[PRELUDE]

Hello everybody
I just want to see what other folks think about this.
As far as in my 40 plus years of life, I cannot remember that even once I asked for something free and I do not like the idea.
While I do appreciate a lot that this sites let me listen to the music I like and to discover new ones I would still want my album in better quality and I would pay for.
 

[Laundrew]

Not paying to purchase music is the same as employers not paying for services rendered by their staff 

Be well...

[PRELUDE]

Not paying to purchase music is the same as employers not paying for services rendered by their staff 

Be well...

I feel the same way.
One time I remember that one of my friends had a pay cut due to the company wan going to hell and he wanted to kill everybody and it was only 10% not free.

[spinner]

Not paying to purchase music is the same as employers not paying for services rendered by their staff 

Be well...  I agree. If it's worth listening to then pay and don't be the free rider..has no class.

[rpmartins]

Not paying to purchase music is the same as employers not paying for services rendered by their staff 

Be well...

Musicians/bands don´t get paid when someone listens to them on spotify?

Neverthless, as Spotify only plays mp3 and I like to read CD´s booklets I´d buy the album.
I bought some original albuns I had ripped to CD-R from friends just because I enjoyed them so much that I considered the band deserved my investment.

[mdconnelly]

I still buy and will continue to buy a lot of music regardless of various streaming services I've used.   But most musicians cannot make a living based on album sales.  The music world is fundamentally changing.

Given the quality of TIDAL and similar services that will undoubtedly sprout up, if a service can provide a truly vast music library with lossless quality whenever I want it, would I be willing to give up (or at least cut back on) music ownership in lieu of readily available streaming (or offline downloading for playback)?    It would certainly be tempting for many- even high-end audiophiles - if they can be assured of the quality of what's being streamed.   

And while I do use Spotify,  it doesn't change my mind because it is still lossy and its library is not quite as vast as I would desire.   But it does expose me to music I might not otherwise hear and that leads to purchase.

[BobC]

Spotify allows me to make more careful buying decisions. 

BTW, commercials get old, so went with the premium subscription and get the higher bit rate.....so it's not free 

[stlrman]

I have had premium package for years. I have not purchased a cd or albums since.

[Grit]

I use streaming services for casual listening (ambient music) and to test albums before I purchase them. Even with higher quality streaming, I don't think I'll always find what I want, so I'll continue to purchase music.

What I'd like to see is higher quality and more dynamic range in popular music. If the offered that quality in greater variety, is be willing to buy more downloadable content. I still like having a hard copy, so I'll still buy.

What I keep thinking will happen with movies and music is a system where you purchase a license to a product. You could then download and use it, and redownload at a later date (making back up unnecessary, and eliminating storage space concerns). Streaming takes up so.much bandwidth on the internet, and it's a poor way to use/enjoy high quality digital material (with video much more so than audio) due to potential limitations in bandwidth.

[JDUBS]

Not paying to purchase music is the same as employers not paying for services rendered by their staff 

Be well...

What does this mean?

-Jim