Future of Digital Music in Doubt

mlknowle writes: "NPR has an excellent article about the growing trend of 'real' radio stations abandoning streaming media due to concerns about advertising, royalties, and (you guessed it) the DMCA. Basically, stations are finding that web streaming isn't increasing their listener base, but is increasing their costs. It's a good read (or listen.)" Meanwhile, there's a study circulating saying that people don't and won't purchase heavily restricted music online at higher prices for a less useful item. This is apparently a revelation to the music industry.

Comments

digital music report on CNN.com

[davey23sol]

Along these lines, CNN reported about a study that shows a "flat future" for digital music. The story is at
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/08/30/digi ta l.music/index.html. It was done by Gartner technology research.

The study was of 4000 Internet-using adults. One half of the people surveyed use their PCs to play CDs, but only one quarter have played downloadable music. Only 6 percent, during a study period during the spring, purchased music online (and this seems to be a high figure to me, IMHO).

The study shows that the record company services are a bust, and that people are not likely to pay for services like Napster since they are used to getting it for free.

It looks like, for now, the record companies are successful at killing an entire new industry and business model through lawsuits and other DMCA stupidity. I personally don't think its dead forever, but it certainly is on a downhill trail.

Re:In what way is it different?

[davey23sol]

I don't think you read the story. This is, in fact, old news. Idiots like Matt Drudge railed against this months ago.

The problem is that the DMCA has made "normal" media totally different than "analog" media, and given people a lever to get more money. The stations had to bail because they were going to be bled for cash. The DMCA says that commercial actors should get different rates of residuals for over-the-air work and "online" work.

There should be no difference between broadcasting on TCP/IP and over the air, but it is the DMCA and the law which has caused the difference, not the station programmers.

The stations are on their way back right now. A company associated with Broadcast (or is it yahoo?) has come up with ways to remove "over the air" spots and put in properly licensed "online" spots.

So don't blame the broadcasters... they only did what they were forced to do.

I don't listen to the radio at all anymore

[Bonker]

I scrounge Usenet and P2P networks for MP3's. If I find one that's interesting, I download (or even buy , if it's really good) the rest of the album.

Cons: Occasional MP3 distortion from a poorly encoded MP3

Benefits: No FM Station audio 'loudness' compression. Never wait for a song to come on. With my trusty CD-RW, I can listen to a song anywhere... Home, Work, Car. More variety: I had never seriously considered most tencho and electronica before downloading MP3's.

Radio stations, especially those who play top 40, distort music and play what the record companies want to be popular instead of what the listeners like. Most are owned by only a few companies. Hear of Cirrus Broadcasting? Before they deregulated broadcasting, there were several pop and rock stations in Amarillo. Now there is one rock, one pop, one r&b, and about 50 country and Tejano stations. Thanks, but I'll stick to Gnutella and Usenet!

"Don't be alarmed by the tone of my voice. Check out my new weapon, a weapon of choice" - Fatboy Slim.

You need to listen to the audio piece

[crath]

I listened to this report when it was broadcast yesterday, via WUNC's ShoutCast web stream. The radio piece is not as negative as the written article; in fact it ends on an upbeat. It really is worth a listen.

Re:Classic example...

[M-G]

ASCAP and BMI are the two big licensing concerns for radio. These companies deal with performance licenses, which provide performance royalties to the composer. Performance, as used in this sense, is rather broad, as it includes radio broadcast, public playing of recordings, and live performances. The bar that has cover bands playing every night is supposed to have paid fees to ASCAP and BMI.

Most stations have what's called a blanket license with ASCAP and BMI, which allows them to do pretty much anything with the music....play it on the air, set up PA systems at events and play music over them, etc.

As more stations started streaming their audio on the net, ASCAP and BMI got bitchy and greedy, and thought they should get more money, even though this stream didn't differ from the terrestrial broadcast. At the time this was coming to a head, our attorney told us to stream away - we had a blanket license, and it did not specifically exclude any uses. Until such time as the licenses were up for renewal, and those terms changed, ASCAP and BMI couldn't do a thing about it.

Now, as far as many "large" radio stations stopping their streams, this isn't such a bad thing. Given the rush to consolidate the radio industry by the major players like Emmis and Clear Channel, you'll always be able to hear pretty much the same thing in every market. I always found it amusing that the homogenized stations used to announce their streaming audio on the air...like I really want to listen to a crackly audio stream instead of the radio.... As long as the smaller, independent stations can get their streams out, things will be good. These stations still have an individual character and personality that is lost in the corporate stations.

Over-the-Air Digital in Canada dn Eerope

[Kenshin]

Digital Broadcasting is already in full-effect in many places. All the major radio stations in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are already broadcasting in digital on the new "L" band using the Eureka DAB standard. Not many people have digital receivers yet, but that's not the point: the signal is there, and we can get it.

Many european countries have already gone this way as well.

Anyways, check out this site, DigitalRadio.ca, for more info.