# Spotify Changes Everything ?!



## Guest

Note: I'm reposting this from my blog because I'd be interested in hearing others' thoughts.

This Spotify thing changes everything. I just started using it, and initially had problems finding what I liked. But I found good search instructions at spotifyclassical.com, apparently a fan blog. Also, it turns out you can share playlists (huh?) and these shared playlists are great. Tonight I imported a 2011 New Release playlist, and NPR Classical 50 playlist, and a Penguin Guide Rosette Winners playlist. If you view these playlists as "album lists" they are really quite handy. No doubt there are lots more useful playlists out there.

Between improved search abilities and pre-packaged links to hundreds of great albums, it's clear to me that there is a LOT on Spotify.

So now I'm browsing (or grazing?) and really enjoying what I'm finding. I listened to a Lou Harrison album (one I'd never buy without hearing first):









I found a great Poulenc Violin Sonata:









And now I'm getting blown away by Jeno Hubay (who?) violin concertos:









Want to try some Reich without reaching for your wallet? It's there. Dinnerstein? Sure. Fancy some Ingrid Fliter? No prob. Andrew Manze? Ok. How about the complete works of Johann Sebastian Bach, recorded under Helmuth Rilling - all 172 discs.

It's like being given the keys to a very big classical music store and told you can listen to whatever you like. The more I look the more I find.

One of my goals for 2011 is (was) to listen to my entire classical music collection (about 800 albums) all the way through at least once. I can see getting seriously side-tracked from that goal by Spotify.

Moreover, why buy albums at all when you can just stream them whenever you want? I downloaded the Pollenc sonata, and am thinking about downloading the Hubay. But I feel a bit like a chump for buying music now.

Spotify changes everything. What were the record labels thinking?


----------



## Aksel

Welcome after. It's been like this in Europe for over three years now. It's rather brilliant.


----------



## Couchie

Not available in Canada 

Why can't we ever get these things? I suppose we make up for it with our very relaxed anti-piracy legislation which makes p2p sharing effectively legal in Canada, ah well.


----------



## samurai

@BPS, I'm in the NYC area and am really happy to learn that you have been able to access spotify already. I was informed yesterday after I registered my e-mail address with their site that I would be sent an invite in the near future unless I opted for their premium service.{for which there is a monthly charge, apparently.} Did you decide to go premium right away and therefore receive the service ASAP, or maybe it works differently in your region than mine? 
At any rate, congratulations and continued good listening!


----------



## Guest

@Samurai - I signed up for the $5 per month variant and was able to start immediately. The $10 per month variant supposedly offers higher audio quality (although there are some questions on this point - cf discussion at spotifyclassical.com) and also the ability to cache songs on your computer for offline listening as well as listening on your mobile or some such extras (which don't apply in my case).

So I think for a fiver you can try it out for a month with no wait.


----------



## samurai

@BPS, Thanks for that update. Since you and so many others have beenspeaking so highly of it, I think I'll indeed give it a test drive!


----------



## TresPicos

Yes, Spotify changes everything. I've had the $5 deal for more than a year and I'm extremely satisfied. And I was surprised by the amount of classical music available, and not only the big names, but some very obscure composers as well.


----------



## Dadof5

Another option to consider: I have had Rhapsody for about a year now. Like Spotify, a subscription service. $10 a month. One option that Rhapsody has that is very important to me is the ability to put the music on my mp3 player. I do not believe you can do this with Spotify (although you can play music over your mobile phone). Please correct me if I am wrong and then I will look into trying Spotify myself. However, I don't know if Rhapsody is available outside if the US.


----------



## haydnfan

I like mog which is $5/month or double that if you want it on your iphone/android/ipod, which also has 320k downloads which you can listen to offline.

But for classical music there is only one great service... and that is naxos music library. Expensive, but worth it. The selection is AMAZING. And finding things is a snap. Nothing else competes at all.

I did not know that spotify finally made it to the US, I'll try it today.


----------



## Ravellian

_While Spotify is clearly targeted at younger users, it has a great deal of classical music available. However, some have criticized the usefulness of Spotify for listening to classical music, because playback is not gapless (there is a slight pause between tracks), which affects much classical music, and searching is very poor._

I read this from wiki. This is the same problem I have with Naxos - there's a small gap between each track of an album, which is a real problem when trying to listen to continuous works like opera or sonatas without breaks between movements. I think I'll stick to iTunes.


----------



## ulyssestone

Thanks BPS for linking to my blog. Yes Spotify is amazing. Since you are interested in Lou Harrison, maybe you will also like this:






It's not tagged by composer so a bit hard to find.

@haydnfan

IMO Spotify is much better than NML. Most stuff on NML are also on Spotify, but Spotify has so many recordings that NML don't. And NML's sound quality is 64/128 kbps, Spotify 160/320 kbps.

@Ravellian

the lack of gapless playback is indeed annoying. Technically Spotify should support this, because it pre-cache the next track before the current track is finished, I have no idea why they don't make use of this existing advantage. As a premium user, I can save Spotify music to offline playlists, and that will minimize the gaps(to about 0.3 second, but still noticeable).


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

the lack of gapless playback is indeed annoying. Technically Spotify should support this, because it pre-cache the next track before the current track is finished, I have no idea why they don't make use of this existing advantage. As a premium user, I can save Spotify music to offline playlists, and that will minimize the gaps(to about 0.3 second, but still noticeable).

This is the biggest complaint I have with Spotify. Of course considering the focus on the much larger audience of younger listeners who just wish to save the single hit songs I'm not certain when they might get around to dealing with this issue. I have discovered any number of older opera recordings which become somewhat irritating when there is a sudden silence at some peak dramatic moment at the end of one track.


----------



## violadude

For some reason I don't like listening to free music very much. Because then if I ever get a CD with the piece on it, when I pop it into the computer to listen I'll be like "oh, I've already heard this." I don't know, I'm weird like that.


----------



## beethovenian

violadude said:


> For some reason I don't like listening to free music very much. Because then if I ever get a CD with the piece on it, when I pop it into the computer to listen I'll be like "oh, I've already heard this." I don't know, I'm weird like that.


Ok.... now i really need to know how much $$$$$ you spend on CDs every month:lol:

I think my mind is wired like yours, free things like library books or Music just doesn't seem as good as those that i paid out of my pocket.


----------



## violadude

beethovenian said:


> Ok.... now i really need to know how much $$$$$ you spend on CDs every month:lol:
> 
> I think my mind is wired like yours, free things like library books or Music just doesn't seem as good as those that i paid out of my pocket.


Well, I don't really have a monthly allowance for CDs. It's more like, my grandparents are filthy rich and spoil me to a disgusting extant every year for my birthday/christmas. So most of that money I get from them for special occasions I spend on CDs, unless I have something else I absolutely need to spend it on.


----------



## beethovenian

@violadude

You didn't really give me a rough figure of how much but it's alright i know you do not like thinking about it.:lol:


----------



## violadude

A rough figure of how much my Grandparents give me every year?


----------



## Fugue

If anyone needs an invite for Spotify just let me know as I have some.


----------



## Polednice

I had wondered if there were enough users on the forum for us to make a shareable playlist as a kind of informal listening group. Is that too ambitious?


----------



## Fugue

Nope, its a great idea!


----------



## Polednice

Cool! Well, I've created a collaborative playlist that can be found here, and added an album just to see if it works. I'll start a new thread about it to see if people like the idea, and perhaps we can come up with a more structured way to use it.


----------



## samurai

If any of my fellow members need a Spotify invite, just let me know, as I have 1 remaining.


----------



## ulyssestone

Composers, Critics, Labels, And Classical Mavens On Spotify Social:

http://www.spotifyclassical.com/2011/09/composers-critics-labels-and-classical.html


----------



## clavichorder

I'll have to check out spotify.


----------



## neoshredder

I'm late to the crowd but the combination of last.fm siimilar lists, spotify full albums, and amazon reviews and I can find great music to my taste usually within minutes. I got the $10 premium so I could use it on my Squeezebox Touch and Panasonic Speakers. So awesome.


----------



## HoraeObscura

there will be updates in the next version... more social features, you'll be able to follow what other users listen to etc...

http://www.spotify.com/us/blog/archives/2012/12/06/discover/


----------



## senza sordino

I suppose many of you are using Spotify. This is where Spotify is available as of the summer of 2014
View attachment 46725

I think it might be taking a while to get Spotify here in Canada because of our broadcast rules, CanCon etc. A certain percent of content on the radio must be Canadian. The CRTC controls the airwaves and maybe Spotify also (I don't know). I'm not holding my breath to get Spotify, I might died of asphyxiation before this happens.

If Beethoven, Led Zeppelin and Britney Spears were Canadian perhaps we'd have Spotify by now.
Maybe if we do ever get Spotify all that will be available is Justin Bieber, Neil Young and Glenn Gould.


----------



## brotagonist

We don't have Spotify, but we have Songza and Rdio and, if your public library has them, we also have Naxos Music Library and Hoopla. With all of those streaming services, I am sure we can get most anything.

As far as that goes, it doesn't change anything for me. I sample music on free streaming services and You Tube, and if I, after having listened a sufficient number of times, decide that I like it a lot, then I want the CD, so that I can listen on my super duper stereo system


----------



## Guest

Spotify would've changed everything, but you can't have an OCD formatting system track info for last.fm scrobbles from spotify, so I refuse to use it  "iTunes" allows me to edit artist names, album names, and track names, so I always have that.


----------



## Dustin

Spotify definitely changed my life in a huge way. I am able to easily organize a huge musical library almost just as if I was using a program like iTunes. Excellent sound quality. And the big thing. Pretty much EVERYTHING I want to hear. There are maybe 1 in 500 classical albums I can't find. With my listening habits I have now, it would easily have cost me $10,000-$20,000 a year to do the same in the past on iTunes, which I can't even imagine spending on music.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I have no interest in Spotify, or in electronic downloads of music. I couldn't care less about it except that in the end it will likely destroy the CD. It will be a sad day when one cannot buy music in a package with artwork and booklet.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> I have no interest in Spotify, or in electronic downloads of music. I couldn't care less about it except that in the end it will likely destroy the CD. It will be a sad day when one cannot buy music in a package with artwork and booklet.


I feel otherwise. In fact, all my CDs are on shelves, in boxes, in the garage. If I want liner notes, the Internet has these in plenty. My music is totally portable on capacious iPods -- second-tier interests are on my computer, where I can listen at leisure through an attached sound system (and a pretty good one).

Needless to say, music files are backed up regularly, an automated task.

"Ownership" is an oversold concept IMO. And tangible, physical products are more of a burden than a necessity.


----------



## dgee

Thoroughly agree Ken about internet resources - and I can't remember the last time I contemplated buying a CD


----------



## opus55

I like buying CDs but I also embrace Spotify and other non-physical media options. When they stop selling CDs, I would already have thousands of them in my collection so I don't think I'd miss them.


----------



## starthrower

I'll never pay for Spotify, because they don't pay squat to the artists who make the recordings.


----------



## Guest

I like buying CDs when it's realistic, but whether I own the CD or not, I'm still probably listening to the music 99% of the time from my iPod. The CD is nice and quaint to listen to at times, but it is mostly a collector's item for the shelf, occasionally withdrawn for notes or a closer glance.


----------



## Piwikiwi

I buy cd's and use Spotify


----------



## Badinerie

I use spotify very rarely. Only if I want to try something out before buying, but then its only helpfull if its on spotify.
I use internet radio sometimes but the sound quality bugs me.


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> I have no interest in Spotify, or in electronic downloads of music. I couldn't care less about it except that in the end it will likely destroy the CD. It will be a sad day when one cannot buy music in a package with artwork and booklet.


I agree. Sort of what those Kindles do to real books. I have no use for either Spotify or Kindle.


----------



## EdwardBast

starthrower said:


> I'll never pay for Spotify, because they don't pay squat to the artists who make the recordings.


This would be my concern as well. Can Spotify users tell me how and at what rate artists are compensated for the products of their work?


----------



## Dustin

starthrower said:


> I'll never pay for Spotify, because they don't pay squat to the artists who make the recordings.


The way I look at it is a lot of these artists make more money from Spotify because way more people become familiar with their music, and therefore attend the concerts. This is where the real money is made, not the pennies from the record deals. I've heard lots of artists say this themselves as well.

And I agree very much with Ken. Ownership is vastly overrated in my opinion. Sure, it'd be very _slight_ preference because it would allow me to do a couple extra non-essential things with the music, but at a massive price.


----------



## Mandryka

Let me tell you one little story about how spotify and the internet can work. I was interested in finding about recent atonal music, so I posted a question on a forum. Some guy who seems to know what he's talking about answered after a few hours saying there wasn't much but one example is Ferneyhough's 6th quartet. I found it easily on spotify and streamed it to my hifi straight away. This combination of internet forums giving access to expertese and spotify is powerful. 

It changes your attitude, listening to a recording has become more like an ephemeral event, a concert. It really doesn't matter to me if I never listen to a recording twice, just like listening to a concert is a unique event. People who use CDs are limiting their experience of performance. 

It helps me to direct the spotify stream to a good hifi, and to control the thing with a tablet. So I can browse the wen for information about what I'm hearing as I listen. I don't miss the artwork, booklet. The tablet is better.

I never buy CDs now unless the performance isn't on spotify. I never buy a recording I can access through a stream.


----------



## starthrower

Dustin said:


> The way I look at it is a lot of these artists make more money from Spotify because way more people become familiar with their music, and therefore attend the concerts. This is where the real money is made, not the pennies from the record deals. I've heard lots of artists say this themselves as well.


It still doesn't excuse Spotify for paying peanuts.


----------



## Dustin

starthrower said:


> It still doesn't excuse Spotify for paying peanuts.


No, I agree that it'd be nice if the artists were paid more. But if the artists themselves view Spotify in the overall picture as a positive revenue-generating application, then I don't see the point in boycotting Spotify to stand up for the artists.


----------



## Tristan

Spotify's sound quality is still sub-par. You can hook up all the hi-fi you want, it doesn't change the fact that the recordings themselves are highly compressed. Since I always want to listen to lossless music, Spotify's not really a good option for me.

Listen to any flute play high notes and you'll start to hear the recording crackling--that's a sure sign of sub-par quality. Spotify is excellent for music in the car or sampling music I'd like to buy, though.


----------



## Dustin

Tristan said:


> Spotify's sound quality is still sub-par. You can hook up all the hi-fi you want, it doesn't change the fact that the recordings themselves are highly compressed. Since I always want to listen to lossless music, Spotify's not really a good option for me.
> 
> Listen to any flute play high notes and you'll start to hear the recording crackling--that's a sure sign of sub-par quality. Spotify is excellent for music in the car or sampling music I'd like to buy, though.


I've never heard crackling with 320 kbps listening on professional headphones. 320 kbps still sounds pretty amazing to me and I notice minimal difference from lossless. So for me, it's not worth spending the extra tens of thousands of dollars.


----------



## Tristan

Dustin said:


> I've never heard crackling with 320 kbps listening on professional headphones. 320 kbps still sounds pretty amazing to me and I notice minimal difference from lossless. So for me, it's not worth spending the extra tens of thousands of dollars.


Well the problem is some Spotify files aren't actually 320 kbps, they're up-converted from a lower bitrate which doesn't improve the sound. For the most part, it isn't noticeable, but sometimes when I listen to flute and other high-pitched woodwinds and such, it's so noticeable I just can't take it. But that's just me--I'm super sensitive to these things.


----------



## Piwikiwi

Tristan said:


> Well the problem is some Spotify files aren't actually 320 kbps, they're up-converted from a lower bitrate which doesn't improve the sound. For the most part, it isn't noticeable, but sometimes when I listen to flute and other high-pitched woodwinds and such, it's so noticeable I just can't take it. But that's just me--I'm super sensitive to these things.


You should listen to some jazz from the 40's, it will make you immune to all of that you mentioned.


----------



## Mandryka

Tristan said:


> they're up-converted from a lower bitrate which doesn't improve the sound.


How do you know this? If it's true, why do they do it? The sound through spotify premium is sometimes not as good as the sound through qobuz, but the service via a squeezebox through qobuz is poor.


----------



## JACE

I've enjoyed using Spotify as way to _preview_ music. But if I really like something, I still want to own it.

I guess I'm "old school" but having a collection of _tangible objects_ is something that I still enjoy.


----------



## rspader

JACE said:


> I've enjoyed using Spotify as way to _preview_ music. But if I really like something, I still want to own it.
> 
> I guess I'm "old school" but having a collection of _tangible objects_ is something that I still enjoy.


That's me! Spotify is costing me much more than the $9.99 per month as it leads me to purchasing more CDs than I would otherwise.


----------



## Marcel

Spotify is the best for to hear in somewhere, all Baroque and Classic music.


----------



## Janspe

I use Spotify all the time _and_ buy recordings every now and then if I happen to have some extra money - as a student I find that such luxury occurs quite seldom... I think that Spotify is a great tool for sampling CDs - I don't like to buy recordings without knowing whether it's actually worth buying or not.

Spotify is also a real treasure trove when it comes to CDs that are hard to come by these days. So many great old recordings available! It's really worth a try.


----------



## hpowders

I notice a lot of TC'ers using the service. I prefer holding the CD Jewel box and playing CD's in my own system at home.

I also prefer holding and reading actual books, rather than a Kindle.

Weird, I know.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

hpowders said:


> I notice a lot of TC'ers using the service. I prefer holding the CD Jewel box and playing CD's in my own system at home.
> 
> I also prefer holding and reading actual books, rather than a Kindle.
> 
> Weird, I know.


I completely agree, I've said before I must own the physical CD, for my personal collection library and for sound quality. However, Spotify comes in handy when you're not sure of a certain recording, give it a test-listen on Spotify before you purchase. You like it, purchase it. You don't like it, you don't have to waste any money on a bad purchase.


----------



## musicrom

hpowders said:


> I notice a lot of TC'ers using the service. I prefer holding the CD Jewel box and playing CD's in my own system at home.
> 
> I also prefer holding and reading actual books, rather than a Kindle.
> 
> Weird, I know.


I *hate* reading books electronically as well - it hurts my eyes, and there isn't any appeal in pressing a button to go on to the next page, as there is in holding a book and flipping through the pages. I don't know, reading a real book is just, better.

However, although I don't use Spotify, I do mainly listen to music through the internet. I don't really see any difference between listening through a CD player versus through the speakers on a computer. Besides taking the CD out of the box, the listening process is completely the same.


----------



## hpowders

DiesIraeVIX said:


> I completely agree, I've said before I must own the physical CD, for my personal collection library and for sound quality. However, Spotify comes in handy when you're not sure of a certain recording, give it a test-listen on Spotify before you purchase. You like it, purchase it. You don't like it, you don't have to waste any money on a bad purchase.


Yes. That is a valuable advantage. I don't know how many times I've been burned, taking a professional's elated review as gospel.


----------



## hpowders

musicrom said:


> I *hate* reading books electronically as well - it hurts my eyes, and there isn't any appeal in pressing a button to go on to the next page, as there is in holding a book and flipping through the pages. I don't know, reading a real book is just, better.
> 
> However, although I don't use Spotify, I do mainly listen to music through the internet. I don't really see any difference between listening through a CD player versus through the speakers on a computer. Besides taking the CD out of the box, the listening process is completely the same.


Maybe so, but I've always been a conservative, old fashioned, resistant to change kind of guy.

Yes. I love the tactility of holding a book and turning its pages. Hopefully, this will never become obsolete.


----------



## Blancrocher

hpowders said:


> Yes. That is a valuable advantage. I don't know how many times I've been burned, taking a professional's elated review as gospel.


I've become convinced over the years that there's no way to save money and be a classical music nut, no matter how you try to strategize. After becoming a premium member on spotify my purchases slowed for awhile, but they've been back up to record levels for months now.

I won't even mention the crap I thought I needed and then gave away after one or two further listens.

However, perhaps others really do have more restraint.

*p.s.* On a side note--new spotify users should look up details on how to "clear your cache." You'll want to do so periodically to prevent your computer from slowing down.


----------



## Marcel

Everything I've heard on Spotify is at least good. Most have excellent sound. The variety is also a point in favor of this system. It is very interesting the amount of works that are constantly being added.


----------



## Morimur

Marcel said:


> Everything I've heard on Spotify is at least good. Most have excellent sound. The variety is also a point in favor of this system. It is very interesting the amount of works that are constantly being added.


Shut up Marcel. Everyone knows Spotify sucks... Tee-hee!


----------



## neoshredder

I have 107 Playlists and counting. So addicting making your own radio stations. Imagine all the possibilities.


----------



## hpowders

Blancrocher said:


> I've become convinced over the years that there's no way to save money and be a classical music nut, no matter how you try to strategize. After becoming a premium member on spotify my purchases slowed for awhile, but they've been back up to record levels for months now.
> 
> I won't even mention the crap I thought I needed and then gave away after one or two further listens.
> 
> However, perhaps others really do have more restraint.
> 
> *p.s.* On a side note--new spotify users should look up details on how to "clear your cache." You'll want to do so periodically to prevent your computer from slowing down.


Yes. I could have bought a Ferrari for the money I've spent on my never-ending collection.


----------



## Morimur

hpowders said:


> Yes. I could have bought a Ferrari for the money I've spent on my never-ending collection.


I never took you for a Ferrari (Italian piece of trash) kind of guy. A Tesla Model S or Toyota Avalon would be more becoming.


----------



## hpowders

Lope de Aguirre said:


> I never took you for a Ferrari (Italian piece of trash) kind of guy. A Tesla Model S or Toyota Avalon would be more becoming.


My latest Mendelssohn Quartet purchase put me at just the right amount of cash to buy a nice red Ferrari California.

Of course I can sell my collection used for the equivalent of a gallon of milk.


----------



## Antiquarian

I tried Spotify, but the sound quality just isn't there. I've heard mp3's with better definition. I can understand if you are just casually listening to it on a mobile device as you jog around town, but most of my listening is at home. I've been spoilt by lossless, and really can't settle for anything else.


----------



## Oskaar

Antiquarian said:


> I tried Spotify, but the sound quality just isn't there. I've heard mp3's with better definition. I can understand if you are just casually listening to it on a mobile device as you jog around town, but most of my listening is at home. I've been spoilt by lossless, and really can't settle for anything else.


I notice that some swear to older recordings from the icons, and have problems with spotify for the sound quality...

For me it is opposite... I swear to spotify, but have "problems" with recordings before 1996 for the sound quality.

I have used spotify for many years, also connected to my modest but good stereo. Before that I downloaded mp3-s as well as lossless. The difference between lossless and spotify ( I use premium high quality, but I dont think there is much difference) is minimal compared to the difference beetween average 2014 recordings and average 2004 recordings.

So.. the purists should stick to 2014...


----------



## senza sordino

As I've mentioned before, Spotify is not available here in Canada. But it soon will be available. I've just signed up to get my early invitation, whatever that means. Sometime in the past couple of months, Spotify was allowed to operate here in the Great White North. I know it won't replace my collection of CDs, the sound quality won't be there. All I can do is connect my iPad mini to the input of my stereo.


----------



## senza sordino

I've signed up for Spotify. Some of you can ask "what took so long?" All I can do is direct you to the Prime Minister's office, we in Canada just allowed Spotify to operate here. 

I've got a 7 day free trial for the premium edition. I can get another 30 free days if I give they my credit card. (I know that doesn't make sense) 

I have some questions:

1) How can do save or star an entire album to your play list? Do you have to star every track? Is there a way to star an entire album?

2) This is a technology question, excuse my ignorance. Which streaming quality should I use? I have a wifi unit for my home.
normal 96 
fast 160
extreme 320

3) Are you able to read any performance / liner notes? Is there any text available to read about the music?

4) I might have further questions later. I'm no technology expert and I'm falling further behind year after year.


----------



## Dustin

As Spotify's unofficial and unpaid VP of marketing, I'll be happy to answer your questions. 

1. As far as saving an entire album to your playlist, I'll tell you how I set up my Spotify and you may or may not want to set up yours the same way. It has worked fantastic for me. I have a list of about 150 or so playlists and each one represents an album or I will name the folder something like "Mahler Symphonies" and place all of his symphonies in that folder. But to create a new playlist you can go to "File" and there is an option for new playlist and you can name it. Also, once you have a large number of playlists and want to insert a new playlist in a certain position, just click on an existing playlist and then go to "File" >New Playlist and it will create a playlist directly below the one you had selected. Once I have an album I want to add to a playlist, you simply use the search feature and then use the shift key to highlight every track on the album and drag it into the playlist you created. You'll obviously want to either alphabetize or group your playlists by composer so everything is easy to find. Once I got to the point where I had like 20 Mozart playlists, I learned you can click on "File" and "New playlist folder" and drag all of your playlists into this folder, which I happen to just name "Mozart" in my case. 

I used to "star" songs and albums but found my way to be easier to organize a quickly accessible and organized library. 

2. I would use extreme unless you have some kind of usage limit. It gives the best sound. 

3. As far as I know, there isn't a way to read liner notes. 

Hopefully my first step wasn't too confusing but if you want to try it and have any more questions, let me know.


----------



## Corvus

I've used Spotify premium for about 90 days now. If I want to save an entire album to a playlist I simply grab the album cover and drag and drop it on the playlist (just like itunes). Also, I can simply save the album to "your music" by simply clicking the big green "save" button. After, if I look at "your music" I can click on the album and then click on a button to save it for off-line use. This is real handy for listening on my ipod away from home where streaming is not an option.


----------



## ericdxx

Tristan said:


> Well the problem is some Spotify files aren't actually 320 kbps, they're up-converted from a lower bitrate which doesn't improve the sound. For the most part, it isn't noticeable, but sometimes when I listen to flute and other high-pitched woodwinds and such, it's so noticeable I just can't take it. But that's just me--I'm super sensitive to these things.





Mandryka said:


> How do you know this? If it's true, why do they do it? The sound through spotify premium is sometimes not as good as the sound through qobuz, but the service via a squeezebox through qobuz is poor.


It is true. Big parts of their library stem from a time before spotify was owned by major labels. As a startup company without getting any support from labels they got their music from torrents and pirating.


----------



## KRoad

starthrower said:


> I'll never pay for Spotify, because they don't pay squat to the artists who make the recordings.


Thank you. As one of those artists with a couple of Albums on Spotify, I can confirm that I receive less than one U.S. cent per Play. I ain't getting rich fast... but then I guess that isn't why I write & play music.


----------



## wandelweisering

Spotify is still not available in my country (Romania). What annoys me even more is that their homepage seemed to me to have changed recently, but when I try to sign up, it gives me (only then) the message: Spotify is not available in your country. Oh, why, I assume?

I had an account on Pandora a long time ago, enjoyed the site before it closed down as well for "third world countries" like ours, sigh.

Is Spotify any good for digging recordings of modern composers or dedicated YouTube channels are still a better solution (for learning about unknown composers/pieces, not for proper listening, of course)?


----------



## Tristan

ericdxx said:


> It is true. Big parts of their library stem from a time before spotify was owned by major labels. As a startup company without getting any support from labels they got their music from torrents and pirating.


That's kind of what I figured. I really hope Qobuz becomes available in the U.S. I'd like to see if it truly is lossless.


----------



## Mandryka

ericdxx said:


> It is true. Big parts of their library stem from a time before spotify was owned by major labels. As a startup company without getting any support from labels they got their music from torrents and pirating.


Do you have any evidence for this?


----------



## Chordalrock

I don't think Spotify really cares about niche recordings. They have some there that I was interested in that have incorrect contents. I reported the problem over three weeks ago and they've done nothing about it. I can only imagine if I've already bumped into these issues what others would run into when using it a lot more than I have.

It's fortunate you can use spotify without paying anything - I don't think I want to pay one album's price per month for faulty service especially considering they don't even have a lot of the stuff that is hard to find and might be a reason to subscribe (they don't have any of the Clerks Group albums for example, and only a few of the Sound and the Fury albums).


----------



## DamoX

Not available also in Japan.


----------



## neoshredder

Spotify is awesome. I love making my own playlists on the iPod Touch. Recommended. The download option is awesome as well. So you don't need a wifi connection to work it.


----------



## Piwikiwi

Chordalrock said:


> I don't think Spotify really cares about niche recordings. They have some there that I was interested in that have incorrect contents. I reported the problem over three weeks ago and they've done nothing about it. I can only imagine if I've already bumped into these issues what others would run into when using it a lot more than I have.
> 
> It's fortunate you can use spotify without paying anything - I don't think I want to pay one album's price per month for faulty service especially considering they don't even have a lot of the stuff that is hard to find and might be a reason to subscribe (they don't have any of the Clerks Group albums for example, and only a few of the Sound and the Fury albums).


That's the record label's fault, they are responsible for fixing the tags.


----------



## Chordalrock

Piwikiwi said:


> That's the record label's fault, they are responsible for fixing the tags.


I doubt the record labels have any sort of access to spotify content creation. It's not just incorrect tags, it's incorrect content (music). Probably from albums that don't even belong to the record label in question.


----------



## senza sordino

I have a free month of Spotify as it's my first month. I still had to give them my credit card number. I told some friends, one signed up for the free version. He plays something he claims is music, but sounds like noise to me. Anyway. These friends think I'm crazy for paying for my music. "You pay for music? Why don't you just download it? Who cares about the adverts? Just don't listen to the ads" 

So I'm curious why you people here on TC pay for Spotify when you can get everything for free?


----------



## DiesIraeCX

senza sordino said:


> I have a free month of Spotify as it's my first month. I still had to give them my credit card number. I told some friends, one signed up for the free version. He plays something he claims is music, but sounds like noise to me. Anyway. These friends think I'm crazy for paying for my music. "You pay for music? Why don't you just download it? Who cares about the adverts? Just don't listen to the ads"
> 
> So I'm curious why you people here on TC pay for Spotify when you can get everything for free?


Yes, I've been asking myself this very question. This past month, September, was my first month of paying for Spotify Premium, I seriously considered cancelling because, as you say, you can listen for free (w/ads). However, I love good sound quality (especially with Classical where instrument separation is key) and the reason why I'll keep Premium for at least another couple months is because the sound quality on Premium is _very good_ and the Free Spotify has terrible low quality streaming. So, for me, it isn't a question of ads or no ads.

This leads me to another question, I'm sure I'm just being weird, but is nobody else bothered by the fact that you don't actually own the music? It just doesn't feel right. I need to actually own the music, with security, knowing that in 10 years, I'll still own that CD. I don't where Spotify will be in 4-10 years. Like I said, I'm weird about stuff like that. The real reason why I'll cancel Premium soon is because of this.

I've still bought 5 CDs on Amazon in the past week knowing that I have Premium.


----------



## Piwikiwi

senza sordino said:


> I have a free month of Spotify as it's my first month. I still had to give them my credit card number. I told some friends, one signed up for the free version. He plays something he claims is music, but sounds like noise to me. Anyway. These friends think I'm crazy for paying for my music. "You pay for music? Why don't you just download it? Who cares about the adverts? Just don't listen to the ads"
> 
> So I'm curious why you people here on TC pay for Spotify when you can get everything for free?


The thing that is great about spotify for me is that I listen to a lot of music while cycling and spotify allows you to download music on your phone so that you can access it without streaming and you can only do that with the premium. I used to spend around 50 euros a month on cd's before I had spotify.



DiesIraeVIX said:


> Yes, I've been asking myself this very question. This past month, September, was my first month of paying for Spotify Premium, I seriously considered cancelling because, as you say, you can listen for free (w/ads). However, I love good sound quality (especially with Classical where instrument separation is key) and the reason why I'll keep Premium for at least another couple months is because the sound quality on Premium is _very good_ and the Free Spotify has terrible low quality streaming. So, for me, it isn't a question of ads or no ads.
> 
> This leads me to another question, I'm sure I'm just being weird, but is nobody else bothered by the fact that you don't actually own the music? It just doesn't feel right. I need to actually own the music, with security, knowing that in 10 years, I'll still own that CD. With Spotify, I don't where they'll be in 4-10 years. Like I said, I'm weird about stuff like that.


I completely get that feeling that's why I still buy cd's that I really like.


----------



## spradlig

I tried the free version of Spotify on my iPhone and it seemed like a big tease. I think there were lots of ads, plus it seemed almost impossible to listen to what I wanted; Spotify would try to make me listen to ersatz classical cr*p that was similar to what I was searching for. Maybe I was doing it wrong. Maybe they've improved.

I pay $4-5/mo. for Pandora One, and it's not bad, but their library is small, and I hear the same pieces over and over again. I wouldn't mind shelling out that much for Spotify if it's markedly better. Anyone know if it is?

Pandora's free service used to be OK, but they increased the # of ads and reduced the listener's degree of control, so I'll never use it again. If I stop paying for it, bye-bye.



senza sordino said:


> I have a free month of Spotify as it's my first month. I still had to give them my credit card number. I told some friends, one signed up for the free version. He plays something he claims is music, but sounds like noise to me. Anyway. These friends think I'm crazy for paying for my music. "You pay for music? Why don't you just download it? Who cares about the adverts? Just don't listen to the ads"
> 
> So I'm curious why you people here on TC pay for Spotify when you can get everything for free?


----------



## senza sordino

My free opening month is coming to a close, and I've hardly used Spotify in that time. I have a lot of CDs, and I've bought many of those in the past year, so I've got lots to listen to. The quality isn't great, certainly not a good as playing a CD. I connect my iPad to the auxiliary input of my stereo. I'm not sure whether I'll pay for it. I like Spotify for the Saturday symphony, and to try unknown music, but is that worth the $10 / month? Not sure.


----------



## Declined

It's great, but the sound, for free, is fairly low in quality.


----------



## spradlig

I signed up for a free month of "good" Spotify and I like it. I'll spring for the $10/month good version.

I got tired of listening to the same pieces on Pandora over and over again. Spotify seems to have a much bigger library, at least for classical. I also have more control over picking which pieces I want to listen to.

Spotify seems to lack long pieces and have only short "tracks", which is unfortunate. So I'll continue to listen more to YouTube at work. I plan to listen to Spotify in my car and to discover new music. I drive ~40 min./day, which is a lot of time.

I don't consider $10/month a lot of money for what Spotify has to offer. It's equivalent to 3 lattes, or whatever, and it's amazing to me how much music is available. Music is important to me.


----------



## Celiac Artery

Spotify is awesome. They offer high quality streaming/downloads when you subscribe premium. Excellent selection of music. If you are a student, you can get it for 5 dollars a month instead of the regular 10 (link: https://www.spotify.com/us/student/).


----------



## ericdxx

Mandryka said:


> Do you have any evidence for this?


yeah there's a documentary on spotify, it's up on the swedish public radio site but you will probs need to attend swedish language classes for a couple of years if you want understand what they're saying on there....


----------



## MagneticGhost

DiesIraeVIX said:


> I've still bought 5 CDs on Amazon in the past week knowing that I have Premium.


But that is fine if you normally buy 6. 

Which is why I think I'll carry on with my subscription because the price of one album a month probably saves me buying all that rubbish which I'd only listen to once. (Mostly pop of course)


----------



## Albert7

I stop using Spotify so much after switching to iTunes and I ended up using the iTunes preview function there for albums.


----------



## pentaquine

I use GoogleMusic instead because I can chromecast to my stereo and control it on my phone. It changes EVERYTHING.


----------



## Guest

I'm such a cheapskate I use the free Spotify. That's my kind of price! I get to hear loads of new stuff. What's not to like? Then if I really really really like something I make with the CD purchasing. (Most recent: Sorabji)


----------



## Albert7

free Spotify is wonderful but I've been using YouTube a ton more to preview stuff. Easier to access IHMO.


----------



## MagneticGhost

Spotify on the go is the only way that gives me complete satisfaction. Create a playlist - sync - and Bob's your uncle. Like having an iPod with almost everything available.


----------



## Guest

albertfallickwang said:


> free Spotify is wonderful but I've been using YouTube a ton more to preview stuff. Easier to access IHMO.


Okey dokey. For me, I can turn the screen off when Spottying, which I like to do (I don't know why!) Can't do that with utube, it stops the program.


----------



## isorhythm

I use Spotify a lot, but when I really like something I buy the CD. The sound quality of Spotify's digital files is really not very good.


----------



## mountmccabe

Spotify has certainly changed how I consume music. I have a couple thousand CDs that are by and large worthless and that was never enough options. I have bought and found many more albums digitally (mp3s), but I was still constantly looking for more to listen to.

Spotify has such a vast catalog that I'm sure I'll never get to the end of it. It's great for listening to recommendations (from here, from everywhere), and exploring.


----------



## Centropolis

DiesIraeVIX said:


> This leads me to another question, I'm sure I'm just being weird, but is nobody else bothered by the fact that you don't actually own the music? It just doesn't feel right. I need to actually own the music, with security, knowing that in 10 years, I'll still own that CD. I don't where Spotify will be in 4-10 years. Like I said, I'm weird about stuff like that. The real reason why I'll cancel Premium soon is because of this.
> 
> I've still bought 5 CDs on Amazon in the past week knowing that I have Premium.


I've thought about this exact issue as well. I am paying for Premium service at the moment and listening to it almost daily. But I am still paying a lot of CDs. I just don't feel like I own anything unless I actually have a CD. Call me old-school but I don't even like to buy MP3s off iTunes for the same reason.


----------



## Albert7

I used Spotify again to preview a disc and it was interesting but the sound quality just wasn't as good as the iTunes version post download. Oh well.

I'm curious where Spotify is getting their tracks?


----------



## mountmccabe

albertfallickwang said:


> I used Spotify again to preview a disc and it was interesting but the sound quality just wasn't as good as the iTunes version post download. Oh well.


If you have Spotify Premium the sound quality is (generally) better than using their free service.

Personally even if I am listening through my stereo system with nice speakers the output from Spotify premium sounds just as good as a CD. Or at least that is how it seems.

I suppose I could do some direct comparisons!


----------



## pentaquine

I'm paying subscription for Google Music and I buy CD only if I absolutely love it. I won't cancel my subscription because there are vast number CDs I want to listen to but I won't purchase them. I have 5 Beethoven symphony cycles, do I want to listen to another one? Absolutely. Do I want to buy another one? Probably not.


----------



## Haydn man

I have Spotify Premium and stream in high quality via Sonos into the Hi Fi and it sounds as good as downloads of CD's to me.
I still buy discs but am happy now to watch Amazon Marketplace for secondhand stock of those things I want having used Spotify to narrow the options.
There is a big selection out there now of used CD's and so far not one has been a problem


----------



## pentaquine

starthrower said:


> I'll never pay for Spotify, because they don't pay squat to the artists who make the recordings.


Spotify pays the label. The labels don't pay the artists. I guess because the streaming revenue was not part of their contract when they recorded the music. But nowadays every major orchestras are coming with their own in house album production (BPO, RCO, BRSO, LSO, NYPO, Philly, San Fran, pretty much everyone), so I'm sure they get paid from Spotify. The future is bright.


----------



## Albert7

mountmccabe said:


> If you have Spotify Premium the sound quality is (generally) better than using their free service.
> 
> Personally even if I am listening through my stereo system with nice speakers the output from Spotify premium sounds just as good as a CD. Or at least that is how it seems.
> 
> I suppose I could do some direct comparisons!


I still am rather leery of renting my music via Spotify Premium honestly... that's $10 per month which is 12 albums I could have bought and owned without strings attached.

and the mp3 downloading from Spotify runs out if you stop subscribing to the service. Not my style either.


----------



## Albert7

pentaquine said:


> Spotify pays the label. The labels don't pay the artists. I guess because the streaming revenue was not part of their contract when they recorded the music. But nowadays every major orchestras are coming with their own in house album production (BPO, RCO, BRSO, LSO, NYPO, Philly, San Fran, pretty much everyone), so I'm sure they get paid from Spotify. The future is bright.


Not necessarily. Apparently Taylor Swift didn't think Spotify did a good job of paying her.

http://www.today.com/money/can-taylor-swift-defeat-spotify-get-people-pay-music-1D80314536

I bought her album off iTunes last year.

I saw what she got from her streaming before her music got taken off and it was a pittance.


----------



## mountmccabe

albertfallickwang said:


> I still am rather leery of renting my music via Spotify Premium honestly... that's $10 per month which is 12 albums I could have bought and owned without strings attached.
> 
> and the mp3 downloading from Spotify runs out if you stop subscribing to the service. Not my style either.


I spent a lot of money on cassettes; they're worthless now, sitting in my parent's garage unless they threw them out/donated them like I asked.

I spent a lot more money on CDs; I basically don't listen to them anymore in part because I just don't have space to display them to make them accessible. And because I've heard them; I want to hear other performances, other pieces, other composers. I have bought more records in the last year than CDs. And I listen to vinyl about as frequently as I play a CD. I listen to neither of them regularly or frequently.

None of those physical formats feel permanent to me anymore; they don't make me feel I own or have control in a way that will matter in ten years, much less further out. I still like having physical objects, but I already have a lot of them around.

I can see many reasons why others may not want to rely on Spotify as much as I do but it works really well for me. I want to listen to all the things and Spotify lets me get far closer than any other method.


----------



## pentaquine

albertfallickwang said:


> Not necessarily. Apparently Taylor Swift didn't think Spotify did a good job of paying her.
> 
> http://www.today.com/money/can-taylor-swift-defeat-spotify-get-people-pay-music-1D80314536
> 
> I bought her album off iTunes last year.
> 
> I saw what she got from her streaming before her music got taken off and it was a pittance.


Haha but that's Taylor Swift. She's up for the all-time selling record. Of course she would pull her album from streaming. She will put her album back in several months.

Plus Taylor only has one album every two years. How many albums does RCO produce in their own label? Am I going to buy those albums? No. They get my money from my streaming subscription.

The other problem with Spotify is that the majority users don't pay. So if you are a subscriber you're basically subsidizing the free users. That's one of the reasons I use Google Music. They don't have a free tier so they pay the artists much better. According to this article http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/231478/how-much-streaming-sites-really-pay-artists/, almost 10 times better.


----------



## Albert7

Also why should I be at the mercy on Spotify. I don't want to depend on the whims of a record label.

What happens if a disc goes out of print and then Spotify pulls the recording off? I don't want to lose that. If I download iTunes I can archive the disc on multiple hard drives.


----------



## pentaquine

albertfallickwang said:


> Also why should I be at the mercy on Spotify. I don't want to depend on the whims of a record label.
> 
> What happens if a disc goes out of print and then Spotify pulls the recording off? I don't want to lose that. If I download iTunes I can archive the disc on multiple hard drives.


Interesting, I cannot agree with this either. I think this is where digital format and streaming shines. CDs went out of print because they can't afford to print them, they can't find enough buyers. But what does it cost to put on Spotify? Nothing. It's free money.

And unlike you my friend, I'm new to classical music so I don't have any access to those out-of-print CDs you've collected over the years. I can only rely on digital formats. Somebody scanned it and put it out on internet. I hope the labels can realize this and put all their old CDs on streaming service. It's a win-win for everyone.


----------



## Albert7

pentaquine said:


> Interesting, I cannot agree with this either. I think this is where digital format and streaming shines. CDs went out of print because they can't afford to print them, they can't find enough buyers. But what does it cost to put on Spotify? Nothing. It's free money.
> 
> And unlike you my friend, I'm new to classical music so I don't have any access to those out-of-print CDs you've collected over the years. I can only rely on digital formats. Somebody scanned it and put it out on internet. I hope the labels can realize this and put all their old CDs on streaming service. It's a win-win for everyone.


You are right as well. iTunes does contain a lot of out of print still esp. with Morton Feldman albums.

However, Spotify has huge chunks missing in their selection and they don't have everything either. Plus what am I am going to do when I'm running around town using my iPod touch or Iphone? I don't want to kill my data with streaming.


----------



## mountmccabe

With Spotify premium you can off-line music, which is great for music you want to listen to repeatedly or for when you are out away from WiFi. I used to have a commute of about 2 hours a day, most of which I'd spend listening to off-line content from Spotify.


----------



## Albert7

mountmccabe said:


> With Spotify premium you can off-line music, which is great for music you want to listen to repeatedly or for when you are out away from WiFi. I used to have a commute of about 2 hours a day, most of which I'd spend listening to off-line content from Spotify.


Yes but the offline music doesn't work anymore when you stop your subscription however. The files ask for a digital signature whenever you use them to verify that you are a current sub. Or not, bam you lost your music.


----------



## mountmccabe

albertfallickwang said:


> Yes but the offline music doesn't work anymore when you stop your subscription however. The files ask for a digital signature whenever you use them to verify that you are a current sub. Or not, bam you lost your music.


Sorry, I was only responding to your question about running around town using your iPhone. The answer to that is that you can use offline music.

You are right, you lose offline music if you cancel your subscription to Spotify. This is one reason I don't plan on doing that!

But it sounds like you really like your current method of iTunes and YouTube; I don't mean to criticize that! And I am not trying to get you to change. Do what works for you!


----------



## neoshredder

Think of all the music you would pay for if you didn't subscribe for Spotify Premium. I get sick of music quickly. So I want to listen to a lot of music. If you are like me, Spotify is perfect.


----------



## Albert7

neoshredder said:


> Think of all the music you would pay for if you didn't subscribe for Spotify Premium. I get sick of music quickly. So I want to listen to a lot of music. If you are like me, Spotify is perfect.


I never get sick of music... I may touch an album once in a year or two but I feel that archiving it then I can invoke it whenever I feel like it.

I am not a fan of the disposable culture syndrome and Spotify reinforces that mentality. I value my music no matter which artist it is and for me, to have it as part of myself and not some fashion accessory is the key aspect that makes my life valued.


----------



## neoshredder

albertfallickwang said:


> I never get sick of music... I may touch an album once in a year or two but I feel that archiving it then I can invoke it whenever I feel like it.
> 
> I am not a fan of the disposable culture syndrome and Spotify reinforces that mentality. I value my music no matter which artist it is and for me, to have it as part of myself and not some fashion accessory is the key aspect that makes my life valued.


I meant getting sick of the same music. I need something new to listen to often. Yes I have goto songs. Having Spotify is like having 80% of the music library in your house. Yes it is only a rental. But no point in keeping something you only listen to a couple of times.


----------



## neoshredder

About $8000 for being a member for the rest of your life. I bet you spend more on cd's.


----------



## Albert7

neoshredder said:


> About $8000 for being a member for the rest of your life. I bet you spend more on cd's.


Not really... and I use iTunes mostly... But I don't mind the outlayed expense either... the fact that iTunes works with every single device including my Android phones is something awesome.

Also Spotify is limited in what you can do. Whether it be streaming to a device at a friend's house or projecting for a music group, I find it easier just to throw the mp3 or AAC file up on a mp3 player.

And plus I can burn in reverse a CD from the iTunes files .


----------



## neoshredder

albertfallickwang said:


> Not really... and I use iTunes mostly... But I don't mind the outlayed expense either... the fact that iTunes works with every single device including my Android phones is something awesome.
> 
> Also Spotify is limited in what you can do. Whether it be streaming to a device at a friend's house or projecting for a music group, I find it easier just to throw the mp3 or AAC file up on a mp3 player.
> 
> And plus I can burn in reverse a CD from the iTunes files .


Spotify works for Android as well. I didn't say Spotify was the only option. But to me it is the most convenient. You can use Spotify offline. Which is great for me given I can't afford the bills for a smartphone. iPod Touch with speakers has been my option.


----------



## mountmccabe

Gah. In the latest update for Windows Desktop version of Spotify we have lost the ability to resize columns. And since for a lot of classical music the song names, artists, and even album titles are very long this means we often can't tell what we're listening to. See an illustrative screenshot at the Spotify Forums (this is also the place to agree with those who made this request where it may make a difference).

This latest update just happened for me; I was not asked if I wanted to update like in the past.

This update adds lyrics support from Musixmatch. It runs like karaoke lyrics, in time with the music. I tried it for a few rock songs, it only had one of them. I tried it for a few classical/opera pieces and got nothing (for one it tried to tell me the piece was instrumental). From browsing at their site there seems to be some lyrics attached to some aria collections (The Essential Pavarotti, for example) but this won't show up for any other recording/release of the aria.

I can't imagine that they'd bother to do this for opera/mass/etc. music but that really would be a cool thing. (Though then I'd be asking for translations, too!)


----------



## MagneticGhost

mountmccabe said:


> Gah. In the latest update for Windows Desktop version of Spotify we have lost the ability to resize columns. And since for a lot of classical music the song names, artists, and even album titles are very long this means we often can't tell what we're listening to.


ABSOLUTE MADNESS!!
I can never understand why this constant tinkering with things that are working perfectly well. Facebook annoys me with it's constant changes. But this has to be the worse thought our Software Update ever!. One can only hope that it is rectified with the next update - Spotify changes reasonably regularly.


----------



## mountmccabe

Agreed! I can't think of any of the changes they have made that are for the better and quite a few that I am fuming about.

Via the forums it sounds like they are adding back in searching within playlists, so there's that, at least. Hopefully if enough people complain about re-sizing columns they'll change that, too.



mountmccabe said:


> This update adds lyrics support from Musixmatch. It runs like karaoke lyrics, in time with the music. I tried it for a few rock songs, it only had one of them. I tried it for a few classical/opera pieces and got nothing (for one it tried to tell me the piece was instrumental). From browsing at their site there seems to be some lyrics attached to some aria collections (The Essential Pavarotti, for example) but this won't show up for any other recording/release of the aria.


Update: I actually tried playing a track from this album to see the lyrics crawl; it told me it was an instrumental song. So even for classical vocal music where MusixMatch has the lyrics in their database they're not going to show anything.


----------



## Blancrocher

Glad to see others are as annoyed as I am--misery loves company! I was going to post about this fiasco yesterday, but I wanted to do some reading online to make sure there weren't any end-runs around the most serious problems. 

Not sure if it's just me or what, but I can no longer put playlists in the order they appear on an album by toggling the "album" button (though I can put them in reverse order, which is not very useful).


----------



## Albert7

New Spotify update messed up my playlists so not a happy camper. Classical music lists have to be redone but at least my jazz playlists are intact.


----------



## Blancrocher

In case anyone's interested, it's apparently possible to recover and keep the version of Spotify that preceded the latest update:

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-03/12/how-to-downgrade-spotify


----------



## Albert7

Blancrocher said:


> In case anyone's interested, it's apparently possible to recover and keep the version of Spotify that preceded the latest update:
> 
> http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-03/12/how-to-downgrade-spotify


Cool thanks for the tip. I don't use Spotify all that much so I probably won't downgrade but I think that I am going to try to disable any further updates.

However, I know that some software companies disable stuff if you don't upgrade however so I worry about that.


----------



## senza sordino

I don't like the new version. I'm using an iPad mini, connected to my stereo via the headphone output, not the greatest sound quality. 

I've tried to play Haas "from the monkey mountains" String Quartet #2. It's on Spotify, but the movements are not in order, and I can't seem to click on the album to play in order. The same for other multi movement pieces, out of order.

Now that might be me and my inability to use Spotify, the limitations of the iPad app, or it might be Spotify.

edit: I finally figured out how to get the tracks in order. I found a button to push to go to the album, and then play the album in order, so it was my issue, and not Spotify.


----------



## mountmccabe

senza sordino said:


> I've tried to play Haas "from the monkey mountains" String Quartet #2. It's on Spotify, but the movements are not in order, and I can't seem to click on the album to play in order. The same for other multi movement pieces, out of order.


Very strange! I just added a recording of that quartet to a playlist and the tracks showed up out of order for me as well. It went 2, 1, 3, 4, almost as if it took longer for the first movement to arrive because it is longer. I had to manually move track 1 up and had to switch back to the album page to check the timings since the song title is too long to see.

I haven't seen this with any other albums or pieces but it'll be hard to tell!

UPDATE: Just tried to move Neuwirth's _Lost Highway_ from one playlist to another and it was completely rearranged. This is insane.


----------



## Albert7

Having issues with Spotify adding tracks for classical music in the proper order. I never had issues like this with my iTunes downloads... I am just going to use this now for preview only but feeling kinda stymied at the moment.


----------



## Kevin Pearson

I don't know what the heck you guys are whining about. I have hundreds of playlists in my Spotify by composer and nothing has changed. Yes...it is true you cannot resize categories within a playlist so you can see the full title but if you click on the album the full title is displayed. And for those who say Itunes sound quality is better than Spotify that is complete rubbish unless you use the "free" service. What the heck do you want for "free" anyway? I do see the point that you can backup your Itunes and have them available to you even if Itunes goes offline but Itunes is expensive. I'd like to see how anyone can buy 12 albums a month for the cost of premium Spotify ($9.99)! One album usually costs about that on Itunes. Nobody can convince me that Itunes is a better value. ITunes also has as many, if not more, holes in its catalogue as Spotify. Yea...it's true they do have the Beatles but so what? I can listen to all the Beatles catalogue on YouTube. So, my point is before anyone goes comparing Itunes to Spotify at least have the decency to subscribe to Spotify Premium so you can have the high quality stream and no advertising before you pass judgment. 

Before Spotify I used to spend about $150 to $200 a month on music but having Spotify is like having access to a public library anytime day or night. I now spend less than that in a whole year for Spotify and it has helped me be more focused on music that is special enough for me to own. I suppose I average buying two or three CDs a month now instead of ten to fifteen. That has freed my budget up for other things. Granted it would be a sad day if Spotify closes it's doors but that's not likely to happen anytime soon. And if they did I still have a pretty large library on CD that I probably would never need to buy any more music for as long as I live. ITunes may one day disappear as well and all those Apple fans will be stuck with a bunch of bricks to remind them of what once was. Oh yea... "back in the day son we used to have this technology called... Itunes". 

Kevin


----------



## hpowders

I have to try it one day. I'm running out of CD space. Sold the dog. The wife's next, I guess.


----------



## Autocrat

I use Spotify heaps, it's the only online service of any description that I subscribe to. I can use it on my Android phone and tablet, or on a PC, and I can access my playlists etc across the platforms. I can also use it on the Sonos devices (although it doesn't load the playlists and saved albums). 

My favourite, though, is through my main system via Chromecast, there's a free app called Spoticast that streams spotify to the chromecast. Sound quality can be pretty good.


----------



## Scopitone

I am a longtime streamer, and I have used all the major services. Mostly, I have settled on Google Play, especially since it also includes Youtube Red for ad-free and offline play. 

However, I recently re-activated my Spotify Premium account, too. For classical, I have not found a better service out of the Big 4 (Apple, Google, Spotify, Tidal). The poor metadata on classical tracks at Google is ridiculous. When you have an album with multiple pieces, as most are, then you can quickly get lost as to which piece is which. 

But on Spotify, it's very detailed on each track. Plus, I can manually adjust the order of my playlist library, as well as use folders. 

Is it perfect? No. But for classical streaming, it seems to be the best.


----------



## Retyc

Scopitone said:


> I am a longtime streamer, and I have used all the major services. Mostly, I have settled on Google Play, especially since it also includes Youtube Red for ad-free and offline play.
> 
> However, I recently re-activated my Spotify Premium account, too. For classical, I have not found a better service out of the Big 4 (Apple, Google, Spotify, Tidal). The poor metadata on classical tracks at Google is ridiculous. When you have an album with multiple pieces, as most are, then you can quickly get lost as to which piece is which.
> 
> But on Spotify, it's very detailed on each track. Plus, I can manually adjust the order of my playlist library, as well as use folders.
> 
> Is it perfect? No. But for classical streaming, it seems to be the best.


Google Play Music suffers from poor performance(at least on Android) as well...


----------



## PresenTense

I got into Classical Music thanks to Spotify two years ago.


----------



## Lenny

Spotify user here as well. I'd love to try out the new Naxos CD-quality service (http://www.classicsonline.com) but so far I'm sticking to Spotify. I also have account for some older Naxos digital library, but that's not technically good enough. Bad user interface, low sound quality etc. Spotify premium has pretty good sound quality I think.


----------



## Pugg

PresenTense said:


> I got into Classical Music thanks to Spotify two years ago.


I don't want Sopitify for that , get the real thing.


----------



## PresenTense

Pugg said:


> I don't want Sopitify for that , get the real thing.


Do you mean buying CDs? Because in Guatemala is pretty expensive to buy CDs. If you mean going to the concert, yes, nothing compares to the "real" thing.


----------



## AndorFoldes

Pugg said:


> I don't want Sopitify for that , get the real thing.


So what is the real thing? Do you mean CDs?

Spotify is a wonderful tool to sample classical music. There is such a big selection of different performances.

Of course, I still buy CDs of the performances that I really like.


----------



## Scopitone

Pugg said:


> I don't want Sopitify for that , get the real thing.


Sure, ideally one would simply buy CDs anytime one wanted new music.

Sadly, it's not in my budget. I suppose I could do the whole "average one CD a week and dig into it thoroughly", and I have considered that model. One could amass a nice little collection after a year.

That's tough to do when exploring all kinds of composers and styles, though.


----------



## millionrainbows

Yes, Spotify changes everything: now I can get all the CDs you discarded used at dirt-cheap prices!


----------



## kanishknishar

Pugg said:


> I don't want Sopitify for that , get the real thing.


What does "real" mean? It has been changing for decades. Now it's coming to digital music.


----------



## GreenMamba

millionrainbows said:


> Yes, Spotify changes everything: now I can get all the CDs you discarded used at dirt-cheap prices!


I don't know how many people are actually discarding CDs for streaming music (I never did). I suspect many or most are simply accessing a lot more music.


----------



## Chronochromie

Pugg said:


> I don't want Sopitify for that , get the real thing.


Some people live in countries where getting many CDs would be unaffordable, plus they'd take months to get there. Not everyone lives in the mighty First World...


----------



## millionrainbows

GreenMamba said:


> I don't know how many people are actually discarding CDs for streaming music (I never did). I suspect many or most are simply accessing a lot more music.


Then Spotify should be viewed as a supplement to one's music collection, and a way of hearing music without spending as much money; not as the new way we will all have to listen to music in the future.

Some are discarding the compact disc, and it's showing up in used CD stores that way. I got a whole collection of flute music on CD at Goodwill, $2 a disc. I run across perfect copies of relatively new releases all the time, and I'm building complete catalogues of artists I would not normally buy.


----------



## Bulldog

Scopitone said:


> Sure, ideally one would simply buy CDs anytime one wanted new music.
> 
> Sadly, it's not in my budget. I suppose I could do the whole "average one CD a week and dig into it thoroughly", and I have considered that model. One could amass a nice little collection after a year.
> 
> That's tough to do when exploring all kinds of composers and styles, though.


I think that 52 cd's allows for plenty of exploration, especially if you're sampling on streaming sites such as youtube.


----------



## Triplets

Why fight over how to access music? In the immortal words of Jimmy McGill, 'It's all good, man"
The important thing is that people are able to access a lot more music now than 20 years ago. Personally I prefer Physical Media, but I do like to supplement it with the occasional dip into Spotify to explore


----------



## Lenny

millionrainbows said:


> Then Spotify should be viewed as a supplement to one's music collection, and a way of hearing music without spending as much money; not as the new way we will all have to listen to music in the future.
> 
> Some are discarding the compact disc, and it's showing up in used CD stores that way. I got a whole collection of flute music on CD at Goodwill, $2 a disc. I run across perfect copies of relatively new releases all the time, and I'm building complete catalogues of artists I would not normally buy.


Well I have ditched completely physical media (CD's, DVD's..) - I see them completely redundant with digital. Reading is something I prefer to keep old skool because text is a bit different thing, but music... I don't even try to list all benefits of digital, you all know that. I also like the feeling of physical media, and I do own sizable collection, but it's just a matter of observation: I don't use it anymore. Btw this discussion reminds me a lot of vinyl vs. CD.

But it's good to have physical media around if digital is not accessible (never happened, but still) 

Some people were referring to a "real thing". I don't think that refers to the actual ones and zeroes, be it on CD or Internet (yes, music on CD is as digital as the streamed music). Nothing beats real concert, I don't think that will change any time soon. That's how I see ALL recorded music: just a supplement to real concert.


----------



## Scopitone

Retyc said:


> Google Play Music suffers from poor performance(at least on Android) as well...


Ironic, that. But I do agree. It freezes up a lot. And frequently, something just won't play when you press play.


----------



## EarthBoundRules

I love using Spotify, mostly for non-classical music. It has a ton of classic rock and pop albums on it.


----------



## Scopitone

EarthBoundRules said:


> I love using Spotify, mostly for non-classical music. It has a ton of classic rock and pop albums on it.


The jazz selection is terrific, too.


----------



## Haydn man

I am a firm fan of Spotify
It lets me explore a great range of music. I can quickly access recommendations on the forum and here them in high quality. It has allowed me to compare different performances of many works and opened my eyes and ears to the great variations in interpretation that I never appreciated before.
Right now with my wife we are streaming Elton John and I am searching for some Telemann for tomorrow.
My only worry is that this 'cheap as chips' service is just too good to be true and one day economic reality will take over and the whole music industry will collapse


----------



## Martyn Harper

For the last 20 years I have been an avid CD buyer and have amassed a collection of about 3000 discs (before this I bought large numbers of records and cassettes). However, in recent years the way I have listened to these discs is not through a CD player but to upload them onto iTunes, then download them onto my iPod Classic. So I haven't actually been listening to the discs as such. I have come to realise lately that the physical carrier of the music is unimportant. It is the music itself that is of value, not the tape, CD, record. It's the same with books - it is the words / language that communicate meaning; what the words are printed on is unimportant. 
This has led me to a decision that has in some ways has set me free from a buying addiction and will hopefully save me a lot of money. I have bought a computer with a larger hard drive and have begun the process of uploading my entire CD collection (prior to this I had to delete CDs from iTunes when disc space started to run out). I have also bought an external hard drive on which I can back up the whole collection. Once this is done, I will list all of my CDs on ebay. My son is doing most of this work for me. I have promised to give him 40% of the final profits once we have deducted p+p costs, ebay and PayPal commission etc.
Using Spotify (I have subscribed to the premium service for a few years now) has strongly contributed to my belief that buying CDs is more to do with materialism than music; the ownership of the object had become more important to me than the actual music (I have about 200+ CDs that I have not even listened to!). I just wanted to own more and more.
So, from now on I will listen thoroughly to the music I already have (which will take many years) and I will listen to music on Spotify but I will never buy another CD.
It's funny but I feel liberated and in some ways it is Spotify that has released me from my mind-forged manacles.


----------



## Pugg

Martyn Harper said:


> For the last 20 years I have been an avid CD buyer and have amassed a collection of about 3000 discs (before this I bought large numbers of records and cassettes). However, in recent years the way I have listened to these discs is not through a CD player but to upload them onto iTunes, then download them onto my iPod Classic. So I haven't actually been listening to the discs as such. I have come to realise lately that the physical carrier of the music is unimportant. It is the music itself that is of value, not the tape, CD, record. It's the same with books - it is the words / language that communicate meaning; what the words are printed on is unimportant.
> This has led me to a decision that has in some ways has set me free from a buying addiction and will hopefully save me a lot of money. I have bought a computer with a larger hard drive and have begun the process of uploading my entire CD collection (prior to this I had to delete CDs from iTunes when disc space started to run out). I have also bought an external hard drive on which I can back up the whole collection. Once this is done, I will list all of my CDs on ebay. My son is doing most of this work for me. I have promised to give him 40% of the final profits once we have deducted p+p costs, ebay and PayPal commission etc.
> Using Spotify (I have subscribed to the premium service for a few years now) has strongly contributed to my belief that buying CDs is more to do with materialism than music; the ownership of the object had become more important to me than the actual music (I have about 200+ CDs that I have not even listened to!). I just wanted to own more and more.
> So, from now on I will listen thoroughly to the music I already have (which will take many years) and I will listen to music on Spotify but I will never buy another CD.
> It's funny but I feel liberated and in some ways it is Spotify that has released me from my mind-forged manacles.


Thank goodness we not necessarily have to agree with you.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Martyn Harper said:


> For the last 20 years I have been an avid CD buyer and have amassed a collection of about 3000 discs (before this I bought large numbers of records and cassettes). However, in recent years the way I have listened to these discs is not through a CD player but to upload them onto iTunes, then download them onto my iPod Classic. So I haven't actually been listening to the discs as such. I have come to realise lately that the physical carrier of the music is unimportant. It is the music itself that is of value, not the tape, CD, record. It's the same with books - it is the words / language that communicate meaning; what the words are printed on is unimportant.
> This has led me to a decision that has in some ways has set me free from a buying addiction and will hopefully save me a lot of money. I have bought a computer with a larger hard drive and have begun the process of uploading my entire CD collection (prior to this I had to delete CDs from iTunes when disc space started to run out). I have also bought an external hard drive on which I can back up the whole collection. Once this is done, I will list all of my CDs on ebay. My son is doing most of this work for me. I have promised to give him 40% of the final profits once we have deducted p+p costs, ebay and PayPal commission etc.
> Using Spotify (I have subscribed to the premium service for a few years now) has strongly contributed to my belief that buying CDs is more to do with materialism than music; the ownership of the object had become more important to me than the actual music (I have about 200+ CDs that I have not even listened to!). I just wanted to own more and more.
> So, from now on I will listen thoroughly to the music I already have (which will take many years) and I will listen to music on Spotify but I will never buy another CD.
> It's funny but I feel liberated and in some ways it is Spotify that has released me from my mind-forged manacles.


Until we go into another dark ages and the internet goes down.


----------



## Lenny

Johnnie Burgess said:


> Until we go into another dark ages and the internet goes down.


For real paranoids ClassicOnline might be a good solution. First you get the CD quality streaming but for extra money, you can also download the music in CD quality, for good (not like Spotify "offline", which I believe stops being offline when they don't get monthly pay anymore). And when the end of this world arrives, you can still happily listen to the precious bits. Until the hard disk breaks, and the backup fails, and....... But you know, the CD's are not going to last forever either.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

With the way things are going. I would not be surprised if major war does not break out.

The next war could see the use of nuclear weapons and other types of weapons.


----------



## Scopitone

Lenny said:


> For real paranoids ClassicOnline might be a good solution. First you get the CD quality streaming but for extra money, you can also download the music in CD quality, for good (not like Spotify "offline", which I believe stops being offline when they don't get monthly pay anymore). And when the end of this world arrives, you can still happily listen to the precious bits. Until the hard disk breaks, and the backup fails, and....... But you know, the CD's are not going to last forever either.


I like the idea of supporting Classics Online, but for two reasons:

1. They don't seem to have an android app. I listen a lot on my phone. They have an iOS app, and I might go back to Apple this fall when the new iPhones come out. We'll see.

2. They don't have some of the big labels, like DG. That limits their selection compared to Spotify.

That said, I may still subscribe or buy some albums from them, just to keep the money more directly in the community. Their prices seem decent enough.


----------



## Scopitone

Johnnie Burgess said:


> With the way things are going. I would not be surprised if major war does not break out.
> 
> The next war could see the use of nuclear weapons and other types of weapons.


I think about streaming music and Kindle books the same way I think about backing up my data in Google and OneDrive -- if there's a war -- or if Microsoft and Google go out of business -- I am going to have a lot bigger issues than whether I can access my photos or stream the latest Taylor Swift album I uploaded to my Google Play Music account.


----------



## Lenny

Scopitone said:


> I like the idea of supporting Classics Online, but for two reasons:
> 
> 1. They don't seem to have an android app. I listen a lot on my phone. They have an iOS app, and I might go back to Apple this fall when the new iPhones come out. We'll see.


Oh, that I didn't know. That's a definitive no go for me as well. But if they are going to compete, they need to do it eventually.


----------



## Scopitone

Just thought I would mention that since my prepaid period with google play is about to end, I didn't want to keep paying for it and spotify. So I started using google play for my classical music. Switched back to spotify less than 24 hours later, for classical listening. 

Spotify seems to have a much better selection. Or else their metadata is done so well that searches are easier. Google Play is fantastic for almost every aspect of music streaming, and normally their search function kicks all kinds of butt. 

But it sucks for classical if you need to dig for anything.


----------



## Fletcher

I've been using Spotify on my laptops, tablet and phone for years and have always found it to have a better selection than its competitors (I only really listen to classical). I recommend a premium subscription for great quality of playback (which is so essential with orchestral music), as well as offline playlists for train journeys etc. Due to the amount of music I listen to daily I make a huge saving, but still occasionally buy CD's and Vinyl for materialistic value + for giving a bit to the artist.

Currently I only use a set of surround computer speakers so my opinions may change after trying a SACD player...

NB. Spotify Premium is £5 for students.


----------

