Recent Down Loads And Additions From E - Music

[John L]

I've heard nothing about emusic losing money; in fact, from all accounts they're (relatively) thriving.

As I've heard the business model, they essentially take all the money each month from the gym-style subscription plan (meaning that many won't use up all their alloted tracks) and after taking their cut, they split the money equally between all the tracks downloaded that month. So, for example, if 100,000 are downloaded in total and an artist's tracks were downloaded 5 times, then that artist receives 5/100,000 of the total pot. I've also heard that the average payout to an artist is .40/track, but that seems high since it's more than what I'm currently paying for a track (.24).

As for an artist not getting paid, maybe he needs to take it up with the label. I still remember Buddy DeFranco complaining on the message board of his website - dunno if it's even still there - that so many years later he never personally saw a dime from Mosaic's boxed set of his work.

Thanks. That is very interesting. I guess that I assumed wrong about the nature of the contracts that emusic signs with labels and artists. So labels and artists can actually monitor the number of downloads purchased through emusic? Interesting.

You know, if the message from emusic had been that they can no longer make ends meet without raising their prices, I would have had a very different reaction, and wouldn't have canceled my membership. But the message was different: we are going to expand, pay out big money to the corporate giants like Sony and pass the costs on to you. No thanks to the latter.

Edited June 4, 2009 by John L

[Shawn]

Well, I haven't been able to afford emusic for awhile now anyway. I was primarily using them to check out new artists that I hadn't heard yet...but I've found recently that lala.com and last.fm provide the same opportunity to me without having to shell out any money for it.

I've kind of reached "collection overload" on the classic jazz stuff, I feel fairly happy with what I've got. I'm more interested in exploring different kinds of music and new artists at this point. I'm sure the pendulum will swing back to wanting reissues again one day, but there's so many new things I'm interested in hearing that I can live without it for now.

[Tom Storer]

I think what bothers me the most is that they have this ridiculous PR campaign that is trying to make me feel GREAT about getting considerably less than I currently do for the same price. I absolutely hate it when companies treat their customers like idiots.

This whole thing is not aimed at their existing customer base of aficionados mining for independent-label gold at low low prices. They want to expand their customer base, and that PR campaign is aimed at people who have been getting mainstream MP3s elsewhere, not at you. The raised eMusic prices will be competitive with iTunes and Amazon. They've decided to target a much wider audience. Some long-time customers are already feeling betrayed and canceling their subscriptions in order, apparently, to pay more per track on Amazon, which I confess I don't quite get. There's still huge amounts of music on eMusic I couldn't get at Amazon or iTunes, so when they get around to jacking up prices for eMusic Europe, I'll stick around as long as they're still competitively priced.

[RDK]

I think what bothers me the most is that they have this ridiculous PR campaign that is trying to make me feel GREAT about getting considerably less than I currently do for the same price. I absolutely hate it when companies treat their customers like idiots.

This whole thing is not aimed at their existing customer base of aficionados mining for independent-label gold at low low prices. They want to expand their customer base, and that PR campaign is aimed at people who have been getting mainstream MP3s elsewhere, not at you. The raised eMusic prices will be competitive with iTunes and Amazon. They've decided to target a much wider audience. Some long-time customers are already feeling betrayed and canceling their subscriptions in order, apparently, to pay more per track on Amazon, which I confess I don't quite get. There's still huge amounts of music on eMusic I couldn't get at Amazon or iTunes, so when they get around to jacking up prices for eMusic Europe, I'll stick around as long as they're still competitively priced.

Exactly. While few are pleased about the changes, there's a lot of cutting-noses-spiting-faces going on right now. I'll stick it out, but I'll certainly be looking for better "bargains" by d/l'ing albums with fewer tracks - and probably buying more real CDs as well. Hell, much of what I get can hardly even be found here in the U.S., and if so it's very costly.

[A Lark Ascending]

Yes, maybe we should be thanking our lucky stars for the three or so years of giveaway prices we've enjoyed rather than bemoaning the introduction of a more realistic pricing structure.

Just as long as they continue to carry the Soul Note, Biscoito Fino, Label Bleus etc.

[captainwrong]

RE: amount of money going to the labels and whatnot.

I made a post on their board as a musician with independently released music for sale on eMusic. We get less than half the per track amount from eMusic as we get from iTunes or Amazon. But, we've made our music available there because I feel eMusic subscribers are more adventurous and with the lower rates more willing to take chances and, because it's a subscription service, I never felt we were in competition with the better returns at the per track stores. Our catalog is handled through TuneCore and I've never had an issue getting the money. If someone hasn't seen a dime it probably means they haven't sold anything or there's a bottleneck at whoever is distributing their music to eMusic. While I've heard many people complain about the amount eMusic pays out, I've never heard anyone complain about not getting paid.

I think eMusic handled this thing very poorly. Reading between the lines of the few public statements representatives have made, I think they were in danger of having more indie labels pull out if they didn't raise their rates. The higher rates may have netted them Sony, but I think they were also a necessity to keep labels they have as well. Because they threw the rate changes in as an afterthought in the Sony announcement, the two events will be linked in most subscribers minds. I think the thing most people are missing because of the confusion is unless you have an attitude where you are willing to gamble getting more downloads at a lower rate over higher prices and fewer numbers, there really isn't much incentive for a label to put their music on eMusic when they're getting back less than half what they could get elsewhere.

I'm glad to see people over here have a bit more realistic reaction to this than the mostly hysterical posts on eMusic's board. Yeah, they came as a blindside to me as well, and I'm really dissapointed that my supposedly locked in grandfathered plan is going away, but from the other side of things, I don't understand how they were able to keep things going for so long without losing more labels than they have.

[mjzee]

I guess I see things differently. I paid my monthly amount precisely to download titles I almost definitely would not have bought otherwise. So it's not a matter of my paying half of what I "should have been" paying; it's money I would not have paid otherwise. I think that's why Fantasy, to use one example, stayed on eMusic, and, in fact, kept titles there that they otherwise put out of print - they were collecting money from these titles they weren't getting otherwise.

I also don't think the timing of the price increase with the Sony introduction was coincidence. Total guess on my part, but I think Sony actually bought a piece of eMusic. This also coincides with their discontinuing the BMG Music Club. I think Sony is seeing that the future is music downloads, and they want a piece of it. It's easier to buy an existing company than to build one from scratch.

I'm quitting eMusic. I really don't see a downside - I can always rejoin.

[John L]

You don't see things differently than me. I feel exactly the same way. That is an interesting hypothesis about Sony buying into emusic. Maybe.

[Shawn]

You don't see things differently than me. I feel exactly the same way. That is an interesting hypothesis about Sony buying into emusic. Maybe.

Happens all the time. I was involved in a corporate takeover of an online music store, which was then re-branded with a new name...within a year it was sold to Napster.

3 different owners in less than 2 years.

[BFrank]

RE: amount of money going to the labels and whatnot.

I made a post on their board as a musician with independently released music for sale on eMusic. We get less than half the per track amount from eMusic as we get from iTunes or Amazon. But, we've made our music available there because I feel eMusic subscribers are more adventurous and with the lower rates more willing to take chances and, because it's a subscription service, I never felt we were in competition with the better returns at the per track stores. Our catalog is handled through TuneCore and I've never had an issue getting the money. If someone hasn't seen a dime it probably means they haven't sold anything or there's a bottleneck at whoever is distributing their music to eMusic. While I've heard many people complain about the amount eMusic pays out, I've never heard anyone complain about not getting paid.

I think eMusic handled this thing very poorly. Reading between the lines of the few public statements representatives have made, I think they were in danger of having more indie labels pull out if they didn't raise their rates. The higher rates may have netted them Sony, but I think they were also a necessity to keep labels they have as well. Because they threw the rate changes in as an afterthought in the Sony announcement, the two events will be linked in most subscribers minds. I think the thing most people are missing because of the confusion is unless you have an attitude where you are willing to gamble getting more downloads at a lower rate over higher prices and fewer numbers, there really isn't much incentive for a label to put their music on eMusic when they're getting back less than half what they could get elsewhere.

I'm glad to see people over here have a bit more realistic reaction to this than the mostly hysterical posts on eMusic's board. Yeah, they came as a blindside to me as well, and I'm really dissapointed that my supposedly locked in grandfathered plan is going away, but from the other side of things, I don't understand how they were able to keep things going for so long without losing more labels than they have.

Most sensible post on this subject that I've read since the "news". I'm not happy to be paying more, either, but just as I wasn't surprised when the unlimited policy ended, I'm not surprised about this development. The online music business is growing by the day and competition will force prices to equalize somewhat.

[John L]

The online music business is growing by the day and competition will force prices to equalize somewhat.

You would think that competition would force prices down rather than up. Of course, if Sony is taking control of emusic, that would be less competition rather than more.

Edited June 5, 2009 by John L

[Tom Storer]

The online music business is growing by the day and competition will force prices to equalize somewhat.

You would think that competition would force prices down rather than up.

I see two different markets corresponding to different communities of taste: mainstream, major-label music, on the one hand, and historical or non-mainstream indie-label music on the other. Obviously there's overlap, and a given customer could be interested in both, but a very large proportion of the mainstream listeners aren't going to be interested in the indie stuff and vice-versa.

For the mainstream market, eMusic will now be competing with Amazon and iTunes, with lower prices. So competition will be forcing prices down there. For the indie labels they already offer, eMusic just about has a monopoly, so they can afford to up their prices. Their sales will go down but in exchange for that they'll enter the larger and more lucrative mainstream market. In addition, as Captain Wrong surmises, they might have been pricing too low to retain their indie labels anyway.

BWTFDIK?

Anyway, John, having seen your collection, what surprises me is that there remains any jazz or blues for you to purchase anyway.

[Soulstation1]

http://www.emusic.com/browse/l/b/-dbm/a/0-...00108689/0.html

Have about 10 of these and they are solid

Anyone DL any of these?

[Soulstation1]

May

ALBERTO MARSICO – ORGANLOGISTCS

ISAAC HAYES – TOUGH GUYS SOUNDTRACK

LORENZO FRIZZERA – EVERYTHING CAN CHANGE

LUTHER GUITAR JR JOHNSON – LUTHER’S BLUES

THE APPLES – THE POWER EP

WILD BILL DAVIS / EDDIE DAVIS - LIVE IN CHATEAUNEUF-DU-PAPE (FRANCE, 1976)

VA

EL BARRIO LATIN DISCO

NIGERIA DISCO FUNK SPECIAL THE SOUND OF THE UNDERGROUND LAGOS DANCEFLOOR 1974-79

NIGERIA ROCK SPECIAL PSYCHEDELIC AFRO-ROCK & FUZZ FUNK IN 1970's NIGERIA

[Uncle Skid]

Lucky 7's - Pluto Junkyard

Darcy James Argue's Secret Society - Infernal Machines

[A Lark Ascending]

The new pricing structure is up on UK e-music but there's no indication that they are taking my existing plan away. Just a warning that if I move away from it I won't be able to go back.

[BFrank]

On the U.S. site, if you click on the link that says "Please read the announcement for details on how this change affects your account," it takes you to a page with a sidebar called "How the change affects your account". Here it tells you what the status is.

In my case, in January, I will be paying about the same annual fee, but getting about 1/2 the monthly downloads. Of course, I can pick any plan that I want at that point.

Edited June 7, 2009 by BFrank

[A Lark Ascending]

There's no official announcement of the changes in any obvious place on the UK site. I assume they sent me an e-mail but I generally delete those without reading them (they're normally telling me that some heavy metal band is now on e-music!). I'm expecting things to change but will wait and see.

In the meantime, those of you wanting to use up one credit might like to chance this:

I've not listened yet, but at 54 minutes for one credit it's worth a chance!

[WorldB3]

I dropped down from the 75 dl a month to 30 a couple months ago because I felt like I wasn't getting to everything I was downloading so the hit for me isn't a big deal but I can see why some people would be upset. Not happy with the way they communicated the change but I will stick it out for a few more months to see how it plays out.

I will probably still use it the same way as before in getting downloads of stuff I can't find in other formats and taking a chance on something new, but enjoy the option to dl some old columbia jazz releases that I may only have vinyl or may have never got to before.

Last batch:

Apparitions - Adam Rogers

Wisteria - Jimmy Raney

Consenting Adults - M.t.b

Edited June 7, 2009 by WorldB3

[mjzee]

Winding down...

Sonny Rollins - Reel Life

Gary Burton & Pat Metheny - Quartet Live

Chet Baker & Charlie Parker - Bird and Chet at the Trade Winds

Duke Jordan - Les Liasions Dangereuses

Art Farmer Quintet at Boomers vol 1, vol 2

Art Pepper - Roadgame

Art Pepper - Today

Art Pepper - Winter Moon

Art Pepper - Renascence

Art Pepper - Tokyo Debut

Stan Getz - Pure Getz

Tommy Flanagan - Master Trio

Tommy Flanagan - Eclypso

14 albums...not bad for a day's work. I'll wait a day or two, then cancel this account. In about 2 weeks, I get one more shot, then I cancel the other account. Then I'm back to being a mere mortal.

[Soulstation1]

http://www.emusic.com/album/Joey-DeFrances...d/11474744.html

Joey D's tribute album to Horace Silver

http://www.emusic.com/album/Fast-3-3-s-Com...d/11474826.html

3's Company tribute album to Grant Green

Edited June 8, 2009 by Soulstation1

[Soulstation1]

What the heck????

All my downloads for the past 10 days are showing 0 songs downloaded for the artists

What is the deal when a label Funky Delicacies / The Orchard is dropped and then added back after 6 months?

I have about 13 albums that were dropped and then added again and it shows 0 downloads for the artist and songs in my profile

http://www.emusic.com/browse/l/b/-dbm/a/0-...00260985/0.html

Edited June 9, 2009 by Soulstation1

[captainwrong]

What the heck????

All my downloads for the past 10 days are showing 0 songs downloaded for the artists

What is the deal when a label Funky Delicacies / The Orchard is dropped and then added back after 6 months?

I have about 13 albums that were dropped and then added again and it shows 0 downloads for the artist and songs in my profile

http://www.emusic.com/browse/l/b/-dbm/a/0-...00260985/0.html

New distributor. Happens often. Though you and I know it's the same album, the fact that The Orchard has the distro now means someone new is getting a piece of the pie. Tuff City, Night Train, Funky Delicacies and I think a couple of other associated labels were all part of this.

[randyhersom]

Enja too, and some of the remastered Fantasy's.

[Soulstation1]

reloading the downloads not showing up

email from Emusic

We are currently experiencing a temporary issue with re-downloading some albums from the “Your Profile” section.

You can still re-download the tracks without losing additional credits by following the steps mentioned below:-

1. Log in to your eMusic account.

2. Click the Your Profile link.

3. Select ‘Downloads’ from the links shown on the dashboard.

4. Click on the artist.

5. Click on the album.

6. Directly above the track column (third column), a link will be provided with the album name, click on this link.

7. You will be taken to the album page.

9. Click on the tracks you previously downloaded (please ensure that you click on the tracks that were downloaded previously)

If you are still experiencing difficulty, please reply to this message with further details or any other observations that will help us solve your issue.