• jerakor@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    2 months ago

    45 million monthly listeners on Spotify. That is 10 million more than The Beatles right now. 60th overall on the top list of plays just above Michael Jackson. Half the amount of TSwift

    So they are a well known artist.

    • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean, using these spotify metrics in comparison with all time greats is kinda flawed.

      For example my band sold just as many tickets as Michael Jackson and the Beatles COMBINED in 2024.

      I am not in a band.

      • jerakor@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        This is why I used Spotify listeners and not plays or ticket sales or album sales. It’s a metric that doesn’t really require a band to be currently active. New hits will clearly improve the metric but we’re talking here specifically about a person’s outreach today and influence on a voting population.

        The idea that more individual people listened to her music than had a single Beatles song in their playlist or a single Michael Jackson song in their playlist is pretty insane. I know I listen to at least one Beatles song a month, it doesn’t matter if it is new.

        • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          Still, not as many people listen to older bands even if they are fans and especially for older bands people tend to listen more in other mediums

          Take any videoclip from YouTube for example of any of the greatest song that is a 3, 4, 5 decades old and it will have far less views than a mild reggaeton hit from last summer, even if the old song has had far longer to accumulate views

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s really sad to me that modern youths and others tend to only listen to streaming music services, paying subscriptions, listening to ads, not being able to choose what song they hear next.

      Everyone should own some form of permanently usable media with the music they like on it. If bands were still putting out CDs I’d recommend that for long term storage, because my collection from the 90s is still working fine. But with smartphones being the king of all social control now, I’d recommend having MP3s of every song and album you enjoy. Store them in multiple places with backups. I have also been collecting those since the 90s. My music collection is awesome. I have hundreds of CDs and about 10000 MP3s that no corporation can deny me access to.

      The only thing I like about streaming services is discovering new artists. But I don’t need it to do that.

      • jerakor@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The big issue is that physical media degrades. A cassette tape wont sound the same as it did after just existing for 20 years. CD’s and Vinyl records if kept really well can last for 100 years or so but are delicate in other ways and a bad record player can cause permanent damage.

        Preserving the experiences of others, art, media is important, but at the end of the day nothing we do is permanent. I know that thanks to online archives I can go and find old music if I need to. I am glad some folks preserve hard copies but a preserved collection isn’t really a functional one and a functional one isn’t really going to last 50 or 60 years at the same quality as what you can get from streaming.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Where do you think the “quality of streaming” comes from? They don’t have access to any technology superior to what any of us can have at home.