Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Lucidae, May 21, 2015.
Because it all sounds the same?
There's any kind of music from all decades, centuries and genres on Spotify. I don't get your point.
I had to ride to work on a Spotify theme bus this morning. They'd taken over a 253-to-Euston. Riding along inside a giant Spotify advert.
Look what they did to Sirius
They sued them and won.
The Algorithms were awesome until their bass player ODed, their accordionist got pregnant, and they switched labels.
I disagree. If fans are not limited by genres then it follows that the artists will also not be limited by genres either. There are so many examples in my Bandcamp collection of artists shaking off the shackles of genres and making music that draws on diverse influences rather than staying within an established formula of genre.
I like genres. It's like painting within a frame, or freedom within certain limits.It makes for great art. Some of the biggest art is created within the smallest of frames. It's like a haiku poem, you have three sentences to say what you have to say and you need to think it over what you want those three sentences to contain. Even I can make limitless music. Or just write away. It's not difficult. It takes talent to learn the craft, and then you can free yourself, like Miles Davis did with jazz. But he played jazz for twenty years before he began calling it 'directions in music'.
It doesn't surprise me. There are not the "youth tribes" here in the UK that there used to be. The last big youth movement was the Ravers from the late 80s/early 90s.
What Spotify are suggesting is simply another form of genre. Only it has no historical basis so anyone can understand it. I want fast music for getting up to. I want slow music for my dinner party. I want music to practice yoga to. Another way of selling music. It sounds like it will accelerate blandness.
Will it stop original minds being original ? No. Will people who are stuck inside genre thinking be more at a loss for ideas ? No. Will more people be able to make even more unimaginative music. Probably.
It's not a bus I will want to ride in.
Hamhead . My comment was purely a play on the literal image induced by the phrase 'Flo and Eddie sicking on them' due to a misspelling by the original poster. I.e the image of Flo and Eddie vomiting on Spotify.
The trouble is that there is a lack of talent and imagination and even will-power out there . When that is the case people hide behind or inside genres.
Who has a lack of talent?
They're actually paying more than before, but it's still not really much.
My Band Has 1,000,000 Spotify Streams. Want to See Our Royalties? »
Unless consumers are willing to pay more for subscriptions and labels are willing to give more to artists I don't see much changing. Although each individual pay out might not be high, in total streaming services still pay out a great deal in royalties. So someone is getting a great deal of money and if it isn't the artists then who is it?
I'm not trying to defend one position over the other re: for or against streaming but it really comes down to numbers. But someone is getting a lot of money so vilifying just the streaming companies while not vilifying labels and consumers who don't want to pay more than $10 a month isn't really fair IMO. But could you imagine if bands starting saying their fans are a bunch of cheap SOBs who are taking their music but not paying for it? Wouldn't go down very well would it?
I can't argue this without specifics and if I'll be damned if I do argue with specifics. So, I stand down. Just to say I never see anything really new but the past being re-gurgitated. If reproducing the past is an indicator of talent as opposed to skills then I'm wrong anyway.
I meant something like "sick 'em Rex, sick 'em Spike" back when somebody would unleash the hounds.
Either way, if Kaylan and Volman got a hold of Spotify the same way they did with Sirius, artists will get paid.
what this comes off as is... people are afraid of surprises. just automate your muzak experience!
He's exactly right...it's all become papermache hip-hop or urban pseudo-folk that's completely neutered and devoid of genuine substance and in no way challenges the listener either mentally or emotionally. This is why the kiddos are so floored when they hear the old/real stuff.
However for metal I believe there is and will always be hope. If it doesn't have raw power its simply not metal.
I wouldn't mind merging all 9000 records in my collection into one giant alphabetical conglomeration ...................... if I had two years.
I like alphabetical by song. I put my Ipod on this sometimes. I sit listening and think – wow all the best songs begin with 'a'. And then a little later – wow all the best somgs begin with 'b'...
I like to play my iPOD on random. But Spottfy is too generic for me. I need some quality filter and such a thing does not exist on there, because the 'if you liked this other people also liked this' doesn't work for me. So I choose the stuff and use my iPOD on random.
I do agree with the Spotify guy that people seem to be seeking out songs to suit particular activities by using general styles and categories. I've seen a lot of that being done.
I do not agree that music itself is "moving away from genres". It isn't. It's incorporating multiple genres into single songs, but it's using genres nonetheless. That's why so much of it is just classified as "Pop" or "Rap" now. It's easier than classifying it as "soul vocals with contemporary R&B, pop, electropop, and hip-hop beats".
I think it depends a lot on your listening habits. I find Spotifys Discover Weekly and Release Radar playlists to consistently deliver interesting stuff. Both are updated once a week and is largely based on what you have listened to the last few weeks. Not the same stuff you have listened to, but artists that are somewhat related.
Be it new releases, older songs that are brand new to me, old stuff I have been somewhat aware of but not really listened to before, or things I listened to 15-20 years ago and have largely forgotten. The key is of course to use it as a jump off point to delve deeper into those 'new' artists you really like instead of just treating it like a simple playlist that are forgotten next week.
For me Spotify has taken music discovery to a whole new level. I find more stuff that is new and interesting to me these days - primarily through the aformentioned two playlists - than I ever did back in the day when I bought new albums every week and read a handful of music magazines every month for more than 25 years.
It has reignited my passion for listening to new stuff instead of just staying in the comfort zone and listening to things I already know that I like.
You couldn't be more wrong.
Separate names with a comma.