TIME MAGAZINE GOING IN ON TIDAL

[mr.africa]

I'm continually trying to figure out why I should pay money for a service I already get for free...makes no sense to me.

THIS
someone explain this to me!!!

 

[MegaTronBomb!]

Thank you, and others, who showed the truth about how it really was. Props!

@MegaTronBomb! WADDEEfukk

Imaginary player

Jut kidding, my negus

YOU couldn't afford shyt, cause YOU were a kid...and didn't have your own money.

many of us as kids, had CD players... and finessed Columbia House and BMG out of CD's for years. Chances are, if you had older siblings or relatives you probably got a CD player off some hand me down shyt... junkies would sell you one they stole for next to nothing.

maybe your parents didn't fukk with you like that breh.

portable CD players cost less than playstations for years , but YOU couldn't afford any CD player til they came out



better yet, keep trying to make Tidal seem like it's revolutionary, when it's "exclusive content" got tossed to the internet for the free... 5 minutes after it was uploaded.

 

[bouncy]

YOU couldn't afford shyt, cause YOU were a kid...and didn't have your own money.

many of us as kids, had CD players... and finessed Columbia House and BMG out of CD's for years. Chances are, if you had older siblings or relatives you probably got a CD player off some hand me down shyt... junkies would sell you one they stole for next to nothing.

maybe your parents didn't fukk with you like that breh.

portable CD players cost less than playstations for years , but YOU couldn't afford any CD player til they came out



better yet, keep trying to make Tidal seem like it's revolutionary, when it's "exclusive content" got tossed to the internet for the free... 5 minutes after it was uploaded.

OK buddy

 

[iamduval]

Jay said if you have $10 headphones you should by the $10 service. Dude is completely out of touch and his business acumen is overrated. His name and branding is being used to push this priduct, not the actual quality. I'm sure he doesn't give a Fuk seeing as he owns such a small share

 

[Cloud McFly]

Jay said if you have $10 headphones you should by the $10 service. Dude is completely out of touch and his business acumen is overrated. His name and branding is being used to push this priduct, not the actual quality. I'm sure he doesn't give a Fuk seeing as he owns such a small share

I don't really see what's wrong with that statement. It would be a waste of money to pay for the lossless level when you don't have what it takes to properly get experience it.

Btw, dude is the majority owner.

 

[Idaeo]

Mumford & Sons, Ben Gibbard question the generosity of Jay Z’s streaming service

http://www.avclub.com/article/mumford-sons-ben-gibbard-question-generosity-jay-z-218018

Both Mumford & Sons and Death Cab For Cutie’s Ben Gibbard have spoken out against Jay Z’s new Tidal streaming service, questioning whether the site really has the best interests of smaller artists in mind.

Mumford & Sons frontman Marcus Mumford told The Daily Beastthat, although his group wasn’t asked to join the cadre of celebrities that publicly launched Tidal, it “wouldn’t have joined it anyway, even if they had asked,” saying his band isn’t interested in being “tribal.” Mumford also says he thinks smaller bands should get a bigger share of Tidal’s payouts, since “bigger bands have other ways of making money,” noting that “a band of [Mumford’s] size shouldn’t be complaining.” Mumford & Sons’ Winston Marshall also spoke out in the same interview, saying Tidal owners are “new school fukking plutocrats,” and that bands should figure out ways to adapt to streaming by diversifying their musical portfolios, whether that’s through playing more shows or creating different ways to appreciate the songs. As Marshall told The Daily Beast, he’s “not into” the “tribalistic aspect” of Tidal, “people trying to corner bits of the market, and put their face on it.” He calls that “commercial bullshyt,” something he says his group is content to hire people to do so that their fans can “listen to our music in the most comfortable way, and if they’re not up for paying for it, I don’t really care.”

Gibbard had similar criticisms, telling The Daily Beasthe thought Jay Z “blew it by bringing a bunch of millionaires and billionaires and propping them up onstage and then having them all complain about not being paid.” Gibbard went on with his logical argument, saying that if he were Jay Z, he “would have brought out 10 artists that were underground or independent and said, ‘these are the people who are struggling to make a living in today’s music industry. Whereas this competitor streaming site pays this person 15 cents for X amount of streams, that same amount of streams on my site, on Tidal, will pay that artist this much.’” Gibbard said he thinks Jay Z’s inability to lay out his site’s actual figures will lead to Tidal’s miserable failure, though he says the rapper had a “wonderful opportunity” to let casual music fans know “what this service would mean for artists who are struggling.”

 

[J-Fire]

Mumford & Sons, Ben Gibbard question the generosity of Jay Z’s streaming service

http://www.avclub.com/article/mumford-sons-ben-gibbard-question-generosity-jay-z-218018

Both Mumford & Sons and Death Cab For Cutie’s Ben Gibbard have spoken out against Jay Z’s new Tidal streaming service, questioning whether the site really has the best interests of smaller artists in mind.

Mumford & Sons frontman Marcus Mumford told The Daily Beastthat, although his group wasn’t asked to join the cadre of celebrities that publicly launched Tidal, it “wouldn’t have joined it anyway, even if they had asked,” saying his band isn’t interested in being “tribal.” Mumford also says he thinks smaller bands should get a bigger share of Tidal’s payouts, since “bigger bands have other ways of making money,” noting that “a band of [Mumford’s] size shouldn’t be complaining.” Mumford & Sons’ Winston Marshall also spoke out in the same interview, saying Tidal owners are “new school fukking plutocrats,” and that bands should figure out ways to adapt to streaming by diversifying their musical portfolios, whether that’s through playing more shows or creating different ways to appreciate the songs. As Marshall told The Daily Beast, he’s “not into” the “tribalistic aspect” of Tidal, “people trying to corner bits of the market, and put their face on it.” He calls that “commercial bullshyt,” something he says his group is content to hire people to do so that their fans can “listen to our music in the most comfortable way, and if they’re not up for paying for it, I don’t really care.”

Gibbard had similar criticisms, telling The Daily Beasthe thought Jay Z “blew it by bringing a bunch of millionaires and billionaires and propping them up onstage and then having them all complain about not being paid.” Gibbard went on with his logical argument, saying that if he were Jay Z, he “would have brought out 10 artists that were underground or independent and said, ‘these are the people who are struggling to make a living in today’s music industry. Whereas this competitor streaming site pays this person 15 cents for X amount of streams, that same amount of streams on my site, on Tidal, will pay that artist this much.’” Gibbard said he thinks Jay Z’s inability to lay out his site’s actual figures will lead to Tidal’s miserable failure, though he says the rapper had a “wonderful opportunity” to let casual music fans know “what this service would mean for artists who are struggling.”

lol

 

[The_King_of_Everything]

Mumford & Sons, Ben Gibbard question the generosity of Jay Z’s streaming service

http://www.avclub.com/article/mumford-sons-ben-gibbard-question-generosity-jay-z-218018

Both Mumford & Sons and Death Cab For Cutie’s Ben Gibbard have spoken out against Jay Z’s new Tidal streaming service, questioning whether the site really has the best interests of smaller artists in mind.

Mumford & Sons frontman Marcus Mumford told The Daily Beastthat, although his group wasn’t asked to join the cadre of celebrities that publicly launched Tidal, it “wouldn’t have joined it anyway, even if they had asked,” saying his band isn’t interested in being “tribal.” Mumford also says he thinks smaller bands should get a bigger share of Tidal’s payouts, since “bigger bands have other ways of making money,” noting that “a band of [Mumford’s] size shouldn’t be complaining.” Mumford & Sons’ Winston Marshall also spoke out in the same interview, saying Tidal owners are “new school fukking plutocrats,” and that bands should figure out ways to adapt to streaming by diversifying their musical portfolios, whether that’s through playing more shows or creating different ways to appreciate the songs. As Marshall told The Daily Beast, he’s “not into” the “tribalistic aspect” of Tidal, “people trying to corner bits of the market, and put their face on it.” He calls that “commercial bullshyt,” something he says his group is content to hire people to do so that their fans can “listen to our music in the most comfortable way, and if they’re not up for paying for it, I don’t really care.”

Gibbard had similar criticisms, telling The Daily Beasthe thought Jay Z “blew it by bringing a bunch of millionaires and billionaires and propping them up onstage and then having them all complain about not being paid.” Gibbard went on with his logical argument, saying that if he were Jay Z, he “would have brought out 10 artists that were underground or independent and said, ‘these are the people who are struggling to make a living in today’s music industry. Whereas this competitor streaming site pays this person 15 cents for X amount of streams, that same amount of streams on my site, on Tidal, will pay that artist this much.’” Gibbard said he thinks Jay Z’s inability to lay out his site’s actual figures will lead to Tidal’s miserable failure, though he says the rapper had a “wonderful opportunity” to let casual music fans know “what this service would mean for artists who are struggling.”