> You are 26% basic. You're trying to be cool with Kapitan Korsakov, but your favorites are the same as everybody else's..
> Your spotify was please-read-my-manuscript-walmart-hawaiian-shirt-sitting-alone-in-the-cafeteria bad.
Really interesting project by all means. I hope they release the source - I'm curious about how it was built.
Edit: This same link was posted 11 hours ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25513886 here and is not at all getting the same popularity. Anyone got ideas?
The output it spitted out while processing was pretty good though.
Not gonna lie, I'm feeling a bit judged by this AI:)
Hope that didn't ruin the magic.
Asked the same thing to me, but about Radiohead.
- Ryan Caraveo, u okay?
- ...of course, K.Flay
At first I had stuff "Waitress in the Sky" or "Tommy Gets His Tonsils Out" or "Alex Chilton" or whatever in mind, but now that I think about it there's a dark undercurrent to plenty of the songs in the core Replacements canon: "Hold my Life", "Unsatisified", "I Will Dare", "Bastards of Young", "I'll Be You", etc. - not to mention of a handful of slow tempo tracks with obviously dark themes.
I don't normally associate the Replacements with mopey music but in retrospect I'm not sure why. It's kinda all over the place, under a very thin veneer of drunken cynicism.
Timing is everything. If a tree falls in the forest and 75% of the potential readership are fast asleep, does it make a sound?
(Numbers are fictional - and possibly eurocentric - for the purpose of conversation. I think the point stands with or without their veracity, it's just easier for form a sentence with values)
After it picked the one very popular song I listen to in order to laugh at me for listening to non obscure things, ignoring the piles of weird random crap I normally listen to that nobody ever seems to know. Funny but not very accurate.
Overall all I got a good laugh though.
[lol, jk.] [yeah, why?]
> > Your spotify was ira-glass-in-your-airpods-manic-pixie-dream-girl bad.
Made me laugh!
> You're stuck in the early 2010s. For you, music's been all downhill since Orden Ogan made The Things We Believe In.
Now I wonder if this is because my account is old, or if I really listen to that much old stuff, or if my favorite bands just don't release that much. Weird.
But I'm entirely fine with the other assments:
> Your spotify was renaissance-faire -too-much-power metal bad.
> Thank your obsessions with medieval rock and power metal (e.g., Sabaton and Dreamtale) for that.
> Based on your listening habits, I can also tell you your spotify was...
> hail-satan bad
> You are 0% basic. Ewigheim and Winterstorm? Where do you even find this shit?.
And I think winterstorm and ewigheim aren't even the most obscure bands.
Oh but there is a new stribog album. nice.
I don't follow the recomendations, I click "Fans also listen to". Here is the rest of my assesment.
> Your spotify was moonshine-renaissance-faire bad.
> Thank your obsessions with Johnny Cash and medieval folk for that.
> napping-in-your-mancave bad
> Here's what else is going on in your aural trash fire:
You listen to these tracks too much:
Enter The Ninja by Die Antwoord
Napalm Sunshine by Lying for Friends
The Lachrymal Sleep by Doom:VS
Thousands Of Bees by In Gowan Ring
The Seer and the Seen by In Gowan Ring
You're stuck in the early 2010s. You only listen to Obama-era jams like Ensigns Of Victory by Winterfylleth and Streamline by VNV Nation.
Analysis completed in 4.012 exhausting seconds.
Thanks for letting me see your music I guess.
> You listen to these tracks too much:
> - Rock-A-Bye Your Bear by The Wiggles
Which, to be fair, is my second favourite Wiggle song!
I got the same thing with a different song. What's funny about this one is it's from 2017.
It's complaining about me listening to Eluveitie and Ost+Front too much (and Metalocalypse and Celldweller).
I'm sorry that I went searching for other german industrial metal bands when rammstein took forever to put out another album.
I made my account this yeah, and i got the same "you're stuck in the early 2010s". I guess I just listen to a lot of music from then.
Hilarious, especially since these are pretty much mainstream artists of my (not so small) niche. I'd love to see how it comes up with those.
HN allows reposts of an article when earlier submissions haven't gotten attention yet. This is our way of mitigating the randomness of what gets traction off /newest.
It makes for a something of a lottery in terms of which submission ends up with all the attention, but it's on our list to implement some kind of karma sharing across multiple submissions. It's been on our list for years, but we'll get to it eventually!
> You're stuck in the early 2010s. You must have peaked right around Ratatat's Magnifique.
The last line is definitely something I will mention to my therapist ... :-)
Still, it validated my hipster taste, even though it made fun of it. Suck it bot, I'm cool and your programmers aren't.
Other of my fav instrumental band is CHON, but they're more of math rock and not really the same.
> You are 15% basic. Yeah, you've got some obscure artists like VanKatoen, but your real top ones are ultra-mainstream like The Weeknd..
> dad-rock bad
> neverland-ranch bad
> nineties-dorm-room bad
> studded-leather-jacket bad
> wannabe-tenor-but-probably-a-bass bad
As a rock-listening dad who spent most of the 90s living in a dorm room, I felt spied on.
> You are 5% basic. Old Man Gloom and Distorted Harmony? Where do you even find this shit?.
I feel called out, but also kinda proud.
> You're stuck in the early 2010s. You must have peaked right around The Dear Hunter's Act Iv: Rebirth in Reprise.
Early 2010s were amazing era for Prog metal alright.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHtdqGy3g5Q or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YftAYq1AHiE if you are in a more upbeat mood
The Act of HN submission. But broadly speaking US working time zone get a much higher chance of submission being upvoted.
oof, I'm not even angry lol
"You are 1% basic. Oh wow Penelope Trappes and Titi Robin! Your taste is so obscure that's so cool I bet you're super interesting..
You're too trendy for your own good. You only listen to music made in the last year."
"You are 1% basic. Have you considered there's a reason nobody listens to DJ Marsta?.
You're stuck in the early 2010s. You must have peaked right around Mez's Tyrone EP."
My spotify was 'heavy-eyeliner-post-punk-boomer-relaxation-dads-still-cool bad'
It's sayin stuff like "You know music existed before 2019, right?", but also criticizing me for liking Stan Rogers, who died in 1983, Jay Z, and Trevor Hall, who seemed to peak in the early 2000s.
Maybe I just haven't finished my coffee yet, but I was kindof hoping that this would actually use AI to figure out the musical variety of my listening history and suggest more people to listen to or something like that. Seems like it was just a bunch of mad libbed insults though.
select case (person%likes)
print *, 80s_pop_insult_char
print *, person%likes_artist//'-stan'
i regret letting this access my account. i would recommend others to not give this tool access, it is not worth it.
It called me a “manic pixie dream girl” - I’m male.
It said I was “local-talk-radio-bumper-sticker-bitch“, which isn’t even an adjective.
I revoked access afterwards but like you I felt a bit conned.
It gave me the line about being stuck in 2010. Just an insult machine. It would actually be useful if it gave me songs it thought were more "cool" based on my current lists. Still, I'm getting a perspective by reading other people's amusement with the comments here on HN.
> Personalize stories
> Create content for stories from reader-generated inputs
Is this clear enough to forbid them from long term storage and passing the data on?
I create a playlist to fit a mood (for example, ambient electronic music with a good beat and no words), and I seed it with at least 10 songs.
Then, I go down to the "Recommended Songs" section and I just play whatever it recommends.
If I don't like a song, I hit the skip button on my keyboard. The vast majority of what it recommends and plays is tolerable but not great.
Every now and then (maybe one out of every 20-30 songs) I will discover a shiny new gem of a song that really resonates with me. So I drag that song up and add it to my slowly growing playlist.
This has the effect of subtly changing the recommendation algorithm for that playlist over time.
Eventually I end up with a playlist with about 100 songs on it, and recommendations that at least roughly align with the mood.
I tend to get bored of songs pretty quickly though, so when a playlist gets too stale, I will prune the old and tired songs from it.
This approach has worked pretty well for me so far, but I really wish that there was a way to explicitly tell Spotify that I "dislike" a song and to never recommend it to me again.
Discovery, recommendations and shuffle are at the heart of what made Pandora a thing... it's literally what Pandora was built on back when it was purely a seeded radio of sorts. Whereas Spotify more-or-less bolted on these features later in the product life... and it shows.
The "shuffle" alone on Spotify was enough to send me running. Have a playlist with 200 songs from 80 different artists? Well, we'll just play this one artist - the same album even! - back to back to back until you're annoyed enough to manually select the next song!
I understood people flocking to Spotify back when it was the only game in town that allowed you to play specific songs, make playlists, and "download" songs for offline (airplane) playback. But now Pandora does all this too - and has for the past several years. The two services are even priced about the same...
So, if Spotify is so bad, as would seem evidenced by all these HN threads that pop up from time-to-time, why do people continue to use it?
I recognize this isn't mainstream listening, and for all I know the ratios are reversed for more popular music.
I found the Pandora choices of songs annoying. I love Philip Glass; I don't want to listen to a bunch of other people playing triplets against eighths. It's derivative and boring in comparison. I do want to listen to his contemporaries that compose in different ways. Or let's take Nuut again. I came across her recently while surveying contemporary Estonian composers. Pandora doesn't let me do that so far as I can tell. I'm interested in what is going on there compositionally over the last 2 decades, I am not looking for another person that writes something that is very 'similar" (according to the Pandora algorithms).
Finally, I never use shuffle. So much of what i listen to are
I understand my use case is not the only one, but neither is yours! People select different apps because they provide what the person wants.
For instance, with Glass - there are 171 albums on Idagio.
And it breaks them down with works, instrumentation, ensembles, soloists, genres (piano solo, chamber, secular vocal. etc.), conductors, and recording date.
If you want to compare the 22 piano solo albums that Jeroen van Veen has recorded of Glass's music - easy to pull all of them up quickly.
Their encoding is also vastly superior to Spotify or (yikes) YouTube Music. If you have a decent signal-chain for listening, high-quality components, and enjoy Classical... Idagio is head-and-shoulders above the rest.
I gave up on Spotify when they removed the widget functionality on Android. I know they returned it eventually, but not without complete uproar. It burned myself as a decade old (family) premium user though; I used to love them, but that complete disregard completely changed that.
Now, only a 3 month minimum (6 would help) completely free retrial would get me back. Thus far, none has been received.
(On the flip side I absolutely love YouTube Red or Premium or whatever they call it these days.)
The UI is the worst I've seen on any music service or player, but I'd found quite a bit of music I like through their recommendations.
I used to pay for Google Music and transitioned to YouTube Music but eventually gave up because it has so many issues. I also tried Spotify but didn't like it much so now I don't know what I will use.
The implementation and mixing music videos with other video content in my Youtube account is horrible on the other way.
Youtube Music implementation of Chromecast is spotless while Spotify every so often interupts with "Your spotify account is used on another device" (Not true just checking my phone). In general Youtube is also tolerant of using two devices with the same account for a few moments.
And no podcasts in the music app... Hurah...
Even now I googled "Pandora windows app", clicked a few times, and ended up on some Microsoft Store page. Interestingly enough if I add "mac" to my search terms I just get a download...
If you are in a highly competitive space that is effectively winner take all - you go where your customers want to be, not where your developers think they should be.
Anecdata, but I open Pandora in it's own window, then minimize it. This makes it pretty easy to find if you have a hundred+ tabs open at once like I often find myself with.
I currently have 44 tabs open, including Pandora in it's own window, and Chrome is only using ~2GB of RAM - perfectly acceptable to me.
That's exactly what I'm not looking for; I'm perfectly fine with making my own music choices. I know what I like, have an extensive "library" on Spotify, and play from just that.
The biggest thing I'm missing from Spotify (or indeed, most players, except the one I wrote myself years ago) is the ability to say "play random album from my collection". Play random track is too biased towards albums with 60 tracks vs. albums with just one track.
Quod Libet (https://quodlibet.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) lets you do exactly that.
It's still the best music player I know of though, even when running with Wine on Linux.
You can customize this feature in Advanced Preferences. Then, go to Playback -> Shuffle -> Album grouping pattern.
I guess Spotify is still the only game in town :(
The rest of the comment still stands for all US based users, however.
You can see here that Spotify has made agreements with specific labels for international rights. What a thing... only licensed to stream a song in some select set of countries... absurd in 2020/2021 and being an internet based service - but that's record labels for you.
Aside from having nearly any artist's catalogue available for almost free, their recommendations have helped me find a lot of great songs. I don't personally listen to the curated playlists but many of my friends love them.
I subscribed to Rhapsody in 2004. It gave me access to "nearly any artist's catalogue available for almost free". As 2 examples of things it did better, instead of using a shitty recommendation system that when I pick some electro swing band it recommends death metal, instead for every artist it showed their lists of who influenced them and who they influenced. I found tons of great bands that way. Way more than i've found on Spotify's crappy system
And that's just one example. The now dead Google Play Music's recommendation system actually worked where Spotify's does not.
It's just your personal experience that is different. Same for the other guy, same for me.
I've been on a paid accounts for Apple Music, Google Music, Yandex Music and even Youtube's adhoc solution for music. At least 1 year each (almost for entire time since the launch of Yandex music).
Spotify beats them all. Both recommendations and content (though we have to agree that content part can vary based on your location). Never had a chance to try Rhapsody.
>that when I pick some electro swing band it recommends death metal
That's how Google Music worked for me though, not Spotify.
Yandex had best UI but worst recommendation system (and lack of content).
Apple's recommendations are about as bad as Google's. Better UI but again - did not have music I wanted.
Is this a new thing?
"Everyone else's opinion * objectively * sucks".
Just because you write "objectively", doesn't make it so.
It is literally impossible for you to just sort the list of stations you have created. If you have 120 stations, you have to s l o w l y scroll through them in random order until you find the one you want. And even though there are thumbnails next to them (presumably to make them easier to identify), the thumbnails change. There's a hundred different usability problems, and as far as I can tell, all of them minor features that could have been implemented years ago.
If you don't pay for the premium version, it's a nightmare of pop-ups to prompt you to pay, to the point that you develop reflexes to pass the prompts. Then there's the actual ads, which sometimes seem to disappear for a while, only to barrage you intermittently for a half hour.
The whole thing annoyed me so much, and I complained on their support channels so often, that I dropped them and just started buying music. And of course I then had to pirate the same music I purchased because there's no way to just buy some MP3s so you can move the music around.
It doesn't matter how good the tech is if business/legal can't keep up with the competition.
3. No matter what, rickroll you on the next song
Cleary 3 is far superior to the other two! ;)
So if something can be objectively WORSE, there must be the possibility of something being objectively better.
Aside from amount of content (which wasn't an issue earlier), I suspect the primary reason is that Pandora isn't available in Europe. I loved it so much (>5 years ago?) that I used as VPN, but this didn't quite work on my phone and ended up being too much of a bother.
Spotify's big advantage, like most monopoly-focused 'startups' is their monopoly. Not actually providing the best to their customers.
I can use Spotify without a VPN, it has a lot of stuff Pandora doesn't have, and I can share stuff with friends because everyone else also uses Spotify. It's difficult to compete with that.
IIRC, these algos were part of a project called ~Muse which later forked, and there was a schism between the algos and clickstream data or the personal data and anonymized cohort data. Will have to review / re-search.
The trove of our searches, listens, and skips Pandora has / had did a good job informing recommendations and was an effective moat for my use.
At least someone's still at it, and all this helps me find my notes from that time.
Pandora wants to get rid of those features. All their advertising now is "if you pay for a premium account, you can play whatever music you want, on demand".
This reminds me really strongly of how eBay decided that (1) customers prefer to buy things at a fixed price [completely correct]; so that (2) they should try to prevent people from listing ordinary auctions, because customers don't like those. [No!] Instead, the goal was to just be the place where people would go if they wanted to buy something online.
Except of course that that completely undermines the concept of eBay. They were an established auction site that intentionally drove auctions away. And then they complained that people preferred to buy things from Amazon.
In both cases, it looks like a popular company with an established brand sees a rival that's even more popular, and concludes that the only path forward must be to implement features the rival offers while discontinuing or discouraging any features where they're doing better than the rival is. How does this make sense?
Spotify generates some decent genre based playlists based on my listening history. Not as good as Pandora was.
Lately with the pandemic, I've created a super-chill, ambient play list (I started with Moby's Long Ambients and expanded from there) to relax before bedtime. This has been really helpful for unwinding in these stressful times.
However, an unintended consequence is that Spotify now thinks I listen to soothing ambient more than 50% of the time. My year in music is all ambient and my suggested play lists are all wishy-washy now. Apparently there is no "ignore this playlist when tracking usage." You can only manually disable tracking under "Settings > Social" and it times out after every session.
Spotify takes a lot more risks and I think its highly preferable.
royksopp - this must be it
trapt - headstrong
ladytron - destroy everything you touch
Some sort of remix of the hand that feeds by Nine Inch Nails (I think it was the photek remix or something)
I got these songs a lot on many stations, and nothing else by those artists ever, haha.
I don't hold a grudge from 10 years ago though
Programming along, with background music playing - when suddenly I become "aware" of the song playing and how good it is. That's when I give it the "Thumbs Up" in Pandora, then go back to work. Might happen once a session if I'm lucky.
In addition I have several playlists, as a song might suit the current playlist, and another song might fit playlist B instead. So any playlist might be seeding several other playlists at a time.
Sometimes I go through many, many recommendations, listen to a song in short pieces quickly by skipping most of it. It sounds weird but that way I can pretty accurately tell if the song is shit or not (read: if I end up liking it). If the song passes my filter, I put it to some playlist. I just do this quickly and finally go back and listen to the new ones.
As for "dislike", there isn't one per song but there is a "Don't play this" per artist. I sometimes play children's songs or pop as requested, and after some time the recommendations include music I truly never want to hear again in any recommendations (Marcus & Martinus I'm looking at you).
Also, it feels like only the first songs in a playlist actually matter for the recommendations. I don't know if this is really the case. I'd hope the recommendation engine took a random sampling of the entire playlist and recommended based on those.
Edit: there's a "hide" for a track.
SoundCloud Weekly recommendations have been solid for months specifically with ambient: ~85% Good tracks with ~30% Resonating enough to Favorite. My other contexts / use cases include listening by Album and Artist, Genre, Mood- and Mind-Setting, and Discovery.
Spotify works well for Albums and Artists.
HypeMachine is my go-to for Discovery and Genre.
SoundCloud and BandCamp work well for diving into artists and labels discovered.
Playlists and Favorites across these are best for Mood- and Mind-Setting, as are "special purpose" options like Brain.fm and Ragya.
I take a similar approach, but I've found that the recommendation algorithm is pretty bad, so as an extra step I click on the artist and spend a bit of time listening to their other songs (and add those too, in the hopes it'll affect the algorithm).
> This approach has worked pretty well for me so far, but I really wish that there was a way to explicitly tell Spotify that I "dislike" a song and to never recommend it to me again.
That's one of my main issues with the 'recommended' algorithm. 90% of it is stuff I already have in other playlists, or stuff I keep skipping. I really wish the algorithm did a bit more with all the data it has, but I imagine they optimize for sales (to us or promoting artists/labels) over our actual desires.
There's no way to prevent songs from getting suggested (other than maybe blocking a song entirely?). My recommendeds don't seem to get updated until the playlist has changed dramatically. And repeat songs get added to the section even if I haven't added it the umpteen times it was suggested prior.
Is the experience different on desktop or am I doing something wrong?
You can at least for radio playlists. You can specifically say to never play this song or artist again. They used to let you thumb up or down on tracks which I think was a much easier UI.
Skipping songs doesn't seem to do enough for songs in your playlists so you have to go through the whole right click -> never play again workflow. I really wish I could just downvote individual songs as they play and tailor it that way since sometimes I'm just tired of a particular song, but maybe I like the song or the artist and don't want to click on 'never hear this again'. It just seems to repeat certain songs way too much based on your listening history.
Though maybe I should say the majority of the playlist consists of songs I've imported into iTunes. Apple does a decent job at letting you seamlessly integrate your personal library with stuff from their streaming catalog.
> effectively, I manually make my own playlist.
Which button is that?
It definitely has the UX feel of being a bit creepy on how well it responds.
With regards to taste, you usually need to find a suitable gateway into an unpopular genre to begin appreciating it. I always hated jazz until I turned 30, when I heard the melodic jazz of Avishai Cohen  and Phronesis , which led me to Eric Dolphy  and ultimately to free jazz outfits like Alexander von Schlippenbach and Peter Brotzmann. Having grown bored of everything else also helps.
I recently cancelled my paid subscription to Spotify after 10 years and I use Youtube a lot now. The Spotify web app is not great and Youtube recommendations are a lot better in my opinion.
Haven't listened to them in a while, but I also enjoyed listening to Tingvall Trio, though I remember them as being more atmospheric. There's also Vijay Iyer Trio, I specifically remember Accelerando well, but that's a long time ago.
I can’t speak much for the recommendations, as I am fine with getting my recommendations from the radio and I prefer listening to whole CDs over playlists.
I play music all day while working and I'd love to listen to more artists but most times, I'm stuck in the routine between my Release Radar on Fridays, Discovery Weekly on Monday, and Daily Mixes during the rest of the week. I add songs I like to a variety of personal playlists and sometimes I start a "Song Radio" for a song I like. But even then, I just end up getting the same songs Spotify seems to think I liked only because they've already played them to me over and over. Part of me wonders if their algorithm favours songs that costs them less in royalties...
Playlists made by real people seem way better than any Spotify playlist, but they are difficult to discover. I'd love a feature that recommends me playlists from people that share my music tastes. One example, is a playlist called "Sexy Bath" by Nicoleta Tataru.
What region is your Spotify set to? It seems to base the recommendations on the region (I live in the Nordics, but used the US version for some time and got recommended a ton of spanish music).
I also got some Scandinavian stuff too but it usually fits my taste at least.
You know that the individual who created the playlist in no way hand curated that list, hell they probably haven't even listened to half the songs that they added to their playlist, much less vetted them.
This is one reason I never really clicked with it, or with Pandora, and why I have really enjoyed and used Apple Music. I'm not really interested in algorithmic playlists most of the time. I want what I want. I've been listening to music a long time; I can make connections on my own. ;)
I actually really enjoy the ability to effortlessly
discover new music I never would have found otherwise that Spotify gives. The recommendation algorithm can be weird at times, but I hear liberal use of likes and dislikes helps though YMMV.
As an aside, everyone else I've seen using Spotify tends to strictly build playlists and not really follow any artists. Not really sure what to make of that.
Spotify constantly queues and recommends songs to me that are so bad, I can’t even imagine how there could possibly exist any data indicating that any significant sample of listeners has ever enjoyed hearing them. Spotify has 5+ years of my listening history, and orders of magnitude more data from listeners all over the world, and yet every time I set it to recommend anything to me I just sit there pressing “skip” repeatedly until I give up.
I always blamed myself, thought I was just becoming old and curmudgeonly in my 30s. But yesterday I finally discovered the problem isn’t with me. I switched to Apple Music, and it queued up 50 songs I’d never heard, and I enjoyed almost all of them.
I can use my HomePod now, too. I’m really loving Apple Music so far, highly recommend it to anyone who thinks their Spotify account is permanently broken like mine was.
They have already announced they intend to let artists buy their way into playlists in the future https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/could-spotifys-new-discovery-...
I've paid for spotify for more than a decade and I definitely wasn't pleased to have every single playlist recommending an artist I don't like, and it was just ridiculous how EVERY playlist had his photo regardless of the genre.
With New releases it is different. If I ever play, say, a song someone else sent me to listen to in a different genre, then it screws up my recommendations here for months, sometimes forever.
That's just Spotify. The AI did a better job of figuring out what I like (138 and uplifting trance) than Spotify does (EDM). I blame it in Armin van Buuren: he is an extremely popular EDM DJ and he plays a very wide variety of EDM. If you listen to EDM chances are he has at least a few dozen sets you'd enjoy. That's the problem: he's prolific and he connects every genre of EDM to every other genre of EDM. He's a "super-connector" and I could easily see how this wrecks recommendation algorithms, all roads lead to Armin.
Basically: recommending music is not the same as recommending goods, and I think the same approach is being used.
Spotify also seems to think I’ll like literally anything with a house kick.
It’s an extremely difficult problem to solve though so they have my sympathy!
Nobody can really explain why they love one song and hate another, and the overlap of the Venn diagram between any two people is usually very small.
I can eat any dish at a restaurant and think it’s not very good, just ok, pretty good, great, or amazing. The same for any movie, TV show, painting, drink, book, article, ... but for a song, I either like it, love it, or hate it so much that I can’t stand it.
Music recommendation algorithms have such a narrow surface area to land on, and when they miss, they go right into a volcano.
That's my default browser bar search term for checking that my interwebs are still wired up, and I've often thought that this was either genius or a really happy accident.
Except Phish fans. For them there is only Phish.
Just as a counter point.
Just a couple of months ago Spotify temporarily blocked playlist exporting and there was an uproar. And it turned out that a lot of the uproar was about those Spotify automagically created playlists. Read some sentiments, coupled with some Apple Music comparative opinions, here-
I guess it just turns out that maybe Spotify isn't for all people. Nor is Apple Music. Some discussions just draw out the edges from whatever side and it becomes the narrative.
Taste is a tough nut to crack.
The playlists that users created? No.
I apologise if that distinction was not clear enough in my original post.
I Am Not A Lawyer, but "a curated collection of units-of-art" seems like a very reasonable thing to protect access to, independently of ownership of the actual units-of-art themselves (overly-generic terminology is intentional, since although we're discussing playlists here, the same argument could be made for, for instance, "a particular framing/hanging of visual arts")
> And what's the difference between someone mechanically scraping playlists [...], and someone hiring people via mechanical turk or getting 3 other people together to make text-based lists?
What type of difference are you interested in?
* Effective difference in terms of output? None.
* Spotify's desire to prevent people from doing so? None (they would want to provide both - and justifiably so, IMO, since, again, the playlist _itself_ is their own (algorithm's) creation).
* Likelihood of evading prevention? The MTurk solution is less likely to get shut down, for sure. That doesn't mean that you have magically gotcha'd copyright and that corporation will cease trying to protect their IP, it just means that you have found the next step in the arms race.
I'm going to need a citation on playlists specifically being protected under copyright. I'm not sure how you can claim that what is effectually a simple plaintext list of things can be copyrighted. What original content there is being put under copyright?
As you already stated, they do not alter the music itself in the way that a rearrangement would, most media players provide fade-in/out functionality so they cannot claim that is unique, and they do not provide any supplimentary content to enhance the experience, at least not in the same way that a book published list, or internet top ten list would ordinarily provide some kind of commentary on the items.
What you're claiming here is effectually that, not even the content, but the mere titles of every single "top 50 foos" list on the internet can be copyrighted. Or that the rearranging of a book's chapters without any change to the contents, can itself fall under copyright
I'm not sure how anyone could think that this is at all a reasonable position to have? It's baffling, to be quite honest.
And I'm not going to give you one, because, as I said, I Am Not A Lawyer (and even if I was, you're not paying me to be). But, regardless, note that I made no reference to copyright whatsoever - I said "this seems like a very reasonable thing to protect access to". I'm making no reference to law whatsoever - just to what _I_ think is reasonable for a corporation to protect. You are free to disagree.
> they do not provide any supplimentary content to enhance the experience, at least not in the same way that a book published list, or internet top ten list would ordinarily provide some kind of commentary on the items.
The collection _is_ the supplementary content. If a Spotify playlist was a quasi-random collection of tracks from across the entire catalogue, then you'd be right, but they're not - the playlists are curated and specifically chosen to fit some niche (genre, artist-relation, time period, etc.). By virtue of _being in a playlist called_ (e.g.) "1940's Smooth Jazz", the songs are demarcated as being a) relevant to the particular criteria, and b) of a high-enough "quality" (whatever that means) that they have been chosen. So, yes, the plaintext-listing of those song titles _would_ have some value, just like a list of "(only the titles of the) top ten sci-fi novels of 2019" would have some value. I would, for instance, value such a list more-highly if it came from someone whose taste in sci-fi I respect and resonate with.
> What you're claiming here is effectually that, not even the content, but the mere titles of every single "top 50 foos" list on the internet can be copyrighted
Again, I'm intentionally _not_ touching on issues of copyright as legal status - but, yes, I am absolutely suggesting that someone who has gone to the effort of curating a "top 50 foos" list, _and_ of associating it with a powerful taste-making brand like Spotify's, would be justified in perceiving that list _itself_ as a valuable and protection-worthy creation.
After the cut because it's less relevant to the discussion, but:
> that the rearranging of a book's chapters without any change to the contents, can itself fall under copyright
I mean...if you _don't_ see how it could be possible for someone to remix the content of an existing artwork into a conceptually-new work, by making statements _with_ the playing-with-form, then I think we're just looking at art from fundamentally different perspectives and are never going to agree. If you truly _do_ want to understand my perspective, you might try thinking about how the consumption of art is affect by the context of how it is consumed and presented, not just the sequence of bytes/soundwaves/visual-elements that compose it.
I remember that Spotify actually had pretty good recommendations when I first started using it at the start of this year, because I had only listened to the songs I actually liked so far. But now I'm lucky if I find one decent song out of a hundred recommended ones.
I wonder for the one with terrible recommendations if I fell into a particular failure spiral: YouTube tried to give me some new stuff for a period, but I happened to not like any of it. The AI noted I was just clicking suggestions from my subscriptions. It eventually tried different recommendations. I didn't like those either, and clicked videos I'd seen before from my subscriptions. Eventually the AI decided I only like watching videos for channels I'm subscribed to, and now doesn't recommend me stuff outside of that. Even when I branch out into a new area, it no longer suggests related channels or anything like that.
It works great when it types out phrases as I swype and I go back and edit in whatever jokes, memes, or 10 dollar words I want to include. It starts to suck when it starts trying to include those into its predictions.
There's like a sweet spot of machine learning beyond which the machine gets more annoying than helpful.
I started it on "The Little Things Give You Away" by Linkin Park, and let it play. For a while it was alright, it gave me chill downtempo kinda emo music selections with some like newer stuff from Linkin Park and like Green Day.
Normally I listen to slow/soft shit from bands like 3 Days Grace, Breaking Ben, 3 Doors Down, My Chemical Romance, Good Charlotte and so on with my Linkin Park (especially the Minutes to Midnight album), so Green Day and Fall Out Boy aren't bad per se even though I like my older stuff. And I do have lots of playlists with GD + LP + FOB + other random pop punk bands.
But then it started throwing in shit like NF, Machine Gun Kelley, Eminem, Logic, then D12, Run DMC, DMX. The Smart DJ on my decade old Zune HD does a better job at building a playlist and recommending music (with the same library).
Pandora, Last.fm, GPM (after 8 years it finally started to "get" me FUCK YOU GOOGLE), Spotify, YouTube Music, Apple Music, etc. They have all done this to me, they all inevitably end up playing some sort of rap, or move to super modern pop music. I do not understand it at all beyond 'it makes them money'.
I do listen to rap music, and I do like listening to those groups and artists. I have quite a few playlists built with just that music, and aside from Eminem, they do not intersect with my emo/punk/rock playlists. If I start listening to Linkin Park, I am never going to want to go from there to early 2000s rap.
I. Don't. Give. A. Rats. Ass. if every other person on the planet listens to Linkin Park with Eminem and DMX. I don't and I tell them every time I play a song or build a playlist, or skip, or remove a recommendation what I like and don't like.
Why can my deprecated Zune appreciate that and keep my genre interests separate and accurate and a billion dollar AI algo can't?
My solution to terrible music algorithms this year has been to, well, give up on them entirely, and go back to the world of curated music. When Google Play Music died, and YouTube Music left an even worse experience in its place, I was done. So now people curate my music instad of machines. Whether that's in the form of letting the artist curate it for me with albums, letting myself curate my favorites with playlists, or letting a DJ curate music discovery on a streaming radio station, I find that humans do it better.
College radio stations (and their streams) are great, by the way. I can't evangelize them enough. Minimal or no ads, and some of the most interesting and creative sets I've heard in my life.
Now it seems that everyone is listening to songs and albums based on recommendations based on what everyone else is listening to, which is also based on recommendations, so you don't find what you really like, you find what everyone else likes and it creates a feedback loop of mediocre garbage totally unspecific to your tastes. And if you try to break out of the loop you land in a loop with people who "broke out of the loop" and you get caught in the cycle again with weirder shit. Rinse and repeat until it pigeonholes you into some inescapable nether of music you might nearly but not really be into.
I would also like to plug Green River College's radio station 89.9 KGRG FM. It has an app and I've never heard a better modern Rock/Metal station
e: my overall sentiment on Spotify is very positive, I just wish recommendations were better.
I wonder how much better algorithm could be if they'd recognise a skip within 10 seconds of a song as "no, bad choice, never play it again".
...I'm also afraid to play something for my son, then the recommendations while coding will surely be polluted by that; just like if you play one or two kid's videos on youtube.
My music taste also diverges drastically but Apple seemed to handle it quite well IIRC.
i get good results from discover weekly for the most part though. I used to spend a lot of hours on social music sites like thisismyjam and the like, where I would stumble across a gem every 1 in 50, but with spotify it feels more like every 1 in 20 or 30, so I'm happy with that and it's also less work not switching between multiple services
other people I know have nothing good to say about discover weekly so I dunno. maybe I just have low standards!