3 ms·
There are lots and lots of existing providers of karaoke tracks: these invest (depending on quality) between several dollars and several hun
by JohnBooty 4y ago
There are lots and lots of existing
providers of karaoke tracks:
these invest (depending on quality)
between several dollars and several
hundreds of dollars to record "soundalike"
tracks
Commercial karaoke establishments will still need to pay for the licensed versions if they want to be legal. That doesn't change.
People who don't want to do that already had tons of options - Adobe Audition and tons of other software can remove/reduce vocals.
So I don't feel like this changes the commercial picture too much? I feel like this will mainly affect at-home singalongs.
- Not15CharsLong 4y agoCommercial karaoke establishments are, outside Japan and Korea, not very relevant. The at-home market in the UK, on the other hand, is pretty significant. None of these households know how to operate Adobe Audition or something similar: they just want to sing along with whatever is on the telly*. There are lots of companies catering to that market. In fact: in the past, Apple was more than happy to allow them on their platform, to fill in the gaps left by Apple's inability to negotiate certain agreements. In the past year or so, Apple has gotten more and more restrictive with regards to "soundalike" content. And we now know why... Is this inevitable? Possibly. Is it fair? Maybe. Is it yet another cottage industry that Apple strangulates? Definitely. *And yes, this is a very simplistic caricature by choice. Of course UK consumers are more sophisticated, but...
- JohnBooty 4y agoThank you for explaining that. I didn't realize there was a commercial home market for those professionally produced karaoke tracks. If I'm understanding things somewhat correctly now, this does sound like it will be a large blow to that market.