|
|
Post by ml on Nov 9, 2022 9:03:04 GMT -6
Article Link“Where music platforms are ingesting 100,000 tracks a day the net result of this is a confusing experience for all of us, consumers, everyone,” said Sir Lucian Grainge last Thursday (October 27). “They’re increasingly guided to low-quality content by an algorithm.” He added: “We don’t think that’s sustainable for the platforms, nor is it sustainable for music fans.” (from Music Business Woldwide) UMG’s EVP, Michael Nash said: “Nearly 80% of this multimillion creator uploading pool has a monthly audience of less than 50 listeners. And, in fact, 90% of these creators have fewer than 400 monthly listeners. “That’s 400 monthly listeners out of an audience of [over] 400 million [on Spotify]. So just to put a data point behind that: that means that 90% of these uploaders are engaging less than 1 millionth of the platform. These are hobbyists that are playing to an essentially empty house.”
|
|
|
|
Post by copperx on Nov 9, 2022 13:44:05 GMT -6
I see only two ways out of this.
One is better algorithms. Let musicians select a few seconds of their tracks, then present these sections to listeners like TikTok or Tinder, and let them quickly swipe or stay if interested. Turn this into a recommendation engine.
The other one is raising the barrier to entry. Require artists to have an audience in the real world or on another platform before letting them join. Saying, "we're on Spotify" could be a status symbol. The only problem is that this solution doesn't scale, and the tech world doesn't like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by pessoa on Nov 10, 2022 14:04:31 GMT -6
I think the fact that everything is there might be plus for the platforms. This draws both the both the mainstream crowd, and those who enjoy niche genres.
The algoritm seems to guide towards the major labels, so I am not sure what the guy from Universal cries about. They have a big enough share of streams, income and influence.
|
|
|
|
Post by putinesqua on Nov 16, 2022 0:35:21 GMT -6
this guy goes to gulag. he his now hobbyist at breaking of rocks. we let kim keep airipods loaded only with "midnights". i hear it is high quality soundtrack for such endeavors. we send kim also his comrade ek to keep kim company.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Nov 22, 2022 16:25:32 GMT -6
I think it's a dangerous path limiting a platform based on audience numbers not quality.
That's a sure way of killing off the next Bowie and ending up with Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift and a 100 matching clones.
(though I'm not knocking those artists per say)
I heard an artist the other day with 11 monthly listeners and he was incredibly talented, the production was great and better then 100's of main stream artists.
He might just be on his way upward, who are "we" to clip his wings.
Spotify will just have to add a few extra servers :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by gwlee7 on Nov 22, 2022 21:59:18 GMT -6
I think it's a dangerous path limiting a platform based on audience numbers not quality. That's a sure way of killing off the next Bowie and ending up with Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift and a 100 matching clones. (though I'm not knocking those artists per say) I heard an artist the other day with 11 monthly listeners and he was incredibly talented, the production was great and better then 100's of main stream artists.He might just be on his way upward, who are "we" to clip his wings. Spotify will just have to add a few extra servers :-) Thanks for the kind words.  |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Nov 23, 2022 1:26:13 GMT -6
You’re welcome! Exactly, it might of been you or me  |
|
|
|
Post by putinesqua on Nov 25, 2022 6:24:00 GMT -6
hello, it's me i'm the problem--but semi-seriously (aside from spotify pretty ((i think)) objectively sounding like shit/-& i'm totally willing to concede vinyl to the bubble gum set--i used to seek out the most obscure 7 inches & whatnot, the things that would now have the least amount of plays. on purpose. but relentlessly numbering everything has an undeniable psychological effect on all of us
|
|
|
|
Post by ml on Nov 25, 2022 8:19:01 GMT -6
I don't think I've ever had the algorithm guide me towards "low quality content". If anything its becoming harder and harder for independent artists to get streams on spotify as most of the main channels are label dominated.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 25, 2022 15:13:32 GMT -6
It’s the same as it ever was, pay the right promotion you can get 1M streams on a song, no prob. The rest of the record will be in the low 1000’s or upper 100’s, and the high count track will slow to nothing when the playlists move on, if it doesn’t go viral or grab some other attention, or have a followup that also has paid promotional support. All being in the same bucket adds nothing to the idea of getting anywhere, but is is essential promotion on all levels, still. If I, as the studio guy, can’t point to your tracks on Spotify/Youtube as part of my demo reel, you don’t exist and I have no reel.
|
|
|
|
Post by ml on Nov 25, 2022 16:22:07 GMT -6
It’s the same as it ever was, pay the right promotion you can get 1M streams on a song, no prob. The rest of the record will be in the low 1000’s or upper 100’s, and the high count track will slow to nothing when the playlists move on, if it doesn’t go viral or grab some other attention, or have a followup that also has paid promotional support. All being in the same bucket adds nothing to the idea of getting anywhere, but is is essential promotion on all levels, still. If I, as the studio guy, can’t point to your tracks on Spotify/Youtube as part of my demo reel, you don’t exist and I have no reel. So spotify has become a public music dropbox haha |
|
|
|
Post by copperx on Nov 26, 2022 1:15:34 GMT -6
So spotify has become a public music dropbox haha I thought that was Soundcloud's business model? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2022 4:14:04 GMT -6
I think it's a dangerous path limiting a platform based on audience numbers not quality. That's a sure way of killing off the next Bowie and ending up with Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift and a 100 matching clones. (though I'm not knocking those artists per say) I heard an artist the other day with 11 monthly listeners and he was incredibly talented, the production was great and better then 100's of main stream artists. He might just be on his way upward, who are "we" to clip his wings. Spotify will just have to add a few extra servers :-) and lately this month I've been almost exclusively listening to stuff that has maybe 500 copies in print with horrific production being punk 45s and CD compilations of rehearsals. Why should Tailor Swift and Ted Sheeran get any of the royalties from my subscription fee? This is why I bought the CDs and bandcamp downloads of what I've been listening to rather than pay a fraction of lamestream pop artists' new mansions. |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Nov 26, 2022 5:41:45 GMT -6
I think it's a dangerous path limiting a platform based on audience numbers not quality. That's a sure way of killing off the next Bowie and ending up with Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift and a 100 matching clones. (though I'm not knocking those artists per say) I heard an artist the other day with 11 monthly listeners and he was incredibly talented, the production was great and better then 100's of main stream artists. He might just be on his way upward, who are "we" to clip his wings. Spotify will just have to add a few extra servers :-) and lately this month I've been almost exclusively listening to stuff that has maybe 500 copies in print with horrific production being punk 45s and CD compilations of rehearsals. Why should Tailor Swift and Ted Sheeran get any of the royalties from my subscription fee? This is why I bought the CDs and bandcamp downloads of what I've been listening to rather than pay a fraction of lamestream pop artists' new mansions. Each to their own as they say ;-) I love Spotify (it's so convenient, I can pipe it around the house) my kids and wife love it too and it's relatively cheap per month .... best thing I ever did was throwing my Technics record deck, CD player, Vinyl and CD collection in the local council skip, I created a lot of spare space :-) Not for everyone, I get that - but I'm happy. |
|
|
|
Post by tim on Nov 28, 2022 21:07:08 GMT -6
I think it's a dangerous path limiting a platform based on audience numbers not quality. That's a sure way of killing off the next Bowie and ending up with Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift and a 100 matching clones. (though I'm not knocking those artists per say) I heard an artist the other day with 11 monthly listeners and he was incredibly talented, the production was great and better then 100's of main stream artists. He might just be on his way upward, who are "we" to clip his wings. Spotify will just have to add a few extra servers :-) and lately this month I've been almost exclusively listening to stuff that has maybe 500 copies in print with horrific production being punk 45s and CD compilations of rehearsals. Why should Tailor Swift and Ted Sheeran get any of the royalties from my subscription fee? This is why I bought the CDs and bandcamp downloads of what I've been listening to rather than pay a fraction of lamestream pop artists' new mansions. Agree! If I only listen to one artist all month long they should get my whole subscriber fee minus a Spotify fee. No one else should get that. If I listen to a 1000 artists then my money should be divided across all 1000. Music that generates no listens after some period of time should get removed unless the artist wants to pay some annual maintenance fee. That should trim out a good amount of shit and this gives new good artist a fighting chance. |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 29, 2022 0:11:20 GMT -6
Uhhh.......not how royalties work.......
|
|
|
|
Post by tim on Nov 29, 2022 10:24:37 GMT -6
Haha! Yeah gross oversimplification playing fast and loose with "artist". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2023 4:15:28 GMT -6
Spotify is payola anyway. "Discovery" is straight up payola.
|
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Jan 16, 2023 0:06:05 GMT -6
Uhhh.......not how royalties work....... But maybe how they should. |
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jan 24, 2023 12:18:31 GMT -6
As long as computers are powerful, there's no downside to keeping millions of low play bedroom artists' music on streaming services. The average consumer/subscriber will never know it's there, and the artist and their friends and family can listen to their hearts content. It's not like the data storage, search or book keeping is a problem, is it?
The streamers do promote some artists over others. Apple Music is particularly annoying in that regard. I find Spotify's curation and suggestions for me better, but it's always someone signed to a label, in my experience.
It would be useful for a chart or playlist of completely unknown artists the curious could sample easily, but given the millions, how could Spotify possibly rank or keep up with that? I wonder if AI could possibly suss out really good music from millions of submissions. Couldn't hire enough humans, betcha.
In reality, nearly every piece of recorded music you've ever liked only reached your ears due to some kind of promotion.
And nobody makes money streaming until the plays are seven digits.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2023 12:35:28 GMT -6
As long as computers are powerful, there's no downside to keeping millions of low play bedroom artists' music on streaming services. The average consumer/subscriber will never know it's there, and the artist and their friends and family can listen to their hearts content. It's not like the data storage, search or book keeping is a problem, is it? The streamers do promote some artists over others. Apple Music is particularly annoying in that regard. I find Spotify's curation and suggestions for me better, but it's always someone signed to a label, in my experience. It would be useful for a chart or playlist of completely unknown artists the curious could sample easily, but given the millions, how could Spotify possibly rank or keep up with that? I wonder if AI could possibly suss out really good music from millions of submissions. Couldn't hire enough humans, betcha. In reality, nearly every piece of recorded music you've ever liked only reached your ears due to some kind of promotion. And nobody makes money streaming until the plays are seven digits. It’s beyond promotion and pr now Certain genres like electronic music are almost 100% payola on Spotify Black metal has a ton of payola on YouTube music too |
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jan 28, 2023 12:47:42 GMT -6
As long as computers are powerful, there's no downside to keeping millions of low play bedroom artists' music on streaming services. The average consumer/subscriber will never know it's there, and the artist and their friends and family can listen to their hearts content. It's not like the data storage, search or book keeping is a problem, is it? The streamers do promote some artists over others. Apple Music is particularly annoying in that regard. I find Spotify's curation and suggestions for me better, but it's always someone signed to a label, in my experience. It would be useful for a chart or playlist of completely unknown artists the curious could sample easily, but given the millions, how could Spotify possibly rank or keep up with that? I wonder if AI could possibly suss out really good music from millions of submissions. Couldn't hire enough humans, betcha. In reality, nearly every piece of recorded music you've ever liked only reached your ears due to some kind of promotion. And nobody makes money streaming until the plays are seven digits. It’s beyond promotion and pr now Certain genres like electronic music are almost 100% payola on Spotify Black metal has a ton of payola on YouTube music too There’s a ton of articles about the streaming services unethical business practices. There’s a good book called Chokepoint Capitalism that deals with their back door arrangements with the majors and stuff like Ticketmaster. As far as streaming, I can only speak to my legacy music over time, and today's streaming has erased and reversed the devaluation of recordings caused by the Napster phase of the internet. It was payola originally, that got classic rock artists play on FM, even established artists. Once a critical mass of exposure was reached, the public came along. I imagine it's the same today with today's distribution. Everybody's got their hand out when there's money being made. And conversely, there's incentive for monopoly and vertical integration by the players. |
|
