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

How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

gamechops.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 237 posts

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#201

Post by izacus »

dhosek wrote: post #138
izacus wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd still like to hear how is that exactly different or worse than the old "publisher" model, where everything is gatekept by publishing megacorporations and they decided what the taste of the decade was. And by "they", it was a few executives in those corporations - it was never a meritocracy and those people never cared about music they peddled either. So what exactly did it change here except the fact that now we'…

Umm, gonna hard disagree. At least before the consolidation of media (whether publishers or record labels), the people who ran publishing houses and record labels did it because they loved books or music as appropriate. Publishing was never a big money maker and book and record stores fall into a weird part of capitalism where they don’t make a lot of money and they have a much larger number of distinct products than…

There isn't a single story of a successful band that wouldn't hinge on having a big publisher exec approve them and work with them to change their music for acceptance. I think you're heavily rewriting history here.

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#203

Post by mrgoldenbrown »

dingnuts wrote: post #115
Gud wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't disagree more. Most radio stations only played the most blandest junk music, even from great artists. Seems they would rotate the top 3 songs even from the absolute most popular musicians. I must have heard Fear of the Dark by Iron Maiden >500 times on the rock stations in Stockholm. The Prowler? 0. Maybe some 3am DJ could play some cool songs on occasion, like you said. There was always very little variet…

yeah it's a hilarious complaint seeing as most radio stations have been a playlist on shuffle with algorithmically determined tracks and no real DJ for over twenty years. It's not different at all from most terrestrial radio. (shout-out to KEXP and KUTX for bucking the trend)

Some of us on HN are old enough to have grown up on radio more than 20 years ago. It's not ancient history, it's within our lifetime. We experienced the consolidation and genericization you are complaining about personally as we saw our favorite local stations get ruined.

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#204

Post by dhosek »

izacus wrote: post #201
dhosek wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Umm, gonna hard disagree. At least before the consolidation of media (whether publishers or record labels), the people who ran publishing houses and record labels did it because they loved books or music as appropriate. Publishing was never a big money maker and book and record stores fall into a weird part of capitalism where they don’t make a lot of money and they have a much larger number of distinct products than…

There isn't a single story of a successful band that wouldn't hinge on having a big publisher exec approve them and work with them to change their music for acceptance. I think you're heavily rewriting history here.

Off the top of my head, how about the Beatles?

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#206

Post by butlike »

Gud wrote: post #109
bane wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "post-radio" world is a weird one. An algorithm selecting songs for streaming audio just isn't the same as the kind of curated-for-genre/channel experience that radio used to provide. Sure songs would get overplayed, but radio also did a pretty good job of keeping that absolute tripe off the air. Good radio stations would also surface good local bands and cater to regional tastes. As much as I love the fact that…

I couldn't disagree more. Most radio stations only played the most blandest junk music, even from great artists. Seems they would rotate the top 3 songs even from the absolute most popular musicians. I must have heard Fear of the Dark by Iron Maiden >500 times on the rock stations in Stockholm. The Prowler? 0. Maybe some 3am DJ could play some cool songs on occasion, like you said. There was always very little variet…

Primetime was very different than late night

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#207

Post by piltdownman »

bane wrote: post #101
nluken wrote: post #60

I would highly recommend that folks read Liz Pelly's Mood Machine , which is referenced here via the Harper's excerpt, not just because it shows artists' perspectives on the long tail model that tech pitched to them, but because it can be read as an indictment of the platform model that increasingly dictates how we engage with art and society at large. Pelly's account really gets to the heart of the problem: these pl…

The "post-radio" world is a weird one. An algorithm selecting songs for streaming audio just isn't the same as the kind of curated-for-genre/channel experience that radio used to provide. Sure songs would get overplayed, but radio also did a pretty good job of keeping that absolute tripe off the air. Good radio stations would also surface good local bands and cater to regional tastes. As much as I love the fact that…

>but radio also did a pretty good job of keeping that absolute tripe off the air. Good radio stations would also surface good local bands and cater to regional tastes.

If ever there was a more censorious medium, I have yet to see it. Not only content dictating _what_ could be played, it dictated _how_ it could be played. This wasn't just about contemporary HipHop and vulgarity - even instrumental songs like Nick Wrays' 1958 song "Rumble" were banned from radio play.

The list of songs banned by the BBC is a fantastic read

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_songs_banned_by_the_BB...

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#208

Post by touristtam »

bane wrote: post #101
nluken wrote: post #60

I would highly recommend that folks read Liz Pelly's Mood Machine , which is referenced here via the Harper's excerpt, not just because it shows artists' perspectives on the long tail model that tech pitched to them, but because it can be read as an indictment of the platform model that increasingly dictates how we engage with art and society at large. Pelly's account really gets to the heart of the problem: these pl…

The "post-radio" world is a weird one. An algorithm selecting songs for streaming audio just isn't the same as the kind of curated-for-genre/channel experience that radio used to provide. Sure songs would get overplayed, but radio also did a pretty good job of keeping that absolute tripe off the air. Good radio stations would also surface good local bands and cater to regional tastes. As much as I love the fact that…

Internet radio still exists like actual radio streaming online and online only radio (such as radio paradise). With the latter you often can find community around then, voting on what comes next and the financement model are very varied. I know I rather spent the equivalent of a Spotify subscription as donation to independent radio instead of suffering the crass absurdity of an algorithm ala Facebook.

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#209

Post by Philpax »

yapyap wrote: post #147
itsoktocry wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I trying to figure out where the author got this from? I laughed at this too. Oh yeah, back in 2005 there was no way to get good sound from that dusty old equipment. I mean, some of the best sounding albums of all time are 50+ years old.

> I mean, some of the best sounding albums of all time are 50+ years old That is.. arguable

The Dark Side of the Moon will be 52 years old next month.

Re: How Spotify Killed Lo-Fi Hip Hop

#210

Post by izacus »

dhosek wrote: post #204
izacus wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a single story of a successful band that wouldn't hinge on having a big publisher exec approve them and work with them to change their music for acceptance. I think you're heavily rewriting history here.

Off the top of my head, how about the Beatles?

What about them? One of their biggest early issues was EMI as a publisher not doing enough to promote their songs. Sounds familiar?
Post reply on HN