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

Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

djmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 425 posts

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#271

Post by smallerfish »

whstl wrote: post #89
SSLy wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I though labels job was to prevent content like that

Spotify allows people to self publish. Not to mention people can set up labels themselves, it's just a company like any other. I'm sure we don't want big labels being gatekeepers. They have their own set of problems, and make streaming even more difficult for everyone but very large artists/groups (and sometimes even for those, as they eat a big chunk of royalties).

Spotify does not allow you to self publish. However, you can pay a distributer like DistroKid an annual fee in order to upload to the platform (and all other majors).

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#272

Post by hashtag-til »

altacc wrote: post #248
poszlem wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Or your AI radar needs calibrating ;) A lot of generative content is becoming hard to differentiate from human created content and it's also becoming common to see people like yourself assign false positives. I think it's good to be skeptical but as a skeptic myself I know there's downsides to considering everything suspiciously. Unfortunately I don't think we'll ever find a good solution for wanting to know if what…

This comment didn't age well :)

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#273

Post by magicalhippo »

whstl wrote: post #68
atoav wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am in a small and new band. In 2023 we earned roughly 500 Euros via Bandcamp (digital, physical and merch) 300 Euros selling merch on gigs 2000 Euros playing gigs 20 Cents on Spotify There is no monetary reason to be on spotify, the only reason we are on there is because fans asked.

Similar experiences (but from a few years ago). Even people who have Spotify end up buying stuff in Bandcamp, anyway. I never had merch but had CDs, and sometimes people would buy two physical copies, one to gift. For me there was never any difference between Spotify and piracy.

I use Spotify because my SO wants it for podcasts and stuff and family subscription is just tad more, and it's in my car and similar which is convenient.

I also buy the music I listen to a fair bit on Bandcamp or at concerts.

As an example, last fall a song from a band came up in the randomized post-album "radio" on Spotify as I was driving, and I added the band to my favorites. A month ago Spotify notified me the band was playing in town, so I went and ended up buying several CDs, including from the warmup band as well.

That said, I agree that Spotify should pay more to small artists. I really dislike that my money goes to Talor Swift and similar artists who have more than enough and that neither I nor my SO listen to.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#274

Post by alcover »

poszlem wrote: post #231
Manheim wrote: post #216

Paying a nominal amount for each stream is one matter; however, compensating nothing for smaller quantities while you pay for larger amounts presents a fundamentally different issue. This scenario is akin to an author not receiving royalties for the first 1,000 books sold in a bookstore, or a manufacturer not being paid for the first 1,000 candy bars sold at a grocery store. Such practices can be equated with theft.…

[flagged]

  > Has anyone else noticed that?
No, and I think you're gifted with good pattern recognition!

Now models could be trained adversarially against this GPTZero and you'd have a harder time..

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#275

Post by whatisyour »

poszlem wrote: post #231
Manheim wrote: post #216

Paying a nominal amount for each stream is one matter; however, compensating nothing for smaller quantities while you pay for larger amounts presents a fundamentally different issue. This scenario is akin to an author not receiving royalties for the first 1,000 books sold in a bookstore, or a manufacturer not being paid for the first 1,000 candy bars sold at a grocery store. Such practices can be equated with theft.…

[flagged]

And nothing is wrong about that in my opinion. As long as the point they are making is cogent, better use of English is just better for the whole environment.

Also, I use akin and perplexing quite often in my text. The semicolon much more rarely however. But when I write professional text, then yes, I use semicolons too.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#276

Post by hombre_fatal »

Manheim wrote: post #243
poszlem wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

true, I first wrote it in my own words, and then I used gpt to improve the English since I'm not English language native. So well spotted. However, what would you/ people prefer, lesser formulations, or precise GPT? Of course, I should improve my English skills. I'm always working on that. Here is the work process: https://chat.openai.com/share/648d0c85-9661-4096-afcc-f92779...

You can avoid this kind of moment by telling the LLM to write in a certain less formal style rather than using its “default voice”.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#277

Post by piva00 »

Manheim wrote: post #243
poszlem wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

true, I first wrote it in my own words, and then I used gpt to improve the English since I'm not English language native. So well spotted. However, what would you/ people prefer, lesser formulations, or precise GPT? Of course, I should improve my English skills. I'm always working on that. Here is the work process: https://chat.openai.com/share/648d0c85-9661-4096-afcc-f92779...

Personally I'd prefer your own words with GPT tasked to just correct grammar instead of rephrasing it. The GPT-generated rephrasing sounds very off to me due to the formality it introduced in your tone, it flourishes the comment to sound "proper" in a formal tone but completely misses the informal aspect of a comments' section.

I'm not a native speaker either, sometimes I re-read some of my own comments and realise I could have phrased them much better, corrected some grammar but I prefer that they sound like me.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#278

Post by coldtea »

snailmailman wrote: post #11

I don’t know much about how music licensing works. But would this cause smaller musicians to decide to pull their stuff off Spotify? I listen to a lot of music on Spotify. And some of it is from smaller indie artists. Not a huge amount, but I’ve definitely listened to songs that are in that It surprises me how much of my Spotify library is no longer available. There’s at least a few dozen songs in my Spotify library…

>I don’t know much about how music licensing works. But would this cause smaller musicians to decide to pull their stuff off Spotify?

It might, but then there's this:

(1) they're not making money already anyway (they'd be getting like $3 for 1000 streams before)

(2) that's were the listeners are (not the listeners they have, since they don't have many to begin with, but the ones they wish to attract)

(3) most of such a low number as 1000 streams are usually themselves, band members, friends, and family, plus whoever they sent a link to and gave it a short listen before moving on.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#279

Post by Manheim »

hashtag-til wrote: post #269
Manheim wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

true, I first wrote it in my own words, and then I used gpt to improve the English since I'm not English language native. So well spotted. However, what would you/ people prefer, lesser formulations, or precise GPT? Of course, I should improve my English skills. I'm always working on that. Here is the work process: https://chat.openai.com/share/648d0c85-9661-4096-afcc-f92779...

The original text is fine. No need to manicure it via gpt. Who are you trying to please?

It's not who, but what. I just want to be presise. I found the improved comment to be better than my original text, and closer to how I would've formulated myself in my native language.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#280

Post by ergonaught »

poszlem wrote: post #231
Manheim wrote: post #216

Paying a nominal amount for each stream is one matter; however, compensating nothing for smaller quantities while you pay for larger amounts presents a fundamentally different issue. This scenario is akin to an author not receiving royalties for the first 1,000 books sold in a bookstore, or a manufacturer not being paid for the first 1,000 candy bars sold at a grocery store. Such practices can be equated with theft.…

[flagged]

I use "akin"; I use semicolons; I find your take perplexing, insulting, and depressing. That remains true despite the commenter actually using LLM to polish the language.
Post reply on HN