Serato gets streaming via Pulselocker

Having announced a consumer streaming music player, it seems that they're bringing streaming to their flagship Serato DJ, courtesy of Pulselocker.

serato pulselocker DJ streaming offline

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcgRQtp9pDU

So here it is, the big announcement that Serato just made at ADE 2015. In a bid to steal a lead over their biggest competitors, Serato and DJ focussed streaming outfit Pulselocker will be delivering streaming right inside Serato.

This has just been announced via an incredibly sketchy live stream that I missed most of, but here’s the press release which give a little more detail:

 Serato Announces Pulselocker Integration with Serato DJ.

DJs will soon have access to unlimited downloads and offline storage, as well as streaming in Serato DJ in partnership with Pulselocker. This integration will soon allow DJs with a Pulselocker Pro account to search, stream and store an unlimited number of tracks from the Pulselocker catalogue offline in Serato DJ.

Pulselocker is unique as it’s not only a full streaming service but allows unlimited offline storage for DJs to hold Pulselocker music and play it back, without being connected to the internet. With a library of around 44 million tracks from around 500,000 labels as well as public performance rights, Pulselocker is a great option for DJs wanting flexibility in their music.

Pulselocker support will be available in Serato DJ 1.9, a forthcoming update.

Pulselocker’s CEO, Ben Harris says: “The concept is simple; sign up for a Pulselocker account and discover, listen, organize and play with our entire catalogue of music within Serato DJ. With the unprecedented capabilities of Pulselocker such as unlimited offline storage, we look forward to seeing this integrated tightly into the Serato DJ software.”

Serato CEO, AJ Bertenshaw says: “At Serato, we always try to carefully choose each feature to be aimed at the professional DJ. When it came to connecting to a subscription music service, we wanted to make sure our offering was the very best available. With unlimited offline storage, and a deep catalog of music pulled from an incredible range of independent and major labels, we believe Pulselocker is the ideal choice for the working DJ.”

Watch an archive of the #SeratoADE press conference from Amsterdam Dance Event for more info on what this means for DJs, a short demo and Q/A with the Serato & Pulselocker teams: https://serato.com/ade2015

SERATO DJ PULSELOCKER INTEGRATION

  • Easily manage your Pulselocker account within Serato DJ.
  • Access your Pulselocker music and playlists on any computer by logging in through Serato DJ.
  • Display Pulselocker music and playlists in Serato DJ.
  • Store an unlimited number of Pulselocker tracks offline and make these available for playback when not connected to the internet.
  • Manage your Pulselocker library and store files for offline use without leaving Serato DJ.
  • Use the standard Serato DJ search bar to search both music in your local library AND from the Pulselocker catalogue.
  • Load and play Pulselocker music from playlists or search results to Serato DJ Virtual Decks.
  • Tracks will cache the first 30 seconds as quickly as possible for fast auditioning on the go.
  • Easily see the status of Pulselocker music in the Serato DJ library with new status column icons identifying streaming, pending or stored music.
  • Music is downloaded at 320kbps unless provided at lower quality (256kbps) by the label.
  • Track Metadata is stored locally for played streaming tracks and analyzed offline music.

Learn more about Pulselocker integration in Serato DJ: https://serato.com/pulselocker

SERATO STREAMS

T’was inevitable really. They’re not the first (VirtualDJ, djay, DJ Player, Cross, and probably some more), and I’m sure that they won’t be the last. And first impressions are that this works much the same as other similar services, except that there is offline play too. So you can build your playlists, do the analysis, add cue points, and get everything streamed and saved to your computer ready for your set. Our Ray (who is there at ADE) says that the Pulselocker content is encrypted on your HD, making it impossible to rip the files into useable audio. But at least you only have to do it once.

This is all well and good, but you can’t record your sets internally in Serato DJ. Oooh no that’s copyright infringement right there, but that doesn’t stop you hanging a hardware recorder off the back of your mixer or controller. And I don’t see this situation changing in a very long time either.

The issue of the legality of essentially broadcasting music you don’t own is an issue for other software companies. But Pulselocker is set up to support this directly via their business model. I wish I could tell you more about that, but the Pulselocker website is little more than a holding page right now. Ray has confirmed that Pulselocker will cost $20 per month, a figure that is twice that of other services, but probably included full rights usage payment, meaning that you probably can use the tracks in public performances.

So nutshelling, Serato DJ 1.9 will allow Pulselocker members get access to the entire catalogue of music for $20 per month. You can stream or store offline, and save all analysed data and cues locally, ensuring instant access without an internet connection. And it’s legal so artists get paid. Ray is going back in to ask awkward questions. More when we have it.

Tags
Mark Settle
Mark Settle

The old Editor of DJWORX - you can now find Mark at WORXLAB

Articles: 1228

Related Posts

64 Comments

  1. What’s to stop you taking out a 1 month subscription, harvesting terabytes of music offline & then cancelling the sub?

    I wonder if your offline content is linked to your current membership status. If you leave, so does your offline stash?

      • I admit…I have a unique advantage, I am a radio DJ/Music Director. I get most new music for free from the record industry. I might spend $10-$20 on specific music I need for a wedding or other event. Personally I would rather spend the money to OWN the music rather than “rent” it.

  4. $20 a month is cheaper than cable TV by a factor of at least 5. Cheaper than Pizza & Beer. Cheaper than weed.

    If the music catalog is awesome and it truly comes with broad usage rights, IE: you can upload to YouTube, soundcloud, or other video services, and play out at clubs globally, the cost is crazy reasonable. Even if it’s just live performances most mobile DJ’s spend a lot more than $20 a month keeping up with music.

    People’s perspective on cost vs. value is totally skewed.

  5. $20 a month is cheaper than cable TV by a factor of at least 5. Cheaper than Pizza & Beer. Cheaper than weed.

    If the music catalog is awesome and it truly comes with broad usage rights, IE: you can upload to YouTube, soundcloud, or other video services, and play out at clubs globally, the cost is crazy reasonable. Even if it’s just live performances most mobile DJ’s spend a lot more than $20 a month keeping up with music.

    People’s perspective on cost vs. value is totally skewed.

  6. $20 a month is cheaper than cable TV by a factor of at least 5. Cheaper than Pizza & Beer. Cheaper than weed.

    If the music catalog is awesome and it truly comes with broad usage rights, IE: you can upload to YouTube, soundcloud, or other video services, and play out at clubs globally, the cost is crazy reasonable. Even if it’s just live performances most mobile DJ’s spend a lot more than $20 a month keeping up with music.

    People’s perspective on cost vs. value is totally skewed.

    • a year of buying air will set you back $240, then after a year you got nothing, there goes another $240 for another year with inflation will prob be $260 to $300…i think DJs prefer owning music instead of just renting it.

      • $240 = maybe 300-400 tracks available to play. The same number is an alleged 44 million (we seriously doubt that number) and growing forever. This generation is seeing streaming as the norm, so owning is way less important than ever, especially if 44 million tracks becomes available on all devices.

        • This generation sees streaming as the norm for consumption, but once they start dabbling in DJing, is streaming the norm anymore? Owning, for me, is far more important than owning for my sister, or my mom, or anyone I know that isn’t a DJ.

          And, let’s be totally honest here, of those 44 million tracks, how many will the average DJ need, ever? A few hundred? Maybe a few thousand? Hell, let’s even say we are talking about the ultimate mobile DJ, they will need a whole million of those songs. Well, they are paying $20 a month for their entire career just to have access to them. Once they’ve built their collection up, what happens? What happens when PulseLocker gets bought, or goes under? They never bought those tracks and now they are gone.

          • “$20 a month for their entire career just to have access to them”
            but if one only plays occasionally, then couldn’t they just buy a subscription when they need it?, not all the time.

            wouldn’t this allow more people to remain a pro dj, without having to invest so much time and money into collecting a library.Seems like there are a lot of comments here about paying that 20 month in month out, but I see streaming as something you buy when you need it, and something that gives people with day jobs the confidence to seek and take gigs that they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do.

            • Yeah, that’s an option. You could pay the $20 for that one month of your gig and then cancel, but it does raise some other questions. For example, if I cancel my subscription, do I lose the tracks and all associated metadata that I put into it? Because then this becomes a time sink issue, right? Duplicating work, etc.

              Granted, I’m thinking about this like a DJ who controls every file in his collection, as opposed to someone who just shows up, downloads some pop songs, and plays them.

                • I understand the business world. I also understand that I never have to worry about losing tracks now, and while it costs me more money than $20 per month I find that to be a very valuable exchange.

                  Others might not. They might find this worth it. But I can’t see it taking off, and the fewer people who utilize these services, the less likely they are to exist.

              • so maybe the solution is a model that lies somewhere between “paying every month even if youre not playing out with it” and “buying and cancelling”
                A system where; if you arent paid up, you lose the ability to play the tracks, but when you reactivate, your cues and stuff are still there. Or a 10 minute cut off so that you could prep tracks and then only pay for full use when you need it. these are just thoughts, but something could be done to make the cost appropriate and fit each individual’s amount of need/use.

                • Right now, you either buy your tracks outright, or you can access them all the time offline for $20 a month. Is $20 a month too expensive for access to all this music? Why have a half way house? If you’re serious about DJing, and make a living from it, $20 a month for the very thing that allows you to be a DJ and play legally is absolute peanuts, and I don’t understand why anyone would question the amount for what you get.

                  The question of whether streaming for DJs will take off isn’t so much about the cost, and more about the technology side of things. I wouldn’t trust wifi or my own computer to deliver solid streaming, and probably not over a wired network either. But given the offline side of things, then Pulselocker is certainly a step nearer, and is a halfway house between owning and streaming. It is essentially renting music.

  7. I genuinely believe streaming will never take off with DJs. I mean, yeah, I use a streaming service, as do many other people, for listening. But for actually DJing? I would never have my collection tied to the solvency of an industry that is two shakes away from disappearing entirely (streaming services, not the music industry).

    That being said, I use google play for streaming access to my collection and cloud backup, but my collection is backed up to other physical drives as well.

    • I completely disagree, that is a very near sighted, 2015 response. WIFI has made leaps and bounds in the last 5 years and is becoming more prevalent in use all over every industry. Streaming is a part of everyones lives.
      This is an advancement in the world of DJ, and even if it takes a few more years to become a part of a DJ’s life, you cannot say it “won’t take off”.
      Like CDs and computers would “never take off with DJ’s” in their perspective eras, this is the next step.

      • I never said anything about WiFi. Since you brought it up, yes, it’s more stable than before, but I still wouldn’t rely on it, especially since it requires me keeping my WiFi card active in my Laptop, which can cause all sorts of issues. Like, I don’t want to be connected to the internet without an antivirus active. And I NEVER want to be DJing with an antivirus running, let alone the WiFi itself.

        And I don’t think this is similar to CDJs or laptops. Those were stand alone pieces of technology that still convey a reality of ownership. I am a DJ. I get paid to play other people’s music. If Traktor disappeared tomorrow, I could replace the software easily. There’d be headaches, but it’s doable. If a vinyl record breaks, I can replace it (as long as it isn’t too old) or have a backup that I can bounce to a CD. If a CD gets scratched I can reburn it. If my computer crashes and my hard drive fails I can pull my backup and keep going.

        If my collection contains tracks I have downloaded from PulseLocker and PulseLocker disappears (as a note, keep in mind that Spotify has never made an operating profit ever, and is existing solely on VC funding), those tracks, my tags, my cue points, my work… gone. And if I am relying on that collection for a gig, well, I need to scramble to replace god knows how many files.

        It’s not that streaming isn’t great. As I mentioned, I use it regularly in my day-to-day life. But I would never rely on it for my gigs or my business, ever, because if everything goes to crap on the provider’s end, I have no control.

        • That all being said, it is very possible I could be wrong. Just because it’s my opinion doesn’t mean I believe it 100% will come to pass. I’ve been wrong, and I will be wrong again. But from my research into this kind of service, it doesn’t leave me a lot of faith.

          • They might. I have never, though, in all my years DJing around clubs, had ethernet available to me. And even then, if it’s running through an unreliable router it might still not work well.

            And if I’m connected to the internet I need to have anti-virus active, especially if that internet connection isn’t mine. And even if I fully optimize my system, I don’t want to worry about antivirus doing ANYTHING during a gig.

    • I would agree IF anyone is solely dependent on streaming tracks while playing. As long as local storage is an option, I think that streaming won’t really come to pass – meaning that tracks will actually be downloaded before being played… which I would do. STREAMING – meaning downloading while playing – is just too risky IMHO… even in 2015… even with ethernet. I wouldn’t do it.

      • It still doesn’t alleviate my main stress. I have been paying this monthly fee, but I own literally nothing. it can easily be taken away from me. What happens if PulseLocker has a falling out with a record label and I show up to my gig without tracks I had prepped?

        That’s the kind of concern I’m talking about.

  8. Useless. What if the signal sucks or the internet goes down or there’s no internet. If you are going to stream may as well st pop your iPhone in and use Spotify.

  9. The REAL issue here is that no one will know their tracks which will inevitably affect performances. I’m split on this. On the one hand, being able to get that one obscure track that was requested in a timely manner is a good thing. On the other, I fear that this will simply devalue music even further… making it even more disposable than it already is. Why? DJs are inherently the last true music collectors. If we stop collecting, then music will simply become as disposable as pr0n… if it isn’t already.

    • if you talk about collecting vinyl or CDs aka tangible music formats then most consumers are non DJs who still appreciate real quality music and who want to hear a tune from beginning to end without interrupting ever 30 secs.

      Of course there still are DJs out there who appreciate non disposable music but they are a minority, it happens too often when i go out i hear nothing but the cheapest club rap possible, if by any chance they sell it on vinyl 12inch format then its usually in the 90% discount department because nobody wants to buy the trash that those DJs play (yep i saw Mix Master Mike recently and he played the biggest disposable crap i ever heard)

    • if you talk about collecting vinyl or CDs aka tangible music formats then most consumers are non DJs who still appreciate real quality music and who want to hear a tune from beginning to end without interrupting ever 30 secs.

      Of course there still are DJs out there who appreciate non disposable music but they are a minority, it happens too often when i go out i hear nothing but the cheapest club rap possible, if by any chance they sell it on vinyl 12inch format then its usually in the 90% discount department because nobody wants to buy the trash that those DJs play (yep i saw Mix Master Mike recently and he played the biggest disposable crap i ever heard)

    • yes, this is true. this is caused by the listeners/crowds requests and there isn’t much the “dj” can do change it. we still deal with the old issues that made “pop” music in the first place; wealth and fame, which in appeal to the listener, will often trump a creative mix. In the “anyone can be famous on the intnet in a week” world, everything will become disposable, like a lottery ticket, where one buys something, displays their “interest in it” to the world, and when it doesn’t change their life and bring them wealth and fame, they throw it away and try again. heck, we almost do that with dj gear already.

    • yes, this is true. this is caused by the listeners/crowds requests and there isn’t much the “dj” can do change it. we still deal with the old issues that made “pop” music in the first place; wealth and fame, which in appeal to the listener, will often trump a creative mix. In the “anyone can be famous on the intnet in a week” world, everything will become disposable, like a lottery ticket, where one buys something, displays their “interest in it” to the world, and when it doesn’t change their life and bring them wealth and fame, they throw it away and try again. heck, we almost do that with dj gear already.

  10. What’s worry me here is that if you take the music offline the quality goes down to 256k instead of 320k that could be an issue for a public performance….except that I prefer owning the music I have, Adobe started with this subscription model years ago, Microsoft followed etc…personally not fan of it…

  12. pulselocker is a terriblename
    serato would be waayyyy better off to just force their streaming partner to call it serato streaming. just the name alone would scare me away.
    #callitlikeiseeit

  14. Concerned about the bloat for Serato here, too. Now there’s streaming & encryption bits in addition to the built-in online upgrade store they added with the DJ release.

    Lots of stuff that has nothing to do with playing my files back in the most reliable way possible, and a lot more bugs to squash in the name of trying to keep things stable.

  15. Concerned about the bloat for Serato here, too. Now there’s streaming & encryption bits in addition to the built-in online upgrade store they added with the DJ release.

    Lots of stuff that has nothing to do with playing my files back in the most reliable way possible, and a lot more bugs to squash in the name of trying to keep things stable.

  17. i love requests. i love drum n bass(although i prefer jungle) i love hip hop. i dont like pop music. i dont like trying to keep up with the latest pop music. i would prefer a streaming service to handle all the pop stuff(or whatever is current) for me so i can do something i love, taking requests and making people happy. i dont like sifting thru tracks and settings cues and loops, i would be more inclined to pay for a service that did this for me; if the people doing it used a “turntablist’s sensibility”(that just means use well defined, clearly denoted from their surrounding sounds) when doing so. i like doing corporate stuff and weddings. i dont like emailing playlists back and forth. i would love a streaming service that would act as the middleman between me and the client and allow them to create a playlist. i’d pay for these services. i wouldnt pay continously, because i dont need it continously.

  18. i love requests. i love drum n bass(although i prefer jungle) i love hip hop. i dont like pop music. i dont like trying to keep up with the latest pop music. i would prefer a streaming service to handle all the pop stuff(or whatever is current) for me so i can do something i love, taking requests and making people happy. i dont like sifting thru tracks and settings cues and loops, i would be more inclined to pay for a service that did this for me; if the people doing it used a “turntablist’s sensibility”(that just means use well defined, clearly denoted from their surrounding sounds) when doing so. i like doing corporate stuff and weddings. i dont like emailing playlists back and forth. i would love a streaming service that would act as the middleman between me and the client and allow them to create a playlist. i’d pay for these services. i wouldnt pay continously, because i dont need it continously.

  19. It is not simple. but for sure will NOT work!

    I am dj from ’91. Idea to have access to bilion of megaton of music track is nice but is not necessary in reality.
    but the real point is is that with 240 USD (that is not a lot as work tool for instance!) a year You can buy (let’s say) around 200 track.
    These tracks are Your forever. You can move, play in the pen drive, play in traktor if you decide that the last update is better, play in Vdj if you think that you next gig require only mouse and soundcard etc, play in cdj 2000…. definitely you will be a “owner” of this track and You are not bonded from serato software.
    Is also very funny that serato is not so open as other software (like vdj for example) and so if you have sx2, for example, and one day it will NOT work before Your gig, for sure you can not burn a cd with your tracks or play with computer (serato) and mouse.

    The topic regarding wifi..is just, in my point of view, question of time as everything. First time I boiught a laptop for me was unthinkable to repleace my vinyl with it….old story repeat…

  20. Quantity does not mean quality, when will people understand this. I’d rather have 100 golden, diverse, timeless tracks than 10,000 shitty, lazy, unimaginative flavors-of-the-week.

  21. Quantity does not mean quality, when will people understand this. I’d rather have 100 golden, diverse, timeless tracks than 10,000 shitty, lazy, unimaginative flavors-of-the-week.

  22. Some of these comments… well, haters gonna hate I guess.

    I think it’s an awesome add-on for Serato. Note, you don’t HAVE to use Pulselocker. If you want to play your music within Serato as you always have, through local tracks that (hopefully) you own on your computer, then do that. But, if you want the option to subscribe to a site for $20 per month for unlimited content, then there’s also that option.

    I used to pay $20 for 1 x 12″ record. $20 a month for unlimited, legit, integrated music sounds pretty sweet to me. Not sure I’ll go down the subscription path myself, as I do like owning my music, but it’s a cool option.

  24. Pulselocker site is now open, allowing log ins and browsing – so you can have a look around.

    I’ve just been testing their library. They don’t seem to have any Amy Winehouse, only karaoke covers. 44 million tracks and no Amy Winehouse?!

Leave a Reply