Hi,
I like to share with you my experience with music streaming services. Currently, I get subscriptions to both, Spotify and YouTube (hence get Youtube(YT) Music inclusive as well).
1. The sound reproduction from YTMusic is superior to Spotify in general.
2. In addition to YTMusic I get all services from YouTube uninterrupted.
3. You get access to many types of music from YT Music e.g Nelson Riddle and old music recorded from Vinyl. Obviously, you can't get the current crop of releases. Fellow music lovers do try or experiment with it.
All in all, I get more value from YouTube than Spotify. My 2 cents worth of contribution. Any comments welcomed.
BTW I don't subscribe to any other services, eg Netflix, etc.
I like to share with you my experience with music streaming services. Currently, I get subscriptions to both, Spotify and YouTube (hence get Youtube(YT) Music inclusive as well).
1. The sound reproduction from YTMusic is superior to Spotify in general.
2. In addition to YTMusic I get all services from YouTube uninterrupted.
3. You get access to many types of music from YT Music e.g Nelson Riddle and old music recorded from Vinyl. Obviously, you can't get the current crop of releases. Fellow music lovers do try or experiment with it.
All in all, I get more value from YouTube than Spotify. My 2 cents worth of contribution. Any comments welcomed.
BTW I don't subscribe to any other services, eg Netflix, etc.
Last edited:
I don‘t want to start a flame, but I believe this would be an appropriate place to think about the other side of streaming services—what the artists get from these services, and what impact it might have on culture...
Nadine Shaw made an impressive statement, like this:
Nadine Shah: 'I can't pay the rent on unfair music streaming revenues' | Music industry | The Guardian
Nadine Shaw made an impressive statement, like this:
Nadine Shah: 'I can't pay the rent on unfair music streaming revenues' | Music industry | The Guardian
Fair enough comment, plenty of pirated music software on Youtube music, Youtube should have deleted them I am not really responsible for them, Youtube does.
Audio quality on most youtube content is good but not the best; Quobuz and Tidal have better options. There is a open source tool called youtube-dl that lists all the available audio and video streams associated to a given youtube url content. Currently, the highest available audio stream does use the opus codec at 160 Kbps with 48KHz sampling rate. The default stream presented to the user may be lower: as example, the default I get on my client is 96kbps at 44.1 KHz, but I don't subscribed the paid service so this may be a reason. The main issue with youtube audio is the mindless transcoding of the master file uploaded by the content creator. There are several complaints on forums. It seems that to avoid degradation and audible artifacts, only a narrow subset of audio codecs and volume levels should be used on the uploaded file, instead of the full range of formats that are accepted by the upload function. The end result is that on many youtube contents, the audio quality is impaired compared to other sources. There is also some automatic volume level compression, most noticeable on live recordings of acoustic instruments. This is the main reason why I don't currently have a YTmusic subscription. The original uploaded file is retained by Youtube, so maybe they will introduce a premium "master grade" subcription in the future. That would be interesting, because the range of musical genres on youtube is maybe the broadest of all the streaming services.
Pirated content is one of the many problems (remember napster?)
Another problem is the share an artist gets from legal streaming services, be it YT, qobuz or whatever.
See this: https://www.delamar.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/grafik_musik_streaming_wer_zahlt_am_besten.jpg
I made my decision and do not stream (or download pirated stuff) except for searching/prelistening stuff
Another problem is the share an artist gets from legal streaming services, be it YT, qobuz or whatever.
See this: https://www.delamar.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/grafik_musik_streaming_wer_zahlt_am_besten.jpg
I made my decision and do not stream (or download pirated stuff) except for searching/prelistening stuff
I know these two services, Quobuz and Tidal and I am holding and also the former service is not cheap.
It’s even worse: those streaming services pay theses microscopic sums per stream to the label, which take their share and — according to nadine shaw — then pay the artists what they deem „ok“ (fees are allocated relative to the genres, not the artists.
Seems the most efficient method to suffocate any non-mainstream music.
Do you notice in the past, before the 1990s recording artists used to rake in millions of dollars in royalties without a sweat? Touring is an added bonus. And now they have to go on the road to make some money to keep up with their normal lifestyle. I sympathise with the current crop of music artists who have to work really very hard to make an affordable living, baring the really successful ones who are only a handful(figure of speech).
Times have changed in the music industry, a lot of music comes FREE on the Internet and they don't(musicians) do even get a cent for their software(music). BTW I am not a musician a really difficult profession even to make a good living.
Times have changed in the music industry, a lot of music comes FREE on the Internet and they don't(musicians) do even get a cent for their software(music). BTW I am not a musician a really difficult profession even to make a good living.