200+ Labels Withdraw Their Music From Spotify

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I know that losing two hundred labels at one time is no laughing matter but this official statement was pretty funny. It's hard to take someone seriously when they end their statement with "f**k Spotify."

A statement from the distributor reads: “As a distributor we have to do what is best for our labels. The majority of which do not want their music on such services because of the poor revenues and the detrimental affect on sales. Add to that the feeling that their music loses its specialness by its exploitation as a low value/free commodity. Quoting one of our labels, ‘Let’s keep the music special, f*ck Spotify.’”
Click to expand...
 
I've honestly been curios how they're getting away with their business model.
 
They can coddle their special fucking music all they want. I'm still not paying for it. ;)
 
Oldie said:
I've honestly been curios how they're getting away with their business model.
Click to expand...

Probably the same way Netflix got such great deals early on, none of the studios/distributors though it would actually take off so they took what they thought was free money, then when it's use exploded they get all pissy.
 
HydroBudz said:
They can coddle their special fucking music all they want. I'm still not paying for it. ;)
Click to expand...

Pretty much. They can think their wares is special, but it really truly is a "low value/free commodity." There are more than enough artists out there that can replace the whining bitches who are more than willing to take the lower income rather than no income at all.
 
They also don't know the difference between "affect" and "effect"
 
Its, pardon my french, AHOLES like you all that are the reason Lars Ulrich can't have the gold-plated shark tank bar installed right next to the pool this week.

Thanks to people using services like Spotify, he will have to wait a couple months before he can afford it. I hope you can sleep at night knowing that Master P's son will not get the tropical island in French Polynesia he always wanted for his birthday.
 
Jeremy C said:
Pretty much. They can think their wares is special, but it really truly is a "low value/free commodity." There are more than enough artists out there that can replace the whining bitches who are more than willing to take the lower income rather than no income at all.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

What they don't seem to realize is that the "low value/free commodity" is the only way to sell music and movies in the future (and even today).

High prices, exclusivity, and inconvenience only serve to piss end users off to the point where they either don't listen to your music at all, or they feel sufficiently aggrieved that they start justifying piracy.

Low cost (both to the distributor and to the end user) digital distribution of entertainment is the ONLY way going forward. When they hold on to old methods of distribution they are really just being Luddites and will never again appeal to more than just some niche groups.
 
Also, I was concerned there for a moment, as I am a paid subscriber to Spotify (so I can use the mobile app, get the high bitrate streams and not have any limits) and I was worried that music I like might disappear.

Then I read this:
That prompted STHoldings, which focuses on techno, grime, dubstep and bass music, to contact the 238 labels that it has on its books to ask if they wanted it to keep distributing content to Spotify or withdraw it.
Click to expand...

:p

Good riddance.

Maybe now some of those annoying techno remixes of songs I actually like will stop showing up in my searches :p
 
I think Spotify's response is pretty much spot on:

'The relevant metrics are: 1) how many people are being monetized by Spotify; 2) who these people are (usually young people previously on pirate services which generate nothing for artists and rightsholders)'

Getting some money from people is better than getting none, although I'm sure after cutting off all their revenue from Spotify this distributor will report lower revenue next quarter and tell it's shareholders that it's all because of piracy and if only piracy didn't exist they'd be making billions in theoretical internet money.
 
Ualdayan said:
...this distributor will report lower revenue next quarter and tell it's shareholders that it's all because of piracy and if only piracy didn't exist they'd be making billions in theoretical internet money.
Click to expand...

bitcoins :D
 
Ualdayan said:
I think Spotify's response is pretty much spot on:

'The relevant metrics are: 1) how many people are being monetized by Spotify; 2) who these people are (usually young people previously on pirate services which generate nothing for artists and rightsholders)'

Getting some money from people is better than getting none, although I'm sure after cutting off all their revenue from Spotify this distributor will report lower revenue next quarter and tell it's shareholders that it's all because of piracy and if only piracy didn't exist they'd be making Trillions in theoretical internet money.
Click to expand...


Fixed that statement for you..you heavily undervalued what the companies will claim they lost. ;)
 
Zarathustra[H];1038048204 said:
Also, I was concerned there for a moment, as I am a paid subscriber to Spotify (so I can use the mobile app, get the high bitrate streams and not have any limits) and I was worried that music I like might disappear.

Then I read this:


:p

Good riddance.

Maybe now some of those annoying techno remixes of songs I actually like will stop showing up in my searches :p
Click to expand...

Same here.

Glad its not including the major music I listen to. It does need to work on bringing some music and have a bit better of a "matching" system but over all I can't complain.

Its, pardon my french, AHOLES like you all that are the reason Lars Ulrich can't have the gold-plated shark tank bar installed right next to the pool this week.

Thanks to people using services like Spotify, he will have to wait a couple months before he can afford it. I hope you can sleep at night knowing that Master P's son will not get the tropical island in French Polynesia he always wanted for his birthday.
Click to expand...

Metalica isn't on Spotify, as are a few other major bands.
 
Describing Spotify, ripped from Wikipedia

Users can register either for free accounts supported by visual and radio-style advertising
Click to expand...

These music labels are against listening to free music that is supported by ads. You mean like on the radio? How much money do they get from letting their music be played by radio? What's the difference between OTA radio and Internet radio?
 
If their music is so special, how come the artists don't see a lot of the revenue?
 
The shit released today rarely qualifies as music to me anyway. I have a Spotify account. I have never used it. AM Radio > the crap on Spotify.
 
Either it's on a service like Spotify (Pandora, etc) or I don't listen to it, seems like a loss to them? I haven't bought an album or even individual song in years and would sooner listen to radio than do so. Maybe one day they will get.... doubtful though.
 
stiltner said:
The shit released today rarely qualifies as music to me anyway. I have a Spotify account. I have never used it. AM Radio > the crap on Spotify.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about sound quality, you are just plain wrong.

Their free level streams are equivalent to what you'd download from iTunes. Their premium high bitrate streams are very high quality Vorbis streams. not lossless, but not far off.

Any comparison to AM (or FM for that matter) radio is just plain silly.

If you are talking about content, I'd say you are wrong too. Their catalog is surprisingly full of material I thought was way too obscure to even be in there, and they have a lot of large popular bands as well (though I don't usually listen to modern popular music). What I am saying is, I only rarely am not able to find music I want there. I find that the most lacking genre of those that I ever listen to is Metal.

I can't speak to their catalog from a Rap/hiphop/R&B/techno/house/douche-rock (you know, Nickelback, 3 Doors Down, Hoobastank, Papa Roach, Godsmack, Creed, etc.) standpoint, because I never listen to that junk, but I wouldn't be surprised if their content is decent there too.
 
I've never used Spotify, and at this point, I guess I never will. I wonder how MOG gets away with it then. $5/month for a 10-million song catalog. And if you have a data stream download program you can download 256/320 kbps MP3s.
 
Fail said:
If their music is so special, how come the artists don't see a lot of the revenue?
Click to expand...

Artists are an exploitable, consumable entity in the eyes of labels, just like how they regard their customers as mere bags of cash and can not understand why they aren't allowed to just empty them out.

The few artists who do get rich do so only by the whims of the label, as a lure for future victi... er, artists to sign up with them :)
 
Zarathustra[H];1038048185 said:
What they don't seem to realize is that the "low value/free commodity" is the only way to sell music and movies in the future (and even today).

High prices, exclusivity, and inconvenience only serve to piss end users off to the point where they either don't listen to your music at all, or they feel sufficiently aggrieved that they start justifying piracy.
Click to expand...

The "Entertainment" industry exists in a "world" where acting and music are two extremely exclusive and valuable commodities. Its an imaginary world where nothing productive is actually happening. Surely artist of various levels go off and donate their time and energy in third world countries, and surely they are doing something productive and kind for these peoples/nations... however no one NEEDS a special person to act or to play music for them. We are all equally capable of acting or playing music (quality disregarded) and there are certainly CEO's and engineers at various companies that are actually quite good with a musical instrument or at running from the cops (providing entertainment). The record industries self worth, like everyone's, is self imagined and in times like these your common poet is just common, while your common engineer developing a new sport-friendly prosthetic leg is uncommon and deserving of special treatment.
 
Zarathustra[H];1038048204 said:
Also, I was concerned there for a moment, as I am a paid subscriber to Spotify (so I can use the mobile app, get the high bitrate streams and not have any limits) and I was worried that music I like might disappear.

Then I read this:


:p

Good riddance.

Maybe now some of those annoying techno remixes of songs I actually like will stop showing up in my searches :p
Click to expand...

Thanks for that post.... yeah, seems these "labels" are just a bunch of shithole-nonamers for the most part. Shit music, wanting to make big bucks.... dubstep, house, pfft... complete trash music anyone with a computer can make in a week or two of studying it.

And a few of the comments here are really lame, as spotify is free and has basically MILLIONS of songs almost... how can you call it junk? It's just another awesome music service for everyone to use, wtf? I mean, the only annoying thing about it the free version is the ads sometimes play country or pop when I'm listening to hard rock or rap for instance... like WTF spotify? Make a system with legit ads :rolleyes:
 
Metrocall said:
Either it's on a service like Spotify (Pandora, etc) or I don't listen to it, seems like a loss to them? I haven't bought an album or even individual song in years and would sooner listen to radio than do so. Maybe one day they will get.... doubtful though.
Click to expand...

Exactly how I feel.... ever since the days of recording audio, records have dropped in sales..... go figure? :rolleyes:

If you build a barrier, they will overcome.... if you leave it open, and put ads, they will come.

If you want to make big bucks, how about be a REAL ENTERTAINER and make some damn shows and travel around to your fans?
 
The music industry would be just fine and probably better without labels. they're a relic of a different era when they were actually relevant to the distribution of music. Hopefully someday soon they will all go out of business. They're not needed anymore. I'd just as soon give my money directly to the artists that I like.
 
I am assuming these are small/unknown/largely independent labels?

If no major artists have been pulled, nobody will notice.

200+ labels who have sold less records in their lifetime than 1 major label sells in ~month or so I'd imagine.

But damn if 200+ Labels doesn't make for a good click generating headline.
 
I buy music some times.

I found nearly all the music I've bought using pandora. If you remove your music from pandora I'll never hear it and will never buy it.
 
At first, I was excited to get access to spotify.. Then I was searching for a non american song that I remember hearing, think it was 'das omen' or something. when i found it spotify said something like it wasn't available to people in my geographic location or some crap.... rage uninstall :/

i mean, if i cant listen to a european song cuz im american why bother using the service?
 
Amaruk said:
Probably Mysterious Art. New wave/synthpop. Like most popular dance hits, there's quite a few versions.

Short one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyD8dfyj_Jo

Long one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T134bZn1yek


Or it could be E Nomine. Goth/Synth/Dance.

NSFW this video is, unless co-workers are down with drinking blood/worms and such. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtM7BuCuEV0
Click to expand...

would be the last one heh, no idea what it says (i rarely listen to lyrics for english songs..) the non vocal beat is what i liked about it.

restrictions with all these different greedy labels etc make such a service like spotify unrealistic, even the paid version.
 
Music artists are the only people who figure they can make a couple of hit songs and live for years off of that. Before recording technology allowed the creation of labels they had to actually perform their craft on a regular basis to get by. Just like everyone else.
 
Fail said:
If their music is so special, how come the artists don't see a lot of the revenue?
Click to expand...
I'm sure it isn't the artists, but rather more so the publishers or recording studios and whatnot.

Ok, perhaps in some cases it may be the artist too, but an artist who is genuinely passionate and true to the heart of music and art wouldn't let $$$ get in the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top