this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
169 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

40289 readers
381 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Recent news revealed that Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek has been investing heavily in military tech companies, which adds another ethical layer to a platform already criticized for how little it pays musicians !

Spotify only pays artists about $3–5 per 1,000 streams, using a pro-rata model that directs most money toward major stars... By contrast, Qobuz (≈$18–20 per 1,000 streams) and Tidal (≈$12–13) pay far more fairly!

However Tidal is far from ethical. Most of its revenue is controlled by private investors and founders and small artists still earn very little...

More fair-minded platforms like Bandcamp, Resonate, Ampled, or SoundCloud’s fan-powered royalties prioritize musicians over investors.

With these more ethical alternatives available, why do we keep using Spotify?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ToxicWaste@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 day ago
[–] ozoned@piefed.social 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bandwagon, Faircamp, Love a Brother Radio, The Indie Beat. Probably not what you're looking for, but direct creator support, Fedi powered, all wonder folks.

[–] cityboundforest@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago

Also gonna suggest Mirlo.space as it's open sourced.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Old fart checking in ... why not just buy the tracks instead of paying for monthly access that screws artists? I mean, each song is unlikely to be more than $1.49, and then you own it. I don't have a streaming music account and never will because the idea of paying repeatedly for the same thing -- with the option of it being pulled at any time -- is nauseating.

[–] mcbenavides85@piefed.social 12 points 2 days ago (4 children)

An old fart listens to entire albums! Fake!

I’m an old fart.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why would I? Pay $1.49 to listen to 1 song over and over or pay $12 to listen to basically the entirety of human creation any time I want? Not to mention custom playlists and whatnot.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My music collection spans some 1,700 tracks and several full albums. It's not difficult to create local playlists, I don't pay monthly, and I don't have an excessive data plan because I need streaming. Look at the knock-on costs. It's not $12/month.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I listen to probably at least a dozen new songs every day. If I bought them that would cost me $18/day. Or $540/mo. Not to mention the absolute fortune required to store them all locally.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago

My 1,700 tracks, most at 320kpbs, take up 20GB. Albums add another 4GB. My four-year-old phone has 256GB of storage. I'm not sure where this "fortune" comes from. Especially when you're paying extra for data monthly just to stream. You're still spending the money, just pretending it's unrelated to music.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You could still do that without paying Spotify. Then you could go and buy the music you liked each month.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I have to pay someone 🤷 at least legally, anyway

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm in the phase of my life where if I encounter a new track I like in the wild, I'll buy it. But I'm not seeking out new stuff because (cracks open a PBR and grows a goatee) everything feels homogenized today.

Perhaps it's just different use cases. Still, you're dependent on a company to be able to continue listening to the music you like. That's worrisome. If a company took away the collection I've been building since the '80s, livid wouldn't begin to explain my reaction.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

if I encounter a new track I like in the wild, I'll buy it.

How do you "encounter" new tracks?

But I'm not seeking out new stuff because...everything feels homogenized today.

If you're not actively seeking out new music, it will feel that way, because you're just listening to whatever is on the radio or on TV or whatever. This is the beauty of streaming platforms. In the past you were only ever exposed to whatever music the record companies decided you should hear. And it was almost exclusively homogenous "pop" music, to some degree. With streaming music you can discover new music every day based on your personal preferences.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

OK. Lots of assumptions here. I haven't listened to the radio since the '90s, and I've never paid for cable.

My preferred genres are progressive house and trance, and I got into the rave scene about the time I stopped listening to the radio. I started my collection via fservs on IRC, ratio FTP sites and then Napster and P2P, totally obviating the record labels. I'm subscribed to various music producers on YouTube for when I'm thinking I want something new, and if it makes me cry, off to Beatport I go.

So, like, not to be rude, but you got every assumption wrong.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Lots of assumptions here.

you got every assumption wrong.

Zero assumptions here, you said you were, and I quote, "not seeking out new stuff", I didn't assume that.

I'm subscribed to various music producers on YouTube

So you DO enjoy streaming music...

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I hope you enjoyed feeling like you had a "gotcha" moment. When on my computer, yeah, I watch some YouTube, but mostly news and late-night monologues. I sure as shit don't pay for it.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have no interest in "gotcha moments". Just having a discussion about the virtues of streaming music platforms vs. buying.

If you don't pay for it then you are pirating, which is a whole other discussion.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"If you don't pay for it then you are pirating" is not a discussion, it's an erroneous blanket statement.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FatLegTed@piefed.social 8 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Why? They have more prog than the others. Believe me, I’d love to stick with Qobuz as the sound quality is magnificent. Unfortunately they just don’t have the music I listen to.

[–] bent@feddit.dk 6 points 2 days ago

I had this problem at first, then I realized there's so much music I never listened to before and I have enough new music between Qobuz and Bandcamp that I'm satisfied. But I see your point. I have pirated some music when the creator don't allow me to purchase the songs.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TerHu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

this is an awesome video on why other streaming services are just marginally better than spotify and not a long term solution: https://youtu.be/gDfNRWsMRsU

with that in mind i’m trying to transition away from streaming but am using tidal as what i hope is the least bad option for now.

[–] kehet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's the same old reason as always. Most users value their convenience more than anything.

[–] ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

I'm still on Pandora and honestly have no idea how they stack up. I just use it as a radio station on long drives.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why?

  1. Lack of Feature Parity

  2. Stickiness of library transfer

  3. Stickiness of social network effects

  4. It's still better ethically than Apple Music or YouTube Music, which behave anti-competitively

1: I've tried out Quobuz, it's pretty good, but it does not have the Jam / Group Session feature which me and my friends use constantly while gaming remotely. It also does not have an Xbox app which I use while playing games. I find Spotify's recommendations somewhat underwhelming, but Quobuz has a noticeably worse recommendation engine, at least for my genres and tastes. Those are the features that lack parity that matter to me, but for some others, it's things like amplifiers having built-in Spotify, or there being a Roku or Playstation app or something.

2: Quobuz uses a third party service to automatically transfer your library, which worked pretty well, but did require jumping through a bunch of hoops and subscribing to a trial subscription that I then had to cancel. It also did not find matches for some songs. Could I make it work if I had enough reason to switch? Yeah, probably, but the lack of feature parity (/roadmap that includes them) is enough to dissuade me from really trying.

3: In addition to friends on Spotify all using Jams, there's also an inherent niceness to just being able to text people Spotify links, especially since there's no cross platform linking service that would otherwise make sharing music easy.

4: Supporting Spotify may not be great, but its still better than supporting trillion dollar anti-competitive corporations like Apple and Google.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›