Spotify

Spotify was mentioned in another thread. Instead of hijacking that thread, I thought I’d start a new one. Everyone seems to have a negative view of Spotify. I gotta say, we LOVE it. We have a family account so each of us can have our own individual liked artists, our own playlists, etc. 

I use Spotify a lot. It has saved me countless money because I can listen to artists and albums without ever having to purchase it all. I still purchase the material I really love, but I listen to a lot of music a few times and then move on, glad to not have spent cash to buy the music. 

Spotify lets me download the music so I can listen to it offline. 

Lastly, I have access to a ton of music that I already own, so I can make playlists out of stuff that I both have and don’t have. 

We love Spotify!

I am a huge fan of Spotify, for many different reasons.
I sort of get why people here can be against it, but we all have our own convictions about how we live our life and spend our money.  P.S. I'm not talking about the perspective of a band, that's a different set of circumstances - just the perspective of a listener/music fan.

One thing I do NOT get though is why some people refuse to go there (or You Tube, etc.) to see if they even like an album.  They'd rather spend the money blindly, sometimes ending up with a bum album.   To me that's odd, as I would have loved to have these types of services years ago, just to check things out before plunking down cash.  The only thing we had back in the day was tape trading, borrowing an album, hanging out and listening to someone's collection, and eventually we had the headphone / demo cassette tape thing.   So to me, services like Spotify, You Tube, or Amazon Music are amazing.

Totally agree FOJ and for all the reasons you listed.

Not a fan, but most of my friends love it. As someone who at one time had an ambition to be a professional musician, I like to spend money to support artists. 

As far as “blind buys,” I’ve discovered great albums that way. Sure, I’ve gotten some turkeys, but I’ve also found that if I pay for an album, I will give it time to grow on me. Sometimes it doesn’t, but if I’m just gonna stream it, I’m probably gonna go solely on my first impression—which might be incorrect.

Real life example. Tourniquet is my favorite metal band and has been for years. The first 2 albums I heard from them were Microscopic and Pathogenic. I bought both and on my first listen or two was not impressed. But I had bought them. So I took them in my car with me and listened to them a few more times. Today they’re two of my favorite albums. If I had only streamed them I would’ve probably thought, “not for me,” and moved on. 

I don’t have a negative view of Spotify users, but I do have a negative view of Spotify.

EDIT: I do stream music nowadays, although I also buy a lot of music.

I use Spotify too, but I prefer Youtube Music. It's similar to Spotify, but you get unlimited skips (even with the free version), and you can upload youtube videos to playlists.

Of course people love getting everything for free, until they lament the current state of the industry.

I use spotify but no so often, most of the time to listen playlist and search for new music or listen the new albums for my fav bands. 

But also i still buying CD or Digital music.

Temple of Blood wrote:Of course people love getting everything for free, until they lament the current state of the industry.

First, I pay for Spotify. It’s not free. Second, bands are free not to have their content posted there. For example, the new Flood album is not on Spotify. After hearing samples, I purchased it. And I love it enough that I probably would’ve purchased it after listening to it on Spotify anyway. But Spotify is not to blame for the current state of the music industry. They did that to themselves.

Yes, bands ruin themselves. Should we help them?

You pay for spotify sure ... But youre getting a ton more value than you paid for.  If i pay 10 dillars a month for apartment rent have i truly paid fair market value?

- there are an awful lot of bands that put their stuff
on bandcamp for "name your price" or, essentially free,
because they have to know most people will download
for free...

- if a landlord wants to charge 10 dollars/month
then what would be the problem?

I do get that that is not normal but probably
exists somewhere. kind of the opposite of "something
is worth what somebody is willing to pay"...

- isn't "market value" determined by what the seller
wants and/or what the buyer will pay?

1. As i said before bands do it to themselves

2. Its unsustainable, therefore it is ensuring a bleak future for the scene

3. Yes.  I bet these bands music would make a lot more than fractions of a penny per song play if they removed them from streaming.

I use Spotify (free version with ads) only to check out a new album and see if I want to purchase it.  It can be good for that (as well as Youtube).  And yes, half I albums I check out on Spotify I pass on buying (and never listen to them again).  But anything I want to listen to repeatedly I will certain purchase.

Fair market value is what the buyer will pay. I've heard for 20 years how the internet is killing music yet there are more bands then ever.

Are they better bands though?

friend of mine texted me this:




A friend of mine was talking to his friend’s son who said his favorite band was 21 Pilots. He asked him how many of their albums he bought. The kid replied that he didn’t own any - he listened through Spotify. My friend replied, “I don’t like your favorite band and yet you and I both spend the same amount of money supporting them.”




I know everyone here doesn’t do this, because you buy stuff from your favorite bands. But this is what streaming is doing to the industry and the artists within it (just replace 21 Pilots with whomever you like).


EDIT: I do stream music nowadays, although I do still buy a lot of music.

Do u really think christian metal bands can tour and make up for lost album revenue like veteran sevular bands do?

Albums are no longer creative statements, they are just advertisers for tours.

Temple of Blood wrote: As i said before bands do it to themselves

your right, you've said that a million times...
I think I had some how taken it as you "blaming" the
spotify listeners...

Some are better. Bands are figuring out how to stay alive, whether through crowdfunding, selling merch etc. Basically we're back to listening to singles which is how music used to sell, you have to flex with the times.

I can think of very few longrunning bands that are better these days ...

Or new bands better than the older ones pre-streaming.

Name any long running band that was better later on even before streaming. You are chasing windmills, adapt or die.

Who is arguing against adapting?

There are many many ways to make music differently than it was made in the 80s and 90s without giving every single song you write away for free.

It also begs the question why someone would want to get with the times when these times are demonstrably worse.  If one is looking for a simple unnuanced slogan to shout at people a better one is "go back to the approaches that actually worked well".

So to spell it out, im saying take the best of the old and new.

That doesnt include making disposable forgettable albums that are just promos for tours.

Black Rider wrote:Name any long running band that was better later on even before streaming.

Sure.  Judas priest, megadeth, and exodus made some of their best albums way past their first 4 when they were in their 40s+.

Not sure what point specifuc examples make about the scene in general though.

The old guard is worse than ever.
The new guard who should be replacing them is even worse than they are.
There is less incentive than ever to do what it takes to write a great album or even a great song. There is more incentive to just tour no matter who is in the band because you cant make money on albums and can only make money through tours and merch.

If you think this hasnt affected album quality then i dont know what to say to you.

A single paying customer (at least for me, and I would guess many other indie bands as well) is equal to approximately 13,095 streams.

showing my work:
Let's just say that an artist make $2 profit per release, which I think is a fair generalization for different sales through your webstore, Bandcamp, or sales to distros.

Spotify pays on average $0.003526648542 per stream.
https://homestudioideas.com/how-much-does-spotify-pay-artists/

However I see from my CDBaby/Spotify receipts that I only got $0.00015272 per stream (at least for one particular song, other songs have different values)  in 2021.  I'd be curious from you other folks in bands what your rate is.