Twitter Logo
Rex Sorgatz

Screenplay idea: Man gets amnesia and reconstructs his life from blog comments he wrote. Short film -- he kills himself after 11 minutes.

jan 28
2009

Muxtape

So not to be snotty about this, but what does the new Muxtape offer that MySpace doesn't? Does "less is more" apply in this case? UPDATE: Sasha interviews Justin in the New Yorker and asks a similar question: "But the beauty of MySpace is that anyone can start a page and put music up quickly. I can't think of a musical act that isn't on MySpace. Will acts be able to make Muxtape pages easily, or will they have to go through a submission process?"

27 comments

See also: Muxtape on Tumblr.

posted by Rex at 9:47 AM on January 28, 2009

I think Muxtape has the requisite "M" but sans the "Space," or I have no idea, but would be keen to know what people who use it think, or as an uneducated shot in the dark, always a risky proposition, would one possible offering be the fuzzy "hip" quality it may bestow on its users, or if "hip" is now a pejorative term, Muxtape offers a more kinky alternative to a stale and conventional MySpace.

"Less is more" might be more on the button though, but like I said, curious to know what people who use it would say.

posted by Amos at 10:06 AM on January 28, 2009

Two words: Hipster cred!

posted by Caroline McCarthy at 10:20 AM on January 28, 2009

As we learned this week, that won't work.

posted by Rex at 10:22 AM on January 28, 2009

Serene respite from shitty wallpaper and chaotic epilepsy-inducing design!

posted by Eric at 10:31 AM on January 28, 2009

I don't even get how Muxtape has anything to do with MySpace.

One is a music service the other is a clusterfuck of social networking for people who think AOL is the beginning and end of the internet.

The audience is completely different.

posted by Soup at 10:41 AM on January 28, 2009

Is it? Why? If the audience difference is "seven decimal places to the left smaller," then sure. Why is it different? I'm sure that almost everyone who uses Muxtape will have cause to visit MySpace in the same week. (I can hate MySpace as a product, but I still love looking up unfamiliar bands on it.)

But besides audience, why is the product different? I saw the phrase "a clusterfuck of social networking for people who think AOL is the beginning and end of the internet" and wondered for a second which you meant -- Muxtape or MySpace.

Muxtape is band-created pages with music selected by artists to be distributed for free. That's pretty much MySpace.

So why's it different?

posted by Rex at 10:49 AM on January 28, 2009

Isn't the fact that it's not MySpace enough?

posted by ronbailey at 10:50 AM on January 28, 2009

I don't have marketing studies to support my claims, my sense is anecdotal. I really don't feel like the audience muxtape is targeting is the same one myspace is targeting.

By design, Muxtape is diametrically opposed to the sensory overload that myspace is loathed for.

Muxtape is an indie record store, myspace is walmart.

posted by Soup at 11:10 AM on January 28, 2009

simple fast muxtape over bandwith hogging myspace. I don't know.

posted by weston deboer at 11:55 AM on January 28, 2009

"Muxtape is band-created pages with music selected by artists to be distributed for free. That's pretty much MySpace.

So why's it different?"

Isn't this a case where there's no difference in functionality but a difference in aesthetics and the overall vibe? Isn't that important to a band?

If you wanted to start a blog that featured hazy photography of waif-y models, where would you put it: Blogger or Tumblr? I guess I just think certain platforms (if that's a fair term to use) carry aesthetic and cultural vibes with them, and that counts for something.

'Course I could just be bitter about how the closure of the original Muxtape reduced flirting possibilities.

posted by Nav at 12:25 PM on January 28, 2009

Suspend your habit of thinking abstractly of features, and experientially compare Dan Deacon's MySpace profile to his Muxtape one.

These two things are different not by degrees, but in terms of fundamentals. One is optimized to please advertisers, the other, musicians.

posted by Jake at 1:02 PM on January 28, 2009

Good example!

One has videos, biographical information, tour dates, links to his personal site, other people who like him, and six songs to listen to.

The other? Four songs.

posted by Rex at 1:06 PM on January 28, 2009

Not exaggerating when I say that I have visited Muxtape more times than I have visited Myspace. I can't handle the optical assault of the latter.

posted by katiebakes at 1:32 PM on January 28, 2009

"Muxtape is an indie record store, myspace is walmart."

Man, they better hope not. How many indie record stores are closing down these days? How many Wal-Marts?

posted by bg5000 at 3:39 PM on January 28, 2009

It's a lot easier to make money catering a niche online than it is with a brick and mortar business.

Walmart crushes indie record stores in the B&M business, but I think they can thrive with the reduced overhead and targeted audience.

posted by Soup at 4:04 PM on January 28, 2009

Nav hits it on the head. Design and intent are major differentiators. Why do people choose Macs over PCs, Facebook over MySpace, or Tumblr over Blogger? They do the same thing, right?

Just because Dan Deacon doesn't have the exact same information on both sites doesn't mean he couldn't. Muxtape's customers are bands now, and bands that are sick of MySpace (or have avoided it completely) will be looking at it much differently than users of the old site.

posted by Justin at 5:07 PM on January 28, 2009

Rex, I don't think you read my post very carefully. :)

posted by Jake at 8:35 PM on January 28, 2009

Well, I think you have a point... but I do too. Dan Deacon's Muxtape profile isn't exactly some sort of design or product break-through. Detach yourself of Muxtape ideology and just look at it -- is it really that interesting?

And from that interview with Justin, I'm not sure that anything groundbreaking is coming.

(I'm coming out sounding much more negative about Muxtape than I intended to. I'm rooting for it. I'd like MySpace to die too! I hope more features are coming...)

posted by Rex at 8:40 PM on January 28, 2009

>Dan Deacon's Muxtape profile isn't exactly some sort of design or product break-through.

Then can you point to a precedent?

posted by Jake at 9:41 PM on January 28, 2009

Precedent for... for product breakthroughs with online music sites? Sure: Last.FM, RCRD LBL, Hype Machine, etc. Those all push the form to someplace new -- they invent something. I'm not sure what Muxtape has invented yet.

(Now I'm coming out REALLY negative. I'll just stop now. Like I said, they probably have other stuff coming... we'll see.)

posted by Rex at 9:45 PM on January 28, 2009

Muxtape isn't as user friendly as MySpace. And they've have problems with their servers lately, too. They talk about an "old Muxtape". It's pretty hard to navigate around in.

Angela from Aberdeen


Backlinks

posted by Angela at 12:45 AM on January 29, 2009

Whoa, I'm late to this party.

I think Rex definitely has a point. MySpace took off for bands because it made it so easy to throw music up and build a home for yourself without having to hire web developers. Of course part of the appeal was that your fans were also on it, and you could connect with them. That aspect has pretty much died off (i'm guessing?), but it's still a decent tool.

But what it comes down to is how you find bands on MySpace. If you're using MySpace's own search tool, that's one thing. But most people are getting to bands pages through google. That means that bands can use whatever service comes along that they prefer, and people will be able to find them.

I see a downside to using both, btw. If I'm talking about your band on my blog, it's good to have one definitive place to link to. Having links to you split between multiple sites dilutes your googleability and generally makes your band harder to find.

posted by alesh at 1:53 PM on January 29, 2009

"it's good to have one definitive place to link to. Having links to you split between multiple sites dilutes your googleability and generally makes your band harder to find."

I am not so sure about this, I think that having multiple profiles has its merits; it allows you to pwn the serps and potentially push the "so-and-so's new album sucks" off the first page.

That said I think it's funny that the biggest benefit discussed is the so-called "hipster/indie cred". Apparently if you have success as a band through myspace distribution of your music,you've "sold out?"

On a side note without selling ads, whats the business model? Are they fee based for A&R/promotion, do they get a cut of bookings, vintage t-shirts?


posted by ryanol at 11:02 AM on January 30, 2009

nevermind just read the rest of the new yorker article; muxtape is the distribution tool of a company that provides online marketing services for independent musicians.

posted by ryanol at 11:13 AM on January 30, 2009

How is this different from Bandcamp? which was featured on Waxy so you should have mentioned it. (I need an interro-comma).

posted by James at 5:26 AM on February 2, 2009

I think there is a market for anything.

posted by Carl at 10:46 AM on February 3, 2009




NOTE: The commenting window has expired for this post.