Google to Introduce Streaming Music Service Today. Apple Is Pissed.

There are multiple reports pointing towards something very interesting happening today at Google I/O, the company's annual gathering of software developers.  The whispers are that Google will unveil its streaming music service.

The service will be subscription-based and connected to Play, which Google's online media centre.  This no doubt greatly pisses off people in Cupertino who have been pushing hard to get all the licensing agreements in place for a similar service for Apple's iTunes.

Apple is close to reaching a licensing deal with all the major players.  The only holdout is Sony, who, like Google, takes great pleasure in causing Apple pain.  If this rumour is true, expect to see plenty of articles saying things like "Apple blew it" and "Apple is on the decline."

This is another step down the road towards access over possession.  Why go through the trouble of physically acquiring and maintaining a music library (even a digital one) when you can access all the music you want--more than you could ever afford to buy--for just pennies a day?

And while it's true that the vast majority of current subscribers to streaming services are classified as "inactive," these are just growing pains.  While many of us--including me--never see a day when we won't own music in some form, the allure of being able to get what you want, when you want it, wherever you happen to be on what device you happen to have will prove to be infectious.

I'm involved in something later today that is along these same lines.  An announcement tonight.

More at the New York Times.  There's also this at All Things Digital.

Poll: America is Over Hipsters

About time, really.  From Public Policy Polling:

Just 16% of Americans have a favorable opinion of hipsters, a new PPP poll on the much-discussed subculture shows. 42% have an unfavorable opinion of hipsters, and 43% aren’t sure. Democrats (18% favorable, 34% unfav) are twice as likely as Republicans (9% fav, 48% unfav) to have a favorable opinion. Voters age 18-29 have a favorable opinion of them (43% fav-29% unfav), but very few voters over age 65 do (6% fav -37% unfav).

Just 10% of voters say they consider themselves to be hipsters – and almost all of those are younger voters. Half of all voters aged 18-29 consider themselves hipsters; every other age group is 5% or less. 

14% of voters say they’d be more likely to vote for a hipster for political office – mostly independent voters. 12% of Democrats and 27% of independent voters say they’d be more likely to vote for a hipster, but just 2% of Republicans agreed. 98% of Republicans say they’d be less likely to vote for a hipster.

I can only hope that Canadians feel the same way.  More data plus the full study here.

Desecrating the Legacy of Punk

Jer passes on this article from The Economist which pillories the new punk exhibit happening at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC.

[F]or a movement that was largely defined by its music, it feels odd that only one gallery blares the extreme and energetic sounds of The New York Dolls, Richard Hell, The Slits, The Damned and others. This feels like a concession to the typical Met patron, and is a good example of the problem with this exhibition: the anti-establishment story of the punk movement cannot properly be told in the hallowed costume section of the Metropolitan Museum. Visitors to this show should expect eye-catching displays, not a coherent narrative. The presentation is vivid and often fun, but anyone hoping for depth will be left with a proper punk sneer.  

Read the whole article here.

When Your Label Won't Release Your Album

When you sign to a label and deliver them a record, the label has the power to release it at their descretion.  But what if they won't put it out?  Then you're stuck in a weird sort of limbo.  Contractually, you can't put it out yourself.  You can't get someone else to release it.  And you're denied any revenues that the record may generate.

Buzzfeed looks at an artist who finds herself in just such a spot.

In 2004, 13-year-old Joanna Levesque became the youngest solo artist ever to have a number one single on the Billboard charts. Levesque, who recorded as JoJo, had been building to that moment since she was just a little girl, giving electrifying performances on shows like Kids Say the Darndest Things with Bill Cosby at the age of 6.

When Levesque was 12, she signed a seven-album deal with Blackground Records, and later her debut album JoJo was certified platinum. Her 2006 follow-up, The High Road, pleased critics and included at least one bona fide hit, the breakup ballad “Too Little Too Late.” She was quickly becoming a rising star in R&B.

And then she went silent.

Click to read more ...

Big UK Debate: Were the Smiths the Best or Worst Band of the Last 30 Years?

This appeared in The Telegraph.  Discuss and/or fight.  First, the pro.

Thirty years since their first single, Hand in Glove, The Smiths remain the greatest band not only of their time but of any time since. No one else in these past three decades has written music as harshly beautiful, or lyrics as moving (or indeed as funny – see Frankly, Mr Shankly). They could get more poetry into a mere title than most bands get into a whole lyric sheet. Shoplifters of the World Unite. Last Night I Dreamt That Somebody Loved Me. There Is a Light That Never Goes Out.

Now the con:

Has any band has ever been so melodically limited, so calculatedly joyless, such as waste of a good guitarist, or fronted by such an inexplicably self-important frontman? (That memorable “Wears Pepe” jeans advert from 30-odd years ago – set to the muscular chug of How Soon Is Now? but sans vocals – was a tantalising reminder of the talent elsewhere in the band.)

Continue reading.