• I've googled to see if I can learn more about Blockchain Technology. It didn't actually help me. All i discovered was that it is linked to Bitcoins. So if anyone can explain for a non-digital native in easy steps it would help me understand what this means!!
  • The article helped a little, thanks BN.     I still haven't made the jump, though, about how it relates to music. Does it mean all our uploads are available to everyone-else? I can't see it being that.
  • A blockchain is, effectively, nothing more than a transaction log. It's cryptographically signed, so older entries can't be manipulated. It helps you keep track of every transaction (whatever that may be) ever of a certain technology, e.g. Bitcoins. So there's one big blockchain that contains logs of all Bitcoins ever created, who owns them, and who traded them (not necessarily helping identify actual persons, just that a person owns a certain amount of Bitcoins).

    It's the hype technology du jour. Everybody is jumping on this bandwagon right now, whether it makes sense or not. Some juice company even experienced a stock rise after they changed their name to include the word "blockchain". It's completely silly right now. Hence the "oh dear".

    I don't see what eMusic wants to do with a blockchain, unless they want to implement their own crypto currency (but why?). Or maybe they want to create a log of all the music you own and that then somehow helps you in accessing it from various devices (and other services?). Just speculating.

    But mostly, I think this is just hype, trying to get attention.
  • Sound like they will limit the usage of files you can use, I would prefer if they could get back the music they lost before getting involved with this, may get some customers back
  • As I understand it, Blockchain is pretty much the same thing as Pokemon
  • I Am A Visionary...

  • More on this:

    If you cut through the buzzwords and go straight to page 14 of the linked PDF, it comes down to this:

    --- snip ---
    So what does Blockchain mean for eMusic Members?

    The eMusic store will continue to be the go-to destination for independent-minded music collectors. It will retain its current membership model, but there will be a number of key improvements:

    More Music
    Savings made by switching to Blockchain technology means more money will be funneled into attracting artists and labels to the platform - established and up-and-coming.

    Pass On Savings
    Likewise, reduced overhead costs and fees means eMusic is able to offer more member bonuses and incentives.

    Added Flexibility
    Blockchain allows us to explore new payment options and incentives for members, including credits that don’t expire and variable bonuses

    Better User Experience
    The inherent flexibility and scalability of Blockchain means eMusic is prepared to adapt and offer new features and benefits that will make the best user experience possible.
    --- snip ---

    Colour me not convinced.
  • So it presumably means that eMusic will try to cut out some of the middle men in order to save costs? Surely Bandcamp does that already? In order to make savings for eMusic and its customers, there will be nothing more for the artists, unlike Bandcamp? I know which model I'd prefer it I was an artist. 
  • Well this confirms it. I am officially old. I did not understand any of that press release. 

    I think I will just hunker down in at the local record store and flip through the bins. 
  • I'll be joining you Plong42!
  • Reading through the presentation it sounds that they are looking to be the middle man going directly to labels and artists splitting the revenues 50/50 for streaming and download sales. It sounds a bit of a poor mans Bandcamp and knowing their previous lack of sales, consumer feedback and lack of numbers it does make me wonder if they can back it up. Also their market presence will their market go for it. 

    Here in the UK they are really small and why would an established group look at this and say its worth their while. The admin needed for such a small return would not be worth it and would it be worth not using Bandcamp which already has a big and well established system.

    I hope they are wrong but really don't think that Warp, Sub Pop and Beggars are going to buy into this as well as the other labels that have left in droves

  • Plong42 said:
     I did not understand any of that press release. . . .  
    In that case I won't even try . . . besides, Blockchain sounds pretty scary :#
  • edited April 2018
    I wrote in a lot more detail about this on the eMusic subreddit, so I won't repeat it all here.   But my net takeaway is that they have a lot more work to do to position this in a way that can really succeed.  Most of what they announced this week borders on "me too" (no, not THAT metoo), and, when you boil it all down, they are basically claiming they'll save artists by squeezing some costs from the distribution channel (and, in an even more dubious claim, shift the revenue split across the industry to 50/50).   Even setting aside the legitimate question of whether their proposed solution actually removes any cost from the distribution channel, I contend they are solving the wrong problem.   The music industry has a top-line revenue problem first and foremost, and shaving (hypothetically) a tiny bit of cost out of the back end isn't going to fundamentally change the dynamics of the industry.

    Here's the thread with my original comments and some follow-up discussion:
  • I think blockchain means that whatever conglomerate currently owns emusic would like to make it look trendy so someone else will buy it. Post bankruptcy Kodak recently announced they’ll be releasing their own crypto currency. Maybe they’ll buy it.
  • Oh and having spent some time reading Pokémon as bedtime stories I think Pokémon’s way better than blockchain.
  • I like to chain my Pokémon to a block, as a kind of best-of-both-worlds solution.
  • This Guardian article 

    Bye, Spotify: can this new streaming service help listeners play fair?

     looks like someone else has beaten eMusic to it! 
  • This sounds very interesting, will investigate further

  • At first glance it looks like I have to stream a track 9 times before I can download it; how is that ever going to work? I've been on the verge of quitting my £9.99 Spotify account for ages as just about the only time I think of it is when I get a monthly email re my direct debit. I'd be all about using a system that is fairer to musicians, but I don't think I've streamed one track more than twice on Spotify. Being an old git I want to own. Anyone who knows more about Resonate please shout.
  • Hmm. I like the idea of changing the streaming payment model and paying artists. As a listener I can imagine myself ending up 1. Spending an uncontrolled amount of money and failing to keep track, 2. Paying for a lot of music at higher than emusic rates and not quite getting to own most of it.
  • I agree GP - it wouldn't work for me, a bit different if all you are doing is buying top selling tracks by a few artists, not the entire album
  • greg said:
    I agree GP - it wouldn't work for me, a bit different if all you are doing is buying top selling tracks by a few artists, not the entire album
    Good point and further proof, if any were needed, that we here aren't exactly anyone's target audience.

Sign In or Register to comment.