this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
1483 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
2962 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

When Bloomberg reported that Spotify would be upping the cost of its premium subscription from $9.99 to $10.99, and including 15 hours of audiobooks per month in the U.S., the change sounded like a win for songwriters and publishers. Higher subscription prices typically equate to a bump in U.S. mechanical royalties — but not this time.

By adding audiobooks into Spotify’s premium tier, the streaming service now claims it qualifies to pay a discounted “bundle” rate to songwriters for premium streams, given Spotify now has to pay licensing for both books and music from the same price tag — which will only be a dollar higher than when music was the only premium offering. Additionally, Spotify will reclassify its duo and family subscription plans as bundles as well.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 194 points 6 months ago (7 children)

Gotta love all my friends who are really into music who happily use Spotify and don’t give a shit it is a weapon of class warfare being used on musicians disguised as a music player!

I basically lost all my drive to make something of my love of creating music seeing how little anyone in my society actually values music or musicians in terms of material support and reward, it is honestly pretty scary how broken music has become.

[–] fpslem@lemmy.world 73 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I really wish there was a better alternative to push my friends to. I do use Bandcamp, so at least I know more of my $$$ are going to the artists and I can take the music with me, but I'm not sure about the platform long-term.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 85 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

As a musician and composer it really took the life out of my identity as a composer seeing an alternative to bandcamp never really form and then one day waking up to it bought by Epic.

I didn’t cry that day, but I might as well have, it made me extraordinarily sad to see that headline and I imagine there are actually countless talented musicians out there who will never actuate on their creative vision because the environment for music production is at this point, downright hostile towards artists and musicians considering the amount of work music production is.

It takes an obscene amount of work to take a song from something that has promise to being as polished as listeners demand nowadays, and listeners won’t even give your song a chance on actual speakers. You have to twist and warp your music so it sounds good on essentially monophonic phone speakers with shitty frequency coverage or otherwise nobody will give it a try on speakers for actually listening to music. Doesn’t matter though, nobody is going to actually support you for the art you make.

🙃

It seems like https://resonate.coop/ is still around tho which seems like a cool idea (a coop owned streaming service where listeners can stream-to-own a song).

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 13 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Not sure if this is exactly good news, but Epic Games doesn’t own it anymore, it was sold to Songtradr.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 22 points 6 months ago (1 children)

the largest music licensing platform in the world

Doesn't sound too good to me. Bandcamp used to be where I could get music from smaller artists who couldn't afford clearing samples (as they weren't making money) and I worry a lot of that will be lost.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 13 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Still is, for now. I run a small vaporwave tape label via Bandcamp. No significant changes under Epic Games or Songtradr that I’ve noticed. That could change, though.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

It will change, I promise you. I am so confident I will literally bet my girlfriend's chihuahua on it.

wikipedia chihuahua

better hope lefties and artists get their shit together you tiny little monster

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 months ago

Everyone on Lemmy and the fediverse as a whole should be aware of this pattern. I just hope something can fill in before it gets too bad.

I'm keeping an eye on Faircamp.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's how it always begins.

But on a more positive note, care to share the label or more about your experience about it? With regards to Bandcamp and more generally.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago

Sure, https://mysticspools.bandcamp.com/

Most of it is pretty fun- find music, reach out to artist, make a few tapes. We just do small runs of 25-100 tapes depending on how much will sell. The worst part IMO is order fulfillment, you either pay a third party a boatload or you DIY and packing 100 cassettes is a bit of a drag. Coming up with good art if the artist doesn’t already have something is quite difficult. The label is on a short hiatus for that reason, but I think we’ll do some more tapes now that some labels have dried up. There’s waxing and waning periods when it comes to these little micro labels, and I can tell people are feeling the economic squeeze.

The most fun part is mastering to tape and dubbing. I’ve got a Nakamichi Dragon and 3x NAD 6300, and I’ve dubbed probably 500-600 tapes across them all. Dunno what it is about tapes, but I really like em.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

🤷‍♂️ not really, none of these corporations are real in any sense that matters other than sucking up actual companies that actually make the world a better place and mining the goodwill out of them until they are cynical, worthless husks that corporations use to fleece consumers into buying products from before they realize their favorite company/brand is dead in everything but name.

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

As bad as Epic is, probably worse…

Even though Bandcamp was profitable the new CEO said this after buying it

the financial state of Bandcamp has not been healthy

So they’re probably looking for any way to cut costs. They fired half of the staff on day 1, including anyone who tried to unionize

[–] SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How about https://qobuz.com ? I've bought some flac files from them.

You can't use Qobuz if you're behind a VPN. It makes me sad because I wanted to try this.

[–] kiku123@feddit.de 3 points 6 months ago

It seems that ampwall.com may come sometime as an alternative to Bandcamp? Time will tell...

[–] jennwiththesea@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I use Napster. I chose it way back when Spotify paid for the Rogan podcast, from a list of platforms that pay artists more. I'm not sure if that's true any longer, but look it up! I've been really happy with their service. (And it's really full circle for me, since I used their original service decades ago.)

ETA I can't vouch for the accuracy of this site, but it says Napster is still one of the top-paying platforms.

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How does this compare to Tidal?

[–] jennwiththesea@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

According to that site, Napster pays more. Here's the info on TIDAL:

[–] CandleTiger@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

Is Pandora any better than Spotify at paying artists?

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I just downloaded Bandcamp, and after searching for my favorite artists, almost none are on the platform aside from 1-2. Did a search on like 20-25. This is why I use Spotify. Maybe if artists started acknowledging Bandcamp as a legitimate alternative to Spotify, then of course I'd listen there. But right now most stuff by my favorite bands are either covers or remixes.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 6 months ago

Chicken and the egg, be the change you want to be, but also I am not absolutist about using Spotify.

I just think Spotify and other streaming services are vehicles of class warfare against musicians that also happen to play music. I understand if you like the playing music part!

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 35 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Soon we'll have AI music generators and most people will be perfectly happy to only ever listen to what those churn out.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I mean, we'll see.

Maybe.

Maybe we will just look back at the period that is rapidly coming to a close as a golden era of music (and video games for that matter) where the tools became sophisticated, affordable and distributed for music production but venture capital hadn't yet destroyed any last vestiges of the monetary value of musician's labor (audio engineer's included) in recording contexts.

Of course, I am sure Spotify and other streaming services are coming around to the value of recorded music being unsustainably low, I mean everybody knows it deep down right? That is why they are going to continue to raise their prices. From the perspective of Spotify, the artists that actually do the work of making Spotify a valuable company aren't in principle excluded from their share of the pie when the line starts to go back up and the company has a chance to reverse some of the belt tightening and sacrifices everybody had to make to keep the lights on.... but every single one of these vapid losers believes deep down in their bones that the rules of the game say that it isn't the responsibility of shareholders or upper management of Spotify to just hand the musicians their fare share of the increasing profits, or even alert them to the fact that profits are in fact increasing in the first place. Musicians are not the customers nor the shareholders of Spotify, they are the commodified, interchangeable contractors that aren't much different than the day laborers who hang out outside of most Home Depots in the US looking for handyman work.

This is like when the English saw that the only crop Irish peasants could afford to grow on the side for subsistence farming to feed their families, potatoes, were getting destroyed by a potato blight, and decided that it would send the wrong message to let those Irish peasants have any of the rest of the crops that Irish farmers were growing to sell to foreign markets to simply pay the English rent for their farms ...... crops that were not significantly impacted by the potato blight because it would make the Irish reliant on handouts and encourage a problematic tendency towards apathy and entitlement stubbornly latent in the Irish population.

🔥 Burn 🔥 It 🔥 Down 🔥
(with love)

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 6 months ago (2 children)

All the streamers suck; plus Spotify definitely sucks the most and it has the most subscribers. So I do my best to support artists I love by buying their albums in some physical form (vinyl if possible because it encourages active listening), t-shirts when I need a t-shirt, fan clubs, etc. It's all I can think to do.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It’s all I can think to do.

I think you thought of a lot of good things to do!

I don’t mean to be overly cynical about people, this is a problem of systems and normalization of things that shouldn’t be normalized primarily, the people are mainly just trying to survive.

sigh

[–] SmackemWittadic@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I say this a lot to people on Lemmy, but everyone here (including you) is honestly so much nicer and more emotionally intelligent than people on other places on the internet

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 3 points 6 months ago

Many of us here might even be toxic in other contexts (I am certainly not perfect at keeping away from being overly negative or argumentative with people), but what matters is which version of someone we invite in the door to our community.

We can invite in any version of people we want, and I agree in general I think the fediverse invites in the better version of people and it is one of the primary reasons I love this weird, loosely connected blob of non-corporate social media.

[–] mihies@kbin.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The thing is, you're buying from their record labels, not directly from artists. And then it depends on their contract how much they actually get. But they are still getting more from it, I guess.

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 6 months ago

It helps when the band runs their own label.

[–] thesmokingman@programming.dev 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Walk me through this.

Before Spotify, I’d buy a record (physical or digital) and listen to that. I pay the artist once. After Spotify, I buy a record and listen to it on Spotify. I pay the artist the normal record price and there’s a long tail from stream payouts (unless they don’t reach the payout threshold).

Before Spotify, if someone heard a song and didn’t buy the record, they didn’t pay the artist. After Spotify, if they still don’t buy a record, the artist now earns from stream payouts.

Finally, before Spotify, if someone bought a record but stopped buying after Spotify, the artist loses that record purchase. This is definitely bad. Was Spotify the real reason? Would something other than Spotify have pulled them away? What levels of fame are materially affected by this?

Do artists have to pay to be on Spotify? Is that the issue?

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

the artist now earns from stream payouts.

Do artists have to pay to be on Spotify? Is that the issue?

The issue is that artists don't make any actual money on Spotify, they are being forced to put their music on Spotify because that is where you have to put your stuff if you want to be a successful recording musician.

Meanwhile a couple of years ago the Spotify ceo said in defense of completely destroying any semblance of money making from recording music:

“There is a narrative fallacy here, combined with the fact that, obviously, some artists that used to do well in the past may not do well in this future landscape, where you can’t record music once every three to four years and think that’s going to be enough,” said Ek.

https://www.reddit.com/r/musicmarketing/comments/mlemlh/why_youre_9998_likely_to_never_make_real_money/

Streaming is great, but the structural evisceration of musicians and the value of labor in composing and producing is basically negative at this point given the huge amount of time that must go into a track to get it 100% there and ready for listeners.

[–] thesmokingman@programming.dev 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The thread you linked says what I said.

I’ve been doing DIY music since I was a kid. The vast majority of bands are never going to make any money ever. Spotify didn’t change that. Streaming didn’t cause that. The reality of every kid with a guitar thinking music is about making money not having fun is what did that.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How much do they really care? I'm not usually a quality snob, especially since I frequently use gear of varying quality making it moot, but wouldn't most people who are really into music at least consider the competition that offers higher quality files at similar if not the same price?

Or are they the type to only have local FLAC with their DAC? Because I like my collection but streaming is still worth the convenience for jumping into a new album.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Edit: I didn't really make it clear, my interest in services like Bandcamp wasn't higher quality music, it was that it was run by at least a relatively benign company that seemed to treat artists like actual human beings who artistic labor was inherently valuable. I would buy craft beer/cider/meader even if Budweiser or Coors Light was actually better quality beer, what I care about at the end of the day is my money going to someone or something good

I have spent a lotttt of time messing around with music production and learning what is pseudo-science (a whole fuckton of it) and what is real science. In all of the ABx testing I have done, read about, and seen demonstrated in person myself a quality MP3 with a decent bitrate encoding (idk 128kps or so?) using a decent algorithm and hell even a sampling rate of 41khz will produce an audio recording that when played back on a hifi audio system and level matched (EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, it is well known in mastering and mixing that a louder mix always sounds better at first glance) is indistinguishable from the source .wav file to the human ear (I don't care how super human you claim your ear is).

People make this silly mistake of thinking that digitization introduces these sharp staircase edges into audio waveforms, which is actually kind of a hilarious misconception (which I completely understand, not trying to insult people's intelligence) because the entire idea of converting a waveform (an analog non-bandwith limited phenomena) into a bandwidth-limited digital waveform is utterly reliant on the idea that the analog reproduction of a digital square wave/stair step function with a voicecoil and diaphragm, physical hardware components with shape, size and crucially mass, must necessarily create a smooth analog waveform because physical hardware components have mass and momentum, they aren't theoretical ideas. It is better to think of a bandwith limited digital waveform as a series of movement commands for an RTS unit in Starcraft 2. The unit will naturally path between discrete points in a way that creates fluid movement, fundamentally it wouldn't make any sense for the unit to just teleport directly to where you click and then teleport directly to where you click next etc....

I mean let us consider Vinyl records for a second, maybe you like most people have a vague perception they are kind of a hifi audio thing for people that reallllllly care about audio quality and don't want to listen to chopped up and compressed digital audio files using a gasp consumer DAC that came stock in their laptop.

This quote from an old reddit thread discussing how CDs actually have far better signal-to-noise ratio fidelity than Vinyls (and really all decent quality digital audio files) about sums it up.

As for quantitative audio quality differences between the two mediums, the CD is superior. CDs operate at a sampling rate of 44.1kHz. These are discrete points, versus the continuous signal produced by a physical vinyl groove. However, the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem explains why a 44.1kHz sampling rate is sufficient for completely reproducing frequencies up to 44.1 / 2 or 22.05 kHz (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem ). True response will actually be lower than 22.05 kHz due to the various anti-aliasing filters involved in the analog-to-digital and digital-to-analog conversion process to prevent frequencies above 22.05 kHz from aliasing down into the audible range (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliasing#Folding ).

Furthermore, the CD is recorded with 16 bits of resolution, results in an output with 65,536 discrete voltage 'steps' on the output. This does introduce some quantization noise, because the real signal is 'rounded' up or down to the nearest of the 65,536 steps. This is another area where some people claim vinyl is superior due to the lack of quantization of the output. But in practice, vinyl only has 9-10 bits of resolution (IIRC) due to manufacturing tolerances. To achieve around 16 bits of resolution, the tolerance of production for the groove would have to be on the order of 1/65,536 or ~0.001%. That's not going to happen on those tiny grooves. Also, you have to consider the non-zero inertia of the physical pick-up moving across those tracks, which will introduce a separate set of distortions as it moves around.

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ic9f0/do_vinyls_really_have_a_better_audio_quality_than/

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

Believe I've gone down a similar path. I agree, but I assumed the layman dedicated music fan would at least be curious.

And on another note we need more discussion music and audio production around Lemmy.