Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
This is a good idea, because it will get more fans to the website. With more visits to the site there will probably be more purchases from their online merch store as well as other interactive actions on their site. It really works to their favor now to have a limited edition release of the scratch-off albums, because since fans can already listen to the album online for free, this will be incentive for major fans to go out and actually buy the album. All around, I don't think the leak was a terrible issue for the band, because bringing more traffic to the site now with the free streaming will still benefit the band.
Listen to the album at: www.whoismgmt.com
Sunday, March 28, 2010
In case you haven’t seen this Chatroulette video of Ben Folds live, now you have. If you haven’t heard of Chatroulette yet, then kill two birds with one stone and watch the video. WARNING -- Video drops the F bomb.
Ben Folds connects with random people around world with webcams. As you can imagine, a good half of the people he runs into are lonely men looking for human interaction (though there is no nudity in this video).
As bands around the world try to break ground via texted song requests or streaming live feeds of their concert, Ben Folds pulls a 180 and uses the consumer for song material -- on the spot.
With a ton a views, he is getting publicity at the same time. As the digital marketplace continues to gain market share, everybody is looking to be the next online phenomena (even seasoned pros like Ben Folds).
- Ian Gollahon
Basically, Immitter works by having artists upload their original content that will be played according to specific parameters, much like Pandora. The founders think that artists will be willing to pay for this service because it connects them with a target audience. The big question is whether artists will be willing to pay to have their music on Immitter and that will largely depend on how many active listeners the site can deliver.
I highly doubt that there will be many artists who are willing to pay to be played on Immitter. To get played on Pandora, the only thing the artist has to do is have their music for sale on Amazon. I don’t think that Immitter has differentiated itself enough from Pandora or Jango to make it seem like a worthwhile investment for indie artists.
Monday, March 22, 2010
I wouldn't doubt it! If "certain conditions are met," the contract could be worth up to $250 million. That's quite an accomplishment for a deceased artist. With all of the hype still around Michael Jackson and his death, I think this is a great idea. These days if you slap MJ's name on anything, it will sell. Die-hard fans will appreciate the new material and the label banking on it will too.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
But now there’s a new idea for email list sign up that works via text message. Bands could, for example, create flyers announcing that each person who texts their email address to the phone number will be entered to win a meet ‘n greet, merch bundle, free tickets, etc.
I think this is an idea that could be invaluable to up-and-coming bands because it allows them to grow their fan base with minimal effort.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
I think “Musicians Wanted” is great because YouTube is acknowledging the people who helped make their platform popular (artists), and rewarding them for their original content. Also, this is a good way for YouTube to continue to grow because it’s providing musicians with more opportunities to gain exposure for their work, which in result will lure more musicians into using YouTube than ever before. Overall, I see this new program being a major move for independent artists because they have another outlet to distribute their music through without being supported by a label (major or indie).
Submitted by: Jarvis R. Smith
Friday, March 19, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
I think this is a great idea. If one of my favorite bands released an app like this that featured a sizable amount of their music on it, I would definitely buy it. I do think that $4.99 is a little expensive for an app, but again, big fans of the band would definitely be willing to pay the price. One thing I like in particular about this app is that it's interactive. The apps that feature pictures and videos are getting really old and dry, because those are things that are very easy to find on the internet for free. A game like this, however, is a great idea for an app.
Here's an ad for the app:
A company called Sonos has developed a wireless music system. This system requires little installation, and can allow users to play music throughout their home. There are houses that have the technology to play iPods throughout the house already, but what makes the product Sonos has developed interesting is that it allows you to not only play music from your collection through it, but it also lets you play music from the internet through the house.
How can it do that? Well, the way this product is operated is through an iPhone app. Yes, the entire system is all controlled by the means of an app. That’s pretty cool, especially considering the picture I get in my head of streaming Pandora on your iPhone and being able to hear it coming through speakers throughout your house. While I currently live in an apartment where I can hear my Pandora music throughout it from my laptop since it’s small, I can see the appeal it might hold for someone with maybe an upstairs and a basement. However, they also sell a single system that is good for one room if you want a better sound on your Internet streamed music.
It would appear this product is being marketed to people with a little bit more money than me, though, since that one room bundle is going to be sold for $399.00 and asking for two rooms bumps it all the way up to $999.00. But other than that, I think it is a pretty cool system simply for the fact that it is controlled by an app. Maybe with a little competition, this Sonos product will come down in price in the future.
-- Ashley Snider
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Indies Boycott Limewire Party At Digital Music East
American Association Of Independent Music (A2IM) President Rich Bengloff is encouraging his members attending this week’s Digital Music Forum East to boycott at Limewire sponsored reception on Thursday evening.
“…Services like LimeWire, Myxer and many more that, by the nature of their services, make it too easy for consumers to violate copyright and/or compensate independents in a sub-standard fashion or not at all,” Bengloff wrote in an open letter to his members and shared with Hypebot. “LimeStore uses the LimeWire illegal hits to drive traffic to their legal site,” he added.
My usual sarcastic rant:
What’s wrong A2IM, too indie for Limewire (or a reasonable acronym for that matter)? Last time I checked, second-generation P2P companies like Limewire and Soulseek pretty much birthed indie rock as it is today. Besides that, who uses Limewire anymore? These guys are so out of touch- not only are they acknowledging Limewire as something worth boycotting, they are giving it free press.
Their argument, and I quote, “Services like LimeWire, Myxer and many more that, by the nature of their services, make it too easy for consumers to violate copyright and/or compensate independents in a sub-standard fashion or not at all”
It’s freaking Limewire. Not only is it entirely out of date, it was never meant to pay royalties to anyone. It’s freaking P2P. Was this guy born yesterday? He’s the “President” of something called “American Association Of Independent Music”. WTF? How can this guy claim to represent Independent Music? Apparently he doesn’t even know what Limewire is.
- Ian Gollahon
Like Hansel from Zoolander, fighting the iTunes man is “… so hot right now”.
While iTunes faces opposition with Amazon, a new seed of opposition has been sown from within: Pink Floyd is suing EMI over unlawful selling of singles on iTunes instead of selling the album as a whole. (Of course, that would never be a problem on Amazon.)
Apparently, Pink Floyd’s contract with EMI specifically prohibits EMI from “unbundling” the album and selling it in pieces. Although, the time of the contract was 1998 and most certainly not referring specifically to iTunes, it may still prove valid.
Considering an album is arguably an artistic statement and taking a song out of that album might be taking that song out of context, it’s a fairly consistent argument. Also, the legal precedent seems to side with Pink Floyd. For example, a synchronization license is required to put a song in the context of a moving picture. In this synch license, it is imperative that the rights holder approves the context that the song will be put in. In fact, sync licenses usually include a vivid description of the scene or commercial being used and a background of that context so as to avoid any contextual doubt.
It’s a fairly important concept when you consider a porno could be phrased as “a love scene”.
Similarly, a prog-rock album might have six one-minute songs and two twelve-minute songs. Making twenty-four minutes of the album two dollars and the other six minutes of the album six dollars.
So really, it is an issue.
In London (where the lawsuit is taking place), there is a set of Copyright Laws known as “Moral Rights”. Moral Rights put artists’ (be they copyright holder or not) on a pedestal much higher than any American court ever would. I’m no lawyer, but it looks like Pink Floyd might have a pretty serious case against EMI.
A version of the story exists at:
For those not familiar with the Daily Deal, it’s basically a free promotion subsidized by Amazon. Artists and labels are asked to give a one day exclusive before the street date if they are participating in the program. During that 24 hour period, Amazon discounts the album to between $1.99 and $3.99 and the album is featured on its web pages and on the Daily Deal’s Twitter feed which is followed by 1.4 million people. Amazon does not charge labels for these promotions, but it does ask that them to promote the release through their websites, e-mail lists, and social networks. One major label group recently told its labels that its own studies had shown that “as much as 95% of all Daily Deal sales would never have happened without the discount.”
To combat Amazon’s Daily Deal, iTunes staffers used both “threats and actions to make it clear to almost every major and indie record label that participation in Amazon’s Daily Deal would cost them dearly at iTunes.” Since iTunes is threatening indie labels as well, it means that these smaller record labels will have to choose between having their content promoted on iTunes or receiving the boost in sales that can come from the Daily Deal. Neither Apple nor any record labels have commented on this battle, Apple’s power over the music industry is clear - the Daily Deals now feature only a fraction of what was offered a month ago and the albums that are featured are rarely new hit makers.
I’ve always thought Apple was a little evil and more than a little hypocritical but this clash with Amazon might finally show that to people other than PC and Zune lovers. Amazon MP3 was really iTunes first worthy competitor and their most effective tactic was the Daily Deal. Apple could have come up with their own exclusives to compete with the Daily Deal, but instead they threatened the labels. The Daily Deal is a tool that helps smaller labels sell more music and since Apple is trying to crush that, I really don’t see how they can keep claiming to be the saviors of music.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Personally I think the industry is viewing the shift of music consumption wrong, and just because consumers aren’t buying music in the traditional way doesn’t mean they don’t want music. People are still going to concerts, buying merchandise, single songs, and ringtones as well as consuming music from other outlets (advertising and streaming services). In short, I think the industry needs to get over this argument, and start moving on to new ways to distribute music and monetize revenue. If anything is going to “kill” the industry it will be the lack of innovation from the record companies and artists.
Submitted by: Jarvis R. Smith
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
www.hypebot.com & http://tinyurl.com/yly8qxa
Monday, March 8, 2010
I have mixed feelings about this. I think it is a good way to package their album because it's unique. Huge fans will feel like they have a special piece of MGMT history when they get this. Also, they've used the ever-popular buzz phrase "Limited Edition." People like knowing they they have a product that won't be made forever...something that not everyone will have. On the other hand, however, I think it's sort of bizarre. I personally wouldn't run out and buy a CD just because the album cover was a scratch off, but to each their own. I give them a lot of credit for coming up with an original idea. It's a way for them to promote Congratulations successfully, because this idea is certainly making people notice the album.
Oh yeah! They also made this tacky video to make sure everyone hears about it:
Sunday, March 7, 2010
OurStage works by having fans compare one song or video to another and then choosing which song they liked more and by how much. The judging system randomizes all entries so that fans have no way of knowing or controlling who they judge. This system eliminates cheaters and the best performers are driven to the top by fans.
By partnering with MTV, each vote on OurStage becomes significantly more powerful and the opportunities for the artists that are voted the best are greater than ever. MTV averages 150-200 music cues daily in their current programming and has 600 music video hours on TV each week not to mention online music video programming, mobile music apps, and music video games like Rock Band. With MTV’s scope combined with OurStage’s unique voting platform, unknown artists from every genre could quickly become household names.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
I think this scavenger hunt is interesting because it’s a creative way for SPIN to gain more readers to their magazine. I have no doubt that one of those rewards will be a year subscription to their magazine, and few other products/events they’re sponsoring. Also, this is good for Foursquare because they could get more people to use their service after using it during SXSW. Overall, I think this type of fan engagement and partnership between companies needs to occur more often because it provides new ways to enhance the way music can be marketed via mobile phones. I can only imagine how this type of interactivity would work for a band releasing an album.
Submitted by: Jarvis R. Smith
Friday, March 5, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Monday, March 1, 2010
So, how did RATM manage to beat Cowell for the no. 1 Christmas song? They reached out to their fans by using social networking sites like Facebook. A group named "RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE FOR CHRISTMAS NO.1" emerged on Facebook, and within 2 weeks, had over 450,000 members. Not only Facebook helped, but also their websites, various blogs, and many other media outlets. It's surprising to me, yet really really awesome that RATM found a way to make a song from 1992 a bestseller in 2009. It just goes to show how artists can use the internet to spread the word about their product to the consumer.
The funniest part about this feud though has to be the fact that Sony is behind both of the acts. Yes, that's right...RATM is under Cowell's Sony deal, so even though Cowell "lost," he still gets that money in his pocket at the end of the day.