>These days I listen to nearly all of my music on paid Spotify subscriptions.
This is absurd from my perspective; to go from the wealth of music created through history and countries available on what.cd such as the bootleg recordings of live music in a small Cairo bar to the limited and commercialized selection of what's on Spotify (and I do have experience with it), along with the fact you no longer "own" (in an informal sense) the music.
Music on the periphery, older releases and things people may not want to listen to are my lifeblood. I couldn't imagine being only able to access Spotify. It works for you and that's good - but for me (and I imagine quite a few other music enthusiasts) it's a totally different situation. Often if it's not on Soulseek or a torrent tracker then the only way for me to obtain it is through buying a physical copy, maybe from an online collector's marketplace like Discogs.
I might throw in an endorsement of the very new things one can find on Bandcamp too - I've profited greatly from that variety.
You might be pointing out how limited my musical taste is, lol.
I am a (hobbyist) musician and producer and my focuses have definitely narrowed inward the past several years. I wouldn't consider myself someone who listens to a lot of new music all the time and a bunch of unknown stuff. (but) I listen to more than most people - last.fm puts me at about 75-78% on number of artists, tracks, and albums listened to. Usually I jam an artist for a few months and learn all of their discography and when I am burnt out I move on. Sometimes I hit a dead patch and don't find a new artist that I love for a while.
The last albums (artists) I fell in love with were (mentioned in earlier comment) Mac Miller - Swimming, Caroline Rose - LONER, Kanye West - Life of Pablo. But really, I fell in love with these artists, and I like their earlier works as much as their more recent work, even when its much different.
I was ready to make this exact same reply - the convenience and popularity of Spotify is exactly why the current copyright environment fails the consumer and why What.cd existed for more noble reasons than "let's rob the record labels." That failure extends past just cloud streaming, because huge swathes of What.cd can't even be acquired physically either - good luck finding that beat tape J Dilla handed out on cassette at shows in 1997 Detroit, that indie electronic album that was pressed to vinyl once, etc.
I love Spotify too! But it is a perfect example of how copyright law gatekeeps the creative media we can consume, for reasons purely inherent to the system and not attributable to any individual's malice. Nobody set out to create an ubiquitous streaming service that's missing music people could love, it's simply impossible to create something else legally.
>good luck finding that beat tape J Dilla handed out on cassette at shows in 1997 Detroit
Ugh, now that I am actually making music I wish I had access to what.cd. When I was using it all I really wanted was the best FLAC / best master of a nice Vinyl I could find.
This is absurd from my perspective; to go from the wealth of music created through history and countries available on what.cd such as the bootleg recordings of live music in a small Cairo bar to the limited and commercialized selection of what's on Spotify (and I do have experience with it), along with the fact you no longer "own" (in an informal sense) the music.
Music on the periphery, older releases and things people may not want to listen to are my lifeblood. I couldn't imagine being only able to access Spotify. It works for you and that's good - but for me (and I imagine quite a few other music enthusiasts) it's a totally different situation. Often if it's not on Soulseek or a torrent tracker then the only way for me to obtain it is through buying a physical copy, maybe from an online collector's marketplace like Discogs.
I might throw in an endorsement of the very new things one can find on Bandcamp too - I've profited greatly from that variety.