Tidal For All?By Editor
What do you give to a man who has it all? Well according to Jay Z, a music streaming service apparently. And sure, he bought this as a gift to himself (for $56 million no less), but this is not the point.
The point is that the relaunching of Tidal seems like the most superfluous act a mega rich artist could do. He's a business tycoon (with a combined net worth of over a billion dollars if you add Beyonce into the mix), so why does he need a few extra bucks that Spotify wasn't giving him? There's no way that any loss of earnings from the current streaming services were keeping him up at night. But even so, what does this mean for us, the little guy?
It will ruin a party playlist
So, you have a few people back to yours after a night out and you need that perfect rolling selection of songs to keep everyone dancing and in high spirits. What do you need? Obviously, a streaming service where you can think on your feet and gauge the mood of the room. However, do you really want to spend £20 for the luxury? Probably not, so what you're going to do is use Spotify's free option. But that equates to ad breaks and, of course, none of the newer music of the artists that have bought into Tidal. That means you can't mix All Falls Down into one of Kanye's latest creations. People will leave the party unsatisfied; civilisation as we know it will crumble. Maybe I've thought too much about it, though, but what if I'm right?
5 million fewer songs than its rival
Spotify has 30 million songs to choose from. From Unplugged albums to those weird pan pipe cover albums that a few session musicians were probably forced to do at knife point in a cold studio, Spotify has all the bases covered. Tidal is said to have a whopping five million albums less and again has the likelihood to ruin a nice sing-along, resorting to a soiree experiencing that weird 14 to 17 seconds where someone finds the tune they want on YouTube. People will leave the party unsatisfied; civilisation as we know it WILL CRUMBLE.
It costs too much cash for the man on the street
For the average guy who likes to listen to a bit of music now and again, the £20 service isn't really an option. I live on pasta and the faded memory of gourmet cuisine, as do most people. Music is, of course, important but us humans have become attuned to find the cheapest thing possible. That means going elsewhere.
No one cares about high-quality audio
One of the biggest selling points about Tidal is that the files that the service uses are Flac, which apparently means they are of a CD-level quality. That means nothing to me or, I presume, anyone else. I really don't care whether a song I'm listening to is 1411kbps. All I want is something audible to soundtrack my rummaging through the reduced aisle in Sainsbury's.
It's only going to make the richer artists richer
Jay Z and co's attempt to reintroduce a service for music lovers may sound like a good idea, but unless you're a vinyl addict who actually cares about how their jazz fusion electronica sounds through an unnecessarily expensive set of speakers, you're more likely to see Tindal as an insult. Kendrick Lemar, who released his remarkable new album, To Pimp A Butterfly, last month is reported to have earned over a million dollars from Spotify streams alone. Does this sound like he's getting messed around?
Yes to releasing new and progressive mainstream music; yes to giving more money to artists, producers and bands that survive on pittance, but no to a group of multimillionaires thinking about how to line their pockets further whilst acting ridiculously austere in a promo video as if it was the most important thing that has ever happened. Get in the studio, guys, make some good music and get a grip.