Follow Us

DMN on Feedburner
Connect with:
divider image

Garth Brooks Is Releasing Music Digitally for the First Time…

Screen shot 2014-07-11 at 1.44.21 PM

Garth Brooks has long refused to make his music available digitally. Brooks did not want to make his tracks available individually, so he stayed away from digital altogether.

Now, Garth Brooks has announced that he is releasing a new album through Sony Music in November. This is his first studio album since 2001.

The new album will be available digitally, and catalogue releases will be now be digitally available as well. All digital releases will be exclusively available through the Garth Brooks website. This means Brooks can release his music on his own terms, avoiding mandates from iTunes and other services. 

The first of the catalogue releases will be made available in the coming weeks. Brooks says previous releases will be made available for a low price.

 

Nina Ulloa covers breaking news, tech, and more. Follow her on Twitter: @nine_u

blue bar background graphic
Comments (9)
  1. The Ghost Of Jerry Garcia

    I wonder how Chris Gaines feels about all this ?


    Reply
  2. FarePlay

    “There’s an increasing number of in-demand artists who believe that holding their records off of the streaming services actually increases their sales, at least in the initial post-release window.  And of course no one is more disturbed about this window effect than the streaming services.  They want you to believe that they are the future–and resistance is futile.  Streaming services want you to believe that they are a critical part of your release strategy so that they can take advantage of all your marketing efforts on your album and touring set up at a low cost to themselves.  Actually–the sum of all the marketing done by all the artists on their service.

    Here’s the fact–the retailer may control the price, but the artists set the terms, particularly artists like Garth.  Garth’s customer is the fan–not some digital retailer that is uncooperative, entitled, and may be sold to the highest bidder tomorrow.  Garth will treat those fans very, very well, just like he always has.  I would not think that any artist wants to subject their fans to the customer service experience at YouTube if they could avoid it.

    If streaming services want to commoditize music, they they are going to be treated as a commodity, too, just like “special markets” departments or the old record clubs.”. Chris Castle MTP

    http://musictechpolicy.wordpress.com/2014/07/13/garth-brooks-says-ill-take-the-80-they-can-have-the-20/


    Reply
    1. jw

      >> Garth’s customer is the fan–not some digital retailer that is uncooperative, entitled,
      >> and may be sold to the highest bidder tomorrow. Garth will treat those fans very,
      >> very well, just like he always has. I would not think that any artist wants to subject
      >> their fans to the customer service experience at YouTube if they could avoid it.

      Yeah, refuse fans who are, in many cases, paying $120/year, your music for their own good. Keep your songs off of YouTube for fans’ own wellbeing.

      lmao.

      What a load of horse shit.


      Reply
      1. FarePlay

        Welcome to the new business model. Depriving the legions of non-paying Spotify subscribers of your work, so you can make money.

        Don’t you ever tire of hearing your own endless rant.


        Reply
  3. Rick Ellis

    Let’s be clear here. This decision is all driven by greed from Brooks and his company. I like his music and enjoyed him the couple of times when I saw him live. But he is all about maximizing the amount of money he can wring out of fans without them pushing back.

    While it’s technically true that he hasn’t released a new studio album since 2001, he kept his music off digital and used the scarcity to sign a lucrative Walmart deal. There were new tracks on both of the sets, as well on yet another “greatest hits” CD released in 2007.

    And now that the Walmart deal is over, he’ll be selling official digital versions of his music, presumably in an album-only format. I can understand Pink Floyd’s efforts to convince people to buy the entire “The Wall” album. But it’s not as if Brook’s albums have any theme to them or any particular reason to buy them. Other than his desire to force fans to purchase entire albums yet again.


    Reply
    1. jw

      Agreed. IMO there’s nothing bad you can say about Garth Brooks, but everyone should be realistic about his business decisions. It’s well within his rights to control the distribution of his music, but it’s most certainly done in an effort to maximize profits.


      Reply
      1. FarePlay

        So your knocking the guy because he wants to make money by selling his recorded music directly to his fans for less money. Are you so enamored of your brilliance that you think everyone will believe black is white, just because you say so.

        You really should be writing speeches for Michelle Bachman.


        Reply
        1. jw

          I don’t know what Michelle Bachman has to do with anything.

          I’m not knocking anyone. I’m making a neutral statement. By every account I’m familiar with, Garth is a stand up guy. I own the dvd set & I saw him at one of the flood relief shows in Nashville. I’m a fan. I’m just saying it’s balogna to try & spin this as anything but a business decision, as if it’s being done on the fans’ behalf (like the Chris Castle quote you posted above attempts to).

          It just is what it is.


          Reply
  4. Willis

    Is this due to the huge pent up demand?


    Reply

Leave a Reply

Connect with:


3 − three =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  1. OUR SPONSORS

  2.  
  3. Most Heated!