Live data from Hacker News

Spotify vs the US Competition

blog.like.fm

11–20 of 108 posts

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#11
I'm in Canada and was disappointed that we were cut out of the stateside Spotify launch, so I went looking and heard a number of recommendations for Rdio.

Out of 18,384 tracks it matched 3,142. Considering my tastes are pretty mainstream and my files have very clean tags, it's hardly impressive.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#12
post #7
post #6

Unless the US version of Spotify is drastically different from the European version, discovery on Spotify is excellent in my opinion. The Radio feature does exist (although it's not one of Spotify's strongest features) and when you're on an artist page there is a tab to view related artists. There is even an radio tab on the artist's page which will play music from related artists.

The radio feature is not available in the US. "The lack of a radio feature for the time being is a factor of licensing agreements with the rights holders but it will eventually be available." http://getsatisfaction.com/spotify/topics/radio_mode_missing...

That's a shame for now, but the fact that related artists are presented very clearly (and you're able to quickly see their most popular songs) doesn't make discovery as bad as the article is claiming. I find myself listening to a lot more different music with Spotify than other discovery services such as Last.fm.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#13

I'm in Canada and was disappointed that we were cut out of the stateside Spotify launch, so I went looking and heard a number of recommendations for Rdio. Out of 18,384 tracks it matched 3,142. Considering my tastes are pretty mainstream and my files have very clean tags, it's hardly impressive.

With most of these services you're bound to not be able to find a few songs. What's important is whether or not it fails gracefully into letting you manage those missing music files yourself and Spotify, Rhapsody, and Grooveshark are the only ones that let you do that to some extent.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#14
post #12
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The radio feature is not available in the US. "The lack of a radio feature for the time being is a factor of licensing agreements with the rights holders but it will eventually be available." http://getsatisfaction.com/spotify/topics/radio_mode_missing...

That's a shame for now, but the fact that related artists are presented very clearly (and you're able to quickly see their most popular songs) doesn't make discovery as bad as the article is claiming. I find myself listening to a lot more different music with Spotify than other discovery services such as Last.fm.

Pretty much every service out there has related artists. But the US version of Spotify has only that.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#15
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a shame for now, but the fact that related artists are presented very clearly (and you're able to quickly see their most popular songs) doesn't make discovery as bad as the article is claiming. I find myself listening to a lot more different music with Spotify than other discovery services such as Last.fm.

Pretty much every service out there has related artists. But the US version of Spotify has only that.

There is also friend's playlists, which I find very useful to discover stuff.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#16
Spotify should lose a point for having no web based player. Installing the Spotify client on a friend's computer can be kind of intrusive.

All of them should lose a point for having not having an integrated music locker to fill in the holes where they don't have licenses to certain tracks.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#17
Spotify's discovery is better than a 4. Since a playlist can be represented by a URL, sites have emerged to share playlists, which is actually awesome, one of those living in the future moments. Even better, these can be dynamic, like a top 40 list, and also curated by everyone.

That said, Spotify could certainly do much more in this area (a lot of their energies have been focused on getting the US launch, it seems).

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#18

Spotify should lose a point for having no web based player. Installing the Spotify client on a friend's computer can be kind of intrusive. All of them should lose a point for having not having an integrated music locker to fill in the holes where they don't have licenses to certain tracks.

You can fill in the holes with Spotify, Grooveshark, and Rhapsody.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#19

Spotify's discovery is better than a 4. Since a playlist can be represented by a URL, sites have emerged to share playlists, which is actually awesome, one of those living in the future moments. Even better, these can be dynamic, like a top 40 list, and also curated by everyone. That said, Spotify could certainly do much more in this area (a lot of their energies have been focused on getting the US launch, it seems).

This.

See spotylist.com, discovery through non-friends playlists beats algorithms as you can understand why songs are grouped together and get a feel for a persons music tastes.

Re: Spotify vs the US Competition

#20

Spotify should lose a point for having no web based player. Installing the Spotify client on a friend's computer can be kind of intrusive. All of them should lose a point for having not having an integrated music locker to fill in the holes where they don't have licenses to certain tracks.

You can fill in the holes with Spotify, Grooveshark, and Rhapsody.

Speaking to just Spotify (and Rhapsody if I remember correctly), only in some scenarios. On your local machine it is easy to fill in the holes. On your phone you have to sync everything over wifi, this is slow and limited by your phones memory.

Comparatively these limits don't exist on Amazon Cloud Player where I can have much more music the my phones memory and after syncing it to their servers I don't have to sync it with each device I have.

Post reply on HN