Spotify vs. Anna's Archive

Comments

• TootGuitar@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Here’s an archive link, in case anyone, like me, refuses to read anything on Substack due to their affinity for Nazis:

  archive.ph/Qh4gw

  source
• SnoringEarthworm@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Simone reminds me of the class perspective: musicians here behave like atomized small owners, caught in their enterprecarity, who (legitimately) ask for some defense of their property rights, attacked both by hackers and by the big monopolists of platforms and AI. Because from these property rights, in this case IP, comes a rent, and from this rent, independent artists and label owners try to make a living. Again, right or wrong, this is what’s happening.

  I remember reading somewhere that independent artists make basically no money from Spotify.

  Is that still true, or have creators found a way to claw back value from the platform, and that’s why they’re defending it?

  source

  • Fandangalo@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Spotify performs as one of the worst when it comes to creator royalties and appropriate pay.

    Image

    It’s not THE worst, and these numbers have shifted since 2022. The general sentiment (that Spotify stiffs artists) is still shared by the general community.

    source

    • verdi@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      This plot is complete BS, Deezer pays double than spotify.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • kboy101222@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’m always surprised that Deezer is still around. Who on earth is still using it?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      This graph is weird. Soundcloud looks like it pays more according to it, but it needs to swap positions with Spotify.

      source
    • Tim_Bisley@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      What’s up with soundlcouds position in that chart?

      source
    • HyperfocusSurfer@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Add it to the fact that, quoting from the aa’s blogpost,

      ≥70% of songs are ones almost no one ever listens to (stream count < 1000).

      The vast majority of the artists are to be “stiffed” of like $3 or less per track during the nearest eternity iff every single one of their listeners is to download the archive and only listen to locally saved copies. Which, given spotify tries to do it themselves by recommending (and, likely, creating) ai slop, tells us more about their predatory practices than of anything else

      source
  • chobeat@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I think the point is more general about profiting from “renting” their music rather than from their labor. The fact that Spotify gives them peanuts make their position even more miserable.

    source
  • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    who (legitimately) ask for some defense of their property rights, attacked both by hackers and by the big monopolists of platforms and AI

    This does not sound like they’re defending Spotify.

    source
• PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What use is the metadata? Or is that stuff like the album covers etc?

  I’m also a bit concerned about this:

  Second, there’s an obsession with audiophile-grade quality (lossless FLAC, etc.) that inflates file sizes, making it impossible to maintain a complete archive of all music ever produced.

  Does that mean that this spotify dump is a bunch of 64kbs mp3s, or worse some kind of lossy spotify transcode?

  source

  • pulsewidth@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Spotify streams all music at 160kbps OGG for free users by default, so that’s what this archive is dumped at - the original Spotify content, no transcode.

    Side note - it would probably not be possible to do a dump as a paid used (as they would notice a user account is being abused, and ban it), but paid accounts go up to 320kbps OGG and some content is also available lossless (as FLAC).

    Anyway, 99%+ of people can’t consistently tell the difference between a 160kbps OGG and lossless, because of limitations in either their equipment, training, ears, or a combination thereof. This has been blind tested many times and the audiophiles that ‘swear they can tell’ are always proven wrong, they then usually blame the equipment or test. There’s tests you can run yourself too, eg here: abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html

    source

    • BlackAura@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Anyway, 99%+ of people can’t consistently tell the difference between a 160kbps OGG and lossless, because of limitations in either their equipment, training, ears, or a combination thereof. This has been blind tested many times and the audiophiles that ‘swear they can tell’ are always proven wrong, they then usually blame the equipment or test. There’s tests you can run yourself too, eg here: abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html

      Ooohhh I did that test when I got a new speaker / amp setup at my PC and as a musician I thought “I got this”. Plus I was trying to decide if Tidal was worth upgrading to from Spotify.

      I did slightly better than average. Like just slightly. I might have the results somewhere.

      I ended up doing Tidal’s free trial. I couldn’t tell a difference. Went back to Spotify. (though now my group of people are on an Apple Music family plan).

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • thermal_shock@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      They definitely don’t see paid accounts using too much. My library is mostly built from Spotify rips using onthespot. 400k songs.

      Everything is broken now and a few patches are up, waiting for it to update and keep ripping.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Tattorack@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Heh, like wine tasting.

      source
    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Sure but if the purpose of the dump is musical archive, then the music should be stored in an archival format, not a lossy one.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • sefra1@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      • For popularity>0, we got close to all tracks on the platform. The quality is the original OGG Vorbis at 160kbit/s. Metadata was added without reencoding the audio (and an archive of diff files is available to reconstruct the original files from Spotify, as well as a metadata file with original hashes and checksums).

      • For popularity=0, we got files representing about half the number of listens (either original or a copy with the same ISRC). The audio is reencoded to [OGG Opus](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_/(audio_format) at 75kbit/s — sounding the same to most people, but noticeable to an expert.

      source
  • Rooty@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Modern pop music is already compressed to hell, FLAC is a waste of bandwidth unless you’re encoding orchestral pieces.

    source

    • sefra1@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I think you’re confusing two different concepts, dynamic range compression and data compression.

      The first is like an automated volume control that lowers the volume really really fast in a matter of ms when the volume reachest a certain threshold, (can also work the other way where in increases below a certain threshold, or both).

      The reduces the file size, sacrificing quantity if a lossy codec is uses. Lossless codecs like flac are a bit to bit perfect of the original.

      source
  • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Spotify uses I think 192 or 320kbps Vorbis which is quite good and still has small sizes.

    source

    • fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Even that’s 300 TB so I kinda understand. If this is all thar survives into the long term that’s ok I suppose

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • trolololol@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s not MP3, it’s Ogg vorbis

    They’re encoding the top songs with higher resolution, the next bunch ( it’s still millions of songs) with about half that bitrate and not planning to save the next tranche which is like a looooot of songs but each has less than 1000 plays over the history of Spotify.

    This is what I vaguely remember after reading the whole original post AND after a night drinking.

    No nitpicking.

    source

    • foofy@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      They didn’t encode/reencode anything with popularity>0.

      What they are providing is the same as the available source.

      They did reencode songs with popularity=0.

      source