emusic, classic or dud?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (35 of them)
I have the 90/$20 plan. I'm getting kind of sick of it and will probably cancel in a month or two, but I loaded up on a fair amount of good stuff.

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 04:29 (seventeen years ago) link

Same here (90/20). eMusic is classic. Cheaper than iTunes, 100% legal, no DRM, tons of independent/pretty obscure stuff, etc. Plus, they always have new shit being added.

brightscreamer (brightscreamer), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 04:57 (seventeen years ago) link

I should have specified...eMusic is classic to supplement your regular music-purchasing habits.

brightscreamer (brightscreamer), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 04:59 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah. I tried to use it as a replacement for a little while as an attempt to save money, but it's just not doing the trick.

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 05:01 (seventeen years ago) link

yeah, you can't use it as a replacement. it's more of a supplement.

the table is the table (trees), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 05:17 (seventeen years ago) link

it sounds like we're talking about powerbars or something.

the table is the table (trees), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 05:17 (seventeen years ago) link

I have tried same with powerbars - well, Clif bars anyway.

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 05:19 (seventeen years ago) link

eMusic stuff is encoded at higher quality than iTunes Music Store.
eMusic encode at minimum 192kb VBR mp3 (using LAME 3.96) and iTunes at 128kb AAC.
Even with AAC's marginally better compression/quality ratio over mp3 eMusic stuff should have better sound quality.

treefell (treefell), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 09:38 (seventeen years ago) link

I see they have Bloc Party's new one, but oh.

I might actually do a get on Felt.

What else? I did get the "Prefects" live one, and there's plenty Fall there.

M Grout (Mark Grout), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 09:59 (seventeen years ago) link

Every time I think to myself that I really want a legit copy of some album, and that it's about time I gave up on CDs, I go over to emusic and see if they have it. And they don't.

ledge (ledge), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 10:13 (seventeen years ago) link

They have that "Dub side of the moon" which is pretty good and better than PFloyd. Oh, and the dub OK computer also.

Arlo Guthrie remade "Alice's Restaurant" that's there also.

M Grout (Mark Grout), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 10:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Oh and "The Gossip" I remind myself...

M Grout (Mark Grout), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:09 (seventeen years ago) link

I am totally addicted to emusic. I have the old annual plan that works out to 90/$16 and a monthly second account at 90/$20.

They just added Luaka Bop which I bookmarked lots of stuff from. It's possible that they'll get EMI, which could change emusic significantly.

a.b. (abanana), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 16:31 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.emusic.com/profile/mycollection.html?nickname=plumdr4nk

and what (ooo), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 16:33 (seventeen years ago) link

what did you think of vakill

deej (deej), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 20:39 (seventeen years ago) link

four years pass...

A rant I ranted last weekend when drunk follows. I stand by it all, the user experience of this site goes from idiotic to idioticker ... but I still love the basic premise of emusic, so that's why I actually care a bit. Who dreams up these shit ideas anyways???

/rantstart
-----
I know most or all of these things have been said many many times before, but I'd just like to add my voice:

-- One should *not* be required to know that one should click a button labelled "+" to save for later. I do not want to "+" the album, I want to save it for later, so I'm looking for a part of the screen saying "save for later", or "remember" or "make note" or something synonymous. Not "+". There are swathes of blank grey space on every page now, so I do not buy that "+" was necessary for space considerations.

-- EVERYTHING IS TOO BIG except the actual information content on every page. This ties in with the "+" point.

-- Tying in with both points above, DO NOT HIDE THE MOST RELEVANT INFORMATION. If an album has 274 tracks, you not only ought to, but *MUST* SHOW ALL OF THEM RIGHT AWAY. No scrollbar, not a "more" link.

-- OK I can choose between seeing 24 and 48 albums on each page. WITH HUUUGE COVER GRAPHIX HURRAH! No. That is not what I want, and especially not in three columns. If it absolutely *has* to be limited, I want to see as a minimum of 500 albums on each page, in ONE column, and hold the covers, not interested in those. (Please remember that for many of us, ctrl+f is a mode of webreading.)

-- Do not violate Web navigation standards. In Opera, shift+click means "open in new tab". In Firefox, ctrl+click means "open in new tab". Emusic ignores all of this, and opens the link in the same tab. Yes, one can rightclick+"open in new tab", but that is not how I (for one) intuitively browse; you are violating universal usability contracts here. (To be "fair", I believe the previous version of Emusic violated them as well.)

-- The general rule to be remembered above all others: Redesigns, updates and revamps are, without exception, A BAD THING per se. I'll grant that sometimes they are necessary. There were quite a few things with Emusic it was necessary to redesign, update and/or revamp. The overlap between these things and the ones that have been worked on is zero.

-----
/rantend

anatol_merklich, Thursday, 1 December 2011 23:40 (twelve years ago) link

i haven't been able to browse at all since the change - i have to search for everything using google

so much for discovering new things or browsing labels

cum (fart), Friday, 2 December 2011 00:03 (twelve years ago) link

guesswork: new ceo of this year wants to make it "premier streaming site", use established brand "emusic" to compete with established brands "spotify" and "pandora"; not give a shit abt actual extant business model and customer base. In other words ALL IS LOST unless I'm a bit paranoid obv.

anatol_merklich, Friday, 2 December 2011 00:20 (twelve years ago) link

you're not paranoid, but i don't think that's the motivation for the site changes.

they went from some costly framework for presenting the site to users to a nearly-free framework for presenting the site to users. the transition has been very rocky, and they apparently didn't do enough beta-testing or take other curative steps. it's gotten better, but there are still many bugs to be worked out. the change, as i understand it, was not motivated by any great decade in revenues or profits (emusic is still at about 400K subscribers, as it has been for a few years now), it was just a cost-saving measure that hasn't been handled well.

this is all from the emusic message boards. i agree with a lot of what anatol_merklich said, btw.

Daniel, Esq., Saturday, 3 December 2011 04:22 (twelve years ago) link

sorry, "any great decay"

Daniel, Esq., Saturday, 3 December 2011 04:22 (twelve years ago) link

finally canceled my account after...eight years of membership? it just got too tedious to try and spend all my money now that track costs are so variable. every month it was like a game of tetris trying to spend down to below a buck.

reddening, Saturday, 3 December 2011 05:39 (twelve years ago) link

mmmm. time has passed, sadly; always warm feelings though and they're welcome to leave the toothbrush just in case

Dranke, the German Drake Impersonator (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 3 December 2011 06:20 (twelve years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.