Does anyone know why on Spotify The Revolution or NPG are not listed on the songs they played on? Purple Rain is just Prince not Prince and the Revolution. They also have God listed as the instrumental version when it is not that version. I know it is petty but I would like for the tags to be right. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Over 1.5M Prince followers on Spotify, up from 300K a couple days ago! "Just like the sun, the Rainbow Children rise."
"We had fun, didn't we?" -Prince (1958-2016) 4ever in my life | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Confirmation bias exposed for the fallacy it is. The world's problems like climate change can only be solved through strategic long-term thinking, not expediency. In other words all the govts. need sacking!
If you can add value to someone's life then why not. Especially if it colors their days... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
fortuneandserendipity said:
Confirmation bias exposed for the fallacy it is. Confirmation bias a fallacy? I don't even think you evenunderstand what it means. [Edited 2/16/17 20:01pm] | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
http://www.startribune.com/prince-s-music-racks-up-3-7-million-streams-in-one-day/413993023/
The Minneapolis Star Tribune is reporting that P racked up 1 million streams on Sunday and 3.7 million on Monday. Thus, "his recordings were streamed more in two days than in the entire prior year, according to Nielsen Entertainment." | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
. This is very sad indeed as this is killing music! . As a result of streaming services, paid for digital downloads for 2016 are down by 20 per cent. . If people don't buy music then there is no money for artists to earn a living and no money for companies to develop artists. .
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
. Agreed.
The streaming business model is a dead end, it's unsustainable and will be surprassed sooner than most people think.
[Edited 2/17/17 3:24am] | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Let me elaborate then, assuming you're not trolling. People who buy expensive 'audiophile' equipment, convinced that they're obtaining a better sound. Just to be clear: Amps, CD players, interconnects, speaker cables - unless designed really badly to the point of emitting faults - make next to no difference to the sound. And don't even get me started on the 'supposed' inferior quality of MP3s.
The world's problems like climate change can only be solved through strategic long-term thinking, not expediency. In other words all the govts. need sacking!
If you can add value to someone's life then why not. Especially if it colors their days... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
fortuneandserendipity said:
Let me elaborate then, assuming you're not trolling. People who buy expensive 'audiophile' equipment, convinced that they're obtaining a better sound. Just to be clear: Amps, CD players, interconnects, speaker cables - unless designed really badly to the point of emitting faults - make next to no difference to the sound. And don't even get me started on the 'supposed' inferior quality of MP3s.
Still don't think you understand what confirmation bias means. Fallacy? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The fallacy is that people claim to hear differences - that aren't really there - because they've told themselves they're hearing better quality sound.
confirmation bias noun
The world's problems like climate change can only be solved through strategic long-term thinking, not expediency. In other words all the govts. need sacking!
If you can add value to someone's life then why not. Especially if it colors their days... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
fortuneandserendipity said: The fallacy is that people claim to hear differences - that aren't really there - because they've told themselves they're hearing better quality sound.
confirmation bias noun
You're describing conformation bias, but it's a description of this human tendency. The way you write it sounds like you're saying confirmation bias is a fallacy. But I get what you're trying to say. And I was never saying there were no decernable difference, just that most people have been listening to music on the radio and cassette, and a bar and a club under much worse circumstances and they complain about mp3's like they listen to music all day in a sound proof room under optimal circumstances. To me that's the real fallacy. I find it hilarious! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I was trying to be brief. What I meant to say, the behaviour behind confirmation bias is a fallacy (within context of audio perception).
The world's problems like climate change can only be solved through strategic long-term thinking, not expediency. In other words all the govts. need sacking!
If you can add value to someone's life then why not. Especially if it colors their days... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
KaresB said:
. Agreed.
The streaming business model is a dead end, it's unsustainable and will be surprassed sooner than most people think.
[Edited 2/17/17 3:24am] According to Tidal lawsuit Prince got 3 million dollars and a higher rate these pinheads in the media will not tell the story of the pennies artist ate getting for streaming. I am certain old Lonnie got the same old Pennie for Prince's Music that everyone else is getting. People don't buy when they can rent. Less money means zero artist development meaning more crappy artist and music. Prince was spot on with what he was doingπ | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
This is how his music will live on and appeal to future generations.It's a good thing. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
We live in new times, and have to accept that "mafia" record labels can't bully around artists like they've done in the past. We get more crap today. But we also get more music, and a bunch of it is actually very good if you have the patience to actually look for it. We had ALOT of crap back in the days too. Even the so called "developed ones". Not everyone are making music solely for the purpose of earning a bunch of cash. Recording equipment today is million times cheaper. Everyone can be an "artist" now. They just gotta develop their talents in other ways. My Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/tundrah | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
KaresB said:
. Agreed.
The streaming business model is a dead end, it's unsustainable and will be surprassed sooner than most people think.
[Edited 2/17/17 3:24am] Nope. Hence why he told Tamar that live shows is where it's at. Streaming isn't going anywhere but we might get to a day where the record labels no longer exist and artists get paid directly from the streaming services. And then license their music to a publisher to handle the business side. With digital downloads and social media who needs record labels anymore? [Edited 2/18/17 9:17am] Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever π | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
rogifan said: KaresB said:
. Agreed.
The streaming business model is a dead end, it's unsustainable and will be surprassed sooner than most people think.
[Edited 2/17/17 3:24am] Nope. Hence why he told Tamar that live shows is where it's at. Streaming isn't going anywhere but we might get to a day where the record labels no longer exist and artists get paid directly from the streaming services. And then license their music to a publisher to handle the business side. With digital downloads and social media who needs record labels anymore? [Edited 2/18/17 9:17am] --He got 3 million out Tidal. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Prince On-Demand Streams Surge By Over 6,300% In First Two Days Emily Blake, Forbes, February 16, 2017
Source: http://www.forbes.com/sit...6eac93bf6d
Live 4 Love ~ Love is God, God is love, Girls and boys love God above | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I've updated the spreadsheet of stream counts.
Here are the 100 most streamed Prince songs over roughly the first week of availability in Spotify: Feel free to join in the Prince Album Poll 2018! Let'a celebrate his legacy by counting down the most beloved Prince albums, as decided by you! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Very cool and thank you for that. I also want to point out that the reason for a song like "Stare" tone so high up is that it's been there for so long. Meaning it's been on people's playlist playing randomly in my case whenever I play that list. Also, I've put almost all of his music on playlists that I've set up to play in random order and more than have of them have not played since I started listening. Only those songs I was particularly hard up to listen at a specific time. So in time, as people place these songs on playlists, they will continue to generate plays for Prince for the foreseeable future without seeing any decline in spins. Yes services like Spotify need to pay artists more, but in general they end doing Ok for big labels and artists with massive critically aclaimed albums. In aggregate Prince will be doing far better with streaming services that not. For new artists, with no only a few hits, not too great a thing. They eventually get buried under all the new music being created every single day. That's why curation by passionate people is a big deal today. You need someone who loves something to keep spreading the word so nothing special gets lost. And with services like Shazam that can identify music, having someone place a track however obscure into a mainstream movie or commercial will automatically make that track bubble back up from underneath the massive ocean of music. Moonbeam said: I've updated the spreadsheet of stream counts.
Here are the 100 most streamed Prince songs over roughly the first week of availability in Spotify: | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
. And where do you think that extra money would come from that they should pay to artists? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
KaresB said:
. And where do you think that extra money would come from that they should pay to artists? --Surpassed or consolidated into one or two companies. I als expect more content other than music. It would be funny as hell if Tidal was one of the companies that hangs around | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Due to the overwhelming amount of reponse on my (pretty stupid, I realise now) question I've played the "previous version" from Tidal on the Stereo to. And ..?
Same as Spotify. Apparently the zooming low base can only be heard prominently when its's played in my car HiFi system. Now I'm wondering what this means for my current HiFi configuration.
(where to put an active sub in my living..) | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
laurarichardson said: KaresB said:
. And where do you think that extra money would come from that they should pay to artists? --Surpassed or consolidated into one or two companies. I als expect more content other than music. It would be funny as hell if Tidal was one of the companies that hangs around Look even Apple gave up on charging 99 cents because THE COMSUMER was not willing to pay. The consumer is responsible for album sales. And this model has bee the only one sustainable. It's either stream your music or hide it away and make nothing. Lastly, you speak as if you have all the numbers in front of you as to sustainability. Like I said big artists with acclaimed music catalogs like Prince will be fine. Far far better than not streaming at all. The Beatles, Prince, Led Zeppelin, they're all fine. In the end, I am with all of you in saying artists need a higher rate of pay. No question. But it's up to the consumer to do so. [Edited 2/20/17 16:22pm] | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Ok, so I know this probably an obvious thing, but I can't figure it out...The music that I already have on my hard drive in iTues can't be added to my Spotify account unless Spotify already has it on their site?
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I find it interesting that for the possibly first time ever the most played version of 1999 is the album version, that's the one "the kids" and casual listeners are streaming. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Ingela said: laurarichardson said: --Surpassed or consolidated into one or two companies. I als expect more content other than music. It would be funny as hell if Tidal was one of the companies that hangs around Look even Apple gave up on charging 99 cents because THE COMSUMER was not willing to pay. The consumer is responsible for album sales. And this model has bee the only one sustainable. It's either stream your music or hide it away and make nothing. Lastly, you speak as if you have all the numbers in front of you as to sustainability. Like I said big artists with acclaimed music catalogs like Prince will be fine. Far far better than not streaming at all. The Beatles, Prince, Led Zeppelin, they're all fine. In the end, I am with all of you in saying artists need a higher rate of pay. No question. But it's up to the consumer to do so. [Edited 2/20/17 16:22pm] The higher royalty rate has nothing to do with the consumer. There is plenty of information about the sustainability of these services and Prince was streaming before the estate put him on their platform and getting go money. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
laurarichardson said: Ingela said: Look even Apple gave up on charging 99 cents because THE COMSUMER was not willing to pay. The consumer is responsible for album sales. And this model has bee the only one sustainable. It's either stream your music or hide it away and make nothing. Lastly, you speak as if you have all the numbers in front of you as to sustainability. Like I said big artists with acclaimed music catalogs like Prince will be fine. Far far better than not streaming at all. The Beatles, Prince, Led Zeppelin, they're all fine. In the end, I am with all of you in saying artists need a higher rate of pay. No question. But it's up to the consumer to do so. [Edited 2/20/17 16:22pm] The higher royalty rate has nothing to do with the consumer. There is plenty of information about the sustainability of these services and Prince was streaming before the estate put him on their platform and getting go money. We'll see. If they aren't sustainable as a business then it will go away. We know that the consumer (in general in this digital age) would rather have it all free. If customers won't pay for the relatively inexpensive monthly plans, then of course it's all on the consumer. I don't know about Spotify but Apple could afford to lose money on streaming indefinitely and have it a loss leader. And it's been said Apple does pay higher royalty rates and is a reason the Beatles and others finally agreed. But again it's not Prince or the Beatles I'm worried about, it's the 99% of the artists who don't have those legacy albums. New music is created every day and added to the services. Those are the ones I worry about. And those are the ones who know not to rely on record sales, but instead to use them to draw people to their shows. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
KaresB said:
. Agreed.
The streaming business model is a dead end, it's unsustainable and will be surprassed sooner than most people think.
[Edited 2/17/17 3:24am] Artist could perform on stage? You know, like the good all days? With streaming there is no need for record companies, You know those companies that sucked all the money out of artist and artists could go bankrupt while selling 10 million albums. Its not like before streaming all was well. Now, artists can get a big public without record companies and make their money giving concerts! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |