Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify next generation explained

blog.hunch.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#41

Post by mzl »

rossriley wrote: post #38
cabalamat wrote: post #30

I won't be using Spotify. Spotify is partly owned by the music industry, who acquired their shareholding not by stumping up money like the other investors, but by threatening them with lawsuits unless they were given free shares. (As an aside, wanna guess what percentage of profits the music industry make out of this will go to musicians? I suspect fuck all). Iniquitous as that is, it's not my reason for boycotting S…

If artists get 4.5million streams a month they earn minimum wage. Source: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/how-much-do-music...

The source for that figure is nothing more than a guess. It takes the approximate number of UK premium subscribers, multiplies by 12 months and £10. Then it arbitrarily doubles the amount to account for advertising income, and divides by the total number of streams in all countries.

I don't know how much an artist may get from Spotify, but my guess is that it is significantly more than from radio.

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#42

Post by goatforce5 »

rhythmAddict wrote: post #31
whalesalad wrote: post #5

It's a shame that it isn't available legally in the US of A. I have to VPN into Sweden every couple of weeks to keep my account active. I'd be more than willing to pay a premium fee... but even that won't work, your address has to be in the country of your account. Reasons I enjoy Spotify so much... * Their client is super quick and simple * Songs load essentially instantly, it's like they're local. * They have an An…

Totally agree. I used spotify for 2-3 months, but after a bit it got annoying when my tor proxy would suddenly stop working, and I'd have to find a new one that had enough bandwidth and was actually reliable enough. It is totally doable, it's just annoying. That said, I would be more than happy to pay their fee. (If anyone has a solution to this...either a good proxy, or something else. I am all ears. Also, when the…

Solution: Pay for a european-based proxy?

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#43

Post by sabat »

mootothemax wrote: post #3

I love Spotify and think it's an amazing service, but have recently started wondering if it's just as bad for artists as AllOfMp3. After reading about Lady Gaga earning close to nothing for 1 million plays, I'm not sure if it's a service that we should continue to support that much. If 1 million plays don't earn you any money, what's the incentive for less well-known artists? http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enterta…

* If 1 million plays don't earn you any money, what's the incentive for less well-known artists?*

Very similar to CD sales -- the record companies take the profits and pay the artists very little. Exactly the opposite of what it should be.

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#44

Post by stse »

kilian wrote: post #26
nailer wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the link you provided, it's a bug with WINE's MP3 decoder. How is that intentional?

Wine's mp3 decoder doesn't work in some cases, including some mp3 files by Spotify's partners[1]. Because the decoder didn't work for some mp3 files, they are actively blocking wine's mp3 decoder for all mp3 files. [1] I agree this is a pretty solid business reason to block it, but it's still intentional.

The workaround [1] seem to work pretty good so far. No crashes, but it does go into a (recoverable) loop if you pull the slider to the end of a track.

[1] http://getsatisfaction.com/spotify/topics/spotify_under_wine...

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#45

Post by marknutter »

mzl wrote: post #41
rossriley wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If artists get 4.5million streams a month they earn minimum wage. Source: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/how-much-do-music...

The source for that figure is nothing more than a guess. It takes the approximate number of UK premium subscribers, multiplies by 12 months and £10. Then it arbitrarily doubles the amount to account for advertising income, and divides by the total number of streams in all countries. I don't know how much an artist may get from Spotify, but my guess is that it is significantly more than from radio.

Not to mention artists can make money from other things besides streaming. They can sell merch, play shows, etc.

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#46

Post by teamonkey »

mmelin wrote: post #6
mootothemax wrote: post #3

I love Spotify and think it's an amazing service, but have recently started wondering if it's just as bad for artists as AllOfMp3. After reading about Lady Gaga earning close to nothing for 1 million plays, I'm not sure if it's a service that we should continue to support that much. If 1 million plays don't earn you any money, what's the incentive for less well-known artists? http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enterta…

I think you'll find that an artist's income from 1 million Spotify plays far exceeds the equivalent income from ten plays at a radio station with 100,000 listeners.

Not that I doubt you, but this really needs a citation.

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#48

Post by yesbabyyes »

I dislike Spotify for the following reasons:

* The music industry is a major shareholder. Spotify is great for them because they can continue as gatekeeper and make Spotify a worse proposition to artists not signed to any of the big four.

* Artists not signed to the big four does, in fact, get a lot less per play than the big four get when their music is being played. So if I am a premium subscriber, and only listening to "indie" artists, the big four will still get my money.

* Artists have to go through digital distribution channels such as RouteNote and DittoMusic to get their music onto Spotify. Why not let them upload their own music directly?

* The big four bought their share in the company (around 5% each) for chump change.

* It is a lot easier to censor music when it's all in the same streamlined interface.

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#49

Post by tonyskn »

superjohan wrote: post #17

Something I noticed while running the new version the first time: http://www.flickr.com/photos/johanhalin/4556877903/ In other words, uncheck that if you don't want Spotify modifying your tags in your audio files.

You can actually select all your local files than choose 'undo gracenote changes' from the right-click menu

Re: Spotify next generation explained

#50

Post by michael_dorfman »

erikstarck wrote: post #33
mzl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Spotify music database is normally updated independently of the application. As for the actual content, about two weeks ago I could see around 7.2 million songs as a user in Sweden. Today I can see about 7.4 million songs. Is there anything in particular that you know was removed?

I'm seeing grayed out tracks on songs by Freddie Wadling, Eva Cassidy, Dione Taylor, Lee Hazlewood, Tupac Shakur, Bob Dylan, Johnny Cash, U96, Land Shark and Moby to name a few. But you're right: all in all they're growing which is great.

The Dylan was pulled quite a few months ago, and in fact, some has been coming back-- they just added "Tell Tale Signs" not too long ago. Also, McCartney pulled most of his stuff a month or two back-- there seems to be a dispute with EMI.
Post reply on HN