Out of curiosity what do you find Spotify has that Tidal doesn’t?
I switched from Spotify to Tidal and found that especially now with podcasts, Tidal had all the features without distractions I don’t care about.
Not knocking it to be clear, just curious what you prefer about Spotify 
I’ll take that one. Over half of my music listening is done away from my home systems (car commutes, running/working out, working remotely, etc.). I used to use Apple Music for that, but switched to Spotify earlier this year. What I love:
And I love Roon – so yes, both Spotify and Roon actually are ‘for me’. I love following where Roon is taking their lovechild. I love seeing it getting better at music recommendation and discovery every release. I love the power and stability it offers.
But as it is, many of my use cases for listening to music are not met. And even at home, the siren’s call of Spotify is pulling me in more often than not (if only for continuity), delegating Roon (and Tidal and Qobuz) to weekend evenings.
That’ll change over time, I’m sure. But hey – for now I’m happy where I am.
I’ll believe Spotify Hifi only when it’s launched. Lots of talk, absolutely no action. I suspect they’re having second thoughts and, in terms of business models, they’re right to do so.
Spotify for my family, 4 bathroom and my business. Roon just me.
Where’s your evidence for this statement? Roon have reached out to Spotify, but Spotify are singularly uninterested in Roon’s model of integration.
Exact same experience. Let me also add that I use Apple Music at home to fill in the material holes in Qobuz.
Yeah, but did Roon twist Daniel Ek’s arm behind his back and threaten him with violence unless he signed on? Well?
I have to say I think Spotify is having second thoughts about offering lossless music.
Their bean counters I think are having the say on this one.
Don’t be surprised if they decide against it and I dont want to listen to compressed music.
Interesting business pod about Spotify. (The first part of the episode is on NFT which may be interesting but not related to the Spotify segment). Points of interest:
The NFT Craze and the Future of Spotify and Streaming Music (hbr.org)
They do not talk about independent music or blockchain based music services (unless i missed it)
Spotify talks a great game but that’s all it is. The direct relationship will fail unless its an obscure artist with little following.
I’m surprised they are entertaining the idea of direct relationships. The second labels sniff that out (if they start actually trying harder) they will pull artidts and content.
To me that seems like a bit of a dead end for spotify. They don’t have rhe leverage required to cut out labels especially as their much larger competitors (in terms of cash, not market share) can cosy up with them in a heartbeat to diminish spotify.
spot on. I am of the same sentiments.
I have to say, I jumped through the episode. They were saying things like… “Being on Spotify’s Top Hits Playlist is worth $100K to an artist”. They were not saying it explicitly, more me reading between the lines.
Having said that, Spotify is gaining leverage, not losing it. They are making a ton of money on Podcasts and advertising. They are becoming the “audio portal” (not for people on this forum!). So if most people listen to music on Spotify, and Spotify is putting competing content (podcasts) up, the record labels need to cut better deals with Spotify in order for Spotify to feature their songs.
I don’t see how a Label could “pull an artist” from Spotify, that would be career suicide for any but existing mega stars. Spotify IS the hit maker.
I am not an industry guy, so maybe I am offbase, but what other channels do the labels have, just Apple Music who is pretty aggressive on their own deal making.
I think labels wouldn’t pull an artist, they would threaten to pull their catalogue.
Also artists at a certain level, particularly the ones used in this leverage scenario, are not opposed to short term pain for long term gain.
Taylor swift is a good example of that in action. While i agree spotify undoubtedly has the most market share and creates all the hits thats really at the permission of the rights holders. Your platform is only as good as your content, if labels decide that spotify is straying too far from the line they set, they’ll take their content to the other platofrms instead. Users will wake up to spotify missing all their music and put pressure on them to cave.
Without other sources of revenue Spotify will never have true leverage. Apple, Google, Amazon can afford to take big hits to subscribers if they were to go down a route that ■■■■■■ off the labels on a longer term strategy, Spotify can’t.
Apple music is in the business of sapping the life out of spotify, thats their immediate goal. A more diverse market share is the target, to do this they can just cosy up to the labels while spotify bleeds revenue. In the aftermath Apple retains a higher marker share and after caving spotify is diminished.
All good points. We also have to bear in mind the fact that there are only 3 major labels. If one label pulls the plug on Spotify then that’s a hell of a lot of content. I don’t see this happening, but it does give the labels leverage when it comes to dealing with Spotify.
Yup, they also make an obscene amount of money:
“UMG’s overall adjusted EBITDA in Q3 – across all of its divisions – weighed in at €461 million (approx $535m), up 20.7% YoY. Yes: Universal Music Group is now comfortably posting profits in excess of half a billion US dollars each quarter.”
UMG could buy Qobuz and charge their own lower subscription if they really wanted to.
Spotify has no real leverage.
I think if we get to a world in which Apple, Amazon and Google are the majority of streams, that can be a different story.
As of now, rights holders dictate the rules.
8 posts were split to a new topic: Spotify CEO Daniel Ek investing €100million in AI defence technology
They told us that our business is to provide a custom user experience on top of a streaming service and that is not something Spotify is interested in. They would rather the customer stay within the Spotify experience and avoid the Roon experience altogether.
I understand that line of thinking. I think it’s wrong (as do TIDAL and Qobuz) but I do understand it. They fear that streaming will become a commodity service. A utility company. They don’t want to become that, so they want to own the experience.
We’d move mountains to integrate Spotify. Our total addressable market would grow so much larger. It’d be a business changing event for us, the largest opportunity we have ever had. Same goes for Apple and Amazon. Unfortunately, we are a tiny blip on all their radars, even with our popularity in this niche. I personally don’t think they care about the niche, and Spotify is still only offering lossy content.
This answer fits with the comments quoted about there view on Spotify being the product and service they are pushing not the music itself , which seems to be just a means to an end for them. They care little for audiophiles they are in it for data and keeping you in thier eco system to mine what they can from you.
Whenever I’ve thought about Roon in the past, I’ve always thought about Spotify and what would I do without it? I really like Roon, the first time I saw it in all its majesty, well, it blew my mind and I have a gigantic hard copy music collection. I pride myself on it. Ridiculous but there you go.
Anyway, I had a Qobuz and Tidal sub just for Roon. Fired them up for the first time when I got a Roon sub. I loved them. They were really different from Spotify and each other. So why don’t I have still have subs to them all? Money.
But this response, the honesty, hell, just the response, well, it deserves some consideration. I need to look at my Spotify account and see how I can get it across to Qobuz or Tidal.
Many thanks.