PDA

View Full Version : Amazon launches music streaming for Prime members



Teh One Who Knocks
06-12-2014, 12:50 PM
By RYAN NAKASHIMA - The Associated Press


http://i.imgur.com/BJGa0Fg.jpg

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Amazon is launching a music streaming service for its Prime members, adding yet another freebie to its popular free-shipping plan ahead of the expected unveiling of its first smartphone next week.

Starting Thursday, Amazon.com Inc. will offer more than a million tracks for ad-free streaming and download to Kindle Fire tablets as well as to computers and the Amazon Music app for Apple and Android devices. The service, called Prime Music, is likely to be integrated with an Amazon smartphone expected to be previewed on Wednesday.

People who pay $99 a year for Prime can listen to tens of thousands of albums from artists including Beyonce, The Lumineers and Macklemore & Ryan Lewis for no extra cost. By adding music, Amazon is hoping to hook new customers and retain existing ones on its Prime free-shipping plan, which also allows subscribers to watch streams of movies and TV shows and gives Kindle owners a library of books they can borrow once a month.

Steve Boom, Amazon's vice president of digital music, said the service will pay for itself and isn't part of the reason why the company raised the price of Prime from $79 in March — a move Amazon said would cover higher shipping costs. Instead, the company will benefit because Prime members tend to buy more from Amazon and remain loyal customers.

"If they come to Amazon for their music needs, they become better and longer-term Amazon customers and we think that's a good thing," Boom said.

Seattle-based Amazon reached licensing deals with most of the top independent labels and major recording companies Sony and Warner Music, but failed to reach a deal with top-ranked Universal Music Group.

http://i.imgur.com/qwP6Wkyl.jpg

That means that while the service will feature artists like Justin Timberlake, Bruno Mars, Bruce Springsteen, Pink and Madonna — it will lack music by Universal stars such as Katy Perry, Taylor Swift and Jay-Z.

The service also won't have many new releases — and for major artists that could mean music that has been released within the last six months.

Universal didn't reach a deal with Amazon because it disagreed with the value of the lump sum royalty payment on offer for the albums in question, according to two people familiar with the matter.

One person said the royalty amounted to about $40 million to $50 million for the entire music industry over two years.

Labels other than Universal concluded the amount would be equal to or better than a per-play streaming royalty, given how often the songs were played on other digital services, the person said. Both people were not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.The deal comes on the heels of Apple Inc.'s announcement that it is purchasing headphone and music-streaming company Beats for $3 billion and is a further acknowledgement of the rise in popularity of streaming and the decline of digital downloads. U.S. sales of downloaded songs slipped 1 percent last year to $2.8 billion while streaming music revenue surged 39 percent to $1.4 billion, according to the Recording Industry Association of America.

Early results this year showed a further decline in music download sales, Boom said.

"Music consumption habits are changing, which is why we started this," he said. "We saw the change happening."

Amazon will recommend songs to customers who have bought music from it in the past with offers to complete albums if they're available on the service. It has also hired experts to compile hundreds of playlists that are 20 to 50 songs in length based on genre or mood that are easy to download before getting on the subway or on a plane, Boom said.

Russ Crupnick, managing partner of market research company MusicWatch, said that while the offering falls short of what's available on $10-a-month music subscription plans like Spotify or Rhapsody, it may be enough for Prime subscribers to discover they can enjoy an album or two for free.

"If you're a young person and really a superfan all about discovering new music, this probably isn't for you. That's ok, there's enough of the rest of us," he said.

PorkChopSandwiches
06-12-2014, 01:15 PM
Wow!

Teh One Who Knocks
06-12-2014, 01:20 PM
Yeah, it may not have stuff from the Universal label or any newer music, but for a brand new start, this isn't too shabby at all. And I'm sure it will only get better and bigger as it goes.

Acid Trip
06-12-2014, 01:24 PM
Looks like they raised the price of prime from $79 to $99 annually. I guess I missed that story somewhere along the line.

Teh One Who Knocks
06-12-2014, 01:39 PM
Looks like they raised the price of prime from $79 to $99 annually. I guess I missed that story somewhere along the line.

I know we were talking about it somewhere on the forum, but I can't find where. Here's a link to a story on it: http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/13/technology/amazon-prime-price-increase/

Still a good deal at $99 I think

Acid Trip
06-12-2014, 01:48 PM
I know we were talking about it somewhere on the forum, but I can't find where. Here's a link to a story on it: http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/13/technology/amazon-prime-price-increase/

Still a good deal at $99 I think

I agree. I could drop my $36 a year Pandora subscription if the music service is any good.

FBD
06-12-2014, 02:33 PM
rock 102.1 is free :dance:

Muddy
06-12-2014, 03:19 PM
I agree. I could drop my $36 a year Pandora subscription if the music service is any good.

I dumped Pandora for the premium Spotify.. So I could hear exactly what I wanted any time I wanted.. It's expensive though.

Acid Trip
06-12-2014, 04:48 PM
I dumped Pandora for the premium Spotify.. So I could hear exactly what I wanted any time I wanted.. It's expensive though.

How much?

PorkChopSandwiches
06-12-2014, 05:01 PM
I agree. I could drop my $36 a year Pandora subscription if the music service is any good.

I posted a free hacked version in the App Store

Muddy
06-12-2014, 05:01 PM
How much?



$9.99 a month I think..

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 06:54 PM
okay, guy with 1950's phone here...


question - can a user download the tracks to a pc (mp3's) for the 99 bucks per year, or is just real time streaming that they offer?

Muddy
06-12-2014, 07:53 PM
okay, guy with 1950's phone here...


question - can a user download the tracks to a pc (mp3's) for the 99 bucks per year, or is just real time streaming that they offer?

With Spotify you can pull anything "offline" so you dont have to continue to stream it if you hear a set you want to hear a lot.. BUT! It's not an .mp3.. I think it has to be played through the Spotify App..

And I just realized you were prolly talking to Lancella.

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 08:11 PM
With Spotify you can pull anything "offline" so you dont have to continue to stream it if you hear a set you want to hear a lot.. BUT! It's not an .mp3.. I think it has to be played through the Spotify App..

And I just realized you were prolly talking to Lancella.

thanks Muddy...no the question is for anyone that knows...

I tend to be anti-streaming with most things. Old school likes to download the file to his desktop :thumbsup:

Muddy
06-12-2014, 08:13 PM
The cloud is the bomb!

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 08:15 PM
I like having the file so I can save it in a folder, move it to other devices or pc's...

funny that way I guess...even if the device or pc isn't able to access the internet, I can always hear the song or watch the movie

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 08:16 PM
okay I'm waiting for that huge EMP to knock out every PC and the internet :lol:


I'll be ready

Muddy
06-12-2014, 08:54 PM
I like having the file so I can save it in a folder, move it to other devices or pc's...

funny that way I guess...even if the device or pc isn't able to access the internet, I can always hear the song or watch the movie

All that moving content is pointless.. Put a small app on any device you want and all your content is easily accessible through that app.. It's really much much simpler than what you do now, but I notice even though you are tech savvy you tend to buck new technology for years until you finally try it and realize how great it is.

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 09:15 PM
All that moving content is pointless.. Put a small app on any device you want and all your content is easily accessible through that app.. It's really much much simpler than what you do now, but I notice even though you are tech savvy you tend to buck new technology for years until you finally try it and realize how great it is.

I have a desktop computer and 18 USB keys/drives...drives go to friends and in my car for tunes...all music stays in a big folder on my desktop, home base.

having all of those devices is pointless, along with streaming content in general for the reasons I mention...with my environment you don't need to be connected or online to use it :)


for example I would never use a phone to view a Youtube vid or a movie...or a tablet....It's not about bucking new tech, it's about what works in my life. I can't afford to buy devices that do the exact same thing as my pc, it's ridiculous IMO

DemonGeminiX
06-12-2014, 09:39 PM
See I'm still torn about purchasing a smart phone. I don't really need it, however I see the potential of its usefulness in certain situations that I may get into that would require fast access to the internet... like on the spot price comparisons when I'm told I need car maintenance service... or even checking the conditions when the need for service is required so the auto mechanics don't try to rip me off.

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 09:50 PM
for me it's always been about streaming vs owning the file...the devices are a whatever thing for me...

benefits to both methods to be sure, but streams are only as good as the source and the device/connection that you're using..

in my world it's always been better to have a copy of the Game of Thrones episode or the song on mp3, rather than relying on a real time connection/source to keep pumping that info in there at a good rate

DemonGeminiX
06-12-2014, 10:00 PM
I wouldn't waste my usage on downloading junk just to have it on the device. I could always hook the device up to my computer with a USB cable and just transfer the mp3s I want on the device, or just use a MicroSD card to store them on the device. I have thumb drives that take SD and MicroSD cards. Use what you have and don't mess with that DRM shit.

However, I probably wouldn't use my phone to listen to mp3s anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's a waste of battery life, taking it away from what I need the phone to do. And I do have an mp3 player that I use for those purposes.

Hal-9000
06-12-2014, 10:09 PM
I wouldn't waste my usage on downloading junk just to have it on the device. I could always hook the device up to my computer with a USB cable and just transfer the mp3s I want on the device, or just use a MicroSD card to store them on the device. I have thumb drives that take SD and MicroSD cards. Use what you have and don't mess with that DRM shit.

However, I probably wouldn't use my phone to listen to mp3s anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's a waste of battery life, taking it away from what I need the phone to do. And I do have an mp3 player that I use for those purposes.

That's what I do. My PC is the procurer of files and then I can fire them off in all directions if needed. And I don't use my phone to listen to music or watch things...but I know people, primarily girls, that use their phones for everything and eschew the PC altogether.

Up here we pay premium prices for both internet connections and phone data connection usage...and the signals are not strong comparatively to the US. I watch some streaming websites for TV shows and they buffer and stall...not saying the Amazon music thing here would do the same on a user's tablet or phone, it's just a personal want for me to have the files.

Muddy
06-13-2014, 12:06 AM
http://i.imgur.com/YEU8HkX.jpg