Spotify HiFi (finally) Coming Soon?

[Zensō]

Spotify code suggests HiFi tier is coming with lossless audio for $20 / month

Spotify Supremium could have a $19.99 / month price.

www.theverge.com

”Spotify’s long-awaited HiFi tier could finally be getting closer to launch. Code within the Spotify app reveals new details about the “Supremium” tier, which could feature 24-bit lossless audio, the ability to create playlists with AI, and more, as spotted by u/Hypixely on Reddit.”

 

[Jimbob54]

Again?!

 

[Zensō]

Again?!

Yeah, I know; it’s beyond silly at this point. Even if it happens, you have to wonder if anyone really cares after so many false starts, especially at $19.95 per month.

 

[Joe Smith]

Yeah...I'm kinda burned out on their lack of transparency re this...they just upped the price for the two-user plan here in the U.S. If they did $19.95/month for two users at the higher quality...maybe. Otherwise I will probably just stay with the current plan, cost-conscious guy that I am.

 

[RDoc]

If any of you are into Teslas, it's a lot like waiting for Full Self Driving to appear. According to Elon completely self driving taxis will be available by end 2017 (yes, that 2017) and Tesla will stop selling cars at that point and only lease them as robot chauffeurs. AND - there won't be any human accessible controls such as steering wheel or brake pedals.

 

[Chrispy]

Uh huh

 

[Sal1950]

If any of you are into Teslas, it's a lot like waiting for Full Self Driving to appear. According to Elon completely self driving taxis will be available by end 2017 (yes, that 2017) and Tesla will stop selling cars at that point and only lease them as robot chauffeurs. AND - there won't be any human accessible controls such as steering wheel or brake pedals.

 

[Emlin]

An interesting article on why you probably shouldn't be using Spotify anyway:

Spotify made £56m profit, but has decided not to pay smaller artists like me. We need you to make some noise | Damon Krukowski

What its Wrapped campaign doesn’t say is that indie musicians and labels are treated terribly, and deserve a better deal, says Damon Krukowski

www.theguardian.com

 

[Looneybomber]

An interesting article on why you probably shouldn't be using Spotify anyway:

Spotify made £56m profit, but has decided not to pay smaller artists like me. We need you to make some noise | Damon Krukowski

What its Wrapped campaign doesn’t say is that indie musicians and labels are treated terribly, and deserve a better deal, says Damon Krukowski

www.theguardian.com

What streaming platform should we use instead?
The article doesn’t provide an alternative streaming platform.
The article only complains about how the unpopular artists don’t make money, but that has been the case for all artists everywhere for centuries.

 

[Emlin]

What streaming platform should we use instead?
The article doesn’t provide an alternative streaming platform.
The article only complains about how the unpopular artists don’t make money, but that has been the case for all artists everywhere for centuries.

I too would like more information on the varying artist remuneration models that different platforms offer.

 

[GDK]

Platform	Pay per Stream	Streams for $1,000
Pandora	$0.0013	769,231
Spotify	$0.0033	303,030
Amazon Music	$0.004	250,000
Deezer	$0.0064	156,250
YouTube Music	$0.008	125,000
Apple Music	$0.01	100,000
Tidal	$0.013	76,924

Source

 

[Waxx]

If you really want to support artists, listen to them on Bandcamp (if they have a page), buy tickets for their shows, buy merch and physical media direct from them (on concerts, on their webpage or Bandcamp page). Streaming makes only the top 0.01% and the owners of the streaming service rich.

 

[Galliardist]

Streaming makes only the top 0.01% and the owners of the streaming service rich.

Not even that. Maybe the major labels are winning. But Spotify? It actually made a small (for its size) profit last financial year through cutting staff, and is using the same ploy again.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/04/tech/spotify-layoffs-third-round/index.html

As for the lossless option… they’ve probably let go of the only person who knows the password to turn that on!

 

[holdingpants01]

including atmos would be newsworthy, but at their pace the world will collapse first

 

[Waxx]

Not even that. Maybe the major labels are winning. But Spotify? It actually made a small (for its size) profit last financial year through cutting staff, and is using the same ploy again.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/04/tech/spotify-layoffs-third-round/index.html

As for the lossless option… they’ve probably let go of the only person who knows the password to turn that on!

There are more ways to earn money with companies than pure net profit. The company worth (market cap) is still estimated at $35.25 Billion, so if you trade shares, you still earn a lot if you bought at the right time (or are the original shareholder). If you bought shares end 2022 and sell them now you made about 131% profit...

 

[Galliardist]

There are more ways to earn money with companies than pure net profit. The company worth (market cap) is still estimated at $35.25 Billion, so if you trade shares, you still earn a lot if you bought at the right time (or are the original shareholder). If you bought shares end 2022 and sell them now you made about 131% profit...

That’s true, but profit from share values has to be realised by selling. The large investors aren’t going to sell quickly, and tbe shares look way overvalued to me right now. The value comes from the large user base and nowhere else, and that has to be exploited. So far they have no way to do that. The number of active paying users is still not enough to support any innovation and also a profit: the staff reductions are not affecting the core service yet.

Spotify is effectively a problem waiting to be solved - how to get more money out of its user base. It can’t really sell more than it does. I suspect its value can only be raised by a sale to one of the big players that may want those users for their own services. Who would that be, today?

 

[pablolie]

An interesting article on why you probably shouldn't be using Spotify anyway:

Spotify made £56m profit, but has decided not to pay smaller artists like me. We need you to make some noise | Damon Krukowski

What its Wrapped campaign doesn’t say is that indie musicians and labels are treated terribly, and deserve a better deal, says Damon Krukowski

www.theguardian.com

There isa big difference between not being paid or thinking you're not being paid enough, though. Spotify does pay, I made $28 on it last year.

 

[Galliardist]

Platform	Pay per Stream	Streams for $1,000
Pandora	$0.0013	769,231
Spotify	$0.0033	303,030
Amazon Music	$0.004	250,000
Deezer	$0.0064	156,250
YouTube Music	$0.008	125,000
Apple Music	$0.01	100,000
Tidal	$0.013	76,924

Source

Those numbers are out of date, but I can't find better I also can't find a 2023 figure for Qobuz, but they were paying more than twice what Tidal paid in 2021 IIRC (and I think I posted in a thread here somewhere but can't find it). I believe part of that was a covid "bonus" that they introduced to pay artists more during the period they may not be able to work, so to see a 2023 figure would be nice.

 

[Joramun]

What's the issue with Spotify and why can't they implement this already?

 

[pablolie]

That’s true, but profit from share values has to be realised by selling. The large investors aren’t going to sell quickly, and tbe shares look way overvalued to me right now. The value comes from the large user base and nowhere else, and that has to be exploited. So far they have no way to do that. The number of active paying users is still not enough to support any innovation and also a profit: the staff reductions are not affecting the core service yet.

Spotify is effectively a problem waiting to be solved - how to get more money out of its user base. It can’t really sell more than it does. I suspect its value can only be raised by a sale to one of the big players that may want those users for their own services. Who would that be, today?

Just focusing on Spotify is probably unfair, it is something that impacts the entire streaming industry. There may be lessons to be learned in music streaming from the video streaming industry, where instead of just recycling stuff you can get everywhere, you have some exclusive and desirable content. Amazon and Netflix and AppleTV bankroll original content, they are producers on top of streaming stuff you can get everywhere. The music streaming services dont do it. They just reuse existing stuff. And the stuff is subject to sudden licensing changes (which is also true with video streaming services, I have paidnfor stuff on Amazon Prime that then disappears).

The whole cry-me-a-river stuff about artists claiming they dont get paid (enough) is of zero interest to me. Artists dont tell my employer to pay me more, I made the adult decision to sign a contract and that's that. And if I am unhappy I negotiate or go elsewhere or consult on my own.

The layoffs may indicate Spotify is trying to focus, which I hope they do. They should keep focusing on content (it is pretty good but could be even better), and better usability (their two separate queues stuff and other things make zero sense to anyone, even their own support staff).