Can’t even seek through songs.

  • Rayspekt@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    211
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, if you don’t pay with money, you’re paying with your attention. Do you think they create this huge service just for funsies?

    Tbf, out of all media streaming services across movies, series, and music, Spotify has the highes bang-for-your-buck. It’s still like Netflix at that time when there was only Netflix and you could watch almost everything on one platform. I still buy records that I like on physical media like vinyl, but Spotify is such a great deal for convenient listening to all music out there.

    • Blackout@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Man these people forget the days when a month of Spotify would afford you 1 CD. I remember cause I would spend half my paycheck on music. I’m just sitting here happy for services like Spotify and YouTube in my life. I remember a time when music and information was much harder to obtain (even illegally).

      • thejml@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        But if you bought the CD you actually owned something. Stop paying for the services and you have nothing if all you used was spotify/YouTube/pandora. I gave up on paying for streaming years ago and spend the same amount monthly on purchasing music. I get CDs, either new or used. I’ve amassed a collection and I don’t need Internet or monthly charges to play them.

        • 𝓢𝓮𝓮𝓙𝓪𝔂𝓔𝓶𝓶@lemmy.procrastinati.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          45
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          But I don’t want to own it. I don’t want to amass a collection of CDs taking up space somewhere. Been there, done that. I have a large collection of ripped mp3s from CDs I bought in the 90s and early 2000s (I’ve long since disposed of the physical media). I haven’t clicked on a single one of them in years, I just keep them for nostalgia sake and because they take relatively little space.

          I just occasionally want to listen to music sans commercials or annoying DJs wasting my time. For the cost of 1 CD a month my entire family can listen to almost anything they desire, at any time, without hassles (on Pandora in our case but I assume the economics are similar).

          Same thing with movies, honestly. I watch them once and move on. There’s a small handful I like enough to rewatch and I do own those.

          I get the whole, we don’t own anything anymore, argument and I mostly agree with it (see my massive Steam library). I just want both options to be viable. Streaming for ephemeral entertainment and actual ownership for the things I choose to keep.

        • Blackout@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We all have our preferences and I enjoy the quantity of music I can get in a heartbeat. It really sucked when you were 16 and spent $15 on a CD that sucked because there was no way to hear it ahead of time.

          • thejml@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            My rule was always “buy it if there are at least 3 songs I know & like”. Only really had a few disappoint. I used to hang out at used CD stores though. I got so many for $2.50 or $5. Even a few gems for $1.

        • Rayspekt@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Valid point, but commuting with my turntable to listen to my sick vinyls on the go is a pain in the ass. Also moving sucks ass when you have a metric fuckton of sensitive vinyl to move. Owning stuff also has its downsides. Also no way I’m digitizing my vinyls and cutting them and shit to listen to them on the go, ain’t nobody got time fo dat.

          I gave up on CDs roughly 15 years ago because I don’t like the format compared to vinyl (small album art, plasticy jewelcases, …).

      • small44@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You owned the music when you buy it. With multiple backups the risks of losing it it very minimal but with spotify or other streaming services, if you have to reduce your expenses you completely lose the access to the music till you pay again. Spotify always grey out songs too so even when you pay you may not have access to the some of the music you want to listen to

      • Rayspekt@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I feel you, the value from Spotify is enormous. I can sift through ten different bands in no time just because I decided that I want to look up a new genre that I may or may not be totally into by the end.

          • Blackout@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was 16 before Napster existed. It didn’t come out til I was 19. You guys are so ignorant and self centered. Claim you care about the artists but you want it all for free and when Spotify makes things difficult on you your solution is to pirate everything. We pirated when music was far more expensive than it was now. Software cost $1000s and there wasn’t a $60 monthly option. People actually lived on minimum wage back then and it was $4.25/hr.

      • Kayn@dormi.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Surely you have a better explanation for why Spotify isn’t giving you the full service for free.

      • Rayspekt@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah don’t use it if you don’t want to, idc. But you might accept the thought that there are people that think the deal Spotify puts on the table is good.

      • porkins@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Spotify is not profitable nor ever has been. It accrued $4B in additional debt last year. The business is subject to high royalty fees. As a competitor, I just leave free Spotify running all day on mute since they lose money from every subscriber. The royalties are the same whether they make money or not on the customer. It is wise of them to more aggressively convert people to paid plans, but I’m sure that their margins are razor thin.

    • AcornCarnage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know not everyone will agree, but I think YouTube premium is the better bang-for-buck service. $3 more per month than Spotify and includes YouTube Music premium and YouTube Premium. So all the music and ad-free YouTube.

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Only so long as Google decides to continue serving content for free to people who contribute nothing to their bottom line, which isn’t guaranteed to last.

            • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ultimately, there’s no real way to get around the fact that operating huge platforms like YouTube that serve hundreds of millions of people every day comes with very significant costs, and someone has to pay them. Either users pay them directly, advertisers pay them in exchange for ad space, or investors pay them in exchange for the ability to control the platform for whatever purpose they want.

              Given that, I’m personally pretty happy to settle on direct subscription fees. For the sheer amount of content you get, I don’t think it’s really that unreasonable, though I am of course speaking as someone in a position where I can afford them.

        • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          An argument could easily be made for Spotify as well. There are plenty of options for streaming music for free to your device with download support. Just about anything can be done for free if people are willing.

        • Empricorn@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure, for now. YouTube is cracking down on ad-blockers, don’t think they’ll let those free tools work forever…

      • SnipingNinja@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        YouTube is basically the same price as Spotify in my country (only 12 cents more actually), so even more bang for my buck, specially for family plans.

      • CO_Chewie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m currently in a three month trial due to the value (music streaming and ad free you tube), but coming from Pandora YT Music’s radio algorithm sucks sooooo bad. One of my first plays was a foo fighters album and now all the stations I create have alt/grunge in them. It’s making it really hard to consider staying.

      • shectabeni@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Surprising to see any suggestions on here for YouTube Premium. I have been lucky enough to be on a family plan for years and it’s honestly great. Sometimes, it’s just easier not to deal with having to hack around things to make them usable.

        • AcornCarnage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Family is one of the biggest reasons. A huge part of it for me was minimizing at least SOME of the ads my kids would be exposed to.

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

        I did not agree when I had both premium, I did not agree when I had YT light and Spotify premium, and I do not agree today.

        Context: I only use YT for its main service; streaming video. I never tried YT music because I already had music streaming set up in a way that worked for me.

        • AcornCarnage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, if you are paying for two services but don’t use one by choice, sure I can see the value not being there.

      • poopkins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I need 48-bit 96kHz raw PWM otherwise my ears can’t tolerate it. I can hear the difference in the waveforms.

    • uberkalden@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Careful, this same take when discussing YouTube ads will draw the ire of the internet

      • Havald@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re not hurting the companies, you’re hurting the artists. I’m not saying don’t pirate at all, especially from artists like Taylor swift. But maybe if you’re listening to a small artist, especially if they’re independent, consider buying their cd.

        • AcornCarnage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          If the option is Spotify or pirating, you’re really not hurting indie artists. They don’t make shit from streaming.

          • mPony@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            hey now I make 10 bucks a year from streaming royalties. I can almost buy a fancy coffee with a shot of booze for that. Oh the life of an indie music artist.

          • Havald@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is still a difference between basically nothing and literally nothing. Spotify is better than pirating and CDs/vinyl/digital directly from them is better than Spotify.

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

              That tracks. Every artist who spoke to me about this (I’m kind of a hobby musician) told me a) fuck labels, not worth it, b) Promotion is 95% of the game and you have to master it yourself, c) no money in Spotify except for the top .1% or so percent, the money always comes from gigs or shows so starting live early is a good idea.

            • Kayn@dormi.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Additionally, when you listen to an artist on Spotify or YT Music, it increases the chance of the app promoting that artist to other users.

                • Kayn@dormi.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Remember, we’re distinguishing between “basically nothing” and “literally nothing”.

                  Of course the best way to financially support an artist is to buy their merch or buy their music on a store like Bandcamp.

          • Blackout@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The last album I bought was Ty Segal’s latest. I have seen him live at least a dozen times and bought roughly $600 worth of limited releases and shirts at these shows. I “discovered” him thru Spotify’s Discover Weekly playlist that automatically puts together music they think I will like.

            I think all the free users are the problem. They don’t want to pay for the service, they complain about ticket and merch prices at shows and hardly contribute anything to the artists themselves. They blame Spotify when it’s Ticketmaster and the labels they should direct their anger towards. Not paying users like me.

        • Dojan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          According to this blogpost or whatever it is Spotify basically doesn’t pay artists, so if there’s a niche/local/whatever band you like, the best way to show support is by buying their tracks/records directly from them.

          I think for smaller artists, Spotify is less for revenue and more for exposure, hoping that your music can reach new listeners.

          • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “I can’t pay you in cash, but I’ll get you exposure!”

            “woah” as they hold up the piece of paper that says ‘exposure’, “this is worthless!”

            (kinda meme kinda serious, as I know nobody who hears an artist on a streaming service and then does anything past listen to them on said streaming service, netting the artist effectively nothing)

            • Dojan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think my favourite retort to “we can pay you in exposure” that I’ve ever seen has been “people die from exposure.” It’s just so succinct.

            • Rayspekt@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I get your point but it really depends on the audience you’re looking at. Personally, I use Spotify a lot to listen to any new artist I can find and check their stuff out without crawling a) youtube or b) buying their records in advance. If I stumble upon some stuff that I’m really into, I look if there are any vinyls available. (Bonus step c): you’re two months late to the vinyl release and the discocks are already hoarding all copies, smh.)

              The point you’ve made kinda boils down to the question if music is a hobby or a commodity for said person. The “problem” I’m seeing is that music is more of a commodity to many people that just listen to stuff for the sake of listening to it. That’s just a product of changing times and the relation between people and music and the distributors inbetween reflects that. Of course this is frustrating for the load of talented artists that just niche audiences care about.

            • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              know nobody who hears an artist on a streaming service and then does anything past listen to them on said streaming service

              Please allow me to introduce myself lol.

              I go to live shows pretty frequently, maybe every two months or so, and my first exposure to many of the artists I’ve seen came from a random Spotify recommendation. I don’t think this kind of thing is particularly uncommon among people who go to shows frequently. If I don’t learn about them from Spotify, I heard about them from a friend or online community that was listening to them. Music really moves through social networks, so exposure can have some real value, though I agree it’s rather cruel to literally not pay an artist and simply tell them they’re getting exposure.

              But hey, if exposure truly was worthless, advertising wouldn’t be a multi-billion dollar industry.

              • Rayspekt@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah, spotify recommendations, spotlist, and whatnot has replaced what MTV was back in the day.

              • Blackout@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I have the same experience. It’s not like I’m on tick tock or watching MTV to find new artists. I deep dive thru the artists I already like and find them that way. It’s expanded what I listen too compared to my dad who is still stuck in the 70s

      • Rayspekt@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah if you can’t pay for Spotify then don’t, I get you. It doesn’t make their subscription offer any worse, though, if you decide on pirating.

      • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Spotify is not actually profitable, not that I imagine you actually care about discussing such annoyances as facts. I imagine you probably wouldn’t personally love the idea of working while actively losing money for the privilege?

        I guess Kbin is getting a reputation for having such wild takes as “Stealing isn’t exactly great,” so I’m glad to see I chose a Fediverse home wisely.

          • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If your definition of resisting capitalism is apparently “not paying for things that other people provide for you”, I think that says more about you than it really says about economics.

            To then call me the self-centered one is actual comedy, so thanks for that laugh.