• Spotify to suspend or terminated ad block users
    140 replies, posted
Instead of using assumptions based on your own collection of music, use real data Normal quality- approximately 96 kbps High quality- approximately 160 kpbs Extreme quality- approximately 302 kpbs https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/1755/8909d135-ae7b-489b-9ebf-79dbffef1777/image.png
Also - lower your stream quality or just download the album at high quality beforehand
wow, so it's even worse than I thought that's really sad I don't even think limewire rips were 96kbps back in the day
1.3% of spotify's user base uses ad blockers? I understand the gravities of blocking spotify ads but this seems like a non issue in the first place. That 1.3% is either poorer than dirt or have dedicated themselves to telling ads to fuck off in any circumstance. Then there's the Streisand effect where by announcing that they're cracking down on adblockers people will go "wait a minute there are adblockers for spotify!? sweet!". This feels weird. I want to say there's an ulterior motive but as far as I can tell no one stands to gain or lose from this and it just seems like a story to put spotify on the papers.
If your response to hearing that Spotify is gonna suspend adblock users is 'oh boy, better get me a spotify adblock', I have to wonder if you're even using your brain.
My co-worker uses free Spotify to play us music at work and it always gets the same annoying ad about "Listening to music during jog. During workout. During lunch. Okay not lunch. BUY PREMIUM." or so and the way the woman talks and presents the ad pissed me off the first time I heard it so hearing it every 30 minutes makes me a bit mad. I've had Premium since it was possible to get and I've not looked back. I've found so much new music and artists just because of Spotify, it's great!
I'm surprised that people here are mad about this. The ads are just audio (no tracking! no viruses! no popups or page hijacks!), you get access to a gigantic library of songs for free with ads, it's super convenient, you can download the files locally at home if data is a problem and best of all? it's just 10$ a month, or even free as long as you also listen to the ads. This ain't like Netflix where shit you wanna watch isn't available to you because you're in the wrong region, you get 99% of everything with Spotify. Even then, some of you guys are still upset that blocking ads will be harder than it used to be. to be fair, that's kinda scummy when Spotify is as good and fair as it is towards its users.
I use Spotify free, I block ads and I also use an external program to rip tracks from Spotify just like how I use this lovely program called Internet Download Manager to rip videos directly from Netflix or even sites that other video rippers can't touch such as WWNLive who do paid rentals of pro wrestling shoot videos and iPPVs and such. Yarr harr fiddle-dee-dee, being a pirate is alright with me.
"i steal because i like getting things for free"
How can you be so smug about fucking over artists?
I hope to god this is a sarcastic post. Creators of these media you’re ripping from need compensation for their works. Ads provided from these platforms need the money to keep their services afloat, and this includes actually paying the creators to continue providing more future content. You just straight-up sound selfish af.
Translation: 'yeah, I know free services need to be sustained somehow and artists need to be paid but what about ME?'
To be fair. If you can't deal with literally 30 seconds of ads I dunno what you're talking about. Spotify is cheap af and well worth it. Admittedly I didn't have much money at one point and it was hard to pay, but then I just used google play music where you can upload your own music collection and stream that on all your devices for free with no ads.
If the music is freely available, why not just stream it with ads? I'm not too fussed with the occasional ad with my music.
Premium let's you download playlists and your library. The app has an offline mode. I don't think it has an automatic "only use wifi and stay offline otherwise" setting though, unfortunately.
How about being honest for a second and just admit you like to get the product without paying? If you actually had principles you wouldn't 'pirate' Spotify because they're missing features you want, their sound quality isn't high enough or whatever, you would be using a different service altogether.
Well fuck you too Spotify, I barely use you anyway.
How does Spotify pay artists, anyway?
If you're ripping from Netflix which doesn't have ads, you're less about liking your material ad free and more just a thief trying to justify his superiority for internet points.
Per stream. It's between $0.006 to $0.0084 a stream - this can be split between a record company, singer, song-writer, etc... though.
times have changed. i would much rather have digital music stored which is why i'm pissed that it is still taking so long to get old material on a modern format legally available and not in a shitty compressed format. but it's just sad that companies are only focusing on the streaming revenue through adverts which literally make no money for the artist.
Data plans aren't really a concern if you have premium and are attached to wifi reasonably often. Between downloading content, and it caching stuff, it does a pretty good job to reduce mobile data usage. I use spotify a lot (~60k minutes last year) and spend a couple of hours a day listening away from wifi, but it only used 178MB of mobile data last month. This is done by primarily caching/downloading content over wifi (where it used more like 2GB). This is with the highest quality setting for both streaming and download. The one downside is that it uses a reasonable amount of storage to achieve this - 18GB right now, of which 8.6GB is cached music and 8.2GB is downloaded, but I'd assume this is managed with the amount of storage available. I'm not sure if free does much caching but if it does then this would still mostly apply. It's hard to beat spotify without just outright pirating, and given musicians need money to produce music and live, the latter is a bit of a dick move.* *When I was younger and didn't have an income I did download music because that was the only way I could get more than one or two albums a year, but on the basis that now I have money I make sure to pay for by buying the album, buying merch, going to gigs or at least listening a bit on spotify. That only works if you stick to the second part too.
I just download my music nowadays. Streaming was fun for a bit but I like the convenience of having my music all saved locally. Haven't really used spotify, but I have to say, ads can really interrupt the mood you have going if you've got a nice playlist, that's my only knock against the ads.
i just wish mixtapes were allowed on spotify
If you have a shit about supporting artists you certainly wouldn't be using Spotify
Don't have much of an alternative when you can barely afford rent. It's better than feeling entitled to free music, I guess.
Tbh the whole system of how artists get paid in the industry is pretty fucked up.
Not to say anything about whether blocking ads is acceptable or not, but audio ads that play in-between music can be used to influence people. That is literally the whole point of them after all. The ads on Youtube are similar, they keep playing the same lines over and over (e.g. "you're walking down a street, it's a street you know well") so you remember it.
Its pretty shit, but ive gone to three live bands that i discovered off spotify. Cant way i would have discovered them otherwise.
If you prefer to have your songs either as files on your device or in physical form I think that's perfectly reasonable. But it hardly invalidates how great Spotify is for a consumer and the advantages of using it, there are so many bad arguments against it in this thread. A good argument against using it though is that it's a horrible way to support the artists cause you need to get up in huge amounts of listens to really make buck. That's the part that bothers me, but I still use it cause it's just so fucking convenient and cheap. Besides, i probably wouldn't be buying most of the music anyway even if Spotify wasn't an option that atleast they get some money out of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.