Le critiche a Tidal non si sono fatte attendere (le ultime in ordine di tempo riguardavano i Mumford & Sons e i Death Cab For Cutie) e ora l’archivio viene aggiornato con le parole di Steve Albini che chiamato in causa da Vulture spiega: “Historically, every time there’s been a new technological progression, there’s been a new convenience format [for listening to music]. So the question is, is it possible for something to be more convenient than streaming? And the answer is obviously yes. It’s a budget version of Pono. If you want your music to play at the push of a button, convenience is going to trump sound quality 100 percent of the time…”. E ancora “It’s for the same reason that if you had a screen that displayed paintings in your living room, very few serious art enthusiasts would care for such a screen despite the fact that it might show you very high-resolution images of artwork. They want to own a piece of art that is a direct connection to the person who made it. Having an HD screen in your house that would display artwork might have a market, but it’s not the same market as people who are interested in owning art”. E poi “The for-pay services are deluding themselves by trying to establish a permanent monetization of something that’s in flux. The internet provides access to materials and things. Creating these little streaming fiefdoms where certain streaming services have certain artists and certain streaming services have other artists is a crippled use of the internet. If the internet has demonstrated anything over the years, it’s that it has a way of breaking limitations placed on its content”.
