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

Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

thefader.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 861 posts

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#741

Post by AniseAbyss »

jimbokun wrote: post #325
quattrofan wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why most is utter dross. People still buy millions of classic albums from the 70's and 80's, in 30 years time very few artists will have that same comfort.

> People still buy millions of classic albums from the 70's and 80's, in 30 years time very few artists will have that same comfort. We are only listening to the best stuff from the 70s and 80s, and in 30 years people will only listen to the best stuff from today. Now, I think a major difference will be the "best" music people will be listening to will be very different from each other. 30+ years ago the popular musi…

Also don't forget that what you saw at MTV and your local record store was heavily manipulated by the big music labels.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#742

Post by Ma8ee »

ksec wrote: post #738
ganfortran wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Taylor Swift releases the full new Album on youtube the first day, which is unthinkable even 5 years ago. I think the industry already accept it is the way forward.

>I think the industry already accept it is the way forward. Yes but this sort of makes me question, if it is on Youtube for free, why are we paying for it on Spotify and Apple Music?

Because on YouTube we pay for it with time and attention to ads. Most people on HN have much more money that time and attention to spend.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#744

Post by wwweston »

lmm wrote: post #693
sukilot wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is silly. If you want to support an artist, give them money.

So set up an organised way for me to do that, e.g. Patreon. Some artists already do.

This is crazy but we used to have this scheme where you actually just paid them for access to the recording. Weird, right?

Then we Spotifyd and that was the end of that and people got a new hobby coming up with justifications for why it's good that we replaced a revenue source for musicians with ... maybe giving them money? Or maybe having them run a T-shirt business?

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#745

Post by mosselman »

enneff wrote: post #714
mosselman wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything mumble rap is a devolution. Add auto-tune to this and you are left with a worthless corpus of shitty rap, hip-hop and also pop music. It is samey, because everybody does the same thing. You can’t really differentiate music by different performers anymore. Each song is the same. There used to be a cost to producing music; you needed a studio, producer, physical copies of the samples you wanted to use (in c…

You’re just saying the same things older people have been saying about new music since time immemorial.

Perhaps, yet: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/opinion/what-these-grammy...

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#746

Post by sefrost »

swinglock wrote: post #719
whiddershins wrote: post #628

The way in which Spotify (and other streaming services) hurts the development of music isn’t what most people say. The problem with per-stream plays is that it is based on pop music logic: more streams equals more money. Fair! But many recording artists made a modest living by releasing music that you might not want to listen to over and over and over. This music is often labeled ‘art’ or ‘experimental’ or whatever,…

They could stop paying out flat per listen. If I pay $10 and listen to 50 tracks, I want $10 (minus the provides fee) to be split among precisely those 50 tracks. The difference is if you only listed to 50 tracks your listens are worth more that someone that diluted their listens over 5000. Throwing everyone's fees into one big vat and dividing that according to the total listens, is bullshit. I want my favorite arti…

It would be very interesting to see which artists would win/lose from this scenario.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#747

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

dahfizz wrote: post #640
chrisseaton wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> selling CD's/BluRays's, collectible box-sets, stickers, pins Hmmm... it's a shame they're trying to sell stuff like this. I want to support artists but the last thing I want is junk.

> But the most someone like you can do for an average band/performer is promote their art through any channels available. I feel like you missed OPs main point.

Could you elaborate?

If you're talking about 'capturing revenue' then there's a direct link between more attention and more money a band can get.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#749

Post by npteljes »

hedora wrote: post #656
shakezula wrote: post #4

I used to work in the music industry professionally, on the ground level doing booking and management. This trend has been happening slowly for nearly a decade but it’s finally here. Rap and Hip Hop figured out a long time before most other genres that rapid small releases was a far better way to keep hype and sales up. Before Spotify was a thing, the shift was happening with YouTube but it wasn’t as predominant. Now…

I prefer to listen to bands that produce an excellent album every few years, vs a pile of sameness every three months. Examples: “Boy Meets Robot”, “Unwoman”, “The Darkest of the Hillside Thickets”, “Goldfrapp”, much of what is featured on “Dark Compass”. Where do people go for music like this? Bandcamp? Other places?

Services with recommendation algorithms can help. Mixcloud can be good, because it features longer mixes that often contain similar music, collected by someone who knows their stuff. You can also check the associated label's other artists, smaller labels often organize around a similar mood or style. I check the people my favorites collaborate with.

Re: Spotify CEO: musicians can no longer release music only “once every 3-4 years”

#750

Post by Traster »

swinglock wrote: post #719
whiddershins wrote: post #628

The way in which Spotify (and other streaming services) hurts the development of music isn’t what most people say. The problem with per-stream plays is that it is based on pop music logic: more streams equals more money. Fair! But many recording artists made a modest living by releasing music that you might not want to listen to over and over and over. This music is often labeled ‘art’ or ‘experimental’ or whatever,…

They could stop paying out flat per listen. If I pay $10 and listen to 50 tracks, I want $10 (minus the provides fee) to be split among precisely those 50 tracks. The difference is if you only listed to 50 tracks your listens are worth more that someone that diluted their listens over 5000. Throwing everyone's fees into one big vat and dividing that according to the total listens, is bullshit. I want my favorite arti…

That doesn't take into account the spotify cut. What would you propose? Right now spotify pays a certain amount per song played, and covers this cost by charging $10 of whatever, and hoping the average user doesn't listen to more than song_cost*songs_listened. In your scenario, suddenly spotify's business risk has been transferred over to the artists themselves - if your songs get listened to by people who listen to a lot of music, you're going to get paid less per listen.
Post reply on HN