Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    556 points greenie_beans | 16 comments | | HN request time: 1.266s | source | bottom
    1. DoingIsLearning ◴[] No.42468831[source]
    If you are a Spotify user please make an active effort to seek and listen to artists _albums_. Playlist are a worse experience (unless you make them) and only play into Spotify's pocket.

    A few key points with albums:

    - You are listening to the artists vision/journey. The songs are not played in isolation but as part of a collective arrangement.

    - Artists get payed more per play than individual songs.

    - Albums don't degrade like playlists which can be changed by users or spotify to inject some newer commercial push.

    replies(5): >>42468924 #>>42468939 #>>42471035 #>>42472351 #>>42475499 #
    2. eptcyka ◴[] No.42468924[source]
    Also consider paying for music on bandcamp or elsewhere.
    3. Kiro ◴[] No.42468939[source]
    > - You are listening to the artists vision/journey. The songs are not played in isolation but as part of a collective arrangement.

    I think this is less of the case nowadays. The latest albums I've listened to have all been just a complication of the artist's latest EPs with a couple of new tracks.

    replies(2): >>42469147 #>>42470668 #
    4. thequux ◴[] No.42469147[source]
    This tends to be true of mamy of the artists that chart, but less so for indie bands. I see Major Parkinson's Blackbox and Magna Carta Cartel's The Dying Option as two of the best albums of the century so far, for example.
    replies(1): >>42469688 #
    5. Kiro ◴[] No.42469688{3}[source]
    I don't think that's an accurate distinction. I think maybe it has more to do with the genre (e.g. more common in rock and less so in the electronic music that I listen to, where it's mostly EP driven).

    If we're talking popularity vs indie, those bands seem pretty mainstream. In my head indie artists that put out single songs on Soundcloud etc don't do albums until they grow big, so pretty much the opposite (more popular = more album focused).

    6. Cthulhu_ ◴[] No.42470668[source]
    That's nothing new though, a lot of the big name artists' albums are a collection of most of their singles (idk how the album vs single market works); e.g. Taylor Swift with 7 singles made from the 13 tracks on '1989'.

    I don't know what is normal, but releasing singles or EPs before the full album seems like a common way to generate hype beforehand. Also, the Spotify model - assuming against what the previous comment says and every stream counts for the same revenue - doesn't differentiate between singles, EPs or albums, so it's whatever from that point of view. I've seen a few artists start releasing demos, songs-that-didn't-quite-make-it, and all kinds of unusual material that wasn't good enough for a full album onto streaming platforms, which then ends up in the long tail of their repertoire. It ties in with the article though, in that these songs will also start appearing in the playlists related to those artists.

    Another interesting one is a single artist releasing songs under different names; Devin Townsend comes to mind, who can fill up a related playlist with songs released under his own name, Strapping Young Lad, Devin Townsend Band, Devin Townsend Project, Casualties of Cool, etc. And given he does many different genres, he'd appear - theoretically - on many different styles of playlists too, although I think the algorithm would get confused when the artist name gets associated with both hourlong ambient tracks and seven minute chaos metal genre mashups.

    replies(1): >>42471375 #
    7. basisword ◴[] No.42471035[source]
    >> If you are a Spotify user

    I would recommend switching to Apple Music if you want to stream. They're continuing to lean into the idea of human curation (with the launch of three new live radio stations this month) and I find their human curated playlists lead to me discovering a lot more music I like than Spotify's. Apple Music also works well with local files so music you purchase of Bandcamp, bootlegs etc. will work across devices.

    replies(2): >>42472967 #>>42482851 #
    8. michaelt ◴[] No.42471375{3}[source]
    > I don't know what is normal, but releasing singles or EPs before the full album seems like a common way to generate hype beforehand.

    I think this arose in the radio-and-CD era of music. Maybe even earlier?

    The radio stations that drove sales of new music wanted to play the latest releases. By releasing three singles before your 12-track album, you got more radio play, more shots at doing well in the sales charts, and hence raised your album sales.

    9. sailfast ◴[] No.42472351[source]
    Do they really get paid more “per play” on an album vs. a playlist? That seems quite tricky to figure out the accounting.

    Is it as simple as per play? I only know what’s posted on the loud and clear website but stream share isn’t quite the same thing from what they’re saying in the FAQ.

    10. jabroni_salad ◴[] No.42472967[source]
    Is the software still garbo on Windows and Android? Last I tried it, it would crash after a couple hours and I have no valid airplay targets in my home. They were generous about the 2 month trial but I only needed 2 hours to realize that I wasn't the target market.

    For all of spotify's faults, it runs on EVERYTHING and Spotify Connect is effectively borderless.

    replies(3): >>42473799 #>>42474009 #>>42480096 #
    11. achenet ◴[] No.42473799{3}[source]
    I prefer YouTube Music's webapp and Android app to Spotify, personally.
    12. bangaroo ◴[] No.42474009{3}[source]
    as an avid apple music user i am continually frustrated by what an afterthought the windows app is

    it's a continuation of apple's legacy of barely putting in the minimum to ship anything for windows.

    there's a reason i won't use their password manager, etc. i still interact with windows, and basically any key app i use can't be apple-made because the windows experience will be utter trash and the linux experience will be nonexistent.

    i make do with the windows apple music app but it is objectively a bad experience.

    replies(1): >>42477289 #
    13. abrookewood ◴[] No.42475499[source]
    I used to think like this, but no longer. Honestly, in an average album, there may only be 2-4 tracks that are excellent and the rest are just OK. This is a pretty common pattern and you can see reflected in the number of streams for each song. As for the album being the artists collective vision, I don't know that that is true. Maybe it is for something like Pink Floyd, but I get the impression most songs are written in isolation, rather than being a part of a collective vision.

    In the end, why waste time listening to something you only half enjoy?

    14. mr_toad ◴[] No.42477289{4}[source]
    Apple still makes most of their money off hardware. They really want you to buy their hardware.
    15. n144q ◴[] No.42480096{3}[source]
    The Android app is solid. I don't remember running into any bugs recently, and (1) the app supports Android tablets well (2) the app for classical music "Classical" works is also top-tier. I switch between the iPhone app and Android app frequently, and I really can't tell any difference between the two versions. The Android one supports Chromecast, although I have had some trouble with it in the past.

    The Windows app is ok, but I haven't used it as much, so I can't provide much feedback.

    16. phatfish ◴[] No.42482851[source]
    There are a number of good independent radio stations I listen to, personally I would say that is the better option for human curation.