Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
While all the executives at these companies are toasting one another the actual musicians and artists are getting pennies...no fractions of pennies on the dollar and angry as hell. You want to know how bad it is? Vinyl revenue is actually pulling in more money than streaming.

It's because of this that I only buy physical albums. I'm not supporting this borderline legal theft.

You don't understand. The payments are made to the artists record labels who screw the artists by not paying them fairly.

Unless you are a major artist who can shift tens of millions of albums then there's no money in selling music anyway and hasn't been for about 10 years. Money comes from touring and being paid to perform.
 
Spotify isn't the only music service being given away when you sign up for a new phone contract. ;)

Does this make that statement less true?
[doublepost=1488532203][/doublepost]
You realise apple does exactly the same thing when quoting thier numbers?

Imagine Spotify were to own .....like....a really successful smartphone, that came bundled with AM with constant pop ups.....lots of lots of apple devices running greater than iOS 8.4....

Do you realize Spotify was the subject of my post and not Apple Music?

Where did I mention Apple Music? Stating subscription numbers are clearly inflated is hardly debatable.
 
Apple is growing at much faster pace than Spotify. Apple has reached a faster-paid subscriber base than Spotify.

Spotify has been in existence since 2008, while Apple Music since June 2015. 1.5 years vs. 9 years.
Untrue. If you look at recent growth, Spotify has been outpacing Apple. 10m subscribers in the past 6 months vs 4-5m for Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paj and motulist
That is wrong. Spotify offers the best sound quality and bitrate of all three. Apple and GPM are both limited to 256kbps audio, while Spotify goes up to 320kbps with premium, and once Spotify implements a Hi-Fi option, that'll be even better.

It's not the same audio codec so comparing bitrate for quality is not the case. Technically GPM uses the old MP3, Spotify ogg vorbis and Apple the AAC (ie MP4). Furthermore, and most importantly, Apple uses different masters (many albums come from 24 bit source), resulting in much better clarity and dynamics I can't wait for Spotify to introduce lossless, competition is always great!
 
Neil Cybart (Very smart apple analyst) made a note on his podcast that "paying" includes people who got Spotify for free because they subscribed to the NYTimes.

Can anyone verify?

If that is the case then the number Spotify gives is not nearly as valuable as it would seem on the surface.
But then again - to be fair, there are offers in the UK where you can get Apple Music for free if you subscribe to their services!

If that is the case then the number Apple gives is not nearly as valuable as it would seem on the surface.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paj and arkitect
Does this make that statement less true?
[doublepost=1488532203][/doublepost]

Do you realize Spotify was the subject of my post and not Apple Music?

Where did I mention Apple Music? Stating subscription numbers are clearly inflated is hardly debatable.

We clearly knew what we you were implying. Though sure , your statement is correct.
 
So, in order for a single, independent artist to make a reasonable living in the streaming world, they have to have at least 10 million streams. For one thing, very few artists are going to reach even 1 million streams. Most, if lucky will get 10,000 streams per year.

You are forgetting that streaming is just one of several revenue streams(!) for artists today. It is not like the money you get from Spotify is the only source, it is one of many.

A million streams is nothing when it comes to the streaming market today if you manage to get some traction. Remember it is a market where many listeners treat streaming like radio and just keeps playlists going in the background all day.

Heck, we have artists in my tiny country (Norway) that sing in Norwegian and thus limits the market primarily to the 5 million people that live here. And yet they have over 100 million streams on Spotify alone.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but an artist that cannot get more than 10,000 streams per year would not have sold any physical albums to speak of either if that was the only option and streaming didn't exist. And practically no-one would have heard of them then either compared to the few hundred listeners they have today that make up the 10,000 streams.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I tried both, Apple Music Initially looks great, but after sometime i discovered that the albums which follow were removed suddenly also they do not have that big repository of albums !!! (very basic and stick you by account location or by your region unlike Spotify it's open any one have account can access any album inside any region!

Currently, I have basic Spotify account ((non paid account)) and i really enjoy much much more than apple music

FYI, I am big fan and stand for Apple , but in this topic . i have to say my experience!
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Oh good lord, how many people do you think are really in that number? That promotion just started, it only applies to new subscribers and it only applies to digital subscriptions.

Not much, actually. The NYT had a growth of 276,000 subscribers last quarter, and the promotion is only available to new subscribers. But, considering this kind of promotion isn't exclusive to the NYT, I would guess 1 to 2 million new subscribers are from these bundles.
 
I'm quite happy with Apple Music but find Spotify very tempting. Better playlists (imo) and user-curated and shareable playlists, direct to Sonos support, and now this lossless function are all things I wish Apple Music had.

Sonos does support Apple Music has via Sonos's app. It has for a little while now...
 
I think its great that we actually have a choice. I've tried Apple Music, twice, and each time gone back to Spotify simply because I prefer the app on my iPhone and the way it works on Sonos. I've got Amazon music too as I've been a Prime subscriber for years and they just keep adding stuff. I still keep going back to Spotify. But, I have a choice and I think it's important they all keep competing with each other so we do have choices as personal preference plays a big part in deciding which service to go for.
 
I'm till a bit old-fashioned and prefer to own my music, be it physical media or iTunes download. I've tried the streaming thing with Apple's trial, but just can't bring myself to rent something that I feel is a big part of my life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WatchFromAfar
They didn't whine at all, on the contrary they said Apple Music was good the streaming in general and that was good for them.
[doublepost=1488528304][/doublepost]
If an artist is lucky to get 10000 streams a year, then they would be unlikely to sell any CDs, Vinyl or downloads. Low steaming revenue is a symptom, not a cause of artists not earning enough for their work.
[doublepost=1488528380][/doublepost]
I think you will find they do....Shareholders are not a charity!

Apple can throw AM into other forever.
 
I just started Apple Music - loving it. There are many things that could be improved in the interface, but hopefully they will be addressed over time. ...

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. It hasn't really changed for the months that I've been using it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that's been giving them feedback. I was surprised at how poor the UI was and at the lack of any kind of "memory" between different devices for what you've been searching and playing, particularly given how much Apple always seems to be pushing iCloud and multi-device sharing. Still, I keep paying because the sound quality is better than Spotify's (which may change if their lossless option comes online) and it's nicely integrated with my owned regular music collection on the devices I am usually using anyway. Either way, being able to listen on demand to anything you can think of is pretty cool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macgabe and Zoddino
I'm till a bit old-fashioned and prefer to own my music, be it physical media or iTunes download. I've tried the streaming thing with Apple's trial, but just can't bring myself to rent something that I feel is a big part of my life.
I agree, even if you rip your own physical media at least you can treat said media as a back medium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DhobiWanKenobi
Not at all. For some reason a number of posters in this thread have negatively singled out the Spotify offers to question how many subscribers are actually paying for the service while ignoring the fact Apple Music is also offered in similar promotions.

I understand that. My point is that numbers are greatly inflated, not that Spotify is losing/winning against AM. I never brought AM into the conversation, indeed,
 
…any one have account can access any album inside any region!
True, the regional blindness and breath of content from anywhere was impressive.

I buy CDs and DVDs. What the hell are you all warbling on about ?
I don’t use the service but when I tested Spotify for stuff that hasn’t been available in physical media for a long time, they had it.
 
They didn't whine at all, on the contrary they said Apple Music was good the streaming in general and that was good for them.
[doublepost=1488528304][/doublepost]
If an artist is lucky to get 10000 streams a year, then they would be unlikely to sell any CDs, Vinyl or downloads. Low steaming revenue is a symptom, not a cause of artists not earning enough for their work.
[doublepost=1488528380][/doublepost]
I think you will find they do....Shareholders are not a charity!
How quick you forget about Spotify complaining about Apple charging 30% when people sign-up through in-app service. No they didn't whine at all they are crying babies. They kinda tuned it down when they realized streaming subscribers went up when Apple Music was officially released.
 
Last edited:
We clearly knew what we you were implying. Though sure , your statement is correct.

No I wasn't "implying" that, at all. The point, which has been made recently by several articles, is that those numbers are greatly inflated.

Indeed, Spotify would not be losing money hand over fist if those figures were anywhere near the number of actual paying subscribers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MH01
Spotify had the head start, cheap pricing and the key USP of sharing playlists simply

It caught the iGeneration who have grown up with the internet and knowing only streaming as a way to digest content and dont have the expendable income to spend buying an album or single each week.

The problem Apple music has is the user base they need is embedded in Spotify already. Theyve built their playlists and library and can easily share it with their mates.....Apple is is just mopping up those yet to make the move and i cant see them eating into Spotifiy's base

Mad considering less than 50 people work for Spotify and Apple has hundreds of thousands
 
I'm an Apple Music user since it became available and I love it. Yes, there are improvements needed but with them still trailing spotify for subscribers I think the competition drives the improvements.
 
Cause it's all about quantity isn't it? You just don't get it.

Quantity can be a factor, especially when your taste isn't compatible with main stream garbage. What's a more important factor these days though is integration. Spotify (and Netfilx on the other end) integrate superbly into the Amazon hard- and software ecosystem -- including support for Alexa. My Echo Dot has a "skill" for Spotify, so if I were interested in a music streaming service beyond what's part of my Prime subscription, Spotify would be on my radar screen.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.