It is by far and away the best way to support artists that I know of, outside of going to their shows. Buy stuff from bandcamp (music, merch whatever) if you can afford it.
You buy music, you download it in whatever format you want, and you play it wherever you want.
Another situation that can be avoided by this is where a release changes during its lifetime.
One release in my collection is a free download (shamelessly so), but one track was removed after it was released commercially. So there’s a situation where my immediate download on day 1 of release has the original track order, but current downloads of it have the revised running order.
Since it’s Friday, I have no hesitation in recommending either or both releases. Good headphones are recommended.
Ooh! An issue close to my heart.
A lot of artists and labels also have their own websites and will sell their stuff directly from there, often via PayPal. Definitely not all of them, especially the younger artists, but I usually try and see if that option's there before hitting Bandcamp.
But YES. Bandcamp is usually the best way to support your favorite artists/labels. Please use it as much as you can, and even pay a bit extra whenever you think it's worth it. If you find yourself playing an album more than once or twice via Spotify, go throw that artist some dough on Bandcamp.
And please, treat yourself to a copy of it on CD or vinyl. Own the music you love.
Even if you never have funds on your account, suddenly getting banned means forgoing the use of paypal ever again with that card / address / name, unless you sort it out.
I know the surge of vinyl. But I do hope the later part of owning something make a comeback.
-- The jewel cases are flimsy, and just opening one too quickly can cause the hinge to snap.
-- Scratches and skipping. This has been a problem forever, and there's no solution.
-- Liner notes: I miss the times when bands would stuff in thick liner notes full of pictures, notes, trivia and lyrics. A lot of acts don't bother putting anything substantive in the notes. This is unfortunately true of vinyl as well, but at least vinyl artwork is large (12" x 12") and can be used as a decorative element in your home.
For me CDs serves the niche of wanting to quickly and easily listen to a record in superior quality. I guess I could get a digital audio player and add it to my audio setup and then upload the flac files to it, but that is a hassle I have yet to perform, it is much easier to just keep buying CDs.
It feels right.
I don't think it is for musicians. It is a marketplace where you can buy and own music. You can pay as much as you want above a minimum price that is set by the musicians. Many albums are free or very cheap. Unlike other music providers the music is available in _lossless_ formats. You can also stream the music you own.
This is a heaven for people who do not like streaming providers. I purchase every single album through them.
The albums I usually end up finding are ~$9 and pay what you want above. What bandcamp understands is that a lot of people know how to get the music for free. What makes me pick bandcamp is that I can afford it, I know where the money is going, and they let me download my music (they also have an app) with no fuss.
> This is a heaven for people who do not like streaming providers. I purchase every single album through them.
+1, though sometimes artists aren't on there, which is a shame.
A lot of the artists allow you to play their music on the website, and if you like it you can buy it in FLAC :) Some of my favourite music I have purchased from there!
I know they have a disclaimer saying that they're not responsible for damage caused by the user installing stuff, but that may be legally unenforceable? i.e. you can't remove someone's rights with a liability waiver.
If they have the authority to approve/disallow apps on the store, then surely they have to take responsibility when they allow malware on the store?
Especially if that security check refused admission to anyone with recording equipment at over 100% success (i.e. they turned away many people because they thought they had recording equipment, or might at some point have it). Where the security check is obviously more about protecting the venue's revenue stream than protecting the attendees, despite being advertised as necessary for the safety of the attendees.
If your screening efforts remove 110% of all apps that break your commercial terms of service, but only 50% of all apps that harm users, how is that screening a "good faith" attempt to protect your customers?
Again: I love Bandcamp and regularly buy stuff there, but it could be SO much better!
IMO, that creates a situation where you don't really explore new music, but just continue listening to stuff you're already familiar with.
That's what algo-generated playlists feel like to me: A dispassionate list of songs, without any explanation for why I would like them. Even your average RateYourMusic list writer attempts to write 2 lines for each song or record on the list. I'm more inclined to try something out when there is at least some human input about why I might like it.
For example, I have been exploring the music of Ministry, and this RYM list provides the kind of human touch I'm looking for to keep my interest.
Realistically if they had a "sync my library" or w/e button then I wouldnt have even cared about that at all.
They seem to think it's OK to lay the blame on the DJ software that won't play their files , but re-encoding a 24 bit .wav file from Bandcamp into 24 bit .wav file using freely available tools fixes the problem.
I'm forever fielding complaints from customers (who are too lazy to search themselves) that the 24 bit .wav they just bought won't play in Traktor.
wtf, whats the issue? And why does Audacity (apparently) modify files without asking?
Bandcamp is great to buy music but the app as a music player is not.
- No resume when launching the app
- No swipe for backward/forward playlist (more album than playlist, really) navigation
It doesn't even make it easy to play music you bought with the app.
The app is truly dreadful.
Hopefully these things will be introduced with a new release
I recently got Stellarium's second album. They're a noisepop/shoegaze band from Singapore of all places!
I am more into the dreampop / shoegaze. So here's a list of some of my favorites I have found:
***Some of the Original-ists:
Andy Bell (Ride / Oasis Guitarist)
Subsonic Eye ("Strawberry Feels" and "Dive Into" are more shoegaze, lately a little more dreampop)
Pale Blue Eyes
Say Sue Me
there's also a pretty cool article about Shoegaze in Russia
The world should not rely on these two companies for distribution, given that they've captured the entire mobile computing industry and all of the commerce that happens there.
Ford doesn't get to control where you go, and they don't tax the restaurants you visit. (They're also not a duopoly, but that's another issue.)
> the app that’s being installed targets API level 29 (Android 10) or higher. (Google notes that the target API level requirement will advance in future Android versions ...
Quit being disingenuous.
Yes, that's anticompetitive too. And?
https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-st... - Android 12 will finally let alternative app stores update apps without bothering the user
This all is to show that Google is low-key hostile to apps installed from sources other than the Play store. Which was the point of the parent comments.
I still think you're blowing it way out of proportion.
Show me someone who is aware of FDroid who doesn't have the technical know how to update apps after sideloading FDroid itself...
My mother, for one. I use F-Droid to let her auto-update NewPipe, since she uses that to download and listen to music in ways that the official application will never let her. Needless to say, NewPipe is not about to be made available on Google Play due to a conflict of interests.
Much ado about nothing.
If you have more than a handful of F-Droid apps, it gets quite tedious.
I bought a new phone just this week, and I'm looking forward to putting a custom ROM on it in part also to have more control over this sort of thing.
It's technically "there" but not good enough to be a reliable form of distribution.
Yes, there are warnings, but what is the alternative? You download an app once, it installs without warning and keeps updating in the background? That'd make it way too easy for malware authors.
How I see it personally is you download the apk, tap "install", then the same permission prompt as the Play Store opens. The app is updated later the exact same way as the Play Store update (either automatically by pulling from an url or manually, depending of what the users have set as a rule for the Play Store)
This should be as seamless as using web apps, and permissions dialogues should come up when the app attempts to use certain device features. (No different than App Store downloads today.)
All of this to say that web-downloaded native apps are not first class on Android. They should be.
I'm also of the belief that we don't have to be a nanny state. We trust people to pour gasoline, drive death chariots at 70 miles per hour, open lines of credit as teenagers, buy and shoot guns, etc.
Why all the ceremony here? I think it serves the owners of the platform more than us.
Well, web base installs are the norm. That's how malware and ransomware spreads.
The problem with security is that is usually anti features. That't why webbrowsers use the path of least resistance and declare that they are secure, they have containers and isolation etc. And Google with project Zero is playing the good guy.
It is all security theater. Security is expensive and no one wants to invest in it because it does not have a clear ROI.
> I'm also of the belief that we don't have to be a nanny state. We trust people to pour gasoline, drive death chariots at 70 miles per hour, open lines of credit as teenagers, buy and shoot guns, etc.
We do not trust people to buy and shoot guns.
> Why all the ceremony here? I think it serves the owners of the platform more than us.
Of course it serves only them. Security in android stops when you give apps access to SD card or camera or microfone or phone or contacts. And the fact that Google apps have all this access by default says a lot about how much google is interested in security.
besides that, permission dialogs are better than nothing. the worst would be apps being installed without me even noticing. just because people tend to ignore them that's no reason to abandon them. what would the alternative be?
Web app sandbox is better than native AFAIK, which is a good reason to add friction (because otherwise you're asking for worms).