Most annoying feature ever
2y 1d ago by lemmy.world/u/AtomfriedMegaforce in memes
I swear they haven't added a single fucking feature that is worth anything. Every single thing they do makes their product worse.
I use tidal, and the only thing I miss from Spotify is the ability to transfer the music I'm listening to the PC or smartphone
I have many friends that complain about these things, that noticed the exact same pattern as you.
And yet, every last single time I've ask them "Have you looked into using a different service? Maybe try one?" they mumble out a noncommittal response and never do.
The question is whether it bothers someone enough to switch, and I cant really say thats the case for me. Because copying the playlists over and the additional price increase (losing the family plan) are too annoying tbh.
This is it for me. I'm on a family plan so I don't pay for premium and I've over 300 songs in a favourite playlist plus probably 100 odd albums saved. That's a lot for me to try and transfer over.
I’d be okay to transfer. It is nice linking to and being linked to Spotify given it’s the default in my circles.
Sorry artists I know they pay nothing :(
I've tried amazon music google music and Spotify over the years. Spotify had by far the best library for me. The others were missing tonnes of incredibly big bands albums.
It’s because the things they don’t like aren’t big enough to switch and get new playlists etc.
Man I just got Spotify because these two artists I got into don't have bandcamp so it's really hard to actually get files. Not even piracy worked. They're on every streaming platform though.
I'm still bewildered by them changing the "Artists" tab in "Your Library" to show artists you follow (for event notifications) rather than just showing alphabetically, the artists in your library.
Its made the saved library useless for me. Once you have so much music it just becomes ridiculous to group them by album rather than artist. It feels like such an obvious thing that that is how the function should work but no, they insist on trying to make their music streaming service into some kind of social media-music streaming hybrid. Idiots.
I stopped paying for and using spotify when they a. renewed their contract with Joe Rogan b. changed their music payment policy so that if you aren't trending, you make no money.
Fuck Spotify.
if you aren’t trending, you make no money
What now?
No payment for sub-1000 streams/year
To be fair, that equates to just above 3 USD per year if the numbers from the other post are correct.
Yeah, and although greedy, maybe not enough to ruffle feathers over.
Seems low tbh
In total per artist or per album or song or what?
Don’t use Spotify. Use Tidal, Apple Music, or just pirate and support authors other ways.
I switched to Tidal a few weeks ago, primarily because of lossless streaming, but also fuck Spotify for your price hikes. Not going back.
How's the artist selection? I find a lot of stuff on Spotify that is a bit niche and I wondering if they have it. I tried searching the catalog which they say you can do but not before you sign up for their free trial which I'm not willing to
So far I’ve found everything I looked for, and a few new ones too. Their app features for lyrics and other songs you might like work great. Admittedly, I’m an old metal head who loves singing to a song at the top of the voice, out of tune of course, so I might not be skirting the kinds of niches you like.
I find there are a few niche artists/songs that arnt on tidal, but it still had a majority as well as some new options of the same genre
Imo spotify had way better playlists (a lot of specific user created ones are great) but u can just transfer the playlist to tidal with a site
I was using tidal and spotify for a bit, as tidal works with my dj software, but they just added a new pay teir for using it for those softwares :/
Overall i still used spotify more than tidal but i didn't have a bad time on tidal
I did the same. Paying $11 a month and getting lossless has been a big plus. There were a few songs that were unavailable from my liked songs when moving to Tidal but I also had noticed several songs on my Spotify were unavailable as well too.
My only gripe so far is the Android app drains my battery more than Spotify did, even in the lowest streaming quality.
What happens at the y-axis is pure magic.
Can also recommend Qobuz which allegedly pays even more than tidal. And it also has real losless audio, instead of whatever Tidal is doing.
And you can even buy FLAC files from them, without DRM. Or use tools which you can find on the internet, where you can download the flac files 'for free' (you still need a subscription).
No wonder deezer lacks most of my beloved artists.
Or, continue to use Spotify but use xManager on android and spicetify on pc. This will give you the premium experience (and more!) without paying a single penny.
My premium Spotify account has resulted in me buying tickets and merch from artists I had never heard of. What's wrong with that?
how do you need premium for that
Because if I had to listen to ads I wouldn't use it.
with xManager or spicetify you don't have to listen to any ads either
Yeah, those days are generally behind me. I want something that always works and I don't mind paying for a functioning product. I don't think comparing an actual service with ways of essentially stealing that service is a fair comparison, but I appreciate what you're saying.
are you implying these apps don't always work? because I've had little issues with them in the past few years (except that some extensions might stop working but those are just extras so 🤷)
I think I'm just saying that it's okay to pay for a service when it gives you what you pay for. And if you don't want to, that's fine, and for much of my life I did that. I haven't used either of the services you mentioned, but I think it's safe to say setting them up is not as streamlined as just setting up a normal Spotify account would be. And beyond that, as Spotify pushes updates, these services presumably not to respond to those updates, but again, I don't know, haven't used them.
I also think it's a bit beyond the discussion, and like I said, not a fair comparison. Tidal v. Spotify v. Apple Music are, I think, better discussions to have.
I think it's safe to say setting them up is not as streamlined as just setting up a normal Spotify account would be.
You just download and install a modified version of the Spotify app and then log in with the same account 🤷
I gave xManager a go, and while it doesn't have ads interrupting your listening, it does still have all the Spotify pop up ads trying to get you to upgrade to premium. It's fine when listening, but selecting what you're listening to is still irritating.
that's strange, I've never had that
Yep after first releases and concerts, the only people benefitting from the music are the distributors who deserve nothing for the effort the artist put in.
The distributors are the only people doing any work and providing a service after the artist walks out of the recording studio.
They are not the talent providing the work. They are skimming off talent. They are riding on someone else’s talent. They are the very definition of parasites. They would have no job if there were no talent. Meanwhile the talent can find other ways to sell their work.
The "talent" doesn't have a platform without them. This is a mutually beneficial relationship. The "talent would be waiting tables and playing for peanuts in bars without the industry professionals.
What value do "industry professionals" add in 2024?
Not OP, but I work in the industry, mostly in the live production side. Here's a taste of behind-the-scenes stuff that artists often rely on others to handle after they leave the recording studio:
-
Booking shows, radio and television appearances, and other events
-
Advancing those events with venue staff
-
Organizing transportation, lodging, and food for tour
-
Acquiring and managing all of the gear for tour
-
Getting the artists from show to show while protecting them from themselves and others
-
Marketing for shows and new releases
-
Mixing the material the artist just recorded in the studio
-
Mastering the music the mix engineer put together from that recorded material into a dozen different formats, so you can listen on vinyl, Deezer, YouTube, Spotify, etc.
-
Mixing the front-of-house (what the audience hears) and mixing the monitors (what the artist hears) for the live show
-
Making sure all the folks involved with the above are booked
-
Paying all the folks they booked to make the above happen
I'm not saying the entertainment biz isn't fucked up and that artists don't deserve a bigger slice of the pie, but a lot of artists rely on other folks to handle this stuff for them so they have the space to live their lives, create new music, and give audiences a show worth attending.
Certainly, I depend on people more creative and musically talented than me, but they also depend on me and my technically-proficient and business-savvy peers to translate their creativity into something you can access and enjoy.
Thanks for a great reply. I totally see the need for recording engineers (live and mechanical) and related jobs.
Can you compare the industry now to 10 years ago. What jobs have disappeared? The music press seems much less relevant. Does the A&R executive still exist? Etc.
I'm actually just now coming up on my tenth year in the biz, and most of my experience is with indie venues and artists --- my perspective on these very good questions is somewhat limited!
On the marketing side, it seems to involve a lot of social media and local publications rather than the traditional music press, as you point out.
I'm sure A&R execs still do their thing with the big labels, but there also seem to be a shitload of small booking agencies/management groups that handle a lot of the organization and business end for national-level indie artists. It seems that a lot of folks in those organizations are doing actual work and not just sitting back collecting a fat executive bonus.
As far as jobs disappearing, my bet is on the assistants and other staff with indirect roles that maybe aren't as involved since technology has allowed more folks to work from home. I'm thinking along the lines of people eschewing large studio spaces for home studios, since a lot of mixing and mastering can be done "in the box" on a computer with a good set of monitors and a decently-treated room.
I imagine the same would go for some of the distribution and licensing side, since instead of depending on a major label or hiring a person to mail out CDs to a bunch of radio stations and such, you can just use an online service like CDBaby to get your tracks submitted to multiple streamers at once and keep track of royalties without needing a dedicated accountant.
Again, take all this with a grain of salt, since my experience is still somewhat narrow! And also, I don't intend anything I've said as a defense of do-nothing execs sitting back and amassing wealth at the expense of us regular folks on the ground. It's just that in my experience, most of the non-artist people involved with the entertainment biz do actually provide value to the artist and fans.
Thanks for the insights.
In my head the fat do-nothing execs are the ones sitting on back catalogues of one sided record deals.
With the democratisation of music production we should be awash with a variety of new music, but the same old artists are still being pushed onto the public. What needs to change?
You're probably right about fatcats collecting royalties from legacy artist catalogs/tying folks up in lopsided deals, and that probably won't stop as long as capitalism is the prevailing system --- they've got the money to buy what they want and set whatever terms they can use to exploit as much as possible.
On the grassroots side, I feel like the democratization of production has definitely lowered the barrier for entry, but just because someone can record their own music at home doesn't mean they'll be able to turn it into something viable to sell to an audience. Additionally, this democratization, I think, lends itself to certain genres more than others.
Sure, you can create a lo-fi album with an inexpensive microphone and a computer using (largely) freely-available software and samples, but if you're producing rock, country, folk, jazz, blues, etc., you'll likely require access to expensive instruments and even more expensive equipment to record said instruments.
And if someone does manage to produce on a low budget, then they have to get their work in front of an audience to make continuing their project worth their time and effort. Social media is the obvious answer, but now they have to cut through the noise of everyone else doing the same thing in the hope they can convince enough folks to listen, come see live performances, or otherwise buy their stuff. You're basically, back to square one.
Once you've uploaded to a streaming service --- while definitely a lower bar to entry than getting an album into national distribution before widespread adoption of the internet --- you still find your art next to the big names, same as you would walking into an FYE in 1999. People being people are largely going to seek out the familiar names over the newcomers, sounds they've heard over the experimental and novel. Not to mention that the big labels are probably able to thumb the scales so that what they're selling shows up in the algorithm first (just like paying for an end cap at Sam Goody back in the day).
So, now we have a bunch more folks listening to slicked-up, autotune country music that sounds closer to a pop album from the 2000s than they do to The Highwaymen, rather than seeking out something actually interesting like Dougie Poole's album Freelancer's Blues. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Now, what to do about all that? Again, same as it ever was: support your favorite independent artists, especially if they're local. Attend shows, especially if they're at your local independent venue, if you're fortunate enough to have one in your area. Contact your local venues and tell them what artists you want to hear, and encourage like-minded friends to do the same. Buy merch from the bands and buy drinks from the bar, because that's largely what keeps the bands and venues in the black. I don't love these answers --- they aren't compatible with Marxism, and they can be at odds with notions of what it means to make art --- but they are the reality of the situation, in my opinion.
Maybe in a better future, we'll see more artist co-ops and other forms of horizontal organizing that sidestep the major labels and the fatcats. Maybe we're in the middle of that process now, and I just can't see it from my limited experience and the slow speed at which such industry-wide changes can happen until a cliff is reached. After all, you could go to any mall and find an FYE until you suddenly couldn't.
I'd like to see a decentralised artist support system, but I can't see anyone legally getting around the "back catalogue access" problem.
I found this video interesting and relevant.
I'm loving tidal. Been a few months now.
I'm finding so much more awesome music now. Spotify seemed to get stuck in suggestions where I went "yeh, I guess that's kinda similar, but that's not actually what I like about those artists".
Deezer exists.
Wait, so we all hate, or should hate Spotify for the low support for artists, but now that I think about it, there is nothing stopping artists from putting their work in the other platforms as well, are they becoming more rich because of it and we just should go with whichever offers the best service for us?
Don't be harsh on me, I am not defending Spotify at all, just a dumb realization while seeing this graph 😆
I have no idea on the numbers, but given just how huge Spotify is compared to the others, I wonder if record labels just don't see the worth in additionally posting to the other non major platforms like Tidal. Sure it pays ~3x more but it likely has ~50x less users.
Edit: I just wanted tildes before my numbers, I put a backslash before them to cancel them out as formatting codes, but now it just renders as <sub></sub>. If anyone can tell me how I should fix this please tell me
And don't forget that Spotify can only handle around 150 songs in the queue. It doesn't matter how big a playlist is, it will start repeat after a while. The proposed solution by spotify itself is to just deactivate shuffle and start on different songs in large playlist. It's absolutely ridiculous. It bothers thousands of people but they won't fix it. https://community.spotify.com/t5/Live-Ideas/All-Platforms-Option-to-have-a-true-shuffle/idi-p/4880594
What? Only 150? Is it some unoptimized list of their in-house song objects? I don't understand how it can be the inefficient. Please tell me they just need to use an array and this isn't them doing that.
I’ve read somewhere some time ago that they generally prefer the songs/files that are already cached somewhere close to the user to reduce costs for traffic whenever the user leaves the choice to Spotify
Spicetify has a true shuffle extension
But why would i need an extension for that; id much rather they get rid of the smart shuffle (legit the most annoying fucking thing on the app, or just a toggle to keep it off) and fix the shuffle on their own
fair enough, I just wanted to share that the option is there for those who really want it
Sorry wasnt directing the comment specifically at you and im actualy going to get the extension myself lmao
Just voicing my disappointment of spotify lol
Anything for Android/iOS?
I can't recall the last time I used Spotify on desktop lol.
no unfortunately, xManager has Spotify premium features (except download) but no extra features
Alternative:
Your whole queue is gone and I'll just stop playing after this song
My queue disappearing is my number one issue with Spotify. It happens at the most inconvenient time, after I have spent ages getting it all together. I usually give up after that.
I once got a message from spotify saying congratulations, your musical taste is unique, you haven't liked a single song we have recommended. They haven't stopped trying though.
I gave up Spotify partly because they support Joe Rogan, but also because I mostly listen to classical music, and they kept shuffling in Britney Spears.
Spotify tends to think my tastes are more indie than they are, meanwhile YouTube Music (ReVanced) tends to to think my tastes are more mainstream than they are.
I haven't tried any other services yet, but if anyone knows of one that provides good balance of well-known and not so well-known music, and is free (and commercial free; modded/hacked apps are preferred), please let me know.
I actually think YouTube is better than most but that's still not saying a lot. Maybe Tidal.
Every time I start the app up it has some Taylor Swift or other pop music in the thing where whatever I was listening to previously should be. I've never searched for pop music so I'm not sure why they think that's helping.
Fuck Spotify. You're better off - in every way - pirating and buying one album a year
Buying an album every month and ripping it for mobile is literally cheaper than Spoofy. No pirating required and there’s a real chance the artist might get a share!
Edit: I do mean a CD, or vinyl if that tickles your fancy.
Thank you. I was trying to make it seem super low effort. I still have all my CDs but pretty much just buy vinyl and FLAC these days.
That implies it's even goddamn possible to get music files. It's a lot harder than I expected if they don't have bandcamp. I suspect region also fucks with it.
The last album I bought was slim shady in like 2001. I don't even have anything that plays CDs anymore.
So? Buy a digital album. There's plenty of ways, including, but not limited to, bandcamp.
Edit: Also, I never said 'CDs'
I feel like I'm the only one around here who likes the Spotify recommendations. I've gotten so many bangers that fit my various little niche genre tastes.
The feature itself is fine, the fact that it's literally in between you and turning regular shuffle on and off is incredibly irritating
Bro so, Spotify is trippin on me. In my discover weekly it hit me with some bullshit called No cock like horse cock.
It started recommending gay playlists. Now I'm straight but I'm far from homophobic. Realized an artist I was listening to was gay so I let off. Then I got hit with another. And traced that one back to another artist. This one wasn't so bad but it hit the chorus and went from a chill song to talking bout nuts slapping nuts.
I have to listen to their music outside of Spotify because honestly the recommendations are atrocious.
I listen to a meme song cause it's stuck in my head and now what? The degeneracy of the Internet is my backyard. Featuring balls in my jaws, the Christmas edition and many more.
I often listen to my music while driving, and sometimes I just scroll and don't look at song titles until something catches my attention.
Don't mind the work truck. Also here's my wrapped. Jake Hill I learned was a culprit lol.
That fact that this is coming from a lemmynsfw.com account is beautiful
I like getting recommendations, but that's what the DJ is for. When I choose a playlist there's usually a reason for it and adding random songs to it is not it.
See, I'd much rather just occasionally have to skip a song than listen to an AI mispronouncing band names.
It also cuts off the end of the song. Which is personally more irritating for me.
can't labels and artists pay for some kind of premium placement in discover weekly, release radar, and playlist recs?
ok, after some research, found this:
In some cases, commercial considerations, such as the cost of content or whether we can monetize it, may influence our recommendations. For example, Discovery Mode gives artists and labels the opportunity to identify songs that are a priority for them, and our system will add that signal to the algorithms that determine the content of personalized listening sessions. When an artist or label turns on Discovery Mode for a song, Spotify charges a commission on streams of that song in areas of the platform where Discovery Mode is active (Discovery Mode is not active in our editorial playlists). This signal increases the likelihood of the selected songs being recommended, but does not guarantee it.
so, at the very least, the recs you get are definitely not organic, and favor major labels, rich folks, and if Spotify can make any money off streaming the track in the first place
not saying the algorithm doesn't get it right most of the time (they'd be shooting themselves in the foot if it was all sponsored), but if it's favoring big labels and drowning out everyone else in the name of revenue for Spotify, I prefer to choose other ways to find new stuff. if Spotify needs more money to pay the bills, imho they should plainly be asking the consumers up front
Spotify erased my precisely curated list because I'm Russian and this somehow helps to stop the war in Ukraine
That's how I'd behave if I wanted to start this journey again
I haven't tested it myself but this seems interesting https://spotube.krtirtho.dev/
It grabs your playlists from Spotify and downloads the corresponding songs from YouTube
Interesting, but won't help me personally. The account was erased.
All other services were like: ok, we cannot process your payment due to the war. This one yielded a bizarre message about how I am complicit with Russian army's atrocities in Ukraine and therefore they delete my account till the end of March 2022
Like okay, Spotify you made your political statement, but does it somehow affect the actual political situation? I admire some Russian piracy sites that replaced advertisements with cinematics from Bucha and links to volunteers that helped Ukrainians to move to Europe through Russia
Money talks; if they imply any support for unpopular opinion people would drop support, thus making them lose money
I don't understand your point tbh.
They did choose to exit russian market because
-
Russian market is minor compared to western market, given the fact that russian market of Music streaming is dominated by Yandex Music.
-
There were not that many ways of legalizing income from Russian territory because of visa/mc ban and swift ban.
-
Political climate in Russia was and is quite harsh: bizarre regulations and employees as hostages just to name a few.
-
Twitter politics (shaming companies that do not exit russian market) was a minor factor I believe. Some western corps are there including the one where I used to work (USA). Also YouTube/google still bans content that authorities find inappropriate (e.g. how to escape draft)
Saving 30 minutes a month (or even week), Spotify starts to sound like a good deal. I'm in!
Wouldn't that work for free Spotify too? If that's your thing, it's probably worth sitting through the occasional ad rather than paying for it.
But that is eating from my time. Given time=money in the above statement, this would eventually bring the value down to zero again.
To rephrase: I would not spend 30 minutes listening to ads in order to save 30 minutes of spare time. Probably even less because ads are very disruptive to me, wasting more precious time.
Weird. I got noone telling me to listen vinyl on a hand driven Grammophone right now
Why would you leave tempo control in tge hands of a soulless machine? #beyourownconductor
Maybe lemmy is too popular for the hipsters.
Why is Spotify's shuffle so abysmally awful? It's nigh on useless
This has some answers: https://youtu.be/OdLyKETk5o0?si=UcD2zCBHVLKZSTsu
Hot take but hasn't been a problem for me. Like, the feature stays off until I turn it on again, and I only turn it on when I'm trying to expand a playlist.
I use Spotify for discovering new songs, mostly for adding to the DJ arsenal. I listen to a lot of music. Enough that I make like 15-20ish playlists a year for various subgenres of tunes either released or discovered that year.
Since I compartmentalize my genres so methodically, smart recommendations tend to be on the money and more of what I'm looking for. But again, when I just wanna hear what I've assembled I just leave it off -- never on unless I turn it on.
Definitely been eyeballing alternatives though, since Spotty is getting deeper into their enshitty arc.
I never want to turn it on, but I do swap from shuffle to regular (depending on whether I want to listen to just the newest stuff I've added), which means I have to click through smart shuffle now too.
Which wouldn't be a huge problem, but if you do it too fast, smart shuffle appears to be off, but the songs it has added are at least partially still in the queue.
As an easily-distracted multitasker I can certainly appreciate the inconvenience of clicking past it. Would be lovely to have a solid on/off in settings to omit the optional from playback.
More options almost always better than fewer in my mind!
Unpopular suggestion these days, but I still find Pandora has the best discovery of the streaming platforms. If you pay for their premium you can make playlists and play songs on demand, too. It's not as good of a UI, but for me it does what I want better than Spotify.
Yeah, I had to read this meme several times over to figure out what it was saying. Smart Shuffle just randomly turns on for people? I've literally never had that happen. It only turns on when I turn it on.
Song quality is terrible. The features are lacking and rarely useful. Now they have increased the rates and take away car play. I left when I realized my top artists and songs were the same every year. Much better to buy the songs when the quality is way better and I actually own the media
Do you and I live on a different planet? I grew up when you downloaded actual poor quality music. I stream Spotify at the highest bitrate it has, and it sounds fine. I have a nice system at home.
You talk about features and whatnot, and admittedly I am a simple user. I have albums I like, I turn on album and listen through cover to cover. I throw on Smartless, because for some reason I find Jason Bateman and Will Arnett's abuse of Sean Hughes to be endearing.
As per usual, people on Lemmy seem to make up problems, and it ruins any sort of argument against anything. Spotify's audio quality is not the issue. The issue is obviously the artist remuneration. To create this fake argument is to dilute any worthwhile argument, but Lemmy and Reddit before it seems to take this tack wherever possible.
I have discovered numerous artists because of Spotify. Spotify has linked me to their tickets (albeit Live Nation and fuck them) and merch stores, and I've bought their shitty tshirts and vinyls. I would say that's a benefit. And I like some obscure nonsense.
Is it perfect? I don't like how Spotify has handled its personnel. I think they can make their business model related to plays a little more friendly, but holy shit, the idealism here is ridiculous. You have people demanding perfection, without recognizing the alternative is nothing.
I'm gonna sound like a fanboy, but the alternative is Tidal.
Better audio quality, better (imo) suggestions, and not wasting money of podcasts and weird AI bs.
I don't understand why everyone suddenly hates Al .
Because it's everywhere and it's being shoved into our throats.
Well his Song "Eat it" kinda has this theme. But he made many other songs with other themes.
I don't understand the whole audio quality thing. I have produced (shitty) music, been playing music my whole life, and my ears just don't had beyond 320, 41k, I guess. I will say, when messing with samples, higher quality led to much less artifacting (practically none with flac), but when I'm just cranking tunes, the returns beyond 320 are nonexistent.
Suggestions, I'm always open to more. Spotify has been good to me, I discovered some bands and albums that have gone on to be number one in my rotation, and I like all sorts of music and am nostalgic to a fault. But more suggestions is good so I'll accept that point.
Podcasts I can take or leave, although as I mentioned I discovered the stupid Smartless podcast because of Spotify so I need to give them a nod there.
So yeah that's it, that's all I got! Thanks for taking!
Well, I'm glad compressed audio is good for you. I know many people that couldn't care less.
The person you commented on and myself have both found Spotify quality to be lacking.
I've found tidal, and it's Spotify without the chuff and pays artists better. And it's cheaper.
Maybe I can't actually hear the difference, and a true A-B blind would show the truth, but I don't care enough to do that. I'm enjoying music more, and I'm saving money
I hate that stupid fucking smart shuffle, I have a playlist with 500+ songs but it only wants to play the first 20
It sounds like it would be nice, but it's worse than the non-AI system it used before. At least before it mostly stayed within the same vibe. With the AI shuffle, it just feels completely random. It doesn't even attempt to stay within a genre. I used it all of 20 minutes when it first came out and then turned it off and never touched it again.
Also, they'll probably kill the Car Thing permanently soon. Another bad move.
Oh, it's Spoofy.
Lidarr + Jellyfin + Finamp... Need I say more?
Yes, because I have no idea what any of those things are.
Piracy and self hosting your music streams
Yes now tell us how to get that working on any device I have regardless of what network I'm connected to. Assume I'm behind a cgnat, don't have my own domain, and know fuck all about networking.
Finally compare all that hassle to just paying a few bucks per month.
Honestly this. I'd love to maintain my own database of music, but streaming services did something right to make it so accessible.
Prices will need to hit a breaking point to scare people away, and even then they will keep using the next easiest thing (e.g. YT Music + ad block in my case).
It really just needs to get annoying enough to use. In my case, I enjoyed it for music discovery, but then its recommendation algorithm got like YouTube where one stray listen just wrecked my discover weekly playlist for a month. I have one friend who's really into jazz, and maybe once every few months, I would click on one of his recommendations to see if he had found something that clicked for me. It got to the point where I stopped clicking on pretty much any recommendations, because Spotify would see that one song a quarter and go "Hold up,I think this guy wants nothing but atonal Yugoslavian free jazz in his playlist for the next month straight!"
In the same boat. Shit country, behind CGNAT, no money for domain. I found a cheap seedbox I use. Yeah it depends on whether it's worth the hassle... For me, I like tinkering with software and I love the concept of owning my media and that no company has their eyes on my data, so it's worth it. But if you just wanna lay down and watch, Netflix it is. Something always breaks when you self-host 🥲
I use Spotify a lot but have zero clue what smart shuffle is
It's supposed to add music similar to the playlist you're listening to randomly to your queue. I think it's just the enhance playlist feature with a different name.
Its real purpose is to stuff your listening experience with cheap songs so that prick can make more billions.
I think most people would rather find new music than something that’s already popular with a million listens already myself.
I don't mind adding to the end of a shuffled playlist you've a set, but not inserting between songs you've chosen. Don't think YTM does that yet.
Gooby plz
ViMusic
I hate how when trying to add a song to my playlist not knowing if I already have it in my playlist, Spotify web UI sometimes successfully detects duplicate songs but most of the time doesn't. It's very inconsistent and I can't figure out why other than them maybe A/B testing features?
I think it's because Spotify frequently includes the same song as being on multiple albums separately--for example, if a band has a greatest hits album, Spotify considers the greatest hits album as a different song, even though it's identical to the song on the original album.
They could even just be loose singles that are different. My list looks like I have 3 duplicates of Cumbersome by Three Mary Six; they're all actually different versions of the song but since 2 of them were single releases and didn't have an original album, they use the same album artwork the studio version is from.
Spotify pushed me to buy an old iPod and upgrade it to flash memory and a new battery. Sweet Sweet control baby
I've actually been enjoying it. I've also had the same Spotify account since I was like 12 so they got enough data on me to give me decent recommendations
I made the mistake of telling YouTube to download songs it "thinks" i would like. My library is now filled with music I WILL NEVER LISTEN TO. And it's going to take forever to clean it up.
It doesn't even let me play the song I'm asking it to play if I'm using the free version.
"Nah, here's a song that's similar to it or something from the same artist, but nuh uh uh, you can only skip 6 times an hour, and you can't go back"
Fuck you, Spotify.
I'm just curious why you believe it should be fully featured for free?
It's the case in the desktop version. Surely there has to be parity between it and the mobile version.
Otherwise you can continue spamming the arrow pointing downwards.
Oh, well if there are unlimited skips, backs, and direct song plays in the desktop version, your argument would be to support taking those away? That seems fair. But no, the market audience for desktop vs mobile has entirely different uses and needs, I do agree that a product should have the same features, but for free you can't be picky.
I guess that kinda makes sense.