Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Afroman

Jay Z - New Tidal Music streaming Service

121 posts in this topic

Tidal, the high-definition music streaming service acquired by rapper and music mogul Jay-Z, is gearing up for its official relaunch under new ownership later today, and it will be doing so by reportedly making a move to snag new releases by some of the biggest musicians of the moment including Kanye West, Madonna and Daft Punk, ahead of rival services like Spotify and Beats.
 
The company has been sending out invites for a press conference being held at 5pm Eastern time today, in which Shawn “Jay-Z” Carter “will announce a commitment to a new direction for the music industry from both a creative and business perspective.” While there is not much detail being provided officially, unofficially we’ve heard that the company will be using the event to confirm the first big-name artists to stream music exclusively on the Tidal platform.
 
What might those artists be doing on Tidal? Not an ordinary streaming deal, it seems. Over the weekend, the Swedish blog Breakit reported — citing sources close to the deal — that Tidal’s plan of attack will be to ink first-window deals with the artists, where Tidal would get first releases of tracks from big-name artists ahead of any other digital streaming services. This would be exclusive, but only for a period: Spotify, Deezer and others would eventually also get these tracks, but only later.
 
This is not unlike how services like Netflix often get films after they have gone through cinema and DVD release windows, and subsequently what Vessel is trying to do to upend that.
 
For those of you who browse social networks or follow music news, the list of artists gathering around Tidal shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise: a swathe of big-name musicians — including Madonna, Kanye West, Beyonce, Arcade Fire, Calvin Harris and others are using the #tidalforall hashtag on sites like Twitter and Instagram, as well as sending out messages or just changing their profile to a turquoise blue color to support the service.
 
It’s a pretty strong bet that the artists that all started sending these out around midnight Eastern time will be among those involved in some way in the news today.
 
It would also follow on the heels of Taylor Swift’s catalog coming to Tidal last week — minus her 1989 album. This is not an exclusive deal but lays the groundwork for other Swift music to make its way to Tidal first.
 
What’s the pull for these artists? It’s partly the Jay-Z connection. His Roc Nation agency works with a long list of musicians to provide publishing, management, label and other services, with Tidal becoming yet another string on Roc Nation’s bow as a one-stop music distribution shop.
 
On the other hand, from what we understand, Tidal is also offering a more attractive set of terms to musicians than other streaming services — often agreeing to payouts of twice as much as its rivals. (We’ve asked to see if we can get more concrete numbers to support the claim.)
 
With many artists complaining that digital music is not providing decent enough returns, the later of these could be a deal maker for Tidal. The big question is whether artists are willing to make the bet on payouts-per-stream over that of visibility: right now Tidal has only 35,000 subscribers paying $19.99 per month across the markets in which it is active, which include the U.S. and UK. By comparison, Spotify noted 15 million paying subscribers in January of this year. Tidal also offers a standard definition service at $9.99.
 
While Jay-Z won agreement this month from Aspiro shareholders to buy Tidal for $54 million, the shares are not due to transfer until mid-April, we understand.

 

 

Thoughts?

 

Hope it does well

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

 

Think it'll bomb tbh.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its meh for the average music listener. 

But think its a nice setup for recording artists. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This what Funk Flex was flipping out over

 

 

Dip Set 4 Life

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

music-wise I couldn't be less interested, until these streaming services are plugging proper DJs for their playlists I can't really care

but it is interesting to hear, I like the idea of there being more competition and people being forced to be different to get into the market

 

Google Play Music as a service for discovery is pretty shit, I'll probably check what Tidal is saying in 2 hours and if it ain't nothing then I'll sign up to Spotify.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long before soundcloud goes into this market?

 

They could absolutely smash it in the independent artist/label sector.

 

Could run along side their current site but in a app format and offer High quality streams.

 

 

Hope they dont though, would flood the current site with shitty sample tracks and snippits

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£20 a month to stream :/

Hope he loses out big time greedy c*nt

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

I'm sure the standard option is half that

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even £10 for a half hearted service is a con

Jay is a true daem

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greedy cunts indeed. Doing their fans zero favours, they could set up their own service and do it at the same price or cheaper than their rivals and still make more from it surely? But no, they want you to pay more for their service just because they put their names to it acting like they are in poverty because they only earnt £79 Million from streaming last year.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 10 years too late. Should have got on this when he was running Def Jam.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope it's good

 

I'll use it if it is.... I won't if it's not

 

#KnowlwdgeIsPower

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit late, with no usp and dat price...nah

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they dont need a usp 

 

the platform is for the artists 

 

when all the big artists move to tidal and the spotify users cant hear their songs on there , they will inevitably move to jayz's ting 

 

it will definitely work in the long run but only if all the artists decide to go to tidal and why wouldnt they seeing as they are looking to receive more royalties as opposed to any other streaming site 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when all the big artists move to tidal and the spotify users cant hear their songs on there , they will inevitably move to jayz's ting

Bingo

We'll probably see exclusives soon, Beyonces album on Tidal for a week before official release or something.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kanye will prob be the first exclusive 

 

ive only jumped onto spotify recently and its sick 

 

in all honesty 20 quid pm  to listen to any music you like is pittance 

 

weve just become too used to getting things for free

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My iTunes library is like 80gig.

About pay for music in 2015  :rofl:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My iTunes library is like 80gig.

About pay for music in 2015  :rofl:

 

The direct to consumer relationship, etc etc.

 

:lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they dont need a usp 

 

the platform is for the artists 

 

when all the big artists move to tidal and the spotify users cant hear their songs on there , they will inevitably move to jayz's ting 

 

it will definitely work in the long run but only if all the artists decide to go to tidal and why wouldnt they seeing as they are looking to receive more royalties as opposed to any other streaming site 

 

Shitty way to corner the market (but fair enough) - majority of artists move to them then we have no choice but to pay out the nose?

 

And is this 'exclusive music' angle even viable, within hours a hot tune or album is everywhere so that cant be it.

 

Them matching or undercutting spotifys price would have put them in very good form with pushing the 'artist owned' aspect second not first, because thats what it comes down to whether these creatives like it or not, price and music library. 

 

My iTunes library is like 80gig.

About pay for music in 2015   :rofl:

 

 

Brah

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its £20 for lossless or £10 for normal quality

 

c/s wanting Soundcloud getting in on the game, though I'd like it to be a separate service, or very subtle with the approach, can't be upsetting the current feel of it

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn't like the direction music was going and thought maybe we could get in and strike an honest blow. Will artists make more money? Even if it means less profit for our bottom line, absolutely. That's easy for us. We can do that. Less profit for our bottom line, more money for the artist. Fantastic.

 

Anyone know what he means by "our bottom line"?

 

Seems delusional to think you can generate more revenue delivering the same service as Spotify (and for the same amount).

It will have to be the labels, distributors and publishers who have to change to make artists get more profit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line = Last line on a Profit and loss statement - i.e. Net profit

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0