 sj |
||
|
||
Changes at mp3.com
|
|
|
Subject: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 16 Mar 01 - 08:29 PM mp3.com has announced a Premium Artist Service, and a lot of people are in a big tizzy about it. The problem is that they have taken away certain services from the "free" artists, in order to try to give value to the "premium" artists. Free artists can expect longer song approval times, and are no longer going to be paid for every play above 15 unique listens. The premium artists are being offered a higher rank in the queue for song approvals, and are going to be paid for each unique listen. mp3.com has also started several money-making initiatives, that do not sem fair to the artists. One is called "Back the Band" and is an auction for a spot of tect that any fan with money can put on your artist page, above your artist picture. Artists are worried that it will upset their page design, and that unscrupulous people will try to win spots to feauture their advertising on. The other is a song auction, which will place an artists' song near the top of the charts if the artist pays enough money for it in the auction. That goes against mp3.com's own principles of fair use of the charts, and it also enables anyone with money to buy a spot near the top for their song. That is totally against musical taste, and fair play. The other problem is, that the premium artists' pages won't have advertising on them. mp3.com is funded by advertising - or it's supposed to be, anyway. I really think that mp3.com has made a mistake with this, and especially in the way they handled it. Sure, mp3.com and the free artists can still make money off DAM CD sales - if their songs get approved so they can be put on a CD, that is. What do other mudcatters think about this? And especially those mudcatters on mp3.com? How should I handle this? I only need to put three more sngs up to create a DAM CD on there. Should I go ahead with it? Even if it takes over two weeks to get my songs approved? Alice, what do you think?
~*sirepseh*~ |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Jande Date: 16 Mar 01 - 08:35 PM I've been thinking about this all day! I'm going to keep on working to get my songs recorded and then turn them into DAM CDs for sale. Perhaps this will work for you, too, Hess, since you seem to be a lot closer than I am to getting a CD finished. ~ Jande (Seanna Rowe) Sure would like to hit the $10 mark first, though (HIgh asperations eh? I left a couple of messages on the forum, too. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Matt_R Date: 16 Mar 01 - 08:46 PM I'd like to make a damn CD too. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 16 Mar 01 - 08:49 PM Hi, Jande! Anyone interested in this thread might also be interested in this article that flattop posted here. Thread. Oh, and the link for Jande's stuff is www.mp3.com/seannarowe (She is more folky than I am, with blues and jazz influences as well.) |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 16 Mar 01 - 10:50 PM Well, Matt, if you have a way of getting your songs onto the computer, you could make mp3 files and put them on mp3.com Then all you'd have to do is some artwork, and you would be able to sell Data And Music CD's through mp3.com It is still the best deal around, I am just mourning the passing of an era, I think... It used to be the best place for the unsigned underdogs, niche bands and solo artists. Now, it has broken it's own rules, and it is no longer the great thing it once was. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: GutBucketeer Date: 16 Mar 01 - 11:14 PM I have bought several DAM CDs and really like them. I thought MP3 had a great setup and wish they would just leave it alone. I have asked them about creating custom CDs of lists of MP3s from artists that have not created their own CD, or don't have enough material for one yet. I would gladly pay outright to have a CD sent to me of, for example, the songs on the Mudcat MP3 sites. Song costs could be prorated based upon their percentage time of a typical CD. A 3 minute song, for example, would cost 3 (15.00$/60 min of a typical CD) = 75 cents. They responded that they don't provide this service, but it sure seems that it would be a much better way to support their site and independent artists than what they are proposing now. I definitely don't like the idea that performers could in effect buy votes to move their songs up the charts. GutterBucky |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Paul G. Date: 16 Mar 01 - 11:26 PM I have been on MP3.com, both solo and with my band for several years. I (and we) have refused at every turn to fork over our scarce, hard earned money to them in oder to buy our way up their charts. This latest scam also strikes me poorly, though I imagine that they are attempting to survive in a world that has recently seen the demise of many, many dot coms. I just think it's inappropriate to climb the backs of starving artists to attain their money goals. What will hapen is that the rich will get richer (the pop genre contributors, techno, rap -- all of the stuff at the top of their charts and P4P lists) -- and the rest of us will continue to trudge along, unwilling or unable to pay the protection money. The more I write about this the less I like the establishment of what amounts to a class system on MP3. pg |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: katlaughing Date: 16 Mar 01 - 11:39 PM Is there an alternative, yet? we are just getting some stuff ready and had thought to put it there, but now I am not so sure. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Paul G. Date: 17 Mar 01 - 12:03 AM Kat -- There have been a number of MP3.com imitators that have not been able to survive -- the latest start-up that The Ashley Gang is trying out is Javamusic.com Paul |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: katlaughing Date: 17 Mar 01 - 01:20 AM Thanks, Paul. Good to see you in here. It's been a while:-) I'm still singng your songs. kat |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 17 Mar 01 - 11:17 AM Since IUMA is no longer accepting new artists, mp3.com is the best. IUMA never said it would pay the artists - it was just a place to put up a couple of tracks to send your fans to. But they are struggling for money as well. I think the best thing to do would be to write to mp3.com and let them know how their policies affect you. There has to be *some* way for an mp3 and CD service to make money for both itself and the arists, in a fair and humane way. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Alice Date: 17 Mar 01 - 03:12 PM As Paul mentioned, mp3.com has continually tweaked the way they work with the artists who post music, trying to find a way to be a profitable dot.com, and not join the ranks of has-been internet sites. I am torn about this situation, because I can't justify paying $20 a month (don't always have $20 a month to spare) and so far don't get enough traffic for my page to pay for itself in $20 of listeners per month. I also don't like the way they manipulate musicians with flattery in statements such as the one describing paying artists as "serious" and those who don't pay as "hobbyists". This was such a blatant mind control tactic to get people to pay their fee, that it really bothered me. I would rather that they just be honest and say, mp3.com needs to make a profit and they may have to charge for the services they provide. I appreciate the ability to be able to share my music with anyone who can access it, considering that I live in an isolated rural state where few would otherwise hear me. I don't think it's unfair for them to charge a small fee for the service of providing a way to promote music online, but I don't like some of their tactics in creating some changes - the auction, the purchased positions in charts, etc. If enough people played the Mudcat music stations, the musicians here may be able to cover that $20 monthly fee with playback pay. But, as of April 1, you have to sign up and pay to be included in the payback feature. At some point, I too, would like to have a CD offered on my site, when I get the time to do everything to set it up!
GB, there is a way to get CDs from downloads at this site, although I have not yet used the feature. CLICK HERE
By the way, I just finished my first of 3 gigs for the day, singing and telling stories to children and parents at the public library. Because of mp3.com, I was able to give the audience a website address to go hear the stories again. People appreciated that, I appreciate the service mp3.com gives, and I do think it has value that needs to be supported. I wish they just managed their service more fairly, without the gimmicks like the auctions. Alice |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Matt_R Date: 17 Mar 01 - 03:20 PM That's cool, Hesp...but I don't do original music, so I'd get sued. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Jande Date: 17 Mar 01 - 09:39 PM Hi Alice, You said "GB, there is a way to get CDs from downloads at this site, although I have not yet used the feature. " And added a blue clicky. How are the artists being paid for their music by the people who run that site? Any idea? (just curious) ~ Jande (Seanna Rowe)
|
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Jande Date: 17 Mar 01 - 09:43 PM BTW, the FYI letter from MP3.com showed up in my email today... Two of them actually. A l i t t l e late. Anyone else get theirs? And really no explanation just "this is what we are doing now". ~ Jande |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Paul G. Date: 17 Mar 01 - 10:01 PM I received the letters from MP3 a couple of days ago, made a note of my opinions and forwarded to my band mates. We all agreed not to join the pay for privilege patrol. Sure, they have to find *some* way of staying solvent, but this amounts to an unfair, regressive tax on those whose music does not fall into the popular genres. As I said, the rich get richer and the poor stay that way in this type of system. Hesperis is also correct, though, that MP3.com is the best thing out there right now, and with the demise of IUMA, they are the 800 pound gorilla. They can basically do anything they please. Hey, Kat -- yeah, its been awhile. My life has been quite full between the music (which has become extremely busy) and the rest of life. My oldest daughter is geting married tomorrow and of course I'll be singing as well as participating. Pray for decent weather for us --we're outside with a 70% chance of rain. Paul |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 17 Mar 01 - 10:22 PM I got the NMA letter and the Artist newsletter, yes. Two days ago. If they had handled it better this situation wouldn't have anywhere near this number of people annoyed and upset. One thread on mp3.com's forum said "The Whiners will be leaving on April 1st" or something like that. But, you know a ship is in trouble when the rats desert it... Depends on your definition of rats, I guess. The rat lawyers are still there, making things hard for the artists, so I guess there might be something left of mp3.com even if the "whiners" leave. This whole business of PAS and P4P is really showing the inner workings of mp3.com in a way that they might not want to see... and like anything else, it has its good points and its bad points. I will stay. But I am not so eager to support them as I once was, when I felt that they really were on the side of the artists, and not JUST out for money. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Willie-O Date: 18 Mar 01 - 10:33 AM I've been seeing MP3 go downhill for a few months now. Thye have considerable creativity when it comes to thinking up ways to separate us (artists, who give the site its value) from what little money we make there. I actually got a cheque from them last month, which was decent--about what I make on an average one-night gig. (That was for eight months play and included my cut of a bunch of DAM CD's that I bought for myself--the main virtue of a DAM CD is that it's a low-cost way to cut yourself a demo CD with professional packaging) I have participated in a few Payola auctions--at least they're honest, and it doesn't get you in the "charts", really it just buys you an advertising line-- which did increase my listens somewhat but usually cost more than they earned for me. The whole "premium artists" thing though pisses me off, because the payback rates seem to be completely unrelated to even the actual statistics they post. We have no rights, (or do we?) it's just a kind of bonus program that they put in there. So even if you are a "premium artist", there's no reason to expect that you'll make your money back. $30/month (Cdn)? No way. Not worth it. And I haven't had any notification from mp3.com at all--just saw now that I won't get pay-for play anymore after this month. (No big loss, since the PfP I've earned according to them has gone down from a dollar or two a day in the fall to about three dollars a moknth in 2001--even though my stats haven't changed much!) The whole thing mirrors the current music publishing/copyright controversy: they'll collect the money, but the typical performer/composer without massive sales won't see a dime back on it. Sour grapes I guess. Did they change the number of tracks that make up a DAM CD? Used to be one was enough. Oh by the way, I uploaded some new songs and one finally went online this weekend (The Peat Fire Flame) Whine whine whine...and a shameless plug... w-o
|
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Peg Date: 19 Mar 01 - 08:29 AM I finally have mp3 capability on my computer as of yesterday! And a demo CD of tunes...what do I do with them now??? Bummer... Even over at Witchvox.com where Fritz was featuring mp3 links to pagan artists for the last several months (in "Bardic Circle") he has officially stopped because of this new rule. It kinda sucks I think; perhaps some other renegade software company will re-revolutionize the music industry the way Napster did... peg |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Paul G. Date: 23 Mar 01 - 03:12 PM This in my email today, from IUMA... Dear IUMA Artists, Just wanted to drop you a quick note with some thrilling news - we just signed an agreement to be acquired by Vitaminic, Europe's leading digital music distributor. The deal means that we're going to be able to rehire the IUMA staff and relaunch all IUMA services by the end of next week! Here's your next best alternative to MP3.COM... Paul |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Willie-O Date: 23 Mar 01 - 04:13 PM jeez, it takes forever to get an upload cleared if you're a peon at mp3com now...I updated my self-plugging thread this morning cause my latest tune was listed as "going live"--which used to mean it would show up on the site within 20 minutes or so. Well guess what, its been all day and still no new tune. Shucks. W-O |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 23 Mar 01 - 05:03 PM Great news about IUMA! Willie - yeah. I put April Moon up one day, and Rain at Twilight the next, and April Moon is approved, and Rain isn't. It's about a week now... |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 23 Mar 01 - 05:29 PM YAY! Rain is up! Now I just need to rip and upload my next two, and I'll have a CD!!! (Who needs P4P? Not I!) But I will check IUMA in another week or so... |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Willie-O Date: 29 Mar 01 - 12:17 PM well here it is almost to the deadline to sign as a Premium Cracker. My resolve is weakening a bit. Partly because the p4p has been trickling in steadily the last couple of weeks--they did change the system so it seems to come every day, not just when you get more than 15 listens--could almost break even at this rate. But also because I've got so much momentum in this site now, and it's a huge pain to wait and wait...Also the highest-ranked song in the Celtic charts right now by a non-premium cracker is #58...I know, charts schmarts, but if you're going to be there it's nice to be noticed. Anh, I dunno...anyone else having this debate with yerself? Willie-O |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 29 Mar 01 - 01:18 PM Yep. Jande is going to go for premium, as she has earned just over the $20 as of today, and she's only been up for just over a month.. I only has $6, and that is not enough. But I have enough tracks for my first DAM, and all I need to do to be able to buy the first one to check the quality, is earn a bit more before April 1st. So I will have DAM earnings, hopefully, and won't miss P4P. And I am churning out mp3s of my compositions, too. Cicada is live already, and there are four more waiting in the queue. Time to check out IUMA... I'll go play your stuff now, Willie-O-Willie. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: Willie-O Date: 31 Mar 01 - 07:48 PM Well strike another blow for capitalism...I did it, in the teeth of the deadline. Flexed a credit card to get my spot in boldface with no banner ads and other more useful perks. MP3.com giveth and MP3.com taketh away. (my mp3.com earningth that is.) Willie-O |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 01 Apr 01 - 12:06 PM Well, I have $10 as of today... but no credit card. Oh well, hopefully people will buy my CD if they like it. |
|
Subject: RE: Changes at mp3.com From: hesperis Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:59 PM The latest - they are showing misleading "amount earned" totals on the artist pages. It looks on the web pages that they are still paying non-Premium artists, but those "earnings" aren't coming to the artists! Here is the body of the letter I wrote to them, please copy it and send it to them as well. "Hello! I am very upset. Please remove the misleading "amount earned" from the web pages of non-PAS artists. This is totally misleading, to both the artists and the listeners. I used to be pleased with your service, and I didn't mind that much when you introduced PAS, and called all people who don't make more than $20 per month here "not serious" about their music, but this is going too far! If you are not going to be paying people, don't make it look as if you are paying them. Please remove the "amount earned" from the web pages of non-PAS artists. Thank you, Serpent Goddess, NMA" I have also put something up on my mp3.com page. GRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!! IUMA still isn't accepting new artists. *sigh* It is April 5th... I will try tomorrow. ~*sirepseh*~ |
| Share Thread: |