Goodbye Qobuz, hello Spotify Lossless!

[record_spot]

I've had a Spotify account for about 15 years. Even went down the paid Spotify premium route for a few years. About two years ago, I jumped ship to Qobus, wound down my Spotify Premium and went with the free service as I liked the interface for the Podcast capability Spotify took on.

And I really liked Qobuz. Great service, good connectivity, heaps of new releases to get into and the rest.

Then along came Spotify Lossless. Initially, my thoughts were "whoop" in a slightly ironic, highly pass-ag manner. And then I had a listen and a bit of a think.

The interface, while a tad busier, is still heaps ahead of the rest. Slick, smart and just works seamlessly. And the audio quality? Heck, it's pretty damn good!

So, I let the Qobuz subscription run down. The Spotify Premium's been renewed and is there a difference?

I don't think I really care...!

 

[davidf]

I personally wouldn't subscribe to a music streaming service from my own pocket, but if I did, it'd be with one that paid artists more.

 

[skinnypuppy71]

I've had a Spotify account for about 15 years. Even went down the paid Spotify premium route for a few years. About two years ago, I jumped ship to Qobus, wound down my Spotify Premium and went with the free service as I liked the interface for the Podcast capability Spotify took on.

And I really liked Qobuz. Great service, good connectivity, heaps of new releases to get into and the rest.

Then along came Spotify Lossless. Initially, my thoughts were "whoop" in a slightly ironic, highly pass-ag manner. And then I had a listen and a bit of a think.

The interface, while a tad busier, is still heaps ahead of the rest. Slick, smart and just works seamlessly. And the audio quality? Heck, it's pretty damn good!

So, I let the Qobuz subscription run down. The Spotify Premium's been renewed and is there a difference?

I don't think I really care...!

That's why I can't give up my Roon subscription, the interface is just so good.... If I had Qubuz sound quality, Roon's interface and Spotify's vast library.....if only Carlsberg were in the music streaming business.....it would probably be ........🤣🤣🤣

 

[record_spot]

I personally wouldn't subscribe to a music streaming service from my own pocket, but if I did, it'd be with one that paid artists more.

Yep, well I did Qobuz which is I think one of the higher payers. None of them get anywhere near the cut that physical media did.

I recall an article on who got paid what years ago on physical media. I think the artist still very much got the thin end of the wedge; something like £1 (before tax) on a £15.99 CD...way better than streaming obviously, but then I tend to look at streaming as free advertising. The stuff I listen to and like, I'll buy. The stuff I don't, I won't and no harm no foul.

But broadly, I agree that the streaming services should be paying substantially more.

 

[skinnypuppy71]

I personally wouldn't subscribe to a music streaming service from my own pocket, but if I did, it'd be with one that paid artists more.

I myself use streaming (paid for) as a means to find new artists to listen too..and try to support by buying the physical media or maybe even go to a gig....so streaming..is also helping artists to be found, noticed and in the end exposure if they're good enough ..it's surely not all bad news for them...even though they might feel short changed on the streams....it's still a vehicle for them to promote their music and have a chance of being heard....that couldn't have been possible in the 60's, 70's, 80's,and the 90's....think about that for a moment....

 

[Witterings]

I've been with Tidal for about a year but prefer using the App on a PC rather than on a tablet or phone and it often doesn't see the devices.
I had a trial on Qobuz and just couldn't get on with their App, I'd try Spotify but if you google / put into AI the general consensus is it's not as good quality wise as the others ....... but the usability and connectivity surpasses the others by a long way.

Seems it really come down to a choice of quality of sound or brilliant functionality / usability.

 

[GroeneLeeuw]

I´ve been with Tidal since 2018/19 after starting with streaming with Spotify. I´ve also tried Qobuz and I liked it.
Not so long ago, and because Spotify offered 3 months subscription for the price of 1 month, I´ve tried Spotify again and I disliked the app very much. Busy, confusing, too much AI it seems.
I prefer the more simple and kind of old fashion Tidal.

 

[RJW232]

I personally wouldn't subscribe to a music streaming service from my own pocket, but if I did, it'd be with one that paid artists more.

If you play an album via a streaming service just as much as you would play a physical album the artist would earn the same with services like Qobuz. Let's say you play an album 50 times, and an album has 12 tracks. Qobuz pays about 0,02 USD per track streamed. The artist get 10...20%. So the artist would earn between 1,20...2,40 USD. About the same as the artist would get per sold CD.

The real problem with streaming is that most people just zap between loads of tracks, and don't listen to complete albums, let alone play that album multiple times like they did in the past.

 

[matthewpianist]

The company I work for has its own streaming service, and we pay on a 'per second' model, rather than 'per stream'. This is fairer to the artists, and we already have integrations with Audirvana, BluOS and Eversolo. We're in development with two big high-end hi-fi manufacturers, and with other mainstream audio brands as well. We are classical and jazz specialists though, so we don't suit everyone, and it would be good to see more platforms adopt a fairer model.

 

[nopiano]

Yep, well I did Qobuz which is I think one of the higher payers. None of them get anywhere near the cut that physical media did.

I recall an article on who got paid what years ago on physical media. I think the artist still very much got the thin end of the wedge; something like £1 (before tax) on a £15.99 CD...way better than streaming obviously, but then I tend to look at streaming as free advertising. The stuff I listen to and like, I'll buy. The stuff I don't, I won't and no harm no foul.

But broadly, I agree that the streaming services should be paying substantially more.

Good points. I wish it was easier to get meaningful data on this however. WHF should do some proper journalism on it, but there simply doesn’t seem to be enough interest.

Did bands ever get more than £1 from an LP, who knows? Or did they get an upfront payment, and the label got all the earnings?

Many groups and artists spend months touring or playing residencies. And these days there is ‘merch’ everywhere which never exited when I was of festival going age, about 50 years ago. You just got a ticket and tent with warm beer, and with luck somewhere to piss!

 

[record_spot]

Good points. I wish it was easier to get meaningful data on this however. WHF should do some proper journalism on it, but there simply doesn’t seem to be enough interest.

Did bands ever get more than £1 from an LP, who knows? Or did they get an upfront payment, and the label got all the earnings?

Many groups and artists spend months touring or playing residencies. And these days there is ‘merch’ everywhere which never exited when I was of festival going age, about 50 years ago. You just got a ticket and tent with warm beer, and with luck somewhere to piss!

I think I'm going back a good 20 years for that article. Think it was in The Guardian and while the artist got about £1-1.50, the piece gave a breakdown of the other costs, X amount of the final cost was on marketing, CD design, management, tax, etc, etc. And now, like you say, all the money is made on the tour which never happened 40 years ago.

 

[Witterings]

@nopiano & @record_spot

I believe bands used to get an advance and paid approx, 10% of an albums sale price BUT there were loads of costs deducted 1st i.e. packaging on every sale, all of the advance and any other costs that could be deducted i.e. recording, artwork, production before the band made anything over what they were paid for the advance.

The tour all those years ago was the loss leader to promote the band so they sold albums which was where the money was ..... nowadays album sales make very little so the album / streaming is to promote the tour where the money is now made through much higher ticket costs and massive merchandise sales.

The industry as a whole though isn't as profitable as it used to be, record companies because they had much more money available would take far greater risks on bands and fund them for 2/3 albums ..... because it's not so profitable they're not prepared to take the risks they used to and are only interested in virtual guarantees .... if the 1st album isn't a hit, there's no chance of a 2nd.