When Bloomberg reported that Spotify would be upping the cost of its premium subscription from $9.99 to $10.99, and including 15 hours of audiobooks per month in the U.S., the change sounded like a win for songwriters and publishers. Higher subscription prices typically equate to a bump in U.S. mechanical royalties — but not this time.

By adding audiobooks into Spotify’s premium tier, the streaming service now claims it qualifies to pay a discounted “bundle” rate to songwriters for premium streams, given Spotify now has to pay licensing for both books and music from the same price tag — which will only be a dollar higher than when music was the only premium offering. Additionally, Spotify will reclassify its duo and family subscription plans as bundles as well.

  • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Gotta love all my friends who are really into music who happily use Spotify and don’t give a shit it is a weapon of class warfare being used on musicians disguised as a music player!

    I basically lost all my drive to make something of my love of creating music seeing how little anyone in my society actually values music or musicians in terms of material support and reward, it is honestly pretty scary how broken music has become.

    • fpslem@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      2 months ago

      I really wish there was a better alternative to push my friends to. I do use Bandcamp, so at least I know more of my $$$ are going to the artists and I can take the music with me, but I’m not sure about the platform long-term.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        As a musician and composer it really took the life out of my identity as a composer seeing an alternative to bandcamp never really form and then one day waking up to it bought by Epic.

        I didn’t cry that day, but I might as well have, it made me extraordinarily sad to see that headline and I imagine there are actually countless talented musicians out there who will never actuate on their creative vision because the environment for music production is at this point, downright hostile towards artists and musicians considering the amount of work music production is.

        It takes an obscene amount of work to take a song from something that has promise to being as polished as listeners demand nowadays, and listeners won’t even give your song a chance on actual speakers. You have to twist and warp your music so it sounds good on essentially monophonic phone speakers with shitty frequency coverage or otherwise nobody will give it a try on speakers for actually listening to music. Doesn’t matter though, nobody is going to actually support you for the art you make.

        🙃

        It seems like https://resonate.coop/ is still around tho which seems like a cool idea (a coop owned streaming service where listeners can stream-to-own a song).

        • Methylchloroisothiazolinone@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          2 months ago

          I see a dystopian future where all art is made by ai and approved by big brother. Artists were always a source of wrongthink afterall. It will be clean, sanitary, and devoid of humanity.

          • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            100% where we are headed with this backwards capitalist approach to ai. Make bots churn out art, films, music, anything creative really, so the proles have more time for mindless manual labor

        • deranger@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not sure if this is exactly good news, but Epic Games doesn’t own it anymore, it was sold to Songtradr.

          • can@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            2 months ago

            the largest music licensing platform in the world

            Doesn’t sound too good to me. Bandcamp used to be where I could get music from smaller artists who couldn’t afford clearing samples (as they weren’t making money) and I worry a lot of that will be lost.

            • deranger@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Still is, for now. I run a small vaporwave tape label via Bandcamp. No significant changes under Epic Games or Songtradr that I’ve noticed. That could change, though.

              • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                It will change, I promise you. I am so confident I will literally bet my girlfriend’s chihuahua on it.

                wikipedia chihuahua

                better hope lefties and artists get their shit together you tiny little monster

                • can@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Everyone on Lemmy and the fediverse as a whole should be aware of this pattern. I just hope something can fill in before it gets too bad.

                  I’m keeping an eye on Faircamp.

              • can@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                That’s how it always begins.

                But on a more positive note, care to share the label or more about your experience about it? With regards to Bandcamp and more generally.

                • deranger@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Sure, https://mysticspools.bandcamp.com/

                  Most of it is pretty fun- find music, reach out to artist, make a few tapes. We just do small runs of 25-100 tapes depending on how much will sell. The worst part IMO is order fulfillment, you either pay a third party a boatload or you DIY and packing 100 cassettes is a bit of a drag. Coming up with good art if the artist doesn’t already have something is quite difficult. The label is on a short hiatus for that reason, but I think we’ll do some more tapes now that some labels have dried up. There’s waxing and waning periods when it comes to these little micro labels, and I can tell people are feeling the economic squeeze.

                  The most fun part is mastering to tape and dubbing. I’ve got a Nakamichi Dragon and 3x NAD 6300, and I’ve dubbed probably 500-600 tapes across them all. Dunno what it is about tapes, but I really like em.

          • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            🤷‍♂️ not really, none of these corporations are real in any sense that matters other than sucking up actual companies that actually make the world a better place and mining the goodwill out of them until they are cynical, worthless husks that corporations use to fleece consumers into buying products from before they realize their favorite company/brand is dead in everything but name.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 months ago

      Soon we’ll have AI music generators and most people will be perfectly happy to only ever listen to what those churn out.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I mean, we’ll see.

        Maybe.

        Maybe we will just look back at the period that is rapidly coming to a close as a golden era of music (and video games for that matter) where the tools became sophisticated, affordable and distributed for music production but venture capital hadn’t yet destroyed any last vestiges of the monetary value of musician’s labor (audio engineer’s included) in recording contexts.

        Of course, I am sure Spotify and other streaming services are coming around to the value of recorded music being unsustainably low, I mean everybody knows it deep down right? That is why they are going to continue to raise their prices. From the perspective of Spotify, the artists that actually do the work of making Spotify a valuable company aren’t in principle excluded from their share of the pie when the line starts to go back up and the company has a chance to reverse some of the belt tightening and sacrifices everybody had to make to keep the lights on… but every single one of these vapid losers believes deep down in their bones that the rules of the game say that it isn’t the responsibility of shareholders or upper management of Spotify to just hand the musicians their fare share of the increasing profits, or even alert them to the fact that profits are in fact increasing in the first place. Musicians are not the customers nor the shareholders of Spotify, they are the commodified, interchangeable contractors that aren’t much different than the day laborers who hang out outside of most Home Depots in the US looking for handyman work.

        This is like when the English saw that the only crop Irish peasants could afford to grow on the side for subsistence farming to feed their families, potatoes, were getting destroyed by a potato blight, and decided that it would send the wrong message to let those Irish peasants have any of the rest of the crops that Irish farmers were growing to sell to foreign markets to simply pay the English rent for their farmscrops that were not significantly impacted by the potato blight because it would make the Irish reliant on handouts and encourage a problematic tendency towards apathy and entitlement stubbornly latent in the Irish population.

        🔥 Burn 🔥 It 🔥 Down 🔥
        (with love)

    • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      All the streamers suck; plus Spotify definitely sucks the most and it has the most subscribers. So I do my best to support artists I love by buying their albums in some physical form (vinyl if possible because it encourages active listening), t-shirts when I need a t-shirt, fan clubs, etc. It’s all I can think to do.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s all I can think to do.

        I think you thought of a lot of good things to do!

        I don’t mean to be overly cynical about people, this is a problem of systems and normalization of things that shouldn’t be normalized primarily, the people are mainly just trying to survive.

        sigh

      • mihies@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The thing is, you’re buying from their record labels, not directly from artists. And then it depends on their contract how much they actually get. But they are still getting more from it, I guess.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      How much do they really care? I’m not usually a quality snob, especially since I frequently use gear of varying quality making it moot, but wouldn’t most people who are really into music at least consider the competition that offers higher quality files at similar if not the same price?

      Or are they the type to only have local FLAC with their DAC? Because I like my collection but streaming is still worth the convenience for jumping into a new album.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Edit: I didn’t really make it clear, my interest in services like Bandcamp wasn’t higher quality music, it was that it was run by at least a relatively benign company that seemed to treat artists like actual human beings who artistic labor was inherently valuable. I would buy craft beer/cider/meader even if Budweiser or Coors Light was actually better quality beer, what I care about at the end of the day is my money going to someone or something good

        I have spent a lotttt of time messing around with music production and learning what is pseudo-science (a whole fuckton of it) and what is real science. In all of the ABx testing I have done, read about, and seen demonstrated in person myself a quality MP3 with a decent bitrate encoding (idk 128kps or so?) using a decent algorithm and hell even a sampling rate of 41khz will produce an audio recording that when played back on a hifi audio system and level matched (EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, it is well known in mastering and mixing that a louder mix always sounds better at first glance) is indistinguishable from the source .wav file to the human ear (I don’t care how super human you claim your ear is).

        People make this silly mistake of thinking that digitization introduces these sharp staircase edges into audio waveforms, which is actually kind of a hilarious misconception (which I completely understand, not trying to insult people’s intelligence) because the entire idea of converting a waveform (an analog non-bandwith limited phenomena) into a bandwidth-limited digital waveform is utterly reliant on the idea that the analog reproduction of a digital square wave/stair step function with a voicecoil and diaphragm, physical hardware components with shape, size and crucially mass, must necessarily create a smooth analog waveform because physical hardware components have mass and momentum, they aren’t theoretical ideas. It is better to think of a bandwith limited digital waveform as a series of movement commands for an RTS unit in Starcraft 2. The unit will naturally path between discrete points in a way that creates fluid movement, fundamentally it wouldn’t make any sense for the unit to just teleport directly to where you click and then teleport directly to where you click next etc…

        I mean let us consider Vinyl records for a second, maybe you like most people have a vague perception they are kind of a hifi audio thing for people that reallllllly care about audio quality and don’t want to listen to chopped up and compressed digital audio files using a gasp consumer DAC that came stock in their laptop.

        This quote from an old reddit thread discussing how CDs actually have far better signal-to-noise ratio fidelity than Vinyls (and really all decent quality digital audio files) about sums it up.

        As for quantitative audio quality differences between the two mediums, the CD is superior. CDs operate at a sampling rate of 44.1kHz. These are discrete points, versus the continuous signal produced by a physical vinyl groove. However, the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem explains why a 44.1kHz sampling rate is sufficient for completely reproducing frequencies up to 44.1 / 2 or 22.05 kHz (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem ). True response will actually be lower than 22.05 kHz due to the various anti-aliasing filters involved in the analog-to-digital and digital-to-analog conversion process to prevent frequencies above 22.05 kHz from aliasing down into the audible range (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliasing#Folding ).

        Furthermore, the CD is recorded with 16 bits of resolution, results in an output with 65,536 discrete voltage ‘steps’ on the output. This does introduce some quantization noise, because the real signal is ‘rounded’ up or down to the nearest of the 65,536 steps. This is another area where some people claim vinyl is superior due to the lack of quantization of the output. But in practice, vinyl only has 9-10 bits of resolution (IIRC) due to manufacturing tolerances. To achieve around 16 bits of resolution, the tolerance of production for the groove would have to be on the order of 1/65,536 or ~0.001%. That’s not going to happen on those tiny grooves. Also, you have to consider the non-zero inertia of the physical pick-up moving across those tracks, which will introduce a separate set of distortions as it moves around.

        https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ic9f0/do_vinyls_really_have_a_better_audio_quality_than/

        • can@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Believe I’ve gone down a similar path. I agree, but I assumed the layman dedicated music fan would at least be curious.

          And on another note we need more discussion music and audio production around Lemmy.

    • thesmokingman@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Walk me through this.

      Before Spotify, I’d buy a record (physical or digital) and listen to that. I pay the artist once. After Spotify, I buy a record and listen to it on Spotify. I pay the artist the normal record price and there’s a long tail from stream payouts (unless they don’t reach the payout threshold).

      Before Spotify, if someone heard a song and didn’t buy the record, they didn’t pay the artist. After Spotify, if they still don’t buy a record, the artist now earns from stream payouts.

      Finally, before Spotify, if someone bought a record but stopped buying after Spotify, the artist loses that record purchase. This is definitely bad. Was Spotify the real reason? Would something other than Spotify have pulled them away? What levels of fame are materially affected by this?

      Do artists have to pay to be on Spotify? Is that the issue?

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        the artist now earns from stream payouts.

        Do artists have to pay to be on Spotify? Is that the issue?

        The issue is that artists don’t make any actual money on Spotify, they are being forced to put their music on Spotify because that is where you have to put your stuff if you want to be a successful recording musician.

        Meanwhile a couple of years ago the Spotify ceo said in defense of completely destroying any semblance of money making from recording music:

        “There is a narrative fallacy here, combined with the fact that, obviously, some artists that used to do well in the past may not do well in this future landscape, where you can’t record music once every three to four years and think that’s going to be enough,” said Ek.

        https://www.reddit.com/r/musicmarketing/comments/mlemlh/why_youre_9998_likely_to_never_make_real_money/

        Streaming is great, but the structural evisceration of musicians and the value of labor in composing and producing is basically negative at this point given the huge amount of time that must go into a track to get it 100% there and ready for listeners.

        • thesmokingman@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The thread you linked says what I said.

          I’ve been doing DIY music since I was a kid. The vast majority of bands are never going to make any money ever. Spotify didn’t change that. Streaming didn’t cause that. The reality of every kid with a guitar thinking music is about making money not having fun is what did that.

          • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t subscribe to this cynical of a viewpoint, it isn’t inevitable that recording music is not valued labor, it is a cultural choice same as any other.

            I live in the richest country on earth, it is a subjective choice to devalue the labor of musicians and decouple it from the profits of music companies.

            • thesmokingman@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Who the fuck has a label? Do you know anything about music that isn’t already incredibly corporate? When was the last time you went to a DIY show and bought handmade merch off a band touring in their minivan? Compare that to the last time you bought a record from a label or merch from an online store run through not the band.

              There are more than likely 300+ bands in a 20 to 50 mile radius around you. Do you support all of them as much as you’re pushing people on the internet to support all music? What about the really bad cover bands? Them too?

              Your statements paint a picture that you have no idea what I meant by “levels of fame” because fucking no one makes money off music unless you get lucky. There’s just too much because music is fun.

              • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Your statements paint a picture that you have no idea what I meant by “levels of fame” because fucking no one makes money off music unless you get lucky. There’s just too much because music is fun.

                Again I don’t see any quantitative evidence to accept this framing of the status quo as inevitable or reflective of some fundamental tendency of human artists to overproduce art.

                Capitalists have systematically stole the labor of musicians and normalized and absolutely absurd vision of austerity where the only way to make money is by doing things that people don’t want to do. It is absurd, and this ideology is pretty easy to locate the motivation behind, it makes us good compliant factory workers.

    • sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      In my experience those kinds of people are Ice Spice fans.

      Who think that SSSniperwolf arriving at another person’s house live on Insta and doxxing them during a manic episode is ‘slay’.

  • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Please, people, for the love of the gods, stop using Spotify. There are numerous other services that are so much better value for your money and don’t treat artists (as much) like trash.

    And that being said, try to support your beloved artists directly as much as you can. Buying digital downloads or physical media will give them more money than a lifetime of streaming ever would. Plus you get to keep the higher-quality music even if the platform or artist goes tits-up.

    • azezeB@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Could you give me some examples of alternative services? I’m paying spotify right now, but i’ll love to ditch it.

      • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sure, although keep in mind this will vary by region due to licensing issues.

        Deezer is probably Spotify’s best direct competitor. They are priced equally (depending on region) and now offer high-res streaming as default instead of a paid extra. They’ve been expanding with new features such as lyrics, collab playlists, song identification, and they recently improved their recommendation system. They also offer a discount if you buy subs yearly instead of monthly so you can save if you like the platform.

        Apple Music is also an option now that Apple has put in some work to make the platform easier to use on non-Apple devices such as the recently added Windows app. It’s not as feature-rich as Deezer but if you don’t use those added features anyway then it is an option. I personally would phrase it as “has less bloat”. If you own any Apple devices already then it will have tighter integration with them.

        Tidal is the old favourite of audiophiles and music appreciators. They have been expanding their platform with new features and music and, somewhat recently, have also lowered their prices. High-res streaming is now included in the base sub tier. All of these alternatives pay artists more than Spotify but Tidal has one of the best artist payouts.

        Qobuz is similar to Tidal and is a premium platform with a focus on quality. They are a newer service and are still expanding their regions, so I don’t have personal experience with them as they only recently opened up to my country. Their price and feature set looks competitive, though, and their UI does look slick. They also have better artist payouts.

        Amazon Music apparently has better payouts for artists but Amazon is a shit company so I’ve never looked into them further. I’ll include YouTube Music here as well which has shitty payouts and is a shitty company.

        • fpslem@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Amazon Music

          I invested heavily in the Amazon Music ecosystem, I bought hundreds of albums on there, and the platform is now very nearly unusuable. I cannot even listen to the songs that I paid for without also having to listen to ads. And the Android app now hides the downloads in some hidden folder so I can’t even download them and listen to them on another player. It makes me furious.

          I’ve actually gone back to CDs, if you can believe it. It’s kind of nice sometimes, especially for full album plays, but I do miss a nice big playlist of my favorite songs from all artists.

          • dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I can believe it. I still have multiple libraries of physical media, and I pretty much never buy anything new that I can’t likewise physically own. I might rip and make MP3’s or transcode or emulate, or whatever, for convenience, but sometimes it’s just nice to be able to stick the disk or cartridge in the machine and have it just work without any of the associated modern ancillary bullshit.

            Everything wants to be a service now. I just find that so irritating.

        • ThirdWorldOrder@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Apple Music also has Dolby atmos and much higher quality audio files compared to Spotify.

          The only thing Spotify has on everyone is excellent playlists. I just use SongShift to copy the playlists over.

          Tidal is okay but I prefer Apple Music since it has a better UI, cheaper price and is more user friendly for my non-audiophile family members.

        • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          What’s the USP of Deezer over Apple Music now that the latter has lossless streaming as well (and live lyrics for longer)?

        • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          None of these have good app support compared to Spotify, sadly. Not supported by my car, nor my Linux desktop, or home speakers.

          Oh and Deezer pays even less to artists than Spotify.

        • Neuromancer49@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Thanks for the recommendation, I was worried they would be missing some of my artists but they had 99% of my music. Can’t wait to ditch Spotify.

          ETA: dear lord the sound quality is so much better. I had no idea what I was missing.

          • Logi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, happily using Tidal as well. Haven’t missed any music that wasn’t also missing from Spotify, so…

          • Codilingus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Tidal on Linux is a crap shoot, which sucks because pipewire is awesome for HiRes music since it can change sample rate on the fly to match a source. Best bet is Firefox and their web player, and using the middle tier “high” that’s blue colored, and letting pipewire play @ 44100

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        As an Apple hater; Apple Music. Cheaper, good cross-platform frontends, more equitable to artists (though by no means satisfactorily so), has a Wrapped equivalent (though who actually cares). Maybe Spotify added something it doesn’t have in the several years since I switched but, I doubt it

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Napster pay decent artist royalties and offer a Spotify migration service for your playlists etc. as well as lossless music.

    • Granbo's Holy Hotrod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s too convenient. Most people just want easy access and don’t even think of the downstream impacts. If a song or two goes unavailable, probably won’t notice. There is gonna need to be an alternative that is cheap and feature rich along with Spotify missing some steps. It’s here for awhile.

      • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You are not wrong, but there are other services that are just as convenient and for less money. Spotify knows they are the “default” music streaming platform and they are exploiting that.

        • Granbo's Holy Hotrod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          A quick Google puts the top two at Apple and Amazon. So that is a big no for me boss. I am pretty sure the next ones listed are just torrent front ends. I have a life now so no time for that…spotify it is.

          • andyburke@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I use Tidal. It may not be much better than Spotify, but it’s better than Spotify.

            • BakerBagel@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 months ago

              Audio quality is better and they pay the artists the most of all the major streaing platforms. I’ve been using Tidal for 2 years and have been very happy with the switch

      • can@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Well better than Spotify is a real low bar. I’m on an apple music family plan and I like it but if I weren’t I’d probably get tidal. And they actually dropped the price of their high quality tier.

        • applepie@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          And they actually dropped the price of their high quality tier.

          This is what we call competition, kids… i know most people don’t understand the concept but it is supposed to make consumer make a change by providing a good deal.

          This is the opposite we see nowadays, where they fuck you and say it is fine because “reasons”

          • can@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Here’s a link with more info

            Tidal will no longer keep its high-res, lossless and spatial audio content locked behind a £20/$20-per-month “HiFi Plus” subscription. Instead, it is now moved into a single individual user plan, costing a lower-cost, Spotify-matching £11/$11 per month.

            Previously, users paid that price for CD-quality FLAC files, but needed to opt for the pricier plan to unlock 24-bit/192kHz tracks and Dolby Atmos content.

            That’s now all changed as of 10th April, which saw the new £11/$11 per month plan implemented.

            And specifically to your point

            This price drop only puts further pressure on Spotify to improve the quality of its catalogue, which is currently capped at 320kbps in its Premium tier, and has no native support for spatial audio tracks.

            That alone should be enough to get people considering other options. I’m sure there’s more beyond the big three too.

        • slaacaa@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I got a few months of Apple Music with some device, was happy to ditch Spotify. Not very good, preferred Spotify’s UI and logic, but still a better alternative, and at least not pushing podcasts in my face (which I have zero interest in). I will never use Spotify again

          • can@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            That’s another big one to me too. I opened Spotify recently and you can plainly see the music is no longer the focus.

        • ThirdWorldOrder@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I used Tidal for a year but went back to Apple Music. I don’t understand what people like about Tidal that Apple Music doesn’t offer.

    • IcePee@lemmy.beru.co
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      While it doesn’t have well known artists, indie streaming Resonate prides itself as having the most generous (or at least, close to) payments to artists. To support this, it has an innovative payment model akin to higher purchase. You pay a little for the first listen to a track, but the price increases through subsequent listens. After 9 listens, you own the track outright. The total cost of ownership is around $0.9

    • stealth_cookies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      One of these services needs to release a feature like Spotify Connect, can’t switch without a replacement for that.

  • anolemmi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just cancelled, have been a customer since 2015 or so.

    I’ve said many times I would gladly pay more, if it were an elective extra cost that goes 100% to the artists you listen to.

    So $11/mo to Spotify, then I could elect to pay another amount of my choosing that gets split up based on what I’m listening to and goes 100% to the artists. I don’t love it but it would be an acceptable solution to me.

    A better solution would be for Spotify to be fair and pay artists accordingly from the start… buttttt Capitalism, and Spotify is publicly traded so no chance of that ever happening. I’m out.

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        (Note I’m not super familiar with Tidal)

        I had a look earlier in the year and I believe Napster pay very decent artist royalties and offer a Spotify migration service. I will be moving to them after this.

    • fpslem@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      😂😂😂

      In seriousness, what is the payment to artists like nowadays on TIDAL? Dare I even ask?

      • HEXN3T@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        As far as I know, it’s $0.025 per stream. Spotify’s rate is $0.003. Pretty substantial difference. TIDAL has the highest rate in the streaming industry.

        EDIT: If you really want to support artists, go to Qobuz and buy albums. I’m planning to get a Sublime subscription so I can own my music and support artists even more (while not missing out on freedom to play what I want on demand).

        Also, fixed the decimals and changed TIDAL to a more accurate average.

        • gramie@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think that you are off by about an order of magnitude. Spotify pays $0.003 per stream, and title apparently pays $0.01 -0.05.

          • HEXN3T@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            I think this is correct. In cents, this is 0.3¢ and 1-5¢ respectively. Zeroes are too hard for my mushy brain…

  • BURN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Definitely thinking about cancelling with this. I’ve used Spotify as long as I can remember, after finally switching over from pandora radio.

    Their shuffle and discovery algorithms suck so much now that it’s nearly impossible to listen to more than 20-30 songs they just keep repeating.

    Add on the extra, inserted ads in podcasts, there’s really no reason to continue to use their platform.

    Then again, I’m probably going to YT music, which is only marginally better, but since I pay for YT premium already there’s no additional cost

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I wish they had something between “top songs” and “completely random” when listening to a band.

      Like, sure, Sweet Child of Mine, Welcome to the Jungle, and Paradise City are great and all, but there’s only so often you can listen to them, and the only alternative is to be reminded that Chinese Democracy exists.

      • Sabin10@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        YouTube music has something like this. You choose a few artists you like then tune the randomness of what it plays. I have discovered more new artists Ina few months of using it than I have in the decade before that.

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you find a better place to discover music please lmk (no sarcasm)

      Their discovery sucks lately and I hate it.

  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Spotify can die in a fire for all I care. Sail the high seas and if you like an artist buy physical releases/merch/tickets.

    • jumjummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      So instead of having the artists make the small per stream income, you suggest they get $0? Buying their releases/merch/tickets is irrelevant to the platform. If anything, the model of these streaming platforms is just further shifting to advertisement for artists to drive people to shows.

  • noodlejetski@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’ve ditched Spotify last year when their app has suddenly started draining battery on my phone (and also because of them being so eager to give Rogan a platform). I’ve switched to Deezer, but I’ve ran into the same issue I’ve had with Spotify for a while - even if I download a playlist for offline usage, it’ll still try to connect to the internet, so if I was somewhere with poor reception, it’d get stuck on a spinning circle for a minute before giving up and showing me the songs I’ve wanted to play. I ended my Deezer subscription, rebuilt the library on my laptop, and just manually transfer files to my phone. I get instant access to my music with no delays, with music players that offer much better experience and handle shuffle and queues the way I want to, and aren’t a glorified Chrome tab on desktop. and if I really like an album, I’ll just straight up buy one. I listen to music a fucking lot (two years ago i was in top 0.2% of my country’s Spotify users), and according to some screenshots of my Spotify Wrapped, I’ve played my artists songs for 1200 minutes, which translates to 300-400 plays at best (probably less than that, given that many of their songs are around 6 to 8 minutes long). given that, from what I’ve found online, 1000 plays gives artists 4 bucks, I could just buy two of their songs on Bandcamp and pirate the rest of their music, and they’ll still get more money in a year from me.

    I do miss seamless playback switching between devices, though. it was a really nice Spotify feature, when it worked, that is.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    weekly PSA that spotify is a dumb company who makes no money because they’re stupid.

    To put it bluntly, between the artists, and the musicians, there is the publisher (the traditional music company) the money pretty much only goes to the publisher, because spotify doesn’t want to make money, nor do they want artists to make money. And the artists put their shit on spotify because people believe that spending 15 dollars a month on a service that doesnt pay artists, apparently pays artists.

    Go support your local musical artists.

    • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      To add to this, buy their merch and physical copies of their albums. Also, go to shows! Lots of small bands would love a bigger crowd and can be seen for cheap or free.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        exactly this, buy merch, buy albums, give them your money directly if you can. (artists, please just let me give you money, i like your shit, maybe i don’t want to buy shit tons of plastic ok?)

    • shikitohno@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      And the artists put their shit on spotify because people believe that spending 15 dollars a month on a service that doesnt pay artists, apparently pays artists.

      It’s probably more a case of artists acknowledging the fact that streaming services are one of, if not the, primary sources of music discovery and consumption for many these days. Even if they won’t make money off it, by not being available on these platforms, they may as well not exist for most people. That’s something that only huge, already established names can pull without feeling it.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        you know what else streams your music? The fucking internet, that shits free! Literally just posting your shit on a torrent will give you tons of traction to work with. Especially if you already have a pretty significant listener base. Plus you also get the benefit of people like me who are significantly more inclined to buy physical releases of media.

        Regardless, streaming is a good way of getting people to hear your shit, if you really want to use a streaming service, don’t go through a publisher, or at the very least, a mainstream publisher. They tend to fuck you over.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I already commented somewhere else in this thread, but I’ve been just buying music via bandcamp and I feel pretty good about it. If I buy about one new album a month for $8, it’s cheaper than spotify and after a couple years I have a large library of music I own outright.

    This works with my listening habits, which are something like “I have like one new (-to me) album on heavy rotation every couple of weeks”. Someone who’s more of a “i never listen to the same song twice” extreme wouldn’t have as good a time.

    • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      This works with my listening habits, which are something like “I have like one new (-to me) album on heavy rotation every couple of weeks”

      I actually kinda do the same thing, so you’ve got me thinking I should start just buying albums. Build a Jellyfin server so I can still stream music, and just not deal with subscriptions.

      And actually, most of the time I buy records that come with digital downloads anyway. Time to rethink my Tidal subscription.

  • arandomthought@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve heard good things about tidal in regards to paying artists (more) fairly. Does anyone know more about the alternatives or has experience with them? Also in terms of the library size I’m not sure how the services compare…

    • Shawdow194@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I love my Tidal subscription. Most everything that’s on Spotify is on Tidal now unless it’s an exclusive. Most annoying part will be tranferring your playlists

    • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I believe tidal actually has a larger library than Spotify, and offers a tier that lets you listen to higher quality of music. Similar pricing to Spotify I think. I had it for a while and really liked it, only stopped paying for it because I’m broke so I’m sailing the seas for now

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’s not really just Spotify. I’m a hobbyist music producer. I uploaded my entire catalog through Distrokid about two years ago. Distrokid serves just about every streaming service. It costs $20 a year for the most basic package. I’ve got ~8 million listens according to Distrokid, and that nets me about $40 US. So, I made my money back. Not bad for 20 years of work. Haha!

    I don’t really care about the numbers, like I said, I’m a hobbyist. I make music because I enjoy making music. It would never be my career unless I dropped everything and struck out touring trying to make it in an industry that traditionally chews up and spits out hopefuls. I’m not exactly the age or attractiveness that most people expect in a touring musician, either.

    • afox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I appreciate this. Can I have a listen? I also make music… Sometimes.

    • mPony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      not exactly the age or attractiveness that most people expect

      What gets me is that, for the right style of music, age or attractiveness shouldn’t matter as much as it does. You should be able to create your art, whatever kind of art it is, and have the art itself be judged on its merits. Instead we’ve got a bunch of our culture still somehow wrapped up in these veneers of attractiveness. It’s kind of maddening, to be honest. If you’re in your 50’s and making 90’s style Acid House or 2000’s style Trance it shouldn’t matter what you look like. If you’re a DJ it shouldn’t matter if you look like Shirley Temple or Shirley Manson. And yet here we are.

      8 million listens netting you only 40 bucks really is insane, isn’t it? I used to think radio royalties were bad: I remember Sting talking about how every time Roxanne got played on the radio someone somewhere got 3 cents. He didn’t say who got the 3 cents, nor did he say how much of that 3 cents went to him. I’m not 100% sure about those numbers (“my memory is muddy, what’s this river that I’m in?”) but they’re a damn sight more impressive than whatever crumbs the streaming companies are paying, somehow a thousand times less than the radio. Spotify’s announcement last year that they weren’t even going to bother paying for songs with less than 1000 streams per month was a shocker - what stops them from making it 2000, or 10,000?

      Still, being a hobbyist isn’t all bad. I’ve been releasing jazz cover-versions of pop songs for about 2.5 years now, and have netted about 25 bucks so far :) Who knew jazz versions of Toxic or Rusted From The Rain could be so popular?