About mp3.com in general, i´m not too fond of the new layout of the artist pages (comes down to personal preference, I know).
Is anyone able to access mp3.com servers to download/stream any music files? When I try to go into any mp3.com page, it takes years to load and shows up in a wrong way (as if the fonts are too big and images aren´t loading).
Well, I just cancelled my mp3 artist account. Seems there\'s more than just slow-loads goin\' on there (which I\'ve been pained by recently as well.) A glitch is keeping many newly uploaded songs from showing up on your artist page (even after you\'ve waited the 2 days for them to approve it.)
So I looked into alternative methods, namely: finally getting around to making my own website. What I found, I feel I should share with anyone considering doing the premium artist thing with mp3.com.
I always assumed that getting a quality site would be fairly expensive (making sure there was ample bandwidth, web space, and fast downloads without the nagging pop-ups -which MP3.com was TERRIBLE about-) I was SO wrong! It seems for only 9.99/mo for a year (paid up front, with a few minor one-time setup fees, including domain names, etc) one can get a GB of space, with 400k/sec tranfers, unlimitted bandwidth (within reason, as explained to me by the rep, but more than I would ever use) zero pop-ups (unless you choose to add them yourself) and to boot, 5 aliases and 5 email addresses with a static IP address, FTP use, etc. This means no waiting for \"approval\" from mp3.com, and it\'s half the price!
Making a web page isn\'t that difficult, and I would assume most composers or musicians in general who have any taste whatsoever could come up with a decent one if they put their respective minds to the task for a bit. This was something I\'d planned to do forever, but didn\'t think I had the time or funds to invest. MP3.com seemed as though it was a good middle-ground temporary solution.
I wish I\'d known long ago that for half as much as I was paying for the headache that is mp3.com, I could have had my own stress-free site. I\'m working with some friends to build it now (people with much more experience -and time- programming than I) and have already cancelled the 19.99/mo artist subscription to mp3.com. I am looking forward to providing mp3\'s at any bit resolution I like (not just 128k as you are constrained to by mp3.com) and maybe throwing some small video up there with my music accompanying various scenes from short films I\'ve done.
Basically, I suggest anyone considering mp3.com as a medium, and willing to wait the 7 days or so for them to \"approve\" your stuff and post it as a 128k file, it is certainly still a good way to go. If you want to get your stuff approved faster than the two days and are willing to pay for that convenience (maybe necessity at some point?), look into setting up your own site. Seems it costs the same or less, and so far the customer support blows MP3.com out of the water.