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

Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 661 posts

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#581

Post by jzb »

hackernewds wrote: post #404
jzb wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"buy music directly if you don't want to subscribe! A lot of smaller artists provide ways to purchase their music that give them a large percentage of the proceeds, and you can get the music DRM-free if that's something you care about." Amen. If you have the money and really like a band or artist, find a way to put some money directly in their hands if at all possible. One: They're going to see a lot more money this…

Producers and record labels do provide a service with distribution which artists share their commissions for. The idea that the record labels don't deserve their cuts is confusing, do they also not have employees and artists? Jack Harlow might be one example, but you see the dearth of D2C music and platforms like TIDAL that the marketing and distribution network does matter, and helps good artists take off. Whether y…

I didn’t say anything about not paying labels. My point was you should buy music rather than counting on it to trickle down from Spotify.

Note that many of the artists I’ve been buying from aren’t on major labels, though.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#582

Post by mock-possum »

small nitpick: what's the point of specifying a value for "%ProgramFiles%" if installers aren't going to respect it?

The default install location for Spotube on windows is in the same directory the installer is launched from - so if it's downloaded to the default "%UserProfile%\Downloads" then it's going to install to "%UserProfile%\Downloads\Spotube" ... and, like, who wants it there?

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#583

Post by mock-possum »

nsteel wrote: post #339

I don't get it at all. > No ads, thanks to the use of public & free Spotify and YT Music APIs¹ There's zero permission to use Spotify's APIs in this way. So what does "thanks" mean in this context? I don't like projects like this that potentially ruin it for the rest of us.

why would you need spotify's permission to look up a youtube video?

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#585

Post by [deleted] »

bayindirh wrote: post #509
_joel wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lastly, it's not possible to completely contain the sound of a symphony orchestra in a stereo recording Thank god we have more than 2 ears.

The problem is not the number of ears we have, but the amount of air moved by the instruments themselves and how they interact with each other. A symphony orchestra is miced per group normally (2 for violins, 2 for trumpets, etc.), but if you're around 60 people, you can mic every instrument individually. To reproduce the sound 1 to 1, you need to mic every instrument individually, and playback them with speakers mat…

[deleted]

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#586

Post by dv35z »

chaxor wrote: post #558
rubymamis wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. This app uses 230mb of RAM on my machine compared to Spotify that uses 208mb. But it's definitely more performant than my hideously slow Electron Spotify client. I'm really done with Electron. I hope this shaming of Electron apps continue because I can't stand this degradation of software. The only Electron app of recent that had good performance is Notion Calendar (used to be Cron). Although, Notion itself is p…

Yeah, electron is so over . Now tbe modern tech stack is to build a bash+python app in an env, add a touch of R, some js, and bundle it into docker container, then make that docker container into wasm with container2wasm, and give that out as the executable. It's wonderful honestly. You can get just about anything working with stitching together stuff, and then serve your 10GB executable to anyone :). So MuCh BeTtEr…

Serious question: What's the feasibility of local web apps in containers, which appear to the user to be a "regular" app. E.g. Django + SQLite, running in a Docker container, and run by a Mac app shortcut. How would you recommend setting up and running that stack? Better ideas?

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#587

Post by Larrikin »

prmoustache wrote: post #522
bayindirh wrote: post #2

Nifty. Please be aware that this is not a "spotify client" per se. It gets the data from Spotify, and plays the audio from YouTube. It's an interesting invention, and worthy of the first page, if you ask me.

On the other hand, why would you choose to use spotify API for a start? Spotify doesn't have nearly the quantity of available music that Youtube has. So many times when I try to find some music on my partner's spotify account it is just not there, and I give up and we listen to it via newpipe or freetube.

I would find it pointless to make music playlist on Youtube. Stuff gets taken down too easily, skits are prevalent, and theres so many accounts that just rip off music from other people. If it can't be on Spotify, I'm better off finding it on Soundcloud.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#588

Post by pinkgolem »

drewdevault wrote: post #550
gnramires wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are saying about 70% of Spotify revenue goes to rights holders, whereas you're saying about 85% of Bandcamp's revenue goes to rights holders. It really doesn't seem like that much of a difference? Maybe what you're saying is, you end up spending much more buying merchandise and labuns directly than you would spend on Spotify. (I'm not sure this would be true for everyone though) Maybe then the solution could b…

> People are saying about 70% of Spotify revenue goes to rights holders, whereas you're saying about 85% of Bandcamp's revenue goes to rights holders. It really doesn't seem like that much of a difference? 85% of a bigger number is significantly more than 70% of a much smaller number.

The number I spend on music before Spotify was well below 120 per year. I would even attribute increased spending on festivals/concerts/merch on Spotify

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#589

Post by Spivak »

CharlesW wrote: post #508
jackjeff wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see. What I really want is a converter from Spotify abomination to standard podcasts which I can read from any podcast client. Last I checked the podcasts are DRM encumbered. So you’d have to spin up a client pretending to be chrome and use the Wivedine extension to decrypt every mp3 frame. No hacking required. But Life is too short. So instead I refuse to listen to fake podcasts on Spotify.

Me too. Spotify may have successfully killed the "open medium" promise of the words "podcast" and "podcasting" as part of their embrace/extend/extinguish strategy, but there are many great podcasting clients that continue to support opencasting, and very few shows exclusive to closed audio platforms like Spotify.

Huh? Does Spotify have any exclusive podcasts worth bothering with? Because I haven't seen the death of open podcasts since every podcast is still on Apple Podcasts.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#590

Post by Reubend »

superultra wrote: post #148
Reubend wrote: post #3

While it's nice to have an open source client, please think twice about bypassing the premium subscription/ads to listen for free. Musician deserve to be paid for their work, and it's not fair to them to bypass all of the mechanisms to do that. Spotify doesn't pay musicians well, but there are still indie artists making a living from it nonetheless. I hear a lot of people these days complaining about ads, and that's…

I work in the music industry and am intimately familiar with streaming earnings. While you are technically correct, I would much rather someone use this tool and buy a ticket to a show or an LP that stream over Spotify. In fact, the ad supported tier of Spotify is one of the lesser equitable ways to pay artists. Your intent is good but gatekeeping people to use an inequitable system is not the solution.

> I would much rather someone use this tool and buy a ticket to a show or an LP that stream over Spotify.

Sure! But at the end of the day, most of the people doing this will listen to hundreds of artists who they don't purchase tickets from, or buy their music directly.

The fact that royalty payment are so low is sad. But if you use this tool, you're lowering them even further to $0.00

Post reply on HN