621–630 of 751 posts
For comparison, as an artist, I made 90 Euros on Bandcamp in December and 0.08 Eurocent on all other streaming platforms together! :-D
Funny to see this right now. Spotify's promotion of AI music bothered me so much that it has actually pushed me to Bandcamp and the practice of buying music again. It's really fun to build a collection knowing you're supporting the artists, download FLAC files, organize your little "collection" page ... Feels like a renaissance in my relationship with music, the most fun I've had since what.cd. Anyway, love this stan…
Bandcamp continues to be the best place to organically discover new artists. If I'm ever bored I go to their front page and browse by genre. It feels like the digital version of Sam Goody or whichever 90s record store had the headphone kiosks where you could listen to songs before buying the record. Spotify, on the other hand, induced a level of visceral disgust I'd never felt before when I stumbled across an AI-gene…
But I absolutely don't agree that Bandcamp does recommendations well. To me, it seems like they don't personalize at all. Maybe you're just lucky enough to share the taste of the (at least human) taste makers at Bandcamp. Spotify's pre-enshittification Discover Weekly was miles better than whatever they do. My experience with old brick and mortar record stores was that at best they stocked a little of the music I enjoyed, but didn't have a clue about it. Most often they didn't stock it at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bandcamp continues to be the best place to organically discover new artists. If I'm ever bored I go to their front page and browse by genre. It feels like the digital version of Sam Goody or whichever 90s record store had the headphone kiosks where you could listen to songs before buying the record. Spotify, on the other hand, induced a level of visceral disgust I'd never felt before when I stumbled across an AI-gene…
This is not Spotify, it's Spotify fraudsters. It's like being mad at your bank that somebody stole your credit card on the subway and made purchases with it.
But guess what, they fired Glenn and now the slop runs wild.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify failed and continues to fail to verify the provenance of the music on their platform. They also routinely allow bedroom EDM and trap producers to associate their releases with older artists just because they have the same name. If they have hundreds of millions of dollars to sign podcasters to exclusive deals then they certainly have the resources to respond to these egregious cases of misclassification. Unfo…
> Spotify failed and continues to fail to verify the provenance of the music on their platform FWIW, so does BC. Stuff gets eventually deleted, but last year there was a leaked pirated copy of an album for sale for over a week, over a month before release.
It had been there for years and hundreds of people had paid for it.
Irrelevant platform says irrelevant thing. Also let people like or dislike things. Maybe we could pick if we want AI content or not. (it’s a no from me personally ) but I feel like the ban hammer is the tool of petty tyrants and lacks creativity and nuance
I'm really not sure about this. I love art, I'm an avid collector of all sorts of things, and I hate "AI art". I've skipped over multiple suno albums, when something feels vaguely AI-ish I'll dig to see if it's denied/acknowledged anywhere. But I think Bandcamp has some value for being a place where anyone can publish their music. The statement is basically "We're banning AI because we don't like it." I feel like thi…
Also, it's kind of antithetical to the purpose of Bandcamp. As you say, a place where anyone can publish music - but that's true for Spotify et al. these days, too. Bandcamp was always about a more direct connection to the artists, so it makes sense that they want their site to be about actual flesh-and-blood artists who have put sweat into their work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LOL you clearly haven’t checked the flows of million-plus-views ambient music bullshit videos on YouTube
I never said it’s impossible to be successful with slop, i said it still needs work and time investment to be successful
I worry that as technologists we are over indexing on accusing things of being AI. I worry about policies like this where they will remove suspected AI content without investigation. Case in point, the other day I made a comment on reddit. I spent about 10 minutes writing it. I used proper grammar, bullet points, clean formatting, and em dashes, as I've been doing for many years. I immediately got downvoted and sent…
So far I've resisted giving in. Something about "those AI bros can grab my ellipses from my cold, dead typing fingers." But I have already caught myself deliberately leaving in a typo when checking over an e-mail before sending it, thinking it makes it less likely to set off AIdars, which is very strange for a perfectionist like me.
I don't have the solution ready either, but if I had to guess, it would be a return to more heavily moderated, closed communities where people have a reasonable expectation to be interacting with real people. It's not foolproof but maybe more manageable. We had trolls and stupid bots on Usenet and IRC as well, after all, and it kind of worked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Spotify hires session musicians (pre-AI) to pay a flat fee for hours of background music. Spotify doesn't do it because Spotify doesn't produce music and doesn't have direct contracts with musicians. > Since many high volume Spotify users just want “something jazzy” in the background, it helps them reduce royalties. How does it help them reduce royalties when they don't produce their own music and license 100% of t…
You're being unnecesarily pedantic. They might not hire the musicians directly but if they're hiring an agency to do that, it's effetively the same thing. Ultimately they're trying to get generic music for cheap to reduce royalty payments to artists.
1. Spotify doesn't pay artists. Spotify doesn't have direct contracts with artists. Spotify pays rights holder and distributors.
I really wish people who have strong opinions on music industry learned at least the absolute bare minimum about the subject.
2. Again, bringing back to my original comment: where's the evidence for that? E.g. the one and only article everyone links [1] and doesn't bother to understand literally has statements like this:
--- start quote ---
But at the end of the day, [the ghost musician] said, it was still a paycheck: “I did it because I needed a job real bad and the money was better than any money I could make from even successful indie labels, many of which I worked with,” he told me.
...
Epidemic’s selling point is that the music is royalty-free for its own subscribers, but it does collect royalties from streaming services; these it splits with artists fifty-fifty.
--- end quote ---
That doesn't mesh well with the narrative of "Spotify bad, doesn't pay royalties, etc.", does it?
[1] https://harpers.org/archive/2025/01/the-ghosts-in-the-machin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one in these threads ever discusses how you would identify and remove AI-generated music. E.g. how is this worse and needs to be removed: https://youtu.be/L3Uyfnp-jag?si=SL4Jc4qeEXVgUpeC but crap that top pop artists vomit out into the world doesn't
I can think of half a dozen ways to detect AI music in it's current form, btu I'm not sure anyone has actually bothered implementing such a system. Is anyone here aware of one? I might give it a go if not.
Can you give a few examples?
For example, how to detect that the song I linked is AI compared to say, anything Taylor Swift produces, or to any overly produced pop song or an electronic beat.