-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Jay-Z takes to Twitter to damage control Tidal rollout
- Thread starter RastaMentality
- Start date
- Status
Jay is so tone-deaf on this.
Like, how are you going to build Tidal into a successful service, if you don't even know why people don't want it in the first place?
Ninja Scooter
Member
Yup. People didn't buy iPhones because they thought Steve Jobs was cool. they didn't buy Nikes because they thought Phil Knight was cool. He and his shitty friends are trying to sell Tidal solely on the back of their image, and nobody cares. Nobody is willing to pay a premium for a service that has been done before (and cheaper) just because you are Jay Z and you have rich friends.
I think this is more to the people saying/asking why Jay is charging what he is cause he is already rich. Meaning no one brings up how wealthy Phil Knight or Steve Jobs are/were when their overpriced products are sold in droves.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Phil Knight and Steve Jobs didnt' crib marketing techniques from charities and awareness campaigns when they launched products though. I think that's where the "Jay Z is rich" criticism comes in, because he and his friends started out by marketing Tidal like if they were trying to raise money to cure breast cancer or something. It just got everything off on the wrong foot. I mean, nobody gave Dre shit like that when he started Beats Music. It's all in the image/marketing and on that front, Tidal was an epic failure. Whoever came up with and co-signed that idea should be fired. They were just openly inviting people to mock them.
It was probably Kanye. I mean he is the one who thinks that by selling extremely expensive sneakers or by breaking into the elite fashion world he is somehow going to help the average joe.
I think it's time Jay stop listening to Kanye.
That is what Jay fails to see though (or maybe he does, who knows). I don't think anyone is saying a rich person can't sell a premium product. The criticism about Jay/Tidal is centered around how they unveiled the re-launch of the service. The campaign was pretty much, "the artists doesn't get enough money" and "we are going to change the world with this." A lot of us took it as this:
The second major criticism was that, you have all these black artists coming together for this cause, to line their pockets, but when young, black men were (are) being gunned down, they never voiced their opinions, even less so came together. You could kinda see that in the freestyle when he mentions a few of them.
Likely wasn't Kanye. He was the first, and so far only, supporter to bail on Tidal. lol
The fuck? Do not start whining, That's not going to do you any favors here. Jesus Christ, who the hell is advising him here?
Kanye bailed on Tidal?
Tidal fucked with it's marketing. Period. This freestyle, while I don't have a problem with it or anything he said in it, isn't going to repair tidal's bad pr and it won't turn people into subscribers but I'm quite sure that wasn't the point of it. Didn't he throw this concert for fans and subscribers? It wasn't an ad campaign so why are we talking about it like it is?
He deleted his tweets supporting Tidal awhile back.
He hasn't officially said anything, but about three weeks ago he was the first artist to change his profile picture back to normal, AND he deleted every Tidal tweet he'd made up to that point. You tell me what that means.
unknown v2
Neo Member
Apparently he actually deletes his tweets often.
He reposted his support after so many took it wrong:
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/591106469698764800
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...motes-tidal-deleting-tweets-article-1.2195592
If it's for fan and subscriber, why do that kind of freestyle? They're already on board.
I don't think it matters that this snippet wasn't an ad campaign. It suggests that Jay-Z still doesn't get what people were annoyed about. Either that or he's trying to strawman his critics.
Probably thought, "oh shit, right, I owe a piece of this company."
Is there a part 2? Politics is my shit, fam.
fuuuu
Because he wanted to be all
and obviously dropping it in front of a bunch of yes men is the best (and only way) for that freestyle to get the intended effect.
"We feel artists aren't making enough, so instead of running a really lean company where we can distribute money more efficiently? We're going to charge you, the consumer, more because you cheapskates have been getting music way too cheap for too long. You're basically taking advantage of us!"
The big bad isn't the consumer here, it's the labels who abuse artists. And if Jay wanted people to feel like he gave a shit about other, smaller artists he should've taken a back seat and actually had them speak at their "signing event".
Tidal is profoundly gross and to echo what others have said astoundingly unaware of its own brand image.
The big bad isn't the consumer here, it's the labels who abuse artists. And if Jay wanted people to feel like he gave a shit about other, smaller artists he should've taken a back seat and actually had them speak at their "signing event".
Tidal is profoundly gross and to echo what others have said astoundingly unaware of its own brand image.
In all seriousness, some of yall are straight casual.
Can someone also explain to me why paying for goods and services is somehow bad.
dskillzhtown
keep your strippers out of my American football
I don't think that anyone is saying paying for goods and services is somehow bad. Hell, paid streaming numbers are going up every year. That is why Jay wanted to get some of that business in the first place. I don't think the issue has been people not wanting to pay. I honestly think that Tidal has not given people reason to switch, and the communication has been so poor that it has given people reason not to switch.
The thing is generally consumers don't give a shit about how much artists are getting. They just want their music. If you are going to advertise that you are kicking out the middle man, most consumers would expect the price to be cheaper. It isn't cheaper, it looks like Spotify, and the exclusives really haven't been enough to make a difference. The terrible launch and the continuing bad communication is just the icing on top of it. So where is the incentive to switch?
As far as people jumping off the ship, the only artist I saw acknowledge that the launch was a disaster was deadmau5. He came out and said it was a disaster and hopes the messaging gets better, but he has his own streaming site for his music so not really sure how invested he is in Tidal to begin with.
I do want to see how this plays out. With Beats about to re-launch, pressure is going to be put on all of the streaming services.
brokenbeans
Banned
Im not a businessman, Im a business, man,
avrophantasm
Member
Jay-Z, you big baby. You waltzed into the bloodthirsty app business, and this is what you have to say to defend yourself?
Shaming your potential consumer base into spending their hard-earned cash en masse isn't going to work. This attitude which is probably what I find the most annoying thing about how Jay-Z and the advertising team in general is approaching Tidal. the thing about Tidal is that it gets some things right, but still gets the most crucial things wrong. The service has some great things going for it, but how it's set up is super consumer unfriendly. It could grow, but its owners are strangling it with their stubborn attitude.
Someone with more business would have backpedaled, rethought their pricing scheme and devised a new campaign the moment the consumer reception turned poisonous. The key to success in business is recognizing and understanding your audience/niche as well as your market, and Jay-Z and crew seem to be unable to do either. It's about serving your customers better, not about making them feel bad for not spending money on you.
Doctor Ironic
Member
Just wanna remind you all that there's no proof whatsoever that the artists are getting a bigger share from Tidal than competing services - the percentage Jay quoted in the OP includes what's going to the record label.
abstract alien
Member
I thought it was a cool flow for what it was.
*shrugs*
*shrugs*
I'm guessing she was thinking she'd like to be relevant again
This is the latest Tidal thread open so I guess ill post this here.
Been using it on the free trial for a week or so now
The HiFi quality is unquestionably far superior to Spotify.
On the Bowers and Wilkins speakers in my home stereo system it's literally a night and day difference. Sound is more open, less constricted, bass hits harder, mid range is more spacious, it's a shocking difference. On my Sennheiser headphones, its instantly recognizable as well. Even on my car stereo system the difference is huge.
So, yeah this is pretty awesome
But...its buggy as shit.
On my phone, the songs seem to stop midway and then go to the next track. Album art seems to take a while to load. Tablet performance seems a bit better.
So yeah. I think there were people arguing that it's snake oil in other threads, that you can't tell the difference between FLAC and mp3 etc, lmao. Yeah, maybe listen to music on something other than a Potato. But for anyone with a decent rig for music at home, it seems like a no brainer if you want quality....but they need to sort out the fucking bugs. This is offering a premium service, I shouldn't have to worry about only hearing half of the song I want to play.
Been using it on the free trial for a week or so now
The HiFi quality is unquestionably far superior to Spotify.
On the Bowers and Wilkins speakers in my home stereo system it's literally a night and day difference. Sound is more open, less constricted, bass hits harder, mid range is more spacious, it's a shocking difference. On my Sennheiser headphones, its instantly recognizable as well. Even on my car stereo system the difference is huge.
So, yeah this is pretty awesome
But...its buggy as shit.
On my phone, the songs seem to stop midway and then go to the next track. Album art seems to take a while to load. Tablet performance seems a bit better.
So yeah. I think there were people arguing that it's snake oil in other threads, that you can't tell the difference between FLAC and mp3 etc, lmao. Yeah, maybe listen to music on something other than a Potato. But for anyone with a decent rig for music at home, it seems like a no brainer if you want quality....but they need to sort out the fucking bugs. This is offering a premium service, I shouldn't have to worry about only hearing half of the song I want to play.
Kibbles
Member
^youre probably listening to shitty 96k Spotify not 320kbps which is $5/month student.
Didn't Kanye cut all ties and delete everything related to Tidal from his Twitter?
Are you comparing with free Spotify?
Spotify Premium's 320k AAC is indistinguishable from lossless.
Uhh no
Tidal HiFi vs Spotify Extreme.
Difference is immediate on quality speakers.
Silly and totally false statement. The perception of what difference is there will be reflective of how and on what you listen to music.
Really?
You'd be the first to reliably distinguish between the 2 then.
Drop down to 320k AAC in Tidal.
So, a placebo effect?
Haha
Risible
Member
So you did a blind A/B?
Kind of hard to blind test myself when to compare I have to switch between apps on my tablet while casting to my AV equipment.
If you have an interest in music and actually own high end audio components, I cant see how the difference isn't immediately noticeable, just as better PQ would be to someone who owns a high end 4K TV and had access to HQ streaming 4K films.
The marketing is shit, and the service has too many bugs for me to decide on whether on I want to keep the subscription, but the audio quality delivers.
Recreating a waveform is very different from recreating a picture.
Lossless and so-called HD audio has no perceptible benefits past a certain point, and this has been proven many times.
You can drop Tidal down to Spotify's 320k AAC in the options, you will not be able to tell the difference.
DOWN
Banned
Well handled 320 isn't distinguishable from lossless. If anything, you are hearing a difference between how Spotify outputs vs Tidal and just prefer Tidal's. It isn't because it is lossless or the actual source file quality. If done correctly, Tidal 320 should sound the same as Tidal lossless.
There's a whole thread of people who admit as much after using Tidal's own Lossless blind test.
Just tested for shits and giggles, as it would be ridiculous not to take advantage of the HiFi streaming option.
Tidal "High" still sounds better than Spotify Extreme. Spotify sound is still more compressed, with Tidal giving more space to the songs, allowing more breathing room. The sound signature of both services is immediate. Its not as radically better as the HiFi option, but its still noticeable.
Again, you keep ignoring that equipment makes difference. I hardly have a crazy sound system. Its not like I own McIntosh amps with $40,000 concerto class loudspeakers, but my B&W speakers are still able to translate the difference with ease.
The point was to compare Tidal's own 320k option with lossless. If you can tell the difference you are unique, the equipment is irrelevant as at that rate there is no distinguishable difference in the source you are feeding it.
You are placing more value on the words to describe a service than what they are actually offering. Hi-Fi in this case means nothing, with lossless being beneficial for archiving music not listening to it.
But as you described a placebo effect earlier as something you value, then feel free to pay double for the privilege.
BabyFaceKillah
Member
was the tidal event where he gave a shoutout to
Chinx?
RIP
The comment I made that you imply is a placebo effect is that audio gear, amps, speakers, will make a difference in the experience you receive listening to music.
If you think listening to a song on, for example, a pair of $100 bookshelves and a $200 amp vs a $1500 pair and a $1000 amp is a placebo effect, then your ears have a serious problem.
For what its worth, my original comparison was between Tidal and Spotify, not the difference between Tidals own offering, and the difference between the two is objectively there. Whether this says more about the quality of Tidal's files, versus the lack of quality on Spotify's files, is a different issue. And btw, Tidal High and HiFI. Miniscule difference, but it is there, in the extreme low and high end. Again. Fuckery on Tidals part or Legit scientific difference? The fuck if I know, I can only trust my own ears.
- Status