I have narrowed down to apple and spotify but i cant seem to decide which to go, both service have artists I like and are missing a few which one of which has.
Right now my decision is based on the playlist curation. And i have not use both discovery fe
ature enough to know which is the better one so really need mu help here.
Which music streaming is the better playlist curator? Apple or Spotify and which do you use?
Other urls found in this thread:
blog.vellumatlanta.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
i've used both (using apple atm) and apple music's playlists are 1000x better than spotify's. i've found tons of artists through apple music's playlists and they have tons more experimental stuff that you would never see on spotify
Yeah i definitely found more artist on apple too but it looks like spotify has alot of playlist variation even in a single genre
Get both, like me.
blog.vellumatlanta.com
read that before you go with apple music. i had it because i have an iphone and it's convenient to have it built into the music app but it's really not worth it
Used Spotify premium for almost two years. It was okay. Then, I switched to Apple Music overall it is pretty good but, the iTunes on Windows is very much bloated and Android app is pretty bad.
FOR FUCKS SAKE JUST DOWNLOAD IT FOR FREE DUDE DONT BE A MORAL PUSSY
Apple does the job
Just use the Apple Music cloud and don't put your music into any iTunes folders set in it's preferences. Use Foobar or Musicbee for personal files.
So far I have no problems like the ones you guys mention cause I have never bought any music from itunes before. Too bad apple music can't chromecast to my tv
I am not gonna be cheapskate retard scavenging the net just to download a stupid album when I just click once and play newly discovered music curated just for me.
Google Play Music is superior to both. Storage of up to 20,000 of your own songs for free so you can stream you illegally downloaded music alongside your streaming stuff. Means I've got loads of super obscure stuff that you can't get on a streaming service out and about.
Oh, great playlists and recommendations too.
I've never bought any music either from there.
Streaming is so fucking gay I can't believe it. Have fun listening to mp3s and burning all your goddamn data just to hear TPAB one more time. The only good thing about the current streaming services is that the playlists offer artists a chance to be discovered - but that's absolutely ridiculous because a lot of those artists or their labels are paying money to be put on those playlists which has been technically illegal in broadcast radio for years. The music industry LOVES that you faggots want to stream music.
>trusting your illegal files with Google
>curated just for me
Do you really fucking think this?? You wouldn't believe that people have developed algorithms just to spoon feed you whatever they think you want to hear and/or what you'll eventually put money into somehow, would you?
>being this indoctrinated
I've done it for a couple of years now, it's fine. How would they be able to distinguish between illegal and legal files?
Apple is better at making themed playlists
Spotify is better at making you a weekly playlist you may actually like.
You realise you can download music for offline play, yeah?
>hell be fine
Oh awesome!!! You mean I can NOT PAY for music and even keep it on my device, all through an official service!? Wow, it's like no one gives a fuck if the artists make a living at all!
i use apple music on iphone and ipad and spotify free on laptop because itunes is too heavy for my cheap hp stream lmao. apple music is better though.
We don't, it's just if you use Spotify and iTunes Music you're getting it all without piracy paranoia.
Wow you faggots really are the worst. There's so much cognitive dissonance going on inside the heads of people that obsessively "support" their favorite artists and then literally admit that they don't give a fuck if the artists get paid. Fuck you.
Artists sell their recordings to the labels. If they don't like that situation they're free to self fund.
>be a good consumer :)
>using apple products
you naive little cunt
i support indie artists by buying their tunes on bandcamp or from the label and i dont want to support some uber rich pop stars like lady gaga or beyonce and their mainstream labels so i use streaming for this. some people don't have money to support their faves do you think they should be deprived from music at all?
We just want free (or cheap) legal music. Fuck what our slaves think.
This, I buy shit not on Spotify or iTunes.
Spotify >>>>> Apple Music > Google Play Music >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tidal
They're cuckolds who live to line the pockets of Spotify, Apple or [insert business here] just for the slightest of conveniences they may offer.
That's the free market my sweet-natured friend, enjoy supporting piracy which also means supporting child sex trafficking and terrorism. At least we know our money isn't going into the pockets of the Russian Mafia or Yakuza or whatever.
It isn't a "slight" conveniance. Being able to listen to new music without having to use your PC to torrent it and manually copy it over to a player is a big deal.
Not to mention most the revenue from these services goes in rights fees
Who said anything about piracy?
This is rarely how it goes. Most of the time, the labels front the artists anywhere from $20,000 to $250,000+ so that they can record, tour and promote an album. Then, the artist has to pay this back either out of pocket or through sales. Surprise, you're fucking the artist while the industry gets the money.
Lol are you fucking serious? You probably typed that out on your fucking iphone. If you aren't paying for music you are actively making the artist's life worse.
>like lady gaga or beyonce and their mainstream labels so i use streaming for this
Uhh if you're listening to them on Spotify you're supporting them, dumbfuck. Not to mention, top 40 pop stars get higher cuts from these streaming services because the services have shelled out money directly in order to secure their library.
How do you expect people to continue making a product when you literally do not pay for it? Goddamn greedy mouthbreathers.
Oh wow holy shit you can't be bothered to A) pay about $10 for something someone worked on for probably months and then B) copy and paste that folder to another device. Fuck you lazy, entitled assholes. Also:
>most the revenue from these services goes in rights fees
What the fuck does this even mean?
>This is rarely how it goes. Most of the time, the labels front the artists anywhere from $20,000 to $250,000+ so that they can record, tour and promote an album. Then, the artist has to pay this back either out of pocket or through sales. Surprise, you're fucking the artist while the industry gets the money.
The artist doesn't have to sign with a label.
Besides, you're arguing that the label, who takes the financial risk, isn't entitled to a chunk of the profit. Most albums don't make back their advance.
please enlighten me on how downloading an album illegally directly or indirectly supports sex trafficking and terrorism
>If you aren't paying for music you are actively making the artist's life worse.
explain
>artist doesn't have to
Practically every artist that you're listening to on a streaming service has a label, which they signed with. What you're saying about the labels taking on financial risk is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that the artists are the poor ones, the ones that just love creating music and taking it out on the road. They don't create it for money but they also can't create it without money, therefore they need support from people that don't want to fuck them over i.e. not music industry personnel. They need the people listening to their music to give them a few bucks sometimes. The biggest insult to your favorite artists is not paying money for their work.
If the music industry didn't have people paying for money, including via streaming, they wouldn't be in a position to release millions of albums that make zero money.
I see no problem with piracy as long as you support a few artists that you really enjoy. I have about 100gb of music in my library. There's no way I, or many others, could afford to have that legally. So does that mean you go without it? Even if possessing those files costs nothing to anyone? I pay for what I really appreciate, and can afford, and I pirate the rest. If every artist has a decent amount of people who really appreciate them, it works out.
>Artist spends years and probably thousands of dollars acquiring the necessary tools just to get to square one in the music industry
>Manages to find a label that wants to "help" them by loaning them thousands of dollars
>Artist is then required by contract to produce music for the label
>Label typically overspends and the artist foots the bill
>Artist, now with the equivalent of a college debt, releases new album, only to have Millennial faggots "appreciate" it so much that they won't actually spend money on it
>Artist is permanently indebted to the label
>Cycle begins where artist must continue to produce content solely to fulfill contractual obligations but never makes enough money to get out of the hole
This is probably happening to multiple artists you're listening to right now. You're contributing to it. They hate you for it.
Wrong. The industry has financiers outside of the music world. Former CEOs of film companies will sign million dollar checks for artists they never even plan to listen to because it's just another investment and they're just another filthy rich asshole with more money than sense. I love how no one on this board actually knows what goes on in the music industry.
i want you to explain how an artist is in a worse situation after i pirate something instead of ignoring it
also it seems like the labels are the real problem here
>Even if possessing those files costs nothing to anyone
This is where you're wrong. If I spent money and sweat on making an album and then it magically appeared on your computer without me making any money, I'd say you've cost me something. Sure is easy to have zero sympathy when you're so far removed. If you actually want to make a difference, pay $25 for a concert ticket and then buy a shirt. Most artists right now make their money from playing shows.
>I'd say you've cost me something
in what way?
is everyone who doesnt give you money costing you something?
hey idiot, it's not that you're making the situation worse it's that you're choosing not to help
>Former CEOs of film companies will sign million dollar checks for artists they never even plan to listen to because it's just another investment
okay the money is still coming from somewhere
>I love how no one on this board actually knows what goes on in the music industry
sorry friendo, it must be tough being the only real music fan here
>also it seems like the labels are the real problem here
hurrr durrr
>how an artist is in a worse situation after i pirate something instead of ignoring it
Well this is kind of silly since they're two completely different scenarios. If I were to create music and you ignored it, that would be fine since you don't care about it and I don't care that you don't care about it. If you were to pirate it, I would directly be out money. Then, you might show it to your friends, and then I'd be out even more money. The music you downloaded doesn't contribute to any sales counters, which are a large driving factor in what consumers want to buy.
why am i obligated to help
following that logic, I'm obligated to throw money at any band I've heard and thought was pretty good.That is financially impossible for anyone
>hurrr durrr
stunning logic
>would directly be out money
how
who said you are? not everything that is subjectively 'right' or helpful is an obligation
iTunes is a bloated piece of shit on Windows so I use Spotify. It's also free and has generally better interface
Apple has a shit interface and Spotify is ran by Jews.
Tidal is better
Effort, you fucking dunce. It's why you pay someone to come over to your house and fix your air conditioner. It's why you pay someone to fly your plane. Yeah, they might enjoy it, but they are literally taking time out of their comparatively short life just to serve you somehow. They spent money on tools and countless hours learning how to use them in a way that best serves you. Without compensation for their efforts they have no reason to continue their services.
I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. Yes, there are a lot of dumb people in the industry with a lot of money. Yes, they love fucking over everyone they possibly can.
exactly
>not everything that is subjectively 'right' or helpful is an obligation
but the people who think it is right claim that it is an obligation... which is the basis of this whole discussion. thanks for the useless comment
so as long as you aren't legally obligated to do something good or morally right you don't do it? kek, luckily you faggots will regret it when apple deletes your library or spotify shuts down and you have nothing to listen to
>Why should I pay money for something I enjoy and that cost other people money to create in order for me to enjoy it????
Stunning logic
How would I be directly out money if you didn't pay for something that I normally charge money for? Are you really this fucking thick?
This
although my phone carrier got a deal with Tidal and I have free premium for 2 years so guess what I use
>They spent money on tools and countless hours learning how to use them in a way that best serves you. Without compensation for their efforts they have no reason to continue their services.
any quality musician's main reason to make music should be that they have something to express. I don't make music to make money, and I barely do make any money. And that's okay, because I do it for fulfillment.
that analogy would only work if the artist has to use extra time for every pirate
you just didnt make any money, no one took anything from you
>no one took anything from you
...except you literally did if you downloaded something I made and you didn't pay the price I put on it.
Tripfags confirmed to be the absolute scum of the earth.
Sure, that's a fine argument. It's different when you're trying to make your living off of your art.
>How would I be directly out money if you didn't pay for something that I normally charge money for? Are you really this fucking thick?
because it costs no money to reproduce a digital copy, and if I'm not going to pay for it whether I acquire it or not, you lose nothing.
>you didn't pay the price I put on it.
where did you lose money
you dont even know i did anything
Streaming is the worst of both worlds. You're paying money but barely anything goes to the actual artists. If you're poor just pirate and don't pay for Apple's permission to listen to music while fucking over the artist. If you have money pay for the music like a reasonable person.
if you want to make the "w-well what if Spotify shuts down??" argument, then we can also pose the possibility of your house burning down and you losing your collection that way. It's a stuid argument.
>It's different when you're trying to make your living off of your art
I wish I could make a living off of my art. Doesn't everyone? I don't think anyone would choose to not be able to make a living off of their art. But trying to make a living should never be the basis of the creation of art. So I disagree that it is "different"
Okay cool so if someone spends an equivalent amount of time writing a book and wants to charge $20 for it, but hey it's so much easier for a faggot pirate just to copy and paste the text and not pay for it, you're saying that the author isn't out anything. It doesn't matter if it doesn't cost money to copy something, it costs money upfront to produce you idiot. You're paying for someone's intellectual property. If you don't value that then you honestly can't say you like art.
What a dumb, dumb train of thought. You're serious too.
No one cares what the artists get through record sales. Bringing up the pennies on a dollar argument is irrelevant.
websites go offline far more often than your house gets burnt to the ground you fucking retard.
>he didn't see me steal it!
>that means he isn't losing money!
Are you literally 13?
>No one cares what the artists get through record sales
....Except the artists relying on the money from sales to pay for the food on their tables. You fucking greedy cunts blow my mind.
You know, if there was some way of pirating food and sharing it with the world, it would be considered a miracle, but because it's music, books, films, etc, it's called a curse. Funny that.
It's not because your house is your responsibility - something which you have control over. The point of streaming is that you are giving control over your library to a company. Music is important to me, so I want to have the power over my collection.
>using Spotify
>at all
Admittedly, Spotify has a decent percentage of the music I want/like, but not everything. Wouldn't you want all your music under one platform for all the other random esoteric shit you listen to?
Download or bust.
i didnt steal anything, i copied it
see mosanto
There's a download function for offline play. Eat shit.
but if I'm not going to pay for it either way, nothing changes except that I got to hear the person's ideas and witness their artistic contribution.
I'm just stating a fact user. no one cares therefor your argument has no grounds.
thread
>at all
>poses an argument based solely on using Spotify exclusively.
It is possible to have a paid collection alongside a streaming service.
>steal it!
But she didn't steal it dude, she just downloaded it.
Not him, but the argument was quite clearly based on the inconvenience of having two different libraries.
It's not like music is a luxury, unlike food or anything lol.
Monsanto charge money for their food.
Didn't catch that. Still, I'm almost certain all services let you hold local files under their platform.
Majority of the arguments ITT are based on ignorance of not even knowing how these services work.
Are you trolling? Are you really this fucking dense?
Steal: take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.
Here, the other person's property is the artist's intellectual property - art they spent hours and days or even months creating and which wouldn't exist without that human being putting their mind to it. Notice the "permission" and "legal right" stipulations, whereby you are stealing something from someone if they did not expressly grant you permission to posses it or you do not have the legal rights to posses it without asking.
Luckily for me, human beings have been trying for a long time to make sure dumbfucks like you can't twist words around and we have these amazing definitions of words that you can't change.
Basic food is a luxury for some.
it's not about the website going offline for a short period, it's about the business shutting down because its model is unsustainable. Even if streaming is here to stay, Apple could easily crush Spotify in a few years' time. And all those playlists they encourage you to make in order to keep you tethered to their ecosystem will be gone.
Spotify's handling of local files is truly awful. It's almost like they want to make it as much as an inconvenience as possible while still claiming they have the feature.
Are you trolling? Are you really this fucking dense?
Steal: take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.
Here, the other person's property is the artist's intellectual property - art they spent hours and days or even months creating and which wouldn't exist without that human being putting their mind to it. Notice the "permission" and "legal right" stipulations, whereby you are stealing something from someone if they did not expressly grant you permission to posses it or you do not have the legal rights to posses it without asking.
Luckily for me, human beings have been trying for a long time to make sure dumbfucks like you can't twist words around and we have these amazing definitions of words that you can't change.
Are you trolling? Are you really this fucking dense?
Steal: take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.
Here, the other person's property is the artist's intellectual property - art they spent hours and days or even months creating and which wouldn't exist without that human being putting their mind to it. Notice the "permission" and "legal right" stipulations, whereby you are stealing something from someone if they did not expressly grant you permission to posses it or you do not have the legal rights to posses it without asking.
Luckily for me, human beings have been trying for a long time to make sure dumbfucks like you can't twist words around and we have these amazing definitions of words that you can't change.
ok how much money did you lose there
Piracy is a miracle, it's literally Jesus and the fish. Praise miracles, don't demonize them. History will look back on piracy and entertaining billions of poor people and making them happy. No-one will remember corporate logos.
>it's about the business shutting down because its model is unsustainable
Fair, but it goes back to the burning house argument. That's a pretty strong "what if?" that at most would inconvenience you for a week. I've lost entire collections quite a few times and it's not that big of a deal.
Music is abstract, and thus limitless in its possibilities. Food is limited in its physicality. Every type of food would have to be made once and then it could be pirated infinitely with no more labour. The same does not apply to music
Even ignoring that, reasonable people suggest that you should pirate music if you can't afford it.
>I've lost entire collections quite a few times and it's not that big of a deal.
do you only have like 10 albums
stop using fucking trips, this is an ANONYMOUS image board for the discussion of music. FUCK OFF ATTENTION SEEKING FAGGOT.
I'm glad we got that cleared up.
>reasonable people suggest that you should pirate music if you can't afford it.
yes
The point is in that situation Spotify has fucked you over and you've had no control over it. If the house burns down, at least it was your fault and you could have done something to stop it.
If it's a small inconvenience to you then fine, but I suspect it could only be considered a small inconvenience because of the fact Spotify offers low quality music, few rare albums etc., whereas a physical collection would be more personal and harder to recreate.
Play and upload your own