In a way he's kind of right. I just don't feel the need for CDs anymore really. I ocassionally buy them, but only if I really like the band, or I can't download their album anywhere. I am stealing from the music industry, but I like to think in gig and festival tickets i'm sort of giving something back.

 

On a site like this I think the majority of people are going to disagree as we are all music fans overall. Spotify doesn't stop me downloading as I love my iPod, and I like knowing I actually have the track, but it's certainly a very great, and useful feature to have...

It's kinda true. I don't really care about owning CDs anymore. I used to make exceptions for albums that I really liked because it is nice to own a CD but that's gone out of the window now. I still make an exception for Shakira but I guess we've all got one artist that we'll always buy from. The thing is, I don't use CDs anymore. I have a good quality dock which I use instead of a hifi and in the car I can put my ipod on with the itrip. In my friend's car she has an adapter to plug your ipod straight in. The only time I use CDs is for making mix CDs which has always been one of my favourite things to do.

"They don't care so much anymore about actually owning physical CDs, or even downloading, they care about being able to access whatever they want, whenever they want it, wherever they are."

 

Then make Spotfiy available in my country you toolface.

 

And he's mostly right. But wrong too a bit. While I nearly do everything illegally, I still like owning stuff here and then, and also being able to have it on my iPod and such. WHEN Spotify is available in my country, I'm going to use it to preview albums I want to download from past years for my top 100 songs/albums of the decade project I want to finish up at the end of this year. Unless he finds a way of making Spotfiy available in my car, I will always have to do things illegally. ;P

 

I don't buy CDs, but at the same time, it will be a shame because some come with absolutely fabulous artwork. At the same time, this isn't stuff your gonna find on the charts, so they're rare to get anyway.

 

In the end, I'm impatient / cheap / don't have the money for all the music I want to listen to so I download. Thar. And, artwork / t-shirts / other products are always sold at concerts so tbh I will not mourn the loss of CDs whatsoever.

I download single tracks and old recordings that i don't have on CD.

 

I am not interested in downlaoding the album as I like to have a physical product. Also I like to listen to CD's in the car.

 

I listen to my I Pod when I am on the move or if I wnat peace and quite away from the family!

He would say that..... <_<

These people don't have a clue, and are driven by money and greed.

It's all because of those chavs you see walking around with their mobiles playing, subjecting everyone in a 1 mile radious to there 'chav anthems'

 

Whatabout when your driving in your car?? or somewhere were you can't get a wifi connection?? c'mon! people will always want to own there music! :rolleyes:

I definately dont agree. I prefer buying physical CDs anyday. Its not the same downloading a track.

I completely disagree with him. Don't get me wrong, I love having my digital versions, i love my iPod, i have been known to download the odd track, i love all this new technology and i've gotta admit to falling in love with Spotify but nothing would stop me also buying CDs :nono: I'm addicted to them :wub:

 

People annoy me when they make sweeping assumptions like that :(

Edited February 25, 200916 yr by Glyn

Omg now they're lying to brainwash people that "no one cares about physicals".

So basically that boss is talking sh!t, as no one seems to agree with him.

He talking sh1t but he's not far off.

 

The reality is most people don't care enough to buy a physical. Preferring instead to get the more instant download instead and skip buying the physical CD single.

 

So as a popular item the CD single is dead. It's dead now. End of story.

 

 

However CD Albums will still sell for years to come.

The one advantage it can give is by allowing me to listen to the album before buying; hence stopping me making dud casual purchases of CD's I then think are awful.

 

Yep, I agree with this. When I think about the money I could have saved, if I had heard the latest albums by Usher, The Wombats, Goldfrapp, Kate Nash or The Feeling before I bought them...

To be fair what he's saying is true. It's obviously not for everyone but the ever declining sales of physical albums and singles shows that he's right, people don't need them anymore...

I made a few dud purchases last year with The Feeling and The Fratellis, I played them once and never got played again. At least with spotify you can listen before you buy. That's one great thing about spotify. I wouldn't go and download the whole album, you might lose everything on your PC overnight, at least with a Physical album its always there.

I think the 'album concept' is dying out faster than the CD. :P

I still love to have the physical product, the artwork, the sleeve notes, the smell of the freshly pressed CD or etched vinyl :P -.

 

totally agree... ain't nothing like the real thing, and the physical album will always continue to exist in some form....whether it is a CD, vinyl , DVD or USB album...

Yet i always prefered CD's they're nice to look at, they have higher quality, it's good for your collection, it's great as a decoration etc....

Downloads are only worthwile if they're FREE. Otherwise, the physical CD is the best.

 

so in general the Spotify exec. is talking bull$h!t....

Edited February 25, 200916 yr by Big Mistake

Then make Spotfiy available in my country you toolface.

 

it is available everywhere but not for free... you can pay 9.99 Euros per month and get it...

believe me i tried it, it's a complete waste of money, most of the good popular songs are not available....WHAT A WASTE!!! :puke2:

 

it is available everywhere but not for free... you can pay 9.99 Euros per month and get it...

believe me i tried it, it's a complete waste of money, most of the good popular songs are not available....WHAT A WASTE!!! :puke2:

Such a big mistake, Big Mistake. :lol:

I disagree

 

Ive bought several cd single this year

 

My collection so far

 

Cahill - trippin on you

Out of office - hands up

Girls aloud - the loving kind

Basshunter - i miss you

Lily allen - the fear

Kid cudi - day n nite

Rudenko - everybody

 

Two more interesting pieces:

 

Where to hear the new U2 album - right now

All of 'No Line on the Horizon' - due for release next week - can be heard for free on website Spotify.

Daily Telegraph.co.uk By Neil McCormick

Last Updated: 6:20PM GMT 23 Feb 2009

 

U2's 'No Line On The Horizon' is the most eagerly awaited album of the year, with advance reviews declaring it their best since the glory days of 'The Joshua Tree' and 'Achtung Baby'. The Daily Telegraph's Andrew Perry called it "less a record than an event, breathtaking in its ambition and its shimmering, mesmerising and sometimes outright volcanic sound". It is not available to be bought (or downloaded) until next week, but by registering with the free Spotify service, fans can already listen to it to their hearts content.

 

U2's stadium allies Radiohead shook up the business in 2007 when they made their album 'In Rainbows' available to download for free, asking consumers to only pay what they wanted. Although a majority paid nothing at all, the band and their label made enormous profits through special editions and by keeping a larger slice of the pie. U2 have not gone quite so far. Yet the very fact that a group in their position would make their music available to be heard for free suggests that the days of paid for albums are numbered.

 

It is certainly a major coup for the newly launched Spotify, an unlimited music "streaming" service which many believe is the model for the future of the music business. Spotify describes itself as an internet radio service in which listeners make their own playlists. It has deals with all major labels, giving it a vast catalogue to rival popular download site iTunes. Users hear a 15-second advert every half hour (while music without adverts is available for a £9.99 subscription).

 

It is, in essence, a vast digital jukebox in the ether. Its biggest limitation is that you can't currently download music to listen to on an MP3 player, in a car, or on any other portable music device. U2 can still expect to go to number one all over the world when their album is released for sale next week, but the writing for the CD is surely on the wall. Once the technology has made the next step, so that the music can be streamed directly to mobile devices, then it is hard to see why anyone should need to own their own copy of an album. Everything you could ever want to listen to will be available, anytime, anywhere, at the click of a button.

 

Whether advertising revenues alone can support the music business in this fashion is open to question. Yet record companies are embracing Spotify in the hope that it will bring an end to rampant illegal downloading. When the U2 album leaked online at the weekend, it was downloaded over 100,000 times in the first ten hours. But now you can listen to it on Spotify faster and easier, without breaking the law.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Music downloads: 'iTunes should be afraid’'

Site subscription services could challenge music downloads.

Daily Telegraph.co.uk By Matt Warman

Last Updated: 5:58PM GMT 24 Jan 2009

 

Money matters: record labels may be freed from searching for the next big thing, such as Radiohead, through regular income from websites such as Spotify.com,

 

When Apple announced last month that it was slashing the price of some of the tracks on its iTunes music store, reception around the world was mixed. Would the difference between 99p and 59p really buck up the now slightly sluggish online music market? And what would allowing iTunes music to play on non-Apple MP3-players do to an industry that the company dominates anyway?

 

The move, however, marked an interesting development in the relationship between music labels and the technology companies that want to sell their music. Sweden-based service Spotify.com , for instance, is the logical combination of commercial radio and the internet. Users can pay £9.99 per month to subscribe to an unlimited amount of music, available from all the major record labels, or pay a euro for a single day’s access. But there’s also a free version that lets users play whatever they want, so long as they allow the service to play them adverts, which take up about one minute in every 30.

 

You can’t currently keep any of the music you listen to on a hard drive or MP3 player, but you can play any track as often as you like, whenever you like. So, effectively, you own all the music on all the major labels whenever you’ve got an internet connection. With Wi-Fi connectivity becoming more prevalent in public places and in homes, that means the Spotify way of listening to music is surely set to become more common.

 

From the music labels’ perspective, naturally, almost any service other than iTunes can be treated as a testing ground. None has yet turned music into the licence to print money it once was, and so the labels are becoming keener on pursuing new revenue models that allow them to exploit their back catalogues more effectively, while also funding new music and charging a premium for it. If, however, they could find themselves a regular income, such as a subscription-based service, then many, and especially the smaller labels, would be freed from the desperation to find the next Coldplay or Madonna.

 

So, as the influential online marketing blog RevenueAddict.com put it, “iTunes should be afraid – very afraid”. For only a little more than the price of one iTunes album, Spotify will give you an entire month’s worth of listening. That means there’s a huge number of listeners out there who would be better off using a subscription service rather than iTunes.

 

The programme’s interface will be familiar to Apple’s fans, while it also allows users to recommend tracks to their peers. Although the music is streamed live from the internet, it’s still very possible to skip ahead within tracks almost instantly.

 

None of this, of course, is actually going to make Apple quake in its boots. Spotify is, for now, a niche service, but anyone who spends most of their days within range of the internet should find it, and similar, forthcoming propositions, quite compelling.

 

 

Well I very much disagree, I love having physical albums and singles.

If I like a single, I want the official CD single to have in my collection.

I've now had to start buying physicals from around the world because some great singles aren't available as physicals here.

For example, i had to buy "Spotlight" by Jennifer Hudson and "One Step At A Time" by Jordin Sparks from Australia.

Luckily they're around the same price (£2.50) so it's not costing me the earth.

I'm just buying them all now because I know pretty soon they'll be gone :(

I prefer to have a physical copy of an album. But the only problem is that i don't have a single opportunity to get any in the place i live at. :manson: I'm a huge music fan of completely different genres... My collection could be rather impressive to be honest. Anyway i don't have an success to Spotify either. :lol:

Two more interesting pieces:

 

Where to hear the new U2 album - right now

All of 'No Line on the Horizon' - due for release next week - can be heard for free on website Spotify.

Daily Telegraph.co.uk By Neil McCormick

Last Updated: 6:20PM GMT 23 Feb 2009

 

U2's 'No Line On The Horizon' is the most eagerly awaited album of the year, with advance reviews declaring it their best since the glory days of 'The Joshua Tree' and 'Achtung Baby'. The Daily Telegraph's Andrew Perry called it "less a record than an event, breathtaking in its ambition and its shimmering, mesmerising and sometimes outright volcanic sound". It is not available to be bought (or downloaded) until next week, but by registering with the free Spotify service, fans can already listen to it to their hearts content.

 

U2's stadium allies Radiohead shook up the business in 2007 when they made their album 'In Rainbows' available to download for free, asking consumers to only pay what they wanted. Although a majority paid nothing at all, the band and their label made enormous profits through special editions and by keeping a larger slice of the pie. U2 have not gone quite so far. Yet the very fact that a group in their position would make their music available to be heard for free suggests that the days of paid for albums are numbered.

 

It is certainly a major coup for the newly launched Spotify, an unlimited music "streaming" service which many believe is the model for the future of the music business. Spotify describes itself as an internet radio service in which listeners make their own playlists. It has deals with all major labels, giving it a vast catalogue to rival popular download site iTunes. Users hear a 15-second advert every half hour (while music without adverts is available for a £9.99 subscription).

 

It is, in essence, a vast digital jukebox in the ether. Its biggest limitation is that you can't currently download music to listen to on an MP3 player, in a car, or on any other portable music device. U2 can still expect to go to number one all over the world when their album is released for sale next week, but the writing for the CD is surely on the wall. Once the technology has made the next step, so that the music can be streamed directly to mobile devices, then it is hard to see why anyone should need to own their own copy of an album. Everything you could ever want to listen to will be available, anytime, anywhere, at the click of a button.

 

Whether advertising revenues alone can support the music business in this fashion is open to question. Yet record companies are embracing Spotify in the hope that it will bring an end to rampant illegal downloading. When the U2 album leaked online at the weekend, it was downloaded over 100,000 times in the first ten hours. But now you can listen to it on Spotify faster and easier, without breaking the law.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Music downloads: 'iTunes should be afraid’'

Site subscription services could challenge music downloads.

Daily Telegraph.co.uk By Matt Warman

Last Updated: 5:58PM GMT 24 Jan 2009

 

Money matters: record labels may be freed from searching for the next big thing, such as Radiohead, through regular income from websites such as Spotify.com,

 

When Apple announced last month that it was slashing the price of some of the tracks on its iTunes music store, reception around the world was mixed. Would the difference between 99p and 59p really buck up the now slightly sluggish online music market? And what would allowing iTunes music to play on non-Apple MP3-players do to an industry that the company dominates anyway?

 

The move, however, marked an interesting development in the relationship between music labels and the technology companies that want to sell their music. Sweden-based service Spotify.com , for instance, is the logical combination of commercial radio and the internet. Users can pay £9.99 per month to subscribe to an unlimited amount of music, available from all the major record labels, or pay a euro for a single day’s access. But there’s also a free version that lets users play whatever they want, so long as they allow the service to play them adverts, which take up about one minute in every 30.

 

You can’t currently keep any of the music you listen to on a hard drive or MP3 player, but you can play any track as often as you like, whenever you like. So, effectively, you own all the music on all the major labels whenever you’ve got an internet connection. With Wi-Fi connectivity becoming more prevalent in public places and in homes, that means the Spotify way of listening to music is surely set to become more common.

 

From the music labels’ perspective, naturally, almost any service other than iTunes can be treated as a testing ground. None has yet turned music into the licence to print money it once was, and so the labels are becoming keener on pursuing new revenue models that allow them to exploit their back catalogues more effectively, while also funding new music and charging a premium for it. If, however, they could find themselves a regular income, such as a subscription-based service, then many, and especially the smaller labels, would be freed from the desperation to find the next Coldplay or Madonna.

 

So, as the influential online marketing blog RevenueAddict.com put it, “iTunes should be afraid – very afraid”. For only a little more than the price of one iTunes album, Spotify will give you an entire month’s worth of listening. That means there’s a huge number of listeners out there who would be better off using a subscription service rather than iTunes.

 

The programme’s interface will be familiar to Apple’s fans, while it also allows users to recommend tracks to their peers. Although the music is streamed live from the internet, it’s still very possible to skip ahead within tracks almost instantly.

 

None of this, of course, is actually going to make Apple quake in its boots. Spotify is, for now, a niche service, but anyone who spends most of their days within range of the internet should find it, and similar, forthcoming propositions, quite compelling.

 

I've got one thing to say - am I the only one who thinks that people are willing to pay to STREAM music - meaning that you're not even getting a digital file of it. :huh: