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

391–400 of 861 posts

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

#391

Post by JAlexoid »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #290
adrr wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that work for a streaming service that charges a flat rate? Do you think public has an appetite for a pay per usage model/micro transaction model or would it drive users back to piracy? Micro transactions in online news media hasn’t managed to get any traction.

It doesn't work for a streaming service which charges a flat rate - which is the point. Spotify is not the same as Netflix etc, because Netflix etc is commissioning and promoting new work - something Spotify has no interest in. So... you sell units, not streams. You buy a perpetual license to play a unit as many times as you want. The artist gets a royalty for the unit sale. This frontloads income around unit release…

What model? Which model had free storage and replication of albums you purchased and free delivery of said albums to your door at no extra charge?

Are you missing the multi-billion dollar infrastructure here, maybe?

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

#392

Post by olivermarks »

I have never used Spotify and I never will. For me it's the Clear Channel of this decade, more interested in monetizing 'content' and having other people define genres so they can pipe similar music into people's ears for profit. A giant swathe of the 'music industry' has zero interest or understanding of creative processes, they just want product that sells easily. These formulaic eras always bland out and I'm sure Spotify will be no different

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

#393

Post by quacked »

lux wrote: post #361
apocalypstyx wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an acquaintance of mine put it the other day on this exact topic (who happens to be a writer/graphic artist/programmer): "First STEM says that the humanities are worthless. Then they say how, really, STEM should get all that glory too because, really, it's the same thing -- but better." Or this quote: "Great paintings, for example, get you laid in a way that great computer programs never do. Even not-so-great pain…

I forgot about Hackers and Painters! Pretty sure there's a copy on a bookshelf here somewhere... Interesting quotes. Reminded me of a conversation I had with some local artists a while back who were staunchly in favour of their kids going into STEM because the humanities don't have a direct application to industry any more. They didn't want their kids wasting money on exploratory education, or in pursuit of the arts…

Even the grouping of STEM together is a bad-taste-in-your-mouth industrial crime against human culture. The real acronym should just be M. (S, T, and E are just bastardized ways to get paid fat bucks for doing simpler versions of M.)

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

#394

Post by idlewords »

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…

The Beatles at the height of their fame put out two albums a year, while making a bunch of movies on top of it. That pace is inconceivable in 2020, but I've never understood why.

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

#395

Post by Marazan »

The Spotify scam is incredible. Negotiate a 'deal' with the people that own you. Negotiate with hat deal. In favour of your owners and against the artists. Justify not paying more to the content creators based on making no money but the money you are 'losing' is going directly to your owners.

Hollywood accounting at its finest

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

#396

Post by nsl73 »

ng12 wrote: post #369
zjaffee wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what the CEO is saying, and it has been an increasing trend in music for a long time now, is moving even further away from large LP releases every few years. The existence of that medium of music doesn't make sense in the current year given how people actually go about consuming music. The way to keep fans engaged involves releasing EPs and Single on a regular basis, releasing a whole album only really makes…

> The existence of that medium of music doesn't make sense in the current year given how people actually go about consuming music. I'm not convinced. The standard 3-4 minute pop song came about because that's what could fit on one side of a 78. Albums came about because an LP (33 1/2) could fit roughly 40 minutes of music, or 10-12 of those songs. These formats proved to be a popular and effective even though the tec…

Over 80% of my music listening is full albums, even though I haven’t played a record or CD since 2015.

I really hope the medium of the album survives, because I much prefer listening to a coherent and deliberate group of songs than any other method.

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

#397

Post by jcdavis »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #195
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much money? Enough for personal private jets or enough to make a living? If the bar is to simply pay the rent then I still think that musicians can do what they want.

It's just one data point, but here's a fairly successful artist (50k+ monthly listeners on Spotify) that still needs another job: https://twitter.com/HeartAttackMane/status/12886231366410362...

Without trying to sound too harsh, 50k monthly listeners really isn't all that much. You can argue that spotify's discoverability (or lack thereof) has a large influence on those numbers, but there are no shortage artists with many times that many that aren't all that widely known.

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

#398

Post by aczerepinski »

zjaffee wrote: post #327
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…

I think what the CEO is saying, and it has been an increasing trend in music for a long time now, is moving even further away from large LP releases every few years. The existence of that medium of music doesn't make sense in the current year given how people actually go about consuming music. The way to keep fans engaged involves releasing EPs and Single on a regular basis, releasing a whole album only really makes…

This is sad and feels to me like a dumbing down of everything due to short attention spans.

I still prefer to listen to full coherent albums, and one of the highlights of my week is my Sunday run, which gives me time to listen to an album start to finish with no interruptions.

I hope some of my favorite musicians will continue to conceptualize albums that have a 45+ minute arc, even if market pressures mean that they'll initially need to release the tracks one at a time.

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

#400

Post by anticsapp »

Can someone explain why the revenue sharing model is broken on Spotify? A lot of bluecheck indie bands complain about their meager $28 monthly checks. I even saw a performative tweet from a label the other day: https://twitter.com/DonGiovanniRecs/status/12865225202213847...

Let's say I run a bookstore. 70% of my revenue goes to pay workers. A works 32 hours, B works 5 hours, and C works 3 hours.

Is it not fair to give A 80% of the pay pool, since she worked 80% of the hours?

Finally, terrestrial pop radio, independent college radio, and ham radioesque bedroom experimentalists are all on the same platform, the swim lanes have been erased. Everything is flattened, everything is discoverable, yet the sobering truth that few people are streaming their work elicits attacks on Spotify from bands and marginal artists. How is their contempt justified?

Post reply on HN