Laura Snapes, assistant music editor I challenged myself to not listen to Spotify for a week, but Alexis, your task was even more challenging. You had to dive deep into the playlists curated by Spotify and the songs suggested based on your listening history. How did that go?
Alexis Petridis, Chief Rock and Pop Critics One day in the car, I didn’t hear anything new, instead facing the familiar. When a song I enjoy is played, it’s not always what I want to hear at that moment. This doesn’t mean the music it recommended was bad. It featured tracks like Sonic Youth, Billie Holiday’s “Riffin the Scotch,” and My Bloody Valentine. While I love these songs individually, I didn’t necessarily want to hear them consecutively. My music tastes are personal, and I don’t appreciate them being rearranged by an algorithm. Record collections are unique to each individual, and having that disrupted felt jarring and confusing.
ls The algorithm is eager to find connections between data points, but it struggles with maintaining consistency.
ls I have a conscious MP3 that I prioritize over Spotify, similar to carbon offsetting. While I do need Spotify to some extent, like film critics need Netflix, I ensure to invest more in platforms like Bandcamp monthly. It allows me to support artists directly, unlike the minimal returns they receive from Spotify streams.
AP My listening habits don’t solely rely on Spotify. I tend to use YouTube more for work and enjoy physical records. Have you explored a variety of music sources after avoiding Spotify for a week?
ls To some extent. I often subscribe to music newsletters and open numerous Bandcamp links weekly. This time, I delved into most of them, discovering a captivating album by Swedish composer Hugo Randulv. While Spotify is a handy tool for music discovery, I prefer exploring unfamiliar albums independently. I was tempted to play the final thud mixtape halfway through, but ending up buying it instead. The algorithm’s approach differs from my understanding of coherent music curation.
AP Despite the algorithm’s efforts, some human preferences can’t be entirely replicated. Observing my “made for you” playlists, I noticed glaring inconsistencies like a “reggae mix” featuring folk recorders instead of reggae tracks.
ls Playlists like “70s Hippie Afternoon” tend to categorize music under generic labels, overlooking the intricacies of each genre. These playlists attempt to create a specific atmosphere rather than honoring the music’s essence. They often feature indie artists like Phoebe Bridgers and Julian Baker, predominantly signed to indie labels.
AP Pop’s competition markers on Spotify can hinder the diversity of music available, forcing artists to conform to mainstream trends rather than embracing their unique styles. The system prioritizes marketability over artistry, favoring commercial success over artistic integrity.
ls Spotify’s categorization of ambient music reflects Liz Pelly’s concept of “Perfect Fit Content” (PFC). This chilled music caters to mood-based playlists but may compromise artists’ creative freedom and financial stability. Some jazz playlists on Spotify lack recognition for established artists, sidelining their contributions.
AP Jazz music faces a dual challenge on Spotify – while it provides opportunities for jazz musicians to earn through PFC, it may limit the exposure to authentic, underground jazz. The curated playlists inhibit listeners from exploring diverse music genres and emerging talents.
ls Despite its shortcomings, Spotify has introduced me to new music through autoplay and recommendations. I’ve discovered unexpected gems through persistent suggestions, challenging my initial perceptions of certain artists. However, the platform’s impact on artist royalties and music consumption raises ethical concerns.
AP The debate around artist compensation on Spotify remains contentious, with major artists benefiting at the expense of lesser-known musicians. The platform’s model favors mainstream acts, overlooking niche and experimental artists who struggle for recognition and fair compensation.
ls Artists often receive minimal royalties from Spotify, especially when their songs garner less than 1,000 plays. This disparity highlights the unequal distribution of wealth in the music industry, favoring established artists over emerging talents.
ls The book presents interesting alternatives to streaming, like US public libraries providing streaming platforms for local musicians. While admirable, these initiatives may fall short of replacing mainstream streaming services. The collapse of previous alternatives signifies the dominance of platforms like Spotify despite their ethical implications.
AP Tidal’s decline showcases the challenges faced by alternatives to mainstream streaming services. While Pelly advocates for change, transitioning to a new paradigm remains complex and uncertain.
ls The future might see Spotify diversify its offerings or evolve into a different product, prompting users to seek alternative solutions. Maintaining personal MP3 collections ensures a level of ownership and independence in a digital landscape prone to sudden changes.
Source: www.theguardian.com