For many, eMusic is the most progressive music site on the Internet. While many new media advocates have been advocating major labels switch to subscription-based service, eMusic has already gone that route for indie labels, providing easy, cheap access to their music and increasing exposure for oft-ignored bands.
But over at Hypebot, Bruce Houghton points to a possible chink in the eMusic's credibility armor: the fact that indie artists and labels receive significantly less per track on eMusic than they do for traditional digital download sites such as iTunes or Amazon. Since eMusic only pays 30-35 cents per download, after distribution costs and songwriter royalties, only 20 cents per track is left for the artists and labels (and that doesn't account for the free tracks you get when you sign up).
Houghton's criticisms are more directed towards eMusic's specific business model than the general model of subscription based music download. Keep in mind that eMusic users receive a finite number of downloads per month depending on how much they pay, so it's not a completely pure subscription model. It's also unclear how the new monthly rate affects the amount paid per track, if at all. A point could also be made that even with pay disparity, eMusic helps offset the costs of piracy and increases exposure, but there's no hard numbers to support that argument. Either way, it's a fair point to keep in mind before lionizing eMusic as harbinger of things to come.
It always seemed like eMusic was a great deal for consumers, but on the flip it does seem to make the cut for artists pretty low.