Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client • Hacker News Board

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#431

Post by smt88 » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:06 PM UTC

squid_fm wrote: post #427

shunyaekam wrote: post #418

As an aside, I think YouTube Music is superior to Spotify in terms of music catalog. You get "everything on Spotify" (high quality audio) plus the YouTube videos (eg mixes that are put up) in a battery-friendy player (possibility to go audio only on these videos). Of course minimizable with YT Premium. I believe that the discoverability algo is much better with YouTube Music as well, which is important to me... I pay…

Fully agree, it is the most underrated platform. Ultimately, it comes down to the catalog. Anything even slightly more obscure (older house music, rare b-sides, unreleased tracks) just isn’t found on Spotify. Pretty much everything is on YouTube though.

Unfortunately YT Music pays the least to artists.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#432

Post by DotaFan » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:06 PM UTC

user_7832 wrote: post #243

DotaFan wrote: post #157

App is very buggy on windows.

Yeah, I just get a white screen on launching. It needs to be force closed via task manager for me.

I couldn't open artist details, songs stop playing after a while, couldn't uninstall it properly.

Just a few after using it for 30 min.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#433

Post by AlecSchueler » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

shunyaekam wrote: post #418

As an aside, I think YouTube Music is superior to Spotify in terms of music catalog. You get "everything on Spotify" (high quality audio) plus the YouTube videos (eg mixes that are put up) in a battery-friendy player (possibility to go audio only on these videos). Of course minimizable with YT Premium. I believe that the discoverability algo is much better with YouTube Music as well, which is important to me... I pay…

YouTube is also better if you're looking for original mixes and not the remaster, as well as for anything out of print.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#434

Post by CatDaaaady » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

linsomniac wrote: post #326

Somewhat related: A month ago I migrated from Spotify to YTMusic (Youtube), and published the scripts I used to do it. People have kind of come out of the woodwork: reporting issues, starring the repo, asking questions, last night I found someone has written a GUI for it. https://github.com/linsomniac/spotify_to_ytmusic The biggest reason I ditched Spotify is that their shuffle play of playlists is laughably bad. I l…

Oh my! I thought this weird behavior was just something _I_ experienced on Spotify. I'm always asking myself, "didn't I just hear this song?"

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#435

Post by artninja1988 » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:09 PM UTC

shunyaekam wrote: post #418

As an aside, I think YouTube Music is superior to Spotify in terms of music catalog. You get "everything on Spotify" (high quality audio) plus the YouTube videos (eg mixes that are put up) in a battery-friendy player (possibility to go audio only on these videos). Of course minimizable with YT Premium. I believe that the discoverability algo is much better with YouTube Music as well, which is important to me... I pay…

The only thing Spotify has over YouTube are the playlists and recommendation engine imo. The ai dj feature is also neat

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#436

Post by redserk » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:09 PM UTC

acheron wrote: post #413

jjulius wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>... especially in HCOL+ areas. Right? NYC and the Bay Area would like a word...

Yeah, and add in when you have to buy the new BMW, and have to go on international vacations every year, and that salary looks even smaller! Or you could buy a used Honda instead, go somewhere cheaper for vacation, and not live in the most expensive area in the country. All those are voluntary consumption.

This response is a strawman and unhelpful to the conversation here.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#437

Post by __MatrixMan__ » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:09 PM UTC

oldtownroad wrote: post #386

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about saving a few bucks, it's about taking responsibility for the consequences of your spending. If $1 out of $10 goes to supporting the artist and the other $9 goes towards stripping users of the ability to control their own devices, or towards other zero/negative sum games being played by the platform in the spirit of moat building, then paying for content through normal channels is doing more harm than g…

People say this but don’t understand the reason artists don’t make much per-listener on Spotify etc. is because of their record deals, it’s nothing to do with Spotify. If you’re an independent artist you can live comfortably off of a small Spotify audience! The stories you hear about an artist getting pennies on millions of listens are because of their record deals and the credits on their work. You can’t solve this…

The artist signed a contract with a label. I was not party to that contract, I'm not bound by it. I can send them money if I wish.

If only they'd give me an address (of a smart contact which would distribute the funds appropriately. I want to pay the parties whose names I don't know also, provided they're involved in actually creating the art.)

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#438

Post by mrtksn » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:10 PM UTC

shunyaekam wrote: post #418

As an aside, I think YouTube Music is superior to Spotify in terms of music catalog. You get "everything on Spotify" (high quality audio) plus the YouTube videos (eg mixes that are put up) in a battery-friendy player (possibility to go audio only on these videos). Of course minimizable with YT Premium. I believe that the discoverability algo is much better with YouTube Music as well, which is important to me... I pay…

I actually like YouTube itself for casual listening, it has everything. My only problem with it is that on autoplay will put 2 hour long albums as a single video instead of picking the most relevant next song.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#439

Post by jjulius » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:13 PM UTC

carlosjobim wrote: post #393

jjulius wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I was absolutely not broke at 70k. I'm genuinely glad that you weren't. Your experience is not everyone else's. I know people who have made around that salary who, for various reasons, were essentially broke. Much of the rest of your comment just sounds... braggadocious.

If you're broke at 70k you are simply bad with your finances. There are no excuses, unless you have a super rare medical condition. You can't blame anybody but yourself.

An absolute that has been shown to be untrue for a litany of reasons time and again, but OK. For many people, yes, you're right, but I would wager you'd be surprised at the number of people trying to claw themselves out of varying circumstances while making that much.

And this isn't a judgement towards those in those situations, it's empathy from my end - I feel the need to clarify after another user's flippant comments elsewhere in this thread.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#440

Post by __MatrixMan__ » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 5:13 PM UTC

dangus wrote: post #396

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about saving a few bucks, it's about taking responsibility for the consequences of your spending. If $1 out of $10 goes to supporting the artist and the other $9 goes towards stripping users of the ability to control their own devices, or towards other zero/negative sum games being played by the platform in the spirit of moat building, then paying for content through normal channels is doing more harm than g…

Under your same logic nobody should buy anything from your employer because they don’t pay you 100% of their profits. Probably only 2 or 3 dollars of every 10 they make goes to salary. But we all know running a business has costs that aren’t salary. Artists who sign to major labels get promotion and other assistance that costs money. That’s the trade off. And they’re making less money than before because people pirat…

Luckily for me, I don't feel like my employer has tasked me with working against our users interests. I want them to succeed at the things they're trying to do and I'm working in support of that goal.

But if things were otherwise? Then yes, the users should either walk away or they should circumvent whatever handcuffs I'm hypothetically building for them.

In that scenario, I'd absolutely participate in cutting my employer out of the loop so that I could do less evil work and instead get paid directly by the people who benefit from what I'm working on, and I hope you would too.