...but since most users don't have unlimited data plans, what does that do to their iPhone bills?

Personally, I have all 5,257 music tracks loaded on my 128 gb iPhone 6.

The only place I use data is in the car, and since I live in Boston that still adds up to about 10 GB's a month worth of streaming music and NPR.

Change it up whenever you want. Select from 30+ million tracks.

Feel like deep diving into Bob Dylan. Download it all. Listen for a few days. Delete it. Move on.

The human curated playlists are fantastic. Based on Artists, Genres, Themes, Specific band members, dates, activities, and much more.

Go to an Apple Store and play with it.

With that said, Taylor Swift and Brad Paisley.......

Great energy. Reminds me of amazing radio I used to stream from the UK.

Right now listening to the 'Cheap Trick: Deep Cuts' playlist on Apple Music.

Cancelled Spotify.

But there is SO much more music available on iTunes that I think I'm here to stay.

Loving the variety and the electronic mixes.

Streaming to this generation was called the radio in mine! But at least then I didn't have to pay for the streaming. I could record on to a cassette or just go purchase the tape, LP, or then CD which I owned.

You own nothing from a streaming service. It is just a rental. If the internet is down or unavailable, so is your music.

I am not adverse to the addition of streaming but what I see is the coming day of only streaming. It is money in the bank for Apple and the services.

Just shoot me that day.

on a local level do occur. That was more my point.

I use Pandora on occasion. If I am working at my computer and want to preview some new dubstep or French House from Europe, it is a great way to do it.

But I don't own it. No access to the service means no access to the music. And if a song is not put up on the service then I have no access to it. Gatekeepers can make or break an indie artist that way.

So in general, no I am not a big fan of streaming.

I then will buy the song and download/own it, trust me Apple is going to make some $$$ off of me this week, sure the trial is free but I've already bought 6 songs tonight!

But even iTunes has a poor track record for a lot of music that I only have available on LP, cassette and CD which are out of print.

For example. Tresor is a Berlin Techno club that had a label through out the 1990's and early 2000's. They shut down, and then re-opened recently. In their store, is but a very small selection of the hundreds of LP's and CD's they once had in their catalog. And almost none of it exists on Amazon, iTunes, or GooglePlay music stores and certainly not on streaming services in abundance. But I own the entire back catalog on LP and CD.

Thanks for the post, enjoy your collection!

Detroit/Berlin techno, Tresor label musicians and DJ's are IMHO simply the best.

I only started streaming recently, but on a Spotify free account. It's good yet, as you said, you have to pay fees for eternity to keep your music.

I generally set up long playlists to record overnight using AudioRecord Wizard then write cue sheets at my leisure to split up the different works. Then it's yours permanently. When I have all I want Spotify gets cancelled.

falls into legal gray areas.

precisely 3 are alive, 2 of them are over 80 in Scandinavia and the other has 1 single CD out of his own stuff, makes his money as a pianist and is doing pretty well. Orchestra members are paid well, and extra, for recording sessions. Doubt I'm stealing much bread from the mouths of the starving artist. And, as any discussion of file sharing never seems to acknowledge, the alternative 99% of the time is not my buying the CD and generating royalties, but simply them having one fewer listener in toto.

I started pirating software when I made copies of the original Castle Wolfenstein with Locksmith on the Apple IIe to give to my buddies.

I totally support file sharing especially as you say with composers and authors whose works are out of print or who are dead. That music, literature, etc. deserves to be out there for all to enjoy and learn from.

In many ways, it will be the only way possible for digital works to be passed on to the next generation.

I'm gen x myself, but I totally get it.

Really, there's SO much content out there, who wants to own something anymore? I used to buy movies, but after awhile I realized why am I spending money on it when I can get most of it on demand? And if there's a day when on demand is no longer available, we likely have bigger issues to deal with.

The radio analogy is decent, but it's faulty. Because that's like driving around in a car with a radio or carrying a boombox. Now it's a lot more personalized radio to tastes, a lot more interactive, and the quality of the stream is definitely better in many areas than radio broadcasts are.

Honestly, at 44, I don't want to own jack shit anymore. I saw my father overwhelmed by the things he owned over the years and now I'm stuck cleaning it out and throwing it away. I'm raising my two kids, both teens, to be very selective about what they own so they don't become tied to stuff. I buy a fair bit of digital music and books, but consider both long term rentals.

None of it's coming with me in the end.

My grandfather was an antiques dealer. I grew up learning to value those objects of human creation that are worth keeping and passing on.

I can share a book or an LP or CD with my nephew or grand cousins. I can't share anything that I rent or stream.

And while you may believe you are free from the accumulation of 'stuff' you are paying monthly for that privilege. Renting and leasing always cost more than the outright purchase would in the end.

You obviously feel you have money to burn. I, and many others, do not.

I miss the days I could program the VCR for my elders.

You will need to sign up for membership but it's free for three months, you can de-select "auto-renew" in settings until you are sure you'll like it.

I love Netflix and Hulu, might subscribe to Amazon Prime at some point. However, I really have zero interest in this new service. As a music fan with a rather large CD collection I would rather listen to my own CDs / albums that I have purchased and not have to pay a monthly fee, thanks.

Haha!

Marketing 101

The artist for whom I write and some of my old stuff is online. Pennies per stream. We will never make money unless we tour. That is a given and most every serious musician understands that.
But man, streaming sure opens doors to new music and artists, who are making the best music right now, not tethered to and engaged in a race to the bottom by the big corporate labels. You want big corporate pop and old school stuff owned by the corporations, it's there. But so is a treasure trove of fantastic music by people you have never heard of. That is why I rarely buy records or CDs anymore. And that's ok. If I want to support an artist I go see them. I swear by Spotify premium. But when I upgrade my phone I might go over to Apple and consider switching if the reviews are still good

The musicians I know (some of them very mainstream) have made inconsequentially little from streaming and downloads. They're living off money they made fifteen years ago. That new artist touring little clubs isn't going to make enough to pay for their flights and hotel rooms.

All at once the barriers to entry have never been lower or higher.

I don't have a solution. Only a infinitesimally small number of musicians in the last 300 years have made enough money to live comfortably, much less live large. Sad but true. The system is set up to only reward the corporate created artist with riches. And for each one of those there are 100 more talented who will never pay off their credit card. The only hope I see if for the new artist to be good enough to create a following, tour like mad, and "sell" download credits. If you are good enough outside the lowest common denominator scene, you might get a corporate or indie contract. But not everyone can afford to secure all the music they want through paid streaming services. Few under 30 buy tangible CDs or vinyl ....

Jazz musicians do it for love. That's how we all must look at it .....

I don't think the music publishers are terribly happy with the new normal either.

Back in 2007-2008 some musicians wanted to bring me into a project to start a new tour promoter that would focus on smaller more adult oriented shows at better venues (concert halls rather than arenas) this went absolutely nowhere, but what I saw in the process was unbelievable to me.

although I downloaded the new iOS update that includes Apple Music.

I am still listening to Slacker Radio, which I like.

There's tons of stuff available on the free trial.

I'm surfing through it in a stream of conscious, checking out some cool tunes. I'm going to be doing a lot of driving, so I'll def be using this.

Same I stream while driving usually.

Next thing you know, poor folks will be have refrigerators too.

First they have the iPhone which will cost them $70.00+ a month. Then there is Apple Music at $10.00. If there are tunes not available on that service then they are paying another $10.00 for Spotify premium. If they want movies and/or TV then they pay more for Netflix, Hulu, or buying it through iTunes.

All of these 'rentals' and streaming fees start adding up really quickly.

I like to irrationally pretend one thing is predicated on a wholly different thing too.

TV will go the way of Apple Music - any episode, any network, any channel on demand. It will take time but that's eventually where everything is heading.

I'm lucky to keep a phone call going.

.. from time to time. But I have an extensive library of mp3/hardcopy music spanning from the 50s to now and I do most of my listening from that.

I'm a boomer. I like technology, make a living from technology, understand technology. But my music tastes include a lot of stuff that I highly doubt will ever be available on any streaming service. It's probably great if most of what you like to listen to is "current".