351–360 of 382 posts
I cancelled my Spotify premium membership after being a customer for over 2 years, because they refuse to actually develop their application. Their music discovery and playlist radio functionality are horrific right now. They are on repeat essentially, with no way to unlike music that you have liked or accidentally liked.
Pandora started "the algorithmic playlists" but sadly their management team could not capitalize on it.
Spotify has some huge lawsuits underway for not clearing proper rights for music as well, I believe one is for 1.8 billion. They do have huge investment (ownership chunk) from at least one major label though I believe?
I don't get all the hoopla about Spotify's bad discovery stations. I notice this similar reality distortion field on reddit, feels like marketing.
And I will be keeping my hard drives full of media and cds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't distributing each subscribers fee individually and distributing all of them collectively by listening habits the same thing? Made up example: $100000000 * 0.0000001 of all listening activity = $10 Or $10 * 1 of all my listening activity = $10 Or are you saying that Spotify cuts off at a certain point and doesn't pay anything out, or that they take a fixed cut after allocation?
Let's say Artist X has their music on Spotify but is currently making $0 a month. Now, for the sake of argument, let's say I spend an entire month listening to only Artist X a thousand times; I personally think it's fair in that case that whatever scraps of my Spotify fee are left for the artists should then go 100% to Artist X because they're the only ones I've listened to. So, in this utopian scenario, they might m…
Getting 100% of your subscription is the same thing as getting 1% from everyone out of 100 customers, where only one person (you) listen to that artist (and exclusively).
That 99% of "your" money went to an artist you dislike doesn't matter if 1% of everyone else's money went to the artist you do like. The money doesn't know where it came from, and the artist doesn't care. Only the aggregate distribution matters.
Now I don't know how they do their reward distribution, I'm merely pointing out the flaw in your reasoning.
Spotify is the reason why I don't pirate music anymore. I say this as someone who used to be involved in the scene (low level FXP couriering in the late 90s and early 00s) and has gigs of release from the RNS, EGO, etc days. It's much faster and convenient to use Spotify. I also think they cracked music discovery. Their discovery weekly playlist is stellar. My only wish is they'd get off Electron (EDIT Chromium - tha…
There are plenty of songs which I've added to playlists, only to find a year or two later are no longer available due to expired licenses. Some of my favorite artists and labels - Drag City is a big one - aren't available on Spotify at all (usually due to objections to the royalty structure). Many live albums, and more obscure and vintage releases are often nigh-impossible to find, or only have one or two songs from the album: likely those that have been licensed previously for use on TV etc.
Spotify is great, but it will forever be fighting the friction of music licensing and fair monetization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You listed the killer features of Google Music for me: no Youtube ads, auto-pay my favorite Youtubers, and upload my own albums. Also the Youtube Music app. I've found their catalog to be really complete, I've rarely not been able to find something specific I'm looking for. Only advantage I'm hearing from Spotify music users is that the algorithmic selections sound really good. Meh, I put in about an hour a month of…
I don’t think it’s possible to really understand how great Spotify’s algorithm is until you’ve experienced it recommending a fantastic song, and you go check the artist out, notice they have less than ten thousand plays and have only released two songs Idk how that’s even possible but it happens once a month for me
For instance, the Fresh Finds playlists - music that's good but very new or undiscovered - are made by curators who sift through songs and artists listened to each week by "tastemaker users". Spotify combs through their listener data and identifies users who have a habit of listening to music that later blows up and becomes much more popular. They tag those users anonymously and use their taste to inform the Fresh Finds playlists, which also feed the rest of the editorial department.
Really cool stuff.
https://news.spotify.com/us/2016/03/02/introducing-fresh-fin...
I’ve tried Spotify but I cannot upload my own library (lots of mashup, asian music, remix, etc... that Spotify doesn’t have), use it and retrieve it later if needed. I’ve been looking for a service to do that and I couldn’t really find anything except iTunes match. But iTunes match is not really the same as spotify. So I did this spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ptV0sWO2tBT4c3G8aiB0...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the document: > Unlike an initial public offering, the resale by the Registered Shareholders is not being underwritten by any investment bank. The Registered Shareholders may, or may not, elect to sell their ordinary shares covered by this prospectus, as and to the extent they may determine. Such sales, if any, will be made through brokerage transactions on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) at prevailing…
But what if NONE of the early investor wants to sell? So there are no shares afloat? Or until a ridiculously high price before they start selling? Let say it is valued at $20B with shares at $20. What is stopping an early investors selling 1 shares at $1000, market valued at 1 Trillion, and get someone to buy that 1 shares? My point is since there is no new shares, unless the early investor are really rushing to offl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But no one actually does that, and if you really did, you don't need Spotify, just buy their album directly. Such a payout seems appealing in theory, but in practice will just give more money to the very popular bands since they dominate the market and leave a much smaller share for the others.
in practice will just give more money to the very popular bands since they dominate the market and leave a much smaller share for the others. Which is exactly the current situation, by the way. Anyway, what I was doing was just demonstrating that the system is not the same. Although I am admittedly bad at maths and statistics, it seems to me that the system I am proposing would be more likely to pay out at least coff…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What music are you generally listening to? There may be some odd connection made internally, between fans of some specific genres and Dutch rap, and you were unlucky enough to be hit by it. I get why Spotify doesn't want to expose the connections their algorithms make (because that's their biggest competitive advantage), but it would be nice to dig through once in a while, to see the connections they've made.
A very broad mix. I think it's reinforcement. A few songs slipped on their by some connection, which is fine. Because I listen to Discover weekly, it'll then register that I listen to songs of that genre and add more of those. It appears to me that they include Discover weekly consumption in determining preferences. Any personalised Spotify playlist should be excluded to avoid this kind of reinforcement.
Hah, imagine that, AI Cognitive Biases!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify app is so terrible, once you like something, it doesn't give you an option to unlike it.
Like Tinder, I really don't understand how these services -- where the magic isn't in the app so much as in the service -- who have big piles of money don't have much much better apps. It really feels like something you should be able to throw money at.