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

Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

digitalmusicnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#71

Post by egbert »

GotAnyMegadeth wrote: post #68
egbert wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I created something like that: http://musiclove.rs You hook up your last.fm profile and each week you get to divide an x amount of money between the artists you listened to. I've been using it myself for about a year now. The only catch is that you need to find the email addresses of artists you want to pay to yourself, so they can be paid with PayPal. This 'catch' allowed me to use it as single user for a year thoug…

This is brilliant. I've been thinking about making this for a while. If I add a band's email address, would that then be available to other people who listen to the same artist? How would you stop wrongly donating to artists with the same name?

Thanks!

Artists' email addresses aren't shared right now (bc then it would be easy to pollute with wrong addresses). So this also answers your second question (Unless someone listens to two bands with the same name). It remembers for your own account though, so you don't have to fill out the same address twice.

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#72

Post by netcan »

Technology giveth, technology..

I think a great analogy is/was the porn industry. Every time a new technology made it big, the industry was turned upside down. Ferraris bought by new guys. Ferraris repossessed for others. Home VCRs created an industry that dwarfed adult cinemas. Selling DVDs over the internet was even better until streaming/download video killed that model. The porn industry collapsed and immediately started trying building a new economy on newer technology. How about interactive and realtime? Can that work? If it can, they'll figure it out pretty quick.

No one takes an indignant pornographer seriously so the industry doesn't spend much energy being indignant. It just grows and shrinks as it can or has to.

Thom and Nigel are great artists. I'm glad they're out there making music. But I'm a little turned off by the tone of their comments (now and at other times) it all rings of a feeling that the world owes them or (more often than not) younger artists a certain business model.

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#74

Post by throwawaykf »

jmduke wrote: post #3

For reference: Radiohead's pay-what-you-want model for In Rainbows was the first of its kind, and groundbreaking. It's entirely possible this starts a trend. On the other end: I don't like the idea of new artists not getting paid (I try to go out of my way and buy tickets for indie musicians I like or, failing that, purchase swag), but as a consumer I like Spotify a lot. It's also hard for me to conflate the ideas th…

> For reference: Radiohead's pay-what-you-want model for In Rainbows was the first of its kind, and groundbreaking. It's entirely possible this starts a trend.

Don't count on it:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/4/4054634/musics-pay-what-you...

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#75

Post by clicks »

anigbrowl wrote: post #57
balbaugh wrote: post #2

This is only for Thom Yorke solo tunes, Atoms for Peace music from Thom and Nigel, and Nigel's side project Ultraista. The two make the argument that new music is hurt in the Spotify revenue equation. With the large stake of Spotify that is owned by the Majors and other large corporate entities such as Coca-Cola, it would be interesting if the 'independent labels' were to come out with some sort of streaming service…

This is only for Thom Yorke solo tunes, Atoms for Peace music from Thom and Nigel, and Nigel's side project Ultraista. The two make the argument that new music is hurt in the Spotify revenue equation. Dear Thom, I wish you had thought about this after you got very rich but before you decided that that made it a good idea of give away music for free. When lack of access to a reliable revenue model makes it difficult f…

Did you read the article?

Thom and Nigel seem to be lamenting new bands' inability to bring in money, they're not grieving about how they themselves don't make enough through Spotify.

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#76

Post by Nursie »

tzs wrote: post #17
josteink wrote: post #4

I wonder if artists who withdraw their music from services like this because they don't make "enough money" from them, realize they are getting paid again and again for me listening to albums I've already bought. You may not be getting paid in buckets and buckets of cash, but what you're getting is really just a freebie. You cannot complain about getting free money. If enough artists do this, services like Spotify wi…

> I wonder if artists who withdraw their music from services like this because they don't make "enough money" from them, realize they are getting paid again and again for me listening to albums I've already bought I wonder how common that is? At least 90% of the things I listen to on Spotify are things that I have not bought on vinyl, CD, or any non-streaming online format.

I think I'm about 70:30 stuff I already own to new stuff. Possibly even 80:20.

This is probably because I have a huge music collection already, and I'm in my 30s and don't like you kids and your darned modern music so much any more. Music was so much better in my day, mumble mumble, get off my lawn etc etc.

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#77

Post by JacobAldridge »

NamTaf wrote: post #30
JacobAldridge wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always used swag to mean 'stuff' or 'gear', based on the Australian "swag-man" who carried all his belongings in a swag (prototypical backpack). Here the word also sometimes specifically refers to a light sleeping mattress that formed part of a swaggies essential kit. So for me, the #yolo application of swag to mean "has his shit together man" derived as a metaphorical application of the literal "has his gear to…

I understood the #yolo version of 'swag' as being a contraction of 'swagger'. The sort of ballsy, narcissistic, uncaring persona that a a rock star or Jack Sparrow might have, for example.

That makes more sense to me - thanks!

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#78

Post by uniclaude »

egbert wrote: post #19
jmduke wrote: post #3

For reference: Radiohead's pay-what-you-want model for In Rainbows was the first of its kind, and groundbreaking. It's entirely possible this starts a trend. On the other end: I don't like the idea of new artists not getting paid (I try to go out of my way and buy tickets for indie musicians I like or, failing that, purchase swag), but as a consumer I like Spotify a lot. It's also hard for me to conflate the ideas th…

I created something like that: http://musiclove.rs You hook up your last.fm profile and each week you get to divide an x amount of money between the artists you listened to. I've been using it myself for about a year now. The only catch is that you need to find the email addresses of artists you want to pay to yourself, so they can be paid with PayPal. This 'catch' allowed me to use it as single user for a year thoug…

That hurts somewhere to say this, but I've been thinking about this subject, and that's better that the idea I had. I'm going to use this, and this will get me back on Last.fm, which I kind of abandoned.

That gittip suggestion down there is also great. I'm in touch with a bunch of artists who would totally love that.

Please keep building this.

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#79

Post by jonikanerva »

jmduke wrote: post #3

For reference: Radiohead's pay-what-you-want model for In Rainbows was the first of its kind, and groundbreaking. It's entirely possible this starts a trend. On the other end: I don't like the idea of new artists not getting paid (I try to go out of my way and buy tickets for indie musicians I like or, failing that, purchase swag), but as a consumer I like Spotify a lot. It's also hard for me to conflate the ideas th…

> A Flattr-esque system for music. You pay $XX/mo, can listen to whatever, and your money gets divvied up to artists based on play count. (if half of my play count in July comes from Blind Pilot, for instance, then they get half my money.)

This is exactly what I would love. ~30% of my monthly fee to Spotify for running the service, the rest divided to the artist I listen to.

But do you think this is up to Spotify? Could Spotify force these terms to the record companies? I always thought this kind of stuff in the contracts that artists make with the big record labels; "We own your music, we pay you as we please".

Re: Radiohead's Thom Yorke and Nigel Godrich Are Removing Their Music from Spotify

#80

Post by toble »

stdbrouw wrote: post #21
forrestthewoods wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$10/month for infinite access to all music ever created just isn't reasonable. And the ad revenue from a majority free user base for infinite access to all music ever created is definitely unreasonable. It's hard to argue with th connivence factor. However right now Spotify is destroying an existing model, not paying artists, and losing money hand over fist. It's lose/lose/lose. I'd rather consumers just pirate the m…

Then how unreasonable is $0/month for radio? I'm happy there's people who can look at services like Spotify and Rdio critically, but I don't think appeals to intuition like "that can't be right?!" help us much.

Radio is like an ad service for the music industry, where you listen to demo tracks and hopefully buy the full album. Rdio and Spotify give you full access to the end product for virtually nothing. It has totally screwed up the perceived value of albums.
Post reply on HN