back to article Spotify: We kick the tyres

Spotify, which opened up to all UK users this week, is a streaming music access service that's gathered an ecstatic response from some users. It's even "made illegal file sharing look like too much hard work" according to one Reg commenter. That's a pretty big claim - but then it's a pretty ambitious service. So what it is …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Robin Layfield
    Go

    don't forget the "mute" button

    I'm really enjoying Spotify. It's damn handy when you're out on the road and you don't have access to your music library. The adverts are a bit annoying but I've found after about 30 "we are the Energy Saving Trust" adverts, the simple application of the mute button for 30 seconds gets around this...

    all in all, thumbs up. A neatly thought-out music client that I would be prepared to subscribe to once they've got more material in the catalog.

  2. Simon Brown
    Happy

    @Robert E A Harvey

    The "record labels" still perform a function which is to fund music. As someone "at the coalface" so to speak, I have limited resources to push my music though a plethora of opportunities. I can put it on myspace along with a million other songs, put it on youtube along with a million other songs, put it on whichever website is the "next big thing" along with a million other artists all scrambling to become the next big thing which most of us won't. I can enter a million competitions where I will be up against the next Arctic Monkeys, a woman who's old enough to know better singing middle of the road "funky pop" in front of a band of bored looking function band musicians and a band that sound kind of like a cross between Radiohead, U2 and Coldplay. We won't win because we sound kind of like a cross between The Band, Ryan Adams and Neil Young.

    I can get gigs but only the small ones because, even with a fanbase, no-one's heard of me. I can pay for my own recording but it won't sound as good as something done by a professional producer. I can release it myself but unless I pay for PR it won't get reviewed, I can send it to radio stations but unless I pay for expensive PR it won't get played, I can even send it in to tv stations but unless I spend tens of thousands on PR it will be ignored.

    Certainly with this level of exposure I'm unlikely to get a support slot on a tour which would expose the music to a whole new fanbase, I'm unlikely to get reviewed in a decent music magazine and I'm unlikely to make it in the music industry. Unfortunately in your suggestion, the record labels disappear - those would be the guys with the money to invest in a band that they might see has some potential.

    I wouldn't even bother writing all this if I didn't think our music was good. I've been a musiciain for 25 years and in my humble opinion am lucky enough to be working with one of the best songwriters I have ever met. He's really good. He runs his own commercial music company and did the music on the malteser ad (with the girls driving round the roundabout) and the Wales tourist board ad (with the welsh mud on the bikes) and the playstation ads with the midgets playing basketball. The music we're playing isn't fashionable but is sellable but probably not in the UK (where we are allergic to folk and country influenced music) and we would probably need a label to get behind us. Don't forget that a lot of the so-called DIY artists today who made it "online" and "without a record company" did no such thing - many of them WERE funded, just not overtly.

    For reference we are here: http://www.reverbnation.com/jawbone - your opinion is always welcome. Smiley. Why not?

  3. David Barr

    Erm.

    I've literally just stuck this on... and so far it's great. Haven't had an ad yet, but I've no issues paying for this if it's as good as it seems.

    Hopefully if it really catches on there will be DAPs that can use the service - let's hope they don't get their hands tied and end up just available on iPod or Zune.

    And hopefully they're will be some kind of client alternative that allows, for example, Foobar2000 to access the library.

    Finally perhaps they'll have lossless available at a little bit of a premium for those that want it.

    If they do all three then they'll get £20 a month off me forever.

  4. Jared Earle

    Wow, moon on a stick much?

    Spotify is so far so good. Yes, it's missing stuff, but I've been able to faithfully recreate compilation tapes I had in the 80s and 90s without a problem.

    However, I was once again surprised by the people here demanding the moon on a stick. Quality is as good as you need and no, you can't take it with you. This is a radio replacement not an iPod-filler.

    Some people will never be happy.

  5. William Dods
    Thumb Up

    Christmas for music lovers

    Can't agree with Jared more.This is probably the best thing to happen to music fans in several years.

    Instant streaming, no limit to number of times you can listen to a track, unlike last.fm. Rapidly expanding catalogue, by my reckoning they've added over 200,000 tracks in the past week. Can't believe some people can't find anything on it to listen to, I've the opposite problem, just too much :-)

    It's not perfect and there are several things which could be done to improve the service, better search, recommendations, downloading, user defined charts etc but for something which is only a few months old is a revelation.

    I'm on the free version at the moment but would happily subscribe if only to prevent it being scuppered by short sighted record companies.

  6. D Baron
    Thumb Up

    like it

    Fed up with itunes stuttering so gave spotify a go and I love it, small on memory and cpu and a simple UI gets my vote.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.