done for them, get into newspapers, magazines, which they probably wouldnt have teh first clue on how to go about it, a nice cushy income before they've even brought out their music and made any money themselves, and then they complain about the deals they struck. Frankly, I don't feel sorry for the artists for screwing themselves. Nobody forced them to go with a label, and many don't.

     

    The independents get a lot more credit in my book.

  • Reply 23 of 47
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 993member
    very little on the air is worth paying for. in fact, they should be paying me to listen to it.

    that being said, in this day and age, why do artists & musicians use or need record labels to begin with? it's another dinosaur that should have been extinct a long time ago.
  • Reply 24 of 47
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,709member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

     

     

    That's certainly what my kids do. They don't have portable music devices, so contra TS they're not ripping songs off it. Why rip when you can stream? 




    Mine, too. My kids have iPhones and they use iTube to create play lists and cache their music. iTube radio plays streamed music from youtube and caches everything inc ads. Afterwards you can delete ads or any tracks you don't want. Very easy to use. Completely free. Everything available. Any suggestion otherwise confirms me completely lame. Its all their friends ever use. 

  • Reply 25 of 47
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     



    Apple needs to continue doing what they're doing. Ensuring nothing BUT search is a revenue generator for Googs, and then continue to hammer on the privacy and data mining so that Google as a whole loses customers. Then change the default browser option in Safari, continue to use Bing as the backend for Siri and Spotlight, etc.


     

    I think this is exactly Apple's plan. And it's brilliant. Apple can slowly build up the front end, so that the back end is hardly even relevant for the vast majority of searches.

  • Reply 26 of 47
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    I have never used any of the popular streaming music services.

     

    I just listen to my local Newport Beach community radio KOCI and their streaming version http://s9.viastreaming.net:9600/listen.pls

     

    They play all classic rock. A few local commercial messages from sponsors.

     

    Another station I listen to is www.radioparadise.com

     

    Eclectic worldwide music, lots of indie acoustic stuff. All DJ mixed by Bill Goldstein. NO ads at all!

     

    Check it out. It is really good stuff for older people like me. Both completely free.

  • Reply 27 of 47
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    So am I. image



    YouTube pays royalties too, even on the "free" service. A tiny bit of research on your part would have shown that. In fact Google has paid out over a $B in song royalties in just the last couple of years. So while users of the free version of Youtube may not pay, Google certainly does.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/youtubes-billion-dollar-payout-provide-new-revenue-for-musicians-20140205



    And the ad-free YouTube Music is NOT free as you'd also have noted if you'd read the link I posted earlier. I'll post it again for you as I know you prefer to know the facts about things instead of listening to FUD.

    http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/12/youtube-music-key-subscription-service/

     

    Um, so you're saying that there is no illegal music sharing on youtube?

     

    I'm pretty sure we all know that's very prevalent. google can't even be bothered to remove terrorist propaganda, let alone curb copyright infringement.

  • Reply 28 of 47
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,424member
    Um, so you're saying that there is no illegal music sharing on youtube?

    I'm pretty sure we all know that's very prevalent. google can't even be bothered to remove terrorist propaganda, let alone curb copyright infringement.
    Heck it's not all that hard to illegally share iTunes content, bypassing DRM. A whole lotta them don't even have DRM protection anymore from what I gather, so no doubt it happens.

    Think someone is using your copyrighted music at YouTube without permission?
    https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807622?hl=en
    Use it.

    Does Google want copyright holders to notify them, file DCMA takedown notices? Yup.
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/google-touts-anti-piracy-efforts-741622

    As for whether it's legal to download for personal use you might want to look into it. Not that it matters all that much really as Google pays the copyright holder for licensed music anyway, even if someone uses the non-subscription ad-supported side of YouTube.

    You might not know as much about it as you thought you did.
  • Reply 29 of 47
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807622?hl=en

    Use it.



    As for whether it's legal to download for personal use you might want to look into it. Not that it matters really as Google pays the copyright holder for licensed music anyway.

     

    1) That's google's job, not mine. (As an aside, so typical of google to push off the work/testing/etc to the user).

     

    2) You're again attempting to obfuscate the fact that there is prevalent music piracy on youtube by pointing out that there is also legal music consumption.

     

    3) You're avoiding the fact that google can't even be bothered to remove terrorist propaganda.*

     

    *How is this not more of a big deal?

  • Reply 30 of 47
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,424member
    1) That's google's job, not mine. (As an aside, so typical of google to push off the work/testing/etc to the user).

    2) You're again attempting to obfuscate the fact that there is prevalent music piracy on youtube by pointing out that there is also legal music consumption.

    3) You're avoiding the fact that google can't even be bothered to remove terrorist propaganda.*

    *How is this not more of a big deal?
    Too busy to be bothered isn't the reason they fail to remove all such content. Did you even read the article you linked?? It appears not. Geesh... :no:
  • Reply 31 of 47
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    Alternative to what? Theft?



    You mean like supposedly most iPod owner were engaged in prior to the iTunes Music Store?

  • Reply 32 of 47
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Too busy to be bothered isn't the reason they fail to remove all such content. Did you even read the article you linked?? It appears not. Geesh... image

     

    A) You're avoiding points 1 and 2 (see previous post).

     

    B) Perhaps you didn't read the article. Here's a couple quotes:

     

    "google said Wednesday that its video-sharing website youtube is so inundated that staff cannot filter all terror related content."

     

    That sounds like they're too busy to be bothered to me. What's the excuse for not allocating more resources to stop terrorist propaganda?

     

    :no:

     

    "When a Scotland Yard unit recently told Google about material that did not comply with the company's own guidelines, De Kerchove said 93 percent of that content was removed. But when individuals flag up problems only a third of it is taken down."

     

    Sounds like even when the users do the work for google, google doesn't even follow up 2/3 of the time.

     

    :no:

  • Reply 33 of 47
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    YouTube is the real problem as far as the labels are concerned. As I understand it, most kids use YouTube to search for and listen to music.

    It's not just kids. I was just listening to a bunch of 90s music on YouTube.
  • Reply 34 of 47
    cgs268cgs268 Posts: 55member
    Great!
    Cheaper monthly subscription with a tight integration into iTunes. Genius.

    I'd actually go lower than $8 though. $6 was a winning formula for Netflix ...

    The idea is to get as many subscribers as possible who will bring overall increase in revenue.
  • Reply 35 of 47
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

     

    YouTube has replaced Napster, essentially.

     

    YouTubeGoogle should be sued out of existence by artists.

     

    Artists, not labels. They should form a mega-union, pool millions of dollars for lawyers, and strike.


    Kim Dotcom thought similarly and was working on a forum called Megabox via which artists could promote and sell their material directly and retain 90% of the profits.   Funny what happened shortly after the idea was announced.

  • Reply 36 of 47
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,424member
    A) You're avoiding points 1 and 2 (see previous post).

    B) Perhaps you didn't read the article. Here's a couple quotes:

    "google said Wednesday that its video-sharing website youtube is so inundated that staff cannot filter all terror related content."

    That sounds like they're too busy to be bothered to me. What's the excuse for not allocating more resources to stop terrorist propaganda?

    :no:

    "When a Scotland Yard unit recently told Google about material that did not comply with the company's own guidelines, De Kerchove said 93 percent of that content was removed. But when individuals flag up problems only a third of it is taken down."

    Sounds like even when the users do the work for google, google doesn't even follow up 2/3 of the time.

    :no:
    Actually it sounds like a very high percentage of individuals flagging content don't know the difference between actual propaganda and something they just don't like or agree with.
  • Reply 37 of 47
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Even tho Google Music is an ad-free subscriber only service, around $10/mo, just the way it debuted last year, and Google's YouTube Music Key is also an ad-free subscriber only service costing around $10/mo. (If you subcibe to Google Music the You tube subscription is included AFAIK.)
    http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/12/youtube-music-key-subscription-service/

    Apple's iRadio on the other hand debuted as free. Yeah, must be all Google's fault for charging for their music services rather than giving them away. :rolleyes:

    Oh GOD. The delusion.

    I done even .... You have GOT to be trolling.

    EVERYONE is posting and streaming illegally on YouTube.
    Napster couldn't imagine this level of theft.
    Every teen I know is skipping iTunes and radio and are going straight to YouTube(and skipping ads). %75 of what they're streaming is NOT from the official channel and diluting the original artists views and revenue.

    You're quick to mention YouTube ads and dismiss iTunes Radio as "free" music.

    How dare you accuse Apple, the same company that saved the music industry, of being the cheap thief that goog is.

    With all the illegal sharing on YouTube and goog not doing sh** about it they should be sued off their a**!!
    They sit back and do NOTHING. Don't believe me? Try contacting their customer service. They push all YouTube duty to their users. You'll be sent to a YouTube community support forum.

    You gotta be trolling to even mention YouTube Music Key. WHO THE FU** IS PAYING FOR THAT SH**?!!
    When you already get the same service without dropping a penny?

    News flash: This new generation isn't looking for music on iTunes they're listening to low quality uploads on YouTube from other users.

    You're either an old man disconnected with the new generation or a troll.
  • Reply 38 of 47
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mike1 View Post

     

    Can't imagine why I would pay for this. iTunes Radio works great for me and the ads are infrequent and unobtrusive.

    Just wish it was available in a browser so I didn't have to use a computer with iTunes installed. Can't put it on my work computer.




    It's great that it works for you, but you aren't everyone. So why not allow there to be a more sophisticated option as well. Why can't Apple have a free iTunes radio with ads, an ad free with iTunes Match and then go for the killer fine tuned (by comparison) version that is Beats Music. One that might actually use data from your iTunes purchases etc to figure out what music to actually group together, allow you to hand create groups of artists etc. Like services like Spotify allow. 

  • Reply 39 of 47
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wdowell View Post

     

     

     

    It's an aside from Google, but generally the Artists seem all too happy to sign up to these labels, get chauffeured around and have their promotion work done for them, get into newspapers, magazines, which they probably wouldnt have teh first clue on how to go about it, a nice cushy income before they've even brought out their music and made any money themselves, and then they complain about the deals they struck. Frankly, I don't feel sorry for the artists for screwing themselves. Nobody forced them to go with a label, and many don't.

     

    The independents get a lot more credit in my book.


     

    Most artists that sign for labels barely make a living. Maybe 5% make a good living, Less than 1% are the chauffered ones...  That's why touring now is the main revenue generator.  Signed artists get a bit more exposure so they make more money from their tour.

     

    Most artists that don't go with labels, make no money at all from sales and have a more limited exposure, they have to tour constantly (if they're popular enough), otherwise they have a side job, and because they have low exposure even with that they barely make a living. 

     

    Being an artist these days is hell; it is passion and not money that sustain most. But, you can't eat passion.

  • Reply 40 of 47
    freshmakerfreshmaker Posts: 532member

    Kind of disappointing.  I was hoping for a free, ad-supported service.  I'm not going to pay for streaming audio.  I prefer the "free to try" method and then buy the songs I like off if iTunes.  Oh well.  I guess I'll continue using crappy Spotify.  I will say I love the Internet Radio feature on iTunes.  there are a lot of great stations there (or whatever it's called - not iTunes Radio, the other one).

Sign In or Register to comment.