On July 10th 2014, Apple released iTunes 11.3. This update improves Apple TV and brings new features for DVD and Blu Ray users. Along with this update came reports from users that Apple had rolled back song preview lengths from 90 seconds to 30 seconds for some new and popular releases.
The song selection for the shortened previews appear to be random. This move does not appear to be a part of the iTunes 11.3 release. It is however being speculated that this could be related to some kind of licensing issue.
Apple introduced the 90 second song preview in 2010 after growing requests for more listening time, especially with regard to songs that play for at least 2 mins and 30 seconds. No official announcement has been given as to what is going on, why it is happening, or if it is a permanent change.
Stayed tuned.
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
Taylor's Op Ed Piece
On July 7th 2014, the Wall Street Journal featured an opinion piece written by Taylor Swift. In it the self professed optimist claimed that that she didn't understand why people are saying that the music industry is dying when it's "just coming alive."
Many bloggers had at least one negative comment to make about her story. Most of those comments dealt with what they claimed was either a lapse of memory or a hole in her perception. There seemed to be some disagreement with her notions of how the music industry is changing.
Taylor feels that artists need to have a love affair with their fans, and she believes that one day artists will be signed to record deals because they have fans. She believes that social media will create a new way for those who seek to become recording artists to bring their musical vision to the public.
Swift sites the fact that album sales are down, but that it's only because artists are not surprising their fans. That fans are now only willing to pay for albums that touch their heart. And, that piracy is the real cause for the slump in overall music sales that continue to dog the industry.
I found her perspective very interesting. Many of the articles I read were also kind to her, in her observations. Those who disagreed with her were concerned that success has obstructed her view of those who have yet to sell millions. In many instances, streaming is being labeled as the culprit that is sucking the life out of album and singles sales.
I agree with Ms Swift when she says that music should not be free. But I think that what we are talking about is the commodity of recorded and packaged for sale music, that should not be free. I would add that it's only been the total conversion to an all digital format that has left sellers of music at a lost as to how to keep those who would steal music from doing so.
Meanwhile, the reality TV machine continues to destroy the meaning of what it means to be an artist, choosing instead to emphasize the idea of being a star, as the end all be all objective that industry hopefuls should seek. Both audience and contestants continue to be exploited for fun and profit.
Major recording companies are now down to just three. Not much incentive is left to present anything that is truly fresh and/or new with so little competition. A handful of producers produce the performers of all three companies. The result is a sameness that leaves most music consumers flat and unwilling to purchase a product that is so unremarkable.
Whether you consider Taylor Swift to be an artist or a star, she has made her mark. She has been a good soldier, and should her popularity begin to wain, I feel confident that there will be more than a few other opportunities for her to pursue.
Many bloggers had at least one negative comment to make about her story. Most of those comments dealt with what they claimed was either a lapse of memory or a hole in her perception. There seemed to be some disagreement with her notions of how the music industry is changing.
Taylor feels that artists need to have a love affair with their fans, and she believes that one day artists will be signed to record deals because they have fans. She believes that social media will create a new way for those who seek to become recording artists to bring their musical vision to the public.
Swift sites the fact that album sales are down, but that it's only because artists are not surprising their fans. That fans are now only willing to pay for albums that touch their heart. And, that piracy is the real cause for the slump in overall music sales that continue to dog the industry.
I found her perspective very interesting. Many of the articles I read were also kind to her, in her observations. Those who disagreed with her were concerned that success has obstructed her view of those who have yet to sell millions. In many instances, streaming is being labeled as the culprit that is sucking the life out of album and singles sales.
I agree with Ms Swift when she says that music should not be free. But I think that what we are talking about is the commodity of recorded and packaged for sale music, that should not be free. I would add that it's only been the total conversion to an all digital format that has left sellers of music at a lost as to how to keep those who would steal music from doing so.
Meanwhile, the reality TV machine continues to destroy the meaning of what it means to be an artist, choosing instead to emphasize the idea of being a star, as the end all be all objective that industry hopefuls should seek. Both audience and contestants continue to be exploited for fun and profit.
Major recording companies are now down to just three. Not much incentive is left to present anything that is truly fresh and/or new with so little competition. A handful of producers produce the performers of all three companies. The result is a sameness that leaves most music consumers flat and unwilling to purchase a product that is so unremarkable.
Whether you consider Taylor Swift to be an artist or a star, she has made her mark. She has been a good soldier, and should her popularity begin to wain, I feel confident that there will be more than a few other opportunities for her to pursue.
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
Share Of Ear
According to a study done by Edison Research called, "Share Of Ear," terrestrial radio is still very popular. The results of the study were announced in June 2014 and revealed that AM/FM radio still maintains 52.1% of listening done by music fans and consumers. 20.3% of all listening was considered to be of the, "owned," variety, (CDs, cassettes, vinyl, or mp3s).
The study was done by asking 2,000 respondents, age 13 and older to keep a 24 hr listening diary of an assigned day. Diaries were completed both online and by mail. The study found that the break down for other forms of listening were as follows: streaming services, (Spotify, Pandora, iTunes Radio) made up 11%, satellite radio, (SirusXM) made up 7.7%, TV music channels, (Music Choice) made up 5.2%, podcasts made up 1.7%, and the category of other, (audio books) made up 1.5%.
Edison did the study as a response to requests from all corners of the audio industry and investment community for, "total share of everything, " figures, which up until the study, did not exist. The study not only pointed out that radio makes up for half of all listening that is done in a household, but it also revealed that the average American spends 4 to 5 hours a day consuming audio.
Proponents of streaming may find the numbers hard to fathom, given the increase in the use of tablets, smartphones, and other mobile devices. However, in my opinion, the growth in overall internet usage is being attributed as on the rise, due to the vast amount of media attention that is being given to new and emerging technologies. More focus should be placed on the consumers ability to actually purchase and/or adopt these technologies. Not everyone is "wired," at this point in time. It is still much cheaper and easier to listen to the radio.
When real purchasing power is returned to the, "mainstream," consumer, it will then be in their hands. Only then will it truly be possible to know whether changes in technology will create a change in listening habits.
The study was done by asking 2,000 respondents, age 13 and older to keep a 24 hr listening diary of an assigned day. Diaries were completed both online and by mail. The study found that the break down for other forms of listening were as follows: streaming services, (Spotify, Pandora, iTunes Radio) made up 11%, satellite radio, (SirusXM) made up 7.7%, TV music channels, (Music Choice) made up 5.2%, podcasts made up 1.7%, and the category of other, (audio books) made up 1.5%.
Edison did the study as a response to requests from all corners of the audio industry and investment community for, "total share of everything, " figures, which up until the study, did not exist. The study not only pointed out that radio makes up for half of all listening that is done in a household, but it also revealed that the average American spends 4 to 5 hours a day consuming audio.
Proponents of streaming may find the numbers hard to fathom, given the increase in the use of tablets, smartphones, and other mobile devices. However, in my opinion, the growth in overall internet usage is being attributed as on the rise, due to the vast amount of media attention that is being given to new and emerging technologies. More focus should be placed on the consumers ability to actually purchase and/or adopt these technologies. Not everyone is "wired," at this point in time. It is still much cheaper and easier to listen to the radio.
When real purchasing power is returned to the, "mainstream," consumer, it will then be in their hands. Only then will it truly be possible to know whether changes in technology will create a change in listening habits.
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
New Release
I've just released a new single. It's a "summer friendly/" mid tempo R&B/Pop/Funk groove that's available on iTunes, Google Play, Rhapsody, and my others. Click the Tunecore widget to the right for a full stream preview. A video clip from the song is also available at YouTube, or click the video player below. Thank you for listening.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Tesla Patents Free For Fair Use
In a bid to accelerate the adoption of the all electric car, on June 12th 2014, Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk announced that all Tesla patents would be shared with other automakers. Musk made the move because he believes that the major car manufacturers are lacking in their electric car programs.
Musk feels that holding on to his patents will only mean growing competition from companies that make combustion engine vehicles. He is opting for a "fair us," approach that he hopes will encourage other car makers to not only make more electric cars, but perhaps in return, share their ideas with Tesla.
Noting that the current rate of electric car production is only 1% of current overall vehicle production, Musk said that it would take about 20 years to replace all of the fossil fuel cars on the road today, with electric cars. He sees the rate of Co2 emissions as a "carbon crisis," and thinks that an accelerated rate of electric car production could only be carried through if the other car manufacturers were to step up their programs.
As for share holders worries that Tesla is "giving away the store," so to speak, Musk believes that by creating an open source platform, Tesla will also "attract and motivate the world's most talented engineers to become involved." Problems with the development of more improved lithium-ion batteries or increasing the range of electric cars, could be solved with greater speed and efficiency, with more minds committed to the task.
Sales of all electric cars were up 288.88% in 2013. The transition has begun. Will this move by Tesla Motors be the spark that ignites real growth in electric car production? We will see.
Musk feels that holding on to his patents will only mean growing competition from companies that make combustion engine vehicles. He is opting for a "fair us," approach that he hopes will encourage other car makers to not only make more electric cars, but perhaps in return, share their ideas with Tesla.
Noting that the current rate of electric car production is only 1% of current overall vehicle production, Musk said that it would take about 20 years to replace all of the fossil fuel cars on the road today, with electric cars. He sees the rate of Co2 emissions as a "carbon crisis," and thinks that an accelerated rate of electric car production could only be carried through if the other car manufacturers were to step up their programs.
As for share holders worries that Tesla is "giving away the store," so to speak, Musk believes that by creating an open source platform, Tesla will also "attract and motivate the world's most talented engineers to become involved." Problems with the development of more improved lithium-ion batteries or increasing the range of electric cars, could be solved with greater speed and efficiency, with more minds committed to the task.
Sales of all electric cars were up 288.88% in 2013. The transition has begun. Will this move by Tesla Motors be the spark that ignites real growth in electric car production? We will see.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Quantum Teleportation Breakthrough
On May 29th 2014, physicists at Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, which is part of the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, announced that they had sent quantum information concerning the spin state of an electron to another electron that was about 10 feet away. Quantum teleportation has been reported before. In fact I posted a blog on results of experiments done by physicists in Australia in September 2013.
In this particular experiment, the results of the study have a replication rate of 100% at the above distance. This was made possible by means of what is known as entanglement. This is a quantum state in which two or more particles can simultaneously communicate their attributes to each other, even when they are separated by vast distances.
The information or data that was teleported in this experiment was not that of a classical sense, such as ones and zeros. The physicists at Delft University had to use quantum bits, or what's known as qubits, which can simultaneously describe a number of values.
In their experiment, the physicists trapped electrons in diamonds at very low temperatures, separated at about 10 feet apart. When the spin of an electron was taken in one location, the physicists observed that the same was true of the corresponding electron that was 10 feet away.
While this is not what one would expect wen you hear the word teleportation, such as being beamed up to the Enterprise as they do on Star Trek, is a very important step in the development of high speed communications. There are five or six groups that are in a race to catch that elusive "big one," and perhaps win a Nobel prize as well.
In this particular experiment, the results of the study have a replication rate of 100% at the above distance. This was made possible by means of what is known as entanglement. This is a quantum state in which two or more particles can simultaneously communicate their attributes to each other, even when they are separated by vast distances.
The information or data that was teleported in this experiment was not that of a classical sense, such as ones and zeros. The physicists at Delft University had to use quantum bits, or what's known as qubits, which can simultaneously describe a number of values.
In their experiment, the physicists trapped electrons in diamonds at very low temperatures, separated at about 10 feet apart. When the spin of an electron was taken in one location, the physicists observed that the same was true of the corresponding electron that was 10 feet away.
While this is not what one would expect wen you hear the word teleportation, such as being beamed up to the Enterprise as they do on Star Trek, is a very important step in the development of high speed communications. There are five or six groups that are in a race to catch that elusive "big one," and perhaps win a Nobel prize as well.
Wednesday, June 4, 2014
SpaceX Presents Its Dragon V2 Reusable Spacecraft
SpaceX, the private space flight company, unveiled its new spacecraft, the Dragon V2 on May 29th, 2014. In a press conference, Elon Musk, the company's founder, announced that the Dragon V2 will be a manned, reusable vehicle, capable of landing anywhere on Earth, after its return from space.
SpaceX made history in 2012 when its Dragon 1 became the first commercial spacecraft to deliver cargo to the International Space Station and then return safely to Earth. Since then, Dragon has flown many successful unmanned, automated resupply missions. However, the Dragon spacecraft was always intended to be used to carry humans into space.
Enter the Dragon V2. The spacecraft will lift off atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. It can seat up to a seven member crew. After docking with the International Space Station, the Dragon V2 is capable of making a safe, controlled landing back on earth by means of eight SuperDraco rocket engines. These engines are placed in four pairs mounted around the sides of the spacecraft.
The SuperDraco engines are capable of producing 16,000 pounds of thrust and should enable the Dragon V2 to land via its landing struts, just like a helicopter. There's also a back up parachute in case of engine or other malfunctions. The spacecraft can then be refueled and readied for flight right away. It is capable of being reused up to 10 times before it needs serious servicing.
SpaceX, Boeing Co, and Sierra Crop all have received about $1 billion from NASA to develop a replacement for the retired space shuttle. Currently, NASA pays the Russians $70 million a seat on a Soyuz capsule. SpaceX expects the Dragon V2 to bring that price down to $20 million a seat. Flights could become even cheaper if the rate of flights increases.
On March 17th 2014, NASA announced that the first test flight of its Orion spacecraft will be moved back from a September/October launch to a mid December launch. Orion is NASA's own multipurpose spacecraft designed by Lockheed Martin. The Orion is intended for future missions to the Moon, the asteroids, Mars, and beyond.
SpaceX made history in 2012 when its Dragon 1 became the first commercial spacecraft to deliver cargo to the International Space Station and then return safely to Earth. Since then, Dragon has flown many successful unmanned, automated resupply missions. However, the Dragon spacecraft was always intended to be used to carry humans into space.
Enter the Dragon V2. The spacecraft will lift off atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. It can seat up to a seven member crew. After docking with the International Space Station, the Dragon V2 is capable of making a safe, controlled landing back on earth by means of eight SuperDraco rocket engines. These engines are placed in four pairs mounted around the sides of the spacecraft.
The SuperDraco engines are capable of producing 16,000 pounds of thrust and should enable the Dragon V2 to land via its landing struts, just like a helicopter. There's also a back up parachute in case of engine or other malfunctions. The spacecraft can then be refueled and readied for flight right away. It is capable of being reused up to 10 times before it needs serious servicing.
SpaceX, Boeing Co, and Sierra Crop all have received about $1 billion from NASA to develop a replacement for the retired space shuttle. Currently, NASA pays the Russians $70 million a seat on a Soyuz capsule. SpaceX expects the Dragon V2 to bring that price down to $20 million a seat. Flights could become even cheaper if the rate of flights increases.
On March 17th 2014, NASA announced that the first test flight of its Orion spacecraft will be moved back from a September/October launch to a mid December launch. Orion is NASA's own multipurpose spacecraft designed by Lockheed Martin. The Orion is intended for future missions to the Moon, the asteroids, Mars, and beyond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)