4 ms·

> Then it became overrun with major label artists. So what. There also many excellent major label artist and it's good to have them. Many new album releases ar

> Then it became overrun with major label artists. So what. There also many excellent major label artist and it's good to have them. Many new album releases are missing on SoundCloud but available on Spotify from day one. Probably I am the only one but I find most 'DJ mixes' on SoundCloud lack in quality/creativity (I am into electronic music though). Maybe some like them I think 95% of them are subpar and sound like my nephew created a song with Magix Music Maker. These mixes and 'the extended repetoire' are no competitive advantage over Spotify and Co.

k-mcgrady 9y ago
>> So what. There also many excellent major label artist and it's good to have them. You're missing the point. I've no problem with major label artists but when you start dealing with them you start dealing with licensing. Then you waste time, don't develop the platform, and abandon the indie artists that got you to where you are. You need to take the point in context of the rest of my argument. When Spotify/Apple Music/Pandora exist why would you enter that market when it's not the market that you started in and you have no chance of beating them? Focus on indie music and you have a business where people actually pay money for the service and you become profitable. >> Maybe some like them I think 95% of them are subpar and sound like my nephew created a song with Magix Music Maker. Well that's how music discovery works. You have to go through rubbish to find the gems. If you want pro level stuff every time you should use Spotify/Beatport etc. I've been on SoundCloud since the beginning (since before it even became the go-to place for electronic music) and it was a great way to discover really good songwriters. You have to do some work to find them but that's part of the fun. SoundCloud tried to evolve into something completely different than it began as. Your expectations are a perfect example of how that skewed the public perception of it to the point where you and I believe it is completely different things - in reality it tries to be both but doesn't excel at either.
- thinbeige 9y ago
  > You're missing the point. I've no problem with major label artists but when you start dealing with them you start dealing with licensing. You think all those mixes come for free? They have to be licensed as well once the embedded song snippets exceed 30sec which most of them do (also depending on the local jurisdiction). Soundcloud had to find agreements with the labels sooner or later anyway because of the mixes and just included the major label artists in the deal because why not. Otherwise they would have been sued (and they were sued by some)—again—because of the mixes. > Well that's how music discovery works. Ok, then let's agree on it's a matter of taste. But I'd like to revise my comment: 99% of the mixes on SoundCloud are cr*p. Maybe it's just my taste but I am also SoundCloud user from day one and somebody who spent tons of money on Beatport. If they can succeed with this music selection and find listeners like you and who pay, great for them, but obviously they can't. Btw, you find the 1% good mixes also on Spotify or Apple Music.
  - detaro 9y ago
    > If they can succeed with this music selection and find listeners like you and who pay, great for them, but obviously they can't. For the longest time they didn't offer a way to pay, and the now-existing payment model doesn't really do anything for someone listening to the small guys, so the only obvious about them not being able to find paying listeners is that without an offer to pay for there is no paying.
  - tuxxy 9y ago
    > 99% of the mixes on SoundCloud are crap. Spoken like a person who didn't understand all that was on the platform. You do realize that SoundCloud had basically spawned a different genre of hip hop and rap, right? It's not just dance mixes, there's a lot of stuff that's super unique on there and it's not just hip hop, rap, or edm.
    - thinbeige 9y ago
      You should have put the quote into its context, I wrote if it's a matter of taste then I implied that (in my opinion) 99% is crap. You might have a different opinion because you have a different taste.
    - CamTin 9y ago
      I'm far from a SoundCloud user or a hip hop or rap aficionado, but I'd like to learn more about this. Can you elaborate? Or do you know of a source where I can read about this?
      - siquick 9y ago
        https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/arts/music/soundcloud-rap-lil-pump-smokepurrp-xxxtentacion.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/arts/music/soundcloud-rap...
  - k-mcgrady 9y ago
    >> You think all those mixes come for free? They have to be licensed as well once the embedded song snippets exceed 30sec which most of them do (also depending on the local jurisdiction). Again you're not understanding what I'm saying. You seem to think of music (or SoundCloud) as only EDM. When SoundCloud started it was largely amateur and indie 'analog' musicians and songwriters (i.e. people playing instruments and writing their own music). None of that needs licensed. Those people, despite not making any money, were paying SoundCloud £9.99 per month to increase their storage space and see listener stats. Obviously I don't know how many but there were badges on the profiles to indicate a paying user and there were a significantly high percentage. There was quite a large community of this type of music around a lot of genres. None of it needed licensed. If you stick to indie artists you don't need to deal with licensing. People doing mixes can use MixCloud which automatically licenses uploads some how. So, my point is, SoundCloud did not start off with DJ mixes or copyrighted material. It started off very legitimately and had a decent business model. They could have made a nice business out of it but like most SV businesses preferred to sink a load of VC money and 'grow' with no ultimate business model. Edit: >> If they can succeed with this music selection and find listeners like you and who pay, great for them, but obviously they can't. My comment was nothing to do with listeners paying - it was about artists paying. Artists have always been able and willing to pay for spotlight/storage/stats.
dzhiurgis 9y ago
> DJ mixes' on SoundCloud lack in quality/creativity By definition they are about selection. Creative live mixes are performed in live events. I use Soundcloud to discover new music in mixes. There’s something exciting trying to ID track using Shazam (cancer) or writing the time down and coming back every few months to find if someone else ID’d it. I’d really like if they defaulted mixes to 320kbps tho. And streams stop randomly on Safari, while Chrome crashes after few hours of playback. Filtering options could be improved too, and Discover option is almost always suggesting me individual tracks - something I never listen to. Oh and there’s buffering problem between tracks that prevents to be used as continous stream.

k-mcgrady 9y ago

>> So what. There also many excellent major label artist and it's good to have them. You're missing the point. I've no problem with major label artists but when you start dealing with them you start dealing with licensing. Then you waste time, don't develop the platform, and abandon the indie artists that got you to where you are. You need to take the point in context of the rest of my argument. When Spotify/Apple Music/Pandora exist why would you enter that market when it's not the market that you started in and you have no chance of beating them? Focus on indie music and you have a business where people actually pay money for the service and you become profitable. >> Maybe some like them I think 95% of them are subpar and sound like my nephew created a song with Magix Music Maker. Well that's how music discovery works. You have to go through rubbish to find the gems. If you want pro level stuff every time you should use Spotify/Beatport etc. I've been on SoundCloud since the beginning (since before it even became the go-to place for electronic music) and it was a great way to discover really good songwriters. You have to do some work to find them but that's part of the fun. SoundCloud tried to evolve into something completely different than it began as. Your expectations are a perfect example of how that skewed the public perception of it to the point where you and I believe it is completely different things - in reality it tries to be both but doesn't excel at either.

thinbeige 9y ago
> You're missing the point. I've no problem with major label artists but when you start dealing with them you start dealing with licensing. You think all those mixes come for free? They have to be licensed as well once the embedded song snippets exceed 30sec which most of them do (also depending on the local jurisdiction). Soundcloud had to find agreements with the labels sooner or later anyway because of the mixes and just included the major label artists in the deal because why not. Otherwise they would have been sued (and they were sued by some)—again—because of the mixes. > Well that's how music discovery works. Ok, then let's agree on it's a matter of taste. But I'd like to revise my comment: 99% of the mixes on SoundCloud are cr*p. Maybe it's just my taste but I am also SoundCloud user from day one and somebody who spent tons of money on Beatport. If they can succeed with this music selection and find listeners like you and who pay, great for them, but obviously they can't. Btw, you find the 1% good mixes also on Spotify or Apple Music.
- detaro 9y ago
  > If they can succeed with this music selection and find listeners like you and who pay, great for them, but obviously they can't. For the longest time they didn't offer a way to pay, and the now-existing payment model doesn't really do anything for someone listening to the small guys, so the only obvious about them not being able to find paying listeners is that without an offer to pay for there is no paying.
- tuxxy 9y ago
  > 99% of the mixes on SoundCloud are crap. Spoken like a person who didn't understand all that was on the platform. You do realize that SoundCloud had basically spawned a different genre of hip hop and rap, right? It's not just dance mixes, there's a lot of stuff that's super unique on there and it's not just hip hop, rap, or edm.
  - thinbeige 9y ago
    You should have put the quote into its context, I wrote if it's a matter of taste then I implied that (in my opinion) 99% is crap. You might have a different opinion because you have a different taste.
  - CamTin 9y ago
    I'm far from a SoundCloud user or a hip hop or rap aficionado, but I'd like to learn more about this. Can you elaborate? Or do you know of a source where I can read about this?
    - siquick 9y ago
      https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/arts/music/soundcloud-rap-lil-pump-smokepurrp-xxxtentacion.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/arts/music/soundcloud-rap...
- k-mcgrady 9y ago
  >> You think all those mixes come for free? They have to be licensed as well once the embedded song snippets exceed 30sec which most of them do (also depending on the local jurisdiction). Again you're not understanding what I'm saying. You seem to think of music (or SoundCloud) as only EDM. When SoundCloud started it was largely amateur and indie 'analog' musicians and songwriters (i.e. people playing instruments and writing their own music). None of that needs licensed. Those people, despite not making any money, were paying SoundCloud £9.99 per month to increase their storage space and see listener stats. Obviously I don't know how many but there were badges on the profiles to indicate a paying user and there were a significantly high percentage. There was quite a large community of this type of music around a lot of genres. None of it needed licensed. If you stick to indie artists you don't need to deal with licensing. People doing mixes can use MixCloud which automatically licenses uploads some how. So, my point is, SoundCloud did not start off with DJ mixes or copyrighted material. It started off very legitimately and had a decent business model. They could have made a nice business out of it but like most SV businesses preferred to sink a load of VC money and 'grow' with no ultimate business model. Edit: >> If they can succeed with this music selection and find listeners like you and who pay, great for them, but obviously they can't. My comment was nothing to do with listeners paying - it was about artists paying. Artists have always been able and willing to pay for spotlight/storage/stats.

dzhiurgis 9y ago

> DJ mixes' on SoundCloud lack in quality/creativity By definition they are about selection. Creative live mixes are performed in live events. I use Soundcloud to discover new music in mixes. There’s something exciting trying to ID track using Shazam (cancer) or writing the time down and coming back every few months to find if someone else ID’d it. I’d really like if they defaulted mixes to 320kbps tho. And streams stop randomly on Safari, while Chrome crashes after few hours of playback. Filtering options could be improved too, and Discover option is almost always suggesting me individual tracks - something I never listen to. Oh and there’s buffering problem between tracks that prevents to be used as continous stream.