Puddlegum » Opinions http://puddlegum.net indie rock music blog Sun, 25 Sep 2011 20:14:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 en hourly 1 Implications of Facebook Music http://puddlegum.net/implications-of-facebook-music/ http://puddlegum.net/implications-of-facebook-music/#comments Sun, 25 Sep 2011 20:14:51 +0000 Flick http://puddlegum.net/?p=2535 Whether you love or hate Facebook (or love to hate it), some of the changes they introduced this week will have implications to the music sphere. Partnering with music services, such as Spotify and Rdio, members have the option of reporting to Facebook what they’re currently playing. This initially shows up in the new Facebook ticker, such as “Kevin Flick is listening to Halogen (I Could Be a Shadow) by Neon Indian on Rdio.” This is all tied under the new Facebook Music feature rolled out this week.

If several friends are listening to the same album, Facebook conglomerates this information in one news feed status, listing friends that are listening to the album. It also posts the album cover and several songs that can be listened to.

Taking this a step further, Facebook’s new Timeline is going to add this information to your profile’s timeline, along with a list of artists you enjoy listening to.

I see several implications to this addition. Though I’m not entirely excited about the new ticker, it does provide an opportunity for bands to gain exposure, and potentially go viral on Facebook. Though it’s unclear how much of an impact the ticker and timeline might have on bands, “word of mouth” helps independent artists out tremendously.

Another implication is that Facebook is promoting the album. From what I’ve seen so far, most of the Facebook music updates are of someone listening to an album. This emphasis might reinforce the concept of albums.

The artist’s name is linked to the artist’s page on Facebook, which potentially translates into more fans. Any band knows that more Facebook fans means that they’re able to update their listeners to new music and performances.

Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t happy with the way Facebook implemented these changes. As someone studying User Experience (HCId at Indiana University), I felt that the ticker and changes to the news feed throw too much information at the user at once. But I do welcome the Facebook Music addition.

One feature I would like to see an the option of utilizing Facebook Music in a Facebook advertisement. If so, artists could pay for an ad that would funnel click-throughs to the song on Spotify (or the music service of their choice). As people listen to the music, it would also appear in that person’s ticker or news feed.

Finally, if you want to see what your friends are listening to, this link will give you a list of the ten most recent albums and playlists your friends are listening to, as well as the top three songs: https://www.facebook.com/?sk=music

Related Posts:

]]> http://puddlegum.net/implications-of-facebook-music/feed/ 3 Music radio may be dead, but music curation lives on http://puddlegum.net/music-radio-may-be-dead-but-music-curation-lives-on/ http://puddlegum.net/music-radio-may-be-dead-but-music-curation-lives-on/#comments Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:11:50 +0000 Flick http://puddlegum.net/?p=2501 It used to be that artists strove to be on the radio. This aspiration became predominant in the 1950s and 1960s, when disc jockeys helped bring artists to the forefront of our conscience. Long gone are the days when disc jockeys had the freedom to play what they wanted, and could establish a name for themselves and their radio station. There are few radio stations that allow such liberty, and most of them are are college owned radio stations. Yes, exceptions can be found. For instance, BBC Radio still has influential personalities like Steve Lamacq.

This corporate control of radio is precisely what ruined radio. Forget the image you have in your mind of radio DJs carefully picking the next song. In fact, in most cases, DJs are no longer sitting behind microphones, running the board, and pressing play. It’s all computerized, prerecorded, and determined by lists that the manager compiles. The manager’s list is decided by trending songs. If you’re looking for creativity music selections on the radio, you’ll rarely find it. Instead, you’ll find nothing but formulas controlling the airwaves. For this reason, music radio is dead (there are a few exceptions to this).

Selective ears can still be found, but don’t look on the typical radio station. They’re everyday people that aren’t paid off by major labels and who curate music out of obsession. You’ll find them in a number of channels, from music bloggers to podcasters, from interactive sites to Youtube.

We can be certain that our children will find different ways of finding music as technology continues to advance. Music blogs may loose their appeal, or become corporatized and infected with formulas. Google may some day sell Youtube to a new owner that shuts it down overnight. But tomorrow’s disc jockey will find new ways of spinning wax and bring new artists to our conscience. We should not mourn what is gone, because elements of it will continue to thrive.

Related Posts:

]]> http://puddlegum.net/music-radio-may-be-dead-but-music-curation-lives-on/feed/ 3 The Value of Streaming Music http://puddlegum.net/the-value-of-streaming-music/ http://puddlegum.net/the-value-of-streaming-music/#comments Sun, 23 Jan 2011 03:02:28 +0000 Flick http://puddlegum.net/?p=2497 Every strong argument for moving music to the cloud also has a negative consequence. But there is one specific positive/negative effect of our modern day access to music.

Positive: Music is always at our fingertips.
 Most of us have smart phones. Whether it’s an iPhone or an Android, it really doesn’t matter. Music is easily uploaded to these devices and played in headphones.

We can also install mobile apps (and more options are coming) that gives us access to millions of songs streaming to our mobile device (check out Last.fm, Spotify, or Rdio). It’s mind blowing, really, to think that for a few bucks we gain access to Library of Congress sized music collections. And it’s always within reach as long as our phones are charged!

Negative: Constant access to music is cheapening it.
 I learned something valuable working at a baseball card shop when I was 16. When a card was mass produced, it was worth less and few people wanted it. And when a card was incredibly rare, it was highly sought after and valuable. This lesson can be applied to almost anything, including music. Because of our constant access and exposure to music, we undervalue music.

Before music was recorded, the only way we could enjoy music was by performing it or being in the presence of someone performing it. It commanded our attention and our involvement. Because of this, music proficiency was much higher than it is now. When music became associated with a physical media, it brought an entirely new way to experience music. Today, music is melded down into digital bits. It isn’t rare to have hundreds or thousands of albums on one hard drive. Music has become that massive collection that we acquire. As music becomes accessed and streamed, we no longer feel like we’re experiencing something of immense value. Instead, it becomes disposable like plastic.

We see this devaluing in the falling prices people are willing to pay for music. A perfect example is that we consider it a wise marketing plan to offer access to millions of songs for $5 per month. Streaming music has the adverse affect of making it cheap.

Related Posts:

]]> http://puddlegum.net/the-value-of-streaming-music/feed/ 3 Gogoyoko: Fair Play in Music http://puddlegum.net/gogoyoko-fair-play-in-music/ http://puddlegum.net/gogoyoko-fair-play-in-music/#comments Wed, 27 Oct 2010 05:18:11 +0000 Flick http://puddlegum.net/?p=2473
There is a new online music store and social network called Gogoyoko, and we’re quite excited about it. Through Gogoyoko, which has launched, artists receive 100% of the sales revenue and 40% of the advertising revenue, depending on the amount of music streaming each artist has. Their goal was to create a “fair music market place,” and it appears that they’ve succeeded.

In this video Georg (Sigur Rós) introduces Gogoyoko by explaining that they aim to address the problem where artists feel the need to get signed to a record label, yet do all the work and get a small cut of the profits. Their site is similar to Bandcamp where you can upload your music and sell or stream it right away. But unlike Bandcamp, Gogoyoko is centered on a cohesion between the store and the social networking experience.

Members can stream music, create playlists, browse charts, rate albums and songs, and purchase Mp3s (320kbps) at a price the artist sets. It also has Twitter and Facebook options integrated into the site, so you can share tracks or albums on Twitter or Facebook. You can also update your “Wire,” essentially your status updates on Gogoyoko. If you prefer, you can set it up to automatically update your Wire with your Twitter updates. But with the networking integrated seamlessly into the store, the focus is on the music and not on what you ate for breakfast.

We’re excited about Gogoyoko for a number of reasons. The most important reason is because it honors the artists. It’s quite clear that their desire is to enable artists to distribute their music digitally and not to milk them of their earnings.

Another reason we’re excited about Gogoyoko is that it originated in Iceland. Because of this, Gogoyoko is currently full of music from Iceland… and if you follow Puddlegum then you’ll know that Iceland is one of my favorite regions in world music. Let’s hope it maintains a high density of Icelandic wonder.

A final reason that we’re excited about Gogoyoko is their desire to raise money for charities (artists and labels have an option of contribution 10% of their music sales to Gogoyoko’s charity partners). I for one will be spending a lot of time on Gogoyoko.

Correction: I mistakingly thought Georg was behind the development of Gogoyoko after viewing the video, but he is merely expressing his excitement for it.

Visit: Gogoyoko.com
Follow Puddlegum on Gogoyoko

Related Posts:

]]> http://puddlegum.net/gogoyoko-fair-play-in-music/feed/ 1 Apple Turns the Lights off Lala http://puddlegum.net/apple-turns-the-lights-off-lala/ http://puddlegum.net/apple-turns-the-lights-off-lala/#comments Sat, 01 May 2010 02:45:56 +0000 Flick http://puddlegum.net/?p=2220 I’m typing this article out on my Macbook, listening to my iPod Touch. Yes, I’m a fan of the Mac OS and I’ve been a user of their products for over ten years. But I haven’t been very happy with Apple lately surrounding their conflict with Adobe. Today’s news about Lala has felt like an insult to fans of music.

Lala was a music locker where you could upload your music and stream your playlist anywhere. It was the best implementation of “music in the cloud” that we’ve yet seen. What was especially appealing to the music consumer was the option of purchasing “web songs” and “web albums,” and you could add them to your online music library (but not download them) for a great price: .10 cents per song.

When Apple bought Lala we suspected that they were going to release an online iTunes. But what we weren’t sure if Apple would continue the web song distribution. Today, it became apparent that they’re going to end the web songs, though we still expect Apple to announce “iTunes in the cloud” in June, since Lala closes on May 31st and Apple’s WWDC will be held a week later.

Anyone that has purchased web songs will be given a refund as iTunes credit, revealing that Apple is not interested in non-downloadable music. This is a really bad deal for the Lala music consumer, such as myself. I’ll break this down:

I’ve purchased 64 web albums on Lala, and a total of 642 web songs (most of them making up the 64 web albums). I bought all of these 642 songs for .10 cents per song, spending $64.20. If Apple credits me with $64.20 in my iTunes account, I’ll only be able to purchase 81 songs at .79 cents per mp3. Apple is ripping me off, since they’re shorting me 561 songs!

First, I never purchase music on iTunes. Never. I think they’re over priced, and I don’t like the fact that you can never download your purchased music more than once. I do use iTunes and appreciate their platform, but I don’t want iTunes credit. I want my music!

I’m also frustrated with this move, as a music blogger. I have occasionally posted a Lala song, album or playlist on my site so you can listen to it, and this means that any blogger that has done the same will need to find other ways to post media (besides direct downloads). Lala was gaining ground, via Billboard, Pitchfork and Google, and we’ll miss seeing their healthy competition with Apple.

I’ll close this by saying that I am hopeful that Apple will extend Lala’s technology by introducing iTunes in the Cloud in June. Apple is finishing a 500,000 square foot data center facility, and I highly suspect that it’s going to be for iTunes Cloud, ahead of Google’s Chrome OS, which will be a cloud-based operating system. Adding to the suspicion, an AP article quotes Rich Miller, editor of Data Center Knowledge, “Only about a dozen data centers in the world are larger than the 500,000-square-foot facility Apple has under construction.”

They’re going to announce something big in June, and I would place my $64.20 that it’s for iTunes Cloud. I just wish they wouldn’t have killed the web song.

Related Posts:

]]> http://puddlegum.net/apple-turns-the-lights-off-lala/feed/ 2