Tag: music

  • Sound Tracks: A fascinating archaeological history of music

    Sound Tracks: A fascinating archaeological history of music

    [ad_1]

    MPTKBG Trumpets and trumpet tube, Bronze Age (Britain), (c2500 BC-c800 BC). Artist: Unknown.

    Trumpets and a trumpet tube from between 4500 and 2800 years ago

    Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology/Heritage Images/Alamy

    Sound Tracks
    Graeme Lawson (Bodley Head)

    DIGGING around for old instruments and the sounds of the past is a natural obsession of music lovers. It conjures up those countless hours spent happily scouring record stores or digital archives for treasures, building up a vinyl collection or rooting out rare gems for a playlist.

    For archaeologist, multi-instrumentalist and historian Graeme Lawson, it takes on a more literal meaning as well as an impressively ambitious scope. The publicity for his new…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Beyoncé’s ‘Cowboy Carter’ Meets Online Fandom at the Crossroads

    Beyoncé’s ‘Cowboy Carter’ Meets Online Fandom at the Crossroads

    [ad_1]

    There’s a nasty not-so-secret secret no one likes to talk about, so it’s best to start there: Black women are among the most hated demographic worldwide. In America especially, anti-Blackness is the air. It’s everywhere even when you can’t see it. From the ivory halls of Washington to c-suites at Fortune 500 companies, Blackness is treated as less than. And because that is how it works and how it has worked generation after generation, not even Beyoncé, currently the most commanding force in music, can escape the fangs of misogynoir.

    Tell me if you’ve heard this one before: A Black woman was told she did not belong, that she was not welcome into a certain space, so she paved a path all her own. That’s the story Beyoncé recounted in an Instagram post in March, the day she announced her new country album Cowboy Carter. “The criticisms I faced when I first entered this genre forced me to propel past the limitations that were put on me,” she wrote. Unlike other musical genres, country is infamous in who it chooses to exclude, the genre’s history is rife with allegiances to the old ways of American prejudice, and no bearing or status can change that.

    The sweet irony, of course, is now we have Cowboy Carter, the second installment in a three-act project of historical and musical restoration Beyoncé began in 2022 with Renaissance, her dancefloor sendup to house music. She is on a mission to reclaim her time. Beyoncé is the rare artist who can pull off such a canny move because she now represents something bigger than music. She’s an industry unto herself: swaggering and audacious in reach, with a built-in fan base that anticipates every album drop, Instagram post, and product release. Whether you agree with the motivations behind her work or not—and there are valid criticisms to be made for artists who create at such a grand scale as her; mass influence in all arenas of life necessitates some level of questioning—there is no denying the fact: No other contemporary Black musician will bring more awareness to country’s gated meadowlands—its past, present, and possible futures—than Beyoncé. If nothing else, she gets people talking.

    “I’d like to actually thank the CMAs for pissing her off,” X user @gardenoutro wrote Friday morning, just past midnight, in the hour following the album’s official release, calling attention to Beyoncé’s her 2016 performance with the Chicks that was later shunned by Country Music Association members. Where Lemonade was scorned memoir and Renaissance flirted with fantasy—a disco-lit dreamscape where freedom and love have no inverse—Cowboy Carter unravels like autofiction: blending biography with novelistic flair on songs like “Daughter” and “Spaghettii.” It takes country music beyond. “It’s easy to listen to 27 tracks when they’re all good,” songwriter Rob Milton wrote on X.

    That’s the other thing about the Beyoncé Effect: there is no room for dissent in her universe. Online, and particularly across social media, a new album of hers is given billboard status. It is cause for celebration but rarely one for challenge or sharp inquiry.

    “A lot of people still want to join in with something larger than themselves. Fandom offers them a way to do that. It is not, though, entirely a utopian space,” says Mark Duffett, a professor at the University of Chester who researches fandom. “The concerns and issues that society has are mirrored in fan communities; they do not escape from being part of the wider social world.”

    As powerful as her music can be, the release of a new Beyoncé album exposes the fiction of a shared internet. There is not one but many. In its most intense form, fan logic thrives in isolation. On Beyoncé’s internet, as is the case for comparable fan cultures, logic finds comfort in the sideways geometry of the echo chamber. Its reasoning animorphs into blind zealotry, wagging its finger in the face of disagreement. Fan logic butts against balanced judgment. It has led Barbs (Nicki Minaj fans), Beliebers (Justin Beiber fans), Hive members (Beyoncé fans) and the like into a cycle of heated confrontation, and sometimes wild irrationality.



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why You Hear Voices in Your White Noise Machine

    Why You Hear Voices in Your White Noise Machine

    [ad_1]

    Every night, I—like millions of others—put on a noise machine to help me sleep. Mine offers several types of noise: white, pink, green, and brown. I’ve noticed something strange, though. After about 30 minutes of the noise pumping into my head, I start to hear things. Sometimes it’s music, like a full orchestral score. Other times it’s people having a conversation just out of the range where I’d hear actual words. Occasionally, it sounds like my husband playing a video game.

    So I do what most people would do when a random sound is keeping them up at night. I try to find it. I turn off the white noise and listen intently. Do I need my husband to turn the TV down? Should I text the neighbors to see if they’re alright? Is there, in fact, an entire orchestra playing a score in the alley below my window?

    And of course, there never is.

    The first time I googled this random noise-during-noise, I panicked. Apparently hearing things that aren’t there is referred to in the psych biz as auditory pareidolia, or auditory hallucinations, and is a hallmark of schizophrenia—and some experts say it requires a psychological check-up.

    “Since there’s a higher probability of this phenomenon in those with psychological disorders, individuals should likely be evaluated by a mental health professional if they are hearing these hallucinations,” advises Ruth Reisman, an audiologist who focuses on rehabilitation with hearing technology. She also notes that research is divided on the topic, with some studies saying noise produces hallucinations and some saying it doesn’t.

    But regardless, surely my therapist, who I’ve seen regularly for nearly a decade, would have picked up on any schizophrenic tendencies I may have. I’m a lot of things, but schizophrenic is not one of them. I’m just … hearing weird noises in fuzzy sounds.

    Luckily for me and anyone else dealing with this particular affliction, it turns out there’s a perfectly normal reason you may hear random sounds in white noise (or any other continuous noise). It’s still called auditory pareidolia, but it’s on the pattern-matching end of the spectrum instead of the psychosis end. Simply put, your brain is trying to figure out what it’s hearing, so it’s filling in the gaps of the noise you’re listening to with a common sound.

    “When you hear, your brain is a pattern-matching machine,” says Neil Bauman, CEO of the Center for Hearing Loss Help. “Everything I say, all my words, all the sounds, are in your brain, in your database. And as each sound comes in, your brain looks through its database to see if it’s got the same pattern of sound. If it does, it says, oh, I recognize that word.”

    Even if it’s a word you don’t know—something in ancient Greek, for example—you’ll still recognize some letters and some sounds, and your mind will fill in the spaces in order to replicate a pattern you already know.

    Any app or machine you listen to that produces a color of noise, like white, brown, pink, green, or otherwise, is based on an algorithm or a code. It’s not truly random—so you’ll get a little while of what seems like random noise, and then the sounds repeat. On the surface, it probably doesn’t seem like it. But your brain recognizes the pattern and tries to make sense of it, which leads to hearing noises that aren’t actually there.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • One Man’s Army of Streaming Bots Reveals a Whole Industry’s Problem

    One Man’s Army of Streaming Bots Reveals a Whole Industry’s Problem

    [ad_1]

    A man in Denmark was sentenced to 18 months in prison today for using fake accounts to trick music streaming services into paying him 2 million Danish kroner ($290,000) in royalties. The unusual case reveals a weak spot in the business model behind the world’s biggest music platforms.

    The 53-year-old consultant, who had pleaded not guilty, was convicted of data fraud and copyright infringement after using bots to listen to his own music through fake profiles on both Spotify and Apple Music, collecting royalties in the process. The data fraud took place between 2013 and 2019.

    Fake or “artificial” streams are a big problem for the streaming industry. Between 1 and 3 billion fake streams took place on popular music platforms in 2021, according to a study by France’s National Music Center. Fake streams are a problem, according to the music industry, because they divert royalty payments away from real artists and pollute streaming platforms’ data.

    “This is an example of a problem that’s becoming a liability within the music industry,” says Rasmus Rex Pedersen, an associate professor in communication at Roskilde University in Denmark, who researches music streaming. “The streaming services have had several years to develop tools to combat this type of fraud and apparently they haven’t been doing a very good job.” There are still services advertising sales of fake streams, he adds.

    In February, a court in the Danish city of Aarhus heard how the man, whose name was withheld, was accused of using bots to generate a suspiciously high number of plays on 689 tracks, which he had registered as his own music. In one week, 244 music tracks were listened to 5.5 million times, with 20 accounts responsible for the majority of the streams. The defendant had previously argued these playbacks were linked to his job in the music industry. He plans to appeal, his lawyer Henrik Garlik Jensen told WIRED.

    The man created software that played the music automatically, claims Maria Fredenslund, CEO of the Danish Rights Alliance, which protects copyright on the internet and first reported the case to the police. “So he didn’t really listen to the music. No one really listened to the music.” According to the Danish Rights Alliance, the defendant had 69 accounts with music streaming services, including 20 with Spotify alone. Due to his network of accounts, he was at one point the 46th highest-earning musician in Denmark.

    While the defendant created much of the music himself, 37 tracks were altered versions of Danish folk music, where the tempo and pitch had been changed, adds Fredenslund, who attended court.

    Starting in 2016, Danish artists noticed altered versions of their tracks circulating on streaming platforms. They reported the suspicious activity to Koda, a Danish organization that collects and distributes fees for songwriters and composers when their music is played online. In an investigation, Koda uncovered how amounts paid to the consultant went from zero to substantial sums in a short time. Koda then reported the case to the Danish Rights Alliance, which investigates fraudulent behavior. “It’s not just immoral, but blatantly unfair to manipulate payments that should rightfully go to dedicated and hardworking music creators,” says Jakob Hüttel, legal chief at Koda.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Review: Orange Box Bluetooth Speaker

    Review: Orange Box Bluetooth Speaker

    [ad_1]

    Think about the last time you saw a person lugging around a Bluetooth speaker and thought to yourself, “Dang, that person looks cool. I want to listen to whatever they’re listening to!” If you have no such memory, you’re not to blame, and you’re certainly not alone. Many portable speakers are dorky hunks of plastic that are aesthetically adjacent to pleather trench coats, mall swords and TJ Maxx hoverboards. And then there are the units that actually sound good, which—with a few exceptions—rank in the looks department between perfunctory and obnoxious.

    Iconic guitar amp makers like Fender, Vox, and Marshall have noticed this hole in the market and have plugged it with their own offerings. Marketed as stylish sound cubes bursting with punchy midrange and timeless rocker swag, models like the Fender Indio ($379) and the Marshall Kilburn II ($399) promised to sound just as good as they looked. Now your cool uncle who sleeps on a waterbed can blast Metallica and make jokes about turning up his Marshall to 11 while you knock back a Leinenkugels and help him change the oil in his van! But do these diminutive faux amps have the cojones to make the infamous snares on St. Anger fill the garage with crisp and clangy treble? Can their woofers be trusted to ensure that what little low-end was left in the masters of …And Justice For All is evetrn remotely audible?

    In the case of the Orange Box, the aptly named entry from the legendary London-based amplifier brand Orange, the answer is a resounding yes. Clocking in at 50 watts and weighing a little over 6 pounds, this workhorse of a speaker packs a massive punch for its size. After spending a month running the Orange Box through its paces in a variety of scenarios where Bluetooth speakers are essential—kitchen prep, yard work, household repairs, bothering fellow hikers with Top 40 music at a National Park—we’ve sussed out the good, the bad, and the bothersome of this impressive little box.

    Dial-a-Tone

    Orange Box amp

    Photograph: Orange

    Stark minimalism has been all the rage since the mid-aughts, but the stripping-away of essential knobs, jacks, and buttons is a sore spot for the aging demographic that know the Orange brand better than most. Thankfully Orange’s mimicry of their beloved amplifiers yields tactile, user-friendly results in the Orange Box. With the exception of a rather standard pairing workflow, the rest of the controls on the device have a satisfying analog feel to them. Turning the volume knob up controls the actual output of the amp rather than that of the paired device. This works wonders when you’re across the room and want to control the unit remotely with a maximum volume ceiling that’s mitigated by the volume controls on your phone.

    Dedicated bass and treble knobs felt like nice extras at first but became essentials after daily use. The former can add or subtract a warm thump from the low end—around the 100-Hz mark, based on our tests—while the latter can be used to either add or remove presence that hovers around 8 KHz: the sweet spot for most spoken word and singing. Having a hard time hearing a podcast in the shower? Crank the treble to 10. Guests straining to hear over your music at a dinner party? Cut the treble to create a lane for casual conversation.

    One minor flaw of the Orange Box is the way it handles the crowded high end of radio-friendly pop music at high volumes. If modern producers cease to brick-wall their mixes and cram every last sonic crevasse with ear candy, then the Orange Box may eventually be up to the challenge, but until then the last era of radio hits that really shine on this speaker is the post-grunge explosion of the late ’90s. Then again, what zoomer is spending $300 on a Bluetooth speaker that looks like the amp their grandpa used to play proto-metal on during the Carter administration? Master of Puppets sounds absolutely killer on the Orange Box, and (almost) nothing else matters.

    Party Time

    Closeup of the Orange Box amp

    Photograph: Orange

    The Orange Box is sexy as-is, but the included leather strap doesn’t do much in making it easier to carry around town on its own. For an extra $60 you can buy a gig bag made of sturdy gray denier fabric, which results in a potent totable that looks and feels more like a soft-side cooler full of ‘Kuges than a portable amp. The bag fits snugly around the box, and a piece of cream-colored cloth covers the grill of the speaker without muffling any of the output. The top snaps in place tidily via a pair of magnets, and it peels back quickly to offer easy access to the control knobs. Side pockets keep small essentials like aux cables, beef jerky, and weed safe from the elements, but the power supply does not fit conveniently in any of the compartments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why Is the Slack Hold Music So Haunted and So Good?

    Why Is the Slack Hold Music So Haunted and So Good?

    [ad_1]

    When Danny Simmons finished his first Slack Huddle, the same thing happened to him as did me: He didn’t hang up, the music faded in, and he went hunting for the source. Only he wasn’t looking for a random auto-playing browser tab. He was trying to figure out how a long-ago basement recording session from his old house in Toronto was piping into his ears.

    Simmons is a lanky sound designer and—I truly didn’t see this coming—a mainly bluegrass musician based in Halifax, Nova Scotia. He and Butterfield met back in college, when they were both in a band called Tall Guy Short Guy. (“I came in to replace the tall guy,” Simmons explains.)

    After graduation, Simmons became a gigging musician and Butterfield embarked on a failed career as a video game designer. Except Butterfield had a funny way of failing. He kept trying to build games and then accidentally building the internet instead. His first, Game Neverending, never ended up making much money but did include an infrastructure for sharing photos that became the basis for Flickr. (And Flickr—with its open API, its use of tags, its social networking functions—became the basis for much of the social web.)

    Flickr sold to Yahoo for about $25 million in 2005, and a few years later Butterfield tried his sorry luck again, setting out to build a lighthearted, esoteric, and surreal new game: Glitch. To do it he got the old band back together, not just from Flickr but from Tall Guy Short Guy too. Simmons came aboard to write a score—to invent a folk music for all the geographies in the game, and the requisite “bloops and bleeps and alerts.”

    In Glitch, as one of the game’s developers describes it, players “planted and grew gardens and milked the local butterflies. They collected pull-string dolls of modern philosophers—including plausible Nietzsche and Wittgenstein quotations. They climbed into enormous dinosaurs, passing through their reptilian intestines and out of their helpfully sign-posted butts. It was, in a word, preposterous.”

    Early on in the game, Glitch encouraged you to do certain things—like build a house or take the subway—that required permits and identification papers. To get them, you had to visit a beige room called the Bureaucratic Hall. “It was just a waiting room, a purgatory with these lizard bureaucrats walking around,” says Simmons. “They’re walking back and forth with piles of paper, and, you know, just looking busy behind their desks.”

    And this, dear reader, is the phantom context of the Slack Huddles hold music; it was playing in the Bureaucratic Hall. To exit this limbo, you had to do something very precise: nothing. A timer started counting down, and if you moved your avatar at all, the counter would start over. That was the “quest.” You just had to sit still, watch the lizards work, and—can you hear that slow fade-in?—listen to the muzak.

    For the waiting-room soundtrack, Simmons played the guitar and synths himself, despite mainly being a banjo guy. Through Toronto’s bluegrass scene, he knew a “really good left-handed guitar player” who dabbled in saxophone. So one day in 2012, Simmons invited the guy over to record a bunch of improvised sax fills, with instructions to make them “as cheesy as possible.”

    In October 2012, Ali Rayl joined the Glitch team as a quality engineer. Just six weeks later an executive pulled her aside. He said they were shutting down the game, and he asked Rayl if she wanted to stay and “help build our next thing.” When she asked what the next thing was, the exec said it would probably have something to do with workplace communications.

    As had happened before with Game Neverending, there were some pretty cool spare parts underneath all the ethereal ambitions of Glitch—like the internal messaging system the team had built. Rayl was one of only eight core people who kept their jobs in the transition to Slack. On the conference call where everyone else was laid off, Rayl felt overcome with survivor’s guilt. “I decided, I’m going to do everything that I can to support these people, to uphold their legacy and get their work out in the public sphere,” she says. And Rayl wasn’t alone in wanting to preserve Slack’s glitchy DNA.

    That’s why the company came to use not just the waiting room muzak but also the “bloops and bleeps and alerts” that Simmons created for Glitch. In fact, Simmons made nearly all the sounds that Slack’s 32 million active daily users hear. That snick popopop noise that gives you a cortisol spike every time? That’s Simmons running his thumb over a toothbrush and making “that sound where you kind of separate your tongue from the roof of your mouth,” he says. There’s a phantom context for all of it.

    So next time you hear the Slack Huddles hold music, remember what you have to do: Sit still. Watch the lizards. The timer is counting down.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Could an AI replace all music ever recorded with Taylor Swift covers?

    Could an AI replace all music ever recorded with Taylor Swift covers?

    [ad_1]

    Taylor Swift performing in Melbourne earlier this year

    Graham Denholm/TAS24/Getty Images for TAS Rights Management

    A rogue artificial intelligence obsessed with Taylor Swift could supplant all recorded music with artificially generated cover versions by her, say researchers. History would show the American singer-songwriter as being responsible for everything from Für Elise to Paperback Writer, leaving no evidence that Ludwig van Beethoven or The Beatles ever existed.

    Nick Collins at Durham University, UK, and Mick Grierson at the University of the Arts London give the unusual warning in a paper that says humanity must think of methods of resistance “now, rather than when it is too late”.

    Thankfully, the risk of an AI Swiftpocalypse is low. Collins says that the idea is a thought experiment designed to prompt researchers to develop ways to protect all sorts of data – music, literature, scientific research and historical records – from being corrupted by AI.

    The pair lays out a future scenario where we rely on a handful of centralised stores of data: Spotify and Apple for music, for example. An AI could infiltrate those stores and corrupt, delete or alter the data within. This could be in a dramatic and obvious way or insidiously and gradually. “Within thousands of years it’s really likely that there’ll be at least some level of corruption and some level of conflict over the musical ground truth in audio recordings,” Collins says.

    To make their point and show how AI can already manipulate data that it has access to, the researchers used current AI models to make Taylor Swift versions of songs including Queen’s Bohemian Rhapsody, Frank Sinatra’s I’ve Got You Under My Skin and The Beach Boys’s Wouldn’t It Be Nice. Generating these “Taylor’s Versions” for all recorded music would currently require 1.67 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity at a cost of more than $266 million, they calculate – a price tag that Swift could afford herself.

    Digital and physical backups can make us complacent about the safety and permanency of our data, says Collins, but an AI with the right motivation and capability could access and corrupt anything we have recorded. “However much you try to preserve human culture, there may be threats in the future that you can’t anticipate,” he says.

    But not all experts are convinced that AI represents a serious threat in this way. Sandra Wachter at the University of Oxford says that AI has shown itself capable of causing great harm by replicating the sexist and racist biases of humans, but it isn’t going to be capable of the sorts of feats described by Collins and Grierson.

    “I don’t think there is a serious problem of AI waking up, creating its own goals, having its own motivations and taking actions to fulfil those goals,” she says. “I think that’s a nonsense argument and I don’t think it’s realistic. This is similar to asking me what would I do if aliens landed on this planet tomorrow. I see it as that unlikely.”

    Carissa Véliz, also at the University of Oxford, says that there is a need for decisive action on AI, but it shouldn’t be some dramatic “kill switch” to halt a malevolent model in its tracks. Instead, it should be a system of careful checks and balances to ensure the safety of the AI models.

    “The debate seems to assume that there’s this malevolent AI that somehow has desires of its own and becomes very powerful, and that we might want to switch it off,” she says. “And that seems to me so implausible and so ridiculous.”

    The real problem, she believes, is that we will integrate AI into so many aspects of our lives that we become utterly reliant on it, creating issues that are likely to be less apocalyptic in nature and yet still very damaging, including racist and sexist biases or simply making up plausible-sounding facts.

    “The more we put it [AI] into products the harder it will be to turn it off. Not because it’s this malevolent thing that has become so powerful that it takes over, but because we’ve come to depend on it and it’s very costly to turn off even when it’s not working well,” says Véliz.

    Taylor Swift didn’t respond to a request for comment.

    Topics:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How to Open Spotify Links If You Aren’t a Spotify User

    How to Open Spotify Links If You Aren’t a Spotify User

    [ad_1]

    Spotify dominates the music industry. This becomes really obvious if you don’t use Spotify: You end up being sent, and inevitably clicking on, Spotify links all the time. It happens on social media, yes, but also in text exchanges with friends, in emails, and in DMs. The thought is a good one; someone enjoyed a piece of music and wanted to share it with you. The problem, though, is that the Spotify link is mostly useless if you don’t use Spotify.

    What if you use other streaming apps, such as those offered by Apple, Amazon, and YouTube, to listen to music? Are you doomed to search for the track, album, or artist on those services manually? Is that forever your fate? Absolutely not. Here are a few tools that can help you turn Spotify links into links for your preferred music service. (Just note, these tools will work to locate songs, artists, and albums across platforms, but since playlists are usually unique to each platform, these methods won’t work with custom playlists.)

    Google Chrome: An Extension to Automatically Redirect Links

    Image may contain File and Text

    If you use Google Chrome or a compatible browser like Microsoft Edge, the browser extension Music Link can automatically open all Spotify links in whatever music app you like. Just install the extension and click its icon to configure it. Choose which music service you prefer and you’re done: Any Spotify link you get from now on will redirect to your app of choice.

    You can optionally uncheck whatever services you’re fine with getting links to. SoundCloud, for example, tends to let you play music regardless of whether you have an account, and a lot of its offerings aren’t on other platforms, so you might as well not redirect those links. For the most part, though, this is the kind of extension you can install and never think about ever again.

    iPhone and iPad: Song.link for Apple Shortcuts

    Image may contain Text Electronics Mobile Phone and Phone

    Chrome extensions may not always work on iPhones or iPads, but thankfully there’s an Apple shortcut for redirecting Spotify links. Just copy any Spotify URL to the clipboard then launch the shortcut Song.Link. This will find the URL in your clipboard and offer you links to the song on other platforms. There’s even a YouTube link, which is helpful if you don’t subscribe to any streaming service.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Spotify’s War on Apple Just Cost the Giant $2 Billion

    Spotify’s War on Apple Just Cost the Giant $2 Billion

    [ad_1]

    Apple has a Spotify problem—and it just cost the iPhone maker a $2 billion fine from the European Commission.

    For years, the two companies have been at war as the streaming service lured users away from Apple’s iTunes and accused the tech giant of exploiting its dominance to stifle innovation. In their long-running conflict, each has made incursions into the other’s territory. When Apple launched its own streaming service Apple Music in 2015, Spotify claimed Apple was able to undercut the platform’s prices because it didn’t have to pay the same App Store fees as rivals. In 2019, Spotify began an ambitious podcast spending spree, splashing out on high profile shows, in another direct challenge to Apple.

    The feud’s early days were civil with few barbs traded in public. “We worry about the humanity being drained out of music,” said Apple CEO Tim Cook in 2018, a cryptic comment widely interpreted as a jibe at Spotify’s heavy use of algorithmic recommendations. But Spotify became more outspoken as EU politicians started to call for laws to reign in Big Tech. The €1.8 billion ($1.9 billion) fine on Apple announced by the European Commission today shows that its tactics are working.

    The fine originates in a legal complaint filed with the European Commission by Spotify in 2019, challenging the restrictions and fees Apple places on developers listing their apps in the Apple App Store. Today the European Commission agreed, saying that Apple’s app store restrictions amount to unfair trading conditions that may have led iOS users to pay significantly higher prices for music streaming subscriptions.

    “For a decade, Apple abused its dominant position in the market for the distribution of music streaming apps through the App Store,” said Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition chief, in a statement. “They did so by restricting developers from informing consumers about alternative, cheaper music services available outside of the Apple ecosystem.”

    Apple’s app store rules restrict music streaming companies and other apps from informing their users on Apple devices about how to upgrade or sign up for subscription offers outside of the app. Instead app users can only see sign up options for in-app subscriptions via Apple’s payments system, where prices are likely to be higher because Apple takes a cut. Some app makers, including Spotify, that do not offer in-app purchases because they don’t want to pay this commission. “Some consumers may have paid more because they were unaware they could pay less if they subscribed outside the app,” Vestager said. “This is illegal under EU antitrust rules.” Apple, which says the EU has failed to provide credible evidence of consumer harm, has already pledged to appeal.

    Big Number

    The fine is far bigger than expected, prompting Apple’s stock to drop 3 percent on Monday. Media reports based on unnamed sources had predicted a penalty of around €500 million. It’s also one of the biggest fines the EU has ever issued against a tech company, ranking below only two Google fines of $5.1 billion and $2.4 billion. Vestager explained in a press conference that the scale of the fine is intended to prevent the company from breaking rules in future. She added that the amount includes a “lump sum” to “achieve deterrence.” $1.9 billion amounts to 0.5 percent of Apple’s global turnover, she said.

    Although Spotify CEO Daniel Ek has expressed disapproval of Apple’s business tactics, he’s also something of a reluctant figurehead in Europe’s fight against Apple. The self-described introvert has adopted the role of spokesperson for disgruntled European app developers, who finally feel their complaints about big tech are finally being heard.

    On Monday, Ek posted a video on X in which he described Apple as a threat to the open internet. “Apple has decided that they want to close down the internet and make it theirs and they view every single person using an iPhone to be their user, and that they should be able to dictate what that user experience should be,” he said. Ek also claimed Apple also wants to effectively levy a tax on Spotify while exempting its own music service, Apple Music.



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Music Is TikTok’s Past. Sounds May Be Its Future

    Music Is TikTok’s Past. Sounds May Be Its Future

    [ad_1]

    As music from Universal Music Group artists started to disappear from TikTok recently, a different kind of earworm got stuck in my head. Even though it’s not a song, I sang it in the shower and whispered it in my sleep: “You have been promoted! You are now one of my elite employees!”

    I was not alone in my obsession. The memeable soundbite was used by TikTok creators to poke fun at everything from FaceTiming close friends to smoking leftover weed; official brand accounts for Xbox and SpongeBob even joined in. This particular audio originated from @mainlymannie’s satirical CEO character, but viral TikTok sounds can really come from anywhere. For example, a two-year-old audio clip of White Lotus characters talking about texting also appeared on my For You Page numerous times.

    With so many popular songs still blocked from TikTok, it’s possible that smaller artists and songs from other labels, like Beyonce’s new music, might fill the gap, but the more likely scenario is that royalty-free, almost-contextless sound clips will become the new hot commodity on the platform.

    Songs from signed UMG artists, like Taylor Swift, Drake, and Olivia Rodrigo, were pulled from TikTok at the beginning of February, and even more music is now disappearing. “Universal not only had their recording deal lapse, which took down all the music that their artists perform, but also had a lapse of their publishing deal,” says Tatiana Cirisano, a music industry analyst at MIDiA Research. “This now means any song that includes lyrics or a melody created by anyone who is signed under Universal Music Publishing Group—that music also gets taken down.”

    UMPG released a statement on Thursday claiming the negotiations are centered on disagreements about music revenue, artificial intelligence, and platform safety. The company also lightly acknowledged the increasing number of artists who are expressing frustration about their songs being blocked from TikTok: “We understand the disruption is difficult for some of you and your careers, and we are sensitive to how this may affect you around the world.”

    User-generated videos of music fans lip-syncing and dancing to songs were foundational to the beginning of TikTok’s breakout success. In 2017, the parent company of TikTok, ByteDance, purchased a popular app called Musical.ly, described by The Verge as a “teen karaoke app.” The following year, ByteDance merged Musical.ly and TikTok. In the years since, it has become a hub of music discovery where artists can find new forms of fame thanks to the platform’s memeing masses.

    Leah Linder, a member of TikTok’s communications team, highlighted the platform’s ongoing commitment to music fans in an email to WIRED. Linder noted there are still plenty of songs on TikTok; though, depending on where you live, around a quarter of the typical catalog is currently missing. The company’s recent statement claims artists can continue to connect with fans on TikTok, even if their official music is gone. This seems true, especially for already well-known acts. Olivia Rodrigo songs might not be on my feed anymore, but a prolific number of fancams from her current concert tour are all over my FYP.



    [ad_2]

    Source link