I’ve had a fair amount of quiet time this weekend (isn’t it sad when a combined total of 2 hours seems like “a fair amount”? Ah well…), and one of the things I got to thinking about was music.

Now, I don’t buy a lot of music. If I spend 100$ a year on music it’s unusual. That said, I love listening to music. So, what’s a body to do?

Well, I listen to the radio. A lot. But, generally radio stations (especially on the east coast) are repetitive, have inane commentary and have too many commercials.

In 1996 or something I discovered Launchcast. Launchcast allowed you to rate artists and songs, and then have your own “personal radio station”. You’d then rate the music you listened to, and eventually it’d have a solid profile of what you liked and you’d get a really, really good mix of your favourite music, genres, artists and songs.

Launchcast was eventually bought by Yahoo, and now lives at launch.yahoo.com (and is being rebranded into “Yahoo! Music”).

Here’s my station.

I’ve rated almost 500 artists / songs / albums, so generally when I listen to it, it’s pretty close to my favourite music all the time (even if I’ve never heard the artist).

I say all of this as background to where my thoughts wandered: owning versus renting music.

In the online music world, 2 distinct models have emerged: the iTunes “buy it cheap, use it in a limited fashion, but you get to keep it forever” model, and the “rent as many songs as you want for x$/month, have lots of freedom, but if you ever stop paying your music will stop working” model.

Both of these obviously have flaws. Apple’s model doesn’t really let you “own” the music at all. If you can only load the song on 3 or 5 devices (or whatever), then you don’t actually own it.

The reality, of course, is that even if you buy a CD you don’t “own” the music. You’re still limited, so I guess consumers are used to this limited licensing thing.

The renting model has flaws as well: if you ever cancel, you lose all your music. If you switch services, you lose all your music. This isn’t good.

But, for someone like me, the rental model (and the Launchcast model) works perfectly. I mean, I can spend a few bucks a month, download thousands of songs, mix’em up and get a “better than Launchcast” experience straight from my computer.

This, then, is the fundamental differentiator: if you’re a “CD person”, you’ll most likely prefer to own. You might choose to get “unlimited music for x$/month”, but ultimately you’d rather have something you actually own. If you’re a “radio person”, though, it’d seem silly to pay for every song you want to listen to, so you’d naturally gravitate towards a subscription model.

One of the questions I asked myself this weekend was “in 10 years, will anybody even keep music on physical media anymore?” I mean, really. If broadband gets to the point where you can get any music you want (suscription or pay), why would you ever need physical media? And if you don’t need physical media, and broadband is fast enough to get you 1000 songs in an hour, will it actually matter if you “own” or “rent” music? If it’s there when you want it, does it really matter if you own it or rent it?

Dunno.

These were the ramblings going through my mind. I know why way I’d swing. I’d love to hear from others that have thought about these things as well.