View Single Post
Old 10-30-2013, 02:36 AM
DrumEatDrum's Avatar
DrumEatDrum DrumEatDrum is offline
Platinum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,351
Default Re: David Byrne: 'The internet will suck all creative content out of the world'

Lots of truth, but Byrne clearly has no clue on one pint.

he says:
I also don't understand the claim of discovery that Spotify makes; the actual moment of discovery in most cases happens at the moment when someone else tells you about an artist or you read about them not when you're on the streaming service listening to what you have read about (though Spotify does indeed have a "discovery" page that, like Pandora's algorithm, suggests artists you might like)
There is more to this, and Byrne sells this one aspect short.
Every band page on Spotify has a "Related artists" button that will give a page full of bands that are actually similar in style to whatever you are listening to. I have discovered many, many new bands this way. This aspect is not like Pandora's algorithm. It's more like a record store grouping bands by sound.

And in addition to there is indeed a discovery page, which is more algorithm based.
I'd be even more curious if the folks who "discover" music on these services then go on to purchase it.
I have. Many times. If I like the band/album enough, I will buy my own copy to have it.

And yes, there have been many albums I was interested in that I did not buy because I heard it on Spotify and decided I wasn't really into it. But there have been bands/albums I had never heard of before, that I discovered via Spotify's "related artists" that I did go out and buy the album, and began to follow said band.

I manage to check stuff out without using these services. I'll go directly to an artist's website, or Bandcamp, or even Amazon
Slight hypocrisy there. If you listen to track on this methods, no one is getting paid, It's all free. How is listening to a free song different than listening to a free song? At least with Spotify, the band might get a penny. Simply going to the bands website means the band gets nothing.

Are these services evil? Are they simply a legalised version of file-sharing sites such as Napster and Pirate Bay with the difference being that with streaming services the big labels now get hefty advances?
Spotify may be evil, but at least it pays towards artists, where as file sharing does not.

When my band gets listened to on Spotify, I eventually get a penny. OK, that's no much. And I have to wait until I get $20 worth to get paid. It's sad. On the other, people are listening to me. I'm not on a record label. No one is promoting my band. It's just there.

The other aspect is I often use Spotify to listen to things at work that I already own at home. Because it beats carrying the album from home. So in fact, some bands are getting paid twice by me, once for the album purchase, and again for listening to it via Spotify.

I do get his overall point. I really do. But as he said:
I don't have an answer. I wish I could propose something besides what we've heard before
And this is what it comes down to. You say it's bad, you can wish it away, but it's here.
Reply With Quote