bowie

Since the summer (or earlier), you’ve been hearing that online streaming service SoundCloud would partner with big content makers. But noticeably absent was any official announcement of a label.

Well, a huge chunk of that picture just came together. SoundCloud and Warner Music Group today announced that they had inked a new partnership. The WMG announcement is huge – the global music conglomerate is just shy of 42% of worldwide market share. They’re the major among majors, the biggest US label, and the biggest publisher.

Oddly, many in the press jumped the gun on this announcement, claiming Warner had made a deal with SoundCloud before it evidently actually happened. But this is that deal, and it has big implications.

And if you think you don’t listen to Warner Music Group releases, you either have extraordinarily obscure tastes, or you’re just wrong. Their labels range from Nonesuch to Atlantic to Rhino, apart from things with “Warner” in them. (Full list below.) It even includes the Bowie record above – I know; it was the top hit on Rhino’s site today.

There were actually two announcements today. We knew as of summer that SoundCloud planned a subscription service not only for people uploading music, but those who just want to listen ad-free as advertisements start to appear on the service. But we only know now when that will happen – in the “first half of 2015.” Now, SoundCloud not only confirmed that subscription to CDM at the time, but also told us that they were investigating the ability for paid upload subscribers (like you, probably) to avoid ads. No additional information is available on that yet, but I don’t think there’s yet reason for panic – there just aren’t a lot of ads on the service yet to want to avoid.

So, what does this mean?

On_SoundCloud

For Warner and its artists (who I’m certain include some CDM readers), the answer is money – at least in some quantity. On SoundCloud‘s Premiere level, currently available only to select partners, offers money via advertising revenue for those who want to ad advertisements to their stream. It should also offer revenue via subscription services. There are a lot of unknowns here. To be successful, SoundCloud must find advertisers wanting to pay, listeners willing to listen, and by next year, subscribers willing to pay not to hear the ads.

What the deal offers for the moment is content – potentially, a lot of it.

It’s up to Warner to choose what content is available out of its catalog. SoundCloud tells CDM that Warner gets to choose which tracks are available, in exchange for revenue on the ad-supported free service as well as next year’s planned subscription service.

soundcloudscreen

Here’s the significant twist: if you’re a Warner-recorded artist or Warner/Chappell-published music author, you will get license fees out of the deal. And what’s unclear is what will happen to, say, DJs uploading music or remix artists. From a control standpoint, you might not want that content uploaded. On the other hand, SoundCloud is licensed, so all those plays would mean revenue. So while SoundCloud isn’t commenting on the terms, and this lies in the hands of Warner (and in Warner’s hands if you happen to be a Warner artist), we’ll see if this means a shift from uploads being taken down or blocked to having them left there, instead.

But I think the most significant information is this: read the full list of who Warner represents:

Asylum, Atlantic, Big Beat, East West, Elektra, Fueled by Ramen, Nonesuch, Parlophone, Reprise, Rhino, Roadrunner, Rykodisc, Sire, Warner Bros., Warner Classics, Warner Music Nashville, and Word, as well as Warner/Chappell Music

That’s a lot of music. And that means SoundCloud is now in the big league for the first time since its launch. Whether they can win in the big league, that’s another story – whether they’re another Spotify, or just another wannabe.

Warner Music Group and SoundCloud Announce Groundbreaking Partnership [WMG announcement]

Previously:
SoundCloud Explains Their New Plans to Us – And How Ads Will Work

Meet Those SoundCloud Premier Partners, Advertisers – And Look Back 5 Years Ago

Addendum: What to watch for

I think there may be some misunderstandings about my position here. Let me sum it up: through this licensing deal, Warner can put an enormous amount of music online – like a ridiculous amount. Check the artist list for Nonesuch alone.

But as we’ve learned again and again in the history of the Internet, having the license deal and access to the music sometimes amounts to absolutely nothing. You have to take that music and connect it to listeners.

The usual questions apply:

1. What will Warner’s music “On SoundCloud” look like that would make people look for it there instead of on YouTube or Spotify or iTunes?

2. What will the content channels even look like; what’s unique to SoundCloud as a format?

3. As I mentioned before, does this mean that existing artists adding Warner-owned content to DJ mixes and remixes will be able to upload it freely – with license fees trickling to the audiences?

These are huge questions, because SoundCloud will need to use the content to attract listeners, and then use those listeners to attract advertisers, then attract still more listeners who want to pay to avoid ads.

So, even as some hot-headed SoundCloud users gripe about ads on their service or the presence of a major label, that really isn’t the problem. The problem is that the whole deal could turn out to be irrelevant if SoundCloud can’t leverage what it just got – and that could mean business troubles ahead for the service. So that’s what we’re looking for; it’s just too early to say.

  • Ryan

    I am a huge SoundCloud user and I personally couldn’t care less. I know for a fact I don’t listen to Warner artists and I frankly have no interest in doing so. I use SoundCloud not as a platform to listen to the works of established, mainstream artists but rather to discover emerging artists in niches and genres that will likely never even be mainstream. I use SoundCloud to track their careers as they grow and an entirely new model has risen up around the generation of artists for whom this is the new normal. None of the artists I follow on SoundCloud would likely ever even sign with Warner as there are more effective options for distribution in the niches they inhabit elsewhere. When these emerging artists outgrow or grow to a point where they want to get serious about monetizing their music, they’re increasingly turning to self-distribution, Band Camp, Drip.fm, Patreon or any of the other disruptive platforms that are making dinosaurs like Warner increasingly irrelevant.

    • Frank

      +1 on literally everything you’ve said.Of the major artists that i like, most i don’t follow on SC at all.For me SC is solely to find out about new and emerging artists that most of them could care less about getting a major deal.Major label record deals are so 90s, unless you *have to* reach Lady Gaga status no matter what, you really don’t need a major label per se.

      • “on SoundCloud” – that’s the key question.

        Look, there’s still a lot of music getting signed out there, and probably more than any of us realize are now on “majors” because those majors now own so many tiny imprints and the like that appear to the untrained eye like minors.

        But this has to fit into hearing music through other channels; that part of the picture is to me what’s murky.

    • I’m sorry, I’m a huge fan of Drip.fm and Bandcamp, but to say they’re “disrupting” a media and publishing conglomerate that has 40% of *worldwide* market share of music – I can’t agree.

      Let’s just take *one* label of the many Warner imprints.
      http://www.nonesuch.com/artists

      This is a huge part of music. I mean, sure, if your entire music diet is obscure SoundCloud uploads, yes, but… sorry, that sounds dismal.

      And as for listening to SoundCloud uploads, their business and sustainability may well depend on revenue from Warner, or one day, that site could be gone.

      • Ryan

        Disruption doesn’t happen overnight. These platforms are working on the fringes of the music ecosystem, catering to both artists and fans of those artists that correlate highly to being technology early adopters. As the technology and associated business models proliferate down the adoption curve I think we’ll see genuine disruption of the majors model as in the digital economy there will ultimately be no room for middle men. Platforms that aggregate and curate content sure, but people who simply take a slice from the pie won’t get a seat at the table when platforms become profligate enough to ensure every artist has the opportunity to find and monetize an audience directly, through a platform that will take a much smaller cut than a label would.

        SoundCloud has many alternative options available to them to monetize their users apart from partnering with the majors. They are first and foremost a grassroots community and in my opinion they should be focusing on that community and offering people the opportunity to directly support the artists they love through their platform. SC could easily borrow from both Patreon and Bandcamp’s monetization strategies and offer uses the chance to directly support an artists and / or purchase their music through SC and take a small cut in the process. If they achieved scale and became the defacto place people go to discover, engage with and support artists in a few niches (Electronic, hip-hop and corners of the indie landscape would suffice) I think they’d be plenty sustainable.

        And my music diet is in fact almost exclusively obscure SoundCloud uploads and I find more AMAZING new music every single day than I can possibly even listen to. It couldn’t be further from dismal.

        P.S. I love you site. Keep up the great work.

      • Popo Bawa

        But the music publishing industry seems incestuous, they only count market share of similar companies. By far, most musicians do not use these labels to publish or distribute their work. The so-called “big labels” are actually a loud minority.

    • Ryan is a gay craphomo

      OOO! I am so eclectic! OOO I am so underground! I don’t listen to any Warner Bros. artists! Don’t you just want to have dirty gay sex with me?! I’m so trendy!!! What a complete total gay poop eating shitfag…

  • Ryan

    I am a huge SoundCloud user and I personally couldn’t care less. I know for a fact I don’t listen to Warner artists and I frankly have no interest in doing so. I use SoundCloud not as a platform to listen to the works of established, mainstream artists but rather to discover emerging artists in niches and genres that will likely never even be mainstream. I use SoundCloud to track their careers as they grow and an entirely new model has risen up around the generation of artists for whom this is the new normal. None of the artists I follow on SoundCloud would likely ever even sign with Warner as there are more effective options for distribution in the niches they inhabit elsewhere. When these emerging artists outgrow or grow to a point where they want to get serious about monetizing their music, they’re increasingly turning to self-distribution, Band Camp, Drip.fm, Patreon or any of the other disruptive platforms that are making dinosaurs like Warner increasingly irrelevant.

    • Frank

      +1 on literally everything you’ve said.Of the major artists that i like, most i don’t follow on SC at all.For me SC is solely to find out about new and emerging artists that most of them could care less about getting a major deal.Major label record deals are so 90s, unless you *have to* reach Lady Gaga status no matter what, you really don’t need a major label per se.

      • “on SoundCloud” – that’s the key question.

        Look, there’s still a lot of music getting signed out there, and probably more than any of us realize are now on “majors” because those majors now own so many tiny imprints and the like that appear to the untrained eye like minors.

        But this has to fit into hearing music through other channels; that part of the picture is to me what’s murky.

    • I’m sorry, I’m a huge fan of Drip.fm and Bandcamp, but to say they’re “disrupting” a media and publishing conglomerate that has 40% of *worldwide* market share of music – I can’t agree.

      Let’s just take *one* label of the many Warner imprints.
      http://www.nonesuch.com/artists

      This is a huge part of music. I mean, sure, if your entire music diet is obscure SoundCloud uploads, yes, but… sorry, that sounds dismal.

      And as for listening to SoundCloud uploads, their business and sustainability may well depend on revenue from Warner, or one day, that site could be gone.

      • Ryan

        Disruption doesn’t happen overnight. These platforms are working on the fringes of the music ecosystem, catering to both artists and fans of those artists that correlate highly to being technology early adopters. As the technology and associated business models proliferate down the adoption curve I think we’ll see genuine disruption of the majors model as in the digital economy there will ultimately be no room for middle men. Platforms that aggregate and curate content sure, but people who simply take a slice from the pie won’t get a seat at the table when platforms become profligate enough to ensure every artist has the opportunity to find and monetize an audience directly, through a platform that will take a much smaller cut than a label would.

        SoundCloud has many alternative options available to them to monetize their users apart from partnering with the majors. They are first and foremost a grassroots community and in my opinion they should be focusing on that community and offering people the opportunity to directly support the artists they love through their platform. SC could easily borrow from both Patreon and Bandcamp’s monetization strategies and offer uses the chance to directly support an artists and / or purchase their music through SC and take a small cut in the process. If they achieved scale and became the defacto place people go to discover, engage with and support artists in a few niches (Electronic, hip-hop and corners of the indie landscape would suffice) I think they’d be plenty sustainable.

        And my music diet is in fact almost exclusively obscure SoundCloud uploads and I find more AMAZING new music every single day than I can possibly even listen to. It couldn’t be further from dismal.

        P.S. I love your site. Keep up the great work.

      • Popo Bawa

        But the music publishing industry seems incestuous, they only count market share of similar companies. By far, most musicians do not use these labels to publish or distribute their work. The so-called “big labels” are actually a loud minority.

    • Ryan is a gay craphomo

      OOO! I am so eclectic! OOO I am so underground! I don’t listen to any Warner Bros. artists! Don’t you just want to have dirty gay sex with me?! I’m so trendy!!! What a complete total gay poop eating shitfag…

  • Ryan

    I am a huge SoundCloud user and I personally couldn’t care less. I know for a fact I don’t listen to Warner artists and I frankly have no interest in doing so. I use SoundCloud not as a platform to listen to the works of established, mainstream artists but rather to discover emerging artists in niches and genres that will likely never even be mainstream. I use SoundCloud to track their careers as they grow and an entirely new model has risen up around the generation of artists for whom this is the new normal. None of the artists I follow on SoundCloud would likely ever even sign with Warner as there are more effective options for distribution in the niches they inhabit elsewhere. When these emerging artists outgrow or grow to a point where they want to get serious about monetizing their music, they’re increasingly turning to self-distribution, Band Camp, Drip.fm, Patreon or any of the other disruptive platforms that are making dinosaurs like Warner increasingly irrelevant.

    • Frank

      +1 on literally everything you’ve said.Of the major artists that i like, most i don’t follow on SC at all.For me SC is solely to find out about new and emerging artists that most of them could care less about getting a major deal.Major label record deals are so 90s, unless you *have to* reach Lady Gaga status no matter what, you really don’t need a major label per se.

      • “on SoundCloud” – that’s the key question.

        Look, there’s still a lot of music getting signed out there, and probably more than any of us realize are now on “majors” because those majors now own so many tiny imprints and the like that appear to the untrained eye like minors.

        But this has to fit into hearing music through other channels; that part of the picture is to me what’s murky.

    • I’m sorry, I’m a huge fan of Drip.fm and Bandcamp, but to say they’re “disrupting” a media and publishing conglomerate that has 40% of *worldwide* market share of music – I can’t agree.

      Let’s just take *one* label of the many Warner imprints.
      http://www.nonesuch.com/artists

      This is a huge part of music. I mean, sure, if your entire music diet is obscure SoundCloud uploads, yes, but… sorry, that sounds dismal.

      And as for listening to SoundCloud uploads, their business and sustainability may well depend on revenue from Warner, or one day, that site could be gone.

      • Ryan

        Disruption doesn’t happen overnight. These platforms are working on the fringes of the music ecosystem, catering to both artists and fans of those artists that correlate highly to being technology early adopters. As the technology and associated business models proliferate down the adoption curve I think we’ll see genuine disruption of the majors model as in the digital economy there will ultimately be no room for middle men. Platforms that aggregate and curate content sure, but people who simply take a slice from the pie won’t get a seat at the table when platforms become profligate enough to ensure every artist has the opportunity to find and monetize an audience directly, through a platform that will take a much smaller cut than a label would.

        SoundCloud has many alternative options available to them to monetize their users apart from partnering with the majors. They are first and foremost a grassroots community and in my opinion they should be focusing on that community and offering people the opportunity to directly support the artists they love through their platform. SC could easily borrow from both Patreon and Bandcamp’s monetization strategies and offer uses the chance to directly support an artists and / or purchase their music through SC and take a small cut in the process. If they achieved scale and became the defacto place people go to discover, engage with and support artists in a few niches (Electronic, hip-hop and corners of the indie landscape would suffice) I think they’d be plenty sustainable.

        And my music diet is in fact almost exclusively obscure SoundCloud uploads and I find more AMAZING new music every single day than I can possibly even listen to. It couldn’t be further from dismal.

        P.S. I love your site. Keep up the great work.

      • Popo Bawa

        But the music publishing industry seems incestuous, they only count market share of similar companies. By far, most musicians do not use these labels to publish or distribute their work. The so-called “big labels” are actually a loud minority.

    • Ryan is a gay craphomo

      OOO! I am so eclectic! OOO I am so underground! I don’t listen to any Warner Bros. artists! Don’t you just want to have dirty gay sex with me?! I’m so trendy!!! What a complete total gay poop eating shitfag…

  • Yur2die4

    I don’t want money. I don’t want ads. I don’t want to pay. I just want a public billboard.

    • That sounds reasonable. So you want a private company to put up a site for you to use for free that has absolutely no revenue at all. Good luck with that.

    • schlauchmilch

      … but you want good music, yes? And artists that want to share their awesome music…? While they live off of…?

      I mean I’m all against the evil money makers, but some musicians really need the money. Asking them to share their music for free is easy to say for the consumer.

      • Yur2die4

        That’s the thing. I always considered soundcloud more of a place that people would upload samples of their tracks, or shit-takes. Or record various anomalies from the streets etc. A cloud much like a cloud for personal photos and videos. Raw, unprofessional, just ‘this is what’s going on’.

        Now soundcloud has taken the step towards being another Bandcamp or MySpace. Which, already exist. Also, there may now be interference with the soundcloud ‘experience’ due to disruptions either from audible commercials or “hey, if you like that, listen to this” forcefed sonic gruel.

  • Yur2die4

    I don’t want money. I don’t want ads. I don’t want to pay. I just want a public billboard.

    • That sounds reasonable. So you want a private company to put up a site for you to use for free that has absolutely no revenue at all. Good luck with that.

    • schlauchmilch

      … but you want good music, yes? And artists that want to share their awesome music…? While they live off of…?

      I mean I’m all against the evil money makers, but some musicians really need the money. Asking them to share their music for free is easy to say for the consumer.

      • Yur2die4

        That’s the thing. I always considered soundcloud more of a place that people would upload samples of their tracks, or shit-takes. Or record various anomalies from the streets etc. A cloud much like a cloud for personal photos and videos. Raw, unprofessional, just ‘this is what’s going on’.

        Now soundcloud has taken the step towards being another Bandcamp or MySpace. Which, already exist. Also, there may now be interference with the soundcloud ‘experience’ due to disruptions either from audible commercials or “hey, if you like that, listen to this” forcefed sonic gruel.

  • Yur2die4

    I don’t want money. I don’t want ads. I don’t want to pay. I just want a public billboard.

    • That sounds reasonable. So you want a private company to put up a site for you to use for free that has absolutely no revenue at all. Good luck with that.

    • schlauchmilch

      … but you want good music, yes? And artists that want to share their awesome music…? While they live off of…?

      I mean I’m all against the evil money makers, but some musicians really need the money. Asking them to share their music for free is easy to say for the consumer.

      • Yur2die4

        That’s the thing. I always considered soundcloud more of a place that people would upload samples of their tracks, or shit-takes. Or record various anomalies from the streets etc. A cloud much like a cloud for personal photos and videos. Raw, unprofessional, just ‘this is what’s going on’.

        Now soundcloud has taken the step towards being another Bandcamp or MySpace. Which, already exist. Also, there may now be interference with the soundcloud ‘experience’ due to disruptions either from audible commercials or “hey, if you like that, listen to this” forcefed sonic gruel.

  • Goldbaby

    Maybe now they will up their streaming quality. 128 kbps is rather underwhelming…

  • Goldbaby

    Maybe now they will up their streaming quality. 128 kbps is rather underwhelming…

  • Goldbaby

    Maybe now they will up their streaming quality. 128 kbps is rather underwhelming…

  • heinrichz

    As suspicious as i generally am about major corporations meddling in the creative arts, this development might not necessarily be a bad thing. Maybe we also get some quality control going here, i’m not asking for old school A&R but aome kind of a curating function besides what DJs or some hyper active self promoters do.

  • heinrichz

    As suspicious as i generally am about major corporations meddling in the creative arts, this development might not necessarily be a bad thing. Maybe we also get some quality control going here, i’m not asking for old school A&R but aome kind of a curating function besides what DJs or some hyper active self promoters do.

  • heinrichz

    As suspicious as i generally am about major corporations meddling in the creative arts, this development might not necessarily be a bad thing. Maybe we also get some quality control going here, i’m not asking for old school A&R but aome kind of a curating function besides what DJs or some hyper active self promoters do.

  • The_SwedishFish

    What this deal offers is content that you can get literally anywhere in exchange for a completely altered user experience. Sorry but the only people that benefit from this are venture capital people.

    Eric Wahlforss, founder and chief technology officer of SoundCloud Ltd., says a licensing agreement with Warner Music Group will “certainly help to boost our revenues.” They are totally allowed to make money any way they want but let’s not pretend it’s a good thing for anyone else.

    • The_SwedishFish

      That this reads like an apologist article for a business press release is a little odd
      though.

      • What about it reads as apologist to you?

        I agree with you – I think it’s completely unclear how the music will actually be presented, and that’s a huge question. This could all turn out to be completely irrelevant based on that question.

        I’m just commenting on what we know now, which isn’t much. It’s in SoundCloud’s and Warner’s hands whether they can sit on this obscenely huge amount of music and actually do something with it that makes sense on SoundCloud.

        • The_SwedishFish

          Sorry if that came across the wrong way. I think more than anything I am just disappointed with soundcloud. Not that they are trying to monetize the site, I know that’s just an unfortunate fact of the world but in how the are doing it. Trying to become another Spotify isn’t even remotely interesting and I don’t think that’s what their current core user base is looking for from them.

  • The_SwedishFish

    What this deal offers is content that you can get literally anywhere in exchange for a completely altered user experience. Sorry but the only people that benefit from this are venture capital people.

    Eric Wahlforss, founder and chief technology officer of SoundCloud Ltd., says a licensing agreement with Warner Music Group will “certainly help to boost our revenues.” They are totally allowed to make money any way they want but let’s not pretend it’s a good thing for anyone else.

    • The_SwedishFish

      That this reads like an apologist article for a business press release is a little odd
      though.

      • What about it reads as apologist to you?

        I agree with you – I think it’s completely unclear how the music will actually be presented, and that’s a huge question. This could all turn out to be completely irrelevant based on that question.

        I’m just commenting on what we know now, which isn’t much. It’s in SoundCloud’s and Warner’s hands whether they can sit on this obscenely huge amount of music and actually do something with it that makes sense on SoundCloud.

        • The_SwedishFish

          Sorry if that came across the wrong way. I think more than anything I am just disappointed with soundcloud. Not that they are trying to monetize the site, I know that’s just an unfortunate fact of the world but in how the are doing it. Trying to become another Spotify isn’t even remotely interesting and I don’t think that’s what their current core user base is looking for from them.

  • The_SwedishFish

    What this deal offers is content that you can get literally anywhere in exchange for a completely altered user experience. Sorry but the only people that benefit from this are venture capital people.

    Eric Wahlforss, founder and chief technology officer of SoundCloud Ltd., says a licensing agreement with Warner Music Group will “certainly help to boost our revenues.” They are totally allowed to make money any way they want but let’s not pretend it’s a good thing for anyone else.

    • The_SwedishFish

      That this reads like an apologist article for a business press release is a little odd
      though.

      • What about it reads as apologist to you?

        I agree with you – I think it’s completely unclear how the music will actually be presented, and that’s a huge question. This could all turn out to be completely irrelevant based on that question.

        I’m just commenting on what we know now, which isn’t much. It’s in SoundCloud’s and Warner’s hands whether they can sit on this obscenely huge amount of music and actually do something with it that makes sense on SoundCloud.

        • The_SwedishFish

          Sorry if that came across the wrong way. I think more than anything I am just disappointed with soundcloud. Not that they are trying to monetize the site, I know that’s just an unfortunate fact of the world but in how the are doing it. Trying to become another Spotify isn’t even remotely interesting and I don’t think that’s what their current core user base is looking for from them.

  • bend

    I don’t know a single label up there. I shouldn’t care , but I do. $hame on you. Where is the ello for music streaming? It certainly would win a lot of users now…

    • Haha, I don’t believe you at all. You most likely just don’t know it, because you haven’t checked the small print details on the records you’ve purchased (or you have never purchased a vinyl or CD record yet in your life and have actively chosen not to look at the label info to the left of *every* album or single in the iTunes Store. But whatever…

  • bend

    I don’t know a single label up there. I shouldn’t care , but I do. $hame on you. Where is the ello for music streaming? It certainly would win a lot of users now…

    • Haha, I don’t believe you at all. You most likely just don’t know it, because you haven’t checked the small print details on the records you’ve purchased (or you have never purchased a vinyl or CD record yet in your life and have actively chosen not to look at the label info to the left of *every* album or single in the iTunes Store. But whatever…

  • bend

    I don’t know a single label up there. I shouldn’t care , but I do. $hame on you. Where is the ello for music streaming? It certainly would win a lot of users now…

    • Haha, I don’t believe you at all. You most likely just don’t know it, because you haven’t checked the small print details on the records you’ve purchased (or you have never purchased a vinyl or CD record yet in your life and have actively chosen not to look at the label info to the left of *every* album or single in the iTunes Store. But whatever…

  • Michael McDermott

    I thought Soundcloud’s business model was some users (like myself) would pay ~$50 per year for Pro Plans and those users who wanted longer tracks times, unlimited sets, etc. would subsidize all the free users (kind of like what Ello is proposing)? To me this deal reminds me of TV cable companies that charge $80/month for their service and then have commercials on every channel. Just seems like greed to me, but then again, I don’t know much about how businesses make money.

  • Guest

    I thought Soundcloud’s business model was some users (like myself) would pay ~$50 per year for Pro Plans and those users who wanted longer tracks times, unlimited sets, etc. would subsidize all the free users (kind of like what Ello is proposing)? To me this deal reminds me of TV cable companies that charge $80/month for their service and then have commercials on every channel. Just seems like greed to me, but then again, I don’t know much about how businesses make money.

  • Guest

    I thought Soundcloud’s business model was some users (like myself) would pay ~$50 per year for Pro Plans and those users who wanted longer tracks times, unlimited sets, etc. would subsidize all the free users (kind of like what Ello is proposing)? To me this deal reminds me of TV cable companies that charge $80/month for their service and then have commercials on every channel. Just seems like greed to me, but then again, I don’t know much about how businesses make money.

  • Sander J Alkemade

    This is the beginning of the end of Soundcloud as a platform for musicians and producers, who upload and share their own music with other producers and musicians. Everybody, every website in the world is looking for quality content, why would I have to pay a service for providing them with this original quality content ? That’s the world upside down. Most of these producers will flock to sites similar to the current Soundcloud. And they will keep moving from time tot time to other similar sites. Instead of one platform for sharing your own produced music, there will be several ones doing the same. Maybe there will be a meta-site indexing all the selfproduced music. And when the upcoming producers have moved away, there is no more unique selling point for Soundcloud as a music provider and it will die quietly. Money for nothing, that’s what this is.

  • Sander J Alkemade

    This is the beginning of the end of Soundcloud as a platform for musicians and producers, who upload and share their own music with other producers and musicians. Everybody, every website in the world is looking for quality content, why would I have to pay a service for providing them with this original quality content ? That’s the world upside down. Most of these producers will flock to sites similar to the current Soundcloud. And they will keep moving from time tot time to other similar sites. Instead of one platform for sharing your own produced music, there will be several ones doing the same. Maybe there will be a meta-site indexing all the selfproduced music. And when the upcoming producers have moved away, there is no more unique selling point for Soundcloud as a music provider and it will die quietly. Money for nothing, that’s what this is.

  • Sander J Alkemade

    This is the beginning of the end of Soundcloud as a platform for musicians and producers, who upload and share their own music with other producers and musicians. Everybody, every website in the world is looking for quality content, why would I have to pay a service for providing them with this original quality content ? That’s the world upside down. Most of these producers will flock to sites similar to the current Soundcloud. And they will keep moving from time tot time to other similar sites. Instead of one platform for sharing your own produced music, there will be several ones doing the same. Maybe there will be a meta-site indexing all the selfproduced music. And when the upcoming producers have moved away, there is no more unique selling point for Soundcloud as a music provider and it will die quietly. Money for nothing, that’s what this is.

  • Pending all the yet unknown details of whatever that is going to mean when it is going to take effect in the real world, all I read in those announcements – as well as in your usually relatively balanced opinion pieces, Peter – is that Soundcloud seems to try to become something like a big blend of what they like about Youtube, Spotify, Mixcloud (!), iTunes and Facebook.

    Man, I don’t want to sound like all the other naysayers here, but I agree to many points made here in the comments about Soundcloud being a wonderful biotope for all the non-mainstream artists and genres. I use it myself to publish my own music somewhat informally, and it is amazing to see that people from all over the world eventually stumble over it, listen to it and even seem to like it (assuming, because some of them seem to bother to click the Like button every once in a while.) And I have discovered a lot of exciting music myself (or used the occasion to listen to full songs or albums instead of short snippets) and made purchase decisions easier because of that.

    But all the social networking, advertising, paying and issueing license money from streaming… Well, I guess, I just don’t like the perceived greediness of the whole concept…

  • Pending all the yet unknown details of whatever that is going to mean when it is going to take effect in the real world, all I read in those announcements – as well as in your usually relatively balanced opinion pieces, Peter – is that Soundcloud seems to try to become something like a big blend of what they like about Youtube, Spotify, Mixcloud (!), iTunes and Facebook.

    Man, I don’t want to sound like all the other naysayers here, but I agree to many points made here in the comments about Soundcloud being a wonderful biotope for all the non-mainstream artists and genres. I use it myself to publish my own music somewhat informally, and it is amazing to see that people from all over the world eventually stumble over it, listen to it and even seem to like it (assuming, because some of them seem to bother to click the Like button every once in a while.) And I have discovered a lot of exciting music myself (or used the occasion to listen to full songs or albums instead of short snippets) and made purchase decisions easier because of that.

    But all the social networking, advertising, paying and issueing license money from streaming… Well, I guess, I just don’t like the perceived greediness of the whole concept…

  • Pending all the yet unknown details of whatever that is going to mean when it is going to take effect in the real world, all I read in those announcements – as well as in your usually relatively balanced opinion pieces, Peter – is that Soundcloud seems to try to become something like a big blend of what they like about Youtube, Spotify, Mixcloud (!), iTunes and Facebook.

    Man, I don’t want to sound like all the other naysayers here, but I agree to many points made here in the comments about Soundcloud being a wonderful biotope for all the non-mainstream artists and genres. I use it myself to publish my own music somewhat informally, and it is amazing to see that people from all over the world eventually stumble over it, listen to it and even seem to like it (assuming, because some of them seem to bother to click the Like button every once in a while.) And I have discovered a lot of exciting music myself (or used the occasion to listen to full songs or albums instead of short snippets) and made purchase decisions easier because of that.

    But all the social networking, advertising, paying and issueing license money from streaming… Well, I guess, I just don’t like the perceived greediness of the whole concept…

  • Austin

    I had a mix up over a year on soundcloud and I noticed people just started to listen to it more over a hundred listens (oh boy) Sony took it down for copywrite infringement this week. I figured it was cuz I hit 3 digits but might it have been due to this deal?

    • Zubetei sucks

      No, it was because it sucked.

  • Zubetei

    I had a mix up over a year on soundcloud and I noticed people just started to listen to it more over a hundred listens (oh boy) Sony took it down for copywrite infringement this week. I figured it was cuz I hit 3 digits but might it have been due to this deal?

    • Zubetei sucks

      No, it was because it sucked.

  • Zubetei

    I had a mix up over a year on soundcloud and I noticed people just started to listen to it more over a hundred listens (oh boy) Sony took it down for copywrite infringement this week. I figured it was cuz I hit 3 digits but might it have been due to this deal?

    • Zubetei sucks

      No, it was because it sucked.

  • PaulDavisTheFirst

    Interesting that this comes just as emusic.com dropped (or was dropped by) all the major labels for its own subscription service.

  • PaulDavisTheFirst

    Interesting that this comes just as emusic.com dropped (or was dropped by) all the major labels for its own subscription service.

  • PaulDavisTheFirst

    Interesting that this comes just as emusic.com dropped (or was dropped by) all the major labels for its own subscription service.

  • ceasless

    So interesting that “Pro”, which we can assume is short for “Professional”, is not linked with “Get Paid”. Says a lot about economics in the 21st century, for musicians and otherwise really.

    • Popo Bawa

      Incentives are for people with no resolve.

  • ceasless

    So interesting that “Pro”, which we can assume is short for “Professional”, is not linked with “Get Paid”. Says a lot about economics in the 21st century, for musicians and otherwise really.

    • Popo Bawa

      Incentives are for people with no resolve.

  • ceasless

    So interesting that “Pro”, which we can assume is short for “Professional”, is not linked with “Get Paid”. Says a lot about economics in the 21st century, for musicians and otherwise really.

    • Popo Bawa

      Incentives are for people with no resolve.

  • imakesound

    The other issue being that it would appear Warner get a slice of revenue and nobody else does. For a service thats USP is unsigned and independent artists uploading stuff on there for promotion that means Warner is going to be making money from the work of artists who have nothing whatsoever to do with warner, while those artists themselves see squat – in fact, most will be paying for the privilege – essentially paying warner so that warner can cash in on their work.
    If it was “everyone gets paid for their work” fair enough, but “warner gets paid by everyone, else for everyone elses work”?
    That stinks.

  • imakesound

    The other issue being that it would appear Warner get a slice of revenue and nobody else does. For a service thats USP is unsigned and independent artists uploading stuff on there for promotion that means Warner is going to be making money from the work of artists who have nothing whatsoever to do with warner, while those artists themselves see squat – in fact, most will be paying for the privilege – essentially paying warner so that warner can cash in on their work.
    If it was “everyone gets paid for their work” fair enough, but “warner gets paid by everyone, else for everyone elses work”?
    That stinks.

  • imakesound

    The other issue being that it would appear Warner get a slice of revenue and nobody else does. For a service thats USP is unsigned and independent artists uploading stuff on there for promotion that means Warner is going to be making money from the work of artists who have nothing whatsoever to do with warner, while those artists themselves see squat – in fact, most will be paying for the privilege – essentially paying warner so that warner can cash in on their work.
    If it was “everyone gets paid for their work” fair enough, but “warner gets paid by everyone, else for everyone elses work”?
    That stinks.

  • Miguel Ângelo

    There’s something I’m not getting here.What about all those bedroom producers without any label? How are they affected?

  • Miguel Ângelo

    There’s something I’m not getting here.What about all those bedroom producers without any label? How are they affected?

  • Miguel Ângelo

    There’s something I’m not getting here.What about all those bedroom producers without any label? How are they affected?

  • bilbo

    You lost me at “And if you think you don’t listen to Warner Music Group releases, you either have extraordinarily obscure tastes, or you’re just wrong.”

    You’re completely ignoring the core content provider base that made Soundcloud the music library it is today. I’m sorry Peter, but I just don’t think you understand that the record labels do not want Soundcloud to exist.

    You should stick to reviewing instruments, that’s all we want from you.

  • bilbo

    You lost me at “And if you think you don’t listen to Warner Music Group releases, you either have extraordinarily obscure tastes, or you’re just wrong.”

    You’re completely ignoring the core content provider base that made Soundcloud the music library it is today. I’m sorry Peter, but I just don’t think you understand that the record labels do not want Soundcloud to exist.

  • bilbo

    You lost me at “And if you think you don’t listen to Warner Music Group releases, you either have extraordinarily obscure tastes, or you’re just wrong.”

    You’re completely ignoring the core content provider base that made Soundcloud the music library it is today. I’m sorry Peter, but I just don’t think you understand that the record labels do not want Soundcloud to exist.

  • Michele Obama’s Cock

    Soundcloud sucks hairy dildoes.

  • Michele Obama’s Cock

    Soundcloud sucks hairy dildoes.

  • Michele Obama’s Cock

    Soundcloud sucks hairy dildoes.

  • mrbob

    explore.fm is the future

  • mrbob

    explore.fm is the future

  • mrbob

    explore.fm is the future