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

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

thefader.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 861 posts

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

#291

Post by JAlexoid »

NikolaeVarius wrote: post #216
oblio wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Most people hated getting and paying for whole albums, out of which most stuff was garbage. Few artists have whole albums worth listening to.

I dont know why people listen to artists who can't put out reasonably consistent music. If only 10% of an artists output is not garbage, are they any good at all? Reviews for metal bands will trash albums that only have 1 or 2 good songs.

Because music isn't plain engineering.

Some artists have one piece that is great for a wide audience and all of their other stuff is only for select listeners.(aka one hit wonders)

If you only listened to people who release consistently good music - you'd listen to 10 artists in total(or something like that).

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

#292

Post by dhosek »

Alupis wrote: post #66
jakelazaroff wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just speaking for my own band: we have had tens of thousands of streams on Spotify, yet we have made over 4x more revenue from music sales on BandCamp than we have on all streaming services combined.

That's great! I wish more bands had this level of success. BandCamp is more-or-less an "indie" place to find music. People have to be "into" it to go there and find music. Spotify and Pandora are far lower barriers for every-day people. Just put on some station you've created from your favorite band, and eventually it'll start playing new bands you've never heard and might love. It's amazing.

What it ends up doing is incentivizing artists to create songs like this: https://play.google.com/store/music/artist/The_Very_Very_Awe...

I read somewhere that the artist behind this discovered that the streaming songs he made the most from were songs that were apparently requested by random small child requests so he created a whole bunch of songs for just that purpose and makes the bulk of his income through that. Discovery on the streaming services is awful and the renumeration for indie artists is also awful. It's the worst of all possible worlds.

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

#293

Post by mortivore »

shakezula wrote: post #255
quattrofan wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why most is utter dross. People still buy millions of classic albums from the 70's and 80's, in 30 years time very few artists will have that same comfort.

Ah yes, the "new music sucks" argument. I've definitely never heard this one before. Please tell me how Metallica is relevant right now.

People still listen to Metallica's music, and their music still ends up in movies.

I don't really think all new music is bad, just most of it. The same could be said for back in the day though. Metallica is a bad example for you to use cause they are still widespread because they are really good. There are other bands you haven't heard of from the 70s and 80s.

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

#294

Post by Reimersholme »

jdoliner wrote: post #86

I prefer the Kanye West model in which every 8 months or so you promise to release an album on a specific date. Then that date comes and you go completely MIA, and pretend you never even announced the album. Then a few weeks later once all the hype has turned to dismay you quietly release the album and the dismay turns back into hype. Maybe that model only works if you're Kanye though.

Kanye West was the first big artist I know to really utilize The new release model to break out of the old formula of releasing an album and then it’s done.

It was fascinating when Life of Pablo was released on Spotify and over the next few months was given continuous updates and patches, like it had been software.

Really proves the old proverb that great art never is finished, it’s abandoned...

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

#295

Post by Dahoon »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #212
alchemyromcom wrote: post #139

I wish more people, especially tech CEOs, could understand the incredible sacrifice of time, money, and energy it takes to make an album people actually enjoy. Everything you listen to, unless you are willing to listen to raw demos, is a miracle. I've worked both as a sound engineer and and a software developer. It's orders of magnitude easier to make working software than it is to make a hit record. The way tech com…

> It's orders of magnitude easier to make working software than it is to make a hit record. True, but hardly apples-to-apples; it's orders of magnitude easier to make music than it is to make a viral app. In either case, the barrier to entry is low, the standard for doing it professionally is surprisingly high, and making a hit is a huge undertaking.

As a musician and programmer I find the bar to make money on apps way way lower than on music. Being a good programmer brings you much closer to making money on an app than being a good musician does to get a record out. For one you don't need luck, money and the right contacts to release an app. It isn't even in the same ballpark IMHO. Pro musician is closer to "race driver" than "viral app creator".

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

#296

Post by btmiller »

ArmandGrillet wrote: post #223

It's probably true and I find it sad. The best musical experiences I had have been from albums, not single tracks. No more albums every 3/4 years means no more singles leading to the hype of an album nor more meaningful shows around one theme. No more albums means no more ways to put something on for an hour of development and feeling like you're (re)living something that has a beginning and an end while having consi…

Huge +1

I really only listen to whole albums. Especially Tame Impala, Father John Misty, Mac DeMarco, Lana Del Ray, Fleer Foxes, St. Vincent, Sufjan Stevens, and on. Those type of artists won’t change because of whatever the Spotify CEO believes. There is still a place for thoughtfully-crafted full albums and they’ll continue to exist.

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

#298

Post by JAlexoid »

jacquesm wrote: post #264

Yes they can. Spotify fortunately is not the only way in which musicians can reach and audience and for some musicians it is still an art rather than a sausage of which they need to produce an extra quota to boost every Spotify quarterly earnings report. Quality takes time, especially in music. I wonder if that CEO has ever made any music themselves?

Even the best musicians get left behind.

If you completely ignore your audience and don't work with them - who's going to buy your stuff?

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

#299

Post by tropdrop »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #220
gwd wrote: post #81

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. If the CEO of an open-source company said, "Software isn't our product, software is our marketing", would you feel the same way?

> If the CEO of an open-source company said, "Software isn't our product, software is our marketing", would you feel the same way? Yes, absolutely, 100%! By all means care about image and marketing, but if your actual product isn't good (software, music, or anything else), then who cares?

What defines "good"? Marketability to the lowest common denominator?

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

#300

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

oarsinsync wrote: post #95
singhrac wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not comparable - music is art.

The implication in your comment is that code isn't art, when code absolutely can be art. Functional things can be artistically beautiful too.

Sorry, it can't. It can be beautiful and amazingly crafted, but it's not art.
Post reply on HN