Taylor Swift really won't shake it off: Singer hits out at Spotify AGAIN calling streaming service a 'start-up with no cash flow'

Taylor Swift removed her entire back catalog from music streaming service Spotify as she was promoting new album 1989.

It sold 1.287 copies in its first week, just shy of Britney Spears' record for the biggest-ever album weekly sales by a female artist (1.319 million).

'If I had streamed the new album, it's impossible to try to speculate what would have happened,' Taylor told Yahoo of leaving Spotify.

'Music is changing so quickly, and the landscape of the music industry itself is changing so quickly, that everything new, like Spotify, all feels to me a bit like a grand experiment. 

'And I'm not willing to contribute my life's work to an experiment that I don't feel fairly compensates the writers, producers, artists, and creators of this music.' 

The star said in the letter: 'I find it to be shocking, disappointing and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company. 

'This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success.  

'This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. 

'This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field... but will not get paid for a quarter of a year's worth of plays on his or her songs. 

'These are not the complaints of a spoiled, petulant child. These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much.' 

She continued: 'Three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing. I say this with love, reverence, and admiration for everything else Apple has done.

'I hope that soon I can join them in the progression towards a streaming model that seems fair to those who create this music. I think this could be the platform that gets it right.

'But I say to Apple with all due respect, it's not too late to change this policy and change the minds of those in the music industry who will be deeply and gravely affected by this. 

'We don't ask you for free iPhones. Please don't ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.' 

After hours of negotiations, the firm made a U-turn and agreed to pay every musician whose work is featured during the trial, which starts on June 30.

Big reward: The 25-year-old rewarded both Apple and her fans and said she was doing so as it finally 'felt right' to stream 1989

'We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists,' wrote Apple vice president Eddy Cue on Twitter, after he personally phoned the platinum-selling singer to deliver the news. 

He added: 'Apple will always make sure that artist are paid. #AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming, even during customer's free trial period.' 

The service first asks what kind of music you like 

Apple's streaming music service, called Apple Music, has finally gone live - and it will have rivals like Spotify and Tidal quaking in their boots.

The app is automatically installed on phones as part of an iOS update released this morning - meaning if your phone is up to date, you'll already have it.

It comes with a highly publicised three month free trial, after which Apple will charge $9.99 (or £9.99) per month for service - on a part with its rivals.

The first time you use the app, it'll ask you for your favourite genres and artists, to help it start to recommended music for you.

Once that's done, you're dropped into the new home screen, which shows you your recommended music.

At the bottom are a row of icons showing you what's new, listen to Apple's Beats 1 radio, see Connect, the social network for artists (which so far seems lacking in content) and see your playlist and the music on your phone.

When playing, there's an option to save music offline, and you can mix music already on your phone with streaming or downloaded tracks.

Sound quality is very good, but not great - it's comparable to Spotify, but not a patch on Tidal's high quality $14.99 HiFi option. 

However, for most users, especially those using Apple's own white earpods, it'll be more than adequate.

Overall, after a few minutes of confusion, you'll be at home with the app. 

Beats 1 is a superbly curated radio station that could become the hidden gem of Apple Music, but otherwise Apple Music doesn't really have any revolutionary features that will have its competitors quaking - but the key is that it doesn't need to.

It has the basics incredible well covered, and for the vast majority of users, that's more than enough. 

There are some questions over certain features -  only time will tell if areas such as the Connect social network are used.

But most important of all, Apple Music just works.

Given the firm's history with cloud based services, it could have made things far too complicated, but the balance is just right, and focuses on listening to music and not the technical details of what's stored where. 

It's biggest rival, Spotify, in many ways has a more innovative app, which it has had time to polish and develop - attracting over 70m users in the process (with around 20m of those paying). 

However, ease of use is key to Apple, and its three month free trial is a masterstroke.

The crunch for Apple will come in three months, when the initial trials run out -  and for a lot of users, I'd wager that they'll pay up and stream their music simply because its easy, the app is already there, and Apple already has their credit card in the iTunes Store.

Apple may be a little late to the streaming game, but the Music app shows that, once again, the firm is set to change the way the masses listen to music.