Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years” • Hacker News Board

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#41

Post by Hoasi » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:19 PM UTC

oconnor663 wrote: post #25

quacked wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The music isn’t your product, the music is your marketing. The shows, the merch, your influence - that’s your product. Man, that's depressing.

I think it could be depressing if we think of "your product" as "the most important part of what you do". But we could also think of it as "the thing that you need to make money from". If the music itself isn't the thing that you need to make money from, then instead of charging a bunch for it, now you want to spread it as widely as possible as cheaply as possible. That's a good thing!

> If the music itself isn't the thing that you need to make money from, then instead of charging a bunch for it, now you want to spread it as widely as possible as cheaply as possible. That's a good thing!

It is, but only if the music gets better in the process. Unlikely to happen if you rush for faster releases. More production doesn't equal to more novelty.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#42

Post by novok » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:19 PM UTC

Kaze404 wrote: post #29

Alupis wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be honest. The amount Spotify/Pandora/et al pay the majority of musicians per stream is far more than they'd make selling CD's. The overwhelming majority of music is unknown, has few fans, and will never "go platinum" nor sell out stadiums - ie, most musicians are not Taylor Swift. For all those artists... access to millions of potential listeners from around the world is an amazing advancement. The number of a…

That's a very bold claim to make without any data.

In the world of google, it's a good idea to look it up before making such one sentence replies.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#43

Post by jeffbee » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:20 PM UTC

agumonkey wrote: post #30

jeffbee wrote: post #17

COVID-19 is going to completely wreck the music business and the spotify guy is right: only endless social media campaigns with procedurally-generated soundtracks will survive in the future.

people enjoy music for various reasons but there are a few deep ones: beauty and live no system can replace a good live concert, it's a high grade experience (sometimes religious even) if the music industry goes toward absurdism, the "customers" will just find the real drug elsewhere

The only live music I'm getting these days is when my neighbors hang out on their respective porches. They are Berkeley's best trombone-and-banjo duo, probably. The last concert tickets I bought, for which I paid a rather incredible $540/pair, have been postponed to 2021 and realistically there's no reason to believe the concert will ever happen.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#44

Post by pier25 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:20 PM UTC

Obviously the guy knows nothing about creativity and art.

It takes time to grow as a person and cultivate new ideas. It may not be possible to do that if you don't get in and out of whatever it is you're doing.

Imagine telling Hemingway he has to release a new blog post every week instead of a book every couple of years.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#45

Post by NateEag » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:20 PM UTC

pier25 wrote: post #32

NikolaeVarius wrote: post #8

I really wish bandcamp would be bigger. Much prefer their platform. The spotify monetization cycle is so bad for music

I don't understand why they haven't improved the platform. Anyone working on a better alternative? If you're into electronic music you can also check Bleep (by Warp records). No DRM, you download your files and play them however you want. https://bleep.com/

They have not improved the platform because the platform is there to make money, not help musicians.

Making it better for musicians would likely reduce their revenues.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#46

Post by 52-6F-62 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

oconnor663 wrote: post #25

quacked wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The music isn’t your product, the music is your marketing. The shows, the merch, your influence - that’s your product. Man, that's depressing.

I think it could be depressing if we think of "your product" as "the most important part of what you do". But we could also think of it as "the thing that you need to make money from". If the music itself isn't the thing that you need to make money from, then instead of charging a bunch for it, now you want to spread it as widely as possible as cheaply as possible. That's a good thing!

Not if you’re coerced into having to produce a piece of music every month/couple of months to keep the machine running.

That’s just producing a commodity.

Some groups have got it together and are able to fund years of quiet work before releases, but no matter how much I enjoy creating I would hate to be so bound as outlined above.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#47

Post by j1vms » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

Looking at it in terms of one of the "golden ages" of recording music - back in the 1960s, think the Beatles - this would mean only returning to what has already proven possible before. Some artists in those previous eras were able to deliver remarkable music as much as twice a year over consecutive years.

Perhaps it was a less competitive industry at the time, but certainly less efficient (and relatively more expensive) production tools were available compared to today.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#48

Post by budgi4 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

NikolaeVarius wrote: post #8

I really wish bandcamp would be bigger. Much prefer their platform. The spotify monetization cycle is so bad for music

Can I ask why do you wish it was bigger? By it being bigger would that make it a better offerring for you?

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#49

Post by 52-6F-62 » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #34

quacked wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The music isn’t your product, the music is your marketing. The shows, the merch, your influence - that’s your product. Man, that's depressing.

I dunno. I've known a few people who dreamed of being in a band, and they weren't excited about the part where they sit at a desk revising lyrics; they were excited to perform their songs, to get up in front of a crowd and have everyone hear them.

That’s the classic line between a performer alone and a songwriter.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#50

Post by Larrikin » Fri, Jul 31, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #20

wldcordeiro wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, not just the monetization scheme but Spotify and others just push the music listening experience to playlists and singles and have very little room for albums and collecting a library of music you refer to.

I’m not a music aficionado, and I have no interest in albums. I love the singles/playlist format, and consume far more music now that I can easily ignore the 9 out of 10 songs I don’t like in an album (back when CDs were still a thing). I also find it easy to have a library of singles that I like.

Most of an album being bad as a stereotype I believe was just from actual bad artists when basically anyone could get a deal and possibly go platinum from a single song. Good artists typically had good albums