• ZeroDrek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was worried for a second until I read the article. $1 more/ is not a huge price increase and I’m ok with it considering they haven’t increased the price as long as I’ve been subscribed and I’ve been subscribed for at least a decade. Also, I use Spotify daily…for hours at a time.

  • FireWire400@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Tidal increased their prices recently too, by the same amount. And for that I’m getting the high-quality audio Spotify keeps on promising for over a year TWO YEARS now.

    Don’t get me wrong, Tidal still has its own problems but I don’t get why people still choose to have Spotify over one of its competitors.

    • DisconnectedChild@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I actually hate Spotify as a company and find their app/service to be frustrating to use, thanks to them almost constantly dicking around with things.

      But… I still use them. Why? Because unfortunately with my needs and preferences, it’s the only music streaming app on Android that doesn’t have a completely shitty experience when either using it with AndroidAuto, or when casting music to my home stereo receiver. Their app offers the best experience and features against all the other apps I’ve tried (and I’ve tried them all).

      Tidal’s AndroidAuto experience is so minimal it’s not funny. No “like” button, no “add to library” button, no “dislike” button, so that killed them for me.

      Apple Music on Android is quite buggy when trying to cast to my home stereo. And their AndroidAuto experience is also buggy and lacking too many features I want.

      Deezer is pretty much the same as Apple Music from my experiences.

      Amazon Music is just “Bleh!” overall.

      Qobuz was really lacking in features I want the last time I tried it.

      YouTube Music drives me nuts with the way it integrates with regular YouTube.

      So I’m stuck with Spotify. And I don’t like it. But it’s the least problematic for me when compared to the alternatives.

      If I used an iPhone (but I prefer Android), I’d switch to Apple Music in a heartbeat because on iOS, Apple Music actually works quite well.

      My one hope, at the moment, is the forthcoming music streaming service from Tiktok. I have no idea how good/bad it will be, but I’m eager to try it when it hits the US, just because I’m praying it will finally enable me to kick Spotify to the curb.

      /rant

    • Action Bastard@lemmy.world@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As someone who tried to use Tidal for nearly a year because it paid better rates, it’s literally just 2 things: Artist Discovery and Algorithm Degradation towards a mass consumer mean.

      Spotify actually feeds me tons of great indie artists I’ve never heard before. Tidal was a constant struggle to purge mass produced giant record label pop from constantly infiltrating every single station and it almost never gave me some little artist who maybe has 5k listens total. I get those literally every single day from Spotify though.

  • JIMMERZ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And I’m sure that’s to better compensate the artists, right?… right?

  • soulifix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everyone’s ‘okay’ with it until it’s $5 more. Then another $5. Then another $5.

    This is what’s happening with all of these streaming services. They’re all doing the gradual boiling water trick. They know if they turned the dial all the way to hot to make the water boiling, metaphorically speaking, that nobody in their right mind would want to jump in. But if they just turn the dial slowly, let the temperature build up by hiking these prices bit by bit, it wouldn’t cause that much of a stir and people will be complacent with it.

      • Colitas92@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And when someone is short on money or just too tired of keeping track of which services having what media and switching chairs all the time ? remember there is always the way of Jack Sparrow, and go sailing to the 7 seas. ARRRGH!

          • ZodiacSF1969@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I agree with you, but this site is full of people who hate the idea of companies having to make money and just steal shit all the time. It’s a lame attitude to have I think, they believe they are entitled to others work because they don’t like the distribution model.

    • galaxy@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      $10 in 2011 would be $13.56 today.

      Source: https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/2011?amount=10

      Per the article, the service hasn’t changed in price in 12 years, while the platform has certainly received a decent number of updates, new features, new artists, etc.

      If it isn’t worth $11/month to you, don’t pay it? But it doesn’t seem right to insinuate that they’re doing something outrageous by raising prices once in 12 years?

      • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is the same group of people who will rampantly upvote graphs showing how wages haven’t followed inflation, but when it’s the other side of the coin can’t seem to grasp it.

      • LetMeEatCake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Streaming services have an enormous amount of fixed costs. It might cost them several billion dollars/year to operate the necessary infrastructure even with zero customers, but the marginal cost to serve a customer might be on the order of $2/month on that $10/month subscription.

        It’s why streaming and digital storefronts are such a sink/swim industry. Either a company gets over user number+sales threshold to override their fixed costs, upon which they become profitable and all further growth makes them exceedingly profitable. Or the company fails to do so or barely does so, and makes somewhere between giant losses to minimal profits.

        From a quick search, Spotify’s user count should have grown somewhere in the neighborhood of ten times over since 2015.

        This is not a cost increase that is mandated or justified by inflation. It never is. It’s a cost increase from a very, very, very simple fact: companies want profit, and Spotify’s leadership has concluded that they will gain more profit by increasing prices than they will by not doing so.

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Enormous fixed cost, yes. Billion not so much. The size of their entire catalog isn’t even going to be that significant. Music is tiny even the flac stuff just isn’t that big. The streams are so small they probably don’t even need peering agreements with most services. I’d be surprised if they’re burning more than 10 million a month in infrastructure. Now Netflix, YouTube, live video streaming services, totally different story. Those poor bastards end up maintaining servers inside other people’s networks.

          • LetMeEatCake@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Fixed costs isn’t the cost of having a single server with the storage. I’m thinking everything they need to have built up with the intent of having between N1 and N2 MAU, in order to make that viable.

            It’s the cost of developing the software stack, of hiring the lawyers and accountants that (1) acquire the music rights and (2) handle the music payouts, it’s the lawyers that handle the different legal requirements across every major global economy, it’s the servers located in all of those countries with as many sub-national locations as necessary, it’s the IT staff that manage that server uptime, it’s the software developers that maintain that system and improve upon it so rivals don’t jump too far ahead… Etc.

            Building a streaming platform that expects to have multiple billions of dollars in revenue across hundreds of millions of users is going to have enormous fixed costs that cannot be trivially scaled down if user counts are lower. If they plan around a much lower user count they can scale it down at that planning phase, but not after the fact (at least not easily).

              • LetMeEatCake@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Interesting. That’s dated October of 2009 and says Spotify had 5m users. Looks like they have ~200m users today. At a linear scaling it’d be twenty times larger, or £120m=$154m per month. That’s $1.85b/year.

                In reality it wouldn’t scale linearly, but it also accounts for zero salaries, which was the major component of my comment.

                • linearchaos@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Look I appreciate the downvotes and all, but didn’t you just say that fixed costs don’t go up and down with users?

        • TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          To be fair (and understand I hate corporations and am speaking through clenched teeth), Costco loses money on those glizzies. They make the majority of their money on their memberships, and have made the bet that they gain more customers than they lose money on cheap hotdogs.

  • Zummy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Switch to Apple Music. It has all the music Spotify has, the music is higher quality (all the way up to the highest quality you can get), exclusive radio shows you can’t get on Spotify, handmade playlists that are curated by a real human, a completely separate classical music site included at no extra charge, and more all for $10 bucks a month.

      • Zummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So Apple uses ALAC, which is it’s own version. Do you mean how much data is used when streaming? If so, I’m not sure. If you mean what’s available it’s:

        High Quality (AAC 256 Kbps)

        Lossless (ALAC up to 24-bit/48 kHz)

        Hi-Res (ALAC up to 24-bit/192 kHz)

  • Techmaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh no, they’re increasing the price from free to free! How will I ever manage the price increase!?

    • kostel_thecreed@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      99% of the userbase doesn’t even know what Hi-Fi music is, so doubt adoption will be a thing. Look towards apple music, deezer, tidal, etc for hi-fi music.

      • lorez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m using Qobuz atm, but I heard Spotify is better for playlists and discovering new music :/

      • weeeeum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Honestly hifi isnt practically useful. It’s extremely difficult to tell the difference between flac and 320kps mp3 (very high quality setting in Spotify). Most people can’t tell the difference even with audio equipment costing a fortune.

        I used to be obsessed with getting the very best quality but frankly I gave up because there just is no discernable increase in fidelity (I use a dac+Sennheiser hd 600)

        *Hifi isn’t practically useful for most listening

  • soot_guy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nice! Thanks for the heads up. ATT just told me my paperless discount is getting halved, so this is the perfect opportunity to even out my costs. Everyone of these tech companies is making a money grab this summer and I’m fed up

    • zumi@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That txt from ATT about the paperless discount was so poorly worded. Took me forever to realize I can still get the $10 discount if I switch the autopay to a debit card. It’s only the credit card autopay/paperless that is getting reduced to $5.

      • soot_guy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The email I just got from them said to expect a rate increase for my august billing cycle of 2.50 a line. So, even switching to a bank account from a credit card won’t help. They were just trying to make me more comfortable while bending me over.

        • zumi@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Weird. My txt said the following:

          “Hi, it’s AT&T. As early as Oct. 2nd, the AutoPay and Paperless discount for customers paying by credit card will decrease from $10 to $5 per line. If you prefer to use your credit card, no action is required to receive a $5 discount.”

          Sounds like your offer is different. One quick tip if you are looking for other ways to save on AT&T. If you sign up for AARP you can get an additional $10 off of the top plan in addition to the paperless discount on AT&T.

  • dgilluly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Now I’m even more glad to have ditched the streaming sub model to buy music instead. Of course new releases may follow and go up by $0.10 per song.

    • malloc@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is the service you are using allow you to download the music DRM free, or is it only streamable?

      If it’s the latter, might want to reconsider. Just like movies purchased on these platforms (Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, …), the license holder of the intellectual property (IP), usually the record/music company, can pull their content from these platforms at any time and you will not be reimbursed.

      • Kitty Jynx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get most of my music off of Bandcamp which is DRM free. The catch it that Bandcamp is mostly independent or small artists. For artists that are not on Bandcamp I usually buy MP3 albums on Amazon which are DRM free.

  • Gravitywell@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Now might be a great time to join the Fediverse alternative FunkWhale. I’ve already built up a collection of nearly 10,000 songs on mine, almost all of which i downloaded from deezer.