Comment by 6stringmerc | Hacker News Reader

Comment by 6stringmerc | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

As a counter-point though, the role of SoundCloud in a diversified music commerce portfolio is not ideal as a catch-all archive. A professional elsewhere mentioned it is a useful tool for sharing and A/B/C listening tests with tracks set to private, but that's not the end use-case scenario. In principle, SoundCloud should not be the sole - or even main - distribution channel for a music act.

To put it another way, SoundCloud at its core is a free streaming site, and it also allows free downloads if enabled by the music act. There is no way I know of to set up SoundCloud for paid downloads or streams. Thus, using Bandcamp, Spotify, iTunes, Amazon, Tidal, Google, Deezr (etc) are wise to capture a modest revenue stream and listener data in ways SoundCloud simply doesn't support.

SoundCloud a lot more like Facebook than it is iTunes: socially important, great for sharing, a way for something to go viral - all important angles in modern business, sure. Is it such a monolith that I'm worried about its future? Not really; it'd be sad to watch it crumble (further, in some respects) but that doesn't seem likely for at least a couple more years. Lots can change.

A significant role of the SoundCloud that I'm most familiar with is as a distribution platform for mixes and performances by musicians for whom the _sale_ of their music is not a significant revenue source; these performers (and I'm talking about dance music, in all its varieties) almost exclusively make their living performing live, and release mixes mostly as a sort of marketing.

This obviously isn't the _only_ type of artist on SoundCloud, but they're a huge part of what makes SoundCloud culturally significant.

I'll just go to my crib-sheet response: SoundCloud isn't for "mixes" as in DJ sets. That's what MixCloud is for. That's why DJ mixes get kicked off SoundCloud routinely, and I won't fault them for it. MixCloud is for mixes, SoundCloud is for creators, in my opinion.

Mixes get kicked off of SoundCloud because they have a higher chance of one of the X songs/samples in them being picked up in the copyright detector net. The fact that it doesn't happen, or that it happens less, on MixCloud only goes to show that MixCloud isn't playing ball with copyright holders, or hasn't been approached to do so. They don't have some magical blanket license to let anyone, anywhere, for free, upload a mix with copyrighted material.

err, yes they do.

enlighten us. :)

Sure!

> Mixcloud streams the mixes and radio shows of its registered users and pays performance royalties by way of its agreements with licensing collectives around the world.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/6221953/mixcloud-...

That's why MixCloud is for mixes and SoundCloud is for individual creators (or their PR machines who effectively control the rights to the material).

Actually quite the opposite - from what I read, MixCloud did get into arrangements with numerous labels/rights holders and therefore the risk of having a mix taken down is greatly reduced - and it's why MixCloud doesn't approve of people uploading individual tracks.

DJs are in the derivative work business, no matter how much they claim to be innovative or 'making something new!' by mixing tracks together, and while I'm an advocate for Copyright Reform, for now the way laws and commercial rules are written, DJs making and uploading mixes don't have a leg to stand on in the SoundCloud model.

Well then, color me surprised. If I can somehow, without paying at all, upload a two-hour mix to Mixcloud, with all copyrighted material, and have it not taken down.... that's great.

Yeah it is, and the player seems to work fine as well. For DJ stuff on PC I tend to use Traktor Pro and I can even upload the track list file (.NML I think) and it adds tags to the tracks. 90% of what I've used was purchased from Beatport, with the other minor amount being rips from CD purchases over the years.

It really does seem to be the proper platform for DJ mixes.

They use some track-recognition technology to generate tracklists and then remunerate copyright holders from the advertising income, I believe.

I think both these points agree: SoundCloud is the one place where you can find lots of music, especially electronica. Also, that's not a very healthy thing if you're interested in preserving history.

A lot of queer music, IME, is primarily distributed through Soundcloud - and more generally, there's a lot of people making music for reasons other than making money off it. Obviously, it's a poor business choice to keep a service running primarily for these people, but it's certainly a cultural centre for certain types of music none-the-less. I'll be sad to see it go.

Oh for sure, I think it's absolutely an equalizer. Some random kid in a small town can follow somebody famous like Chance the Rapper and then upload their own content. I'm very glad it exists and still keep mine up to date (and leave some historical tracks too, why not). Digital equipment is getting cheaper and better year by year, it's awesome.

As an Ableton Live and Propellerhead Figure user, I've always been amused by the "Upload directly to SoundCloud!" plug-ins / capabilities, because on the one hand "Yay, convenient!" and the other hand "Wait, I've still got to master these and bounce them to mp3s for other uses."

There's what "should" be, and then there's what is.

The simple truth of reality is that a lot of music is only available through soundcloud.

Smart? No. But it's how things really are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com