I totally forgot about that. Here it is. He sold half of his catalog for 150 Mil.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/06/business/neil-young-rights-deal-scli-intl-gbr/index.html
So there ya go. Still legit I suppose. But that is about all for that. Spotify is a great service, and I’m sure one day they will go lossless or Hi-Res, or whatever you want to call it. That will make it even better. Whether Young is on board or not.
If you’re trying to use your influence to silence another person on the same platform, you’re an asshole.
If silence yourself because you don’t want to share the same platform as someone else, that’s standing by your principles.
You say you don’t want to get caught in the crossfire yet finish your post saying Neil got punked by Spotify. Charming.
Did you really think Neil would back down and was just brokering a better deal from Spotify? If so, then you don’t know much about Neil Young. He’s been a man of principle – right or wrong – for his entire life as a professional musician.
Neil wanted his stuff removed from Spotify because he disagreed with their enabling of Rogan. It’s that simple. And you know who loses? Fans of Neil on Spotify and perhaps Spotify itself, as some follow Neil off the service (I’m one of them). They’re the ones who got punked, not Neil.
I stand corrected. Liner notes was a bad term. But most albums have detailed background on the artist, the genesis of the album and more tasty treats for musicheads.
But you’re right: They’re not the ACTUAL liner notes. Thanks for the clarification.
So, you’re trying to infer Rogan and Neil were “teammates” because they’re both on Spotify?
Neil isn’t naive enough to think Spotify is going to silence or censor Rogan, who is the No. 1 podcaster on the platform and a big cash cow for Spotify. But he did threaten and follow through on removing his music because he feels Rogan spreads misinformation about COVID (which I agree with) and because Spotify does nothing about it, and he wanted to shine a light on both.
Now, there’s very little financial loss to Neil for pulling his music from Spotify, and he knows that. He makes more money from ONE live show than he does from a year of Spotify streaming royalties due to Spotify’s pitiful payouts.
So, Neil’s move was largely symbolic and intended to shine a light on something he sees as a real problem. That’s his right, and it doesn’t make him an asshole.
Neil always has had an uncomfortable relationship with big streaming companies and their shitty sound quality and poor royalty payouts. Remember his alternative, Pono?
Well, you can view it any way you like. I respect your opinion. But hey, when you puff out your chest and give someone a “me or him” ultimatum like that and get the door slammed in your face, you got punked, Son. And you are right, so did we, because now he is slinking away with his music and what the hell did I or we do to have his work pulled from me/us? That is all I’m saying. That is the cross-fire I was referring to. As far as the rest of it, I can’t control any of it, so it is what it is. We move forward.
The rumor about Spotify’s delay in launching hi-res was that it was caught with its pants down by Apple and Amazon’s free high-res plans and that its original intent was just to offer CD quality, at best. So, when Apple and Amazon came out with high-res plans for no added cost and at higher bitrate than CD quality (at least Amazon, I believe), Spotify had to go back to the drawing board.
Again, just a rumor I read in a report in a tech magazine.
This makes sense. Thanks for the information. It seemed like they were close, and now you don’t really hear about it. I’m sure they will get there, but I imagine the delay is hurting a bit.
Again, “ultimatum” was just the public front. If you really think Neil believed Spotify would back him instead of Rogan, you don’t understand business or the amount of money that Spotify paid to land Rogan and the amount of dough his podcast brings to Spotify.
The “ultimatum” was a symbolic gesture by Neil, made to shine a light on a problem he sees. Combine that with a small loss of revenue and that he’s a man of principle, and it was easy for him to follow through on the threat.
My big question: Will Spotify use MQA, or is that a proprietary technology for Tidal?
Qobuz does not use MQA. I don’t believe Amazon or Apple do, either, so that leads me to believe it’s special sauce for Tidal. Or it’s just marketing bullshit and dodgy tech that Tidal clings to as a “feature”, as some audiophiles believe, so other services don’t use it.
Yep, copy that. They are both going to take hits, no doubt. It just saddens me a little ya know? I just want to listen to music. The rest of it is just boring and unfortunate to me. There is too much of this crap everywhere else. Why can’t they leave music alone? Oh well.
OOOOOH, the 64-thousand-dollar question!! I have been wondering if that was what the delay was about. Maybe they were looking at MQA, and when all that blew up, they had to re-think the whole thing! Pure speculation of course, but possible maybe?
I am of the opinion that MQA is crap and won’t waste any time on it, btw. But that is just me.
Interesting. Since Neil doesn’t have rights to his music, then why did Spotify oblige his request? What did the rights holders want?
Neil is a HUGE name in rock and classic rock, but the dude isn’t a big money maker for Spotify. He has 6 million monthly listeners. Meanwhile, Adele has 60 million. Drake has 53 million. Dua Lipa has 68 million. Olivia Rodrigo has 44 million. Billie Eilish has 49 million. Lana Del Rey has 21 million.
So, Spotify shed no financial tears by losing Neil.
Agree with you 100 percent on this one, brother. Too much conflict in the world already. Music is supposed to be a unifier, and even it’s getting f*cked up by greed, commerce and partisan politics.
Agree with you on MQA, especially when Qobuz sounds better than Tidal without it.
GoldenSound’s epic takedown of MQA and Tidal illuminated me.
Me, too. Sorry to all for the minor thread derail, but I enjoyed this discussion, @Raptor168!
Copy. I watched it a couple of times because some of it goes pretty deep, and I wanted to be sure I was getting it!
Removing your music as a protest against a platform hosting someone is standing by your principles.
Threatening a platform that you’re going to remove your music unless they silence someone else makes you an asshole.
I am going to guess that most fans of Neil Young understand him, and his politics, they have been consistent since long before I was born. I suspect that most people who actually care about his music are going to be fine with this, or need to have a reckoning about what both Young and Rogan are about.
The fact that Rogan is Spotify’s number 1 podcaster doesn’t influence my view of this, I don’t listen to him, and don’t get the appeal. If that is the audience they want to cater to, it is a free market, and they can choose to do so.
Spotify made the decision that seemed like best monetary decision for them, and Young made the decision that seemed principled and his record label ( who co-owns his music ) backed him up.
–
Neil Young has a fairly impressive library on YouTube Music, but that caps at 256kbps AAC. The only glaring classic rock hole on YTMusic is Hendrix, but you can upload recordings.
I use YouTube Music most of the time during my workday, since it is part of YouTube Premium. The 5 person family plan only costs $18/mo, and is commercial free YouTube and their Music service.