Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Warner Music Remains Optimistic on Streaming Music, as Long as It's Paid
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Simple; it's a matter of time (available) either spent obtaining (however the means) versus exploring (on-demand). I don't have a lot of spare time and would rather spend what free time I have enjoying it rather than working (more)...
Because you can stream music you dont own. And, if the user experience is actually don't properly, it isn't glorified radio. It should be like YouTube: search a song, listen to it.
Beats @ $5 per month is going to work.
But only if they can get close to 200,000,000 subscribers.
I think I'm in so thats 1.
But only if they can get close to 200,000,000 subscribers.
I think I'm in so thats 1.
If I can search and listen to any song, and it's availble in the UK, count me in.
Total: 2. 199,999,998 to go!
----------
This! None of this limited skips bull.
If videos on YouTube can be supported with ads, at <$0.001 per view, can't we have music funded in the same way?
Only, instead of listening to an ad, you pay the subscription.
----------
If songs are 99c each, and Beats is aiming at costing $5.00 a month, it's cheaper, unless you buy less than 6 songs a month.
You might not want to own a song, just listen - like when you hear a song on the radio, find it on YouTube, etc
My only issue is the price.
It's too expensive at $9.99 a month.
I don't want to feel like I'm streaming my own music if it's already in my library, which I can sync to my phone for free.
I probably buy 6-7 albums a year and less than 10 individual tracks at most. It's cheaper for me to buy than to stream.
It's great for listening to new albums and artists and listening to the album in full as made me purchase a couple of albums, but other than that I have no real use for it.
Sure Netflix is the same price, but it's a vastly different product and well worth the $8 I pay a month.
It's too expensive at $9.99 a month.
I don't want to feel like I'm streaming my own music if it's already in my library, which I can sync to my phone for free.
I probably buy 6-7 albums a year and less than 10 individual tracks at most. It's cheaper for me to buy than to stream.
It's great for listening to new albums and artists and listening to the album in full as made me purchase a couple of albums, but other than that I have no real use for it.
Sure Netflix is the same price, but it's a vastly different product and well worth the $8 I pay a month.
If anything, I think prices need to go up. $5 is way too low for streaming. I think it should be $20 a month, minimum, to stream ad-free.
Or maybe $10 a month to have an ad-free radio-like stream where you have no control over the songs that play (you can only choose the genre). Pay $20 to $30 a month for you to have the ability to select the songs that play, ad free.
Of course, you can also offer a higher sound quality stream for an extra $5 to $10/mo.
Maybe give a discount for an annual vs monthly membership.
Ad supported radio/curated music streams would continue to be free.
I think this would be a fair pricing structure for everyone. It has a price point for all economic and music enthusiasm/interest levels. It also has the benefit of being more sustainable for the music industry, as a whole.
Or maybe $10 a month to have an ad-free radio-like stream where you have no control over the songs that play (you can only choose the genre). Pay $20 to $30 a month for you to have the ability to select the songs that play, ad free.
Of course, you can also offer a higher sound quality stream for an extra $5 to $10/mo.
Maybe give a discount for an annual vs monthly membership.
Ad supported radio/curated music streams would continue to be free.
I think this would be a fair pricing structure for everyone. It has a price point for all economic and music enthusiasm/interest levels. It also has the benefit of being more sustainable for the music industry, as a whole.
Umm well I think you hit the nail on the head its more convenient. Some of us also like the fact that legit/legal and it supports the artist. Especially less popular artists who don't draw huge crowds at concerts. The one thing that might get me to cancel my subscription is the lack of smart list and be able to sort my music by year and genre easily.
In other words: SHOW US THE MONEY!!!
Oh, pay no attention to those starving people behind the curtain. They did the stuff we sell for us out of the kindness of their hearts. They were paid for their performances. What about US! He do all the hard work...
Oh, pay no attention to those starving people behind the curtain. They did the stuff we sell for us out of the kindness of their hearts. They were paid for their performances. What about US! He do all the hard work...
Again music labels show that they could care less what Customers actually want and what all they really care about is money.
Streaming music is a replacement for the Radio - why would I pay to listen? If i feel like paying for a song because i like it enough I want to own it and play it as many times as i want and be able to skip it or replay it as many times as i want or skip back 5 seconds to rehear one part.
Streaming music (like the radio) is advertising for musicians - it is for listening to music i would not otherwise pay for and to find new music i might want to purchase and add to my library.
The Music labels need to wake up soon and start listening to customers or they are all going to start losing their precious money....
Streaming music is a replacement for the Radio - why would I pay to listen? If i feel like paying for a song because i like it enough I want to own it and play it as many times as i want and be able to skip it or replay it as many times as i want or skip back 5 seconds to rehear one part.
Streaming music (like the radio) is advertising for musicians - it is for listening to music i would not otherwise pay for and to find new music i might want to purchase and add to my library.
The Music labels need to wake up soon and start listening to customers or they are all going to start losing their precious money....
Maybe instead of streaming music Warner could make a jukebox app where you have to buy virtual coins to operate.
Headline 3:
Random MR poster has to incorporate a Samsung blast into every comments section, regardless if it makes sense
If songs are 99c each, and Beats is aiming at costing $5.00 a month, it's cheaper, unless you buy less than 6 songs a month.
You might not want to own a song, just listen - like when you hear a song on the radio, find it on YouTube, etc
....which I can do for free.
I want to create dupe accounts to give you more thumbs up.
Couldn't agree more!
Glassed Silver:mac
Streaming services like Spotify and Beats allow you to pick what you want to listen to.
I suspect you've been living under a rock, like the managers at Apple who made iTunes Radio, and so only ever used Pandora which, is the only streaming service that doesn't let you pick what you're listening to. Every other streaming service lets you pick the track you want to listen to.
Well not sure how much the artists get from spotify but it has to be more than what they used to get from people who used to just download album/songs for free. I believe I saw a stat saying most people moving to subscription are people who didn't pay for music. People who like buying actual CD's and owning music on itunes seem to be keeping to that method.
A lot of people like online streaming services because it helps them find bands they might not have heard before. They use it as a replacement for (or an addition to) radio, and all other sources of music.
With a streaming service you can listen to any song or album whenever. Ad free. Cost less than an album power month. Worth to me
any song ? haha
That would be a dream...... if every single song and or album to date was available on streaming, then sign me up...
Similar, if every single movie was available to stream, i'm good.. And is this across different services..... Double that if u except all of it to be available on a single streaming service....no chance.
Spotify or instance does not have that much good in the dance scene..... only classical and a bit of trance//dance stuff..
but we all know that's just not how it is.. And while more is becoming available, i reckon it will always be that way for some time anyway.
That would be a dream...... if every single song and or album to date was available on streaming, then sign me up...
Similar, if every single movie was available to stream, i'm good.. And is this across different services..... Double that if u except all of it to be available on a single streaming service....no chance.
Spotify or instance does not have that much good in the dance scene..... only classical and a bit of trance//dance stuff..
but we all know that's just not how it is.. And while more is becoming available, i reckon it will always be that way for some time anyway.