Last week, social music network Last.fm said that since allowing free streaming of full-length tracks and albums through their site, just two months ago, they’ve seen a 119% increase music sales through Amazon.

Users can stream music and buy through Amazon in two ways:

1) Through their audio player (downloadable software):

2) Through their site:

Here’s a right-on-the-money reaction from ars technica:

If music sales as a result of streaming offerings show growth over a longer period of time (say, a year), then other services may also begin to push for full-track previews in hopes of increasing sales. Imagine if Amazon MP3 or iTunes allowed full previews on their respective services before buying—digital music could take off even faster than it already has. It shows how the very ideas that the music industry resisted for years have the potential to pay off financially.

Chris Anderson is saying “told you so” right now.

As if labels didn’t have enough variables to stress about, it seems big brands are now competing for their business too. Groove Armada has signed a 360 deal with Bacardi. Yes, Bacardi:

Read more about the deal at The Daily Swarm.

To learn more about 360 deals, read my post “360 Music Deals: Investing in the Experience.”

Unrelated, but hilarious, is this chart:

(video via hypebot)

From a leaked RIAA training video:

Really, RIAA?

…Really?

(via DailySwarm)

I can’t think of a single reason why it makes sense for Kanye West to have his own jankily-designed search engine, but nevertheless, there it is.

He’s such a mogul, bless his heart.

Go Search With Kanye. Good grief.

Just caught this post from hypebot:

Google is reportedly just weeks away from announcing a free music service in China with the help of Top100.cn. The move helps Google compete with China’s top search engine Biadu who allows searches of pirated downloads that Google blocks.

Beijing based Top100.cn already has deals with Universal Music and a hundred other foreign and domestic labels to sell licensed downloads for 1 yuan (14 cents). Now working with Google, they will offer free watermarked mp3’s paired with value added services like links to concert dates and ringtones.

The article goes on to say that it’s estimated that 90% of music in China is pirated, so it’s a nice snapshot of where we’re heading. It’s also an ideal place to try a music model that competes with illegal P2P networks.

One significant difference in Google’s plan vs less-than-successful (perhaps an understatement) attempts by like SpiralFrog and Qtrex is that while the latter is ad-supported, the former is added-value supported.

Google’s success has always been in being tricky - providing some valuable service while sneakily slipping in their own ends. But I’m cool with that.

I just read a November New York Times article about 360, or “multiple rights,” deals. It’s an emerging music business model in which labels invest in bands for the longer haul.

It works like this: Labels bankroll more cash upfront, work more heavily in artist development, and in exchange get a bigger share of artist earnings. Traditionally, labels made money from artists based on album sales, but with 360 deals, artists share earnings beyond albums (a reaction to rapidly declining album sales) - including concerts, merch, and other revenue.

For new artists, these deals are supposed to provide for a little more breathing room to grow into stardom. Paramore seems to be the flagship example of a 360-deal-gone-right. Their label, Fueled by Ramen (an Atlantic Records partner and once-home of the ex-Impossibles from Austin Texas, a band I loved dearly in high school…but that’s neither here nor there), apparently nursed them along for a long time before they hit it. In an MTV article, their lead singer said this about the relationship:

I feel like we have a new kind of partnership with our label…

…a lot of bands on indie labels, they’re working their way up, but it’s slow…and so they don’t get the chances we got. We spent two years playing to, like, anywhere from nine to 20 kids, and it grew gradually over those two years, and it got to where it is today because of that. But I don’t feel like a lot of bands get that leniency, that patience, to just wait around for that big single to happen.

I’m split: Half of me is really skeptical, and half of me likes it. It certainly feels better than hearing about labels dropping artists after almost no time because album sales didn’t hit the mark. This new model almost ends up treating the album as a marketing piece for the band’s full experience, which is really going back to how the Grateful Dead did business. They gave away their music, rocked out, and merchandised.

I guess the bottomline is that success depends on the label - for it to work, labels have to follow through on their promise to nurture talent. I just hope “nurture talent” doesn’t end up being another way to say “convince the talent to become a sell-out hit-factory.”

What do you think?