Amid the hype for the "not available at store near you" service called Spotify, one often reads of its promise to be the next "iTunes killer" — though one also wonders why it's really necessary to kill iTunes. Granted, I don't use iTunes for "purchasing" music much any more, but it's still a very useful program, and of course essential for sync'ing up my iPhone.
So it's interesting to get Techdirt's take on the obvious question, "why would Apple approve a Spotify app for the iPhone?" and here is the most obvious answer:
I would bet that the folks at Apple are pretty damn sure that they can outlast and out-innovate Spotify. Spotify hasn't shown much ability to make money, and while it has become a press darling as a music app, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Apple's quietly been working on its own version of a Spotify-like offering built directly into iTunes. And, given Apple's standard operating procedure, if that's the case, there's a good chance that the Spotify-like iTunes will be even better than Spotify itself.
In other words: "iTunes" is the "iTunes killer." And Spotify goes down with it…
Let's give credit where it's due: iTunes has played a pivotal role in the way music is offered and delivered in the Music 3.0 era; it has pursuaded a vast legion of music lovers of the ease and advantage of downloading their music collections rather than buying and ripping them. That's a huge — and very successful — exercise in consumer behavior modification and an essential phase in the transition from Music 2.0 to Music 3.0.
iTunes has gotten a lot of mileage out of the "purchase per unit," product-based delivery model. All the while, Steve Jobs and his minions have insisted that listeners (I hate calling us "consumers") are somehow compelled to "own" our very own collections of music. And the relatively modest acceptance of the subscription services like Rhapsody and Napster would seem to affirm that assessment.
But just you wait: Someday — probably sooner rather than later — Apple will begin converting the faithful. You'll see stylish ads from Apple that say "for the price of a single CD, for the cost of just 10 tracks per month, you can now have access to millions of tracks…and listen to whatever you want whenever and wherever you want (somebody should trademark that…)
And millions of iTunes users will slap their foreheads and exclaim, "well, fucking DUH!"
Tonight, Spotify boss Daniel Ek admitted that less than 10% of Spotify subscribers had upgraded to the Premium version.
Spotify claims over 1 million subscribers but only a maximum of 90,000 of them are stumping up £10 a month for the ad-free Premium service. That means it brings in just £900,000 a month – not small change but not enough to make the service profitable.
It's likely that the Spotify Mobile app on Android and iPhone will increase those numbers but Spotify is keeping just how much close to its chest.
Ek told the crowd at the Glasshouse that Spotify could be profitable if it "chose to be" but that he's focused on developing the business.
via stuff.tv
I suppose that for most users, the occasional ad is a small price to "pay." I would say though that the fact that there are a million users is not insignificant. That represents the leading edge of a constituency that is going to get used to hearing whatever they want, whenever they want. And if Apple ever approves the iPhone app, you can add "wherever" to the equation.
While I was at the Americana Conference last week, I found myself explaining to a lot of people what I mean when I tell them my computer is my jukebox. Maybe they think I’m talking about iTunes. Or maybe they think I’m listening to all this music on the speakers in my MacBook.
Not hardly. I’ve got access to a virtually infinite (as in, more than I can listen to in a lifetime) library of music, and I’m listening to it all in excellent fidelity on my stereo. Aside from the computer (in my case a MacBook or a MacPro) there are three essential components to this system:
Lala.com: I know, I’m starting to sound like a broken record on this one (pun intended?). But this is where it starts for me. Unlike the
subscription services like Rhapsody or Napster, Lala sucks me in by letting me listen to whatever I want to one time for free. After that, I purchase “access” to the tracks I want to hear again for a dime.
With Lala.com, the browser becomes your iPod, with one important difference. Instead of “owning” a few thousand tracks, you get “access” to… a few million. Just about anything you want to hear.
Airfoil is really the secret sauce in this recipe. Airfoil is a program that can take the audio output from any program on your computer — most notably in this case your browser — and send it over WiFi to an
Airport Express — an Apple gizmo which is a WiFi receiver with stereo audio output.
That’s all there is to it, and it works on either PCs or Macs. The signal comes out of your browser, Airfoil sends it to the Airport, and then the sound comes out of your stereo.
And just like that, your stereo is transformed into the “Celestial Jukebox.”
With this configuration, the prophecy is about 3/4s fulfilled. You can hear whatever you want, whenever you want to hear it — but you still have to be connected to some kind of broadband connection through a lap- or desk-top computer.
The only thing that’s missing is the mobile app that puts the capability in your car. The apps exist, but so far they’re not available for the public. But why wait? Unless you’re one of the road warriors that you’re listening to you’re probably tethered to cable or DSL (forget dialup) most of the day anyway.
So be the first on your block to set up your own Celestial Jukebox TODAY!
I spent most of Wednesday through Saturday of last week at the Americana Music Festival and Conference in Nashville.
I went to a lot of panels, and I took a lot of notes using an analog device known as “pencil and notebook.” This antiquated technology works really well, at least until I go back and try to read what I scribbled. But it was more convenient than trying to find an outlet in every room so that I could type notes on my laptop.
First, a general observation: “Americana” seems at times like a brand in search of a genre. Musically, the category covers a broad swath of the musical spectrum. Jed Hilly, the Executive Director of the Americana Music Association, did his best to narrow it down when he defined “Americana” (for the purpose of a new Grammy Awards category) as “contemporary music that honors and derives from American roots music.”
That does, indeed, cover a LOT of territory. But more important than what the brand or genre represents musically is what the concept embodies as a movement. Musically, this may be “roots” music, but market-wise, this is music that is coming up from the grassroots. And, based on what I heard over this past week, it represents in some respects the very best of what the new grassroots paradigm has to offer the listening audience. I mean, these people are GOOD and deserve the recognition that “mainstream” cultural forces are too often too slow to provide.
With that as a premise, here’s a note from the first panel I attended early on Thursday morning.
I didn’t realize until I got there that a discussion of “Raising The Next Generation of Americana Fans” would turn out to be a discussion about bringing this music to children, which is not generally speaking an area of my own personal interest.
Well… duh. Music is sorta like cigarettes – if you want them smoking it when they’re adults, you gotta start ‘em out as kids. So (politically incorrect tobacco reference aside), what could be more important than a discussion of bringing “Americana” music to kids?
So once I realized where I was and why it was the right place to be, I started paying attention to Jason Ringenberg (aka “Farmer Jason“) and Miss Melba Toast as they described their experiences bringing music to children.
Panelist Kathy Hussey said the one thing I found most encouraging: When she shows up for her songwriting-for-kids workshops, she said, “they start out wanting to write a rap song,” but their interest is very easily redirected. ”Kids are learning that they don’t have to consume what’s on the radio.”
When I was growing up, “what’s on the radio” was all their was, and we all grew up wanting to be The Beatles or The Stones. But the impact of an infinite variety of cultural choices is beginning to have a diversifying effect on a new generation.
Kids today may show up wanting to replicate what they hear in the media. They may think for a moment that that’s what’s expected of them But if Kathy’s experience is any indication, the commitment is shallow. They wind up wanting something resonates personally on a deeper level.
That’s a consequence of a world of infinite choices instead of just a few dominating channels. More choice forces us to dig a little deeper to find what matters. Mark that down as another upside of the new era, Music 3.0.
Farnovision
Fusor.net
Photography
T. Townsend Brown
The Incorrigible Iconoclast





Chris Brogan on Music 3.0: Turn The Chairs Around
The big deal in Nashville today was an appearance by social media maven (he says he doesn’t like the word “guru”) Chris Brogan, author New York Times Bestseller Trust Agents.
Among the many pertinent points that Brogan made about utilizing Web 2.0 tools to “build influence,” etc., there was one point in particular that stands out in the context of the Big Shift in music.
My point exactly.
Indeed, there are portions of “Trust Agents” that sound like a field manual for musicians who are trying to find their way in the Music 3.0 world. More on that when I’ve had a chance to spend more time with the book I picked up today.