Tidal Digital Music Service

[rsimms3]

#Ouch #FuckingRepublicans

Indiana, America's piñata.

That's rough. Canada's piñata is Quebec and they get it pretty bad..haha

Toronto had it's turn with Rob Ford.

Meh, Rob Ford was all in good fun. Trust me, The Québécois are some crazy people....not sure how that Province is run the way it is. Then there is the fact that they want to separate from Canada, which they wouldn't last a month on their own..

Sounds a lot like Texas. But then again we stole Texas from Mexico so there's a long standing friction over where it belongs.

[Aquamarine]

everyone seems to be cancelling their spotify account in order to switch to this.

Really? Most of the comments I've read seem to be along the lines of "I wouldn't touch this with a 33 foot pole due to it being the work of Satan."

I have seen a lot of people on Facebook changing from Spotify to Tidal because they think Tidal is paying more than Spotify to their artists....which as far as we can all see, is false. Oh, and then there are all the other crazies who are changing just because Jack is involved.

I guess reactions are pretty intense on both sides, then. I don't belong to Facebook groups etc., so all I'd seen were a few folks saying how appalling the whole thing was, for reasons I didn't quite get. I've never used a streaming service before, so thought I'd check out this one during the free trial, and I like it--I gather it's much the same as other services, though. I'll probably stick with it at the $9.99 level, which seems pretty reasonable.

[cwja]

#Ouch #FuckingRepublicans

Indiana, America's piñata.

That's rough. Canada's piñata is Quebec and they get it pretty bad..haha

Toronto had it's turn with Rob Ford.

Meh, Rob Ford was all in good fun. Trust me, The Québécois are some crazy people....not sure how that Province is run the way it is. Then there is the fact that they want to separate from Canada, which they wouldn't last a month on their own..

Sounds a lot like Texas. But then again we stole Texas from Mexico so there's a long standing friction over where it belongs.

Texas knows right where it belongs.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1428105373.719894.jpg

[koala]

I, too, think this project will most probably fail badly.
Unless they find some better marketing strategies for it. I really like the whole idea of the Artist being able to do their own write-ups and being able to present their work directly, "as they intended". In Jack's words, " the Artist gets full control". Which is pretty much what he himself has been doing since the start, being involved in every bit of the process and manner the music is presented to the listener, and it's worked out pretty well for him. It would be extremely difficult to get every Artist's involvement though and even after it all, it would be lost on the casual listener.

As for the price being set so high, it's a clear indication that they are also anticipating it to be a failure. They've set the price high and created a hype so that even if it fails in the near future, they'll have recovered their costs. If they were sure of their plan and really wanted a longer-term customer following they would have priced it cheaper.

Personally, none of this matters to me at all because Tidal, like most other streaming services, is not available in my country. Edit: That is also why I'm almost certain they won't mix vault services with tidal. The Vault reaches out to way more number of countries than tidal.

[Aquamarine]

I don't quite get the logic of why they would do it at all, if they were anticipating it would be a failure? That sounds like a pretty bad business move to me, not to mention a PR nightmare. (Mind you, they've had that already, so . . . )

[JonnyH]

I,

As for the price being set so high, it's a clear indication that they are also anticipating it to be a failure. They've set the price high and created a hype so that even if it fails in the near future, they'll have recovered their costs. If they were sure of their plan and really wanted a longer-term customer following they would have priced it cheaper.

.

Tidal is the same price as spotify. Tidal does have a more expensive option, however.

[Getbacktogether]

I still have a very sour taste in my mouth about Jack being apart of this. Isn't this the guy who gets mad when people us cell phones at his concerts? The guy that likes "real life experiences"? So now he tells us its okay to use technology to stream music but we better not use it to record a "real life experience" at his concert or he gets his panties in a bunch. Does he not have enough money already? I buy all his records and subscribe to the vault but now people that wanna listen to lady gaga get exclusive White Stripes content I don't get? I will see how it pans out but I have lost so much respect for Jack considering what he has been preaching all those years.

[Aquamarine]

It's not technology itself but certain uses of it that he objects to. He uses it himself to record his albums, after all. I don't really see how listening to digital music in your car (say) and going to live events are mutually exclusive, or incompatible concepts. You could listen to Tidal while en route to the live event. (Listening to it AT the live event, then they do become incompatible. Also dumb.) I genuinely don't see in what way JWIII is being inconsistent here. He's a businessman, and in his eyes at least, this is a better business model than Spotify or whatever. (Whether it actually is or not, I wouldn't know.)

[Kali Durga]

I think what might bother (some) people is the seeming suddenness of Jack becoming so deeply involved in the digital format after promoting tangible and analog formats for so long. It seems a bit out of the blue. But it probably isn't as sudden as we all think, though, if you've read &/or listened to a lot of the interviews with him over the last couple years, he's been hinting more and more frequently that he doesn't hate digital, he doesn't hate technology, he just believes vinyl is better. Having become involved with Tidal, he's now saying it much more emphatically. If he feels that cds are on the way out and that vinyl and streaming are the two formats that are going to continue to grow in the coming years, then it really shouldn't be a surprise that he'd get involved with something like this at some point. I think it might've happened a bit sooner than anyone would have anticipated, so it took people by surprise. But considering the other artists involved and the concept of it, in hindsight it doesn't surprise me at all that he decided now was the time. My feeling is that somewhere along the line, after the hubbub dies down, he's going to find a balance between the two, between digital and tangible, between what he's always espoused and this new(er) line we're hearing from him. And hopefully as many fans as possible will be able to reconcile with that.

That said, I'm still fascinated by all the hubbub. From a marketing perspective, it really is kind of astounding that they held that hyperbolic press event last week for a product/concept that isn't even completely thought through and mapped out yet. Would love to know whose decision that was.

[Juanjo]

I always wondered where some people would get the idea from that a musician playing electrical guitars might hate technology...

[Getbacktogether]

I guess basically im sour that he is completely against people using there phone to take pictures and videos when we PAY to come to his concerts but now he wants us to PAY for a streaming service to use on our phone. Seems a little backwards. Either completely jump on the phone bandwagon or don't jump at all.

[Kali Durga]

But the reason for not wanting you to use your phone to take a picture or video at a show is that it takes you out of the moment and impinges, however briefly, on your interaction with what's happening on stage. What he seems to feel you're paying for at a show is the visceral experience, so the phone prohibition at shows really isn't related to this at all. And can't people stream on a computer as well as a phone? I can see more valid reasons to be sour on this than that, the argument seems to be a little bit of a stretch.

[grumblestiltskin]

But the reason for not wanting you to use your phone to take a picture or video at a show is that it takes you out of the moment and impinges, however briefly, on your interaction with what's happening on stage. What he seems to feel you're paying for at a show is the visceral experience, so the phone prohibition at shows really isn't related to this at all. And can't people stream on a computer as well as a phone? I can see more valid reasons to be sour on this than that, the argument seems to be a little bit of a stretch.

PLUS Jack recognises that you might want some pics of the night as memories and pays a professional photographer to take super high quality photos of the whole thing and puts them up on his site for you to download for free...there is literally no reason for you to take low quality phone pics at a Jack show.

[Getbacktogether]

The argument may be a bit of a stretch but its how I feel lol. I feel if you pay for a ticket you should be able to experience it how ever you want even if its watching through a phone. Its America. You paid for a ticket enjoy it how you please. I for one don't ever pull my phone out at a concert but if that's how people want to experience it let them. Just like letting people experience music however they like whether it be with a phone, computer, cd, record or streaming service.... Like I said it may be a stretch and it may sound stupid but I just don't like this for many reasons. It may just be me and that's fine because everyone has their own opinion. Its just hard seeing him with jay z and all those people starting a service because they say artists don't get or make enough money yet everyone of them are Millionaires. Tidal for All right? after you pay a quick $20.00 a month fee.... Just really don't like Jacks involvement.

[Juanjo]

But the reason for not wanting you to use your phone to take a picture or video at a show is that it takes you out of the moment and impinges, however briefly, on your interaction with what's happening on stage. What he seems to feel you're paying for at a show is the visceral experience, so the phone prohibition at shows really isn't related to this at all. And can't people stream on a computer as well as a phone? I can see more valid reasons to be sour on this than that, the argument seems to be a little bit of a stretch.

PLUS Jack recognises that you might want some pics of the night as memories and pays a professional photographer to take super high quality photos of the whole thing and puts them up on his site for you to download for free...there is literally no reason for you to take low quality phone pics at a Jack show.

Plus, you are not only detaching yourself from a whole experience using your phone camera for pics or recording videos during a gig, which is your personal choice and really I don't care whoever wants to do it, but you might be molesting those behind you, which will see that annoying screen in their sight instead what they really paid for: the show.