Free, ad-supported Google Play Music stations debut in US a week before Apple Music & Beats 1

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 37
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,368member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    Yeah didn't see an ad-supported tier coming, ...

    What?!

     

    GG, I am disappointed. I thought that they'd have told you first, of all people!

     

    ;)

  • Reply 22 of 37
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,509member
    What?!

    GG, I am disappointed. I thought that they'd have told you first, of all people!

    ;)
    That just never gets old does it?

    FWIW Google doesn't seem to even know who "I" am (of all people) 8-). I wish I was as young as they think I am with the athleticism needed for some of the hobbies they think I have.
  • Reply 23 of 37
    croprcropr Posts: 1,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post



    What's interesting is that if you subscribe to Apple music, the iTunes Match features are included automatically and there is no mention of a limit on the number of songs. The 50,000 uploads just fluff. I can't imagine any one person having even 1000 songs that are not already In iTunes and would require uploading.



    If you are not living in the US, then you realize very quickly that there are big gaps in iTunes for local music issued by local labels.  I definitely have more than 1000 songs in my CD collection that are not in iTunes

    You'd better work on your imagination skills, they are pretty poor.

  • Reply 24 of 37
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Yeah didn't see an ad-supported tier coming, but I guess I should have. Makes sense considering the other music streaming options available or soon to be. So that pretty much fills out the music offerings from Google with:

    - the new ad-supported and human curated radio service (apparently from their Songza purchase?)
    - a free cloud music drawer for up to 50,000 songs
    - ability to transfer/match your iTunes catalog of music
    - à la carte album and individual track purchases
    - and an all-you-can eat on-demand music streaming subscription that includes off-line playback.

    I can't think of anything else they could include. Still the ad-supported tier does surprise me a bit.

    You really should add the 'Sponsored by Google' disclaimer. :D
  • Reply 25 of 37
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,073member

    I am amazed at the opposite, I've never understood how people have commercial radio in the workplace pumping out advertising all day long, or on TV in their homes. And streaming ads in the home between songs instead of simply listening to music, is bizarre. But I do get it that plenty of people just don't care.

  • Reply 26 of 37
    tdknoxtdknox Posts: 76member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post



    What's interesting is that if you subscribe to Apple music, the iTunes Match features are included automatically and there is no mention of a limit on the number of songs. The 50,000 uploads just fluff. I can't imagine any one person having even 1000 songs that are not already In iTunes and would require uploading.



    Hi there.

     

    I have more than 1000 songs that require uploading. In fact, I have more than 25,000 songs that require uploading.

     

    There is a lot (really, a lot) of music that isn't in the iTunes Match system. Especially if your collection encompasses a lot of non-American, non-English music, older music, non mainstream music. Stuff that was released on LP only and never CD.

     

    For me, iTunes Match is a complete non-starter.

  • Reply 27 of 37
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



     Still the ad-supported tier does surprise me a bit.

     

    It shouldn't. Google is an ad company after all. Sooner or later they will do it. It surprised me that they didn't do this from the beginning.

     

    What surprises me is why music industry think it's a good idea to have another ad-supported service, which didn't pay much, in the face of Apple Music launch which try to change consumer's behaviour into respecting artist's works and pay for it. That's just dumb.

  • Reply 28 of 37
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,509member
    matrix07 wrote: »
    It shouldn't. Google is an ad company after all. Sooner or later they will do it. It surprised me that they didn't do this from the beginning.

    What surprises me is why music industry think it's a good idea to have another ad-supported service, which didn't pay much, in the face of Apple Music launch which try to change consumer's behaviour into respecting artist's works and pay for it. That's just dumb.
    To match up better with Apple's ad-supported music tier I would imagine. If it's dumb for Google it's dumb for Apple too isn't it? I guess those two don't think so.
  • Reply 29 of 37
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    To match up better with Apple's ad-supported music tier I would imagine. If it's dumb for Google it's dumb for Apple too isn't it? I guess those two don't think so.

    Nope. I meant it's dumb to license to another free with ad service right now. When they're perfectly happy with a scrap, a scrap is all they will get.
    What they should do is starting to eliminate this kind of services one by one. Leave only the one that acts like a radio, the one that you can't set anything up at all.
    But of course music execs are always too dumb and too greedy to think of anything long term. That's why the industry is going downhill after downhill.
  • Reply 30 of 37
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,509member
    matrix07 wrote: »
    Nope. I meant it's dumb to license to another free with ad service right now. When they're perfectly happy with a scrap, a scrap is all they will get.
    What they should do is starting to eliminate this kind of services one by one. Leave only the one that acts like a radio, the one that you can't set anything up at all.
    But of course music execs are always too dumb and too greedy to think of anything long term. That's why the industry is going downhill after downhill.
    The free ad-supported tier of Google Music works only as a radio station. There's no on-demand option to hear a specific track or album or artist unless you pay-to-play, just like iTunes Radio or Pandora. You'r saying you're OK with the idea of one acting like a radio station, right? That's what this Google Music add-on is.
  • Reply 31 of 37
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,328member
    matrix07 wrote: »
    It shouldn't. Google is an ad company after all. Sooner or later they will do it. It surprised me that they didn't do this from the beginning.

    What surprises me is why music industry think it's a good idea to have another ad-supported service, which didn't pay much, in the face of Apple Music launch which try to change consumer's behaviour into respecting artist's works and pay for it. That's just dumb.
    by trying not to pay the artists for three months?
  • Reply 32 of 37
    elehcdnelehcdn Posts: 385member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    The free ad-supported tier of Google Music works only as a radio station. There's no on-demand option to hear a specific track or album or artist unless you pay-to-play, just like iTunes Radio or Pandora. You'r saying you're OK with the idea of one acting like a radio station, right? That's what this Google Music add-on is.

    If Google is always listening, maybe they can better tailor your playlists ...
    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/23/google-eavesdropping-tool-installed-computers-without-permission
  • Reply 33 of 37
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    The free ad-supported tier of Google Music works only as a radio station. There's no on-demand option to hear a specific track or album or artist unless you pay-to-play, just like iTunes Radio or Pandora. You'r saying you're OK with the idea of one acting like a radio station, right? That's what this Google Music add-on is.

    In all those services you still can set the stations up yourself.
  • Reply 34 of 37
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    by trying not to pay the artists for three months?

    I know people will always fall for sensationalism rather than substance so I'm not surprised.
  • Reply 35 of 37
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    I tried it and it's not too bad. Honestly, I prefer the music I already have anyway, so I personally would not be a consistent customer for any streaming audio service, free or paid.
  • Reply 36 of 37
    elehcdnelehcdn Posts: 385member
    matrix07 wrote: »
    In all those services you still can set the stations up yourself.

    Yes you can set up stations within certain parameters such as artist or song title, but you are not guaranteed it will always play that artist, album, or even the song. That is why there are on-demand streaming services - so that when you want to hear a song or album, you get direct access to listen to it immediately.
Sign In or Register to comment.