Spotify - where's the catch?

[fhdz]

You do know that Justin Bieber was made rich by a professional talent scount and then signed to a major label before he became rich?

You're getting in the way of his original point, which is that he has better taste than everyone else. Shame on you.

[garbon]

That's exactly the kind of thinking that made Justin Bieber rich

Which means that the kind of thing you're talking about has not been a part of pop music taste-making process since the days of the crooners.

I actually wasn't talking about pop music, but I can see that you're using this as an excuse to be elite, not make an actual argument. So have at it

[Eddie Teach]

You do know that Justin Bieber was made rich by a professional talent scount and then signed to a major label before he became rich?

You're getting in the way of his original point, which is that he has better taste than everyone else. Shame on you.

I thought his point was that he has better taste than teenage girls. Probably true.

[The Minsky Moment]

You do know that Justin Bieber was made rich by a professional talent scount and then signed to a major label before he became rich?

Record companies and agents are, on the whole, interested in money a little else. That was true before the internet age as much as it is now.

Sure, the difference being that before what mattered was how you sounded on the radio.  Now what matters is how many likes you can draw.

[The Minsky Moment]

You do know that Justin Bieber was made rich by a professional talent scount and then signed to a major label before he became rich?

You're getting in the way of his original point, which is that he has better taste than everyone else. Shame on you.

I apologize.
Apparently someone has seized my internet identity and been sending you messages without my knowledge.

[garbon]

Sure, the difference being that before what mattered was how you sounded on the radio.  Now what matters is how many likes you can draw.

You don't get likes if people don't like your sound (or perhaps presentation as there is the visual component for some artists).

[fhdz]

You do know that Justin Bieber was made rich by a professional talent scount and then signed to a major label before he became rich?

You're getting in the way of his original point, which is that he has better taste than everyone else. Shame on you.

I apologize.
Apparently someone has seized my internet identity and been sending you messages without my knowledge.

I forgive you

[garbon]

Also I think fhdz is right that you're being a bit snobby. We've a long history of popular music coming out of people with little talent.

[The Minsky Moment]

Also I think fhdz is right that you're being a bit snobby.

One person's snobby is another's person giving enough of a crap to care.

We've a long history of popular music coming out of people with little talent.

No reason to encourage it further.

[mongers]

To a large extent, quality will endure, so give it 50 years and we'll be able to see what was good in today's pop music.

For all of the good stuff that came out of the 60s and which is lionized today, there was a fair bit of dreadful stuff that the sands of time have washed over, but dig a bit and you can still find reference and examples of it; for instance teen bands every bit as dreaful as some of today's pap products.

[Eddie Teach]

To a large extent, quality will endure, so give it 50 years and we'll be able to see what was good in today's pop music.

For all of the good stuff that came out of the 60s and which is lionized today, there was a fair bit of dreadful stuff that the sands of time have washed over, but dig a bit and you can still find reference and examples of it; for instance teen bands every bit as dreaful as some of today's pap products.

Awful stuff like the Beatles, the Beach Boys, Dion, Del Shannon, Herman's Hermits...

I guess there wasn't much market in the early-mid 60s for rock music that wasn't teen-focused. 

[mongers]

To a large extent, quality will endure, so give it 50 years and we'll be able to see what was good in today's pop music.

For all of the good stuff that came out of the 60s and which is lionized today, there was a fair bit of dreadful stuff that the sands of time have washed over, but dig a bit and you can still find reference and examples of it; for instance teen bands every bit as dreaful as some of today's pap products.

Awful stuff like the Beatles, the Beach Boys, Dion, Del Shannon, Herman's Hermits...

I guess there wasn't much market in the early-mid 60s for rock music that wasn't teen-focused. 

I think this says more about your 'thought processes' than it does about my comment.

[Valmy]

Sure, the difference being that before what mattered was how you sounded on the radio.  Now what matters is how many likes you can draw.

The practical difference eludes me.  You were judged by how many people called the station requesting your songs and how many albums you sold.  That seems like just more committed versions of 'likes'.

[Eddie Teach]

My thought processes are more interesting than your comment. 

But it is relevant to your comment in that both the good and bad of the day were teen bands. The oldsters listened to Frank Sinatra and Glen Miller. Nowadays, "teen band" is synonymous with lukewarm studio-created blandness sold more by how they look than how they sound.

[fhdz]

One person's snobby is another's person giving enough of a crap to care.