SanDisk on Monday announced a partnership with all four major music labels in a deal that's set to bring future albums to microSD cards. The preloaded cards, dubbed "slotMusic" media, will be sold at brick-and-mortar retail locations as an alternative to the CD.
(Credit:
SanDisk)
At this time, there's no information on which albums will be sold for how much and when, but the first outlets set to receive the new digital music medium are U.S. branches of BestBuy and Wal-Mart, among others. More than likely, the slotMusic cards will go on sale in time for the upcoming holiday season.
No doubt in the interest of compatibility, music will come in a 320Kbps MP3 format. Each card will offer a 1GB capacity, which gives musicians the option of including various album extras such as liner notes, videos, and other creative content. It will also leave extra space for the user to transfer his or her own content to the card.
The idea of slotMusic cards is to bridge the gap between the physical and the digital, as users of certain cell phones and MP3 players will be able to purchase the cards and insert them directly into the device, eliminating the need to rip CDs or download from a service and then connect to the computer to transfer the songs.
However, given the relatively large size of each card (1GB could fit about eight albums assuming 12 tracks per ripped at 320Kbps MP3), this usage model doesn't completely make sense, as you would need to connect to a computer to make full use of the capacity--unless, of course, you're purchasing songs wirelessly, which in itself indicates a certain amount of comfort with a fairly advanced downloading practice.
And say you elect not to make use of the leftover capacity. A phone or MP3 player only has one memory slot--do you really want only one album taking up that spot? Finally, microSD cards are tiny, which raises a concern over how to keep track of them if you start racking up a collection.
All that being said, I'll wait until pricing is released before passing final judgment on slotMusic. I can certainly see an argument if it ends up being a much better value than the current 99-cents-per-song download structure. At the moment, however, I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around who this might appeal to. Am I completely out of touch? Or do you see microSD albums as just another teeny thing to misplace, too? Chime in below.
Musicians aren't merchants.
We certainly learned that through Radiohead and Trent Reznor's separate experiments with choose-your-price album promotions.
Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails
(Credit: Rob Sheridan)In October, Reznor, the leader of the band Nine Inch Nails, and Radiohead attempted to promote and distribute albums online without the help of a major record label. Both offered fans the opportunity to obtain the music for free. Both saw some success.
But they also illustrated that the music business is probably better left in the hands of businessmen. Musicians are not the new labels. Artists need someone to provide financial support and business acumen. If we end up ridding the world of labels, we'll only have to re-create them--in some other, probably more nimble form.
Last week, I interviewed Reznor about the online promotion of rapper Saul William's album The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of NiggyTardust. In that interview, Reznor said he was disappointed that only 18 percent of the more than 150,000 people who downloaded the album paid for it. He and Williams offered two options: pay nothing or obtain a higher-quality audio version for $5.
By backing Williams with his money, name, and know-how, Reznor essentially thrust himself into the role of a music label. That is, a music label with a lot to learn. The first lesson was that you don't always back a winner. A music company's fortunes can often rest on its ability to discover superstars. Profits generated by a few marquee acts have always kept the companies going while all the other performers break even or lose money.
EMI said this week that only 5 percent of its acts are profitable. This kind of prospecting requires a huge investment.
Reznor said he didn't get involved with Williams to profit, but acknowledged that he spent too much making the album and said he hasn't yet recouped his money. A record company can afford to make bad bets once in a while, said Chris Castle, a music industry insider who has worked as a vice president for both Sony Music and A&M Records. Musicians, even successful ones like Reznor, probably can't.
... Read more
- prev
- 1
- next
