Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Listen.com vs emusic.com

Has anybody tried both?  I have tried neither (sorry) but it appears that Listen.com you are actually renting the music but emusic.com you are buying it (licensing it).  Emusic.com gives you unprotected MP3s so you can do whatever you want with them.  Burn a CD, put them on your iPod etc.  The hope is that paying them $9.99 a month is far more convenient than trying to find them on the net for free.

Gregg Tavares
Saturday, July 20, 2002

I tried emusic.com first. Loved the idea, but had a real hard time finding the music i wanted.

Listen.com, on the other hand, has been great. I've spent about three days just following the "similar bands" links; taken myself on a little lo-fi tour, and so on. It rocks.

Yeah, it sucks that they don't give raw mp3s, but I'm ok with it.

Matt Christensen
Sunday, July 21, 2002

I don't get it. From the looks of it, these places only offer stuff that I could just wander down to my local chain music store and pick up, if I wanted it. Maybe I was mistaken but I was under the impression most people downloaded music as a way to get stuff they *couldn't* just go to the mall and buy.

greg
Sunday, July 21, 2002

> Maybe I was mistaken but I was under the > impression most people downloaded music
> as a way to get stuff they *couldn't*
> just go to the mall and buy.

No, actually most people download music because they don't want to pay for it. Which is why a site that charges $100/year for music isn't going to make any kind of dent in the online file trading that goes on now.

-Mark

Mark Bessey
Sunday, July 21, 2002

Mark,  you need some real counterfactual evidence to make that claim.  Otherwise, there's a lot of sophisticated arguments pro and con at Slashdot and K5.

anon
Sunday, July 21, 2002

Hi,

I'm just finishing my yearly subscription at emusic.com.  I'm going to stop as I feel that even at US$9.95 I'm not using it enough. Lately they have been adding a lot of new music but I did not have that impression when I first started. They are very quick to respond to problems as I'm one of those guys who sends emails when a site doesn't work as I want it to or as it should.

I'm also a member of bmgmusic but I'm going to stop that as well as I just need to cut done on costs as few people are seeking my employ:)

I cannot imagine not having the right/power to burn to CD. That would be a must. I take those CDs to the gym with me. I've got quite collection now. 

I think there is a market for an emusic. I find it interesting to go to the site and just browse through the music collection. It's a good inexpensive way to find new music. But I must be able (legally) burn to CD.

Peter

Peter J. Schoenster
Monday, July 22, 2002

I have been buying recorded music for more than 20 years.  I have hundreds of albums and thousands of songs, most of it ripped to my hard drive.  I'm not bragging, because I suspect there are lots of people like me, probably many with more than me.  My point is that I can't really imagine wanting to spend $100 per year for the equivalent of internet radio. 

I guess if you didn't already have a fair-sized collection, it might be nice.

Scott Gamon
Monday, July 22, 2002

I would definitely believe that at least 51% of Napster/Kazaa/etc. usage is to avoid paying. If they truly wanted to develop a service aimed at "trialing" music, they could simply facilitate the distribution of slightly "crippled" tracks (e.g., a message appended to the beginning, lower quality, ticks in the middle, etc.).

pb
Monday, July 22, 2002

listen.com does not compete with kazaa and napster, whose purpose is to provide raw MP3s. Although I agree with earlier posters that the majority of Kazaa users would not be using it if they weren't getting tracks for free, my own goal is NOT to get free music. My goal is to have a substantial selection of music that I could legally download in a non-proprietary format. Moreover, I want individual tracks, not entire CDs.

Is that a lot to ask? I admit it is. Is it possible for the music industry to provide it, and still make a comfortable profit? Absolutely. Look at it this way: If I could buy a CD for $14 that had 14 tracks on it, only one of which I really want to own, or I could spend $2 for just that track, I'd rather just get the track. If the same service also offered all 14 tracks for $14, I'd be in heaven. Why would I buy music anywhere else?

Zahid Ali
Monday, July 22, 2002

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home