[HN Gopher] Spotify has shut down several API endpoints
___________________________________________________________________
Spotify has shut down several API endpoints
Author : leecoursey
Score : 106 points
Date : 2024-11-27 22:33 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (developer.spotify.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (developer.spotify.com)
| leecoursey wrote:
| Spotify announced they have shut down several API endpoints,
| effective immediately. They have grandfathered in existing apps
| that have extended mode Web API access.
| leecoursey wrote:
| Unfortunately, this breaks a lot of custom python programs I was
| using to facilitate music discovery and to generate playlists for
| myself.
| Yajirobe wrote:
| It doesn't affect existing apps
|
| > Applications with existing extended mode Web API access that
| were relying on these endpoints remain unaffected by this
| change.
| danielkuntz wrote:
| Doesn't affect existing apps with extended mode access, for
| which you have to apply and be approved. Gives you a higher
| ratelimit so you can ship to production. Plenty of people (me
| included) build small widgets for themselves without
| bothering to apply for extended.
| echoangle wrote:
| > These changes will impact the following Web API
| applications:
|
| - Existing apps that are still in development mode without a
| pending extension request
|
| - New apps that are registered on or after today's date
|
| Most people writing small scripts were probably using an API
| key with development mode.
| totetsu wrote:
| Any great discoveries you mightn't have made otherwise?
| smashah wrote:
| Godspeed to all the OSS Adversarial Interoperability reverse
| engineers! APIs should be a digital human right.
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| De-enshittify by any means necessary!
| shiroiushi wrote:
| Companies are going to continue to enshittify as long as
| customers refuse to leave them. There's no incentive not to.
|
| People who want to do stuff like making custom apps or
| scripts that use these APIs should instead be building their
| own music servers.
| thejazzman wrote:
| PlexAMP is awesome
| sham1 wrote:
| And when one is building this kind of a music server,
| please support your favourite artists!
|
| Ideally, if they have a Bandcamp or something similar,
| where you can directly buy their tracks and albums from
| them, do that. Usually this means that you can get access
| to high-quality FLACs and whatnot, but it will also mean
| that more money will go directly to the artists (usually
| money going to the record label and whatnot is unavoidable
| even with this, but there will still be fewer people in the
| middle).
|
| And well, if that's not a thing, then at least try to buy
| the tracks from somewhere, so that they at least see some
| return on their efforts. Maybe physical CDs and the like.
| The point is just to be able to support your favourite
| artists!
| shiroiushi wrote:
| Your suggestions are fine, but if you _really_ want to
| support your favorite musicians, you should attend their
| concerts and buy merchandise there. They personally get
| far more profit from ticket sales and merch sales than
| from selling music directly. And of course, the concert
| experience is something way beyond just listening to a
| track from Bandcamp or a CD.
| bpye wrote:
| Of course that depends somewhat on the venue and the cut
| they take of ticket and merch sales too.
| yurishimo wrote:
| Uhm, is that actually true? How is the $10 I spend on a
| digital album on Bandcamp not 90%+ profit for the band?
| Sure, maybe the overpriced T-shirt has a bit more profit
| as a raw number, but realistically, I'm going to buy a
| band's merch the one time I see them every 3-5 years
| (assuming they stay together and tour for that long). If
| they release music more frequently, I would suspect
| buying a digital album is more sustainable long term.
|
| I think this is also why you see bands like Weezer
| releasing more niche EPs/LPs. Heck, look at jam bands
| like Phish or Dave Matthews who release every single live
| show online as a separate album for fans to also buy to
| relive the experience they had at a particular show. The
| hardcore fans will buy the music, so it's in the band's
| best interest to "keep shipping" and record as much as
| possible.
| saaaaaam wrote:
| This is a myth unfortunately. Unless you are a really big
| name artist - or a mod-level or above artist doing a show
| in your home town - the economics of live and touring for
| most musicians mean they are more likely to lose money
| than make money.
|
| Imagine a band with four or five members doing a 20 date
| tour in 1000 cap venues where tickets are $40 each. Maths
| looks good, right? $40,000 a night! $800k for the tour,
| and then you can sell a bunch of merch an easily make $1
| million. Great!
|
| No.
|
| A touring band might sell out every night of the tour but
| more likely it's going to be 70-80% occupancy. So let's
| call it 75%. Suddenly that $800k drops to $600k.
|
| But then you need to pay the venue/promoter a big chunk
| of that. Depending on what the promoter is providing that
| could be as much as 40-50%
|
| Let's go with a conservative 40%.
|
| You're down to $360k now.
|
| But you've still got to pay all the costs of the tour.
|
| A 20 date tour probably means 25 days on the road, at
| least.
|
| A tour bus that could fit 4 or 5 people plus tour manager
| (yes, you need one) and a tech/roadie/sound engineer to
| get the set up right in each venue (let's say you've got
| one person who can do all of this) is going to cost $1500
| a day for the vehicle. Add in mileage, which is often
| about $5+ per mile. So that 20 date tour with 25 days on
| the road, and 4000 miles (coast to coast) will cost you
| maybe $57.5k for the tour bus and driver and mileage.
| (Gas, insurance etc are covered by the per mile charges
| that tour bus operators charge). You're going to need to
| park the tour bus during the day. That's maybe $200 a
| day. More in some cities.
|
| You're down to $300k now.
|
| But wait - no one has been paid yet!
|
| The tour manager will easily cost $450 per day or more -
| and there will be days require for planning ("advancing")
| the tour and wrap up days. So the 25 date tour might need
| 5 days advancing and two days post-tour admin. That's
| $14400, so call it $15k.
|
| Your technician will cost about the same. Maybe less, but
| you want someone who can do three things, so let's call
| your manager plus tech/sound engineer $30k.
|
| We are down to $240k now.
|
| At this point it's worth mentioning that the artist's
| manager and billing agent commission on the "gross" - the
| entire amount the artist gets before costs - the $360k
| fee from tickets after the promoter's share. Those
| commissions are typically 20% to manager and 15% to
| agent. So we need to deduct another $126k.
|
| That gives $114k left.
|
| None of the band members have been paid yet.
|
| But, also, they need a support act for each show. If each
| support act gets $500 then that's another $10k gone.
| $104k left.
|
| Everyone needs a per diem! 7 people on the road, plus
| driver. They all need coffees, water, laundry, dry
| cleaning, gym passes, cough medicine, whatever, plus a
| "buy-out" for meals. So let's make sure everyone has $60
| a day for the buy-out and another $20 for incidentals.
| $16k. $88k left.
|
| The tour - and all the gear - hasn't been insured yet,
| and the band and crew don't have insurance for medical
| emergencies while touring. Let's say that's going to cost
| another $3k total.
|
| And then everyone needs flights and cabs at the end of
| the tour to get home. They'll have excess luggage and
| instruments. So let's call that $1500 each. Another $10k.
|
| That's means there's $75k left.
|
| The band needs to rehearse and build their live show. So
| that's probably a couple of weeks rehearsal, planning,
| etc. So that's a 40 day commitment.
|
| Five people, 40 days, $75k. Each band member walks away
| with $15k - or $375 a day.
|
| But how often are you going be doing a tour of that
| scale? Once a year probably. And touring is gruelling.
|
| If you're playing bigger venues with higher ticket prices
| there is more money - but costs can also scale.
|
| To make $75k from bandcamp you need to sell maybe 10,000
| $10 albums.
|
| To make $75k from streaming you'd need maybe 18-20
| million streams.
|
| And you can do that without the crippling costs of
| touring.
|
| Sure, if you're on a label you're going to get a lot
| less.
|
| But touring isn't a magic money tree, and it's hard work.
| thisisabore wrote:
| Counter point, from a small touring punk band, Direct
| Hit!: You Don't Have to Lose Money on Tour
| https://www.vice.com/en/article/you-dont-have-to-lose-
| money-...
|
| Have you ever heard of Direct Hit!? I think they squarely
| fit in the mid-level or below.
| gsck wrote:
| Even the 75K is super optimistic. If you are touring you
| want to bring your own equipment, much easier to run a
| show that is roughly the same in multiple places then
| relying on the house rig in multiple venues. Once you
| factor in bringing your own gear (Almost definitely
| rented, sound is expensive, lighting even more so), you
| now need to factor in maintenance of the equipment and
| rigging.
|
| Also the assumption you can get one guy to do lighting
| and sound is pretty unrealistic unless your show consists
| of a static wash throughout the entire show. Theatrical
| shows you can get away with it, but that's usually
| because the man hours are heavily front loaded into pre-
| production, but with live music you will need a dedicated
| LX Tech and a dedicated Sound Engineer.
|
| I moonlight as a lighting technician during the evenings
| and weekends, mainly working in handful small local
| venues, there's me running lighting and the sound
| engineer doing his thing. The bands playing are easily
| spending PS300 a night just on 2 people (And this is a
| small venue probably about 200 cap in the main hall),
| youd be spending much more for a touring crew
| leoh wrote:
| >Companies are going to continue to enshittify as long as
| customers refuse to leave them.
|
| True but--
|
| Also going to remain the case as long as customers refuse
| to pay for things they appreciate
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Are any alternative APIs (non Spotify) available for the
| functionality being deprecated in this notice?
| danielkuntz wrote:
| Not any good ones unfortunately! Great opportunity for someone
| to make one while other platforms are still scrapeable.
| leoh wrote:
| You don't need to scrape other platforms. LLMs are already
| probably pretty darn good at this.
| echoangle wrote:
| Can LLMs analyze song features (danceability,
| instrumentalness, speechiness, tempo)?
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Audio analysis is one of the easiest problems that ML can
| deal with. The problem is, how can you use a pretrained
| LLM for discovering newly-released music? And how do you
| train future models without a source of new data?
| echoangle wrote:
| > Audio analysis is one of the easiest problems that ML
| can deal with.
|
| Maybe, but that doesn't tell me anything about LLMs. I'm
| not saying that it's a particularly hard problem, I'm
| surprised that an LLM specifically would be good for this
| purpose.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42266735
|
| https://blog.metabrainz.org/2024/11/28/pissed-off-by-spotify...
| RGamma wrote:
| > Kills API
|
| > Third party integrations continue to play an important role in
| the way users can experience the Spotify experience through third
| party apps. We evaluate the set up of our platform on an ongoing
| basis and remain committed to ensuring it provides the best
| possible opportunities for developers, artists, creators and
| listeners.
|
| Read that as: Hell yeah, we're gonna enshittify.
| Pesthuf wrote:
| Has the same ring as "we value your privacy. That's why we and
| our 739 partners want to track everything you do, link it to
| your real ID and sell it off to anyone willing to buy."
| dxxvi wrote:
| Long time ago, spotify allowed us to create, modify our playlists
| through end points. Now, it's impossible.
| tim-- wrote:
| When did this stop being supported by Spotify?
|
| https://developer.spotify.com/documentation/web-api/referenc...
|
| https://developer.spotify.com/documentation/web-api/referenc...
|
| https://developer.spotify.com/documentation/web-api/referenc...
|
| I think you are talking about "Get Featured Playlists", which
| is more geared towards Spotify created playlists, which is
| under the 'Browse' tab in Spotify.
| specproc wrote:
| This is very sad, and another nudge away from Spotify for me.
|
| I remember the API being a motivator for signing up, and I've
| hacked together a few toys with it over the years.
|
| Realistically now, the only benefit Spotify provides over my MP3
| collection is that it's better organised.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Musicbrainz Picard + PlexAmp is a pretty good solution.
|
| Picard sets _all_ the metadata on the music and PlexAmp uses it
| to create playlists with the OpenAI API.
| specproc wrote:
| Nice, thanks for the rec. I'd seen beets as well which also
| looks good.
|
| Spotify is definitely the lowest hanging fruit for culling on
| my subscription list. The API was very much part of the value
| proposition.
|
| I don't believe it's even that good a deal for artists. I
| heard the mighty Snoop Dogg makes like USD 40K a year off it
| or something stupid like that.
| leoh wrote:
| Why?
|
| Iiuc this is just about APIs for the recommendation engine
|
| It's never been easier to generate recommendations (eg via LLMs
| and other routes)
|
| The core functionality otherwise remains unchanged in the API
| specproc wrote:
| On the API front, the endpoint that's being killed that was
| most interesting to me is actually their music analysis one.
| That was super-nerdy fun to fuck around with, I had a half-
| finished project on that with an old job. Totally interested
| in hearing of feature-parity alternatives I can run locally.
| I'd also thought I'd sometime get around to doing some
| network analysis with related artists too.
|
| I honestly don't find Spotify's recommendations all that
| great. I definitely experienced a broadening (perhaps
| deepening) of my listening early on, but my experience has
| been that the recommendations are pretty shallow.
|
| I find after throwing together a playlist with some stuff I
| like, it'll add a few more artists to my mental roster, then
| nothing. I'll get thrown around in the same loop with the
| same tunes and artists -- usually from the more famous
| albums.
|
| I don't want to sound too much like the grouchy aging hipster
| that I am, but recommendations engines are just one of many
| ways of discovering music, and I feel like y'know, the old
| ways were better than just paying some company to do it for
| me. I'm talking here about being a regular on a local music
| scene, smoking weed with musicians, trading MP3s on the
| sneakernet.
|
| Another thing where we just pay some money for "convenience",
| but are left with some hollow and empty algorithmic imitation
| of something we once loved.
|
| Your LLM suggestion made me do a little sick in my mouth.
| leoh wrote:
| Cool Good to know, I won't mention it to you again
|
| Maybe you have ondansetron around
| echoangle wrote:
| The cool thing that's gone now was the "Audio Features"
| endpoint ( https://developer.spotify.com/documentation/web-
| api/referenc... ). You could easily get some important values
| about every song, now you would probably have to run your own
| analysis for every song you're interested in. That's a lot
| harder and slower if you don't want to preprocess every
| single song available.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| yup. The ability to make anything interesting with the
| Spotify API just got flushed.
|
| So happy I never got started on that little dream project
| that's been knocking around the back of my head for a
| couple years...
| leoh wrote:
| >The ability to make anything interesting with the
| Spotify API just got flushed.
|
| I respectfully disagree but ok
| lxgr wrote:
| Are LLMs actually good at music recommendation?
| Spivak wrote:
| No, they're absolutely garbage at it. I don't even
| understand the thought to use LLMs in the first place. And
| even if they weren't garbage the whole point of a music
| recommendation algorithm is surface music that wouldn't be
| in the training set so you need a way to recall likely
| matches at which point you've built a recommen engine.
| righthand wrote:
| > I don't even understand the thought to use LLMs in the
| first place.
|
| You know how people believe whatever they read, hear, and
| watch even though it might not be true? Well an LLM is
| something people read and to get over the hurdle of
| whether something might be true or good, you simply
| embrace it and ignore that it could ever be wrong. I
| don't get it either as I get upset when I find out a
| source is mostly wrong.
| ska wrote:
| > Are LLMs actually good at music recommendation?
|
| As far as I can tell, the only thing actually any good at
| music recommendation is (some) humans.
| grgbrn wrote:
| So you're here telling people who were actually using these
| APIs that we're wrong to be upset, because LLMs? Awesome,
| super helpful, thanks
|
| LLMs require data, as I'm sure you know. This is locking up
| what was previously an interesting source of data, which
| undermines your argument over the long term
| leoh wrote:
| Slippery slope fallacy
| ribadeo wrote:
| Spotify siphons yet more income artists should be getting into
| corporate coffers and Daniel Ek's bank account.
|
| No music lover should be using Spotify. They are notorious for
| driving the downward trend in streaming payments to artists. They
| are arguably worse than the worst of the old Music Industry we
| were taught to hate in "tech disruptor culture 1.0".
|
| Bandcamp revenue goes straight to artists, largely. I got 89 out
| of 99 dollars paid on a release of mine.
| leoh wrote:
| Good to point out and I'm with you but... fwiw...
|
| I think the intersection of people that are upset about a free
| recommendation API being cancelled and people who want a music
| platform that pays artists fairly is essentially zero.
|
| So yeah
| blitzar wrote:
| > arguably worse than the worst of the old <insert industry> we
| were taught to hate in "tech disruptor culture 1.0"
|
| Always has been (meme)
| kotaKat wrote:
| Whatever happened to "app fairness"? Oh, right -- Fairness For
| Me, Not For Thee.
| rightbyte wrote:
| If I had bought a CD every 2nd month for 10 years I would have
| had 60 albums. That is about what Spotify costs.
|
| Spotify has been making the music field even more winner takes
| it all than the old status quo.
| rchaud wrote:
| The economics of the music industry were always heavily
| tilted to the record labels, but Spotify somehow took it even
| further. Their CEO is a billionnaire for what? Being an
| unprofitable middle-man that pays $1 to the labels for every
| $0.80 they get?
| piva00 wrote:
| It pays US$0.70 for every US$1 it gets, it's in their
| financial reports quite easily to see.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Did you honestly buy music so infrequently, or did I buy
| music more than the normal person? In high school, I'd buy an
| album/CD a week. That wasn't just new releases but also meant
| including back catalog to fill in the collection.
|
| Are we just opposite ends of the music acquisition spectrum?
| explain wrote:
| Spotify pays 70% of revenue to music rights holders.
|
| They aren't profitable.
| rightbyte wrote:
| Small bands can't have fans revenue from recordings in the
| same way as before, since they share pot with Tailor Swift
| and bot farms.
|
| It doesn't matter if its 70 or 99.99%.
| jmpz wrote:
| They are: https://www.statista.com/chart/26773/profitability-
| developme...
| explain wrote:
| Maybe, for the first time ever.
|
| Though historically when Spotify has come close to making a
| profit, record labels see it as an opportunity to demand
| more or pull out.
| oh_fiddlesticks wrote:
| Many companies, for example, Amazon during its rise to
| power, will choose to not profit and instead reinvest in
| business growth and avoid tax. When there is profit,
| there is more tax; As i understand it, if all the revenue
| is allocated to expenses, it will benefit from large tax
| exemptions. It's sort of like running a for-profit entity
| as if it were a non-profit entity, though by choice and
| not mandate.
| tekla wrote:
| Selling music itself pretty much never benefits anyone in a
| significant way outside the top 1% of bands/whatever pop music.
|
| This is why any touring band asks you to buy merch, they eat on
| the money from merch
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| How has Bandcamp been after the last acquisition for the
| artists? We (end users) were all predicting its downfall, but
| so far the new owners haven't done anything _especially_
| egregious yet, other than laying off a bunch of staff.
|
| I've still got my hand on the trigger waiting to download my
| entire library as lossless FLAC and jump ship, but so far it
| seems like it's been mostly business as usual.
| turbojet1321 wrote:
| I'll open by saying that I've bought about 50 albums from
| bandcamp and qobuz this year, so broadly, I'm with you about
| supporting artists.
|
| However, the whole "Spotify is terrible for artists" argument
| seems ill considered. Terrible compared to what? I lot of what
| I buy is relatively niche artists on relatively niche labels,
| who would never have been signed to a major and would never had
| had international distribution. These artists can't make a
| living through streaming, sure, but I don't think they could
| have made a living in the old world, either.
|
| I still have a Spotify subscription - mostly for the family -
| but I use it to listen to albums before deciding to buy them.
| I'd buy a lot less if I couldn't vet it on Spotify first.
|
| A lot of artists seem to think that they're entitled to make a
| living off their art, which seems to me to completely
| misunderstand the history of the music industry.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Apple Music and Tidal play multiple times more to artists.
|
| People are staying on Spotify just because of inertia and because
| "everyone" is there, not because it's the best at anything any
| more.
| subarctic wrote:
| I got spotify a year ago because I needed an easy way to just
| put on some decent music from a playlist a friend sent me when
| I had people over. Since then I've realized that basically any
| song that I want to listen to is on there. Am I missing out on
| a better experience on some other platform? If so, which one
| and why is it better?
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Sound quality is better and they pay artists more. That's
| about it.
|
| UI quality is a subjective thing.
| herbst wrote:
| It never was. The idea of using a limited catalog as the sole
| source of my music content is like assuming Netflix is all you
| need on a TV.
| terminalbraid wrote:
| How can you say that? Spotify held a moment early on where it
| was built upon pirated mp3s. At that time it was _the_ easy
| way to listen to anything _for free_.
| herbst wrote:
| I remember the time where there was no party without
| constant Spotify ads running over the speaker, that's the
| only type of free account I know of.
|
| Other than that my point was how incomplete it is and
| always was. It could be nice as additional catalogue to my
| music, but for me it's missing to many of my favourite
| songs to use it as main driver.
|
| Edit:// in Switzerland downloading music for private use is
| no crime. So the initial situation was different I guess.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| Spotify is from Sweden, not Switzerland.
|
| And they didn't start with illegal MP3s. They did have an
| ad-supported free tier from the start though. But it was
| not illegal. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotify
|
| I think it's napster you're thinking of. That was an
| illegal sharing platform and now a mediocre paid service.
| jfim wrote:
| It might be Grooveshark that they're thinking of, it was
| notorious for quickly reuploading content that was taken
| down by DMCA requests:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grooveshark
| crtasm wrote:
| Were the claims made in 2017 shown to be false? I haven't
| yet read the book - how widely accessible was the beta?
|
| https://torrentfreak.com/spotifys-beta-used-pirate-
| mp3-files...
|
| https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/4136/Spotify-
| TeardownInsid...
| jmpz wrote:
| Citation needed.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| I stay on Spotify because it has an open source client spotify-
| qt.
|
| I use Firefox on BSD which doesn't have DRM support so the web
| versions of Apple Music and Deezer don't work properly. On
| Apple it only plays the first 30 seconds of each song and I
| forget what the problem was with Deezer.
|
| Also a real app is way nicer than a web interface of course.
| And with libspotify I can even change songs that play on my
| mobile and control it through home assistant.
|
| None of the others allow third party clients or open source.
| Sure it's a niche reason but this is the reason I'm on Spotify
| and not somewhere else. I've tried other platforms for a month
| but it was crap.
|
| I only listen to big artists anyway that are well compensated.
| explain wrote:
| Spotify pays 70% of their revenue to music rights holders.
| nojito wrote:
| Which is much less than Apple and Tidal.
| piva00 wrote:
| Tidal is in a downwards spiral because they are running out
| of money, Apple subsidisies Apple Music with profits from
| other parts of the company.
|
| The pot splitting model Spotify uses is definitely not good
| but the major labels are the ones with all the power,
| without pot splitting they wouldn't accept licencing to
| Spotify because they would make less money.
|
| At every filthy corner of the music industry you'll find a
| very sore spot: the big 4 labels control this industry.
| From fucking with artists where contracts requiring artists
| to pay back all "marketing and fees" before any royalties
| are distributed, royalties split usually 80:20 or 70:30 for
| label:artist, forcing artists to make their songs viral
| before they can be released (without much marketing support
| from the labels, the only reason they exist).
|
| It's a passion industry, and just like any other passion
| industry it's fraught with exploitation. Just look at game
| development, underpaid, overworked, because there's always
| someone else with passion to make a game.
| nojito wrote:
| How is any of that relevant when Apple Music pays artists
| much more than Spotify?
| piva00 wrote:
| They subsidise that from other parts of the business
| though.
|
| Also they don't technically pay artists aside from the
| self-released ones, most artists with bigger payouts
| aren't self-released so Apple Music just like Spotify is
| filling major labels coffers more than the artists'
| pockets
|
| That's all relevant on the comparison of why Apple Music
| can pay more than Spotify, unsure what you didn't get but
| willing to clarify.
| threeseed wrote:
| > Apple subsidisies Apple Music with profits from other
| parts of the company.
|
| No evidence of this and it doesn't even make sense.
|
| EU would have a field day with it and Apple likes making
| money wherever it can find it.
| barbazoo wrote:
| What are the numbers?
| surgical_fire wrote:
| Never tried Tidal. What makes it better?
|
| I refuse to use anything Apple out of principle.
| midtake wrote:
| Apple Music has more live radio streams featuring artists too,
| and the Apple Music 1 radio features real live commentators.
| Whoever is at the controls for Music over at Apple is someone
| who really cares about music.
| threeseed wrote:
| It's Zane Lowe who was a highly respected music presenter in
| the UK.
|
| He's very knowledgable about music, great interviewer and
| seems to be in his element.
| threeseed wrote:
| Also Apple Music and Tidal have high bit-rate, lossless audio.
|
| Once you've tried it there's no turning back.
| anothername12 wrote:
| And classical music gets proper special treatment!
|
| People have been begging for that for ages on Spotify's
| forum...
| barbazoo wrote:
| > Apple Music and Tidal play multiple times more to artists.
|
| Seems like Apple pays 3x what Spotify pays? It can't be as
| simple as that though.
| chewz wrote:
| I have used Spotify Audio Features API to display albums and
| playlist on a radar charts showing acousticness,
| instrumentalness, energy etc. And to make recomendations
| (generate playlists) for similiar music based on these
| charateristics.
|
| It has been fun project but now I am glad that I have never
| considered making anything serious out of it.
|
| I did this project because my impression is that Spotify had been
| always trying to steer me not to music that I like but to music
| that Spotify makes most money of. It had always been paid
| promotions over user's tastes in music.
|
| And I am not on Spotify anymore for years now. Apple Music have
| really tasteful recommendations and music curation.
| ravenstine wrote:
| I worked on the Apple Music frontend and can't help but be
| pleased people are still using it and are pleased. I remember
| recommendations being a bug priority, but I wasn't involved
| with that. Spotify's recommendations aren't as bad as they used
| to be, but it still thinks I'm more into early 2000s emo rock
| than the kinds of metal I'm actually into.
| tyre wrote:
| I use Apple Music over Spotify whenever possible. The Spotify
| UX has always been, to me, inferior. Thank you for your work!
| andyferris wrote:
| It's funny, I had the opposite experience - Spotify
| understood my taste while Apple Music didn't. (Specifically,
| Apple Music pushed a lot more Hip Hop/R&B music than I was
| used to - this was in early 2016 mind you so things may have
| changed since).
| bilekas wrote:
| > As we continue to review the experience provided on Spotify for
| Developers, we've decided to roll out a number of measures with
| the aim of creating a more secure platform.
|
| I'm sorry but more secure platform to what extent exactly?
|
| They're breaking tooling because someone might know what I'm
| listening to? This is so frustrating along with getting a Spotify
| update almost every morning.
| h4ch1 wrote:
| I recently just started using psst which is a Spotify GUI that's
| much lighter. When you right click a song and go to show similar
| tracks u get an array of sliders corresponding to the audio
| analysis/features like valence, danceability, energy, etc to
| tweak the recommendations.
|
| It made a light and day difference for music discoverability for
| me, while the default spotify radio keeps giving me songs i skip
| instantly multiple times along with songs I've listened to a
| hundred times, doing this through the API, is 100x better. I've
| discovered 30 new songs that I love this past week while that
| number has been steadily dwindling for the past 6 months using
| Spotify.
| fallinditch wrote:
| I've always wanted a slider that gives increasingly eclectic
| and random selections for the radio playlists.
|
| Psst sounds good, I'll try it, hopefully the API changes have
| not affected it.
| mattigames wrote:
| The official app doesn't even have a way to hide all podcasts for
| good, you have to click "music" at the top every single time you
| use the app, and now this, never-ending enshitifficattion.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-28 23:01 UTC)