←back to thread

556 points greenie_beans | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.474s | source
1. big-green-man ◴[] No.42468463[source]
I'm not a Spotify user, but I've got to go against the grain here and say "who cares?"

Have you ever bought a CD in the days of CDs because you heard a song or two from the album on the radio and found that only those that you'd already heard were any good? Hair metal was particularly rife with this. Flower power stuff from the 60s stands out, mostly utter hot garbage, you can find entire mixes of the low quality knockoff crap getting sold at night on PBS. There are people that have every motley crue album (and not just the first 2 like more cultured people such as myself), and listen to them regularly. There has always been a massive market for low quality garbage.

Radio stations used to get paid to put crap in rotation. Anyone remember Limp Bizkit? They got famous by buying slots on Seattle radio stations. Who didn't grow out of that garbage? A lot of people, unfortunately.

You've got playlists, played by lazy people that don't care about anything but the mood or vibe, that they didn't curate, going on in the background while they ride the elevator and youre surprised that it's elevator music? How often do you hear billboard top 100 hits while on hold with the cable company? Complain when someone tries to play one of those tracks and a cover band plays instead, that's when someone is getting screwed over.

Subscription services have always been and will always be a race to the bottom. Quality art has always had to be manually curated by the enjoyer. The best stuff has always been hidden behind the stuff people were trying to sell you. People looking to squeeze out an extra buck were always willing to sell lower quality to those who would tolerate it. So if you don't want low quality crap in your life, take the time to pick what's in your life and pay fairly for it. There was never going to be a miracle cure to the downfall of the music industry for the low low price of ten dollars a month.

replies(1): >>42469404 #
2. Vegenoid ◴[] No.42469404[source]
I agree. I have left streaming services, and rely on purchasing digital downloads of albums to obtain music. I am very into a niche subgenre of electronic music where many artists don’t have their music available on streaming services. I pay for those albums (if I like the music, obviously) and I am happy about it. I also fairly happily pay $3-5 for an album that is available on streaming services. But when I encounter albums that are on streaming platforms, but cost $10+ for the digital download, it’s a hard pill to swallow. I want to give them money for their music, but to do so I must give them vastly more than their listeners on streaming platforms give them.

I know that artists often just treat digital download sales as a donation mechanism, akin to a busker’s money can. But I want to pay for music, not donate to artists who are then handing that along to streaming services by giving them their music practically for free.

I’m not sure if my feelings about this are justified, or if they’re irrational.