MIA: New project coming Monday, exclusive to Apple Music

Status
Not open for further replies.
HUELEN10 said:
For those crying foul, what is technically the difference between this and an MTV exclusive or radio exclusive premier? It's nothing new, right?
Click to expand...

Those exclusives are like 10 minutes and no form related, just outlets on TV or web that everyone can get to pretty much. Other websites can pick it up right after.

This is making it so for everyone who streams, they can't get it if they don't get it through an Apple Music account that they start a trial on. That's going to get especially crude when the user's favorite artist has an exclusive track come out after the trial period is over.

This is clearly more paywall hassle in the long term for music fans than a simple video premiere on MTV that goes online for free from MTV in minutes and then their competitors are free to pick it up at the same time.
 
tali'zorah84 said:
This. Although after the news of her label holding it back, maybe this was the only way she could put it out? Someone found data for the project on Spotify so I'd imagine it's a timed exclusive.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was thinking maybe she ended up doing it because Apple offered an economically viable way to actually get it out, and she's been dogged by label politics in the past, but my initial reaction was still definite disappointment.
 
Would be great if peopled flocked to Google Play Music and just pirated the album, uploaded it, and streamed it from there when Tidal and Apple pull this exclusive bullshit.
 
What does exclusive even mean. No other streaming services? There is already music exclusive per service, just like Netflix and any other media streaming

Does it mean can't even buy on iTunes or digital/retail stores. Somehow I doubt that would be the case. For very long anyway
 
jaxapollo said:
Apple music is free for 3 months. The amount of salt in this thread is palpable
Click to expand...
Platform exclusivity is fucking terrible.
They need to compete on quality of service instead of who can buy the most popular artists.
Pointing that out isn't "salt".

Luckily, they don't usually pay for artists I particularly care about.
 
Mr_Appleby said:
I see this exclusivity as a guarantee you're going to get pirated big time. I wonder if the payout is better than potentially lost sales/royalties from other platforms.
Click to expand...

You're going to get pirated big time whether you make your music exclusive or put it on every available service. Might as well take the paycheck from Apple and call it a day.
 
border said:
You're going to get pirated big time whether you make your music exclusive or put it on every available service. Might as well take the paycheck from Apple and call it a day.
Click to expand...

Yeah but it could make piracy even bigger by converting once-paying customers into booty mongers. If an album comes out and a fan on Spotify, Rdio, or GMusic want it they may resort to piracy and having gotten a taste decide to do that for all releases.
 
Acorn said:
Argh I really hope this isn't going to be a trend of exclusive albums for x,y,z service.
Click to expand...

I'm going to bet that this will be a trend, and the company with the most resources will win. That $3 billion for Beats is slowly showing it's worth.
 
Music being exclusive to any service is fucking dumb, period.

That said, still excited to hear this...
 
I really don't get the point of getting excited about content being exclusive to a specific service, unless its' music that wouldn't otherwise exist (like Spotify's live/acoustic stuff).

Then again, people celebrate when games get limited to a specific platform, so no reason for this to be any different.
 
How is this that different from Netflix buying out exclusive rights to Friends, or Hulu getting exclusive rights to Seinfeld?

That's not to say that it's morally right, but it was pretty much an inevitability that streaming services would start to secure exclusive content that differentiates them from the competition. I'm actually kinda surprised that it took this long for music streaming services to start pushing exclusives, since various TV/video services have been doing it for years now.
 
border said:
You're going to get pirated big time whether you make your music exclusive or put it on every available service. Might as well take the paycheck from Apple and call it a day.
Click to expand...

Oh that's a given. At the end of the day however money is still being made and I'm just curious about the value of exclusives to the artist, as opposed to the value to apple. Despite the comments it's a radically different playing field to game exclusives.
 
border said:
How is this that different from Netflix buying out exclusive rights to Friends, or Hulu getting exclusive rights to Seinfeld?

That's not to say that it's morally right, but it was pretty much an inevitability that streaming services would start to secure exclusive content that differentiates them from the competition. I'm actually kinda surprised that it took this long for music streaming services to start pushing exclusives, since various TV/video services have been doing it for years now.
Click to expand...

Different market expectations. Netflix doesn't come close to being the only destination you need for all your movies & TV. Rather, it has a rotating content selection. Same with Hulu, HBO, etc.

But Spotify, Apple Music, etc - all sold themselves as the last service you'd need for music. Aside from some big names, every artist the average music fan wants is contained in their catalogs. Shifting that to a model where content is blocked off is going to be an irritating transition, and possibly one that consumers won't stand for (pirating the exclusive content instead of paying for an additional subscription).
 
Mr_Appleby said:
Oh that's a given. At the end of the day however money is still being made and I'm just curious about the value of exclusives to the artist, as opposed to the value to apple. Despite the comments it's a radically different playing field to game exclusives.
Click to expand...

Yeah to be honest this feels more like artists exploiting Apple than anything else. These exclusives are probably not going to get new subscribers for Apple Music.....it's just going to mean more people pirating tracks that they would have otherwise streamed over Spotify. I guess Apple has gotta do something to make their service attractive, but these exclusives are a drop in the bucket at best.
 
border said:
You're going to get pirated big time whether you make your music exclusive or put it on every available service. Might as well take the paycheck from Apple and call it a day.
Click to expand...
lmao right, this narrative that piracy is going to become a thing as if it wasn't already is naive.
 
If I am not mistaken the visual part of this was being refused by her label to release and now all of sudden it it is getting a release via Apple Music. So it sounds like this was one of the only ways for her to share the video aspect and maybe the songs became part of the deal on top of that.

Basically this may only exist because Apple stepped in and mitgated the risk for the label by putting it out under Apple Music instead.

Link to an article detailing her label refusing the release of this.

http://www.avclub.com/article/mi-says-her-label-wont-release-her-new-video-due-c-219652
 
Mushroomer25 said:
Different market expectations. Netflix doesn't come close to being the only destination you need for all your movies & TV. Rather, it has a rotating content selection. Same with Hulu, HBO, etc.

But Spotify, Apple Music, etc - all sold themselves as the last service you'd need for music. Aside from some big names, every artist the average music fan wants is contained in their catalogs. Shifting that to a model where content is blocked off is going to be an irritating transition, and possibly one that consumers won't stand for (pirating the exclusive content instead of paying for an additional subscription).
Click to expand...

But both spotify and apple music have catalogues that differ already. Isn't Taylor swift only on apple music?
 
When people say that they'll just pirate music they can't stream, what are they pirating? A rip of the streamed tracks? Or is this music typically available for purchase, and that's what ends up on file sharing sites?

In other words, can you not supplement missing streaming music with legally purchased versions? As opposed to subscribing to two competing services simultaneously.
 
Man-is-Obsolete said:
If I am not mistaken the visual part of this was being refused by her label to release and now all of sudden it it is getting a release via Apple Music. So it sounds like this was one of the only ways for her to share the video aspect and maybe the songs became part of the deal on top of that.

Basically this may only exist because Apple stepped in and mitgated the risk for the label by putting it out under Apple Music instead.
Click to expand...

The whole thing is rather confusing. How could the label stop her from releasing a video? Did the label pay for it? If so, why would they pay for something they knew was going to be controversial given her previous hot water moment with cultural appropriation? And how would putting it on Apple Connect change the label's mind? Did Apple repay the label for the video production costs?

It's a risky move for Apple, but I think ultimately it makes them look like they are on the side of the artist and their right to expression. And as a bonus they get some timed exclusive songs. M.I.A. wins because she gets her video out and will probably get a big marketing boost via Beats 1.
 
Angelus Errare said:
My chain hits my chest when I'm banging on the dashboard!
My chain hits my chest when I'm banging on the radio!

1MMy3Ek.gif
Click to expand...
.
 
eyeball_kid said:
The whole thing is rather confusing. How could the label stop her from releasing a video? Did the label pay for it? If so, why would they pay for something they knew was going to be controversial given her previous hot water moment with cultural appropriation? And how would putting it on Apple Connect change the label's mind? Did Apple repay the label for the video production costs?

It's a risky move for Apple, but I think ultimately it makes them look like they are on the side of the artist and their right to expression. And as a bonus they get some timed exclusive songs. M.I.A. wins because she gets her video out and will probably get a big marketing boost via Beats 1.
Click to expand...

It could have been self produced without the label's knowledge like the Born Free video, and they held it back once they learned of its existence.
 
flaxknuckles said:
It had exclusives? Well, it's still bullshit for Google too.

EDIT: I don't see anything but some albums that have extra tracks on the GP version.
Click to expand...

When they first launched their service, just like Apple Music.

Look, I'm not a big fan of exclusive content, but I'm confident that most of the vitriol in this thread is about
Apple hate then about the music
 
Breaking news not long from now:

"New MIA album hits record figures on Kickasstorrents and The Pirate Bay"

Good job apple.
 
pyros said:
When they first launched their service, just like Apple Music.

Look, I'm not a big fan of exclusive content, but I'm confident that most of the vitriol in this thread is about
Apple hate then about the music
Click to expand...

My hate is not about Apple hate, it's about exclusive album hate so don't get too confident. People pissed all over Tidal's exclusives too and it's likely no one cared about GP's exclusives when they launched because

1. it was probably some indie crap and not stuff from popular artists

2. didn't have enough publicity so people didn't even know (like me)
 
flaxknuckles said:
My hate is not about Apple hate, it's about exclusive album hate so don't get too confident. People pissed all over Tidal's exclusives too and it's likely no one cared about GP's exclusives when they launched because

1. it was probably some indie crap and not stuff from popular artists

2. didn't have enough publicity so people didn't even know (like me)
Click to expand...

That's why I said most, but regardless, fair point, I was pissed when I couldn't listen to pearl jam's live album which was exclusive to GPMusic and the service was not available in my region, snagged a physical copy instead.

Every streaming service is going to do this, but I'm not going to steal an artists work just to right some superficial wrong, there is always legal solutions
 
This is no different to Netflix making their own content for their service.
I don't see people complaining about Daredevil not being on Hulu.
 
None of this is really different from.... God, forever. MTV Unplugged, or the gazillion MTV live performances back in the day that you actually had to tune in the channel for. Limited run EPs and 7" vinyls. Etc. We've gotten so used to music everywhere and anywhere, but this exclusive shit has been around practically since broadcast music itself.

Frankly though I see very little reason to bitch about this specifically. Anyone with iTunes can sign up for three free months of the service right now and see/hear this. Unless you're an Android user with absolutely no access to a PC there's no reason anybody is shut out from this.
 
Entire albums being exclusive to some streaming service is shitty and I hope it doesn't become a thing.

In this case it sounds like Apple is just releasing her music video and a single from her upcoming album. At worst they'll probably get an exclusive b-side.

I'll start bitching if I can't get a physical copy of her new LP. As it is this sounds like standard promotional fare, just via a new venue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

New School Music Thread
20
1K
Audiophile replied
Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on streamer Apple TV+ according to a new report
News  2
82
4K
MastAndo replied
Apple to rename all of its operating systems
23
623
Drew1440 replied
Can you create a playlist in apple music without a sub ?
2
452
thefool replied
Project Hail Mary - Ryan Gosling Film
2
57
446
MrTroubleMaker replied
Top Bottom