The Official Jay-Z's "Tidal" Streaming Service Thread (New Stand Up Comedy Series Added)
Options
Comments
-
These RAT ? don't want truthful post, they want negativity"Has a $10 & $20 option signed up for a free month it's cool.
-
This ? taking L's like crazy
LMFAO
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/31/giving-away-music-is-how-you-get-people-to-pay-for-it/&sa=U&ei=bvoaVdieN5PisAT1-4GgDA&ved=0CBcQqQIwAA&sig2=kciwjXcE7levwGW42ZaEjA&usg=AFQjCNF7mDDrcryfcxxnGeM3jZJTlVdByg
? is killin this ? ? & his latest debacle
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://gizmodo.com/can-you-hear-the-difference-in-high-quality-music-test-1661706595/1694757624/+marioaguilar&sa=U&ei=bvoaVdieN5PisAT1-4GgDA&ved=0CBsQqQIwAg&sig2=ZkUElW9C5SvKmrds_cJ-Ew&usg=AFQjCNGuB7g0WikpQe1rfMEZaCnoVoI45A
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.vox.com/2015/3/30/8314869/tidal-jay-z-streaming&sa=U&ei=rfoaVZWWA_XasASmsoHIBA&ved=0CBYQ-AsoADAA&sig2=zzs1OeDPVoPaYW75c5MBvg&usg=AFQjCNGbBCabHyXOzZhPGN3JVKHfZNNENg
? fukn over his own investors (Dead @ anyone
being fukn ? enuff 2 do biz w/ this hoe)
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/aspiro-soars-as-star-struck-investors-miss-jay-z-deal/article23704977/&sa=U&ei=rfoaVZWWA_XasASmsoHIBA&ved=0CB0QqQIoADAB&sig2=MKgVCddV-iBAh2PRsy74Zg&usg=AFQjCNHkFltPv5_fgRlGjU-q10REcdslyQ
Yo you freak creature. You all over the place like Roaches in the dark, calm down you Herpes Bump" -
Like someone else has said, this would be worth it if they provide more than an album record, Live Streaming a concert/show, Q&A with fans, Mini Documentary/Reality behind the scenes
-
Im technogically behind bc the whole market doesnt make sense to me
Why would you pay to STREAM music?!?!? As opposed to owning just what you want. And for random music use Pandora which is free (it is still free right). I dont get it -
For ppl who don't care to own and keep up with their own music libraries, saves memory on your phone, tablet etc & the libraries are huge most streaming services have upward of 20mil songs.
I get it but I'm not one of those ppl I still buy mostly physical copies. -
Im technogically behind bc the whole market doesnt make sense to me
Why would you pay to STREAM music?!?!? As opposed to owning just what you want. And for random music use Pandora which is free (it is still free right). I dont get it
it's a one stop shop basically. you can do the pandora thing & listen to stations but it also keeps your library. -
Pandoras library is miniature compared to everyone else's too
-
Boxdendotcom
-
Monizzle14 wrote: »are people willing to pay $20 a month for something they can access for free? I don't see the real value of it, but I do think that a Digital label that provide exclusive content that you have to pay for will be the future of music.
Because we're taking all this free music for granted and in the long term, the "music store" is going to be streaming websites for new music. Even Youtube will eventually charge a subscription service for exclusive content and channels, you think for a minute them Youtube stars won't sign a deal for that ?
What Jay-Z is doing is playing real life monopoly because he can exclusively sell his and his artists' music on #Tidal at a premium and you'll pay for it because it's Jay-Z and co. and you can't get it anywhere else. The price will become more competitive over time. This is not a new company they've been around for a while and already have a customer base so obviously SOMEBODY was paying for this. Give it some time so it can work it's prices to be more competitive.
youtube streaming and hov e hov having exclusive albums come out only on tidal are way far down the pipeline. Remember when CD's were supposed to not be in stores by now? Remember by now ? was supposed to be flying cars and ? ?. Change takes time and the way things change is a crapshoot.
Lets say Jigga releases a cole album only on tidal will people really buy the service just for that? Lets say a big time youtube artist or 2 only shows ? on youtube subscriptions you think ? really gon pay?
Part of any successful youtube channel or rap artist is the idea that content can be spread for free. That's excatly why Nikki Minaj or Tyga has 4 times as many followers than people that actually buy their album. That's why a youtube protoge goes from a free channel like Spoken Reasons to paid comedy shows and movie roles.
You can't limit content from bootlegging and still expect a brand to grow. Letting people bootleg a J cole album or letting someone watch spoken reasons on tv will turn into a person buying a concert ticket or paying for a comedy show/movie. Word to Wu Tangs special 1 copy album that ? don't work it will backfire.
I had to come through with the nosign on part of this post. If Jigga releases a Cole album on TIDAL that may not be enough incentive to sign up, but the benefit of having this same ability with multiple artists or making it exclusive to the streaming site more regularly with the same artist could be enough pull.
Also, bootlegging could help artist popularity expand through word of mouth, but is the value in this large potential enough to eat that loss. If that person isn't even interested in buying an album, its more unlikely that they would be willing to drop the dough for a concert or movie featuring the artist. I think that the loss is not worth the word of mouth enough to not at least attempt to combat bootlegging. -
? talking bout it's not worth it already like he relaunched this a couple years ago.... Its only been a day I'm pretty sure all the stuff that ppl are looking for for this to be seen as worth it is coming down the pipe.... Beyonce had her album exclusive to iTunes Drake had his exclusive to iTunes.... Give these artist the actual control over the actual streaming site the music is being streamed from and all the extras and exclusive music is coming just give it more then 24 hours sheesh
-
the free music crowd (i'm part of this) that's complaining about price & all that other ? need to understand that yall ain't the targeted group for this.
-
atribecalledgabi wrote: »the free music crowd (i'm part of this) that's complaining about price & all that other ? need to understand that yall ain't the targeted group for this.
true but at the same time the music base that loves high quality music in FLAC format usually collects their own music they dont stream. Tidal has a thin target market (people who will stream HQ music) which is why it will be difficult for them to consistently see growth after a year or 2. Time will tell but people who are into this format can get it through rhapsody or spotify for less than $20 a month or already at $9.99 if you just want regular mp3 quality. -
I just copped Tidal. I'm a fan, but I'm a huge audiophile so I'm exactly the market for this kind of thing. I haven't decided whether I'll shell out $20 a month for it though. But in terms of the 30 day trial, I'm very happy with the service. It has most, if not all of the features of Spotify.
I still have Spotify though. We'll see how it goes. I think it might be better if they could bring the price down to at least 13.99 or something like that. I can justify bumping up a few dollars more to give up Spotify for hi fidelity sound, but I'm not sure that I'm gaining that much in the jump from 320 kb/s on Spotify premium to lossless on Tidal for another $10 a month. I say that as a full blown audiophile with very expensive audio equipment. -
I just copped Tidal. I'm a fan, but I'm a huge audiophile so I'm exactly the market for this kind of thing. I haven't decided whether I'll shell out $20 a month for it though. But in terms of the 30 day trial, I'm very happy with the service. It has most, if not all of the features of Spotify.
I still have Spotify though. We'll see how it goes. I think it might be better if they could bring the price down to at least 13.99 or something like that. I can justify bumping up a few dollars more to give up Spotify for hi fidelity sound, but I'm not sure that I'm gaining that much in the jump from 320 kb/s on Spotify premium to lossless on Tidal for another $10 a month. I say that as a full blown audiophile with very expensive audio equipment.
Hopefully the price will come down with more Hifi competition. The files are huge but if Netflix can stream HD quality video for the price they're charging, then subscription should be at most $5 more. -
What I'm really interested in is that since they had kanye, jay, cole & nikki up there is if/how this will inspire/impact hip hop production moving forward. We had kendrick put out an album with mainly live instrumentation...cole does this at his shows...of course the roots been holding it down...this is probly a big ass reach but what I'm getting at is if this hifi sound takes off to where that's the preferred way to listen in 10, 20 years from now will hip hop adapt and use more instrumentation? ? could be gettin they isaac hayes on and really create some ? music. That would be dope if it did.
I've never heard hip hop on hifi equipment but I've heard zeppelin & hendrix on it & the ? was incredible. I'd love to be able to look back on the great rap music being putting out right now & have that feeling. -
TheEyeronic1 wrote: »Monizzle14 wrote: »atribecalledgabi wrote: »the free music crowd (i'm part of this) that's complaining about price & all that other ? need to understand that yall ain't the targeted group for this.
true but at the same time the music base that loves high quality music in FLAC format usually collects their own music they dont stream. Tidal has a thin target market (people who will stream HQ music) which is why it will be difficult for them to consistently see growth after a year or 2. Time will tell but people who are into this format can get it through rhapsody or spotify for less than $20 a month or already at $9.99 if you just want regular mp3 quality.
not true.
rhapsody and spotify do not offer lossless audio. at most, they offer music @ 320 kbps compared @ $9.99 to the 1411 kbps that TIDAL is offering.
tidal is going after a growing audience.
again people paying $20 a month for lossless audio streaming is a very small audience. and of that audience the majority of people already own the music they want in that format on hard drives/clouds etc etc. -
Monizzle14 wrote: »are people willing to pay $20 a month for something they can access for free? I don't see the real value of it, but I do think that a Digital label that provide exclusive content that you have to pay for will be the future of music.
Because we're taking all this free music for granted and in the long term, the "music store" is going to be streaming websites for new music. Even Youtube will eventually charge a subscription service for exclusive content and channels, you think for a minute them Youtube stars won't sign a deal for that ?
What Jay-Z is doing is playing real life monopoly because he can exclusively sell his and his artists' music on #Tidal at a premium and you'll pay for it because it's Jay-Z and co. and you can't get it anywhere else. The price will become more competitive over time. This is not a new company they've been around for a while and already have a customer base so obviously SOMEBODY was paying for this. Give it some time so it can work it's prices to be more competitive.
youtube streaming and hov e hov having exclusive albums come out only on tidal are way far down the pipeline. Remember when CD's were supposed to not be in stores by now? Remember by now ? was supposed to be flying cars and ? ?. Change takes time and the way things change is a crapshoot.
Lets say Jigga releases a cole album only on tidal will people really buy the service just for that? Lets say a big time youtube artist or 2 only shows ? on youtube subscriptions you think ? really gon pay?
Part of any successful youtube channel or rap artist is the idea that content can be spread for free. That's excatly why Nikki Minaj or Tyga has 4 times as many followers than people that actually buy their album. That's why a youtube protoge goes from a free channel like Spoken Reasons to paid comedy shows and movie roles.
You can't limit content from bootlegging and still expect a brand to grow. Letting people bootleg a J cole album or letting someone watch spoken reasons on tv will turn into a person buying a concert ticket or paying for a comedy show/movie. Word to Wu Tangs special 1 copy album that ? don't work it will backfire.
I had to come through with the nosign on part of this post. If Jigga releases a Cole album on TIDAL that may not be enough incentive to sign up, but the benefit of having this same ability with multiple artists or making it exclusive to the streaming site more regularly with the same artist could be enough pull.
Also, bootlegging could help artist popularity expand through word of mouth, but is the value in this large potential enough to eat that loss. If that person isn't even interested in buying an album, its more unlikely that they would be willing to drop the dough for a concert or movie featuring the artist. I think that the loss is not worth the word of mouth enough to not at least attempt to combat bootlegging.
be honest you nosigned me cause Uconn done beat down on that gator ass 3 games in a row in the last 2 years lololol.
-
The hate is strong from competitors and others alike. Tidal offers Music streams @ 320 kbps & 1411 kbps (Lossless Audio) Rhapsody & Spotify do not offer lossless audio, at most they offer music @ 320 kbps @ $9.99 <(All 3 charge this for 320 kbps) Tidal also charges $20 for their higher grade streams.1411 kbps (Lossless Audio) it's an option.
-
I know im in the minority, i know everyone her eis familiar with and has been dying for 'lossless audio', but from a marketing perspective, the fact i havent heard Tidal actually explain this is rather odd.
You have to EXPLAIN what lossless audio actually provides and what gaps it fills in and what noussances it clears up that othrs dont-. 'Its lossless audio' is a technical statement and MOST consumers, even electronics consumers, are not technical.
I.e. If you got a dishawasher, and i ask what it does, and you say 'it provides 1000megahertz of cleaning powe'r, that doesnt mean anything! Not to the consumer. A better statement would be 'it cleans x times as fast, x times cleaner, etc.'
In the marketing world its refered to WIIFM....'Whats in it for me.' Clearly, Tidal has taken a stance of less for the consumr and more on whats in it for the artists. How do you sell Losless audio to the people who DONT knw what it brings to the table. -
Damn dude, you must really hate Jay
-
TheEyeronic1 wrote: »I know im in the minority, i know everyone her eis familiar with and has been dying for 'lossless audio', but from a marketing perspective, the fact i havent heard Tidal actually explain this is rather odd.
You have to EXPLAIN what lossless audio actually provides and what gaps it fills in and what noussances it clears up that othrs dont-. 'Its lossless audio' is a technical statement and MOST consumers, even electronics consumers, are not technical.
I.e. If you got a dishawasher, and i ask what it does, and you say 'it provides 1000megahertz of cleaning powe'r, that doesnt mean anything! Not to the consumer. A better statement would be 'it cleans x times as fast, x times cleaner, etc.'
In the marketing world its refered to WIIFM....'Whats in it for me.' Clearly, Tidal has taken a stance of less for the consumr and more on whats in it for the artists. How do you sell Losless audio to the people who DONT knw what it brings to the table.
its CD quality (tidal) vs less than CD quality.
thats it.
some people will never care about streaming CD-quality audio. but those very same people might care about exclusive content from their favorite artist, which is something spotify/rhapsody/pandora isnt offering up yet.
some people wont ever go to chiptole because taco bell is just fine for them. but that doesnt stop chipotle from being one of the fastest growing chains out.
there is always a market that will pay a premium.
but the argument i make is that market is more about the tangible product not streaming. high quality music heads for the most part want something tangible weather its a CD or a Vinyl copy. Time will tell but im willing to bet not many people will pay for this service long term at a $20 clip.
Likewise exclusive content in this day and age is ? . Like i said earlier unless you can physically meet an artist and or get a premium concert ticket extra content ain't ? . Matter fact 99% of people will wait for the extra content to leak online or not watch it at all. Back in the late 90s and 2000's exclusive or bonus content was dope as ? . But now we pretty much get more access to behind the scenes than ever its not as exciting.
-
Lol y'all ? man
-
Damn dude, you must really hate Jay
I'm allergic to ? ? , plus I hate when ppl
act like ? ? Camel ain't been lapped a
million times over by Drizzy Da Gawd. -
You're a Drake fan? *automatically blocks out anything this ? says*
Also lol at Drizzy apparently not being a ? ? . -
Monizzle14 wrote: »Monizzle14 wrote: »are people willing to pay $20 a month for something they can access for free? I don't see the real value of it, but I do think that a Digital label that provide exclusive content that you have to pay for will be the future of music.
Because we're taking all this free music for granted and in the long term, the "music store" is going to be streaming websites for new music. Even Youtube will eventually charge a subscription service for exclusive content and channels, you think for a minute them Youtube stars won't sign a deal for that ?
What Jay-Z is doing is playing real life monopoly because he can exclusively sell his and his artists' music on #Tidal at a premium and you'll pay for it because it's Jay-Z and co. and you can't get it anywhere else. The price will become more competitive over time. This is not a new company they've been around for a while and already have a customer base so obviously SOMEBODY was paying for this. Give it some time so it can work it's prices to be more competitive.
youtube streaming and hov e hov having exclusive albums come out only on tidal are way far down the pipeline. Remember when CD's were supposed to not be in stores by now? Remember by now ? was supposed to be flying cars and ? ?. Change takes time and the way things change is a crapshoot.
Lets say Jigga releases a cole album only on tidal will people really buy the service just for that? Lets say a big time youtube artist or 2 only shows ? on youtube subscriptions you think ? really gon pay?
Part of any successful youtube channel or rap artist is the idea that content can be spread for free. That's excatly why Nikki Minaj or Tyga has 4 times as many followers than people that actually buy their album. That's why a youtube protoge goes from a free channel like Spoken Reasons to paid comedy shows and movie roles.
You can't limit content from bootlegging and still expect a brand to grow. Letting people bootleg a J cole album or letting someone watch spoken reasons on tv will turn into a person buying a concert ticket or paying for a comedy show/movie. Word to Wu Tangs special 1 copy album that ? don't work it will backfire.
I had to come through with the nosign on part of this post. If Jigga releases a Cole album on TIDAL that may not be enough incentive to sign up, but the benefit of having this same ability with multiple artists or making it exclusive to the streaming site more regularly with the same artist could be enough pull.
Also, bootlegging could help artist popularity expand through word of mouth, but is the value in this large potential enough to eat that loss. If that person isn't even interested in buying an album, its more unlikely that they would be willing to drop the dough for a concert or movie featuring the artist. I think that the loss is not worth the word of mouth enough to not at least attempt to combat bootlegging.
be honest you nosigned me cause Uconn done beat down on that gator ass 3 games in a row in the last 2 years lololol.
Nah actually that aint even cross my mind, but thanks for reminding me. I have a permanent vendetta against that ? ass squad now lol
