smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Michael Adelsheim" <madelsheim@adelsheimvineyard.com> |
| Subject | Re: audities-digest V7 #217 (1 msgs) |
| Date | Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:06:49 -0700 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (2.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
For me, this latest change at Emusic may - I say "may" - be a non-issue for me. Having long since tired of would-be divas and hip hop acts not understanding what the category "power pop" means, I look for new music at other sites these days, and then see if Emusic has the album.
With their tiered pricing, I'm expecting that most of the indie-music I'm looking for will end up in the 49¢ section, which leaves the pricing the same for me as it is now.
The deal breaker - of course - is if my assumptions are incorrect.
Adelsheim
-----Original Message-----
From: audities-owner@smoe.org [mailto:audities-owner@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Eric Van Rysdam
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 6:39 PM
To: audities@smoe.org
Subject: Re: audities-digest V7 #217 (1 msgs)
Couldn't have said this better myself. Complete agreement with you,
especially about the clogging up of "product" with the major labels and the
comparison to Waterloo, etc...
Eric Van Rysdam
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 15:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
> From: shteevea@yahoo.com
> To: audities@smoe.org
> Subject: Re: new Emusic pricing (again!)
> Message-ID: <540207.55682.qm@web65805.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
>
> I've been a steadfast member since 2001, and have never had problems using
> my 50
> or even 75 credits, but this will be it for me. The only time I haven't
> used
> all my credits is in the past few months, as the site got larded up with
> the
> Sony catalog, and it became impossible to actually discover any new music;
> if I
> didn't know exactly what I wanted, it was a useless exercise. The site
> will be
> that much worse when they add UMG.
>
> Honestly, I think they'll probably be dead in a year, as this latest
> expansion
> of the catalog will likely drive more folks away, and their not going to
> compete
> with iTunes or Amazon for major label downloads. I think they really had a
> chance about 18 months ago to stake a claim to being unique - to being the
> Waterloo or Easy Street or ear x-tacy of online music - but they've decided
> to
> be Best Buy. I mean, what's their slogan going to be, we're just like
> iTunes
> now but cheaper? Inertia is a powerful force, and folks aren't going to go
> en
> masse to save .25 a track. Just like I won't mind paying a little bit more
> to
> get the things I really want from CD Baby or Kool Kat or the artists
> themselves.
>
>
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.