soundcloud non-free = rip-off?

[Arthur Stone]

Originally Posted by dhollmusik

...For me, I much enjoy Bandcamp more than Soundcloud for the pure pleasure of listening to new music for 4 key reasons:

- they are ordered into albums (and I for one enjoy listening to the classic album form)
- the wave-graphic isn't there (it's too tempting to skip the song when you're seeing the wave-graphic...Bandcamp's simple player system is more conducive to actually listening to the whole piece
- the audio quality is superior
- I've discovered more interesting unsigned artists on Bandcamp than Soundcloud.


A further advantage is without having to pay Bandcamp a fee you can lose the "bandcamp" part of the URL for your profile page...

I respect your opinion but there's a couple of things to say in response:
1/ I have albums on Soundcloud - they are called 'sets' - artwork and details can be included along with a load of release options.
2/ Personally I find the wave graphic useful for many reasons..also it looks distinctive when embedding.
3/ If the audio quality is superior then please post links to two audio files which demonstrate this (Gearslutz after all); no-one has taken this challenge yet.
4/ I think it's possible to find plenty of interesting unsigned artists on both Soundcloud and Bandcamp...and other sites too.
5/ I think Soundcloud is a trusted brand and it's player is synonymous with a standard of quality. Personally I like my music to be associated with it.

Apologies for any contention

[Simonator]

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

2/ Personally I find the wave graphic useful for many reasons..also it looks distinctive when embedding.

I think it was Dholl who in a previous thread said he dislikes the waveform visual as you can see what's going to happen & it encourages skipping.

While I fully accept this point, and get that you'd ideally want people to sit through your entire track & appreciate it fully.... I think this is quite a personal preference & the majority of people are not going to have the patience to sit through a minute long beat intro from an artist they've never heard before.

I personally find that waveform graphic incredibly useful.

[drumdrum]

both sites (bandcamp and soundcloud) are dominated with independent / unsigned artists. Its simple social statistics....

1 - There are more people as musicians than ever before, hence a higher music output rate.

2 - piracy has reduced the "risk taking" factor associated with the labels of old. As a result, if you dont fit the "current" selling sound, you dont get signed. Talent rarely had anything to do with it.

3 - do people still want or even need label support anymore? Seems to me that the decent ones that are left are more publishers nowadays than anything else, who will still take a grossly disproportionate chunk of the musicians earnings for basically doing c*** all!



On another note, do bandcamp sales count towards chart tracking statistics?
Seeing as how important radio play is these days, would sales from iTunes indirectly do more for the artist than bandcamp would, if bandcamp sales were not chart tracked?

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Gearslutz.com

[dhollmusik]

Originally Posted by Simonator

Was he talking about Bandcamp? I thought he was referring to Soundcloud... but his post was so nebulous that it's anyone's guess.

Whatever, just these 99.9% and 99% comments are extremely daft. Can you imagine if only 1 in every 100 Soundcloud link you clicked was worthwhile? It would drive you insane. It's not even possible unless you are ultra-cynical.

Originally Posted by Simonator

I pay €29 per year for my SC page... mainly to get the feature of being able to replace uploads with updated versions (ie after mastering etc) without killing the first link & starting a new one.

You can do that for free, thus:

- delete the old file
- upload the new file with the same name (URL remains thus the same)



I like Soundcloud anyway, I like it a lot. I also like Bandcamp. I use both for different purposes. Both have their place.

I tried Reverb Nation and it's like Myspace at their spammiest, overblown peak. Youtube and Vimeo are handy, but I'd like to eventually try and actually upload music videos instead of just a static picture playing music.


The OP, as aimless as he may sometimes sound, would really be better off just paying for the Pro account and concentrating on his output.

[Simonator]

Originally Posted by drumdrum

On another note, do bandcamp sales count towards chart tracking statistics?
Seeing as how important radio play is these days, would sales from iTunes indirectly do more for the artist than bandcamp would, if bandcamp sales were not chart tracked?

I'd suggest that iTunes is virtually irrelevant to the real house/techno market (ie, excluding artists like Deadmou5e/Tiesto etc).

Also, I'd go as far as to say that those charts are equally irrelevant to that market.

[Simonator]

Originally Posted by dhollmusik

Whatever, just these 99.9% and 99% comments are extremely daft. Can you imagine if only 1 in every 100 Soundcloud link you clicked was worthwhile? It would drive you insane. It's not even possible unless you are ultra-cynical.

?? But I don't just amble around Soundcloud picking a random selection of music; I follow my favorite artists, listen to their new works, and occasionally check out the tracks that they post positive comments of.... thus I get an appropriately (positively) filtered channel, whereby I might find say 80% of the music acceptable, and perhaps 5% (1 in 20) genuinely exciting.

Originally Posted by dhollmusik

You can do that for free, thus:

- delete the old file
- upload the new file with the same name (URL remains thus the same)

Are you certain you can do this? It used to just give a message saying 'this URL has already been used' or something to that affect... even if you'd already deleted the first track.

Either way, you lose all of the plays/comments/likes & will disappear from peoples' personal playlist of tracks on which they've hit like so they can easily find them later (this is the main reason I will 'like' a track- rather than an effort to publicly demonstrate my approval).

[munnin]

I have a soundcloud account. I find being able to see where everyone that listens to my mixes handy. As for posting original material it isn't great as your material tends to get lost. As for community, that can be debated. I get a ton of folks that follow me, post a track and then unfollow me. To me that is a pain and borderline rude. If the people that follow me have tracks I listen to them and comment. Sometimes I actually DL or purchase them to spin in sets. I would never pay for the highest package. It just doesn't seem worth it to me. Bandcamp would be attractive to me if I had tracks worth selling. As it is I'm just starting out and don't feel like flooding the scene with more chaff ;-)

Sent from my ADR6300 using Gearslutz.com

[dhollmusik]

Hi Arthur (best King ever, by the way).

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

I respect your opinion

I too respect your opinion and how you encourage many members here and on Soundcloud (insert smiley of humbly-nodding japanese head here).

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

1/ I have albums on Soundcloud - they are called 'sets' - artwork and details can be included along with a load of release options.

Yes, I saw them but they're not very user-friendly or aesthetic when compared to how Bandcamp portray albums. But this is no doubt just my subjective impression.

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

2/ Personally I find the wave graphic useful for many reasons..also it looks distinctive when embedding.

I agree, except I am often sorely tempted to skip the file...something I don't do nearly as much on Bandcamp files. The world is big enough for both types, tho' - skipping the audio with the help of a wave-graphic is very useful, especially in those times I upload 20 minute demo-files

But I do also enjoy the Bandcamp way, as it somehow brings me back to a simpler time when we listened to music on tapes and CD's when we discovered songs differently. I also get the impression that people who upload to Bandcamp are uploading their labour of love, whereas on Soundcloud it's often a lot of demos, clips and temporary stuff.

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

3/ If the audio quality is superior then please post links to two audio files which demonstrate this (Gearslutz after all); no-one has taken this challenge yet.

By your command:

(although my own files probably aren't very suitable to the task as I don't post-process them, nor are they anything related to finished EDM productions, and nor do I have many audio examples where both files are on my Soundcloud and Bandcamp simultaneously - so we'll just have to make do with these 2 examples for now)


RS7000 earthy drone piece:

http://soundcloud.com/dhollmusik/rs7000-nathrak

Bandcamp - Nathrak

To my ears the Bandcamp sounds more rounded, warmer, deeper...with a fuller low-end and more dynamic range. The file I used to upload to both platforms is exactly the same 320kbps MP3 file (having lost the original WAV some time ago, I had to convert the MP3 to WAV so Bandcamp would accept it)


And for the 2nd example I uploaded the original WAV to both platforms, but the same difference in quality is evident (especially from 1:50 where the lower end kicks in, and from 4:45 where the dynamic range is more audible):

Roland D-50 single-partial, single-tone drone:

Bandcamp - d50ne

http://soundcloud.com/elseedier/d50ne


What do you think? Are my ears being subjective or do you hear it too?

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

4/ I think it's possible to find plenty of interesting unsigned artists on both Soundcloud and Bandcamp...and other sites too.

Agree 100%.

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

5/ I think Soundcloud is a trusted brand and it's player is synonymous with a standard of quality. Personally I like my music to be associated with it.

And that is fine and dandy by me too But the OP was basically asking which free upload sites let him have unlimited downloads, hence the Bandcamp discussion. Only if an artist wants to sell their files do Bandcamp start asking for money, and that's a very fair commission-system based only on completed sales.

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

Apologies for any contention.

No apology necessary, Arthur. The only issue I had in this thread was the silly use of "99%" and "second-rate" being bandied about, which wasn't really helping anyone.

Originally Posted by drumdrum

1 - There are more people as musicians than ever before, hence a higher music output rate.

2 - piracy has reduced the "risk taking" factor associated with the labels of old. As a result, if you dont fit the "current" selling sound, you dont get signed. Talent rarely had anything to do with it.

Good points. But with 2) I would suggest this is only limited to mainstream EDM scenes. Fortunately music is much larger than any one scene.

Originally Posted by munnin

Bandcamp would be attractive to me if I had tracks worth selling. As it is I'm just starting out and don't feel like flooding the scene with more chaff ;-)

But it's your chaff

All my Bandcamp audio is free to download. It's not attractive enough to be worth anyone's money, but I think it's worth a little listen to now and again, maybe yours is too.

Plus I generally don't like to charge for music I do for fun, even if it might turn out great. I do charge for planned project work, but that's different.

[Reptil]

moving this to the appropriate forum

[Arthur Stone]

@dhollmusic - thanks so much for providing the samples...it's one of the things that makes GSlutz a great forum.

Originally Posted by dhollmusik

...To my ears the Bandcamp sounds more rounded, warmer, deeper...with a fuller low-end and more dynamic range.

I'm listened to the 'Nathrak' track (streaming on SC and BC) on Focal CMS40's via a KRK Ergo in a semi-treated room. The first thing I noticed was that the BC mp3 had a crispier top end whereas the SC mp3 was more full-bodied particularly in the low-mids (interestingly you noted that BC has a fuller low-end). I preferred the Soundcloud mp3 as it sounded more musical.

Then I listened through AKG K702 cans and noticed that, subjectively, the BC mp3 sounded louder. I downloaded both mp3 files (file sizes were SC @ 22748 KB/BC @ 22716 KB) and imported them into Audacity:



I noticed that the waveforms were slightly different. A closer view:




I then used Audacity's frequency analysis to plot the first 23 seconds of both files. These are the results (up to approx. 4500Hz):



I then deleted the files and repeated the process...re-downloaded the originals and re-analysed them as a double-check. I haven't got round to your second sample yet but it's safe to say we cannot directly compare the files because they are different when downloaded. Is it possible for you to use Audacity's frequency analysis on the original source mp3 as a benchmark? From those figures we could see how Soundcloud and Bandcamp processing affects the audio.



IMO Bandcamp looks a like a great site especially for 'free' but it's a different kind of site format from Soundcloud and essentially serves a different purpose. In general I think it's a bit pointless knocking Soundcloud at 9 Euros (or the 29 I paid); I could spend that on one round in the pub...easily We invest 1000's in our audio kit and hours of time so why be concerned at the minor cost (less than a good cable) of a front-end delivery and networking system that has 10 million users? IMO my music is worth that small investment.

I will be thinking about Bandcamp now - it seems a good site for collating one's work for display and sale but it's no alternative to the Soundcloud experience. It's too empty although perhaps there's a forum?

Be interested in your thoughts and any data on the mp3's. BTW I love the work you're doing cataloguing the synthesizers...an excellent listen!

[yotonic]

It's funny how people today want everything for free. They don't want to pay anybody for their products including other musicians. It's like once it's up on the web it should be free.

[dhollmusik]

Hi Arthur, nice one for replying like that.

Just listening back myself I hear Nathrak has some overloud, piercing percussive sound from 5:10-6:30 (ouch!). Sorry, didn't realise before how badly mixed that was. I should have used the quieter, more ambient, version of that piece for our little test, as it's a bit easier on the ears:




But yeah, funny how we come away with different sonic impressions.

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

Is it possible for you to use Audacity's frequency analysis on the original source mp3 as a benchmark? From those figures we could see how Soundcloud and Bandcamp processing affects the audio.

The d50ne file is clean and hopefully isn't as painful to listen to as Nathrak. Both the BC and SC files are the same WAV source-file. I've just uploaded the original WAV now to MediaFire just in case BC or SC alter the file in any way if you download from them.


I don't know anything about frequency analysis (as you can probably tell from my audio, haha!), and I don't have the Audacity software anyway. But if you or anyone else wants to compare the original WAV of d50ne and the Bandcamp and Soundcloud uploads of that same WAV then all the links are here:


d50ne original WAV
d50ne Bandcamp
d50ne Soundcloud


I guess MP3 uploads will vary considerably depending on bit-rates, so this WAV-test is probably the most accurate way to test differences. The most useful test would be to not download the BC or SC files, but to analyse how they sound when the player is playing them, then to compare that with how the original WAV file sounds when you play it in a neutral-sounding media player.


A much better file for this kind of test would be a well-produced EDM clip with some vocals. If anyone wants to offer such a file in a similar way to how I've split d50ne then do join the thread (or maybe even make a new thread, as we've derailed the original intention here slightly).

[Dubber]

@simonator:

i was told that soundcloud got no contract with companies like ascap/biem/gema etc. so the uploading of their "protected" tunes is not allowed - even if you are the original composer. if you are not a member of the ascap etc. then you can post all of your tunes of course... hope you understand now what i tried to explain

@all:

does sc convert mp3s after uploading? or is the uploaded mp3 served unchanged?

i dont wanna upload wavs there because the download for the users takes too long and what the hell do they want with a 50 mb wav file?!?!

also another question: how get the followers informed about new tracks from their favorite artists? just on the dashboard when they log in?

if so - there is always the problem when a person is not online every day... they miss perhaps a release you've posted there... same for facebook .... it gets lost in the timeline very fast :(

[Arthur Stone]

Originally Posted by Dubber

@all:

does sc convert mp3s after uploading? or is the uploaded mp3 served unchanged?

All tracks are transcoded to 128 kbps mp3; downloads are originals.

Originally Posted by Dubber

i dont wanna upload wavs there because the download for the users takes too long and what the hell do they want with a 50 mb wav file?!?!

Soundcloud is twice as fast as Bandcamp. People use WAV files for the audio quality - better for listening and for re-editing, also 50MB isn't a lot nowadays. I'm currently working on a project that involves users downloading a 52MB WAV file:http://soundcloud.com/groups/the-river - it wouldn't really work with mp3.

Originally Posted by Dubber

also another question: how get the followers informed about new tracks from their favorite artists? just on the dashboard when they log in?
if so - there is always the problem when a person is not online every day... they miss perhaps a release you've posted there... same for facebook .... it gets lost in the timeline very fast :(

It's possible to PM followers with a link to new tracks. Lack of filter options is a MAJOR issue - unless they fix this I think they will lose subscribers. Social psychology studies suggest that humans have natural groupings: approximately, a dozen close friends and family, 120 or so regular acquaintances and then a few thousand contacts; IMO Soundcloud filtering options should reflect this.

[Dubber]

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

It's possible to PM followers with a link to new tracks.

Where? Or do i have to mail every follower singly? :-/

[Dubber]

edit:

Can I message all of my followers at once?
You can't message all your followers at once on SoundCloud. However, you can share a track with all your followers and add a sharing note (which acts as a message).

T H I S sucks.

[Arthur Stone]

Originally Posted by Dubber

Where? Or do i have to mail every follower singly? :-/

On the upload page.

[Dubber]

Originally Posted by Arthur Stone

On the upload page.

I can't see any option like "share this track with all your followers" or something there...

[Arthur Stone]

Originally Posted by Dubber

I can't see any option like "share this track with all your followers" or something there...

I typed " share with followers" into Soundcloud's search and this page came up:
"You can privately share a track to email addresses, followers, contact lists, or your following, and add a sharing note. All you have to do is go into the edit mode of the track (the little pen icon above the waveform), then make the track private and click 'Add/Remove people'. There, you'll be able to select how many users you would like to share the track with and add a sharing note. If they have email notifications turned on, they'll receive this as an email." SoundCloud | Search Results

[Dubber]

aaah got it.

but "private" means no other users can see the track?

really strange "promo"...

[HiFi Yeah]

Originally Posted by Dubber

i dont wanna upload wavs there because the download for the users takes too long and what the hell do they want with a 50 mb wav file?!?!

If I am going to take the time to listen I want to hear the real thing on a real system.

[Arthur Stone]

Originally Posted by Dubber

aaah got it.

but "private" means no other users can see the track?

Send it as private and then make the track public.