🚨If you enjoy this video on the story of Spotify, I think you may also like my other new video, which looks at the inside story of Instagram: th-cam.com/video/6jv98VfM3vQ/w-d-xo.html - let me know what you think of them both! :) 🧠 Thank you Noom for sponsoring today’s video! Go to noom.com/magnates & take your free 30-second quiz to find out how Noom can help you hit your health goals!
Another genius Spotify move, elaborating on the whole “personalization of users”, is the yearly wrapped they do. I think that’s one of the things that gives them so much more leverage over Apple Music
FYI be sure to save those. I had been a subscriber for years and they got rid of those. It only saves the last 2 or 3 years and then deletes anything further.
The Spotify algorithm is trash compared to TH-cam music. I noticed without having any idea of all of this that Spotify make me listen music that no one knows. I started using TH-cam music and the experience was much better.
The artist blaming Spotify for their record company screwing them is insane. Record companies have done so much more harm than good. Especially in the direction of society
It's coz they work for the industry tho. Imagine your boss pays you millions to make sales and a new company is interfering with the business. You're gonna point the figure at the new guy and demand more money to the label. Yeah, the record company may be screwing artists but they're already locked in.
@Goopy Le Grande No they don't. Artists get basically the exact same cut of revenue per stream(varies by label some artists make a bigger cut on streams than physical) as they do per album sale and more money is coming in overall from streams than physical media now. The data is fairly easy to find and you should really look into it before saying dumb shit you clearly know nothing about.
Also it probably works just like yt, YOU have to upload a song, so why don't you stop uploading them and stop screaming that they're paying you too little? Or even better, find a job, and treat making music like a hobby, mabye, but just maybe... you'll finally be a better person... Yes, I don't like "artists" (Just to be clear, by saying "you" I mean those artists)
how can people say Spotify/streaming is causing artists to make less money when it literally stopped the piracy fiasco in which artists make no money from.
Greed. For these people there‘s never enough money. They want you to buy every song/album in order to make the maximum amount of money. Because it‘s not enough to be a multi millionaire, got to be a billionaire.
while Spotify reduced piracy, it also severely reduced music purchases, which pay a lot more than streams revenue of the music industry is shifting towards smaller artists, who have dedicated fanbases still buying music and merch, away from the mass market obviously those small artists aren"t the ones to be featured in news stories, since none of them individually have that reach, as a result the side you hear is the side that has a reason to complain
@@illdeletethismusic the problem with that is that music purchases were going to decline regardless cause a streaming service for music had to be invented at a point of time
I've discovered dozens of great artists through Spotify's recommendations and playlists that I wouldn't know otherwise. Whether they're intentionally pulling away from big labels or not, the result is that it's probably the best place to find new music and small underground musicians. Nowhere else would you hear a #1 hit next to a song with 2K views on YT and enjoy both of them.
I found Amazon's ai to be really scary for finding music I like. It just knew too well. Songs I'd forget about 5 to 7 years ago, it would randomly recommend.
So let me get this straight. Big record labels were only willing to give Spotify licensing deals that shaft them so badly they cant turn a profit to this day. Then the same record labels turn around and tell their artists that there is no money in streaming. And then artists go on to blame Spotify? Its no secret that most famous people are remarkebly hollow behind their eyes but damn ...
Spotify is doing shady practices alright. But if was any other industry I would have stayed away from them. As it is music industry and they are fucking over record labels and their greedy execs I am more than happy to pay monthly premium to spotify for that alone.
This video made me view Spotify and the Label's early relationship like an abusive relationship, the record labels constantly threatening to hurt spotify if they didn't do what they were told. This left spotify to figure out new ways to get out from under the oppression of the labels and now that they have with some of the things listed (podcasts, leveraging royalty free music libraries, promoting less expensive licensed music, etc) The music industry i.e. the labels is now saying they can't do that, and it's cheating... Make no mistake, the labels MADE spotify what it is today by simply giving them no other choice than to pivot to new paths in order to gain their freedom back.
Yeah. Make no mistake Spotify has some shady practices, practices that if were made in other industries would displease me, but they are doing it to record labels, the music industry is ruthless (specially to smaller artists) so fuck them. If the industry one day pulls the rug from under Spotify (Which most likely won't happen) my Soulseek server is alive and well to return to piracy in a heart beat, just like my private trackers, torrent servers and Plex are alive and kicking right now since Hollywood remembered once again that they are greedy.
With that view, doesn't it seem like Spotify is perpetuating a cycle of abuse? The big labels abused Spotify because they wanted to be the only ones taking advantage of artists, however Spotify used manipulative and dishonest underhanded strategies to become just a different form of artist exploitation. From the artists' perspective they have merely traded one oppressor for another. If you can imagine the labels and Spotify as the parents, and the artists as their kids in a custody battle, then aren't the artists _still_ being mistreated? [2nd sentence edited for bias. 5/19/22]
@@jemmapellemma8185 The solution to this problem would be for artists to just sign with spotify then, no? Since that's the platform most people use to listen to music. That's just my uneducated guess though, I can't really see why artists would want to work with record labels instead.
As a swede, I’ve been using Spotify since 2008 and I stopped downloading (illegally) music almost over night. In my opinion Spotify is the best thing that’s ever happened for music lovers. Regarding the artists I don’t know but then again, like another comment here said - now they at least get something per stream than nothing at all with illegal downloading. Peace ✌🏻
And not to mention how helpful it is for small artists, The day when spotify got released for India and when I got my new phone, I stopped pirating the songs (except the one which aren't available for my country). Elk did something which has to be done otherwise most of us still would've stuck with pirating songs from malicious sites
@@iditrirajan that’s a good point as well. Do you use the free version or premium? How much does premium cost in India? In Sweden I think it is around 12$ per month.
@@smOOdiebOOdie thanks. I use premium version of Spotify but fairly, there isn't much point of buying Spotify premium in India because free version in India isn't as restrictive as the free version in Western nations. (And yes, we can play songs without shuffling ) In India, premium individual for a month costs 129 rupees (almost 2 usd a month). For 6 months, its 719 rupees (almost 10 usd) and for a year, its like 1400 or 1500 rupees (almost 20 usd) - its okeyish in pricing. And also, you can't pay like monthly - you can only buy subscription once and you have to renew it manually For duo and family, price must be like 60 rupees higher individually. I hated ads and wanted "higher quality" audio so I got premium - no other reasons so far. And it's pretty expensive - how much is it in Swede currency?
@@iditrirajan 2$ is very cheap with western eyes but ofc in India I’m guessing average joe still can’t afford it. I got premium because of higher quality and no ads. In Swedish krona it’s 119:- for premium , 149:- for duo and 189:- for family , so that would be roughly 13$, 16$, 21$ per month. It continues until you yourself end the subscription.
I actually think there's a long way to go in the music marketing industry. Spotify already has some aspects of success, but I don't see any companies capitalising on the passion a lot of people have for music. Spotify's wrapped yearly is already incredibly successful, so why not other fun gimmicks that make people feel like they have a good music taste? just speculating
@@shawn3333 HAHAHAHA yeah right. I listen to music for a minimum of 3 hours a day. Everyone in my class? At least 2 hours a day. All my friends, "_____ is listening to ______ on Spotify for 5 hours" Where did you get that idea from?
Spotify should create their own music label where they can sign new artists and musicians and profit off their own homegrown artists in streaming their music as they already own their music IP from the start without having to deal with other music labels as the middle men. This creates a cycle and monopoly of music which are owned and streamed by Spotify. This gives them more leverage over the music labels and enables them to be more profitable and pay their artists better. This, in turn, would attract already existing artists to quit their old labels and join Spotify instead.
That would create a big conflict. As then it would be very clear which artists would be favoured on the platform. Artist (hypothetically) signed by Spotify would receive much more promotion while others, signed by other record labels, would get left behind. They probably would get sued so many times until they're out of business.
At least smaller artists can have their music heard now. Back in the late 60s and 70s when I was peripherally involved in the industry, typically a record company would offer a band a recording contract. The band would put enormous effort in making a record, but the record company would just put the tapes on a shelf and record a debit against the band that they would collect _if_ they ever released the recording. The contract prevented the artists from recording and releasing their music elsewhere! Most of the CDs I’ve purchased over the last 20 years were recorded by the musicians themselves who sold them at their gigs. The funniest thing I came across was a bunch of musicians who were big in the late 60s and 70s touring together and selling compilation CDs of their hits. The CDs weren’t made by the labels; they had been pirated by the musicians! And yes, these very same musicians were railing against piracy of their music in the press. You hafta laugh...
@@ravantheoghacker863 You sold your ownership over the songs through contracts to record labels, and therefore you dont have a right to make copies of those songs anymore, so you making a compilation etc will count as piracy.
it's a bit of a side note but also labels controlled access to studio space which resulted in quite an amazing lack of diversity. now we have much easier access to studio quality equipment which has allowed us to hear the creativity of a lot of humans that were shut out of the industry. fender recently said 50% of its sales were now to women, which says a lot about this. youll notice that most of the people saying that music sucks these days look a whole lot like the people who used to gatekeep record contracts and large studios.
Seems to me like the traditional music industry companies are just as guilty as what people are now accusing Sporify of, e.g. deciding who wins and who loses. Hard to say that curated playlists etc were inorganic when .. popular music always was that way to begin with. Nevermind the fact that the big labels keep much of the money and pay artists relatively little as well.
if anything artists should be grateful that they can now move on from record companies. they are lowly businesses who at times even drug and pimp out their talent. it is shocking what goes on behind the scenes
I don't remember purchasing any albums at all. I pirated them all. Now i kind of overpay for Spotify and i don't really give a shit. No spotify - going back to Rarbg or kickasstorrents.
I keep all my favorite music ready to download and listen to in an app. No need for streaming services, I feel bad that they don't get the money they deserve for their hard work but I just don't have the money to be buying everything I like to listen to right now.
There's one thing I don't understand, these artists are getting less money and blaming spotify, but it seems to me that the real problem is that the artists gave these "labels" ownership and negotiating power over their music. If not for the labels, couldn't an artist get the full 70% revenue from their music as opposed to some percentage of that 70% that they get from their label?
sadly, no. They have to pay 70% because that's what the labels negotiated. Most artists from the label get $0.0004 cents per play, so Spotify generally offers the same amount to an indie artist, keeping 90% for themselves - the artists don't really see a difference either way.
Spotify has not only never had a profitable year in its history, but it has burnt over 4billion euro since its foundation in 2007. This is largely due to the dynamics between Spotify and its suppliers (major record labels) who have huge leverage over it, thus can charge Spotify insane rates for music royalties (nearly 70% of Spotify's revenue), leaving only 30% for itself to pay for everything else. This is why Spotify must expand beyond music if it ever wants to turn profitable, thus their recent drive into podcasts, having invested over $1billion to sign deals with the likes of Joe Rogan, Kim Kardashian, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and even the Obamas etc. I made a video explaining the problem behind Spotify's persistent lack of profits, and how they're trying to fix it. Might be interesting to you.
Spotify also has exclusive music available that's unavailable on TH-cam and cannot be purchased on iTunes. They're branded as Spotify Exclusives. I tried to purchase one of these songs and reached out to the artist - they apparently didn't own the rights to sell the audio track but appreciated me reaching out.
And there's also songs that aren't available on spotify that TH-cam has. The song I wanted on Spotify isn't even on there and the song released like 4y ago😭
@@jemmapellemma8185 That's business as usual in the music industry. Generally, artists own the rights to their songs; that is, the lyrics and composition. They do NOT own the rights to specific recordings of their songs. The one making and editing the recording(generally, the record label) does. Spotify paid them to make a song for them, that Spotify has exclusive rights to the recording of. This is why Taylor Swift recently re-recorded all of her early music. The label(and later, the individual) that owned the rights to her masters was being a dick and trying to hush her up when she was talking about the shit she had to deal with from them. They told her that they'd only give her the rights to her masters if she signed an NDA saying she wouldn't talk about them anymore. So she hired out a studio and a bunch of musicians, and re-recorded all of her songs herself. SHE owns the rights to those new recordings, and uses those everywhere.
@@peterscasny2803 Well, spotify is the only one available on Xbox... So I have like no choice. I really wish Yt music was there... Maybe algorithm will show it to some Ceo of yt and they will consider it :P
Independent artist here. Spotify has offered a unique opportunity for new artists that simply wasn’t there before. I personally have been self-releasing music for fun for a while and thanks to a Spotify-run playlist I hadn’t even heard of before, I went from (at best) a few hundred streams on a track, to having a song with nearly 2 million streams. Keep in mind this still doesn’t generate enough money to live off of, but it’s given me exposure in a way that I would have had to do so much more work for if I had to convince people to purchase music on iTunes or CDs for a similar amount of profit. It’s going to be very interesting in the next few years as recommended content continues to dominate all forms of media, as many artists are going to have to figure out how to take advantage of sudden virality and turn it into a consistent career. I hope there continues to be more opportunities for independent artists, because Spotify has to realize that supporting them means having great content while also not having to worry about gigantic labels breathing down their necks.
Im not explaining my point further but what ill say is simply that i do respect the founder of spotify for all of this, it was literally like a villain story except he isnt really the villain, its the labels that made him this way, he got so pressed and knocked to the ground but eventually he came back on his feet ONE WAY OR ANOTHER which i totally respect. THEY gave him NO CHOICE so he chose the only choice left for him, which is play the chess by the other person's rules and play him the exact way he played you. well done spotify, gg:)
I normally dont take notice of good editing because its usually a background thing you come to expect, but holy crap man, your editing is one of the few that made me stop and look at each animation over and over again, great job my man!
to be honest, i’ve seen a lot of people saying spotify is bad for pay etc, but it seems like it was almost entirely other people’s want for profit that fucked spotify’s reputation.
Personally I think this whole market is full of greed. I can't afford a monthly subscription, so I gladly listen to the 3 or so ads every 10 minutes on the free version. If not for Spotify, the artists would be getting even less, as probably 90%+ of the music on the platform has been downloaded, and can just be distributed illegally if Spotify ever dies.
i mean, music is still incredibly easy to pirate, it's just that with services like spotify it isn't all that appealing - it's way more convenient to go on spotify and access most of your favorite music for a few bucks a month, or completely free for that matter, than to download whatever songs/albums you want, possibly segregate them in some way etc. etc. the day spotify stops being convenient will be the day music piracy will be back in full force
I built up my music collection from 2008-2012 (umm legally of course…) i had over 15K songs ranging from a bunch of albums/artists on my computer and iPod. Then I discovered Spotify and started utilizing it in 2011. I would use the local file to combine it. I’ve been a loyal Spotify user since I was 14 lol. It’s crazy how time flies. I thoroughly enjoy the service and everything it provides.
Why have such a computer system to upload and raise up music files. Besides Good Old LPs still sell online. However there is a problem with the Piracy of our globe and system.
Much respect to Daniel Ek, if he hadn't taken the risk he had at the beginning we'd probably still be stuck with Napster & iTunes. Whilst Spotify isn't perfect, a lot of the issues seem to be caused by strong arm tactics from the record labels rather than Spotify itself. With most of the functions record labels fulfil being available directly to artists (i.e. social media for promotion, Spotify/Bandcamp for distributio, etc) record labels are functionally obsolete and the sooner they disappear, the better.
Super difficult industry to disrupt when the record label already screw the artist. Meaning dealing with the record labels will ultimately mean the same thing. It’s like a domino effect from Spotify to the Record label and trickling (very minimally to the final people) the artist.
Record labels will literally kill you before giving you power of your own art. It will take a movement to make a shift in the industry. With the help of the internet especially web3, it is much more feasible. It just takes a leader to take charge to make a change but it’s a high risk
That's why I make my own playlists and only listen to artists that I know of. If I discover something new, I'd look for more info on other platforms, then shall I add it to my playlist. However, I recently prefer youtube music since it automatically integrates dozens of my already made playlist from youtube to youtube music. It's just... convenient. I must note that youtube music is great if you already have a paid subscription to youtube premium, as some music just cannot be played unless you have premium.
As a musician, my opinion is that is wether is labels or Spotify or TH-cam, somebody gets rich on our works while we, except for the big household names, only get the crumbles they throw for us under the table.
@@C00LI0DUDE unless you have already proved you worth to a record company, all artists, especially new ones, get awful first record deals. Look at the Beatles, for instance. They record sales were huge, yet they had to keep on touring to make any decent money in the early years.
I never thought to consider why Spotify had gotten worse. Recently they had an update where you cant pick a song you want to listen to, instead that song is mixed with a bunch of others users like, for some reason. You only get 6 free skips so you have to pray your songs among the various others that get played before youre listening to something you didnt even want to. I get wanting money from all of this, especially as a big record lable, but making the platform THIS bad is honestly just turning people either back to pirating or TH-cam
I doubt that I’d rather use TH-cam than Spotify but not until TH-cam also had its own music streaming service too! And at least on YT Music you still can pick a song and unlimited skips but buying subscriptions to get rid of ads and offline listening is basically just the same thing. Also I still used YT Music more but I sometimes occasionally use Spotify but Spotify isn’t my choice anymore…
The funny thing is that this only happens on phone, on all the other devices (iPad, pc, PlayStation) it doesn’t happen. Apart from the 6 skips per hour + ads on all other devices apart from phone you have premium
I've binged all content on this channel repeatedly, and even taking into account the extraordinary standard of quality of all your videos this one was still literally off the charts. Fantastic work. Keep 'em coming🙌
As an Independent Artist myself, I can definitely say that the royalty percentage we get from streaming platforms are quite low! But WITHOUT TELLING PEOPLE ABOUT THE ROYALTIES DISTRIBUTION AND THE PROCEDURE BEHIND IT, THIS VIDEO IS INCOMPLETE!! Specifically in case of Spotify as it has to pay 2 royalties for same song every single time it streams. Anyways I've been here with you since 20k subs and its great to see your growth @MagnatesMedia. You definitely deserve it🙌
i dont understand how people could be so mad at spotify, its just a place for podcasts and music to be in one place for free. And the "less money" thing makes sense but only way you can really hit it big in anything is if you are lucky enough and have connections anyways
Record labels were screwing artists long before the internet came around. There's a great article online called "Courtney Love does the math" where she breaks down how far a million dollars for a record goes. Spoiler, the band ends up with something like 45k each. And that was back when people spent MUCH more on music before streaming, and most bands didnt get a million for their record.
You forgot to mention that musicians/artists pay Spotify to have their songs on the platform, it's a yearly charge. I lose money every year with my four tracks I have on there :D
I think you are taking about distributors?Then it applies to Apple Music, Tidal, etc. You don’t usually sign a contract with Spotify, you use distributors as a middle man. And it depends on what distributor and what tier you choose. It could be a revenue share, but I think that’s like a service fee. It’s pretty much fare for small artists.
I love such content. This helps people understand the situation from Spotify POV and realize that it always were record labels behind everything that wanted to melt Daniel’s platform into an easy cash grab.
Been sick the last few days these videos have made the time much better. 20 minutes or over an hour in length, they are interesting and well put together. Very nice work
I remember back in 2020-19 i hadn't heard of a single person around me using Spotify. But now in 2021-2022 almost everyone uses it. I have been using Spotify since 2019 and I love it.
Great information! You did forget to mention that Spotify recently made a deal with Barcelona for around $300M so that it could be rebranded as a Spotify soccer field for the next 5 years and decreasing the money Spotify will be paying artists so that they can pay off the deal
It's insane that a publishing company can get 70% of revenue. No one would even listen to 90% of the artists that they do if they couldn't listen to them on Spotify for free.
I've been a paid member of Spotify since 2017 and I have never regretted it. I love that they expanded into podcasts and now audiobooks it is pretty nice to have everything in one app than having three apps
I find it interesting how the artists were going after Spotify when you would think they especially know how a lot of that stuff has always been down to what their labels want. That amd it's not exactly a secret at this point how the labels themselves aren't exactly holy towards them as is
THANK YOU. Someone finally points out how much power Spotify has over what we listen. I have had discussions with multiple people about this and nobody ever takes me seriously. So THANK YOU.
Do you think it's simply a shift of power from record labels - who formerly had so much power over what we listen to - to now Spotify? Edit: P.S. I don't know the answer and am genuinely interested in hearing your thoughts. Feel free to elaborate on your comment :)
Oh, sorry. I'm only seeing this now. But to answer your question: I think it's a little more complicated than a power shift. Really, Spotify is like a third player in the game between artists and record labels. We know that, throughout the years the labels are the ones controlling the artists' earnings. Now, Spotify is one more layer that the artists associated with labels have to go through. I don't know what the numbers are exactly... but I presume if an artist associated with a record label goes on Spotify, a percentage of the earnings made in each song is given to the record label, another percentage is given to Spotify, and the leftover is given to the artist. I don't know what the actual numbers are like. But it's undeniable the cut these artists get is getting smaller. On the other hand, you could argue that Spotify gives artists without labels an opportunity to sell their music to a wide audience. I think I heard Billie Eilish started recording her music from home, for example. I also don't really understand what algorithm they have in place to promote this music. But if they wanted to, Spotify could prioritize showing labeless artists, which would strip some power from the labels, perhaps. So they also have that advantage. But what I meant in my comment above was coming more from the perspective of a consumer whose music choices are most often not in Spotify. I do not use Spotify because the music I like is most often not there, as simple as that. And because it is not there, most people haven't heard of it. And even if it was there, who is to say that it would be prioritized by the algorithm? In one way or another, by staying only in Spotify, consumers narrow down the media they are exposed to. This saddens me. (But that's more about decentralization)
@@machupikachu1085 I feel like saying it's like the radio or MTV isn't quite right either? Because back then, how did you find songs? When the internet wasn't as developed as it is now and information wasn't flying around freely. I feel like back then the only way to find music was through those sources. Right now, Spotify is probably the most influential platform for finding music. But it's not the only option. So it's nowhere near as limiting as it was back then.
I gave up on Spotify recently but I wouldn't have the same tastes in music today if it weren't for Discover Weekly finding lesser known artists (and royalty-free stuff). I wouldn't have found synthwave.
I am always blown away with your editing style! I absolutely loved how you used the smoke in this video as a layer to reveal parts. I must learn this trick. What editing software do you use John?
Spotify can have control for all i care. As long as they don't become your typical cyberpunk corpo monopoly or whatever and censor unnecessary stuff. I've discovered many new artists thanks to it's algorithm.
Spotify has even more tricks up its sleeve. for example, they only pay the artists/labels per song played. less songs played by the user = more money for spotify. that's why when you're searching for a song you usually don't find the 'radio'-version of it that you're looking for, but the 'extended mix' or whatever version of the song is longer.
Is anyone going to mention how insanely good this video is? I'm geniuenly impressed by these editing skills, it must have taken days to make... Keep up the great work!!!
I’ve used literally 80% of music streaming services out there and except for tidal and TH-cam music none come close to the level of personalization i enjoy on Spotify
I remember in high school (about 4 years ago) when I paid for Spotify premium and the suggested songs from their algorithm were much better than it is now. On top of that, the app was so much easier to navigate. I dont know why they changed the app so drastically, I low key kinda hate it. My family pays for an Apple Music subscription now and I will say that now that I have access to both, Apple Music's interface is much better but nothing will ever top the 2015-2018 Spotify interface. If we could go back to the, I would be 100% on board with ditching Apple Music. Its just that Spotify feels weird to use now compared to how it was several years ago.
I tried out Spotify premium for free for 3 months and couldn't go back afterwards but I don't have a lot of money, but I found a way to pay 13€/year for it
@@imienazwisko4219 through a brasilian VPN and a brasilian currency gift card and Spotify family (it could be even cheaper than 13€/year (It could be as cheap as 8€/year) but another guy did all the work so I'm ok with paying 13€
The desktop app was ditched in favour of a scaled up mobile app for desktop because it was too expensive to maintain both. This is why the desktop app is borderline unusable now. There have been other confusing layout changes on the mobile app too, which sometimes reflect the shifting priorities for spotify and sometimes are, i think, just poorly thought out design decisions. As for the music recommendations and personalised playlists and especially the mood playlists, they are muzak at this point and I think that is to do with trying to include as much cheap to license music as possible on them.
I stopped downloading illegally ever since Spotify. There is absolutely nothing stopping me from downloading anything illegally, if you make a system tailored for heavy music users like myself WHILE making it so easy to ignore the extra leg work of finding/downloading/ and transferring music to my phone... Most people are going to pay 10 bucks a month lol, imo this is the best thing to happen to the music industry, maybe even saved the music industry
I happily enjoyed Spotify since 2012 and now moved on to Apple Music mostly for their Appreciation of Artists and their high qualitiy audio (Dolby Atmos especially)
Meh. Spotify was neither here nor there with regard to artist's profit share. Any profit artists lost out on because of Spotify would have been gobbled up instead by predatory record labels anyway. It's probably a net gain for artists if anything for those who sign directly with Spotify
I agree. One thing that people rarely talk about is how services like Spotify and TH-cam have really helped democratise the respective industries. No longer are artists beholden to record label gatekeepers and it is much easier to release music independently keeping control of their own masters and a bigger percentage of the revenue. If you want to become a mega star like Taylor Swift, then yes, you probably still do need a label still, but for the vast majority of artists, I don't think the label is needed anymore. Of course, most of these big artists with the biggest voice are not going to criticise the labels and bite the hand that feeds them. Artists like Taylor Swift claim to be standing for the small artists when in reality she just wants to increase her own personal wealth.
@@mistymu8154 remember tho - labels don't make music - they finance, market and promote it. And, they're pretty good at it. They invest heavily in your music when others aren't but expect to recoup their investment. Even back in the 2000's, only about 20% of artists didn't lose money for the labels, and only the top 3-5% is where the profits came from. I'm not necessarily an advocate for labels, but it was just a loan from a specialized bank/promotions company that was willing to pay you to write, record, and perform music on a larger scale than most everyone could manage on their own. Cheers!
I don’t really see a problem here with most of the points, record labels have always done what spotify is doing and would pick and choose artists who they were gonna sign and therefore succeed, or bar their music all together similar to spotifys shadow ban. All that’s happening is a shift of power from greedy music labels to a different source. As for the “greed” the only options were to let piracy rise and get 0 money or get some money, spotify had no control over the other websites that would stream the music for free so honestly spotify giving them something over nothing can’t really be complained about especially when record labels have always and still do take a massive cut and screw over their artists.
John you awesome dude! I always love watching these videos that focus on the raise of our current big tech overlords. There's always a lesson to be taken away from there hardwork/smartwork
this is exactly what is happening. An artist named Brent Fiyaz for instance is one of those shady business practices where garbage music is owned by a big Music industry company with Spotify deals, so thst "artist" was made the number 1 album that nobody heard or bought.
Tbh I think more people listen to more music now. I used to download music, but it was very tedious and therefore only had like 100 songs until I was 15. Now, 5 years later, I have nearly 2000 songs and discovered some of my favourite artists due to the ease of using spotify, and I never would have done without them. I've then been to concerts of those artists. So overall, I'd say the artist overwhelmingly benefits from Spotify, even if the individual streams don't earn them that much.
Cool. But ask yourself this - if 10 of those songs from that 100 were from the same artist, would you pay $100 to see them live when they came to town? Since you've probably memorized them, the answer is most likely yes. Now, if you have unlimited options and are not really invested in any of them, are you gonna shell out $100 for a concert ticket to hear the one song you kinda like? Maybe not. So how does that help out artists exactly? Personally investing in something emotionally -and especially - financially creates value and loyalty. Otherwise it's off to the next frivolous interaction. Just imagine if we had a dating app like that: endless choices with no real investment - oh, wait, never mind....
@@machupikachu1085 Counterpoint: Most people NEVER go to concerts, devaluing your entire point. The artists lose literally nothing, but can gain everything from streaming services. And Spotify doesn’t just pay them in exposure.
So basically how to make a succesfull company : Make a great free product. Gain a big auditory using it. Make it paid. Make both clients and artist pay to be there.
have been waiting for this ✌️ thanks for this.. currently I'm being interviewed by the team..if everything goes right, by May 7th I will have the offer letter. Thanks again for such informative video. Good luck to you & hoping for the best 🤞
Honestly, this sounds like record companies are the villains and not Spotify. Spotify did what it had to, in order to survive. I personally don't care. I just want Spotify to deliver me stuff my ears like. I don't care of Maria Carey or Justin Bieber can buy another Mansion.
But you noticed that those same artist who pulled their music, returned to Spotify "Joni Mitchell Returns Music to Spotify After Two-Year Protest" Along with Neil Young. And most old artist are selling their catalog to big music/record companies that will have Spotify getting that same music. So their "protest" isn't worth jack .....
I love the production, quality & storytelling of your videos John. Me personally when it comes to a music streaming service, I've been using TH-cam music after my subscription ended with Spotify.
You also have to look at the positives of removing the possibility of financial success through releasing records. Artists, especially independent artists, are no longer inclined to follow trends just to get a bigger paycheck. People are making the music they want to make and the stress of possible financial growth doesn't push them towards mimicking popular artists. Entire genres have been created that never would have been heard otherwise. It is really terrible that artists are not getting what they've earned, but music had more variety now than it ever has if you know where to look.
Paying 0.99e for one track is outrageous. Especially when the music nowdays is so cheap to make, and majority is lower quality. Streaming services like Spotify make most sense.
Yeah like 200$-700$ for the daw, 20-600$ instruments, mics and amps (optional) and 300-1000$ for the hardware running a DAW. THAT IS OUTRAGEOUSLY CHEAP COMPARED TO WHAT THE LABELS HAVE. THESE SCUMBAG COMMUNIST LIBRRALS JUST WANT TO EARN MILLIONS BY PLINKING AND PLONKING WHILE SPOTIFY DOES ALL THE HARD WORK GIVING THEM A PLATFORM. THAT IS THE REASON THEY ARE THE MULTI MILLION DOLLAR COMPANY.
'Lower quality' is subjective. Production and marketing costs are not. So, you're not willing to pay 0.99e for a favorite song you can listen to wherever and whenever you want forever? Seems like you may be a little cheap, bro lol!
Spotify is responsible for expanding my musical tastes in ways that I couldn't have imagined prior to subscribing to Spotify, it really is a remarkable streaming service. Also, Spotify Wrapped is something that I look forward to each year as it never fails to fascinate me when it comes to looking back on my musical taste throughout the year that was. If Spotify launched a record label of their own, they would most likely become the top dog of music streaming and distributing worldwide. Great work as always my friend.
Spotify owning the rights to the music and controlling 100% of the playlists makes an uneven playing field for every artist who is not Spotify. Also, artists get their fanbases to follow playlists and the same artists get thrown out a couple of weeks later, leaving Spotify with more and more followers to which they can later play their own music to. My point is, Spotify is an amazing platform if you are Spotify or one of the 3 record labels. There is a reason every artist hates being on the platform.
Exactly and what do you see here, nothing but posts praising their total monopoly, as if the new boss is any different from the old boss. People are goddamn idiots who live to worship companies and be good little consumers.
@@Nikki_the_GAnd they keep wondering why today's music is schit. If you praise a attention model, you'll get artists to force themselves to get your attention through face tattoos, big bubbles for females, terrible personalities just to gain your attention to sell it to advertisers. This has nothing to do with music. Everything to do with egotism and you're feeding into it
Is the destruction of the music industry a bad thing? I thought now that the world's artists finally have an option to make a living outside of the industrial process that it would be celebrated no? I certainly do.
@@4cps777 well that's a common rhetoric but I make a living off it and what's more, I get paid far more from Spotify than I do Apple or any other service because their service actually works. Also I don't advertise our use playlists. You can't just make art and get paid, it still has to be good. If you can't sell it direct to your super fans then you certainly can't get sell it on a store front competing with 66k over songs EVERY DAY. I find most people saying "Spotify doesn't pay " are people that just can't make money from music in general. Which lets Face it is 99 percent of the population. Music is hard who'd of thunk. I'm not saying it's optimal , and the major labels have invaded now with the payola playlists etc but don't forget Spotify took 8 to years + to be even profitable, and was the first to figure it out.
@@BuzzaB77 Well, the cut musicians get is still not pretty good. I'm not speaking music or anything here, just numbers. Also, the secound main problem with spotify is their power over the industry. However, compared to the state the industry was in before spotify, I still think that it has somehow changed to the good.
@@4cps777 agreed it's certainly better than it used to be, the cut musicians make is worth it, but only if self releasing like myself. anyone who still uses labels they are just as screwed as before.
@@BuzzaB77 labels can ensure investment in your projects so you'll be more famous, have better audio or video etc. its really what you want to chose now. you can make money from both sides but if you are already famous then self releasing is wayyy better than having a company take a giant share for doing absolutely nothing.
Apple doesn't take 30% of Spotifys revenue, since you can't actually do any in-app purchases, which is a requirement for Apple to do that. Spotify opens an external URL whenever you try to cancel / upgrade your subscription, circumventing the requirements.
Both are open to payola! The Weeknd put over 500K to promote his music (also stolen from indie arts) using thousands of bots, pretending to be real accounts/listeners. Using US, UK and Canada 4G proxies. To be honest, he’s not alone. Same can be used to take down charts of the music from other artists. Buying fake traffic has never been so cheap. Spotify or Apple will never open the boxes for independent professionals to check it out. Take Anathema example, provide great music for your fans and they will pay for. I do. Last time I checked, over 170K were paying for their music, merchandising and even touring costs. Most artists are lazy and step down blaming a system they won’t stop.
I use apple for most products but when apple music launched it was a terrible interface and I unsubscribed to my free trial plus all my playlists are on spotify and you can have colaborative playlists.
Spotify may say they deleted their old deleted music from the Napster servers, but I've heard a lot of old songs that has broken parts in them from the old school sharing and rips. So the songs are definately the fileshared ones.
what's ironic is spotify could have 'replaced' evil music companies who offer paltry contracts and use their artists. Instead, they became them. both need to cease to exist
I'm from a middle eastern country which buying music wasn't easily possible and if we could actually buy it, it was so expensive that we had to pirate it, now with these ad paid music it definetly brought huge part of the world to the table, yeah less money but more fans and more popularity for the artists! not to mention now someone like taylor swift can ditch the label compeletly and make more money thanks to the big platforms like this.
![วันเกิดเธอ (TO YOU) - PHUWIN [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_ROx1Bj3T0Y/mqdefault.jpg)
🚨If you enjoy this video on the story of Spotify, I think you may also like my other new video, which looks at the inside story of Instagram: th-cam.com/video/6jv98VfM3vQ/w-d-xo.html - let me know what you think of them both! :)
🧠 Thank you Noom for sponsoring today’s video! Go to noom.com/magnates & take your free 30-second quiz to find out how Noom can help you hit your health goals!
Hey Man, could you do the full story of Discord
Dude you need to make a video about Google Amazon
Can you tell what music you put on this video, it sick!
Please 🙏 make a video about our future
......
Singularity... AI....
Is this 🤔 masyoshi said in interview with intention of his plan ??
what is with the shit aspect ratio?
Another genius Spotify move, elaborating on the whole “personalization of users”, is the yearly wrapped they do. I think that’s one of the things that gives them so much more leverage over Apple Music
FYI be sure to save those. I had been a subscriber for years and they got rid of those. It only saves the last 2 or 3 years and then deletes anything further.
Apple Music has the same thing
The Spotify algorithm is trash compared to TH-cam music. I noticed without having any idea of all of this that Spotify make me listen music that no one knows.
I started using TH-cam music and the experience was much better.
Yeah that always trends super hard
@@puredamian5862 But it doesnt get posted on social media as much as spotify wrapped does, thats the point.
The artist blaming Spotify for their record company screwing them is insane.
Record companies have done so much more harm than good. Especially in the direction of society
It's coz they work for the industry tho. Imagine your boss pays you millions to make sales and a new company is interfering with the business. You're gonna point the figure at the new guy and demand more money to the label.
Yeah, the record company may be screwing artists but they're already locked in.
@Goopy Le Grande No they don't. Artists get basically the exact same cut of revenue per stream(varies by label some artists make a bigger cut on streams than physical) as they do per album sale and more money is coming in overall from streams than physical media now. The data is fairly easy to find and you should really look into it before saying dumb shit you clearly know nothing about.
@Goopy Le Grande Yeah. But you get to hear the CD all the times you want by paying once. So it's a one time pay.
Also it probably works just like yt, YOU have to upload a song, so why don't you stop uploading them and stop screaming that they're paying you too little? Or even better, find a job, and treat making music like a hobby, mabye, but just maybe... you'll finally be a better person... Yes, I don't like "artists" (Just to be clear, by saying "you" I mean those artists)
That's true!
how can people say Spotify/streaming is causing artists to make less money when it literally stopped the piracy fiasco in which artists make no money from.
Greed. For these people there‘s never enough money. They want you to buy every song/album in order to make the maximum amount of money. Because it‘s not enough to be a multi millionaire, got to be a billionaire.
@@mojabaka also envy. They cant escape the notion that a “middleman” is getting rich.
while Spotify reduced piracy, it also severely reduced music purchases, which pay a lot more than streams
revenue of the music industry is shifting towards smaller artists, who have dedicated fanbases still buying music and merch, away from the mass market
obviously those small artists aren"t the ones to be featured in news stories, since none of them individually have that reach, as a result the side you hear is the side that has a reason to complain
@@illdeletethismusic the problem with that is that music purchases were going to decline regardless cause a streaming service for music had to be invented at a point of time
because a single stream doesn't even make 1% of what 1 music purchase from 1 unique listener would make.
I've discovered dozens of great artists through Spotify's recommendations and playlists that I wouldn't know otherwise. Whether they're intentionally pulling away from big labels or not, the result is that it's probably the best place to find new music and small underground musicians. Nowhere else would you hear a #1 hit next to a song with 2K views on YT and enjoy both of them.
Ikr ,spotify definitely did put me on
I found Amazon's ai to be really scary for finding music I like. It just knew too well. Songs I'd forget about 5 to 7 years ago, it would randomly recommend.
Soundcloud baby
So let me get this straight. Big record labels were only willing to give Spotify licensing deals that shaft them so badly they cant turn a profit to this day. Then the same record labels turn around and tell their artists that there is no money in streaming. And then artists go on to blame Spotify?
Its no secret that most famous people are remarkebly hollow behind their eyes but damn ...
This is why I say, never give money to streaming.
It's ironic that record labels who were already expolting musicians took offence to Spotify doing the same thing.
Not ironic, hyprocritical.
@@TheIndogamer irony is just a polite way to say hypocrisy
@@mistersir7882 *euphemism for hypocrisy
Exactly
@@TheIndogamer "polite way" is a polite euphemism for "euphemism"
The biggest take I got from this is how greedy the music industry is.
All I heard was "Greed, blah blah blah, screw th artist with more greed, blah blah blah."
Spotify is doing shady practices alright. But if was any other industry I would have stayed away from them. As it is music industry and they are fucking over record labels and their greedy execs I am more than happy to pay monthly premium to spotify for that alone.
@@benjaminshiels1824 wdym?
fr imagine paying for every time you listen to a song
Of course! I 100% absolutely agree…
This video made me view Spotify and the Label's early relationship like an abusive relationship, the record labels constantly threatening to hurt spotify if they didn't do what they were told. This left spotify to figure out new ways to get out from under the oppression of the labels and now that they have with some of the things listed (podcasts, leveraging royalty free music libraries, promoting less expensive licensed music, etc) The music industry i.e. the labels is now saying they can't do that, and it's cheating... Make no mistake, the labels MADE spotify what it is today by simply giving them no other choice than to pivot to new paths in order to gain their freedom back.
Yeah. Make no mistake Spotify has some shady practices, practices that if were made in other industries would displease me, but they are doing it to record labels, the music industry is ruthless (specially to smaller artists) so fuck them. If the industry one day pulls the rug from under Spotify (Which most likely won't happen) my Soulseek server is alive and well to return to piracy in a heart beat, just like my private trackers, torrent servers and Plex are alive and kicking right now since Hollywood remembered once again that they are greedy.
they made their beds, now lie in them. and what do they think is gonna happen if spotify goes bankrupt, do they think people will pirate less? lmfaooo
With that view, doesn't it seem like Spotify is perpetuating a cycle of abuse? The big labels abused Spotify because they wanted to be the only ones taking advantage of artists, however Spotify used manipulative and dishonest underhanded strategies to become just a different form of artist exploitation. From the artists' perspective they have merely traded one oppressor for another.
If you can imagine the labels and Spotify as the parents, and the artists as their kids in a custody battle, then aren't the artists _still_ being mistreated?
[2nd sentence edited for bias. 5/19/22]
@@jemmapellemma8185 The solution to this problem would be for artists to just sign with spotify then, no? Since that's the platform most people use to listen to music. That's just my uneducated guess though, I can't really see why artists would want to work with record labels instead.
Labels made Spotify the evil monster it is today.
this was a rollercoaster it just went from spotify being bullied by music companies to spotify bullying music companies and nonconpanies
people have a problem with spotify promoting smaller people and 'catapulting' them, but forget what TH-cam does to their content creators
As a swede, I’ve been using Spotify since 2008 and I stopped downloading (illegally) music almost over night.
In my opinion Spotify is the best thing that’s ever happened for music lovers.
Regarding the artists I don’t know but then again, like another comment here said - now they at least get something per stream than nothing at all with illegal downloading. Peace ✌🏻
And not to mention how helpful it is for small artists, The day when spotify got released for India and when I got my new phone, I stopped pirating the songs (except the one which aren't available for my country). Elk did something which has to be done otherwise most of us still would've stuck with pirating songs from malicious sites
@@iditrirajan that’s a good point as well. Do you use the free version or premium? How much does premium cost in India? In Sweden I think it is around 12$ per month.
@@smOOdiebOOdie thanks. I use premium version of Spotify but fairly, there isn't much point of buying Spotify premium in India because free version in India isn't as restrictive as the free version in Western nations. (And yes, we can play songs without shuffling )
In India, premium individual for a month costs 129 rupees (almost 2 usd a month). For 6 months, its 719 rupees (almost 10 usd) and for a year, its like 1400 or 1500 rupees (almost 20 usd) - its okeyish in pricing. And also, you can't pay like monthly - you can only buy subscription once and you have to renew it manually
For duo and family, price must be like 60 rupees higher individually.
I hated ads and wanted "higher quality" audio so I got premium - no other reasons so far.
And it's pretty expensive - how much is it in Swede currency?
@@iditrirajan 2$ is very cheap with western eyes but ofc in India I’m guessing average joe still can’t afford it.
I got premium because of higher quality and no ads.
In Swedish krona it’s 119:- for premium , 149:- for duo and 189:- for family , so that would be roughly 13$, 16$, 21$ per month. It continues until you yourself end the subscription.
The best thing happened to real music lovers is the invention of CD and the digital way of recording music...
I actually think there's a long way to go in the music marketing industry. Spotify already has some aspects of success, but I don't see any companies capitalising on the passion a lot of people have for music. Spotify's wrapped yearly is already incredibly successful, so why not other fun gimmicks that make people feel like they have a good music taste? just speculating
Hard truth but music isn't popular among new gen z
@@shawn3333 that is just laughably incorrect, what the fuck would you know Shawn
@@shawn3333 uh how did you come to that conclusion from my personal experience it seems the opposite despite some crappy taste 😇
@@shawn3333 Get a life
@@shawn3333 HAHAHAHA yeah right. I listen to music for a minimum of 3 hours a day. Everyone in my class? At least 2 hours a day. All my friends, "_____ is listening to ______ on Spotify for 5 hours"
Where did you get that idea from?
crazy to think most of the music industry is owned by just three companies
It won't be long before just about everything that exists will be owned by about three companies
@@BradyR95 Disney is trying to speedrun this.
@@BradyR95 collapse moment
Basically all movies and shows you watch are owned by either Viacom or Disney so it's been like that for awhile with visual mediums as well
@@BradyR95 It already is. Blackrock and Vanguard.
Spotify should create their own music label where they can sign new artists and musicians and profit off their own homegrown artists in streaming their music as they already own their music IP from the start without having to deal with other music labels as the middle men. This creates a cycle and monopoly of music which are owned and streamed by Spotify. This gives them more leverage over the music labels and enables them to be more profitable and pay their artists better. This, in turn, would attract already existing artists to quit their old labels and join Spotify instead.
This is brilliant.
That would create a big conflict. As then it would be very clear which artists would be favoured on the platform. Artist (hypothetically) signed by Spotify would receive much more promotion while others, signed by other record labels, would get left behind. They probably would get sued so many times until they're out of business.
The problem is that the record companies would then take their music out of the service.
At least smaller artists can have their music heard now. Back in the late 60s and 70s when I was peripherally involved in the industry, typically a record company would offer a band a recording contract. The band would put enormous effort in making a record, but the record company would just put the tapes on a shelf and record a debit against the band that they would collect _if_ they ever released the recording. The contract prevented the artists from recording and releasing their music elsewhere! Most of the CDs I’ve purchased over the last 20 years were recorded by the musicians themselves who sold them at their gigs.
The funniest thing I came across was a bunch of musicians who were big in the late 60s and 70s touring together and selling compilation CDs of their hits. The CDs weren’t made by the labels; they had been pirated by the musicians! And yes, these very same musicians were railing against piracy of their music in the press. You hafta laugh...
what's wrong in selling your own work that won't count as piracy right
@@ravantheoghacker863 the record company bought their work and it became piracy ig
@@ravantheoghacker863 You sold your ownership over the songs through contracts to record labels, and therefore you dont have a right to make copies of those songs anymore, so you making a compilation etc will count as piracy.
it's a bit of a side note but also labels controlled access to studio space which resulted in quite an amazing lack of diversity. now we have much easier access to studio quality equipment which has allowed us to hear the creativity of a lot of humans that were shut out of the industry. fender recently said 50% of its sales were now to women, which says a lot about this. youll notice that most of the people saying that music sucks these days look a whole lot like the people who used to gatekeep record contracts and large studios.
@@ravantheoghacker863 selling it is ok reselling it is wrong since you don't own it anymore
Seems to me like the traditional music industry companies are just as guilty as what people are now accusing Sporify of, e.g. deciding who wins and who loses. Hard to say that curated playlists etc were inorganic when .. popular music always was that way to begin with. Nevermind the fact that the big labels keep much of the money and pay artists relatively little as well.
if anything artists should be grateful that they can now move on from record companies. they are lowly businesses who at times even drug and pimp out their talent. it is shocking what goes on behind the scenes
@@zkxnkj534 Agree. Now instead of just big artists who have connections with industry others can grow from nothing with skill too.
Fuck record labels. If I didn't have spotify I'd just go back to pirating all my music again.
crazy how they make spotify look as if theyre the bad guys
I don't remember purchasing any albums at all. I pirated them all. Now i kind of overpay for Spotify and i don't really give a shit. No spotify - going back to Rarbg or kickasstorrents.
I still pirate everything, never downloaded Spotify, no need to
I keep all my favorite music ready to download and listen to in an app. No need for streaming services, I feel bad that they don't get the money they deserve for their hard work but I just don't have the money to be buying everything I like to listen to right now.
Same here. Never bought a song or album in my life. I'm only using spotify for the convinience of a huge music library
There's one thing I don't understand, these artists are getting less money and blaming spotify, but it seems to me that the real problem is that the artists gave these "labels" ownership and negotiating power over their music. If not for the labels, couldn't an artist get the full 70% revenue from their music as opposed to some percentage of that 70% that they get from their label?
sadly, no. They have to pay 70% because that's what the labels negotiated. Most artists from the label get $0.0004 cents per play, so Spotify generally offers the same amount to an indie artist, keeping 90% for themselves - the artists don't really see a difference either way.
Spotify has not only never had a profitable year in its history, but it has burnt over 4billion euro since its foundation in 2007. This is largely due to the dynamics between Spotify and its suppliers (major record labels) who have huge leverage over it, thus can charge Spotify insane rates for music royalties (nearly 70% of Spotify's revenue), leaving only 30% for itself to pay for everything else. This is why Spotify must expand beyond music if it ever wants to turn profitable, thus their recent drive into podcasts, having invested over $1billion to sign deals with the likes of Joe Rogan, Kim Kardashian, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and even the Obamas etc. I made a video explaining the problem behind Spotify's persistent lack of profits, and how they're trying to fix it. Might be interesting to you.
Spotify also has exclusive music available that's unavailable on TH-cam and cannot be purchased on iTunes. They're branded as Spotify Exclusives. I tried to purchase one of these songs and reached out to the artist - they apparently didn't own the rights to sell the audio track but appreciated me reaching out.
I really do like to buy music to have a personal copy of. I don't appreciate being tied to the internet.
And there's also songs that aren't available on spotify that TH-cam has. The song I wanted on Spotify isn't even on there and the song released like 4y ago😭
youtube has way more music (even before yt music) than spotify lol
"they apparently didn't own the rights to sell the audio track"
@@jemmapellemma8185 That's business as usual in the music industry.
Generally, artists own the rights to their songs; that is, the lyrics and composition. They do NOT own the rights to specific recordings of their songs. The one making and editing the recording(generally, the record label) does.
Spotify paid them to make a song for them, that Spotify has exclusive rights to the recording of.
This is why Taylor Swift recently re-recorded all of her early music. The label(and later, the individual) that owned the rights to her masters was being a dick and trying to hush her up when she was talking about the shit she had to deal with from them. They told her that they'd only give her the rights to her masters if she signed an NDA saying she wouldn't talk about them anymore.
So she hired out a studio and a bunch of musicians, and re-recorded all of her songs herself. SHE owns the rights to those new recordings, and uses those everywhere.
The people leaving spotify are only hurting themselves. It would be like a band protesting being on the radio.
That sure is some victim blaming!
Not really, there are other, just as good or better alternatives to spotify.
@@peterscasny2803 spotify is super cheap compared to other streaming services , at least in my country
@@peterscasny2803 Well, spotify is the only one available on Xbox... So I have like no choice. I really wish Yt music was there... Maybe algorithm will show it to some Ceo of yt and they will consider it :P
@@made.online2149 do you know the definition of victim blaming?
Wow.. the amount of influence Spotify has and the way they leveraged themselves to get there is mind blowing...
Independent artist here. Spotify has offered a unique opportunity for new artists that simply wasn’t there before. I personally have been self-releasing music for fun for a while and thanks to a Spotify-run playlist I hadn’t even heard of before, I went from (at best) a few hundred streams on a track, to having a song with nearly 2 million streams. Keep in mind this still doesn’t generate enough money to live off of, but it’s given me exposure in a way that I would have had to do so much more work for if I had to convince people to purchase music on iTunes or CDs for a similar amount of profit. It’s going to be very interesting in the next few years as recommended content continues to dominate all forms of media, as many artists are going to have to figure out how to take advantage of sudden virality and turn it into a consistent career. I hope there continues to be more opportunities for independent artists, because Spotify has to realize that supporting them means having great content while also not having to worry about gigantic labels breathing down their necks.
Im not explaining my point further but what ill say is simply that i do respect the founder of spotify for all of this, it was literally like a villain story except he isnt really the villain, its the labels that made him this way, he got so pressed and knocked to the ground but eventually he came back on his feet ONE WAY OR ANOTHER which i totally respect. THEY gave him NO CHOICE so he chose the only choice left for him, which is play the chess by the other person's rules and play him the exact way he played you. well done spotify, gg:)
I normally dont take notice of good editing because its usually a background thing you come to expect, but holy crap man, your editing is one of the few that made me stop and look at each animation over and over again, great job my man!
to be honest, i’ve seen a lot of people saying spotify is bad for pay etc, but it seems like it was almost entirely other people’s want for profit that fucked spotify’s reputation.
Personally I think this whole market is full of greed. I can't afford a monthly subscription, so I gladly listen to the 3 or so ads every 10 minutes on the free version. If not for Spotify, the artists would be getting even less, as probably 90%+ of the music on the platform has been downloaded, and can just be distributed illegally if Spotify ever dies.
i mean, music is still incredibly easy to pirate, it's just that with services like spotify it isn't all that appealing - it's way more convenient to go on spotify and access most of your favorite music for a few bucks a month, or completely free for that matter, than to download whatever songs/albums you want, possibly segregate them in some way etc. etc. the day spotify stops being convenient will be the day music piracy will be back in full force
reset it all down
Same here. Using the free version.
u cant afford $5 per month?
@@ohsehun6470 No, I have literally no income, as I'm too young to work.
I built up my music collection from 2008-2012 (umm legally of course…) i had over 15K songs ranging from a bunch of albums/artists on my computer and iPod. Then I discovered Spotify and started utilizing it in 2011. I would use the local file to combine it. I’ve been a loyal Spotify user since I was 14 lol. It’s crazy how time flies. I thoroughly enjoy the service and everything it provides.
Here I was thinking I was special for having only 380 songs in my playlist, which is about 28 hours
Why have such a computer system to upload and raise up music files.
Besides Good Old LPs still sell online.
However there is a problem with the Piracy of our globe and system.
@@G59forlife. I have less than 50 bro
I like how Spotify turned from depending on the labels and being very limited to literally controlling (more or less) the music industry :)
Much respect to Daniel Ek, if he hadn't taken the risk he had at the beginning we'd probably still be stuck with Napster & iTunes. Whilst Spotify isn't perfect, a lot of the issues seem to be caused by strong arm tactics from the record labels rather than Spotify itself. With most of the functions record labels fulfil being available directly to artists (i.e. social media for promotion, Spotify/Bandcamp for distributio, etc) record labels are functionally obsolete and the sooner they disappear, the better.
Super difficult industry to disrupt when the record label already screw the artist. Meaning dealing with the record labels will ultimately mean the same thing. It’s like a domino effect from Spotify to the Record label and trickling (very minimally to the final people) the artist.
I would like to see Record Label companies to get the fuk for what they done for decades due to greed.
Record labels will literally kill you before giving you power of your own art. It will take a movement to make a shift in the industry. With the help of the internet especially web3, it is much more feasible. It just takes a leader to take charge to make a change but it’s a high risk
@@henrylam92 every programmer I know says web3 is just hype man.
@@Research_This62 in its currents state, I agree. Dotcom bubble was all hype too until the real players like google emerged from it
Honestly. Spotify has never done anything bad. They had a dark mode as their default before everyone made a dark mode like within last 3ish years
That's the best defense of Spotify I've ever heard.
@@ArkhamCookie hahahaha
"never done anything bad" that's some hard denial right there
That's why I make my own playlists and only listen to artists that I know of. If I discover something new, I'd look for more info on other platforms, then shall I add it to my playlist.
However, I recently prefer youtube music since it automatically integrates dozens of my already made playlist from youtube to youtube music. It's just... convenient. I must note that youtube music is great if you already have a paid subscription to youtube premium, as some music just cannot be played unless you have premium.
As a musician, my opinion is that is wether is labels or Spotify or TH-cam, somebody gets rich on our works while we, except for the big household names, only get the crumbles they throw for us under the table.
This is the only comment that matters.
you say "we," are you losing out on big sales due to an unfair contract you signed?
@@C00LI0DUDE unless you have already proved you worth to a record company, all artists, especially new ones, get awful first record deals. Look at the Beatles, for instance. They record sales were huge, yet they had to keep on touring to make any decent money in the early years.
I never thought to consider why Spotify had gotten worse.
Recently they had an update where you cant pick a song you want to listen to, instead that song is mixed with a bunch of others users like, for some reason.
You only get 6 free skips so you have to pray your songs among the various others that get played before youre listening to something you didnt even want to.
I get wanting money from all of this, especially as a big record lable, but making the platform THIS bad is honestly just turning people either back to pirating or TH-cam
That’s why people pay for Spotify. it’s more convenient than pirating and has none of those issues🤯🤯🤯
I doubt that I’d rather use TH-cam than Spotify but not until TH-cam also had its own music streaming service too! And at least on YT Music you still can pick a song and unlimited skips but buying subscriptions to get rid of ads and offline listening is basically just the same thing. Also I still used YT Music more but I sometimes occasionally use Spotify but Spotify isn’t my choice anymore…
The funny thing is that this only happens on phone, on all the other devices (iPad, pc, PlayStation) it doesn’t happen. Apart from the 6 skips per hour + ads on all other devices apart from phone you have premium
@@Mxshy_ EXACTLY
It's genuinely so frustrating, and unfair to all hell
@@Mxshy_ Ok got it and thanks btw
I've binged all content on this channel repeatedly, and even taking into account the extraordinary standard of quality of all your videos this one was still literally off the charts.
Fantastic work. Keep 'em coming🙌
I honestly appreciate the time and effort you put in to make these videos. Hats off to magnates media
As an Independent Artist myself, I can definitely say that the royalty percentage we get from streaming platforms are quite low! But WITHOUT TELLING PEOPLE ABOUT THE ROYALTIES DISTRIBUTION AND THE PROCEDURE BEHIND IT, THIS VIDEO IS INCOMPLETE!! Specifically in case of Spotify as it has to pay 2 royalties for same song every single time it streams. Anyways I've been here with you since 20k subs and its great to see your growth @MagnatesMedia. You definitely deserve it🙌
i dont understand how people could be so mad at spotify, its just a place for podcasts and music to be in one place for free. And the "less money" thing makes sense but only way you can really hit it big in anything is if you are lucky enough and have connections anyways
Record labels were screwing artists long before the internet came around. There's a great article online called "Courtney Love does the math" where she breaks down how far a million dollars for a record goes. Spoiler, the band ends up with something like 45k each. And that was back when people spent MUCH more on music before streaming, and most bands didnt get a million for their record.
You forgot to mention that musicians/artists pay Spotify to have their songs on the platform, it's a yearly charge. I lose money every year with my four tracks I have on there :D
Gimme the links to the track. If those are good I’ll prolly share with my friends
@@gummybro_ SAME!!
@@gummybro_ (2)
I think you are taking about distributors?Then it applies to Apple Music, Tidal, etc. You don’t usually sign a contract with Spotify, you use distributors as a middle man. And it depends on what distributor and what tier you choose. It could be a revenue share, but I think that’s like a service fee. It’s pretty much fare for small artists.
I love such content. This helps people understand the situation from Spotify POV and realize that it always were record labels behind everything that wanted to melt Daniel’s platform into an easy cash grab.
Been sick the last few days these videos have made the time much better. 20 minutes or over an hour in length, they are interesting and well put together. Very nice work
I remember back in 2020-19 i hadn't heard of a single person around me using Spotify. But now in 2021-2022 almost everyone uses it. I have been using Spotify since 2019 and I love it.
Great information! You did forget to mention that Spotify recently made a deal with Barcelona for around $300M so that it could be rebranded as a Spotify soccer field for the next 5 years and decreasing the money Spotify will be paying artists so that they can pay off the deal
It's insane that a publishing company can get 70% of revenue. No one would even listen to 90% of the artists that they do if they couldn't listen to them on Spotify for free.
I've been a paid member of Spotify since 2017 and I have never regretted it. I love that they expanded into podcasts and now audiobooks it is pretty nice to have everything in one app than having three apps
I find it interesting how the artists were going after Spotify when you would think they especially know how a lot of that stuff has always been down to what their labels want. That amd it's not exactly a secret at this point how the labels themselves aren't exactly holy towards them as is
You're going places with your channel, mate!
same here
The personalization feature is really what makes me use Spotify all the time.
Exactly. The algorithm is incredible, mainly because of feeds off people who have similar tastes to you.
THANK YOU. Someone finally points out how much power Spotify has over what we listen. I have had discussions with multiple people about this and nobody ever takes me seriously. So THANK YOU.
Do you think it's simply a shift of power from record labels - who formerly had so much power over what we listen to - to now Spotify?
Edit: P.S. I don't know the answer and am genuinely interested in hearing your thoughts. Feel free to elaborate on your comment :)
Oh, sorry. I'm only seeing this now. But to answer your question:
I think it's a little more complicated than a power shift. Really, Spotify is like a third player in the game between artists and record labels. We know that, throughout the years the labels are the ones controlling the artists' earnings. Now, Spotify is one more layer that the artists associated with labels have to go through. I don't know what the numbers are exactly... but I presume if an artist associated with a record label goes on Spotify, a percentage of the earnings made in each song is given to the record label, another percentage is given to Spotify, and the leftover is given to the artist. I don't know what the actual numbers are like. But it's undeniable the cut these artists get is getting smaller.
On the other hand, you could argue that Spotify gives artists without labels an opportunity to sell their music to a wide audience. I think I heard Billie Eilish started recording her music from home, for example. I also don't really understand what algorithm they have in place to promote this music. But if they wanted to, Spotify could prioritize showing labeless artists, which would strip some power from the labels, perhaps. So they also have that advantage.
But what I meant in my comment above was coming more from the perspective of a consumer whose music choices are most often not in Spotify. I do not use Spotify because the music I like is most often not there, as simple as that. And because it is not there, most people haven't heard of it. And even if it was there, who is to say that it would be prioritized by the algorithm? In one way or another, by staying only in Spotify, consumers narrow down the media they are exposed to. This saddens me. (But that's more about decentralization)
@@chaop4o878 So Spotify is like Radio, or MTV was?
@@machupikachu1085 I feel like saying it's like the radio or MTV isn't quite right either? Because back then, how did you find songs? When the internet wasn't as developed as it is now and information wasn't flying around freely. I feel like back then the only way to find music was through those sources.
Right now, Spotify is probably the most influential platform for finding music. But it's not the only option. So it's nowhere near as limiting as it was back then.
I am in complete support of Spotify, it’s the Record Labels that tried to play the dirty tricks!
I gave up on Spotify recently but I wouldn't have the same tastes in music today if it weren't for Discover Weekly finding lesser known artists (and royalty-free stuff). I wouldn't have found synthwave.
I am always blown away with your editing style! I absolutely loved how you used the smoke in this video as a layer to reveal parts. I must learn this trick. What editing software do you use John?
It's most likely done in After Effects by using alpha matte
Spotify can have control for all i care. As long as they don't become your typical cyberpunk corpo monopoly or whatever and censor unnecessary stuff.
I've discovered many new artists thanks to it's algorithm.
I’ve found more on TH-cam personally but that could be because I mainly listen to industrial and EBM and some stuff isn’t on Spotify
@@SinRuin Yeah when it comes to underground music spotify is useless
All companies become corpo monopolies if they become powerful enough, most users just don't care as they aren't personally affected.
@@adisaikkonen they don't care until they are - which is inevitable
Great video. I remember the early days when my labels revenue started slowly moving feom iTunes to Spotify
Spotify has even more tricks up its sleeve.
for example, they only pay the artists/labels per song played. less songs played by the user = more money for spotify.
that's why when you're searching for a song you usually don't find the 'radio'-version of it that you're looking for, but the 'extended mix' or whatever version of the song is longer.
Is anyone going to mention how insanely good this video is? I'm geniuenly impressed by these editing skills, it must have taken days to make... Keep up the great work!!!
I’ve used literally 80% of music streaming services out there and except for tidal and TH-cam music none come close to the level of personalization i enjoy on Spotify
I remember in high school (about 4 years ago) when I paid for Spotify premium and the suggested songs from their algorithm were much better than it is now. On top of that, the app was so much easier to navigate. I dont know why they changed the app so drastically, I low key kinda hate it. My family pays for an Apple Music subscription now and I will say that now that I have access to both, Apple Music's interface is much better but nothing will ever top the 2015-2018 Spotify interface. If we could go back to the, I would be 100% on board with ditching Apple Music. Its just that Spotify feels weird to use now compared to how it was several years ago.
I tried out Spotify premium for free for 3 months and couldn't go back afterwards but I don't have a lot of money, but I found a way to pay 13€/year for it
How did you do it
@@imienazwisko4219 through a brasilian VPN and a brasilian currency gift card and Spotify family (it could be even cheaper than 13€/year (It could be as cheap as 8€/year) but another guy did all the work so I'm ok with paying 13€
I remember Spotify having super good songs around the time and I was in elementary
The desktop app was ditched in favour of a scaled up mobile app for desktop because it was too expensive to maintain both. This is why the desktop app is borderline unusable now. There have been other confusing layout changes on the mobile app too, which sometimes reflect the shifting priorities for spotify and sometimes are, i think, just poorly thought out design decisions. As for the music recommendations and personalised playlists and especially the mood playlists, they are muzak at this point and I think that is to do with trying to include as much cheap to license music as possible on them.
The Rust code lock noise 🥰
Killer video! I didn't know about half of this insanity!!
I stopped downloading illegally ever since Spotify. There is absolutely nothing stopping me from downloading anything illegally, if you make a system tailored for heavy music users like myself WHILE making it so easy to ignore the extra leg work of finding/downloading/ and transferring music to my phone... Most people are going to pay 10 bucks a month lol, imo this is the best thing to happen to the music industry, maybe even saved the music industry
more or less the same for me, but what about stuff that isnt on spotify?
@@naptime43x Well, you know lol
I happily enjoyed Spotify since 2012 and now moved on to Apple Music mostly for their Appreciation of Artists and their high qualitiy audio (Dolby Atmos especially)
Dude, I'm 2 minutes into the video and I'm seriously impressed by the presentation!
Never heard about your channel, gonna watch you from now on!!
nothing can match how good the Spotify recommendations are
Meh. Spotify was neither here nor there with regard to artist's profit share. Any profit artists lost out on because of Spotify would have been gobbled up instead by predatory record labels anyway.
It's probably a net gain for artists if anything for those who sign directly with Spotify
I agree. One thing that people rarely talk about is how services like Spotify and TH-cam have really helped democratise the respective industries. No longer are artists beholden to record label gatekeepers and it is much easier to release music independently keeping control of their own masters and a bigger percentage of the revenue. If you want to become a mega star like Taylor Swift, then yes, you probably still do need a label still, but for the vast majority of artists, I don't think the label is needed anymore. Of course, most of these big artists with the biggest voice are not going to criticise the labels and bite the hand that feeds them. Artists like Taylor Swift claim to be standing for the small artists when in reality she just wants to increase her own personal wealth.
It's either piracy or Spotify. Those dumb fuck are shooting themselves in the foot
@@mistymu8154 remember tho - labels don't make music - they finance, market and promote it. And, they're pretty good at it. They invest heavily in your music when others aren't but expect to recoup their investment. Even back in the 2000's, only about 20% of artists didn't lose money for the labels, and only the top 3-5% is where the profits came from. I'm not necessarily an advocate for labels, but it was just a loan from a specialized bank/promotions company that was willing to pay you to write, record, and perform music on a larger scale than most everyone could manage on their own.
Cheers!
I don’t really see a problem here with most of the points, record labels have always done what spotify is doing and would pick and choose artists who they were gonna sign and therefore succeed, or bar their music all together similar to spotifys shadow ban. All that’s happening is a shift of power from greedy music labels to a different source. As for the “greed” the only options were to let piracy rise and get 0 money or get some money, spotify had no control over the other websites that would stream the music for free so honestly spotify giving them something over nothing can’t really be complained about especially when record labels have always and still do take a massive cut and screw over their artists.
what the fuck why is this a full ass production. such an insanely good video
This is a 10M subscriber channel. For real. I feel it.
15:48 was that the sound of putting the wrong code in a code lock on rust? Am I the only one who caught that?😂
John you awesome dude! I always love watching these videos that focus on the raise of our current big tech overlords. There's always a lesson to be taken away from there hardwork/smartwork
this is exactly what is happening. An artist named Brent Fiyaz for instance is one of those shady business practices where garbage music is owned by a big Music industry company with Spotify deals, so thst "artist" was made the number 1 album that nobody heard or bought.
Tbh I think more people listen to more music now. I used to download music, but it was very tedious and therefore only had like 100 songs until I was 15. Now, 5 years later, I have nearly 2000 songs and discovered some of my favourite artists due to the ease of using spotify, and I never would have done without them. I've then been to concerts of those artists. So overall, I'd say the artist overwhelmingly benefits from Spotify, even if the individual streams don't earn them that much.
Cool. But ask yourself this - if 10 of those songs from that 100 were from the same artist, would you pay $100 to see them live when they came to town? Since you've probably memorized them, the answer is most likely yes. Now, if you have unlimited options and are not really invested in any of them, are you gonna shell out $100 for a concert ticket to hear the one song you kinda like? Maybe not. So how does that help out artists exactly?
Personally investing in something emotionally -and especially - financially creates value and loyalty. Otherwise it's off to the next frivolous interaction. Just imagine if we had a dating app like that: endless choices with no real investment - oh, wait, never mind....
@@machupikachu1085 Counterpoint: Most people NEVER go to concerts, devaluing your entire point. The artists lose literally nothing, but can gain everything from streaming services. And Spotify doesn’t just pay them in exposure.
So basically how to make a succesfull company : Make a great free product. Gain a big auditory using it. Make it paid. Make both clients and artist pay to be there.
have been waiting for this ✌️ thanks for this.. currently I'm being interviewed by the team..if everything goes right, by May 7th I will have the offer letter. Thanks again for such informative video. Good luck to you & hoping for the best 🤞
I like using Spotify for finding new artist that add a new spice into my playlist. Plus I just love how I can organize my playlist within the app.
Honestly, this sounds like record companies are the villains and not Spotify. Spotify did what it had to, in order to survive. I personally don't care. I just want Spotify to deliver me stuff my ears like. I don't care of Maria Carey or Justin Bieber can buy another Mansion.
But you noticed that those same artist who pulled their music, returned to Spotify
"Joni Mitchell Returns Music to Spotify After Two-Year Protest" Along with Neil Young. And most old artist are selling their catalog to big music/record companies that will have Spotify getting that same music. So their "protest" isn't worth jack .....
I love the production, quality & storytelling of your videos John. Me personally when it comes to a music streaming service, I've been using TH-cam music after my subscription ended with Spotify.
Is it free?
@@newb4038 If you have the free version? Yes, but there's ads. So, you will have to pay $10.99 to not have ads.
You also have to look at the positives of removing the possibility of financial success through releasing records. Artists, especially independent artists, are no longer inclined to follow trends just to get a bigger paycheck. People are making the music they want to make and the stress of possible financial growth doesn't push them towards mimicking popular artists. Entire genres have been created that never would have been heard otherwise.
It is really terrible that artists are not getting what they've earned, but music had more variety now than it ever has if you know where to look.
Paying 0.99e for one track is outrageous. Especially when the music nowdays is so cheap to make, and majority is lower quality. Streaming services like Spotify make most sense.
Yeah like 200$-700$ for the daw, 20-600$ instruments, mics and amps (optional) and 300-1000$ for the hardware running a DAW. THAT IS OUTRAGEOUSLY CHEAP COMPARED TO WHAT THE LABELS HAVE. THESE SCUMBAG COMMUNIST LIBRRALS JUST WANT TO EARN MILLIONS BY PLINKING AND PLONKING WHILE SPOTIFY DOES ALL THE HARD WORK GIVING THEM A PLATFORM. THAT IS THE REASON THEY ARE THE MULTI MILLION DOLLAR COMPANY.
'Lower quality' is subjective. Production and marketing costs are not. So, you're not willing to pay 0.99e for a favorite song you can listen to wherever and whenever you want forever? Seems like you may be a little cheap, bro lol!
He couldn't possibly not have known that the record companies would be opposed to someone completely destroying their monopolies and cartels.
Spotify is responsible for expanding my musical tastes in ways that I couldn't have imagined prior to subscribing to Spotify, it really is a remarkable streaming service.
Also, Spotify Wrapped is something that I look forward to each year as it never fails to fascinate me when it comes to looking back on my musical taste throughout the year that was.
If Spotify launched a record label of their own, they would most likely become the top dog of music streaming and distributing worldwide.
Great work as always my friend.
Spotify owning the rights to the music and controlling 100% of the playlists makes an uneven playing field for every artist who is not Spotify. Also, artists get their fanbases to follow playlists and the same artists get thrown out a couple of weeks later, leaving Spotify with more and more followers to which they can later play their own music to. My point is, Spotify is an amazing platform if you are Spotify or one of the 3 record labels. There is a reason every artist hates being on the platform.
Exactly and what do you see here, nothing but posts praising their total monopoly, as if the new boss is any different from the old boss. People are goddamn idiots who live to worship companies and be good little consumers.
@@Nikki_the_GAnd they keep wondering why today's music is schit. If you praise a attention model, you'll get artists to force themselves to get your attention through face tattoos, big bubbles for females, terrible personalities just to gain your attention to sell it to advertisers. This has nothing to do with music. Everything to do with egotism and you're feeding into it
Is the destruction of the music industry a bad thing?
I thought now that the world's artists finally have an option to make a living outside of the industrial process that it would be celebrated no? I certainly do.
If only Spotify would actually pay the artists.
@@4cps777 well that's a common rhetoric but I make a living off it and what's more, I get paid far more from Spotify than I do Apple or any other service because their service actually works. Also I don't advertise our use playlists. You can't just make art and get paid, it still has to be good. If you can't sell it direct to your super fans then you certainly can't get sell it on a store front competing with 66k over songs EVERY DAY.
I find most people saying "Spotify doesn't pay " are people that just can't make money from music in general. Which lets Face it is 99 percent of the population. Music is hard who'd of thunk.
I'm not saying it's optimal , and the major labels have invaded now with the payola playlists etc but don't forget Spotify took 8 to years + to be even profitable, and was the first to figure it out.
@@BuzzaB77 Well, the cut musicians get is still not pretty good. I'm not speaking music or anything here, just numbers. Also, the secound main problem with spotify is their power over the industry. However, compared to the state the industry was in before spotify, I still think that it has somehow changed to the good.
@@4cps777 agreed it's certainly better than it used to be, the cut musicians make is worth it, but only if self releasing like myself. anyone who still uses labels they are just as screwed as before.
@@BuzzaB77 labels can ensure investment in your projects so you'll be more famous, have better audio or video etc. its really what you want to chose now. you can make money from both sides but if you are already famous then self releasing is wayyy better than having a company take a giant share for doing absolutely nothing.
It sounds weird the fact that originally Spotify paid the musicians for the music and now the musicians pay Spotify to promote it
Apple doesn't take 30% of Spotifys revenue, since you can't actually do any in-app purchases, which is a requirement for Apple to do that. Spotify opens an external URL whenever you try to cancel / upgrade your subscription, circumventing the requirements.
I Love Spotify, one of the best thing that ever happened to me..
Whoever controls the means of distribution controls the industry
This video made me love Spotify even more than before and made me feel proud to use it. Very interesting video.
It still gets me today why people think Spotify is better than Apple Music when its not and never will. Spotify will die off in a couple of years.
Both are open to payola! The Weeknd put over 500K to promote his music (also stolen from indie arts) using thousands of bots, pretending to be real accounts/listeners. Using US, UK and Canada 4G proxies. To be honest, he’s not alone. Same can be used to take down charts of the music from other artists. Buying fake traffic has never been so cheap. Spotify or Apple will never open the boxes for independent professionals to check it out. Take Anathema example, provide great music for your fans and they will pay for. I do. Last time I checked, over 170K were paying for their music, merchandising and even touring costs. Most artists are lazy and step down blaming a system they won’t stop.
I use apple for most products but when apple music launched it was a terrible interface and I unsubscribed to my free trial plus all my playlists are on spotify and you can have colaborative playlists.
Spotify may say they deleted their old deleted music from the Napster servers, but I've heard a lot of old songs that has broken parts in them from the old school sharing and rips. So the songs are definately the fileshared ones.
Apple Music wins here right from iTunes Digital Master?
what's ironic is spotify could have 'replaced' evil music companies who offer paltry contracts and use their artists. Instead, they became them. both need to cease to exist
One to look at is how Google has improved TH-cam Music lately, If Google add Podcasts to TH-cam Music. Could Spotify be in trouble?
So in a nutshell, another great idea destroyed by greedy capitalists... poor taylor swift can't even buy a 3rd private jet.
all I can say is that spotify is dominating all over the world and as long as it gives me music I will always use it
I'm from a middle eastern country which buying music wasn't easily possible and if we could actually buy it, it was so expensive that we had to pirate it, now with these ad paid music it definetly brought huge part of the world to the table, yeah less money but more fans and more popularity for the artists! not to mention now someone like taylor swift can ditch the label compeletly and make more money thanks to the big platforms like this.
Artists should get 90% and the record companies should no longer exist
Spotify would absolutely love that to happen but the record labels themselves would do anything to avoid it from happening :
@@nakirium9713 absolutely
This is a well researched episode... Big up Magnates media