Showing posts with label music. Show all posts
Showing posts with label music. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Why I Love Rhapsody

Amazon Cloud Player? No thanks.

So Amazon is getting a lot of attention with the introduction of its new cloud-based music service. Yawn…
I don’t see that it stacks up at all against Rhapsody, a truly cloud-based music service.
About two years ago I was at QCon San Francisco and had a great, wide ranging conversation with a software engineer from Rhapsody.  About a year later, while calculating how much I was spending on music every month – mostly on iTunes, occasionally on Amazon – I remembered that conversation and visited the Rhapsody site. The price was right, $10 a month for all the music I wanted.
I signed up, and haven’t looked back.
Short-sighted luddites will say, “Yeah, but you can’t download the music, and if you drop your subscription, your music goes away.” Wrong.
Here’s the deal….
The only reason we buy CDs or download music is a matter of access. You lay down your money to insure that you can listen to your tunes any time you want, any where you want. That concept made sense in the steam-powered days before the Internet. Back then you either carried your music with you on some kind of storage device (cassette tape, portable CD player, or later, MP3 player) or you listened to it on the radio. Your access to music was limited by how much you could afford to buy, and/or what your favorite radio station played.
Fast-forward a couple of decades… Cassettes are dinosaur bones, and CDs are going extinct as you watch. Most music is purchased online and downloaded to a computer, where it can then be transferred to a portable MP3 player. A vast improvement in convenience over vinyl or CDs, but not without issues.
One big issue is storage. Once you download that music you have to put it somewhere safe so that if your computer craps out the money you’ve invested in tunes doesn’t vanish along with all your other data.
So you buy back-up drives, or you pay for a back-up service like Carbonite. That made sense. Once.
Which brings me to why I love Rhapsody:
  • At $10 bucks a month I now pay a fraction of what I used to pay for music on iTunes.
  • Storage is no longer an issue. True, I still have 10,000 songs on my hard drive (one of the reasons I have a Carbonite account). But most of the music I “own” and regularly listen to is available on Rhapsody. So if I lost those files through hard drive failure, not a big deal. In fact, had Rhapsody been around when I bought those tunes originally, I could have saved a ton of money.
  • I can listen to entire albums by unfamiliar artists at absolutely no risk. If I like what I hear,  I add it to my Rhapsody library. No messing around with 30 second samples. If I don’t like what I hear, no loss. This means that I end up listening to a lot of stuff I might otherwise miss because I didn’t want to risk $10 on an unfamiliar album in iTunes. So I can afford to expand my musical horizons, because no matter how many songs or entire albums I add to my Rhapsody library, I still pay only $10 a month. I spend more on coffee.
  • The Rhapsody app on my iPhone makes my Rhapsody library portable. I can put my phone in the dock  connected to the sound system in my living room, or plug my phone into the system in my vehicle.
  • Music in my Rhapsody library can be downloaded to my iPhone for listening when I’m not connected to the 3g network or wifi.
Is there a downside? Yes. Rhapsody’s music selection is vast, but limited. There are some gaping holes, in fact. No Beatles, for one. But iTunes only added the Fab Four in the past year, so that omission isn’t all that surprising.  But Rhapsody’s selection also includes a lot of music that I was surprised to find, rare stuff by some obscure bands. And I expect that as time goes on the gaps will be filled.
In the end, it’s all about access. As long as I have 24/7/365 access to the music I want, why would I want to store the stuff locally? Like many people I’m getting pretty damn tired of the term “cloud computing,” but that’s where it’s all headed. Most of my TV viewing is now done via Netflix and Hulu Plus – services that offer the same benefits as Rhapsody: a vast selection of on-demand content that I can access through multiple devices anytime I want, anywhere I want.
And if Rhapsody goes away, some other service will be there to take it’s place. My music will always be available. No files, no storage, no risk. Just all the tunes I want.
So Amazon’s Cloud Music Player…? No biggie.



Friday, May 21, 2010

Books in the Cloud?

Reading E-Books Rewrite Bookselling in today’s Wall Street Journal got me thinking about how much the manner in which I consume media has changed of late.

Several months ago I cancelled all of my cable movie channels and re-activated my NetFlix account; I stream the movies more often watching via DVD.  Similarly, I also recently started using Rhapsody (love it!), a fantastic alternative to downloading and storing music -- and worrying about secure back-ups to protect my investment. I also cancelled my Sirius-XM account because my iPhone is a far more useful and flexible alternative (especially with the Rhapsody app.)

So a great deal of the media I consume lives in the Cloud, where I can access it via a variety of devices.  Is there a similar model on the horizon for the publishing industry?

While I often read newspaper and magazine articles on my iPhone, the idea of reading a book on that device never appealed to me. But the iPad offers an excellent book-reading experience, so much so that I doubt that I'll purchase another paper book (with the exception of library sales and the occasional irresistible remainder bargain.)

But rather than having to download and store digital copies of books, I'd love to see a model similar to Rhapsody or NetFlix, where I pay for 24/7, any-device access to the e-books I want to read.

Audible, the digital audiobook company, has a  sort of hybrid model. The audiobooks I've purchased are permanently stored on the site, where they can be streamed to my computer. The downside is that if I want to listen on my iPhone I have to download the file and then upload to my device. But unlike content I purchase from iTunes, if any of my Audible purchases are accidentally deleted, I can download another copy from the site. (An Audible iPhone app that allows me to stream titles in my library seems like a no-brainer, no?)

(At least as far as music is concerned, Apple's purchase of Lala may signal a move to a cloud-based model that will go head-to-head with Rhapsody. Time will tell.)
Audible also offers monthly membership deals that allow users to download a predetermined number of titles each month.

So as the new breed of ebook stores comes online, I hope someone offers a model similar to NetFlix, Rhapsody, and Audible.

 

 

Cross posted to Bob Rhubart’s Blog and Smallification

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Top 100s by Year by Bing

As iPhone music apps go, Top 100s by Year by Bing is pretty damn cool, especially if you’re a pop music fan of certain age. But after combing through some of the year-by-year lists, I have questions about the source of the data.

For the year 1962,  the BillBoard Top 100 list has many songs in common with the Bing list. But focusing on the top ten, there are significant differences…

    Bing

    Billboard

    1. Green Onions -- Booker T and the MGs

    2. Bring It On Home To Me -- Sam Cooke

    3. You’ve Really Got a Hold on Me -- The Miracles

    4. The Loco-Motion -- Little Eva

    5. Sherry -- Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons

    6. I Can’t Stop Loving You -- Ray Charles

    7. Up On The Roof -- The Drifters

    8. Twist and Shout -- The Isley Brothers

    9. These Arms of Mine -- Otis Reading

    10. Do You Love Me -- The Contours

    1. Roses Are Red (My Love) -- Bobby Vinton

    2. I Can't Stop Loving You -- Ray Charles

    3. Let's Twist Again -- Chubby Checker

    4. Stranger On The Shore -- Mr. Acker Bilk

    5. The Stripper -- David Rose

    6. Johnny Angel -- Shelley Fabares

    7. The Loco-Motion -- Little Eva

    8. Breaking Up Is Hard to Do -- Neil Sedaka

    9. Mashed Potato Time -- Dee Dee Sharp

    10. Soldier Boy -- Shirelles

For my money, the Bing list, being heavy on classic R&B, is far more listenable. But what’s the source of the data? And there are other issues that have me very suspicious of the Bing data.

For instance, the Bing app lists The Beatles “Love Me Do” at #15 for 1962. But according to Wikipedia, the Beatles are nowhere men on the ‘62 US charts; that song wasn’t released here until April 1964.  “Love Me Do” did show up on the UK charts in ‘62, but according to Wikipedia, it peaked at #17.

There are other issues. The Bing app lists Roy Orbison’s “Blue Bayou” at #65 for 1963. According to Wikipedia, that song peaked on the Billboard Pop Singles chart for 1963 at #29.  Another issue is that the Bing app plays a live version of the song that I strongly suspect is from Orbison’s Black and White Night set from 1988. If I’m looking at the chart for ‘63, I want the version of the song that made it to that chart.

Yes, the Bing Top 100s app is free  -- for now, at least. And regardless of the data source it’s very cool to have access, however limited, to this amazing archive of pop hits. But I wish the people behind the app would share information on the source of the charts, and take pains to insure that the version of the song the app plays is the same version that hit the charts.

On the other side of the fence, I’ll take issue with some of the negative comments about the Bing ads that play periodically as you listen to the tunes. The app is free, fer cryin’ out loud,  and while you can’t control the playlist, you get to listen to the entire track for each song, rather than a sample. What’s not to like?

For me, this app takes me back to the days when I first heard these songs, over the radio, on AM not FM, and with commercials. Didn’t bug me then, doesn’t bug me now.

I’ll use this app a lot this summer, with my iPhone or Touch plugged into a set of speakers on my patio, sipping cool adult beverages and thinking back to an era that remains unsurpassed in pop music history.