Spotify Is Eating the Entire Music Business?

[Shabdahbriah]

^^^ noted ^^^

[ghettosynth]

# 3 from the same list, coming in at 8.3k views on Youtube with 147 likes, hardly mainstream.



And #4 with something like 1700 views and 27 likes.



This is hardly mainstream and comes from what I regularly listen to on Spotify. I would not know about any of these artists, now I follow several of them and their music is on some of my playlists for various moods.

[dayjob]

i buy music straight from the artist, Bandcamp preferably, i never use a streaming service.
I find new artists all the time, by digging through 'crates', just like the good ol days.
It's lossless, and doesn't require the internet to play. I don't see why i would ever use spotify, as a listener nor as an artist. I feel offended when people label the work of an artist as "Content".
I might be old school, but i'm in it for the MUSIC and i support real artists not money grabbers and posers. f**k everything else.

same. i don't need what spotify offers. i like to make my own playlists of old and new things or add things to them.

internet or cell service as a requirement to listen to music is fvcking dumb. my ipod is my main listening device when mobile. already stuffed with so much music.

I also buy a lot on bandcamp or at Bleep.com or direct from labels. I digitized my vinyl years ago but still listen to vinyl when i want the experience. at home i can listen to whatever format. vinyl, CD, ipod etc. getting it all from an algorithmic streaming service seems like being handcuffed.

Cds and CD players are so cheap in the used shops. my Cd player died a couple years ago. i found a nice tascam w/tray loaded single CD tray for $30. it's perfect. someone could buy so much music for price of a spotify subscription. find a couple used Cd stores, get a cheap CD player, digitize the favorites.. make some play lists. .throw it on the phone or any MP3 player. bandcamp, juno.. whatever webshop someone likes.. find the tunes.. buy them. i like to support labels and artists that make the things i like.

[dayjob]

# 3 from the same list, coming in at 8.3k views on Youtube with 147 likes, hardly mainstream.



And #4 with something like 1700 views and 27 likes.



This is hardly mainstream and comes from what I regularly listen to on Spotify. I would not know about any of these artists, now I follow several of them and their music is on some of my playlists for various moods.

and they get exactly nothing from all the streaming services combined. like i said, it's good for the consumer, bad for the artists. i'm glad you found some niche things.. but niche things are fodder for streaming services. they don't get paid. the taylor swifts and joe rogans see al the gains. some working bands and artists get a payout but it's not much and shrinking royalty rate even compare to just a couple years ago.

spotify isn't a music company. .it's a tech company. they got a high stock valuation, sold some stock, sucked billions out of the system while not kicking out any money to the people who created the resource they exploit.

also, years ago they gave the major labels essentially a bribe in the form of stock. billions in value. squirreled away in the label's financials so the artists don't see a dime but spotify got access to the label's discographies.

if that sounds good to you then fine. but it sounds awful to me. i want no part of it.

[ghettosynth]

# 3 from the same list, coming in at 8.3k views on Youtube with 147 likes, hardly mainstream.



And #4 with something like 1700 views and 27 likes.



This is hardly mainstream and comes from what I regularly listen to on Spotify. I would not know about any of these artists, now I follow several of them and their music is on some of my playlists for various moods.

and they get exactly nothing from all the streaming services combined. like i said, it's good for the consumer, bad for the artists. i'm glad you found some niche things.. but niche things are fodder for streaming services. they don't get paid. the taylor swifts and joe rogans see al the gains. some working bands and artists get a payout but it's not much and shrinking royalty rate even compare to just a couple years ago.

spotify isn't a music company. .it's a tech company. they got a high stock valuation, sold some stock, sucked billions out of the system while not kicking out any money to the people who created the resource they exploit.

also, years ago they gave the major labels essentially a bribe in the form of stock. billions in value. squirreled away in the label's financials so the artists don't see a dime but spotify got access to the label's discographies.

if that sounds good to you then fine. but it sounds awful to me. i want no part of it.

I don't care. It's not my problem to solve. It is their choice to put their music on Spotify. Because they did, I know about them. If they didn't, I wouldn't know, and I wouldn't care that I didn't know. I get that you're all bent out of shape over this, but what is your suggestion? I'm not interested in human curators, Bandcamp got it wrong far more often than they got it right. I want algorithms recommending artists to me based on what I like and someone has to pay for that.

In the 90s I spent hours in record stores hunting for DJ records. While I miss some aspects of that, the world is not going back to that. What I don't miss at all is trying to find things that I like in shrink-wrapped CD packages that I couldn't return. It was a very unsatisfying way to shop for music. I spent too much time about a decade ago listening to partial tracks on Beatport. I'm not doing that anymore either. If were to gig as a DJ again, well, then I would need to buy my music, but I would find it on Spotify. I went through my vinyl record collection adding that which is on spotify to various playlists, this recommended other artists and other tracks. That's the best you can hope for if you're trying to get me to give you money for DJ records. I have far too many purchases where the 30 second bit that I could hear was the best part of the record.

[ghettosynth]

internet or cell service as a requirement to listen to music is fvcking dumb. my ipod is my main listening device when mobile. already stuffed with so much music.

Good thing that's not required for Spotify. You can download anything you want to be played offline within the app.

[sqigls]

at least with Bandcamp the artist gets some return.
f**k spotify

[Jbravo]

I guess it all boils down to whether you think music by semi-pro artists should just be like some kind of folk music which gets passed around freely without any kind of significant monetary reward for the artist, which is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your motivations and whether you mind the industry profiting from that. Now they have this new rule of only paying artists who get 1,000 plays for any song, that’s pretty much the end of any reward for me. Maybe we should think of Spotify as just a promotional tool and sell the majority of our work elsewhere. 1,000 plays amounts to about 3p in royalties. No one is prohibiting the purists from avoiding Spotify completely and trying to make their own way, and total respect to them if so

[sqigls]

dodgey record company shit
dodgey as f**k

by the way, f**k this label "purist".
oh, i don't really enjoy satan's cock in my mouth.
oh, purist eh?

[Jbravo]

dodgey record company shit
dodgey as f**k

by the way, f**k this label "purist".
oh, i don't really enjoy satan's cock in my mouth.
oh, purist eh?

What identifier would you prefer?

[sqigls]

music enthusiast number 120484792057663040600201019474

thank you

[sqigls]

cheers

[Jbravo]

music enthusiast number 120484792057663040600201019474

thank you

Okay

[ghettosynth]

I guess it all boils down to whether you think music by semi-pro artists should just be like some kind of folk music which gets passed around freely without any kind of significant monetary reward for the artist, which is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your motivations and whether you mind the industry profiting from that.

I don't think anything about any of that. I'm purely a consumer, and most likely a bit atypical. Folks like me have no voice in this. For everyone one like me listening to weird shit there are at least 100k if not more people listening to Taylor Swift. The masses don't care about "semi-pro artists" at all. As long as they have what they want, they're going to pay for Spotify. What I do is a drop in the bucket. I think all of KVR is a drop in the bucket. If all of KVR killed their spotify accounts then the only thing that you would change is that interesting niche artists would get a few fewer listens.

Now they have this new rule of only paying artists who get 1,000 plays for any song, that’s pretty much the end of any reward for me. Maybe we should think of Spotify as just a promotional tool and sell the majority of our work elsewhere. 1,000 plays amounts to about 3p in royalties. No one is prohibiting the purists from avoiding Spotify completely and trying to make their own way, and total respect to them if so

So time will tell whether or not this has any impact. By impact I mean in terms of their catalog which would make spotify less interesting to me. I'm not sure that anything else would be better. However, it might open the window for a different kind of service that appealed to people who were into niche music in some way.

One of the things that frustrates me is that I can't find all of my old (DJ) vinyl on Spotify. Is there a service with almost every record from the 90s? Probably not. A lot of them used to be on youtube, less so today.

That said, I just looked at the artists who showed up on my list. Most of them have some monthly views, not much, but e.g., Samuel Organ as some 28k monthly listeners. Not a lot in the sense of making money, but I have to wonder if even I care about those artists with fewer than 1000 plays. Even Anna Homler has some 8k monthly plays and Nadi Qamar has 5k. I guess that earns him some 15p/month?

Let me be clear, Nadi's album is cool, but I would not buy it if I had to buy this music to listen to it. I would just listen to something else. So you have to weigh that in your calculus.

[sqigls]

I guess it all boils down to whether you think music by semi-pro artists should just be like some kind of folk music which gets passed around freely without any kind of significant monetary reward for the artist, which is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your motivations and whether you mind the industry profiting from that.

I don't think anything about any of that. I'm purely a consumer, and most likely a bit atypical. Folks like me have no voice in this. For everyone one like me listening to weird shit there are at least 100k if not more people listening to Taylor Swift. The masses don't care about "semi-pro artists" at all. As long as they have what they want, they're going to pay for Spotify. What I do is a drop in the bucket. I think all of KVR is a drop in the bucket. If all of KVR killed their spotify accounts then the only thing that you would change is that interesting niche artists would get a few fewer listens.

Now they have this new rule of only paying artists who get 1,000 plays for any song, that’s pretty much the end of any reward for me. Maybe we should think of Spotify as just a promotional tool and sell the majority of our work elsewhere. 1,000 plays amounts to about 3p in royalties. No one is prohibiting the purists from avoiding Spotify completely and trying to make their own way, and total respect to them if so

So time will tell whether or not this has any impact. By impact I mean in terms of their catalog which would make spotify less interesting to me. I'm not sure that anything else would be better. However, it might open the window for a different kind of service that appealed to people who were into niche music in some way.

One of the things that frustrates me is that I can't find all of my old (DJ) vinyl on Spotify. Is there a service with almost every record from the 90s? Probably not. A lot of them used to be on youtube, less so today.

That said, I just looked at the artists who showed up on my list. Most of them have some monthly views, not much, but e.g., Samuel Organ as some 28k monthly listeners. Not a lot in the sense of making money, but I have to wonder if even I care about those artists with fewer than 1000 plays. Even Anna Homler has some 8k monthly plays and Nadi Qamar has 5k. I guess that earns him some 15p/month?

Let me be clear, Nadi's album is cool, but I would not buy it if I had to buy this music to listen to it. I would just listen to something else. So you have to weigh that in your calculus.

but if you didn't have the streaming option you might buy 2 or 3 tracks out of an album?