Thoughts on Taylor Swift?

That is assuming you will stream that 180 times.

Think of all those one hit wonders, in the chart for 2 weeks and disappear forever or songs that define that summer and never heard of again.

Well they obviously sucked and just had good marketing, which will hopefully start to fall away.
I don't know about other people but I have a set playlist that plays on random, never have gone in for albums. Just the songs I like.
 
I believe in ''try before you buy''. Fair enough it's still possible thanks to Youtube and piracy. She boycots Spotify which annoys me greatly, as streaming services are the way forward, I'd be willing to pay more than the tenner per month easily for Spotify to support good artists. The apple thing is just another example. She's the perfect example of pushing consumers more in the direction of piracy.


Well you can try before you buy using Apple's streaming service.

Taylor Swift ‏@taylorswift13 5 hours ago
After the events of this week, I've decided to put 1989 on Apple Music...and happily so.
 
I'd list my last.fm chart as evidence but my daughter has corrupted it with 2 billions plays of Let it f'in Go and Do you want to build a bleedin' Snowman :(
 
Erm ? This is since 2008, and only on my pc&phone, let alone youtube views and grooveshark, etc :

Schermafdruk_2015_06_25_22_01_58s.png

Enough one hit wonders in that list.

A real one hit wonder will be popular for many years to come, just see the Youtube views on summer hits like the Ketchup song, Macarena, and all that other stuff.

That's not what i am only talking about. Posting your favourite tracks obviously going to support your argument.

What about all those albums you bought down the years that you played only a handful of times, bought it because you liked the single, or buy the album from the same artist because you liked the last one. What about those albums that you only listen to about 3 songs on it.

Those are the ones that the artist get paid in full, and get paid for the songs that you don't listen to.

That is the point.

The point isn't your personal top 40 playlist.
 
That's not what i am only talking about. Posting your favourite tracks obviously going to support your argument.

What about all those albums you bought down the years that you played only a handful of times, bought it because you liked the single, or buy the album from the same artist because you liked the last one. What about those albums that you only listen to about 3 songs on it.

Those are the ones that the artist get paid in full, and get paid for the songs that you don't listen to.

That is the point.

The point isn't your personal top 40 playlist.
I've never bought music bar some used LP's ( due to nostalgia, I like the LP sound), by the time I was old enough to have my own money I was well known with a CD burner, a cassette recorder, Kazaa, Emule/Edonkey, Limewire, and others... The only legit music on cd's here is bought by my dad, but is only a small part of the huge music collection on cassettes that was copied. Also we have a handful of legit LP's, classics like DSOTM or Out of the Blue, but otherwise, when I was small I knew most of my music from copied casettes or the radio or friends.

All those artists have now got cash from my through Spotify and concerts, money they'd never otherwise see.

So basically, they wouldn't have ever seen a nickle of me in the first place, without Spotify I'd go back to Usenet and private torrents for music like before I had Spotify. Before internet piracy it'd be recording off friends and family and radio, like in the old days.

I refuse to buy cd's personally.
 
Last edited:
What about all those albums you bought down the years that you played only a handful of times, bought it because you liked the single, or buy the album from the same artist because you liked the last one. What about those albums that you only listen to about 3 songs on it.

Those are the ones that the artist get paid in full, and get paid for the songs that you don't listen to.

So the consumer should pay for their mediocrity and inability to create a lasting impression?
 
So the consumer should pay for their mediocrity and inability to create a lasting impression?

No, I am saying, from the artist's point of view. They are making more money.

Is it good for consumers? No.

But you can see why Swift dislike Spotify and wants people to buy her albums. It is money in the bank from day one.
 
And at the same time she will never see a penny from people who don't buy cd's, and the only legit source of income are services like Spotify or Youtube.
 
And at the same time she will never see a penny from people who don't buy cd's, and the only legit source of income are services like Spotify or Youtube.

No doubt her accountant has one the math and weight both sides of the coin.

And it hasn't hurt her thus far. She has the record of best selling artist for over a decade or something silly like that.
 
No, I am saying, from the artist's point of view. They are making more money.

Is it good for consumers? No.

But you can see why Swift dislike Spotify and wants people to buy her albums. It is money in the bank from day one.

It would be money in the bank if people still bought albums just to get one song but the simple fact I suspect now it people don't do that. Times have changed.

And yes I can see why Taylor Swift personally wants people to buy her albums. So she should come out and say that straight bat and stop pretending this is about the upcoming artists.
 
No doubt her accountant has one the math and weight both sides of the coin.

And it hasn't hurt her thus far. She has the record of best selling artist for over a decade or something silly like that.

I'm assuming she is going to be the female success version of Michael Jackson?

It would be money in the bank if people still bought albums just to get one song but the simple fact I suspect now it people don't do that. Times have changed.

And yes I can see why Taylor Swift personally wants people to buy her albums. So she should come out and say that straight bat and stop pretending this is about the upcoming artists.

There are people who still purchase CDs.
 
No doubt her accountant has one the math and weight both sides of the coin.

And it hasn't hurt her thus far. She has the record of best selling artist for over a decade or something silly like that.

Fair enough, it's a conservative thought I feel strongly against though, I just don't see the point in cd's, they're slow, impractical, and unnecessary ( I can see the nostalgia to analog media, but not digital media), and it's a shame there are so many masses who buy cd's still, of course they're free to, but they're not helping the transition off optical records. Money is better spent on internet services and an internet connection imho.

I'd sooner buy an iso of a cd than the cd itself, simply because the 35 seconds it takes to download a 700 mb cd is more practical than looking for a cd case, putting it in your cd player, etc ( let alone the buy process)...
 
Last edited:
It would be money in the bank if people still bought albums just to get one song but the simple fact I suspect now it people don't do that. Times have changed.

And yes I can see why Taylor Swift personally wants people to buy her albums. So she should come out and say that straight bat and stop pretending this is about the upcoming artists.

She hasn't said people should buy her albums. I thinks she said something like artist should be paid for their hard work/music and because Spotify has a free level, she doesn't think music should be free, or something to that effect.

YouTube is a different medium, you can't exactly play that like a playlist.
 
Fair enough, it's a conservative thought I feel strongly against though, I just don't see the point in cd's, they're slow, impractical, and unnecessary ( I can see the nostalgia to analog media, but not digital media), and it's a shame there are so many masses who buy cd's still, of course they're free to, but they're not helping the transition off optical records. Money is better spent on internet services and an internet connection imho.

CD is better than download quality. I don't like being stuck at 256kbps.
 
Spotify has a free level, she doesn't think music should be free, or something to that effect.
Spotify free is payed for by ads, and it behaves like a radio on mobiles ( you can't just select a song and play it).

If she feels like this over Spotify free, how does she feel over FM radio, or streaming radio's ?
CD is better than download quality. I don't like being stuck at 256kbps.
FLAC or 1:1 images of cd's then... ( personally I don't really hear the difference between between 256kbit and loseless, but I can understand some audiophiles do).
I remember ripping borrowed CD's with Windows Media player into lossless WMA's in the old days.
 
Last edited:
I think she's too young to be so wrong about these things. To promote her album she will happily put her single/promo/excerpt from the album on the radio, more often then not as part of the royalty free weekly showreel (that's why you hear 10-15 songs repeated over and over on commercial stations, they are free to play, if not actually paid for to be played by label) and it will blast on in every shop, every car, every mall and every elevator as unwanted freebie for weeks, until you are sick of it. But she doesn't treat internet radio/streaming service as a lead on to physical sales or price of acquiring listeners leading to ticket sales. I would expect this from someone stuck in eighties like Metallica (and oddly they actually support Apple Music) , not a young country turned pop star that made money purely because of internet media.
 
I just do not understand Taylor Swift's popularity. It's just... I just... what?

To me, it's like saying your favourite painting is a canvas of solid poo brown. My ears just reject it and it's depressingly predictable pedestrian monotony. And I know I'm in the minority.
 
Back
Top Bottom