SMAODJ
Sidenote: Did anyone ever manage to get a discount on the monthly rate from Tidal?
Posted Thu 12 Oct 23 @ 9:51 am
D-Boz
I just posted a thread about not being able to make acappellas and instrumentals anymore all of a sudden and in my post, I also mentioned it only happens when I play music via Tidal whereas these buttons still work when I play music locally stored on the computer. It seems like Tidal has turned on us regarding stems, which definitely isn't cool at all and I already miss making mashups on the fly from their catalogue. I do have a membership (albeit trial) on Deezer but I haven't yet tried to see if stems work via their service.
All in all, this is a huge letdown. Seriously considering ending my Tidal subscription now.
All in all, this is a huge letdown. Seriously considering ending my Tidal subscription now.
Posted Fri 13 Oct 23 @ 9:03 pm
facebook
Hi, this is very disappointing! I bought new Notebook to apply stems on Tidal Music. Now, all my playlists are useless. When I start from scretch new with my playlists, I need to think about to leave Tidal and Virtual DJ. Serato and local music seems to be a more reliable setup for the future. :-(
Posted Thu 19 Oct 23 @ 5:39 pm
wollerosekauf
...local music seems to be a more reliable setup for the future :-)
Posted Thu 19 Oct 23 @ 6:19 pm
facebook
wollerosekauf wrote :
...local music seems to be a more reliable setup for the future :-)
Crazy, but true! The dependecy of the stream providers is a significant risk.
Posted Thu 19 Oct 23 @ 6:27 pm
IIDEEJAYII
user19335033 wrote :
I need to think about to leave Tidal and Virtual DJ. Serato and local music seems to be a more reliable setup for the future. :-(
Tidal does NOT allow for stems, across all DJ Software. So changing software will NOT help at all.
Its a Tidal streaming issue alone.
And FYI....all your playlists are still perfectly intact and unchanged..........its only that one cannot use stems when streaming those few files from Tidal.
Posted Thu 19 Oct 23 @ 7:44 pm
klausmogensen
user19335033 wrote :
I need to think about to leave Tidal and Virtual DJ. Serato and local music seems to be a more reliable setup for the future. :-(
Why are you blaming VDJ??!?
This is a Tidal thing, and will also happen with Tidal on other DJ platforms including in Serato
And stems will work with local files in both VDJ and Serato
Posted Fri 20 Oct 23 @ 1:20 pm
SpontaneousMixx
My attempt to level with the powers that be:
Posted Thu 26 Oct 23 @ 4:57 pm
DJ CRASHDOWN
I have been Using TIDAL for 2+ Years and I am done. First the Stems Issue, now they are forcing you to upgrade to HIFI Plus for half the tracks in VDJ, enough, Beatport it is. I Guess I will be Going back to Deezer for all the Rock sets. Why do these companies do this crap, this is not cool on any level.
Posted Thu 16 Nov 23 @ 4:22 pm
Sepatro
DJ CRASHDOWN wrote :
I have been Using TIDAL for 2+ Years and I am done. First the Stems Issue, now they are forcing you to upgrade to HIFI Plus for half the tracks in VDJ, enough, Beatport it is. I Guess I will be Going back to Deezer for all the Rock sets. Why do these companies do this crap, this is not cool on any level.
I agree. I also expect some interesting legal analysis & discussions in the coming months. Can companies such as Tidal, or even the publishing companies, forbid the use of STEMS? After all, these are just an (hi-tech) type of FX. EQing, mixing, compressing, ... are all very common, so why should STEMS be treated differently? It wouldn't surprise me if many courts in the near future will conclude that imposing any limts on the use of STEMS are illegal.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 8:57 am
groovindj
Sepatro wrote :
why should STEMS be treated differently?
Because they're different.
They're not like an effect or EQ which changes the sound of the original very slightly. They separate the individual component parts of the track.
When Native Instruments introduced their stems, which were proper full blown individual part recordings, it did not catch on for the same reason. The labels/artists do not want the separate isolated parts of their work made available, because it makes it easier for people to mess around with them.
Typically when music gets released, copyright prevents people from "copying, hiring, lending, public performance and broadcasting" - unfortunately many people (especially DJs) either ignore this completely or seem to think that it doesn't apply to them.
Strictly speaking, the things DJs do already, such as mixing tracks together, recording the mix, then uploading it somewhere, are already breaking the copyright.
Being able to separate stems just makes it worse, because then you'll get DJs making mashups etc on top of everything else, then even potentially offering these altered recordings up for sale.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 9:56 am
kradcliffe
groovindj wrote :
[quote=Sepatro]Strictly speaking, the things DJs do already, such as mixing tracks together, recording the mix, then uploading it somewhere, are already breaking the copyright.
And that shows how totally out of date these organisations are in 2023. They haven't embraced the change in formats and DJ playing habits.
They are firmly stuck in the last century and completely ignored by most.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 10:09 am
groovindj
kradcliffe wrote :
that shows how totally out of date these organisations are in 2023
No, that shows what I said - that some people seem to think they can just do what they want with other people's copyrighted material.
Case in point: YouTube. People are not supposed to be uploading copyrighted material to YouTube, but ridiculous amounts do, so unfortunately that means YouTube end up having to foot the bill when they're not the ones responsible.
If the copyright holders had the time and resources to go after the individuals who uploaded in the first place, it would be far less common.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 10:22 am
locoDog
You play on twitch, quit it with the holier than thou act.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 10:41 am
groovindj
So does DJ Jazzy Jeff, David Morales, Louie Vega, Questlove, Carl Cox, Beatport, DJ Yoda....
I think we're allowed to have a discussion about something without anyone needing to prove their innocence (etc).
I think we're allowed to have a discussion about something without anyone needing to prove their innocence (etc).
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 11:04 am
Sepatro
groovindj wrote :
that shows what I said - that some people seem to think they can just do what they want with other people's copyrighted material.
that shows what I said - that some people seem to think they can just do what they want with other people's copyrighted material.
No sane person still thinks that today.
groovindj wrote :
Case in point: YouTube. People are not supposed to be uploading copyrighted material to YouTube, but ridiculous amounts do, so unfortunately that means YouTube end up having to foot the bill when they're not the ones responsible.
Case in point: YouTube. People are not supposed to be uploading copyrighted material to YouTube, but ridiculous amounts do, so unfortunately that means YouTube end up having to foot the bill when they're not the ones responsible.
YouTube evolved and now offers various mechanisms. I am uploading copyrighted music to YouTube all the time, perfectly legally.
STEMS is just an FX. I repeat: it should, and will, be hard for publishing companies to forbid using this FX.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 11:09 am
groovindj
Sepatro wrote :
I am uploading copyrighted music to YouTube all the time, perfectly legally
https://www.youtube.com/intl/ALL_uk/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 11:13 am
Sepatro
groovindj wrote :
https://www.youtube.com/intl/ALL_uk/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/
Sepatro wrote :
I am uploading copyrighted music to YouTube all the time, perfectly legally
https://www.youtube.com/intl/ALL_uk/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/
Exactly. Perfectly legal.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 11:23 am
groovindj
How so?
"they should not upload videos that...use content....that someone else owns the copyright to, such as music tracks"
You've just said that's what you do.
"they should not upload videos that...use content....that someone else owns the copyright to, such as music tracks"
You've just said that's what you do.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 11:32 am
Sepatro
groovindj wrote :
How so?
"they should not upload videos that...use content....that someone else owns the copyright to, such as music tracks"
You've just said that's what you do.
"they should not upload videos that...use content....that someone else owns the copyright to, such as music tracks"
You've just said that's what you do.
"or that they're authorised to use" & "necessary authorisations".
Doesn't really matter for this discussion. But we're not living in the 60ies anymore.
Posted Wed 06 Dec 23 @ 11:37 am
