We've been thinking about limiting the number of tracks per member on CMO to something like 3 to 5 songs as oppose to unlimited.

There are 2 reasons to this change:
1. First and foremost it is a expensive model to maintain- as the number of artists and number of tracks will always be increasing- which makes it expensive and difficult to keep backups.
2. More importantly- Quality over quantity: By limiting the number of songs per artist, it gives everyone a chance to put their best foot forward and only feature what they consider their best work. Greatly limiting the total number of songs on CMO which will give everyone a longer "Feature" time on the front page.

*If* this comes into action there will be a email warning sent out to all members who have more than X number of songs, and we'll give them a 1 month grace period to choose the songs they wish to keep on the site. After the month has past we'll launch a magic mathematical robot to decide which songs to keep if they are over their limit.

Thoughts? This is a open discussion and we welcome your opinion.

What about pro level accounts?

herr_prof wrote:

What about pro level accounts?

Isn't that what soundcloud is for?

Wait, people post music here?

BR1GHT PR1MATE wrote:

Wait, people post music here?

Thanks for your input. tongue

Makes sense. The CMO shouldnt have to foot the bill for everybodys online music storage.  Theres plenty of other options availble now.

egr wrote:

Makes sense. The CMO shouldnt have to foot the bill for everybodys online music storage.  Theres plenty of other options availble now.

Yeah, and I personally would like us to be more of a showcase & feedback than a repository. Which would possibly include some changes to the presentation of songs here- but that's only my opinion.

step 1. Sell chipmusic.org shirts (People would love to show their support)

step 2. Pay for more hard drive space

step 3. ????

step 4. PROFIT!!!

if it is costing you a lot of money then i think it is fare enough

it would be nice to see an overhaul of the music section and i think it is a shame that more people dont use it.

Last edited by Jellica (February 23, 2013 10:07 pm)

BlakePalmer wrote:

step 1. Sell chipmusic.org shirts (People would love to show their support)

step 2. Pay for more hard drive space

step 3. ????

step 4. PROFIT!!!

Unfortunately that also costs money and time to manage- which in the end may not be worth the effort- though it's a good idea. Right now we are utilizing "unlimited" space for file storage which is pretty cheap but I worry the hosting provider of that service might not appreciate it once they find out- we are running 2 separate server/services- The code and content is on a expensive service and the large file storage is on a cheap unlimited service. If we end up having to move the files to a actual server or cloud storage service the cost will be way way too high to maintain.

people can use ucollective.org for storage?

It's all well and good to say get the money coming in elsewhere, but someone has to manage that too. I'm not a musician, I dont have tracks up on the site, but seriously, how many people go back and listen to tracks that are on here repeatedly? I don't know if it's possible to get an average number of plays a track gets but I'm going to get most of them are fairly minimal.

Maybe when people are making vetting their own tracks (and put up their newest, best tracks instead of the My first LSDJ that they now are embarrassed by) the quality of the music on the site will go up and more people will listen to it?

Upload it elsewhere and put links to it in your profile, theres plenty of sites around the internet that allow you to store files for free.

xX 8 BIT CHAMPION Xx wrote:

people can use ucollective.org for storage?

Sure? Or any of the free services out there. Though I suspect ucollective will end up having the same issues when the data size is too large for cheap services- or when the cheaper services bottleneck.

Which leads me to another feature of limiting the usage: We can easily move the files to Amazon S3 or another replicated cloud service once we cut down the usage a bit. Which in turn will provide a faster world-wide solid upload/download service. 

Jellica wrote:

it would be nice to see an overhaul of the music section and i think it is a shame that more people dont use it.

Me too.

It's a little disappointing but understandable smile. Do what you must to keep the site working. I'd rather feature a few of my best tracks than none at all smile. Besides, I figure after a couple of weeks of one set of songs I would imagine I could delete those and upload some new ones after a while so it's not as big a deal as it seems. As someone else pointed out there's Ucollective and Soundcloud for storage. It would be worth it to me to have a song up there longer so that everyone could get more feedback. Whatever happens, I'm just glad the upload music feature isn't completely gone.

Would I like to have another place with unlimited storage? Sure! Do I expect the nice people here to run themselves dirt poor just because I am prolific? Not really. Bottom line, I'd love it if it stays unlimited but if it has to change to keep the site manageable then so be it. I hope not of course..but we have options and the chance for more feedback here is a plus. So, I'll just wait and see what happens. Maybe it will move me to make another album and post it in the releases section tongue.

BlakePalmer wrote:

step 1. Sell chipmusic.org shirts (People would love to show their support)

step 2. Pay for more hard drive space

step 3. ????

step 4. PROFIT!!!


Wait, does CM.O even have an official logo to put on a shirt?

It's probably the only choice, and the wisest.