4 ms·

At a $120/year for 6 years, you've basically spent $720. That is amazing. I, on the other, have spent $0 on all music in my entire life (excluding concerts).

pestaa 11y ago
You're listening to music available for free or...? (Assuming you're listening to music at all because otherwise why go to concerts...)
- rplnt 11y ago
  I'm in the same boat (not $0, but certainly in the tens of dollars, not more) and for me it is the "or". That is pirated music. Nowadays I either listen to youtube playlists (with ads) or something like Spotify (with ads). So in a way I pay, but just with my time, not money (unless the ads work).
m_eiman 11y ago
The sad thing is that those $720 have provided no lasting value for the user; had it been spent on albums it would have been enough for 50-ish CDs that will last "forever" (at least if you rip them). Or 720 individual songs. That wouldn't have given access to as diverse music as Spotify does, of course. But on average, how diverse is the music taste of random people?
- jmccree 11y ago
  As at least one study and plenty of anecdata has shown, music helps a lot of people with their work performance. The ROI on that $10/mo should be pretty good for your average developer. Spotify radio and playlists make easy to discover new music or listen to music you like without spending any time curating playlists etc. If you think of the time spent to find and buy 720 songs, at just one minute each, that's 12 hours spent just buying songs. The value of spotify is wasting no time or money on acquiring or managing a music library.
- namenotrequired 11y ago
  Why should it provide lasting value? He's paying for a service.
- Osmium 11y ago
  > The sad thing is that those $720 have provided no lasting value for the user I don't necessarily see this as sad. I spend money on lots of things that have no lasting value (beyond memories), many of which are experiences. I think we over-estimate how much time we have in ours lives anyway to enjoy these "permanent" things (like CDs).
  - lentil_soup 11y ago
    And not only time but mental and physical space as well.
    - rhia 11y ago
      This here! For 10 bucks a month I know I never have to worry about syncing music, whether something is available, etc.
      - 72deluxe 11y ago
        How will you satisfy your desire to hoard crap and fill your house up with ever-increasingly dusty CDs? How will you read the sleeve notes and who did a rubbish job of mastering and mixing this album?
        colmvp 11y ago
        God this spoke to me. I'm in the midst of cleaning out our basement filled with old cassettes, VHS' and CDs. My siblings who moved out years ago, asked me to donate them or throw them away. So now I've got to spend hours sifting through piles of media to figure out what to do with them. It's such a hassle. (Yes, First World Problem) My parents as Costco users have this belief where having physical things, especially in bulk, is a key strategy in savings. They hate subscription models especially for digital formats. But what they fail to acknowledge is space is valuable too. The space lost around the house because of their buying habits and unwillingness to let things go (items that were bought on sale but never used, old clothes, magazines, books, media, etc.) is pretty sad.
- jamespo 11y ago
  50ish CDs of which at least half you bought because you liked the first single and find out the album is not very good, so they just sit there. Spotify fills my use case almost perfectly.
- marceldegraaf 11y ago
  I see this exactly the other way around: paying for a service like Spotify allows me to experience almost any music I want to, and discover much more, at any time and place I desire without having heaps of plastic discs collecting dust in my home. For me the lasting value of experiencing music in an efficient and uncluttered way far outweighs that of physical media.
- fsloth 11y ago
  Given my tendency to accumulate useless crap and no emotional bond to the physical media that stores that music - for me the physical discs would be logistics and interior decorational problem rather than any thing of value. I'm paying spotify to provide me a service to access music. Now I don't need to hoard it and waste my OCD on endlessly minding 'my' collection. For me the lack of any physical items or files that I would need to administrate is a win.
  - thirdsun 11y ago
    ...Until you notice that some licensing deal has ended and some albums you love have been pulled of the service. It happens. I don't care for physical media either but I buy everything I like as digital lossless audio. Not owning my music wouldn't work for me. Not that it has to be like this for everyone, it's just something to be aware of.
- pjc50 11y ago
  I think the sibling comments are showing that if you want to have the inconvenience of binding your music to physical artefacts, you might as well buy records, which have nicer sleeves. Then you can continue to listen to the music on Spotify, apart from those special occasions when you bring out the record and listen specifically to it.
- dbattaglia 11y ago
  Unlike these folks I grew up in the age of cassettes and CDs and have spent a small fortune on music. The past 4/5 years have been just Spotify and I don't miss CDs one bit. The fun of reading thru the album art is cool for a minute or so, but flimsy scratchable CDs are a terrible medium for music.
- murbard2 11y ago
  He can still get those for an extra $0. What you're really getting for your money is convenience and integration.
- bemmu 11y ago
  Personally what I feel like I'm paying for is access to music in such a way that I no longer have to make album purchasing decisions. All the music is just there for me when I happen to feel like listen to it, as long as I keep paying monthly of course.
- iMerNibor 11y ago
  Compared to the thousands of songs he'll most likely regularly listen to (I do) it's still cheaper - especiall when your music interest shifts. Not to mention being able to just listen to whatever without having to spend any extra
fsloth 11y ago
I pay the same amount for useless snacks. They provide no lasting benefit except a few extra calories when needed. People have different budgets but 120$ a year is not so much to pay for a thing that provides some noticeable value for me. Spotify is a similar service that provides me something I want at a moments notice.

pestaa 11y ago

You're listening to music available for free or...? (Assuming you're listening to music at all because otherwise why go to concerts...)

rplnt 11y ago
I'm in the same boat (not $0, but certainly in the tens of dollars, not more) and for me it is the "or". That is pirated music. Nowadays I either listen to youtube playlists (with ads) or something like Spotify (with ads). So in a way I pay, but just with my time, not money (unless the ads work).

m_eiman 11y ago

The sad thing is that those $720 have provided no lasting value for the user; had it been spent on albums it would have been enough for 50-ish CDs that will last "forever" (at least if you rip them). Or 720 individual songs. That wouldn't have given access to as diverse music as Spotify does, of course. But on average, how diverse is the music taste of random people?

jmccree 11y ago
As at least one study and plenty of anecdata has shown, music helps a lot of people with their work performance. The ROI on that $10/mo should be pretty good for your average developer. Spotify radio and playlists make easy to discover new music or listen to music you like without spending any time curating playlists etc. If you think of the time spent to find and buy 720 songs, at just one minute each, that's 12 hours spent just buying songs. The value of spotify is wasting no time or money on acquiring or managing a music library.
namenotrequired 11y ago
Why should it provide lasting value? He's paying for a service.
Osmium 11y ago
> The sad thing is that those $720 have provided no lasting value for the user I don't necessarily see this as sad. I spend money on lots of things that have no lasting value (beyond memories), many of which are experiences. I think we over-estimate how much time we have in ours lives anyway to enjoy these "permanent" things (like CDs).
- lentil_soup 11y ago
  And not only time but mental and physical space as well.
  - rhia 11y ago
    This here! For 10 bucks a month I know I never have to worry about syncing music, whether something is available, etc.
    - 72deluxe 11y ago
      How will you satisfy your desire to hoard crap and fill your house up with ever-increasingly dusty CDs? How will you read the sleeve notes and who did a rubbish job of mastering and mixing this album?
      - colmvp 11y ago
        God this spoke to me. I'm in the midst of cleaning out our basement filled with old cassettes, VHS' and CDs. My siblings who moved out years ago, asked me to donate them or throw them away. So now I've got to spend hours sifting through piles of media to figure out what to do with them. It's such a hassle. (Yes, First World Problem) My parents as Costco users have this belief where having physical things, especially in bulk, is a key strategy in savings. They hate subscription models especially for digital formats. But what they fail to acknowledge is space is valuable too. The space lost around the house because of their buying habits and unwillingness to let things go (items that were bought on sale but never used, old clothes, magazines, books, media, etc.) is pretty sad.
jamespo 11y ago
50ish CDs of which at least half you bought because you liked the first single and find out the album is not very good, so they just sit there. Spotify fills my use case almost perfectly.
marceldegraaf 11y ago
I see this exactly the other way around: paying for a service like Spotify allows me to experience almost any music I want to, and discover much more, at any time and place I desire without having heaps of plastic discs collecting dust in my home. For me the lasting value of experiencing music in an efficient and uncluttered way far outweighs that of physical media.
fsloth 11y ago
Given my tendency to accumulate useless crap and no emotional bond to the physical media that stores that music - for me the physical discs would be logistics and interior decorational problem rather than any thing of value. I'm paying spotify to provide me a service to access music. Now I don't need to hoard it and waste my OCD on endlessly minding 'my' collection. For me the lack of any physical items or files that I would need to administrate is a win.
- thirdsun 11y ago
  ...Until you notice that some licensing deal has ended and some albums you love have been pulled of the service. It happens. I don't care for physical media either but I buy everything I like as digital lossless audio. Not owning my music wouldn't work for me. Not that it has to be like this for everyone, it's just something to be aware of.
pjc50 11y ago
I think the sibling comments are showing that if you want to have the inconvenience of binding your music to physical artefacts, you might as well buy records, which have nicer sleeves. Then you can continue to listen to the music on Spotify, apart from those special occasions when you bring out the record and listen specifically to it.
dbattaglia 11y ago
Unlike these folks I grew up in the age of cassettes and CDs and have spent a small fortune on music. The past 4/5 years have been just Spotify and I don't miss CDs one bit. The fun of reading thru the album art is cool for a minute or so, but flimsy scratchable CDs are a terrible medium for music.
murbard2 11y ago
He can still get those for an extra $0. What you're really getting for your money is convenience and integration.
bemmu 11y ago
Personally what I feel like I'm paying for is access to music in such a way that I no longer have to make album purchasing decisions. All the music is just there for me when I happen to feel like listen to it, as long as I keep paying monthly of course.
iMerNibor 11y ago
Compared to the thousands of songs he'll most likely regularly listen to (I do) it's still cheaper - especiall when your music interest shifts. Not to mention being able to just listen to whatever without having to spend any extra

fsloth 11y ago

I pay the same amount for useless snacks. They provide no lasting benefit except a few extra calories when needed. People have different budgets but 120$ a year is not so much to pay for a thing that provides some noticeable value for me. Spotify is a similar service that provides me something I want at a moments notice.