main

Universal Music unveils download plan

Daniel Fleshbourne   on 20 November 2002 - 09:27 · 13 comments & 1397 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Universal Music Group, the world's largest music company, on Wednesday announced it would make more than 43,000 song tracks available for download at retail outlets and music Web sites, opening a new front in the marketing of digital music.
The initiative is aimed at attracting fans who may want to buy songs or albums on a one-off basis online rather than through monthly Internet subscriptions, the alternative that major labels have offered to peer-to-peer song swapping services.

Universal Music, a unit of Vivendi Universal, said the downloads will be burnable to CD and transferable to secure portable devices. The digital tracks will be available for purchase by consumers in the U.S. for 99 cents for individual tracks and $9.99 for albums. The digital downloads will be available through more than 25 retailers and music sites, including Best Buy, Circuit City Stores, MP3.com, Rolling Stone, Tower Records and others.

"This is a direct blow to the peer-to-peer services by providing consumers with a cheap and easy way to get a trusted file," said P.J. McNealy, analyst with GartnerG2. The labels all attempted to sell limited digital downloads in the early days of their online efforts, but at about $2.99 or $3.99 a track or higher and with heavy restrictions.

McNealy said he expects the other major labels to wait and see how Universal fares before attempting a similar push.

View: The full story
News source: c|net




The threatened closure of ASPFriends has prompted write-in protests and threads against Microsoft from angry members of the listserv. Guthrie promises that if Charles Carroll proceeds with his threat to shut down the service, there will be a replacement. "We are committed to making sure that an independent, non-Microsoft run, listserv service is always available to the ASP.NET community, and supported by the ASP.NET Team."

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 13 additional comments
#1 Jstphish on 20 Nov 2002 - 09:52
It is about damn time they figured it out. People will pay 99 cents for a track and 9.99 for an entire album just plain rules. I hope the quality is good. None of that 128kbps crap (cd quality my ass).

Last edited by 11680 on 20 Nov 2002 - 09:57
#2 Jstphish on 20 Nov 2002 - 10:01
Just read all about it on the [url=http://consumers.umusic.com/]universal music group[/url] site, seems the files will be either wma or liquid audio (AAC) ... for DRM. They will be encoded at 128kbps. I am not used to using WMA but I know AAC's quality will be good even at 128kbs.
#3 mAcOdIn on 20 Nov 2002 - 10:04
it's definately a good start .99 cents is a good price for a song, soon the days of having to buy 9 crappy songs for the 2 you like for 15 bucks is over!
#4 crookram on 20 Nov 2002 - 10:16
128 kbps wma? you can forget about cd quality then. no way in hell that's gonna sound as good as on cd. i'm sure many of you won't believe me, but you'll find out when you try it yourself. oh, and how typical this is only for the US. i guess us non-US'ers will have to continue downloading our files from the net for free, then.
#5 Fotix on 20 Nov 2002 - 10:53
I would pay around $ .80 - .99 per track for unencumbered high-bitrate AAC or MPC. WMA and MP3 have too many issues with pre-echo to be ever worth paying for. The music companies should just make their own Napster but make it superior to present-day KaZaA and WinMX and the like and the people would come... too bad their arrogance and control freak nature prevents them from accomplishing this.

Last edited by 6042 on 20 Nov 2002 - 11:26
#6 cub-x on 20 Nov 2002 - 11:46
These GartnerG'ays are everywhere, aren't they? They have a word for every item in the world.. They drive me nuts with their worthless comments.
(2 replies) #7 Fubar on 20 Nov 2002 - 12:15
Forgive me if im wrong but paying any money for an album is a rip off ... how many songs on one album would be good....... i can bet only about 3 -4 max out of an album of 12 songs will be good songs..... parting with 15 english pounds for one cd with a max of four decent songs isnt justified ...... weather its 99 cents or 99p per song the 128kbs on wma isnt good quality infact it only just measures up at being a little bit better than tape quality...... and as for the people in the us ..... good on ya but if you wanna pay for music rather than getting it for free and at a better bite rate it makes me wonder who are the smart arses . you or the music industry....
#7.1 Fotix on 20 Nov 2002 - 13:13
[quote]Forgive me if im wrong but paying any money for an album is a rip off[/quote] you're forgiven [quote]how many songs on one album would be good. i can bet only about 3 -4 max out of an album of 12 songs will be good songs[/quote] not true, if you buy from people who are on MTV all the time that would probably be the case though. search the reviews on amazon.com or epinions.com for some lists of good artists who are consistently non-crappy. I do agree that the current Universal Music plan for downloads is a piece of garbage. They never hire anyone who can think outside the box, which is why they will fail.
#7.2 Fubar on 20 Nov 2002 - 13:23
i havent bought a cd in at least 2 years and i dont intend to buy any time soon..... i have cable and i get mtv and mtv2 and all the other music channels. but even the bands i like are going through the stage of putting 3 - 4 decent songs on an album. now writing decent songs is another thing...... its just a marketing stratergy by the record company...... unless otherwise..... music industry should just get the head out fo there arses and relise no matter what they do paying for music will become second fiddle to those places where u get music for free..... lets face it there is no evedance that musicians are suffering from this senario... hell im sure bands would make enough money touring more often than putting half arsed albums out...... and lets not forget me being british have to cope with untold amounts of crap thats in the charts at the moment..... i blame new kids on the block for starting all that gay boy band trend heh
#8 AMD-XP on 20 Nov 2002 - 13:22
good idea but i wouldn't use it though
#9 V0b0 on 20 Nov 2002 - 13:39
"is a direct blow to the peer-to-peer services by providing consumers with a cheap and easy way to get a trusted file" as aposed to a free and easy way to get a trusted file at a better bitrate.
#10 antareus on 20 Nov 2002 - 23:43
128kbps? This is a piece of crap. Give me super high quality VBR, 224kbps at least.
#11 prick on 21 Nov 2002 - 12:18
pfft why pay 99cents for a song when i can go on irc and get the same thing for nothing?

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)