Friday, May 27, 2016

How Sample Clearance Works

Written by Lucas Garrison — When done right, a great sample flip can make an album. But despite my love for them, I’ve never really thought much about how a sample is actually cleared for an album. We hear all the time about a song not making an album because of sample clearance issues, but what does that really mean? What happened?

While art and commerce are often seen as different currencies, when it comes to sampling they're two sides of the same coin. Without sample clearances, some of our favorite songs wouldn't be on our favorite albums at all, so while we honor the likes of Juicy J, Premo and 9th Wonder, we also need to give some shine to people like Deborah Mannis-Gardner, the President of DMG Clearances, Inc.

Like I would for any producer or singer, I began researching Mannis-Gardner after I saw her name in the Views liner notes. It turns out she has over 25 years of credits on albums like Fat Joe’s Jealous Ones Still Envy (J.O.S.E.), Lupe’s The Cool, Eminem’s Encore, Nas’ Life Is Good, The Roots’ How I Got Over and that just scratches the surface of a resume that also includes work for films (8 Mile) and video games (Rockstar Games). Putting a name and a face to the mysterious, confusing world of sample clearance and publishing has helped me to see sampling in a different light, and when I got her on the phone and picked her brain about sampling's past and present, it was illuminating.

Here are just a few gems from the woman who helped to make your favorite albums, beats and samples a possibility.

What clearing a sample was like 20 years ago:

I've been doing it for 25 years, so I've been around for a long time. Back then we used to be able to do it for a lot less. When Common did an album, like his first album, he would have four or five samples in a song and it would be a challenge, but we would be able to make it happen.

You just can't do it anymore because everyone's so greedy and they [the publishers] want a minimum of 10 or 15 percent. So it makes it very difficult to be able to take a song and sprinkle it in, which is what producers like DJ Premier used to do. That was a specialty, to do a whole bunch of scratches and stuff. That was the style, a sound and a feel that's very difficult to do now because most publishing companies have been bought by the majors. You have Sony ATV, you've got Warner/Chappell, you have Universal (BMG) which has acquired a lot of stuff.

Back 20 years ago you had all the different little companies that gave us more flexibility to negotiate, but now, everything's been bought.

What clearing a sample looks like now:

When you're putting together a budget for an album, you're going to put together $100,000 to $150,000 in upfront fees to clear your samples, if it's an album filled with a lot of samples. You have to utilize a sample first before you can clear it. You can't just come up with the idea because the copyright holder needs to hear it. And in most instances, people come to me and then we handle it two different ways.

Depending on who the artist is, if it's Marshall or if it's Drake, Khaled, they're very protective of their stuff and it gets played over the phone. If it's another artist, we can put stamps on it to protect them. But then you send it to the copyright holder so they can listen to it. They need to determine how extensive the use is for them to determine what kind [of cost] they're going to come up with.

And then it goes to the publishers, then the labels, and in some instances based on what the contract states, it has to go to the writers for consent and it might have to go to the artist or the artist managers. So there's a lot of approvals that it needs to go through, and then once the approvals come about, a quote or value is then determined and negotiated.

How often do samples get denied?

Whenever a sample gets denied, you always want to find out why and what we can do to perhaps change that into an approval. Was it a lyrical use? Could we change the lyrics to change that denied into an approval? Was it their content? What is it exactly? So we can try to keep denials to a minimum. My clients rarely get denied and if they get denied chances are I told my client in advance that I anticipated a denial, so they were prepared prior to me even sending the request out. My denials are probably less than 1 percent because I forewarn my clients of denial.

Who are the artists who typically don’t clear?

I’ll give free advice to my clients so they have an idea of if what they want to sample is feasible. I'll say “that copyright holder isn't clearable,” like Anita Baker or Rod Temperton, it's going to be costly or time consuming. After 25 years, I know who clears and who doesn't, who's quick, who's difficult, all that kind of stuff.

Prince never cleared. He's never cleared for samples. When it came to synchronization stuff, he rarely cleared. I cleared his stuff for In Her Shoes [the film], but those were songs there's cover versions of; his stuff was always difficult. He was very protective of his material. When I did Kendrick's album, To Pimp A Butterfly, they reached out to him personally and still he very politely declined. He was always polite about it, but he just declined.

Stevie Wonder used to clear. I cleared his stuff for DMX, but then he stopped. He doesn't allow his stuff to be used anymore. It was just a decision he made that he just didn't want to be sampled anymore. And he too declined Kendrick. He was really polite about it like, 'You know this is a great song, but it's really not what I want to do.'

That list is so big and it is always changing because copyrights get bought and sold all the time.

Do you have any one particular standout clearance story?

The funniest clearance I've ever done, which is all over the internet but was never legally released, was Old Dirty Bastard with Macy Gray wasted in the studio singing "Don't Go Breaking My Heart." I wondered if I was going to really get this cleared, because it was really horrible sounding and funky and they were wasted, but I got it cleared because it wasn't a cover, it was an interpolation; it wasn't verbatim, word for word.

How do you track down copyright holders?

When I started out a long time ago, you could call up BMI and you were only allowed to ask five questions at a time. So I would hang up and then put on an accent, change my name, and ask five more questions; I’d put on a Southern accent, then I’d have an English accent, then a Massachusetts accent, a New York accent.

We have tracked down people who have died and you’d find out who takes care of the cemetery plot. You just go to the ends of the Earth - if you know someone is alive and you haven't heard from them, you find out where they live and you find a neighbor to knock on their door which I've recently done.

Now, the internet makes things a lot easier. I love the challenge. And it's becoming more and more challenging because producers are finding really obscure stuff on YouTube, so it's getting more difficult, but I love it.

Can an artist sample on a free project without clearing?

You can not sample on a free mixtape, and I know of cases that I think are in process right now where copyright holders are going after this stuff because the concept of a free mixtape is to promote an artist. Therefore it's deemed to have a value. If the artist goes to the next level, so that when he goes to sell something it has a greater value, then the mixtape does have value.

What does sampling mean to you?

Sampling is, in my opinion, like a collage, a piece of art where you're taking pieces of other music and creating new pieces. I think there are copyright holders and artists and writers that never saw income or never thought they'd see income again but do because of samples. I have gotten thank yous before from people just for bringing their stuff back to life. I think there are generations that hear music that they would have never heard had there not been samples.

In some ways it's sad that technology and the current music business model have made it more difficult to sample like Premo or Common did back in the day, but it's those very same advancements that make sampling a pillar of the industry. At the same time we find it frustrating that a song needs to get cleared, it's exciting to think about all the songwriters and artists who continue to live off music, and whose work continues to be passed down to different generations, all because of sampling.

For better or for worse, the business behind sampling has allowed hip-hop to rise to where it is today and I'm happy to see someone like Deborah, a true fan of the art, helping to find that balance.

Click here to read from this article's source.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Hi-Res MUSIC Initiative Expands to Include Streaming Services

Written by Rob Stott — Music streaming services have been welcomed into the club. On Thursday, the music industry’s official logo mark for Hi-Res MUSIC, which previously was applicable to primarily high-quality digital download services, made the decision to include music streaming services as well. The decision was made and announced by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and its member companies including Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group, in cooperation with the Recording Academy Producers & Engineers Wing, the American Association of Independent Music, and DEG: The Digital Entertainment Group.

Hi-Res MUSIC logoThe Hi-Res MUSIC logo and accompanying definition was first announced in June 2015 by RIAA on behalf of its members. It was intended to focus on the various types of digital files and download services that met the definition’s requirements. In the year since its introduction, nearly a dozen download services have adopted the definition.

RIAA explained that expanding the definition to streaming services will help ensure that these technologies provide listeners with an audio experience that preserves, without loss of information, recordings from sources that achieve a minimum of 48kHz/20 bit resolution.
“The expansion of the Hi-Res MUSIC definition to encompass streaming technologies reflects the continued evolution of the marketplace to deliver high resolution music to fans,” David Hughes, Chief Technology Officer, RIAA, said in a statement. “We are thrilled that the Hi-Res MUSIC logo will allow streaming enthusiasts to easily identify higher quality versions of their favorite recordings via services that use these approved technologies. It’s the logical next step, one embraced by music labels large and small, that will provide an optimal listening experience to this growing consumer segment.”

RIAA referenced a number of data packaging technologies under development that can support the streaming of hi-res music files to consumers in a more-efficient manner. Among them: MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) and MPEG 4 Audio SLS. These and other approved hi-res streaming techs will enable licensed services to display the Hi-Res MUSIC logo mark on their landing page or next to an individual album or track, RIAA said. If the resolution of a recording falls below the required minimum standard at any time, the user will be made aware of the change.

“We are looking forward to the Hi-Res MUSIC logo being associated with services that adopt MQA,” Bob Stuart, Chairman of MQA, said in the statement. “MQA is a revolutionary new technology which enables the sound quality of hi-res music with the convenience of efficient streaming, something that wasn’t possible even a few short years ago.”

The expanded Hi-Res MUSIC logo requirements for streaming services will be made available to interested parties on June 1.

Click here to read from this article's source.

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Introducing the festival-ready TOUR system CDJ-TOUR1 and DJM-TOUR1

Written by Pioneer DJ — Meet the Tour system CDJ-TOUR1 and DJM-TOUR1: the festival-ready set-up with arena-grade sound components for a huge, reliable sound – plus 13-inch touch screens that give you instinctive, confident control when it matters most.

The CDJ-TOUR1 multiplayer and DJM-TOUR1 mixer take the professional sound quality of the NXS2 set-up and add the components needed to deliver that performance in large venues such as festivals and arenas. Both models have an ESS Technology 32-bit D/A converter to eliminate low noise and distortion and give a clear, crisp sound at scale. The DJM-TOUR1 is the first mixer to have a pro audio grade AES/EBU digital output, so you can connect directly to front of house – even over long distances – with no loss of sound quality.

The 13-inch, full-colour touch screens with built-in CPU give you effortless control: you can browse faster, grasp waveforms more easily, and do it all while keeping the crowd in your line of sight. And back-to-back DJing is a breeze, thanks to the DJM-TOUR1's two independent headphone sections that let you monitor and cue tracks separately.

The TOUR1 set-up is as sturdy as the name suggests, with reinforced sides, lockable NEUTRIK etherCON® LAN ports and gold-plated RCAs – making it a stable set-up you can count on in any large-scale environment.

The CDJ-TOUR1 and DJM-TOUR1 will be available from July 2016.

Click here to read from this article's source.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Led Zeppelin Copyright Case Heats Up as Lawyers Clash Over Music Experts

Written by Tim Kenneally — Attorneys for Robert Plant and Jimmy Page claim they’re being prevented from deposing music experts in “Stairway to Heaven” lawsuit.

The lawyers for Led Zeppelin are taking a page from the Marvin Gaye songbook and asking a court, “Can we get a witness?”

The copyright infringement case revolving around Led Zeppelin’s iconic tune “Stairway to Heaven” took a heated turn on Monday, when the group’s attorneys filed papers claiming that the opposing side is improperly trying to block them from deposing the plaintiff’s music experts.

Led Zeppelin is being sued by Michael Skidmore, the trustee for Spirit frontman Randy Craig Wolfe — a.k.a. Randy California, who died in 1997 — for copyright infringement. Skidmore contends that “Stairway” infringes on the Spirit song “Taurus.”

According to the papers filed by Team Zep, a judge made four of Skidmore’s music experts file new expert reports after deeming the first reports inadmissible.

The new reports were submitted on May 2, Monday’s filing says — but, Zeppelin’s lawyers claim, Skidmore’s side is refusing to make the experts available for deposition.

Led Zeppelin’s lawyers say that unless a judge intervenes, their side will be “substantially prejudiced by proceeding to trial without the ability to depose plaintiff’s experts as to the new reports.”

The trial, initially slated for May, has been pushed to June.

The dispute arises from a difference in interpretation of the court schedule; according to the group’s lawyers, Skidmore’s team is asserting that the expert depositions needed to be completed by February 11, the cut-off date for discovery, while Led Zeppelin’s team contends that that date doesn’t pertain to expert depositions.

According to the papers, going by the interpretation of Skidmore’s side, Zeppelin’s attorneys would be required to compete the depositions just one day after receiving initial expert disclosures “and a month before receiving rebuttal reports. Under plaintiff’s view, no expert could be deposed in this action.”

On Tuesday, Skidmore’s attorneys filed an opposition to the Zeppelin team’s Monday filing, accusing them of being “self-serving.”

“Defendants did not take Plaintiff’s expert’s depositions by February 11, 2016,” the opposition reads. “They now make the self-serving and unsupported argument that the discovery deadline set by the court in the Scheduling Order did not apply to expert discovery.”

The opposition continues, “But Defendants’ self-professed ‘reasonable interpretation’ of the Rules and Scheduling Order is not reasonable or correct.”

Click here to read from this article's source.

Monday, May 23, 2016

Bandcamp Is Doing A Lot Better Than The Rest Of The Music Industry

Written by Greg Moskovitch — We’ve long preached the gospel of Bandcamp, highlighting the ways in which allows independent artists and record labels to take control of their careers and the way it shares the wealth with those artists and labels in a fair and transparent way.

There’s a lot of wealth to go around, actually. At the time of writing, fans have paid artists $156 million using Bandcamp, and $4.3 million in the last 30 days alone, according to the frontage of the service, which gives users a constant update.

In fact, according a recent blog post from Bandcamp higher-ups, the company is killing it and is actually doing better than the music industry as a whole, growing by an incredible 35 percent in just the last year.

According to Bandcamp’s own stats, fans pay artists $4.3 million dollars every month using the site, purchasing about 25,000 records a day, which equates to about one purchased every four seconds, with a real-time feed of the purchases available on the site.

What’s most remarkable, however, is the growth across Bandcamp’s sales. Digital album sales grew 14 percent last year, whilst dropping three percent industry-wide and track sales grew 11 percent whilst dropping 13 percent industry-wide.

Vinyl was up 40 percent, cassettes were up 49 percent, and even CD sales managed to grow by 10 percent whilst decreasing 11 percent industry-wide. “Most importantly of all,” they write, “Bandcamp has been profitable (in the now-quaint revenues-exceed-expenses sense) since 2012.”

“Subscription-based music streaming, on the other hand, has yet to prove itself to be a viable model,” they continue, “even after hundreds of millions of investment dollars raised and spent.”

“For our part, we are committed to offering an alternative that we know works. As long as there are fans who care about the welfare of their favorite artists and want to help them keep making music, we will continue to provide that direct connection.”

Click here to read from this article's source.

Friday, May 20, 2016

Music Marketing: Five Album Promotions That Truly Disrupted The Music Business

Written by Magnetic Magazine — From Michael Jackson to Thom Yorke, these marketing campaigns got creative.

The music business is notoriously competitive. Not only are brand new artists doing their best to be discovered, but already-established acts must still work hard to remain relevant and interesting, lest they become simply yesterday’s news.

The internet, despite some artists no doubt cursing its creation as a hindrance due to illegal downloads, has brought with it many benefits. New album news, updates, or tour dates, can be accessed instantly, and word of mouth spreads extremely quickly online. Also, domain names like .music or .band found via these providers – are becoming far more popular, and are designed to help both users and search engines alike to better identify the site’s content, thereby assisting online promotion.

That said, there are still fun and interesting ways to promote yourself and a new album other than classic online and print methods. These are some of our favorite examples.

Thom Yorke

Having already attempted something distinctive with Radiohead’s 2007 album In Rainbows, which was released as a pay-what-you-feel digital download due to a record contract dispute with EMI, Yorke again tried something different with his solo album Tomorrow’s Modern Boxes. TMB was released in 2014 via file sharing program BitTorrent for $6, which Yorke explains was a way to try out new methods of delivering music. "If it works well it could be an effective way of handing some control of Internet commerce back to the people who are creating the work," he said.

Wu-Tang Clan

Most artists do whatever they can to make sure every man, woman, and dog listens to their music, but this evidently doesn’t apply to Wu-Tang Clan. Their 2015 album, Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, was one of the most unusual releases in recent times. Only one physical copy has been made, and was auctioned off to the highest bidder in the same year. The catch? The buyer cannot sell the album until 2103, yes, 2103. It can however, be released for free or can be heard during listening parties.

Michael Jackson

The late King of Pop’s 1995 album, HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I, was promoted in a way that perhaps only Kanye West could pull off nowadays – creating several 30-foot statues and placing them in city centers across the world. Los Angeles, London, Berlin, Paris, and Milan were among those metropolises that received a Jackson statue during the album’s promotion.

Nine Inch Nails

NIN’s 2007 album, Year Zero, had some espionage tactics tied into its promotion. USB drives containing songs from the forthcoming album, were concealed in bathroom stalls and other nooks and crannies at several NIN shows. What’s more, hidden messages on T-shirts spelt out a website URL, which lead to more info concerning Year Zero.

Arcade Fire

For their 2013 album, Reflektor, Arcade Fire went with an interesting guerrilla marketing campaign. A logo started appearing on the walls of cities across the world, which featured the word 'reflektor' in scrambled letters. Several weeks later, the band put up a mural on a Manhattan building, which featured the symbol next to the words 'Arcade Fire 9pm 9/9'. On that date and time, two songs were released from Reflektor.

Bonus round: U2

U2’s 2014 album, Songs of Innocence, while not the worst album ever, received an overwhelming amount of negative reactions due to its automatic insertion into the accounts of every iTunes user in the world (well over 500 million users). Lead singer Bono has since apologized for the stunt, in the aftermath of iTunes users becoming irate at the forced receiving of U2’s music. "I had this beautiful idea and we kind of got carried away with ourselves. Artists are prone to that kind of thing. Drop of megalomania, touch of generosity, dash of self-promotion and deep fear that these songs that we poured our life into over the last few years mightn’t be heard," said Bono. "There’s a lot of noise out there. I guess we got a little noisy ourselves to get through it."

Click here to read from this article's source.

Thursday, May 19, 2016

Facebook trialling music video product to rival YouTube

Written by Jessica Goodfellow — Facebook is testing a music video product, Slideshow, that allows users to share photos and videos, now with accompanying music from Warner Music Group to help users create “soundtrack options.”

Slideshows are a new way for Facebook users to share photos and videos. So far the company has been using Facebook-owned music to accompany the slideshows, but a spokesperson has reported the social media giant is now testing the use of a limited amount of music from Warner Music Group as soundtrack options, the New York Post reported.

Facebook previously considered the acquisition of video service Vevo, a joint venture operation by Universal Music Group, Google, Sony Music Entertainment and Abu Dhabi Media.

This year has seen Facebook bolster efforts to host video and music content within its walls, as Zuckerberg announced in the company’s earnings call: “We’re at the beginning of a golden age of online video.”

“Facebook is trying to figure out how to keep video as part of its experience,” a source familiar with the talks said, reported by the New York Post. “They’re looking for a way to take photos, add licensed music and share it with friends.”

“They’re thinking about launching it first in Australia,” the source added.

In December last year Facebook announced a partnership with music service, Deezer, in a deal that will allow the social network giant to integrate music sharing into the news feed.

The news comes just days after Amazon launched a YouTube-style video service which will allow anyone with an Amazon account to upload their own content.

The tech giant is set to play rival Google at its own game in the user-generated video space, and let creators upload their own content which will be hosted on Amazon's Prime streaming service, and from which they can generate royalties.

Click here to read from this article's source.

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Why We're Talking About Music and Mental Health This Week

Written by Joe Zadeh — "This is how artists deteriorate," said Kendrick Lamar last year, speaking about how fame and touring affected his mental health, "if you don't catch yourself."

Whether we know it, talk about it, or try to brush it off, mental health affects every single one of us. In the UK, one in four of us will experience a mental health problem each year, yet one in five still believe that the main cause is simply "a lack of self-discipline and willpower".

In the last few years, it's felt as if some of that stigma has been removed, and we've become much better at talking about the stuff that happens in our head. While our government continues to damage and remove the infrastructure and support networks that are so key to those suffering, the public debate and sense of awareness is becoming louder and more empathetic by the day.

This week on Noisey, we've decided to mark Mental Health Awareness Week by focusing on a specific issue: mental health in the music industry. There is no evidence to suggest that just being an artist makes you more likely to encounter psychological problems, but it's become clear that the lifestyle which comes with a career in the music industry can exacerbate mental distress, especially when exposed to the harsh glare of fame and fandom, pressure and criticism, and the unstructured lifestyle of touring and recording.

According to a survey by Help Musicians UK, over 60% of musicians suffer from depression or other psychological problems at some point. Three in four experience performance anxiety, and loneliness or separation from family and friends. Worse still, less than half of the musicians who took the survey had thought to seek professional help.

Over the years, it has almost become routine for us to see artists struggle in broad daylight with the pressures of their lifestyle. Too often, these struggles are mishandled. It's become colloquial to hear musicians labelled "tortured geniuses"; their mental health problems fetishised and romanticised as some sort of magical well from which their art springs. Others are cast as having a "meltdown". For many, their plight is simply ignored, until something so serious happens it can't be ignored anymore.

This is changing. Artists suffering with mental health problems have become more willing to talk about them than ever before, and we are more willing than ever to listen and learn. Whether it was the dubstep producer Benga speaking about how he attributes his diagnosis of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia to his life as an artist, Olly Alexander from Years & Years opening up about his experiences with depression, or Asif Kapadia's 'Amy', which showed us how blind we can be to mental distress unfolding right before our eyes.

But what exactly is it about the life of a musician that presents so many challenges to mental health and wellbeing? How do our favourite artists cope when problems surface? Is the traditional structure of the British music industry doing enough or anything to support them? And how can we help the charities that are fighting everyday to improve conditions? These are all questions we'll be tackling this week on Noisey – with the aid and advice of Help Musicians UK – by launching the Noisey Guide to Music and Mental Health: a series of very special features, interviews, and short films.

We hope that by putting this together we can widen the debate, remove stigma, shed light on individual stories, improve the way the music industry talks and acts around mental health, and show how intrinsically linked music is to our minds.

We'll be publishing new content every day this week, and you can follow all it all on our home page here.

Click here to read from this article's source.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

SoundCloud Denies That It Will Block All DJ Mixes That Aren't Fully Cleared

Written by Alexander Iadarola — SoundCloud has provided THUMP with a statement denying the claim made by Digital Music News that it will restrict DJ mixes.

Music streaming platform SoundCloud has refuted a claim that it may soon restrict uploads of DJ mixes to the platform. According to a report by Digital Music News, the Berlin-based company may impose a new series of "significant and serious" limitations on the uploads of mixes. Citing an anonymous source that had previously accurately tipped them off to a number of major SoundCloud-related stories, the publication said that as of right now it is unclear what exactly these restrictions will be, but that they could include a "complete block" on all DJ mixes that are not fully cleared.

"I don't think the DJs are going to be happy," said the source in the original article. "Probably piss off a lot of subscribers too."

A SoundCloud representative told THUMP via email that the claims made in the article were false. "The DMN story has no truth to it," they said. "At SoundCloud, we're on a mission to create a place where all creativity can live. SoundCloud's creator community, including DJs, is incredibly important to us."

On March 29, SoundCloud officially joined the streaming arms race with the introduction of a new paid service called SoundCloud Go. The move followed a series of deals with the three biggest record labels—Sony, Universal, and Warner—which happened alongside a site-wide removal of content flagged over copyright claims.

Are you a producer or DJ who feels confused by how to navigate this confusing online world of copyright? If so, we've put together a handy little primer just for you.

Click here to read from this article's source.

Monday, May 16, 2016

Apple to Update iTunes After Reports of Deleted Music

Written by David Z. Morris — The question remains whether the glitch was a bug or a feature.

Earlier this month, marketer and composer James Pinkstone related a harrowing tale of loss, in which iTunes and Apple Music apparently conspired to delete 122GB of music from his hard drive—including some of his own original compositions.

In a statement to The Loop, Apple has confirmed that some users have reported similar issues, and that it is working to identify and correct the cause.“In an extremely small number of cases users have reported that music files saved on their computer were removed without their permission,” Apple told the site. “We’re taking these reports seriously as we know how important music is to our customers and our teams are focused on identifying the cause. We have not been able to reproduce this issue, however, we’re releasing an update to iTunes early next week which includes additional safeguards. If a user experiences this issue they should contact AppleCare.”

Pinkstone has been getting mixed messages about whether the deletion was a design feature or a bug. An Apple support rep first explained to him that users can authorize Apple Music to delete their local music files when it determines that a copy already exists in the Apple Music database. An Apple technician later contacted him and told him this was not true, and that the deletion was likely a bug.

Apple’s reference to “additional safeguards” hints that some users may simply be unwittingly activating an option to upload their libraries to the cloud, and that the update will make that choice clearer.

While storing a personal music collection remotely is attractive to some users, Pinkstone’s experience highlights several problems with the idea, particularly for truly dedicated music fans. He says rare and unique files, such as song demos, were misidentified as later versions of songs, then deleted. He also says Apple Music downcoded his hi-definition WAV files to MP3 before deleting the originals from his hard drive.

Pinkstone also points to the larger issues his experience highlights: In the digital age, ownership of media is a very fragile thing.

Luckily, Pinkstone was smart enough to have a local backup of his files.

Click here to read from this article's source.