3 ms·
> Why not view streaming as convenience, and still be interested in backing up what you pay for? To put this into context in Japan, there is, even now, not eve
by Veratyr 10y ago
> Why not view streaming as convenience, and still be interested in backing up what you pay for?
To put this into context in Japan, there is, even now, not even one streaming music service that can satisfy most people's musical needs.
It's not just that Japanese people aren't willing to stream their media, it's that it's not possible. Compare the Oricon charts [1] to the catalog of LINE [2] and you'll notice very popular labels missing in their entirety. It's very different to the west where you can get most western artists minus a few (single digits?) popular artists on your choice of service.
> Not sure why in the the mind of some people streaming started being equal to loss of backup, or in other words to renting.
I'm not entirely sure where this is coming from but that's exactly what it is. When you own the music you listen to, you know it'll always be available. When you stream the music you listen to, there's a chance it'll be removed from the service at some point in the future.
> Why not view streaming as convenience, and still be interested in backing up what you pay for?
For me and most of Japan, the issue is that streaming is a very very minor convenience. Since most of the music we'd like to listen to is missing from streaming catalogs, the convenience is nullified.
If, theoretically, a streaming service existed that actually had all the music I was interested in, this might change.
> In this context I agree, that increase in DRM, causes decrease in availability of lossless audio. But why wouldn't same users want DRM-free as well (in which case, lossless is a logical addition)? Stores like Bandcamp cater to these users.
I suspect that perhaps it's because streaming services have devalued music to the point where owning music appears to be expensive. An average CD costs ~1.5x 1 month of streaming, where you can listen to countless albums.
[1]: http://www.oricon.co.jp/rank/ http://www.oricon.co.jp/rank/
[2]: http://music.line.me http://music.line.me
- thirdsun 10y ago> minus a few (single digits?) popular artists Not even close. Of course it depends on what kind of music you're listening to, but as someone who still maintains nad grows a collection of bought lossless, digital music I'd guess that about 20% to 30% of my library isn't available via streaming. I understand that my collection may be way more obscure and niche than most, but my point is that there is a lot of music you're missing if you only use streaming. Furthermore, whatever is available now might not be tomorrow - licensing deals end and music disappears on Spotify and Co.
- Veratyr 10y agoI'm in the same boat as a very small portion of the music I listen to is western made and hence available on western services. But I think your average non-HN-reader is usually going to have fairly conventional tastes and if you look at the most popular music in Western countries going by the Billboard charts, pretty much all of it is streamable.
- shmerl 10y agoTastes differ, and in music especially. So I'd avoid generalizations here. Most of the "mass market" music today is garbage anyway.
- thirdsun 10y agoI understand - however the gaps in the streaming catalog will be different for everyone, depending on taste, which in total results in a vast selection of music not available via streaming, even in western music. No doubt, however, that most people will be fine with that. For me it isn't - I really care about my music and missing certain releases or the risk of losing it at some point isn't an option for me.