Spotify Adds Led Zeppelin as It Focuses on Mobile Business(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Spotify Adds Led Zeppelin as It Focuses on Mobile Business
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/business/media/spotify-said-to-secure-exclusive-deal-with-led-zeppelin.html?hp&_r=0
62 comments
Albums I and II are already available on Spotify--I just checked. Interestingly, their Spotify popularity is currently zero, probably because they just got added.
This is a shame. Spotify's Ogg Vorbis streaming is the poorest quality of all streaming services. I wish they'd switch to a real codec.
Wait, we don't have spottily here in india.
So its back to the LPs. Or maybe the mp3.
Wow. This is both great and sucky. Remember when you'd have to save up, buy the album, listen to it for a whole year, and then listen to the next one? That time was important - it allowed you to grow musically so that you were, indeed, ready for the next album. Now imagine being 13 years old and hearing Kashmir (1975) and then Whole Lotta Love (1969) as your first intro. Those are great, great songs. But really - you needed to hear Whole Lotta Love and understand where that came from - that bluesy roots really coming through. Kashmir is "Led Zeppelin at it's original peak" IMO - it's as unique as any Top 50 song every made IMO. If you started with Whole Lotta Love, you aren't ready for Kashmir!!!! You need time to let that shit soak and for your brain to grow haha. Oh sure, "It's got a killer hook/riff" but you don't get it. Not at 13. You like it for superficial reasons. Later on - 1-5 years go by - and you'll really dig it for what it is and what it represents.
Get off my lawn!
Get off my lawn!
My favorite part of Spotify is the "Related Artists" link. I can click on it and see that Robert Johnson, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis, Pink Floyd, and Queens of the Stone Age are somehow related to Led Zeppelin. This starts me on a very cool journey to discover music I might not have heard.
It is like Wikipedia - click on an artist, then a related artist, then an artist related to that ... Great for road trips and long coding sessions. I can get a sampling of a little bit of music history without having to go to a record store and search through bins of records. Don't get me wrong - the record store was great, but this is better.
It is like Wikipedia - click on an artist, then a related artist, then an artist related to that ... Great for road trips and long coding sessions. I can get a sampling of a little bit of music history without having to go to a record store and search through bins of records. Don't get me wrong - the record store was great, but this is better.
If you use "Follow" on sufficient amount of artists, and Favorite some songs, the "Discover" option gives you some decent selection of more of what you might like (plus the alerts will tell you every time something new from one of your followed artists appears).
After year with Spotify, I can't imagine going back to the model of buying one album/song at a time now.
After year with Spotify, I can't imagine going back to the model of buying one album/song at a time now.
Just don't try the option they call radio. It's awful.
The way you matured with your favorite artists, which is the way I did too, is not the only way. My children, now 13 and 16, first experienced Pink Floyd by finding Dark Side of the Moon in my collection. They liked it and proceeded to listen to the entire catalog digesting the whole thing in about 4 weeks time.
Three years later they still love Pink Floyd and have the same appreciation for music that I have. Now they will have access to Led Zepplin and can experience it the same way they did with Pink Floyd.
Three years later they still love Pink Floyd and have the same appreciation for music that I have. Now they will have access to Led Zepplin and can experience it the same way they did with Pink Floyd.
Yeah, I remember those times, and I hated them, because sometimes you got a shitty album and you were stuck with it. You go to the record store and there are these long ass shelves just full of stuff that may be good or may be shitty and you're never gonna know.
Growing up in the mid/late 90's (HS class of '99) and without high-speed service, I think I had an interesting hybrid experience. Napster wasn't around yet, but you could still get music from other sources like various FTP sites that you could discover or IRC channels.
Using dial-up services for whole albums was time consuming but downloading individual songs wasn't too bad. So I could download one or two songs from an artist I wasn't that familiar with and if I liked the songs, I might go to the store, or CDNow :), to buy a CD.
So you could access a lot of music to sample but still only ended up with a few albums to actually listen to.
I recall growing up listening to certain albums countless times. I'm not sure if I'd still do that today. Some songs require a few listens before they really click with you, and services like Spotify don't have the limits that the old models did.
While it may be nice nostalgia to look back at how I listened to and acquired music growing up, if you could have given 16 year-old me today's Spotify, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.
Using dial-up services for whole albums was time consuming but downloading individual songs wasn't too bad. So I could download one or two songs from an artist I wasn't that familiar with and if I liked the songs, I might go to the store, or CDNow :), to buy a CD.
So you could access a lot of music to sample but still only ended up with a few albums to actually listen to.
I recall growing up listening to certain albums countless times. I'm not sure if I'd still do that today. Some songs require a few listens before they really click with you, and services like Spotify don't have the limits that the old models did.
While it may be nice nostalgia to look back at how I listened to and acquired music growing up, if you could have given 16 year-old me today's Spotify, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.
That applies to enjoying music that is released contemporarily vs. discovering music after the fact, what ever the medium. Anyone being introduced to Led Zeppelin in 1976 on the purest vinyl had just as much (or little) opportunity to grow with the music as someone introduced to them on Spotify in 2013.
That said, I would really like for Spotify to get their discographies cleaned up. A huge number of albums are just plainly mis-tagged with the publication year, and especially for older music you have to scroll through dozens of "Best of", "The original", "The definitive" etc. as well as re-publications "Re-masted", "Legacy edition" etc. to get to the original albums. This makes it difficult to try to explore an artist work in the original arrangement. Also, the knock-off albums need to disappear. I never, ever, ever want to hear even a single song by "The Rock Masters" or anything with "Made famous by" in the title.
That said, I would really like for Spotify to get their discographies cleaned up. A huge number of albums are just plainly mis-tagged with the publication year, and especially for older music you have to scroll through dozens of "Best of", "The original", "The definitive" etc. as well as re-publications "Re-masted", "Legacy edition" etc. to get to the original albums. This makes it difficult to try to explore an artist work in the original arrangement. Also, the knock-off albums need to disappear. I never, ever, ever want to hear even a single song by "The Rock Masters" or anything with "Made famous by" in the title.
Eh... it was also a time when I had to listen to the radio. The radio! The same 50 crappy songs in rotation. It reached its nadir in the 90s-2000s with Clear Channel and the end of DJs and only with Internet radio and the rise of really good public radio stations did it recover.
So I'll take the trade. I can still listen to Led Zeppelin 50 times (not that I'd want to), but I can also listen to a myriad of artists, styles and mood that I would never have been exposed to on my radio.
So I'll take the trade. I can still listen to Led Zeppelin 50 times (not that I'd want to), but I can also listen to a myriad of artists, styles and mood that I would never have been exposed to on my radio.
What you describe is a music world in which your entire music vocabulary was controlled by large labels.
What kids have now isn't sitting around waiting for Atlantic or Columbia to grace their record store with the next big thing to listen to. Instead, they have a world where they can dig through an immense, mind-bendingly vast catalog of music and unearth their own hidden gems.
What kids have now isn't sitting around waiting for Atlantic or Columbia to grace their record store with the next big thing to listen to. Instead, they have a world where they can dig through an immense, mind-bendingly vast catalog of music and unearth their own hidden gems.
The death of physical media means one rarely watches the same film more than once or listens to the whole album. Something is definitely lost. Especially with music, where an album can take a couple listens to really like it. That said, I'm not sure how you fix it. And most people I know listen to iTunes radio or Pandora anyway.
By that logic someone who was born in 1970, and is 43 now, can never appreciate Led Zeppelin. There weren't born when Whole Lotta Love came out, and were 5 when Kashmir came out. They never grew with the artist. By your logic, we should throw out all "old" music.
No need to be captious, snarky, or just plain obnoxious. If you don't agree, fine - move on or comment in a polite way. Don't over-analyze with a lot of biased assumptions.
Yes but remember the time you saved up and bought an album only to realize there is only one good song on it. I like the option to listen to the songs I like.
Sounds like Stockholm syndrome for technologically lacking times :P
If you appreciate music at all, you will appreciate it whether you can get it instantly or wait weeks for it, the latter being an inconvenience, though one filled with anticipation, stress, and excitement.
Spotify is the best thing to happen to music since forever!
If you appreciate music at all, you will appreciate it whether you can get it instantly or wait weeks for it, the latter being an inconvenience, though one filled with anticipation, stress, and excitement.
Spotify is the best thing to happen to music since forever!
I'm not sure that's always true. Some of my favourite artists are ones that I really didn't get when I first heard them.
I remember being away from home for a few days in the late 80s and, having got bored with the few tapes I could carry with me I bought Husker Du's Zen Arcade, as I'd read a review of an album I liked that made reference to that one. On the first listen, I thought it was an absolute chaotic racket.
But having bought it, and not having much else to listen to, I played it through a few times and by the end of my trip I'd bought their next two albums. I'm pretty sure that had I had Spotify back then, I would have managed at most a couple of tracks before dismissing the album out of hand, trying something else and never listening to it again.
Don't get me wrong - instant access to most of the world's music is great. But unless you've got better willpower than I have, that access could easily result in you missing out on some of those harder to get into artists.
I remember being away from home for a few days in the late 80s and, having got bored with the few tapes I could carry with me I bought Husker Du's Zen Arcade, as I'd read a review of an album I liked that made reference to that one. On the first listen, I thought it was an absolute chaotic racket.
But having bought it, and not having much else to listen to, I played it through a few times and by the end of my trip I'd bought their next two albums. I'm pretty sure that had I had Spotify back then, I would have managed at most a couple of tracks before dismissing the album out of hand, trying something else and never listening to it again.
Don't get me wrong - instant access to most of the world's music is great. But unless you've got better willpower than I have, that access could easily result in you missing out on some of those harder to get into artists.
I had the exact same experience with a few albums when I was growing up. Some of my favorite albums were unappealing to me on first listen.
Now I just listen to whatever really accessible pop music bubbles up through the social ecosystem. It's kind of sad.
Now I just listen to whatever really accessible pop music bubbles up through the social ecosystem. It's kind of sad.
>If you appreciate music at all, you will appreciate it whether you can get it instantly or wait weeks for it, the latter being an inconvenience, though one filled with anticipation, stress, and excitement
Unfortunately, this just isn't true. Enjoyment of music is very dependent on context in most circumstances.
An easy example is metal drumming -- not necessarily impressive based on sound alone, but extremely impressive once you realize the physicality it requires.
The same goes for the way in which the user hears the music. Track 6 out of 10 on a physical CD or spotify CD may not get noticed as much as it would if it were track 1 on side B of a vinyl
Unfortunately, this just isn't true. Enjoyment of music is very dependent on context in most circumstances.
An easy example is metal drumming -- not necessarily impressive based on sound alone, but extremely impressive once you realize the physicality it requires.
The same goes for the way in which the user hears the music. Track 6 out of 10 on a physical CD or spotify CD may not get noticed as much as it would if it were track 1 on side B of a vinyl
This is huge news for 17 year old me.
How does this work if Spotify supposedly pays all artists in the same way?
Who said they pay them the same way? Spotify has never said that and it is most certainly not true. They carefully worded that they pay roughly 70% to rights holders, and that it is their percentage of the total streams, times their rate. They did not ever say everyone gets the same rate. They just tried to imply it so that artists would stop bitching.
The rate is what the rights holder pays to the artist. The rights holders all get paid on the same formula.
http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/#royalties-i...
http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/#royalties-i...
They probably just cut them a check as a flat payment; streaming terms the same.
A good friend of mine in the music biz had this to say, in response to my questions:
"They absolutely don't pay every artist the same amount. Besides the fact that per-stream rates are almost meaningless because they vary month-to-month as Spotify's own revenues fluctuate, I would be willing to believe major labels get a higher payout as a result of their equity positions. And with that, it isn't too preposterous that Atlantic (via parent WMG) would have brought Led Zeppelin exclusively to Spotify on special terms such as a minimum per-stream rate, some free extended term advertising to artificially boost data figures, or something entirely more enticing. And even if Spotify is, in fact, paying out an equal rate for Led Zeppelin streams, it may be that Atlantic received a nice advance--or even a debt-free bonus--as an incentive."
"They absolutely don't pay every artist the same amount. Besides the fact that per-stream rates are almost meaningless because they vary month-to-month as Spotify's own revenues fluctuate, I would be willing to believe major labels get a higher payout as a result of their equity positions. And with that, it isn't too preposterous that Atlantic (via parent WMG) would have brought Led Zeppelin exclusively to Spotify on special terms such as a minimum per-stream rate, some free extended term advertising to artificially boost data figures, or something entirely more enticing. And even if Spotify is, in fact, paying out an equal rate for Led Zeppelin streams, it may be that Atlantic received a nice advance--or even a debt-free bonus--as an incentive."
"That 70% is split amongst the rights holders in accordance with the popularity of their music on the service. The label or publisher then divides these royalties and accounts to each artist depending on their individual deals."
So maybe Spotify is dealing with the labels/publishers (Atlantic has Zepp) to cut this special deal and perhaps allow them a bigger rev share?
So maybe Spotify is dealing with the labels/publishers (Atlantic has Zepp) to cut this special deal and perhaps allow them a bigger rev share?
You beat me to it. Wasn't there a judgment against Spotify because they hadn't paid ANY Artists yet?
Are you perhaps thinking of Grooveshark? They were sued (and in a bad legal spot) over unpaid royalties, can't find any reference to Spotify and unpaid royalties online.
You might be right. I tried to find a link. However, revealing that they only pay 0.006 per stream? They might as well not pay Artists. What a joke!
I've been waiting for Spotify to get Led Zeppelin in their catalog since I signed up when it launched in the US (Summer 2011). No Quarter is one of my favorite songs and I would love to play it on speaker at home digitally.
Tool would be the next one I'm hoping for, until then... grooveshark for them.
Edit: Looks like only two albums for now =\
Tool would be the next one I'm hoping for, until then... grooveshark for them.
Edit: Looks like only two albums for now =\
I wonder if Led Zeppelin's "deal" with Youtube will survive:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=led%20zeppelin&s...
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=led%20zeppelin&s...
Even with spotify access, I really don't like the way those deals are going. Soon we'll need spotify for LZ, itunes for TB, let's say Google music for ACDC, etc. In reality this means only one thing: instead of paying for access, people will choose one or two providers and just torrent the unavailable albums. This is not beneficial to any of the groups involved (unless the streaming providers count on people paying for multiple subscriptions).
How many years will have to pass before publishers / authors really get what people expect and are willing to pay for?
How many years will have to pass before publishers / authors really get what people expect and are willing to pay for?
Well if people just torrented everything instead of giving money to the old pigs with new lipstick, it would be beneficial to all of the groups not wanting to have the Internet regress into the equivalent of unbundled cable TV.
Except for, you know, the people MAKING stuff.
I switched from Rdio to Spotify because the latter allows sideloading your own mp3s into your catalogue. So my Spotify includes Tool, which aren't on any streaming service.
The bottom line is as long as I can buy the content instead of renting I can get it in via sideloading, so it really doesn't matter if the streaming services have excusives.
The bottom line is as long as I can buy the content instead of renting I can get it in via sideloading, so it really doesn't matter if the streaming services have excusives.
Conversely, we've had more than a decade of common music piracy, and it hasn't destroyed the music industry, so who cares if everyone pirates?
Who's TB?
How many people are interested in streaming Led Zeppelin and don't already own a big chunk of the collection.
Spotify premium subscriber here. What I've heard of LZ is good, but I don't think I've heard anything other than best-of albums. I'd love the chance to listen to their back catalogue.
I gave away / lost / threw away all of my CDs over the last few years. I don't own a stereo, so they just took up space. I think that the artists that refuse to appear on Spotify are very short sighted, they may as well be invisible to a whole generation.
I gave away / lost / threw away all of my CDs over the last few years. I don't own a stereo, so they just took up space. I think that the artists that refuse to appear on Spotify are very short sighted, they may as well be invisible to a whole generation.
Spotify Premium user here too. To my knowledge the two albums available today (and not before today, as far as I can tell) are the only tracks available that are by Led Zeppelin and not a tribute/cover band.
I am. A few years ago I gave up on CDs and sold my entire collection, including a big chunk of Led Zep
Are you assuming that LZ is not getting new listeners?
It strikes me as an unstable equilibrium a la Prisoners' Dilemma.
I agree that the best situation seems to be one where every service has everything, and they just compete on price, UI, audio quality, reliability, etc. Users can subscribe to the service they like best, services can concentrate on technical excellence instead of negotiating with artists, and artists get access to all users.
However, given that situation, what happens when one of the services decides to negotiate a big exclusive deal with a popular group? This is a huge competitive advantage for them. They'll steal a ton of new users jumping ship from other services. Naturally, a service would try to accomplish this.
How do other services respond? I don't think they'd have any good way to deal with that besides trying to score their own exclusives.
Before long, everything is fragmented and nobody is happy. Users have trouble finding the music they want. Services are stuck fighting over exclusive rights to popular artists. Artists don't get the exposure they want. But they're stuck with it, because the good situation is not stable.
I agree that the best situation seems to be one where every service has everything, and they just compete on price, UI, audio quality, reliability, etc. Users can subscribe to the service they like best, services can concentrate on technical excellence instead of negotiating with artists, and artists get access to all users.
However, given that situation, what happens when one of the services decides to negotiate a big exclusive deal with a popular group? This is a huge competitive advantage for them. They'll steal a ton of new users jumping ship from other services. Naturally, a service would try to accomplish this.
How do other services respond? I don't think they'd have any good way to deal with that besides trying to score their own exclusives.
Before long, everything is fragmented and nobody is happy. Users have trouble finding the music they want. Services are stuck fighting over exclusive rights to popular artists. Artists don't get the exposure they want. But they're stuck with it, because the good situation is not stable.
I think that given enough providers it could be stable. Right now we've got just few big players. Spotify, google, itunes, deezer in some places. Some are much bigger than others. Losing 0.5 potential listeners of not that much. But if we had 20+ providers, who would ever accept an exclusive deal? I.e. which artist would go for a "95% of listeners will not be able to access your music, but that's OK, you'll be exclusive and well promoted on our service" (+the deal signing bonus of course)
Exclusivities don't need to last forever. An exclusive of a few months may be enough to acquire additional subscribers while keeping the cost low enough to be justified as an acquisition cost.
Personally, I think exclusives will always be around.
Personally, I think exclusives will always be around.
I'm a librarian by trade and exclusive deals are the bane of our existence. Whether its scholarly journals or popular ebooks, it's an incredibly inefficient way for us to provide service. Just the overhead of supporting multiple platforms is problematic, never mind how inconvenient it might be for the user.
Terrible news for Led Zepagain and Lez Zeppelin.
I dunno if you're being flip, but Lez Zeppelin is a pretty good group in its own right and not trying to simply place cover songs of originals....
[deleted]
I think we'll see more battles in the coming years between Apple and Spotify over exclusive rights for the music of artists that aren't on either service.
Sidenote: I'm curious how iTunes Radio has done since they released it. I haven't heard from anyone who prefers that over Pandora or Spotify's offering. It'd be a large acquisition by their (or anyone's) standards, and I know I'm not saying anything revolutionary here, but there have to be discussions that have happened/will continue to happen about Apple buying Spotify.
Sidenote: I'm curious how iTunes Radio has done since they released it. I haven't heard from anyone who prefers that over Pandora or Spotify's offering. It'd be a large acquisition by their (or anyone's) standards, and I know I'm not saying anything revolutionary here, but there have to be discussions that have happened/will continue to happen about Apple buying Spotify.
Re: Sidenote:
I tried out iTunes Radio last night, thinking "this'll be cool!" About two songs into it, they played an ad for Macy's. I'll stick with Rdio, thanks.
I tried out iTunes Radio last night, thinking "this'll be cool!" About two songs into it, they played an ad for Macy's. I'll stick with Rdio, thanks.
Sounds about right. I gave it a try because of their Beatles catalogue, but went back to Spotify after a few sessions.
Oh yeah. So that's a feature now...