When Bloomberg reported that Spotify would be upping the cost of its premium subscription from $9.99 to $10.99, and including 15 hours of audiobooks per month in the U.S., the change sounded like a win for songwriters and publishers. Higher subscription prices typically equate to a bump in U.S. mechanical royalties — but not this time.

By adding audiobooks into Spotify’s premium tier, the streaming service now claims it qualifies to pay a discounted “bundle” rate to songwriters for premium streams, given Spotify now has to pay licensing for both books and music from the same price tag — which will only be a dollar higher than when music was the only premium offering. Additionally, Spotify will reclassify its duo and family subscription plans as bundles as well.

  • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Please, people, for the love of the gods, stop using Spotify. There are numerous other services that are so much better value for your money and don’t treat artists (as much) like trash.

    And that being said, try to support your beloved artists directly as much as you can. Buying digital downloads or physical media will give them more money than a lifetime of streaming ever would. Plus you get to keep the higher-quality music even if the platform or artist goes tits-up.

    • Granbo's Holy Hotrod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s too convenient. Most people just want easy access and don’t even think of the downstream impacts. If a song or two goes unavailable, probably won’t notice. There is gonna need to be an alternative that is cheap and feature rich along with Spotify missing some steps. It’s here for awhile.

      • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        You are not wrong, but there are other services that are just as convenient and for less money. Spotify knows they are the “default” music streaming platform and they are exploiting that.

        • Granbo's Holy Hotrod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          A quick Google puts the top two at Apple and Amazon. So that is a big no for me boss. I am pretty sure the next ones listed are just torrent front ends. I have a life now so no time for that…spotify it is.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    weekly PSA that spotify is a dumb company who makes no money because they’re stupid.

    To put it bluntly, between the artists, and the musicians, there is the publisher (the traditional music company) the money pretty much only goes to the publisher, because spotify doesn’t want to make money, nor do they want artists to make money. And the artists put their shit on spotify because people believe that spending 15 dollars a month on a service that doesnt pay artists, apparently pays artists.

    Go support your local musical artists.

    • BURN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      Spotify negotiated shit deals when they were a startup and they’ll basically forever be not profitable because of it.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Seriously. They had a completely open market, then essentially signed a perpetual deal where something like 40% of gross income is paid out to the labels. It’s absolutely insane how poorly run they were in the beginning.

          If they had become a publisher, distributor and/or a label, they’d be on top of the world now.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    “Let’s throw away all of our physical media! All digital streaming music, movies and books will be so much better! Everything we want, always available, anywhere!!!”

    Somewhat true if you’re a seasoned sailor of the high seas, not so much if not…

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m fighting this fight with phone and sd cards. It’s part of the reason they are killing sd card slots to get people to put everything in the cloud.

      Sadly most people are morons and are doing exactly that.

    • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      You don’t need to be a “seasoned sailor”. It’s incredibly easy IMO to get what you want if you’re willing to put forth a tiny amount of effort.

  • alienanimals@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 months ago

    More money for the executives and less for everyone else. People need to start standing up to this shit.

  • BURN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Definitely thinking about cancelling with this. I’ve used Spotify as long as I can remember, after finally switching over from pandora radio.

    Their shuffle and discovery algorithms suck so much now that it’s nearly impossible to listen to more than 20-30 songs they just keep repeating.

    Add on the extra, inserted ads in podcasts, there’s really no reason to continue to use their platform.

    Then again, I’m probably going to YT music, which is only marginally better, but since I pay for YT premium already there’s no additional cost

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Spotify could charge ten times their current price - indeed, should have been, for nearly the entire catalogue of western music? even at $100/mo it would have been a steal - and even so, they wouldn’t be paying artists significantly more, or even at a reasonable rate.

    The model is the problem. The middleman is the problem. The service itself is the problem. It can never work in a way that pays artists fairly as long as it requires human oversight, administration and intervention, let alone all the wasteful shit like advertising and legal overhead/payola for politicians.

    Get an AI to do it right, though… puffpuff, pass

    • fukurthumz420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      thank you. the fact that we aren’t rioting to have more automated services that pass the cost benefit on to the people is something i’ll never understand. we have the tools to build utopia but they can;t figure out how to make enough money from it.

  • MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    I love how no one mentions that the great success business Spotify got all their starting music from the mp3 warez scene.

    Early Spotify songs still had the meta data from those files, including misspelled song names and years of issue.

  • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    No matter what you think about Apple, Apple Music pays multiple times more than Spotify

    And Tidal pays multiples more than Apple.

    It’s up to you if you want to support artists or not.

    • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Does YouTube music pay its artists? I prefer an Android platform. A lot of the stuff I want isn’t on Apple Music for classical is also why.

  • Cossty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    15 hours of audiobooks per month is a joke. That’s not even one longer book.

    • benpetersen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      And it’s not every member of the plan, it’s only the primary user. Also the “buy more hours” of an audiobook is such a crappy idea to get us to buy an audiobook, and gosh it’s not even all audiobooks it’s only the first of the series. Even if you add more hours, you can’t listen to the 2nd book. This is half the reason why they had to raise prices. It costs them a bit for those 15 hours and the music lovers and creators are paying the price for their misunderstanding

      • Cossty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I didn’t think it could be worse… I just bought one Dell mini PC and I will turn it into server and I will start self host a lot of my services. Audiobookshelf is going to be one of them

  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Spotify can die in a fire for all I care. Sail the high seas and if you like an artist buy physical releases/merch/tickets.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      I still buy everything on CD that I can get from good bands. Nothing beats CD quality and durability. My CDs from 30+ years ago still play just fine except for the few that have too many scratches from abuse.

      After I get a new CD I rip it to high quality MP3 and add it to my personal streaming library.

      • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’ve seen quite a few download codes included with vinyl releases that have 24 bit wav/flac files available. Some will even offer 88.2/96kHz files.

        You could argue that the quality difference isn’t detectable between those and an MP3 rip of a CD though.

    • jumjummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      So instead of having the artists make the small per stream income, you suggest they get $0? Buying their releases/merch/tickets is irrelevant to the platform. If anything, the model of these streaming platforms is just further shifting to advertisement for artists to drive people to shows.

        • jumjummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Of course they do, but those suggested options are the same for Spotify users too. I’m not seeing the connection here unless you’re saying Spotify users are less likely to buy merch or tickets. Pirate what you want, but trying to spin the argument this way is just disingenuous.

          Edit: and to add to this, I would argue that platforms like Spotify and other subscription models are key ways for new people to be introduced to a bad. (Short of having your song blow up on something like Tik Tok of course)

          • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Pirate what you want, but trying to spin the argument this way is just disingenuous.

            I’m not following you. Spotify is notorious for paying out very little to artists, so therefore they don’t deserve my business, fuck 'em.

            Instead I like to support the artists directly.

            As to your second point, I’ve never had a problem discovering new music.

            • jumjummy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              My point is people saying “Spotify doesn’t pay artists enough so just pirate everything” is disingenuous. Nothing about paying for a platform (Spotify, TIDAL, Apple, YouTube, etc.) precludes you from supporting artists through other means as well.

              The second point didn’t imply that this is the o ly way to discover music, but it absolutely is an avenue where many people discover new artists.

  • scripthook@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Doesn’t make me feel guilty using Soulseek. Artists get next to nothing but I’m refusing to give any money to Spotify. If there was a better way to buy and own music digitally from popular artists I would

  • andros_rex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    Spotify seems to be trying to transition to podcasts anyway - it’s harder to get it to recommend music. My guess is that eventually the Spotify and the record labels will have more disagreements about royalties, and that Spotify will pivot more towards podcasting - independent folks who have far less power in negotiations.