7 ms·

Here's the thing(s): 1. It's not just 1 type of ad. In Little Snitch, I have permitted Spotify to connect to 281 different domain names, most of which are ad-r

Here's the thing(s): 1. It's not just 1 type of ad. In Little Snitch, I have permitted Spotify to connect to 281 different domain names, most of which are ad-related. That's a lot of companies being allowed to run JS in whatever webview Spotify uses to display ads. I don't listen much on my computer anymore. 2. They keep advertising deals to me - $0.99 for a month, or $9 for 3 months, that I can't subscribe to because they don't let people in Quebec sign up for them, (something related to the consumer protection laws here). These ads are audio, in-app visuals, and even E-mails. This leaves a horrible taste in my mouth, and I've let them know several times, but they never change it. That, combined with the fact that I feel like the $10/month subscription is a tad expensive, make me very reluctant to subscribe again, (I was a subscriber through my mobile phone plane for a long time). At $5/month I'd subscribe instantly. $7-8 I'd probably still do it. $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year that I own in perpetuity. I feel like if they did the ads right, (in-house, with non-insulting geotargeting), or offered a subscription price closer to one latté per month, I would have a lot less animosity and be more supportive of this move.

wool_gather 8y ago
> $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year This is good in other ways! One of the problems with Spotify is that the musicians don't really get paid a realistically useful amount. I say this as someone who has both a Spotify subscription and musician friends whose music is on Spotify. That said, I personally find the subscription price surprisingly low for what I get, but I wouldn't try to tell you what to do with your money.
- jbeales 8y ago
  There's a strong argument for "$10/month is amazing for unlimited access to this entire catalog!" But I wonder how many songs or artists I actually listen to. Is it really that much more than I would if I were buying CDs? I do enjoy the personalized playlists a lot, though.
  - matwood 8y ago
    For me it's much more than "I could buy CDs". A sub to Apple Music for example lets me go on musical journeys. I listened to the many versions Vivaldi's 4 seasons the other day and enjoyed hearing how different orchestras performed. I have taken a dives into 80s rap/hip hop, or hair bands, or whatever else strikes me. Those types of exploration were not possible in the days on only buying CDs.
  - dwild 8y ago
    Personally it's the freedom that I enjoy more. For example I have 400 songs into my Christmas playlist. There's so many duplicate, like Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas is there 9 times, but it's fun to have the different versions. Sure it would be fine to have 2-3 albums of Christmas, but then I would have to choose and there would be less diversity. It's also amazing to discover stuff and follow new paths. Sure you could try to buy a random new album during a month, but that would be your whole exploration for that month, I could explore many more albums in a day. Right now I listen to a lot of a cappella group because of a good Pentatonix song I heard a few days ago. I also enjoy just being able to listen to any CD. When I heard about A star is born, I was curious and I just had to open Google Music to listen to it, without paying more. Would 12 CD a year would be enough to entertain myself? Yeah I have no doubt, but it wouldn't allow me to discover to having that much freedom.
- gowld 8y ago
  CDs don't send money to musicians either, unless they are self-publishing. But there's still a gap: I can't mix my paid-for (ripped) CDs and paid-for MP3s/AACs with streams in one app. This is the problem of letting the music distributer (Spotify) also control the player app.
  - judge2020 8y ago
    > I can't mix my paid-for (ripped) CDs and paid-for MP3s/AACs with streams in one app It's not an optimal solution, but iTunes can import songs from CDs, and you can add other mp3s to your library, but it doesn't cloud sync across devices. Another solution is Google Play Music, which can import your iTunes library (and CDs indirectly from iTunes) and does do cloud sync.
    - dewey 8y ago
      iTunes can do that too if you use iCloud Music.
      - erikstrottmann 8y ago
        iTunes has two options for cloud syncing your library: $10/month Apple Music (which includes downloading or streaming both music you uploaded and the whole Apple Music catalog) and $25/year iTunes Match (which lets you downloading or streaming music you uploaded, but not the whole Apple Music catalog)
        wasdfff 8y ago
        I wonder who the target is for itunes match. I always figured people with massive physical libraries aren’t using iTunes to begin with.
        eridius 8y ago
        There's 2 ways Apple handles music you've ripped. If the music's fingerprint matches that of something they already have in the iTunes Store, your iCloud Music Library will be populated with the iTunes Store version of the song, so you can download that on your other devices. Only the original uploading device retains the original file. This is usually a good thing as the iTunes Store version is frequently better-quality than whatever MP3 or AAC you had ripped. The second way is if the file's fingerprint doesn't match any song in the iTunes Store catalog, then with iTunes Match, iTunes will actually upload the whole file and your other devices will then stream or download that exact file. There are some limits here; I think there's a limit on the song duration (not sure what it is but I'm pretty sure songs over 1 hour are past the limit), and there's a limit on total number of songs (at launch this was 25k; I think they've raised it higher but I don't know what the current limit is). Whatever the limits are, I do know my father's music collection (all manually ripped from a massive CD collection) is too large for iTunes Match, so he's stuck managing music the way we all used to do before Apple Music and iTunes Match came along. As far as I'm aware, the Apple Music subscription supports the first mechanism but not the second, and the iTunes Match subscription is needed for the second option. That said, I'm not 100% positive.
- fastball 8y ago
  I'm willing to bet that your musician friends wouldn't be getting much of a payout if Spotify didn't exist either. The actually popular artists make great money from Spotify.
  - jammygit 8y ago
    Apparently almost the entire musician-as-a-middle-class has been wiped out since the internet and streaming got big. Jaron Lanier talks about it fairy often: now, almost everything goes to the top earners.
  - wool_gather 8y ago
    This is a fair point. The one who is most vocal about Spotify does not make her living (entirely) from her music in the first place. It would be most accurate to say Spotify has had no effect. > The actually popular artists make great money Is this so? As I recall, Spotify pays tenths of a U.S. cent per stream. The gross payout for a million streams is a few thousand dollars.
- baybal2 8y ago
  > $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year For that money I can rent a cheap DSL line with which I can download 10-12 terabytes of music for absolutely free and without ads
- wasdfff 8y ago
  If you wanted to support the artist the answer is buying concert tickets and $40 tshirts. Physical and digital sales/streaming are a drop in the bucket for a music arists income; you really burn the label when you pirate content. Cue RIAA “you wouldnt download a car, think of the artist” propaganda.
  - H1Supreme 8y ago
    This is genre specific, and artist's popularity specific. I listen to a lot of smaller bands whose tours are almost never less than 2-3 hours from me. Plus, I don't really care for concerts anymore. I'd rather just buy the album.
amatecha 8y ago
Dang, it's pretty telling that they don't provide their paid offerings to users due to the consumer protection laws in the respective region...
- mononcqc 8y ago
  they do. I'm a paying user in the specific region mentioned. The thing they do not offer is the first month free. Quebec law forbids companies from "offering one month free" and then auto-billing you whether you consent or not at that point. What companies frequently do instead is offer "pay N months, get N+1 months", such as getting 13 months for a yearly subscription. Spotify just never felt like modifying their offer for local laws, but I've nevertheless been a premium member for years now.
IanCal 8y ago
And it's completely fine to not want to trade getting the ads for getting music. I think their point is that it's available for free in return for ads, or for a fairly reasonable cost. To decide neither is for you is just fine, but it's less reasonable to choose no money+no ads.
freewilly1040 8y ago
re #2: then why not buy 10-12 CDs per year and not use Spotify?

wool_gather 8y ago

> $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year This is good in other ways! One of the problems with Spotify is that the musicians don't really get paid a realistically useful amount. I say this as someone who has both a Spotify subscription and musician friends whose music is on Spotify. That said, I personally find the subscription price surprisingly low for what I get, but I wouldn't try to tell you what to do with your money.

jbeales 8y ago
There's a strong argument for "$10/month is amazing for unlimited access to this entire catalog!" But I wonder how many songs or artists I actually listen to. Is it really that much more than I would if I were buying CDs? I do enjoy the personalized playlists a lot, though.
- matwood 8y ago
  For me it's much more than "I could buy CDs". A sub to Apple Music for example lets me go on musical journeys. I listened to the many versions Vivaldi's 4 seasons the other day and enjoyed hearing how different orchestras performed. I have taken a dives into 80s rap/hip hop, or hair bands, or whatever else strikes me. Those types of exploration were not possible in the days on only buying CDs.
- dwild 8y ago
  Personally it's the freedom that I enjoy more. For example I have 400 songs into my Christmas playlist. There's so many duplicate, like Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas is there 9 times, but it's fun to have the different versions. Sure it would be fine to have 2-3 albums of Christmas, but then I would have to choose and there would be less diversity. It's also amazing to discover stuff and follow new paths. Sure you could try to buy a random new album during a month, but that would be your whole exploration for that month, I could explore many more albums in a day. Right now I listen to a lot of a cappella group because of a good Pentatonix song I heard a few days ago. I also enjoy just being able to listen to any CD. When I heard about A star is born, I was curious and I just had to open Google Music to listen to it, without paying more. Would 12 CD a year would be enough to entertain myself? Yeah I have no doubt, but it wouldn't allow me to discover to having that much freedom.
gowld 8y ago
CDs don't send money to musicians either, unless they are self-publishing. But there's still a gap: I can't mix my paid-for (ripped) CDs and paid-for MP3s/AACs with streams in one app. This is the problem of letting the music distributer (Spotify) also control the player app.
- judge2020 8y ago
  > I can't mix my paid-for (ripped) CDs and paid-for MP3s/AACs with streams in one app It's not an optimal solution, but iTunes can import songs from CDs, and you can add other mp3s to your library, but it doesn't cloud sync across devices. Another solution is Google Play Music, which can import your iTunes library (and CDs indirectly from iTunes) and does do cloud sync.
  - dewey 8y ago
    iTunes can do that too if you use iCloud Music.
    - erikstrottmann 8y ago
      iTunes has two options for cloud syncing your library: $10/month Apple Music (which includes downloading or streaming both music you uploaded and the whole Apple Music catalog) and $25/year iTunes Match (which lets you downloading or streaming music you uploaded, but not the whole Apple Music catalog)
      - wasdfff 8y ago
        I wonder who the target is for itunes match. I always figured people with massive physical libraries aren’t using iTunes to begin with.
        eridius 8y ago
        There's 2 ways Apple handles music you've ripped. If the music's fingerprint matches that of something they already have in the iTunes Store, your iCloud Music Library will be populated with the iTunes Store version of the song, so you can download that on your other devices. Only the original uploading device retains the original file. This is usually a good thing as the iTunes Store version is frequently better-quality than whatever MP3 or AAC you had ripped. The second way is if the file's fingerprint doesn't match any song in the iTunes Store catalog, then with iTunes Match, iTunes will actually upload the whole file and your other devices will then stream or download that exact file. There are some limits here; I think there's a limit on the song duration (not sure what it is but I'm pretty sure songs over 1 hour are past the limit), and there's a limit on total number of songs (at launch this was 25k; I think they've raised it higher but I don't know what the current limit is). Whatever the limits are, I do know my father's music collection (all manually ripped from a massive CD collection) is too large for iTunes Match, so he's stuck managing music the way we all used to do before Apple Music and iTunes Match came along. As far as I'm aware, the Apple Music subscription supports the first mechanism but not the second, and the iTunes Match subscription is needed for the second option. That said, I'm not 100% positive.
fastball 8y ago
I'm willing to bet that your musician friends wouldn't be getting much of a payout if Spotify didn't exist either. The actually popular artists make great money from Spotify.
- jammygit 8y ago
  Apparently almost the entire musician-as-a-middle-class has been wiped out since the internet and streaming got big. Jaron Lanier talks about it fairy often: now, almost everything goes to the top earners.
- wool_gather 8y ago
  This is a fair point. The one who is most vocal about Spotify does not make her living (entirely) from her music in the first place. It would be most accurate to say Spotify has had no effect. > The actually popular artists make great money Is this so? As I recall, Spotify pays tenths of a U.S. cent per stream. The gross payout for a million streams is a few thousand dollars.
baybal2 8y ago
> $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year For that money I can rent a cheap DSL line with which I can download 10-12 terabytes of music for absolutely free and without ads
wasdfff 8y ago
If you wanted to support the artist the answer is buying concert tickets and $40 tshirts. Physical and digital sales/streaming are a drop in the bucket for a music arists income; you really burn the label when you pirate content. Cue RIAA “you wouldnt download a car, think of the artist” propaganda.
- H1Supreme 8y ago
  This is genre specific, and artist's popularity specific. I listen to a lot of smaller bands whose tours are almost never less than 2-3 hours from me. Plus, I don't really care for concerts anymore. I'd rather just buy the album.

amatecha 8y ago

Dang, it's pretty telling that they don't provide their paid offerings to users due to the consumer protection laws in the respective region...

mononcqc 8y ago
they do. I'm a paying user in the specific region mentioned. The thing they do not offer is the first month free. Quebec law forbids companies from "offering one month free" and then auto-billing you whether you consent or not at that point. What companies frequently do instead is offer "pay N months, get N+1 months", such as getting 13 months for a yearly subscription. Spotify just never felt like modifying their offer for local laws, but I've nevertheless been a premium member for years now.

IanCal 8y ago

And it's completely fine to not want to trade getting the ads for getting music. I think their point is that it's available for free in return for ads, or for a fairly reasonable cost. To decide neither is for you is just fine, but it's less reasonable to choose no money+no ads.

freewilly1040 8y ago

re #2: then why not buy 10-12 CDs per year and not use Spotify?