Recent news revealed that Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek has been investing heavily in military tech companies, which adds another ethical layer to a platform already criticized for how little it pays musicians !
Spotify only pays artists about $3–5 per 1,000 streams, using a pro-rata model that directs most money toward major stars… By contrast, Qobuz (≈$18–20 per 1,000 streams) and Tidal (≈$12–13) pay far more fairly!
However Tidal is far from ethical. Most of its revenue is controlled by private investors and founders and small artists still earn very little…
More fair-minded platforms like Bandcamp, Resonate, Ampled, or SoundCloud’s fan-powered royalties prioritize musicians over investors.
With these more ethical alternatives available, why do we keep using Spotify?
I’m in the phase of my life where if I encounter a new track I like in the wild, I’ll buy it. But I’m not seeking out new stuff because (cracks open a PBR and grows a goatee) everything feels homogenized today.
Perhaps it’s just different use cases. Still, you’re dependent on a company to be able to continue listening to the music you like. That’s worrisome. If a company took away the collection I’ve been building since the '80s, livid wouldn’t begin to explain my reaction.
How do you “encounter” new tracks?
If you’re not actively seeking out new music, it will feel that way, because you’re just listening to whatever is on the radio or on TV or whatever. This is the beauty of streaming platforms. In the past you were only ever exposed to whatever music the record companies decided you should hear. And it was almost exclusively homogenous “pop” music, to some degree. With streaming music you can discover new music every day based on your personal preferences.
OK. Lots of assumptions here. I haven’t listened to the radio since the '90s, and I’ve never paid for cable.
My preferred genres are progressive house and trance, and I got into the rave scene about the time I stopped listening to the radio. I started my collection via fservs on IRC, ratio FTP sites and then Napster and P2P, totally obviating the record labels. I’m subscribed to various music producers on YouTube for when I’m thinking I want something new, and if it makes me cry, off to Beatport I go.
So, like, not to be rude, but you got every assumption wrong.
Zero assumptions here, I just asked a question. You said you were, and I quote, “not seeking out new stuff”.
So you DO enjoy streaming music…
I hope you enjoyed feeling like you had a “gotcha” moment. When on my computer, yeah, I watch some YouTube, but mostly news and late-night monologues. I sure as shit don’t pay for it.
I have no interest in “gotcha moments”. Just having a discussion about the virtues of streaming music platforms vs. buying.
If you don’t pay for it then you are pirating, which is a whole other discussion.
“If you don’t pay for it then you are pirating” is not a discussion, it’s an erroneous blanket statement.
Good thing that’s not the discussion we were having then.
Even while you are being careful, you are still reading things in. He didn’t say he listens to music on YouTube. It might be a safe assumption but that isn’t what was stated. If you’re going to be pedantic, do it right.
LOL your suggestion is that they said they’re subscribed to various producers but they don’t listen to them? Now that’s pedantic.
Being subscribed is not the same as listening. In fact, I use a Firefox add-on to specifically exclude what I’ve categorized as music. It is vanishingly rare that I turn that setting off.
I strongly associate any given track with the mood I was in when I first heard it, and I’ve not been in anywhere near a good mood since the election, so listening to new stuff at this point would give it negative connotations that would forever follow that track around in my mind.
So I stick with “college road trip” or “I just met my (ex-)wife” sorts of stuff. I don’t exercise or anything, and my earbuds are lost somewhere in my van. I rarely listen to music, period, because it reminds me of not being homeless.