I used to buy lots of music but then I realised bulk of musicians are just ruthless predators that prey on their neighbours. I used to be in musician circles and used to try sing a lot in my 20s and I have musician neighbours and just there's this attitude of entitlement to other people's apartments and other people's time. Zero concern about how one's musical practice it affects others. Like if people had to rent spaces to practice music and wouldn't be allowed to do ruthless noise pollution and abuse of their neighbours, there would be way less musicians. I guess the problem of market saturation would solve itself. So, I used to buy a lot of music - at peak my collection had like 100 CDs and vinyls. Now I don't feel good about buying music because I may be funding/rewarding abuse. I try to buy more books and support visual arts instead. Like I sometimes buy a CD or a vinyl but much more rarely and try to buy used if possible. Spotify itself never made sense to me. It always sounded like something that can function only through ripping off artists. Being an artist generally sucks because of how over-saturated art markets are. Like with visual arts it's super bad because when Patreon became a thing, all these "all my 100k... 200k... 300k... 400k subscribers can be online artist if they try hard enough and not give up" grifters started appearing on social media.
You raise some great points about the industry but the headline story isn't all bad. The threshold is so low that most artists can't even withdraw those royalties from distributors. The fractions just get lost to middlemen anyways. When they say it will go to more popular artists that includes those who just pass the threshold at 1001 (estimated) yearly streams and not only the superstars. I understand your wider frustrations but I honestly believe they're doing the right thing here.
While Spotify is the worst offender, the Amazon of music if you like, their competitors are upto the same shit, Apple is not much better, sure maybe they pay tiny teensy a bit more, but they're all involved in the same race to the bottom to fleece artists. The problem is deeper and structural. Like fair enough, Spotify are pricks, don't give them your money if you don't want to, i try not to, but i end up giving my money to a only a slightly less worse prick.
I used to buy lots of music but then I realised bulk of musicians are just ruthless predators that prey on their neighbours. I used to be in musician circles and used to try sing a lot in my 20s and I have musician neighbours and just there's this attitude of entitlement to other people's apartments and other people's time. Zero concern about how one's musical practice it affects others.
Like if people had to rent spaces to practice music and wouldn't be allowed to do ruthless noise pollution and abuse of their neighbours, there would be way less musicians. I guess the problem of market saturation would solve itself.
So, I used to buy a lot of music - at peak my collection had like 100 CDs and vinyls. Now I don't feel good about buying music because I may be funding/rewarding abuse. I try to buy more books and support visual arts instead. Like I sometimes buy a CD or a vinyl but much more rarely and try to buy used if possible.
Spotify itself never made sense to me. It always sounded like something that can function only through ripping off artists.
Being an artist generally sucks because of how over-saturated art markets are. Like with visual arts it's super bad because when Patreon became a thing, all these "all my 100k... 200k... 300k... 400k subscribers can be online artist if they try hard enough and not give up" grifters started appearing on social media.
You raise some great points about the industry but the headline story isn't all bad. The threshold is so low that most artists can't even withdraw those royalties from distributors. The fractions just get lost to middlemen anyways. When they say it will go to more popular artists that includes those who just pass the threshold at 1001 (estimated) yearly streams and not only the superstars.
I understand your wider frustrations but I honestly believe they're doing the right thing here.
🤓🤓🤓🥰🥰🥰💯💯💯😁😁😁
It makes me want to leave Spotify altogether, but I'm on a family plan, and it'd be cancelling everyone's Spotify lol
While Spotify is the worst offender, the Amazon of music if you like, their competitors are upto the same shit, Apple is not much better, sure maybe they pay tiny teensy a bit more, but they're all involved in the same race to the bottom to fleece artists. The problem is deeper and structural. Like fair enough, Spotify are pricks, don't give them your money if you don't want to, i try not to, but i end up giving my money to a only a slightly less worse prick.
i left spotify its trash
very well structured video, this sucks, capitalism continues to under value artists and their work 🫥