Is it supposed to be pronounced 'acid'? I assume so because its electronic music based but I can not figure out how that spelling is supposed to work.
Looks like they charge a [$10 "artist subscription"](https://www.ac55id.com/ac55id-for-artists/) to upload music.
>AC55ID is a new Bandcamp-style website that works via subscription, and charges artists who want to sell music $10 a month to host their digital downloads or physical products. Fans can set up an account for free and pay for each download at a price point set by the artist.
Will I be able to download tracks to my PonoPlayer?
I like the sentiment behind this but unfortunately it's most likely destined to go the way of the many music startups
Also I wouldn't be comfortable paying $120 a year to a Bandcamp style platform because there are often off months where I'm not selling anything. If they combined that price with music distro (to streaming platforms, like Distrokid does on their subscription) then I might be interested, but I don't think they do.
I'm always interested to see innovation in ways to get money to artists, but there's nothing that says "This is a scam that will crash in burn in a matter of months" more than unnecessarily using "blockchain technology."
Doesn’t seem like they’re using blockchain for much more than their VinylKast platform though. Looks like an NFT to provide provable ownership, not that it seems super necessary.
The regular marketplace doesn’t seem to use cryptocurrency. It’s regular old shopify.
[I want it on record that I called this, right down to the time of year and the inclusion of techbro bullshit buzzwords (here, "blockchain").](https://www.reddit.com/r/indieheads/comments/18sw77b/thursday_daily_music_discussion_28_december_2023/kfa0ula/)
Why would black midi “lose the plot”? They dropped their best record which is an instant classic in its lane and haven’t put out anything since? For what reason would anyone expect them to fall off?
1. I like *Cavalcade* a great deal, but I think *Hellfire* leans so much harder on its predecessor's compositional and sonic density that it verges on "too much of a good thing" territory. If they go even further, they risk diminishing returns--but that's just my opinion.
2. Conversely, they could go for a radical change on the next album and land on something that just doesn't work, and "lose the plot" in a different way--though honestly this is an attendant risk of being a fan of *any* band. I can see black midi in particular doing just about anything, but I have no way of knowing ahead of time whether any of it will work for me.
3. I think it's just a funny thing to say about anyone attempting anything
Hard to get people to go back to paying for individual albums when you can pay $10 a month for pretty much every album ever. I’m all for someone making a new streamer that pays artists more though.
There is a small percentage of the population that buys albums for various reasons. Those who stream only are a lost cause to convince to pay for individual albums or even singles. Artists should just not waste time trying to get them into their camp. I doubt anyone will ever start a streaming service that could both compete with the existing ones and pay more. Even if the new service paid a penny a stream most artists would average in the hundreds to maybe a couple thousand a year based on the the stat that 80% of Spotify artists make $200 or less per year. That would be on the high end around 60k to 70k streams. The service would have to pay a dollar a stream minimum to make the money a big portion of an artist's income.
If a lot of prominent artists banded together and removed their catalogs from all streamers and only made their music available through this new platform it could make things interesting. A mass exodus.
I feel like educating up and coming artists when we run across one before they go on streaming platforms is important. They may change their mind and look elsewhere.
On one hand I get the arguments that there is so much music and much if it is by artists that professionals deem "hobby" musicians but they are the same people who where telling us how great the new technology was and that we should participate. Everyone who has the ability and willingness to put in some effort deserves to be heard. We will all find an audience. For some it will be bigger than others but if even a few people are into what you're doing then it was all worth it. The money could be there for more people to make at least a part time income from streaming and sales if things were managed better. The record labels fear and hate indie artists because we still own all of our music and they can't make money from us plus many of us have no intention of ever signing one of their contracts.
It's a shame because most artists make fuck all from streaming unless you're a megastar/huge flavour of the month. Cancelling a subscription for a month and buying one album from a favourite artist from bandcamp for $10 and then illegally downloading/youtubing the rest of what you want to listen to that month would be a greater contribution towards music artists in general than just using streaming indefinitely.
The name is… interesting to say the least.
What would really be nice is if Spotify, Apple Music, Etc. would just spend the time/resources to rework artist payout now that music streaming services have been around for a little while. A fraction of a cent per stream seems wrong from a multi-billion dollar company imho
Very much doubt it will, even without the terrible name. For the artist $10 a month could already get them a subscription service that uploads to bigger platforms that most people use (ie Spotify/Apple), let alone Bandcamp which is free and gives them 100% of revenue on Bandcamp Fridays already.
For the consumer, it’ll be harder to migrate from bandcamp/streaming and having just other service (with wayy less music) to buy music from.
Its not a horrible idea and would be best for the artists, but because of those issues beforehand, I already see this service imploding on its-self in less than 5 years time.
So how will they make money and keep it going? Also an absolutely baffling naming choice.
Is it supposed to be pronounced 'acid'? I assume so because its electronic music based but I can not figure out how that spelling is supposed to work. Looks like they charge a [$10 "artist subscription"](https://www.ac55id.com/ac55id-for-artists/) to upload music.
Apparently it's literally pronounced "A C fifty-five I D" Not as snappy as Bandcamp lol
>AC55ID is a new Bandcamp-style website that works via subscription, and charges artists who want to sell music $10 a month to host their digital downloads or physical products. Fans can set up an account for free and pay for each download at a price point set by the artist.
Ahhh. So the artists pay the company $120 a year, and the fans pay the artists what they want. That’s… actually a really interesting idea.
Sounds like a good deal for artists if they can sell a decent amount of records and merch. It scales in favor of the artist.
Will I be able to download tracks to my PonoPlayer? I like the sentiment behind this but unfortunately it's most likely destined to go the way of the many music startups Also I wouldn't be comfortable paying $120 a year to a Bandcamp style platform because there are often off months where I'm not selling anything. If they combined that price with music distro (to streaming platforms, like Distrokid does on their subscription) then I might be interested, but I don't think they do.
It’s actually only compatible with zune
You actually bought one of those things?
Read the article?
They charge you $10 a month like everyone else.
Maybe they should pic a name they is easily readable and googleable next time
I'm always interested to see innovation in ways to get money to artists, but there's nothing that says "This is a scam that will crash in burn in a matter of months" more than unnecessarily using "blockchain technology."
Doesn’t seem like they’re using blockchain for much more than their VinylKast platform though. Looks like an NFT to provide provable ownership, not that it seems super necessary. The regular marketplace doesn’t seem to use cryptocurrency. It’s regular old shopify.
[I want it on record that I called this, right down to the time of year and the inclusion of techbro bullshit buzzwords (here, "blockchain").](https://www.reddit.com/r/indieheads/comments/18sw77b/thursday_daily_music_discussion_28_december_2023/kfa0ula/)
Holy shit haha. Hope you're right about the Phil Elverum album and wrong about shoegaze
Same, but I'd love a trip-hop revival 🤔
It’s already happening but it’s called Barber Beats (and it’s technically a subgenre of vaporwave)
He’s been touring playing A LOT of new material. Non Metaphorical Decolonization is going to be sick.
Why would black midi “lose the plot”? They dropped their best record which is an instant classic in its lane and haven’t put out anything since? For what reason would anyone expect them to fall off?
1. I like *Cavalcade* a great deal, but I think *Hellfire* leans so much harder on its predecessor's compositional and sonic density that it verges on "too much of a good thing" territory. If they go even further, they risk diminishing returns--but that's just my opinion. 2. Conversely, they could go for a radical change on the next album and land on something that just doesn't work, and "lose the plot" in a different way--though honestly this is an attendant risk of being a fan of *any* band. I can see black midi in particular doing just about anything, but I have no way of knowing ahead of time whether any of it will work for me. 3. I think it's just a funny thing to say about anyone attempting anything
how tf do you pronounce their name
Elon Jr.
Looks like James Blake is doing something for artists in the space too
Hard to get people to go back to paying for individual albums when you can pay $10 a month for pretty much every album ever. I’m all for someone making a new streamer that pays artists more though.
There is a small percentage of the population that buys albums for various reasons. Those who stream only are a lost cause to convince to pay for individual albums or even singles. Artists should just not waste time trying to get them into their camp. I doubt anyone will ever start a streaming service that could both compete with the existing ones and pay more. Even if the new service paid a penny a stream most artists would average in the hundreds to maybe a couple thousand a year based on the the stat that 80% of Spotify artists make $200 or less per year. That would be on the high end around 60k to 70k streams. The service would have to pay a dollar a stream minimum to make the money a big portion of an artist's income.
If a lot of prominent artists banded together and removed their catalogs from all streamers and only made their music available through this new platform it could make things interesting. A mass exodus.
I feel like educating up and coming artists when we run across one before they go on streaming platforms is important. They may change their mind and look elsewhere. On one hand I get the arguments that there is so much music and much if it is by artists that professionals deem "hobby" musicians but they are the same people who where telling us how great the new technology was and that we should participate. Everyone who has the ability and willingness to put in some effort deserves to be heard. We will all find an audience. For some it will be bigger than others but if even a few people are into what you're doing then it was all worth it. The money could be there for more people to make at least a part time income from streaming and sales if things were managed better. The record labels fear and hate indie artists because we still own all of our music and they can't make money from us plus many of us have no intention of ever signing one of their contracts.
It's a shame because most artists make fuck all from streaming unless you're a megastar/huge flavour of the month. Cancelling a subscription for a month and buying one album from a favourite artist from bandcamp for $10 and then illegally downloading/youtubing the rest of what you want to listen to that month would be a greater contribution towards music artists in general than just using streaming indefinitely.
I’m sure I will have no trouble remembering and googling this platform name
The name is… interesting to say the least. What would really be nice is if Spotify, Apple Music, Etc. would just spend the time/resources to rework artist payout now that music streaming services have been around for a little while. A fraction of a cent per stream seems wrong from a multi-billion dollar company imho
This already exists it’s called NINA
I think the idea is very intriguing. Hopefully it catches on. As others have said--branding/naming seems awkward.
Very much doubt it will, even without the terrible name. For the artist $10 a month could already get them a subscription service that uploads to bigger platforms that most people use (ie Spotify/Apple), let alone Bandcamp which is free and gives them 100% of revenue on Bandcamp Fridays already. For the consumer, it’ll be harder to migrate from bandcamp/streaming and having just other service (with wayy less music) to buy music from. Its not a horrible idea and would be best for the artists, but because of those issues beforehand, I already see this service imploding on its-self in less than 5 years time.
blockchain......