Amazon has opened its MP3 music store.
The files are free from digital rights management code, so they can be played on any device or computer you want, unlike previous online stores, including iTunes. Generally in the past you could use an iPod or other devices, but not both.
TidBITS article about this.
... I notice that today's top band on Amazon is Pink Floyd. Man, do those guys have stick-around power! I heard once that Dark Side Of The Moon has been on the top 100 for decades. An astounding accomplishment in pop music, a business which more than any other is known for one-hit wonders and three-year careers.
TTL ventured:
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognise that the whole idea of a centralised MP3 store is passé to begin with. Fer heaven's sake, just upload your MP3s on your web server, put a PayPal (or Google wallet, or whatever) buy button on your page, and have a simple script e-mail the song to whoever buys it from you.
It's a bit like when the web was new, there were all kinds of "shopping malls" where you were supposed to rent a page to sell your wares. Shopping malls make sense in the physical world because otherwise it would take a lot of calories to move your body from shop to shop. But here in cyberspace it's just a mouse click no matter what the distance.
The only reason these MP3 stores exist today is because artists have signed their work away to record companies. But if you want to buy older music you might as well buy the CD from Amazon and get a physical backup of the data.
For newer music, why have Amazon/Apple/Wal-mart as a middle man? I don't get it.
You're not alone. I've been thinking about these things myself. And I think you're right... but... there is another side to it:
1: Most people can't handle the technical side of things. It took MySpace and Blogger to make many people get their own web sites. And taking payments is still a couple of technical steps beyond that, easy as it looks to a geek like you.
2: I may be biased, being a publisher and editor myself, but I think those may still be needed. Look at all the drek and the horrible web interfaces you have to wade through on the web just to find one good song (or picture or whatever). A good publisher/editor can remove the bulk of the crap and make the interface much more pain free.
6 comments:
There is quite some diversity in Pink Floyds music, though the later Waters stuff kinda fell into a formula. There are some fun tracks in the old Syd Barrett days. Then they have the three soundtrack albums. They even got on the radio series of The Hitchhikers Guide (but not on the CDs). Marvin hums the opening bars from one of the longer instrumentals on Magrathea.
The concentration on concept albums probably helped, the album as a whole had a feel, not just the three hit songs and a bunch of others stuff. The later albums have a continuing story too.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognise that the whole idea of a centralised MP3 store is passé to begin with. Fer heaven's sake, just upload your MP3s on your web server, put a PayPal (or Google wallet, or whatever) buy button on your page, and have a simple script e-mail the song to whoever buys it from you.
It's a bit like when the web was new, there were all kinds of "shopping malls" where you were supposed to rent a page to sell your wares. Shopping malls make sense in the physical world because otherwise it would take a lot of calories to move your body from shop to shop. But here in cyberspace it's just a mouse click no matter what the distance.
The only reason these MP3 stores exist today is because artists have signed their work away to record companies. But if you want to buy older music you might as well buy the CD from Amazon and get a physical backup of the data.
For newer music, why have Amazon/Apple/Wal-mart as a middle man? I don't get it.
I kinda think that plan skirts a little bit of the licensing issues. The big deal about Amazon doing it is that all the RIGHTS have been taken care of, isn't it?
"The big deal about Amazon doing it is that all the RIGHTS have been taken care of, isn't it?"
Yes, artists have little choice with material they have already signed a deal for with the big record companies. But the scene is rapidly changing. Nowadays operating independently (selling directly to the fans, or through a friendly middle man) is not only feasible but in many cases more profitable too. You sell less copies, but you pretty much keep all the proceeds to yourself.
Eolake, what I am thinking is that most bands/artists already have a website anyway, often a very elaborate one. Yes, those DYI e-shops aren't always that pleasant to do your shopping in, but perhaps this is temporary? Perhaps someone will soon recognise the problem and develop a plug-and-play component to add to your web site that provides an iTunes-like shopping experience.
Editorialising is important, too. But there is no need to combine the shop and the editors. Just give the editors an associate fee and they will happily mention the new Eolake Stobblehouse album in every instance.
What's this I hear? Eolake Stobblehouse has a new album? Like, cool!
Yeah, it's called "Me Doing The Dishes, with TV in the background". I expect it to reach gold next year.
Post a Comment