Recent news revealed that Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek has been investing heavily in military tech companies, which adds another ethical layer to a platform already criticized for how little it pays musicians !
Spotify only pays artists about $3–5 per 1,000 streams, using a pro-rata model that directs most money toward major stars… By contrast, Qobuz (≈$18–20 per 1,000 streams) and Tidal (≈$12–13) pay far more fairly!
However Tidal is far from ethical. Most of its revenue is controlled by private investors and founders and small artists still earn very little…
More fair-minded platforms like Bandcamp, Resonate, Ampled, or SoundCloud’s fan-powered royalties prioritize musicians over investors.
With these more ethical alternatives available, why do we keep using Spotify?
Old fart checking in … why not just buy the tracks instead of paying for monthly access that screws artists? I mean, each song is unlikely to be more than $1.49, and then you own it. I don’t have a streaming music account and never will because the idea of paying repeatedly for the same thing – with the option of it being pulled at any time – is nauseating.
Why would I? Pay $1.49 to listen to 1 song over and over or pay $12 to listen to basically the entirety of human creation any time I want? Not to mention custom playlists and whatnot.
My music collection spans some 1,700 tracks and several full albums. It’s not difficult to create local playlists, I don’t pay monthly, and I don’t have an excessive data plan because I need streaming. Look at the knock-on costs. It’s not $12/month.
I listen to probably at least a dozen new songs every day. If I bought them that would cost me $18/day. Or $540/mo. Not to mention the absolute fortune required to store them all locally.
I’m in the phase of my life where if I encounter a new track I like in the wild, I’ll buy it. But I’m not seeking out new stuff because (cracks open a PBR and grows a goatee) everything feels homogenized today.
Perhaps it’s just different use cases. Still, you’re dependent on a company to be able to continue listening to the music you like. That’s worrisome. If a company took away the collection I’ve been building since the '80s, livid wouldn’t begin to explain my reaction.
How do you “encounter” new tracks?
If you’re not actively seeking out new music, it will feel that way, because you’re just listening to whatever is on the radio or on TV or whatever. This is the beauty of streaming platforms. In the past you were only ever exposed to whatever music the record companies decided you should hear. And it was almost exclusively homogenous “pop” music, to some degree. With streaming music you can discover new music every day based on your personal preferences.
OK. Lots of assumptions here. I haven’t listened to the radio since the '90s, and I’ve never paid for cable.
My preferred genres are progressive house and trance, and I got into the rave scene about the time I stopped listening to the radio. I started my collection via fservs on IRC, ratio FTP sites and then Napster and P2P, totally obviating the record labels. I’m subscribed to various music producers on YouTube for when I’m thinking I want something new, and if it makes me cry, off to Beatport I go.
So, like, not to be rude, but you got every assumption wrong.
An old fart listens to entire albums! Fake!
I’m an old fart.
I prefer buying individual tracks to the Tower Records model of $20 before you know if that one song you’re getting it for is the only good one on the album.
I like getting the whole album because it exposes me to the whole brainchild. It’s a gamble but sometimes my favorites are not what I would first have thought!
So much money dropped at on cue / sam Goody’s back in the day only to get that tape / CD home and realize that one song on the radio was fire… but the rest of the album was just a train wreck of flaming garbage.
Isn’t that why we used to buy 45s? And if you discovered the B-side was good then maybe someone would buy the album and everyone else would tape it?