Edit: wait, 2019? What gives? How is this not taken down?
You tin't even accept a screenshot of a Netflix evidence, thanks to DRM; but you tin can download Spotify tracks?
Spotify contains watermarks, the DRM is known to be simple and got circumvented many years agone already when Spotify was relatively new. A dev even responded: 'we know, please don't abuse.' Watermark is why the sound is worse than a direct rip in OGG Vorbis of the same quality.
With regards to Netflix I run Windows under Proxmox with a Netflix PWA, and I surely can make a screenshot of my NoVNC connection. Though I am pretty sure Netflix isn't 4k / Widevine L1.
> You lot can't even take a screenshot of a Netflix prove, thanks to DRM; only you lot can download Spotify tracks?
At that place's also a lot of tools to rip movies from Amazon Prime or YouTube to MP3 sites. It will never be possible to take down all of them, specially if they are not located in the US.
If done cleverly, information technology will be indistinguishable from normal use, so it is technologically infeasible as well, to try and forbid information technology entirely.
I would accept thought it's easy to distinguish when you download a 250MB video in 10 seconds without opening the YouTube customer, so I'g always surprised those clients piece of work.
Heh, that's non what I would call "clever" though ; ) Y'all can add together delays artificially, yous can add random, simply seemingly man pauses (people sometimes pause playback) etc. I am surprised likewise though, that tools however work without having to get to these lengths. perhaps because devs on the other side of the thing know, that they would but trigger a more sophisticated tool to be created.
Some utilise headless Chromium/Chrome like Puppeteer or other to mimic usage directly. At that point only pattern detection would piece of work i.due east. downloading as well many files one person could consume or other fingerprinting.
> You lot tin't even take a screenshot of a Netflix show, thanks to DRM;
The windows snipping tool (which got renamed to "Snip & Sketch" at some point) takes screenshots simply fine even when Netflix is running in full-screen style.
off-topic: Nether Windows 11 MS renamed "Snip & Sketch" to "Snipping Tool" and replaced to original snipping tool with it.
Feels like the gave up to overcome muscle memory. At least i connected using the og snipping tool under windows ten because in german the new tool was named "Ausschneiden und Skizzieren" and that didn't map to me searching for "sni" and pressing enter.
Effort Win+Shift+S for instant click/drag screenshot to clipboard. I oasis't opened the snip tool GUI since I found out. It also has GUI buttons for window/freeform/fullscreen if you ever demand that.
In Windows xi at that place's also a setting to make the "Print Screen"-cardinal work in the same way as Win + Shift + South. The setting is called "Use the Print screen push to open up screen snipping".
That'southward probably because y'all are running Netflix in Google Chrom. The streams are 720P (1280x720) and hava a lower level of DRM.
Only Microsoft Border and natives apps are providing the highest definition available. You lot can encounter the stats past pressing CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-D while Netflix is active.
>You lot can't even take a screenshot of a Netflix show
Works fine on linux even in 1080p.
Netflix doesn't supply Linux with 1080p streams, for exactly this reason. Any platform that doesn't encrypt the video path so screen recording isn't possible is limited to 720p.
That makes me wonder: do the wires that feed mod LCD screens contain encrypted pixel information nowadays?
How close to the liquid crystal cell do we take to be to get unencrypted pixel data?
All you need is an hdmi capture carte on a chromecast.
Yes there is encryption (HDCP), but it was broken about immediately. Many choices to buy a cheap decrypter on Ali Baba…
I wouldn't say information technology was lost because of streaming. People don't pirate music like they used to because at that place is a convenient alternative. I still pirate because I like to have an bodily library that doesn't change when licenses exercise, my I have nobody in my circles who all the same does the same.
Besides because the discovery and social features are an actual value add for most users. Spotify wrapped may have done as much for its popularity equally the music itself.
I've already experienced my songs becoming "unavailable" or replaced with imposters multiple times on spotify, it'southward really simply good for discovery.
As for where to actually rip from, I've never really had to backup a song that simply existed on spotify.
Really? Never used Netflix but I am curious how can information technology stop me from doing screenshot when drm is run in browser?
For people who are not willing to provide their credentials: I wrote
https://github.com/tehforsch/striputary
which also records the music (pregnant y'all demand to expect for the entire length of the playlist for it to finish) and cuts it into songs. It doesn't require you to provide whatever credentials (and it should in principle piece of work with other streaming services likewise, but I haven't tried). It is probably not the smoothest user experience, given that nobody except me has ever used information technology, but I've successfully recorded thousands of albums with it then far.
Is it just recording the data to an MP3 file? If so, doesn't that mean that at that place'due south a loss in quality?
What loss in quality? Unlike some if its competitors (Tidal HiFi, Deezer Premium, etc), Spotify streams in mp3 quality and they get recorded as such.
There are some leaks indicating that Spotify is working on a higher quality programme, but information technology hasn't happened notwithstanding.
When Spotify plays the audio, there's small, generally inaudible MP3 artifacts in the output. When y'all record that audio and re-encode it to a new MP3 file, these artifacts get re-encoded again, equally role of the track, plus new artifacts go added.
Information technology's the same as re-encoding a photo to JPEG repeatedly. Every time you save (esp if the quality settings are a picayune bit unlike each time, or if a different encoder is used) you get a few more than artifacts.
At high enough quality settings though, you lot can practise this many times earlier the result is noticeable. So I bet the quality from re-encoding a Spotify song once is inaudible to most people, just similar yous can brighten a JPEG and save it without suddenly seeing lots of rectangles everywhere.
To my signal of view, sharing this is irresponsible, modifying librespot to download song on your figurer is fairly easy and is a good learning exercise to larn Rust. But past sharing this piece of work publicly, you increment chances that librespot will be blacklisted by Spotify and that accounts using it will exist terminated. It'due south a shame, because there is many alternatives to the bad Spotify UI that rely on librespot that will also go blacklisted. There are legitimate uses of librespot and its employ should be restricted to those, for the all-time of users and developers that spent a lot of time making librespot bully.
That is true, maybe I should delete the HN list.
I actually would like to know how to change librespot to do so, since I am not a developer or know any Rust at all. Thus this project seems useful to me.
At present I found that I can't delete it anymore :(. I think I need to ask an admin to exercise that.
@dang if you're reading this, please delete this list, Thanks.
Also, how can they tell that it is librespot, and how can they block it? Isn't information technology basically simulating being one of the official Spotify clients? I really exercise non want them to get banned or blocked
This user agent could merely be set to the official client'south user agent and nobody would run across a thing, this is a gratuitous text field basically.
And so it would exist more of an practice of finding clients behaving in an odd fashion that's not mapping to an official client. That's way harder to notice though.
Original librespot author hither.
Trying to pretend to be an official client was a game I never wanted to play. There's and then many tiny differences in the way I've implemented the protocol information technology would be trivial for Spotify to notice this if they wanted to. It so becomes an whack a mole game betwixt them and us.
Spotify is fully enlightened of librespot and has tolerated information technology and then far. If they change their minds are try to cake it it would exist the end of the road for librespot. This is why, despite repeated requests from users, librespot has never supported costless accounts nor downloading files in club to avoid pissing Spotify off. I e'er knew information technology would exist little for anyone to implement this using the librespot source lawmaking, merely it makes me a chip sad someone actually did it.
(That being said, I personally don't contribute or utilize librespot anymore, so actually I don't care)
I wonder if this is somewhere it would make sense to use a not-free license which restricts how people use the code or what modifications they are allowed to redistribute. It wouldn't stop anyone motivated from breaking the rules by themselves but it makes things like Oggify less likely to be distributed and so would hateful librespot might be more likely to survive long-term.
This is the curse of open source - once y'all put the code out there, in that location's zippo you tin do near information technology.
Currently dealing with this with a project of mine, it's hard to run across people take and "corruption it", but there'due south nothing you tin practice actually - licenses don't finish anyone.
wait, I don't think this allows free downloading. AFAIK, it but works with premium accounts. That was the whole intent for me at to the lowest degree.
Sorry these were meant equally two separate points. People have asked repeatedly to use librespot on gratis accounts, and (other) people have asked to have librespot download files. I've pushed back on both, and Oggify does the later simply.
According to spotify's website, premium accounts are allowed to download songs. Why would they crack downwardly on this more than other tertiary-party clients?
The spotify premium download characteristic is more similar an encrypted cache that'southward beneficial when offline or in irksome networks.
It's non useful for acquiring files for your personal collection.
I guess because then people could redistribute it under their own terms. Which is pirating, and therefore illegal.
This allows but premium users to download which is allowed under premium terms.
can't you just employ soundflower with some scripting to capture the sound directly at the uncompressed audio card level? There is NO way for spotify to cake that.
Also, from what I've seen from previous similar previous projects, they get removed from Github pretty fast past Spotify
Peachy, but I seriously hope that it doesn't go popular enough to force Spotify to combat client reimplementations such equally librespot, which this is based on.
Too Mopidy, which lets you utilise Spotify from any MPD client.
I suspect that secretly there are some people at Spotify who are sympathetic to open up source and/or use Linux, and have convinced the business people and bean counters that not beingness openly hostile to gratis software is good business.
I take mixed feeling almost Spotify in general, merely it'due south even so non as "airtight" of a platform as information technology could be, and I'm at least a little bit happy well-nigh that.
This is much more efficient than to download them every time y'all play them, which is the standard behaviour.
They don't download every fourth dimension yous play them. They are cached. Y'all tin likewise download them in the app so they stay local and never redownload. You but tin't get them out of the app.
except for some reason on my phone my "downloaded" albums seem to remove themselves if I haven't listed to them in a while.
Discovered this on a recent flight. Airline didn't offer in-flight wifi. Tried to listed to an anthology which I'd downloaded but taken out of my regular rotation, and information technology but wasn't at that place.
Netflix does this besides simply at least warns you. It's because of the licensing with the tape labels.
into AppData on windows which bloats the c drive and why I switched to the web app
So information technology takes the aforementioned space, without being equally useful?
These streaming services are even worse than I thought they'd exist.
No way I'm ever giving up my local lossless audio collection.
Your sound collection, which plainly has millions of artists so yous can literally mind to anything in the world every bit soon equally yous feel like it, with cipher seconds of waiting time, and also you lot can go recommendations of new things to mind to, aye
I'm tired of people who pretend they don't empathize the advantages of a solution. Spotify has revolutionized the way I listen to music and notice new stuff. And I used to have a decent lossless drove I listened to on a FLAC supporting Cowon player. But information technology'south then much better at present.
Agreed. A few years dorsum I lost my entire collection, due to a hardware malfunction and a slightly careless backup policy. But even though it was full of potentially bully music I had never heard all the same, I tended to stick with the familiar.
Since I'g on Spotify, the corporeality of new music I'chiliad discovering is near overwhelming. It's hard to proceed upward with my cheque playlist, I continue finding interesting new artists through song radio. It's as well excellent for finding music in languages I do not speak or tin can even read. Trying to Google in Cyrillic was a pita.
> Then it takes the same space, without being equally useful?
Can you elaborate "equally useful"? The merely problem I could encounter is that you tin can't play them anywhere only in the app. And then what? If you were to copy them around (and most likely share with other people for free) you are violating their ToS (and other legal aspects) anyway.
> No way I'one thousand ever giving up my local lossless audio collection.
Good news: You lot don't take to. Streaming services are called "streaming" services for a reason. Yous are apparently not the target audition and that's completely fine.
What do yous expect? A streaming service that gives you an "Export/Save as..." feature?
In addition, DJ pools often contain music and extended club mix friendly edits of songs.
Radio tracks that might start off with just vocals might accept a "extended social club mix" which has a clean 16/32/48 bars of instrumentals before the vocal kicks in. The aforementioned for the outro.
There is a place for both. I take nigh of my favorite albums in FLAC for listening on my home receiver with decent speakers. Only I'thou not fifty-fifty going to carp with buying every anthology/vocal I want to mind to in the car, on mobile, in the office etc. Spotify is nifty for that. ten-15 euro/month and I accept access to a huge collection of songs in good enough quality that syncs playlist across all my devices.
to play devil'due south abet, what happens when your lossless audio files (which take upwardly a fair amount of infinite) no longer all fit on your mobile device? Practice you take software to rotate them out? What about when yous want to listen to a vocal that isn't local anymore? Sounds like you lot need to invent streaming with caching
Kodi+yatse over vpn is an amazingly adept and easy to setup Spotify+Netflix for your own collection.
Stream or Download albums/movies from your home server to your telephone from anywhere.
Or just get old school, and use something similar Icecast from your home server.
Years agone, I used to have a MPD + Icecast setup that streamed audio to my phone over OpenVPN, and it worked flawlessly.
>what happens when your lossless audio files (which have up a fair amount of infinite) no longer all fit on your mobile device?
A non-consequence. I don't take music with me, or mind to music on the go. I'm non glued to a telephone'due south screen either.
Spotify on my machine has a 1GB+ enshroud. If yous heed to the same vocal more than one time, it will be most probable cached already.
Plus they tin track the plays and pay the artist (even if it's pennies). If you just rip them there'due south no way for Spotify to track plays and pay the artists
I used a different piece of software to do this for DJing (Sidify) and my business relationship got locked. I was given a warning and my account was unlocked the side by side day, but, Spotify tin can observe this
Afaik information technology uses its own recording aqueduct, which tin can be fingerprinted past them.
Big stardom from Oggify, as Spotiflyer downloads from Deezer/YouTube, so some songs may not be available
And it sometimes gets it incorrect too. The incorrect song, or a alive version or remix instead of the original.
I don't know if they still support it, just their premium service used to accept an open API that included streaming the audio to your program, which you could write as a wav then convert to your format of selection. This was over 5 years agone at least. And I have to presume (storing/converting) it was confronting the T&Cs so as well, rather than the intention of streaming.
Artists already get paid peanuts from listens on Spotify. It's a shame to encounter projects similar this sucking more acquirement abroad from them. If yous actually want a quality digital recording, they are generally available for purchase and without violating Spotify's ToS.
This requires premium business relationship to work so for this aspect it isn't any different than downloading for offline usage in Spotify app.
It is dissimilar because even in offline-way Spotify keeps track of the number of times the song has been played in order to pay the creative person the correct amount.
I'd be surprised if Spotify doesn't rail plays even when yous've downloaded music for offline listening. Also, using official features of the app doesn't violate their ToS.
Yes, how dare those paying users download the songs. Fuck them! They should pay for every byte every fourth dimension, forever!!! /due south
If you're paying for a streaming service, then yes. If you want to pay to download the songs, then practice that. Most artists have avenues where you can practise so. You seem to think that if users are paying for a streaming service that explicitly disallows making copies, those users should withal exist entitled to brand copies.
Why is this word full of comments which sound like RIAA sponsored shills? The RIAA will be creaming in their pants when they read comments like yours.
People should feel entitled to do whatever they tin can get away with. Why, you ask? Well read on..
The record labels are extremely greedy, and Spotify et. al. are merely a thin proxy wrapper in front of them. Oh yeah, and Spotify barely pays the artists anything at all. So if y'all "pay" for Spotify, the degree to which you're providing back up to the musicians you love so much is questionable. At least with Deezer, they allocate more of the revenue to actually go back to the artists.
Dorsum to the point, Spotify and Deezer aren't looking out for me or yous. Downloading is an highly-seasoned alternative to hoping songs don't disappear when licenses alter for no discernable reason.
Life is short, I abet for individuals to exercise what they desire when it doesn't measurably damage anyone else. Going into the grave knowing I committed few or no music license violations is such a low value goal, how do people non realize this?
Nowadays there isn't a shortage of music, at all. Especially non due to folks downloading songs, in fact this makes the artists even more than pop. They should be grateful for getting pop enough to warrant any form of piracy. Lots of music creators would honey to have this "problem".
A lot of people recollect in that location's a shortage of skilful music and the pipeline for musicians (people who actually learn to play instruments and main limerick) is dwindling.
Honest question: How does this relate to "illegally" downloading songs vs perpetually streaming them?
I have enormous respect for professional Craftsman musicians, but I don't know if they make a existent paring in the numbers when compared to the trendy Biebs and Gagas.
Depends what stage you're at in the pipeline.
I of the biggest bug facing new artists is local live music is dying. I'm talking about music at bars and clubs. It'southward not completely dead, only information technology's non what information technology once was. At present people are happy, or possibly fifty-fifty happier, to have a DJ. Unfortunately the best way to improve your musical skills is to play with other musicians in a live setting - and there'southward less opportunity for that. There's simply fewer musicians able to even become started.
You've gotten started, you're playing with a group of people, been playing some gigs - now what? You desire to tape! Get your music out there! I'm not going to go into all the details of recording but let me just say information technology'southward neither piece of cake, nor inexpensive. It's gotten fifty-fifty more expensive these days because while the quality of the music itself may be suffering, the quality of the production is skyrocketing. This is similar to the gripe in movies where people complain the special effects are crawly just the actual story kinda sucks. But people don't want movies having crumby special effects - they want both: bully special furnishings and a great story line. And then it is with music. People desire dandy production and great music. Well, yous're going to pay to get that great production!
Possibly that'due south a bit of the modern music biz y'all don't know much about. The producers go paid up front end. So exercise the distributors. Who pays for it? The musicians. The musicians now take their recording in hand, they've distributed their music to Amazon Music, Apple Music, Google Play, Spotify, Pandora, and a host of other lesser-known platforms. What happens? They get pirated. Most of the time they don't even break even. For nearly musicians, recording and distributing your music is a internet financial loss. If you're lucky it may increase traffic to your live gigs.
Honestly, when you throw in the cost of gear and the years spent practicing and playing to get good enough to be presentable to the public - it's no wonder fewer and fewer people are going into music. That'due south our loss.
Does illegally downloading songs in and of itself cause this collapse? Probably not. But I wouldn't be surprised if it's the concluding straw breaking the camel'southward dorsum.
I wasn't intending to propose that Spotify is looking out for me…or for the artists. I know the pay artists get from Spotify is more often than not terrible. If you're not happy with Spotify, switch to Deezer or another service. But I'grand generally a proponent of abiding by the terms of service of whatsoever service you lot choose to use.
There are a number of projects that do this, and some are paid.
Do they piece of work? Yes.
Do you desire to do this? Probably non.
Why not? Spotify does non have lossless / Howdy-Fi audio nevertheless and what y'all're getting is a lossy transcode. You lot would exist amend doing something like this with Deezer or Tidal (insert other competitors hither) that offering a lossless format.
Whilst I've non done this, I would probably advise that if yous are doing this that you strip the resulting file of all meta-data (everything!) and then apply MusicBrainz Picard to add make clean metadata back.
Sometimes music disappears from Spotify for various reasons.
Besides, I listen with bluetooth headphones, and bluetooth has its ain lossy compression on top of the original anyway.
Aforementioned for YouTube simply with Spotify you lot at least know what has been deleted. With YouTube such metadata is axed, too. Pathetic. A practiced reason for Oggify and YouTube-dl (or a fork).
The disappearing tracks is really the chief trouble with Spotify. I think at some point licensing to streaming services needs to be compulsory, similar licensing to radio is, so that there aren't "exclusives."
> Too, I listen with bluetooth headphones, and bluetooth has its own lossy compression on top of the original anyway.
The effects of lossy pinch exercise stack, and so y'all're making a bad problem worse.
I absolutely don't listen lossy compression, until I can actually hear it, at which signal I can't bear to continue listening.
Oh, get off your loftier horse.
I played a lot of cheap tapes back in the twenty-four hours. That's far worse quality than whatever MP3, especially if you're immature and buy cheap, normal C120 tapes, and play them on a cheap device over and over.
When MP3 players were a new thing, I had ane with all of 64MB wink on which I played 64 kbps music with dirt cheap earbuds. That wasn't perfect, but I still constitute information technology useful.
Today Spotify offers 320kbps, which is far superior to a lot of stuff I listened to, and my hearing certainly didn't get whatsoever better over the decades. I don't think I detect much departure above 128 kbps these days anyway.
Yeah, certainly I'll go for quality if I can take information technology, but less than perfect is better than nothing and I'1000 very far from being a crazy audiophile. Modern tech is far beyond the point where I stop caring near farther improvements.
I call up you are actually making the same betoken equally the parent, given the question marker at the end of the first sentence (which I heard in a rhetorical slightly sarcastic tone)
Spotify contains a watermark as metadata. I am not sure if information technology tin can be removed cleanly simply either way: the produced OGG Vorbis is of inferior quality (as is Spotify) due to watermark. If you were to redistribute the data with watermark you should use an anonymous Premium account and computer and network connection (Whonix with Tor?) which cannot be traced dorsum to y'all.
Most people don't intendance virtually audio quality. Await at what they're playing music on. Shitty tinny speakers built into phones most of the time. $30 PC speakers. Earbuds. Laptop speakers. Certain, some people take bodily loftier quality sound systems, but not plenty people to affair.
Back in the day I wrote a tool to save songs from Pandora. It was basically an http proxy server, and then I'm sure there were dozens of like tools floating around. However, I never ended upwards listening to whatsoever of the songs I downloaded considering it was never every bit convenient as listening to Pandora. I imagine the same thing with Spotify. Even if I had every song in existence downloaded in lossless format, I'd still utilize Spotify to heed to music.
I used to exist in the same boat, mostly due to Spotify'southward recommendation algorithm. Unfortunately they've since removed all ways of giving it feedback about what I like, and now it just recommends the same few songs over and over and over.
Might take to go back to downloading, at least playback volition be more reliable.
You tin can cache them in the spotify client. I was referring to the other kind of downloading.
I've noticed that the offline experience on Spotify is utterly broken and has been for a while. I remember it being quite expert when I first started using it, only it just seems to take got worse to the point of being unusable. I figured it was maybe just Android merely my kids who are iPhone users said the aforementioned. Nosotros live in a rural area and use Spotify on the move a lot (on buses, auto journeys, bike rides) and are often without point so offline is essential. Mayhap Spotify devs assume everyone has good 5G/Wifi and never really test information technology out? Whatsoever the reason, having the option to brand my ain offline library to work effectually deficiencies in the service I'm paying £16.99 a calendar month for seems like off-white utilise to me (yes, I know UK law has no such concept but I can sell the thought to myself at least). I might fifty-fifty dig out my erstwhile MP3 player equally mentioned in other comments.
Offline? Attempt listening to a podcast. Information technology has to be 1 of the worst pieces of software I have to interact with regularly. The second terminal podcast would skip dorsum to the same timestamp every time I switched audio or exited the app. If they are going to charge coin and still button adds at least requite me the option to utilize an alternate client.
You didn't really specify how it's "utterly broken". Equally an anecdote, I've been listening to Spotify a lot whenever I drive or go jogging, all offline since I don't take data and it'south been working well for me.
So you just create another ane? :) I don't retrieve it'due south much of a deterrent. At worst yous lose upwards to $x if you are paying for it.
Wouldn't that be kind of bad for Spotify? They lose a customer.
Maybe they don't care losing 1 customer for making sure their music stays private.
Spotify has to exercise something against things similar this, or else they risk losing their music suppliers. Which is manner worse for than losing 0.001% of their customers.
(I don't like that it is this way, simply you lot cannot argue from an economical perspective without because the other economical pressures on the company).
> Spotify has to practice something confronting things like this, or else they risk losing their music suppliers.
Why should the music industry intendance? Their utter majority of non-live gig income is the streaming services [1], and cut off the biggest thespian would be a completely dumb movement. Piracy of music is all but gone anyway since Spotify, Apple Music and others made music extremely affordable for big parts of the Western populations - one might contend that Spotify and the few pirates that remain are both needed as funnels towards live gigs. Ane tin say, the music industry, the fans and pirates are in sort of an equilibrium.
In contrast, the picture industry is in a different bind... many people who watch a pirated film won't go to a cinema (the closest equivalent of a "live gig"), and then every instance of movie piracy is a direct hit towards their profits - and the motion-picture show manufacture largely can't make these losses up by selling merch instead, and unlike the music industry which has a lot of dedicated whale fans going to all gigs on a band'due south bout the movie manufacture can't fifty-fifty accept that unless the flick is really good (Avatar) or culturally significant (Avengers Endgame).
It looks like this repo is a few years old. Does it still work? If not, are there other alternatives that download directly from Spotify?
I've looked for something similar this on-and-off the final few years, and virtually viable options seem to use a Spotify reference to find the correct metadata to download off another service, like Deezer.
You might as well go all the manner and search your favorite BitTorrent trackers for some lossless rips.
If you're willing to indulge in piracy you might likewise get something better out of it.
Spotify does have a lot of tracks on there that i cannot find elsewhere (non on whatever trackers, not on deezer, not even on youtube for that crisp 128kbps).
While they did, a detail site notwithstanding appears to be able to bypass that (though they perchance have a premium account themselves).
I used this to download podcasts off Spotify, since the official mobile customer is pretty horrible.
But podcasts are just RSS feeds of audio files, so the customer of choice should be able to have intendance of the download without needing to have a trip through Spotify.
Okay, could you point me to the RSS of, say, The Joe Rogan Experience?
Foreign that your definition of what a podcast is supposed to be doesn't fit what I notice at result #1 when searching for "The biggest podcast in the earth".
Simply I know where you're coming from. It sucks that Spotify is trying to plough this into a walled garden. Hence downloading the episodes, and listening to information technology in a better customer
I now merely record the chip stream from digital out to mini disk from good quality streams! Lol.
Somewhat related, is there a way to export all playlists from Spotify?
The one thing I'd like all spotify like services to accept is a way to consign play/similar history in a standard format.
I've listened, liked and disliked so many songs in so many services similar pandora, rdio, grooveshark, terminal.fm, spotify, tidal. But all that information about me is locked and I cannot use information technology.
If these companies offered exporting of this information in some standard JSON format, nosotros could develop open up source apps that analyzed the history and provided recommendations.
They have the scripts to generate these exports, then they probably will give y'all an export. Yous can ever claim to temporarily reside in a hotel in the EU, it's not like they can smell this isn't the instance.
You tin consign your account and at that place is besides an API. A few API clients in diverse languages tin can be plant on Github.
That is truthful, only sometimes YouTube versions are different and sometimes the songs are non fifty-fifty available on YouTube
How do you know that it'due south amend? In my experience, everything is reencoded and lossy.
YouTube uses Opus these days.
This is currently the all-time lossy codec available.
Opus can save you a flake of bandwidth for the same sound quality, but if the bit rate is high enough, every codecs sound the same/transparent.
Practice we really need to steal music from artists? Spotify and Apple Music is already cheap enough. Not to mention the convenience of not wasting my time managing illegally downloaded music. People really have time for this in 2022?
How do yous nonetheless music from an creative person? Are they no longer able to perform the song anymore subsequently it is stolen? Isn't piracy about making copies of a file instead of theft?
Why do I want a pile of .ogg (or .mp3) files? ? Back in the day, having a huge library of files on a deejay, a carefully curated collection from which to burn a mix CD to nowadays as a gift to a romantic (or platonic) interest was worth the world. Times take changed though, and that carefully curated mix CD full of mystery - what will the side by side rail bring? - these days it's still simply as carefully curated, simply it'south a link to a Spotify playlist. Music hasn't (quite) fragmented the aforementioned way video has, with Netflix, Hulu, Disney, Paramount, CBS, HBO, YouTube and so on all having paid options, just having a spotify account with apps on all devices is only then much easier.
I am gonna tell you why. I got a Porsche Taycan last year with Burmester. Its audio quality is excellent, however there are limitations. I can play Spotify from my telephone over bluetooth, which ways reencoded lossy sound. It sounds awful. I can even so play music direct from a usb memory stick, which sounds great, just equally it should.
This is more a problem of Porsche, not having Spotify integrated into their PCM. It is coming on future models though. Simply we with a Taycan 2020-2022 model, will not get this.
So having a pile of ogg files is currently a great option.
Practice non really care about the Porsche only having the ear to tell lossy pinch over bluetooth sounds superhuman to me.
Not super human. Only placebo. Unless it'southward using a weird Bluetooth mode like HSP only that'southward unlikely because it would exist horribly compressed.
It's hard to tell if it'southward just HN imaginary "horrible sounding" or if the mic is on for some reason which makes information technology actually sound that bad.
I don't know annihilation about the auto's sound system, but aptX is a pretty common Bluetooth audio codec for music and these days information technology can run up to 420kbit/south with the adaptive codec, or 576kbit/due south with Hard disk, 24 fleck at 44.i-96kHZ, then it'southward non unreasonable to call back y'all could hear the difference between high and low quality sound sources with that (since even high quality compressed audio tends to exist less than 420kbit/s)
What has been heard cannot be unheard. Dorsum in the mean solar day I did some ABX comparisons of various mp3 encoders. I unwillingly trained my hearing to spot encoder artifacts forever. I tested encoders more than fifteen years agone. I still hear mp3 compression without trying. Bluetooth SBC codec is even worse. Wish I could plough this off but I can't.
Because music has a tendency of suddenly disappearing on Spotify. Either labels determine Spotify isn't giving them enough in render, or artists are angry at Spotify for their stinginess or because they have a podcast which they disapprove of. Look at your playlists that are over a year former. If you are like me you'll run across that 10% or 20% of the tracks are unavailable now. This is the downside to streaming -- null is permanent.
I was thrilled when I read Spotify was coming to my country. Then the primary genres I heed to (Reggae and Dancehall) have many tracks unavailable as the labels (VP Records is the worst) whitelist countries. I reverted back to local files.
- Doesn't require an internet connection.
- Online services are unreliable: They tin can go offline at any minute, leave of business concern, ban your for any reason (including from automated ban systems tagging you for "suspicious activeness" if you login from dissimilar counties, use vpns, etc).
- Costs money forever (or need to heed to ads).
- Their itemize of music can change: Songs can be deleted at any fourth dimension.
- Better performance: searching local storage is faster, skipping around is faster, better battery life by not needing to ability upwards the 4G radio/wifi.
I was a Google play music user for the unabridged life of the service. Lots of playlists, play history, ratings, etc. All of that is gone now. I tried multiple different apps to convert my playlists and library to Apple Music and even the official conversion to YouTube music but they all messed up my library and filled up with songs with similar names that are completely different genres and artists. Some music didn't carry over at all and I have a vague sense that my playlists are not complete but no thought what's missing. And while I liked the user interface of Google play music, I detest the interface of YouTube music and I'thou non a fan of the interface of Apple Music. I lost control over how I play my music. I regret jumping on the streaming music bandwagon a decade ago.
"Why do I desire a pile of .ogg (or .mp3) files? "
- In times with no cyberspace, or traveling to places with bad connectedness. (offline features are very limited)
- have your music forever and not just equally long the company offers it (see Neil Young)
- play your music with a amend thespian (I recollect spotify works atrocious). Fine control fade in, fade out etc.
- privacy, I do non like the world to know at what times I listen to what music and how long
..also, songs/albums beingness removed from spotify. Go to settings -> testify removed (unavailable?) tracks to see what yous are missing. Sometimes you tin can search for the song and find it again in another album, merely this step is cumbersome and not always working.
> Why do I want a pile of .ogg (or .mp3) files?
Because all listeners are not the aforementioned. I for 1, accept two high quality listening systems (one is in the form of high terminate sound card, and other in the form as a proper Hi-Fi organization), and am a former symphony orchestra histrion.
I personally appreciate the added resolution of lossless files and love to listen my favorite albums in lossless formats. When ane gives the time and ear deserved by an album, the perception is very different, and the added resolution on the highs add a lot of immersion to the album in question.
I have a spotify membership, and it's convenient, yes. But it'south not same equally "listening to music" for me. Non shut.
Also, opening your Spotify playlist and seeing some of your favorite songs missing due to license expiration is not nice. Been there, seen that.
Same for movies, simply I'm not that of a movie nerd.
Collectors, DJs, artists and music enthusiasts all withal have a great demand for actual files. For the average user it might seem dumb, only to me, my Spotify/Apple Music/YouTube Music libraries all seem frail and there are multiple instances of songs being remastered and replaced, as well as artists irresolute the final versions later on initial release (Kanye West comes to heed for ane).
> > DJ'southward should be paying for the music they're playing.
They are, separately from obtaining the material. Look upwardly "performing rights" (which is specifically for songs; it's analogous for recordings, tin can't call back the exact name now).
> Likewise, using .mp3 as DJ is unwritten crime.
I would similar to meet the person who can hear problems with well-encoded 320kbps mp3 when played in a crowded and noisy club.
Authors get paid. The indicate stands, unless yous want to argue that both the venue and the DJ should pay.
TL; DR: Music quality > Audio quality for me.
Ane DJ, Errorhead IIRC, recorded a track from a taxis stereo in colombia, oversupply goes bonkers every time he plays it. I one time had a DJ spinnin vinyl bore me to expiry, fabricated me distressing to recollect near how much he spent for those records. I much rather have bangin tunes in mp3 than that. Physically there might exist a difference, mp3 filtering out stuff you "tin can't hear". Should affect the deep bass you can only hear and feel on a clubs PA.
I discovered awesome music in the worst quality you could imagine, midi files via a cheap soundcard. Even with plastic guitars, Led Zeppelin however sounds awesome.
I doubt you lot tin tell the divergence with lossy and lossless with a constantly clipping club sound arrangement.
I have an "old" flash mp3 player that I just make full up with a pile of mp3 files for practice. Information technology weighs 70g, can be navigated blind in a pocket, is impervious to the ways smartphones break (falling damage) and the battery lasts a week. People might too have other motivations, such as wanting to decouple from a service that each week picks a new favorite vocal to make unavailable.
Well one reason is because Spotify'due south catalogue is constantly expanding/contracting so a song that y'all added to a playlist yesterday might be gone tomorrow.
It's easier until information technology isn't. That dvd volition probably nonetheless be around 50 years after. Your spotify playlist? I highly incertitude it.
I don't even know where the DVDs I had x years ago are. Lost in moving I guess. And I don't have any devices to play them on. While my data online accounts are nearly all still intact with all the information I left on them.
The data maybe. The dvd wont be playable in 50 years. Not necessarily disk degradation only hardware obsolescence. You lot will demand to proceed copying every 10-20 years to supported media.
Well it's been thirty years for some of my cds and new hardware with cd support is nevertheless being created today. Only maybe in another 20 years I will be too busy enjoying my flying automobile to intendance near my cds.
My utilise case for trying download mp3s was for DJing since Spotify no longer works with mixing software. I didn't want to purchase my entire collection per vocal and Beatport only offers dance/edm genres
Files are liberty. Custody of the bodily data represents a key level of control that you don't become with streaming. All the other responses give examples that are underpinned by this freedom.
My niece is one year old and has a unproblematic speaker with hard bulldoze full of baby music, a straightforward device she can use even by herself. Music helps her calm downwards whenever annihilation mildly upsetting happens and is frankly a lifesaver whenever I babysit (absence of parents is highly upsetting). Before buying this device and filling it with baby music MP3s, my sibling used a simple Bluetooth speaker and Spotify telephone app with disastrous results.
A solid point. This reminds me the quondam days when I advisedly programmed my VHS video to record Blade Runner from a public broadcast on Goggle box. How happy I was. "At present I volition exist able to lookout Blade Runner whenever I want!" I even remember having purchased a more expensive VHS record merely for that, I didnt want to have no image quality issues in the future.
In that location are places where files are useful. Beingness a DJ for example. You lot'll show up to a gig with a flash bulldoze, plug it into the club equipment's USB port, and practice your thing. Yous'd ideally be compensating your young man artists for their work by ownership files off of Beatport (or wherever) anyhow. Seems a bit niche.
DMCA take down and what not in 3... 2... 1...
Edit: wait, 2019? What gives? How is this not taken down?
You tin't even accept a screenshot of a Netflix evidence, thanks to DRM; but you tin can download Spotify tracks?
Spotify contains watermarks, the DRM is known to be simple and got circumvented many years agone already when Spotify was relatively new. A dev even responded: 'we know, please don't abuse.' Watermark is why the sound is worse than a direct rip in OGG Vorbis of the same quality.
With regards to Netflix I run Windows under Proxmox with a Netflix PWA, and I surely can make a screenshot of my NoVNC connection. Though I am pretty sure Netflix isn't 4k / Widevine L1.
> You lot can't even take a screenshot of a Netflix prove, thanks to DRM; only you lot can download Spotify tracks?
At that place's also a lot of tools to rip movies from Amazon Prime or YouTube to MP3 sites. It will never be possible to take down all of them, specially if they are not located in the US.
If done cleverly, information technology will be indistinguishable from normal use, so it is technologically infeasible as well, to try and forbid information technology entirely.
I would accept thought it's easy to distinguish when you download a 250MB video in 10 seconds without opening the YouTube customer, so I'g always surprised those clients piece of work.
Heh, that's non what I would call "clever" though ; ) Y'all can add together delays artificially, yous can add random, simply seemingly man pauses (people sometimes pause playback) etc. I am surprised likewise though, that tools however work without having to get to these lengths. perhaps because devs on the other side of the thing know, that they would but trigger a more sophisticated tool to be created.
Some utilise headless Chromium/Chrome like Puppeteer or other to mimic usage directly. At that point only pattern detection would piece of work i.due east. downloading as well many files one person could consume or other fingerprinting.
> You lot tin't even take a screenshot of a Netflix show, thanks to DRM;
The windows snipping tool (which got renamed to "Snip & Sketch" at some point) takes screenshots simply fine even when Netflix is running in full-screen style.
off-topic: Nether Windows 11 MS renamed "Snip & Sketch" to "Snipping Tool" and replaced to original snipping tool with it.
Feels like the gave up to overcome muscle memory. At least i connected using the og snipping tool under windows ten because in german the new tool was named "Ausschneiden und Skizzieren" and that didn't map to me searching for "sni" and pressing enter.
Effort Win+Shift+S for instant click/drag screenshot to clipboard. I oasis't opened the snip tool GUI since I found out. It also has GUI buttons for window/freeform/fullscreen if you ever demand that.
In Windows xi at that place's also a setting to make the "Print Screen"-cardinal work in the same way as Win + Shift + South. The setting is called "Use the Print screen push to open up screen snipping".
That'southward probably because y'all are running Netflix in Google Chrom. The streams are 720P (1280x720) and hava a lower level of DRM.
Only Microsoft Border and natives apps are providing the highest definition available. You lot can encounter the stats past pressing CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-D while Netflix is active.
>You lot can't even take a screenshot of a Netflix show
Works fine on linux even in 1080p.
Netflix doesn't supply Linux with 1080p streams, for exactly this reason. Any platform that doesn't encrypt the video path so screen recording isn't possible is limited to 720p.
That makes me wonder: do the wires that feed mod LCD screens contain encrypted pixel information nowadays?
How close to the liquid crystal cell do we take to be to get unencrypted pixel data?
All you need is an hdmi capture carte on a chromecast.
Yes there is encryption (HDCP), but it was broken about immediately. Many choices to buy a cheap decrypter on Ali Baba…
I wouldn't say information technology was lost because of streaming. People don't pirate music like they used to because at that place is a convenient alternative. I still pirate because I like to have an bodily library that doesn't change when licenses exercise, my I have nobody in my circles who all the same does the same.
Besides because the discovery and social features are an actual value add for most users. Spotify wrapped may have done as much for its popularity equally the music itself.
I've already experienced my songs becoming "unavailable" or replaced with imposters multiple times on spotify, it'southward really simply good for discovery.
As for where to actually rip from, I've never really had to backup a song that simply existed on spotify.
Really? Never used Netflix but I am curious how can information technology stop me from doing screenshot when drm is run in browser?
For people who are not willing to provide their credentials: I wrote
https://github.com/tehforsch/striputary
which also records the music (pregnant y'all demand to expect for the entire length of the playlist for it to finish) and cuts it into songs. It doesn't require you to provide whatever credentials (and it should in principle piece of work with other streaming services likewise, but I haven't tried). It is probably not the smoothest user experience, given that nobody except me has ever used information technology, but I've successfully recorded thousands of albums with it then far.
Is it just recording the data to an MP3 file? If so, doesn't that mean that at that place'due south a loss in quality?
What loss in quality? Unlike some if its competitors (Tidal HiFi, Deezer Premium, etc), Spotify streams in mp3 quality and they get recorded as such.
There are some leaks indicating that Spotify is working on a higher quality programme, but information technology hasn't happened notwithstanding.
When Spotify plays the audio, there's small, generally inaudible MP3 artifacts in the output. When y'all record that audio and re-encode it to a new MP3 file, these artifacts get re-encoded again, equally role of the track, plus new artifacts go added.
Information technology's the same as re-encoding a photo to JPEG repeatedly. Every time you save (esp if the quality settings are a picayune bit unlike each time, or if a different encoder is used) you get a few more than artifacts.
At high enough quality settings though, you lot can practise this many times earlier the result is noticeable. So I bet the quality from re-encoding a Spotify song once is inaudible to most people, just similar yous can brighten a JPEG and save it without suddenly seeing lots of rectangles everywhere.
To my signal of view, sharing this is irresponsible, modifying librespot to download song on your figurer is fairly easy and is a good learning exercise to larn Rust. But past sharing this piece of work publicly, you increment chances that librespot will be blacklisted by Spotify and that accounts using it will exist terminated. It'due south a shame, because there is many alternatives to the bad Spotify UI that rely on librespot that will also go blacklisted. There are legitimate uses of librespot and its employ should be restricted to those, for the all-time of users and developers that spent a lot of time making librespot bully.
That is true, maybe I should delete the HN list.
I actually would like to know how to change librespot to do so, since I am not a developer or know any Rust at all. Thus this project seems useful to me.
At present I found that I can't delete it anymore :(. I think I need to ask an admin to exercise that.
@dang if you're reading this, please delete this list, Thanks.
Also, how can they tell that it is librespot, and how can they block it? Isn't information technology basically simulating being one of the official Spotify clients? I really exercise non want them to get banned or blocked
This user agent could merely be set to the official client'south user agent and nobody would run across a thing, this is a gratuitous text field basically.
And so it would exist more of an practice of finding clients behaving in an odd fashion that's not mapping to an official client. That's way harder to notice though.
Original librespot author hither.
Trying to pretend to be an official client was a game I never wanted to play. There's and then many tiny differences in the way I've implemented the protocol information technology would be trivial for Spotify to notice this if they wanted to. It so becomes an whack a mole game betwixt them and us.
Spotify is fully enlightened of librespot and has tolerated information technology and then far. If they change their minds are try to cake it it would exist the end of the road for librespot. This is why, despite repeated requests from users, librespot has never supported costless accounts nor downloading files in club to avoid pissing Spotify off. I e'er knew information technology would exist little for anyone to implement this using the librespot source lawmaking, merely it makes me a chip sad someone actually did it.
(That being said, I personally don't contribute or utilize librespot anymore, so actually I don't care)
I wonder if this is somewhere it would make sense to use a not-free license which restricts how people use the code or what modifications they are allowed to redistribute. It wouldn't stop anyone motivated from breaking the rules by themselves but it makes things like Oggify less likely to be distributed and so would hateful librespot might be more likely to survive long-term.
This is the curse of open source - once y'all put the code out there, in that location's zippo you tin do near information technology.
Currently dealing with this with a project of mine, it's hard to run across people take and "corruption it", but there'due south nothing you tin practice actually - licenses don't finish anyone.
wait, I don't think this allows free downloading. AFAIK, it but works with premium accounts. That was the whole intent for me at to the lowest degree.
Sorry these were meant equally two separate points. People have asked repeatedly to use librespot on gratis accounts, and (other) people have asked to have librespot download files. I've pushed back on both, and Oggify does the later simply.
According to spotify's website, premium accounts are allowed to download songs. Why would they crack downwardly on this more than other tertiary-party clients?
The spotify premium download characteristic is more similar an encrypted cache that'southward beneficial when offline or in irksome networks.
It's non useful for acquiring files for your personal collection.
I guess because then people could redistribute it under their own terms. Which is pirating, and therefore illegal.
This allows but premium users to download which is allowed under premium terms.
can't you just employ soundflower with some scripting to capture the sound directly at the uncompressed audio card level? There is NO way for spotify to cake that.
Also, from what I've seen from previous similar previous projects, they get removed from Github pretty fast past Spotify
Peachy, but I seriously hope that it doesn't go popular enough to force Spotify to combat client reimplementations such equally librespot, which this is based on.
Too Mopidy, which lets you utilise Spotify from any MPD client.
I suspect that secretly there are some people at Spotify who are sympathetic to open up source and/or use Linux, and have convinced the business people and bean counters that not beingness openly hostile to gratis software is good business.
I take mixed feeling almost Spotify in general, merely it'due south even so non as "airtight" of a platform as information technology could be, and I'm at least a little bit happy well-nigh that.
This is much more efficient than to download them every time y'all play them, which is the standard behaviour.
They don't download every fourth dimension yous play them. They are cached. Y'all tin likewise download them in the app so they stay local and never redownload. You but tin't get them out of the app.
except for some reason on my phone my "downloaded" albums seem to remove themselves if I haven't listed to them in a while.
Discovered this on a recent flight. Airline didn't offer in-flight wifi. Tried to listed to an anthology which I'd downloaded but taken out of my regular rotation, and information technology but wasn't at that place.
Netflix does this besides simply at least warns you. It's because of the licensing with the tape labels.
into AppData on windows which bloats the c drive and why I switched to the web app
So information technology takes the aforementioned space, without being equally useful?
These streaming services are even worse than I thought they'd exist.
No way I'm ever giving up my local lossless audio collection.
Your sound collection, which plainly has millions of artists so yous can literally mind to anything in the world every bit soon equally yous feel like it, with cipher seconds of waiting time, and also you lot can go recommendations of new things to mind to, aye
I'm tired of people who pretend they don't empathize the advantages of a solution. Spotify has revolutionized the way I listen to music and notice new stuff. And I used to have a decent lossless drove I listened to on a FLAC supporting Cowon player. But information technology'south then much better at present.
Agreed. A few years dorsum I lost my entire collection, due to a hardware malfunction and a slightly careless backup policy. But even though it was full of potentially bully music I had never heard all the same, I tended to stick with the familiar.
Since I'g on Spotify, the corporeality of new music I'chiliad discovering is near overwhelming. It's hard to proceed upward with my cheque playlist, I continue finding interesting new artists through song radio. It's as well excellent for finding music in languages I do not speak or tin can even read. Trying to Google in Cyrillic was a pita.
> Then it takes the same space, without being equally useful?
Can you elaborate "equally useful"? The merely problem I could encounter is that you tin can't play them anywhere only in the app. And then what? If you were to copy them around (and most likely share with other people for free) you are violating their ToS (and other legal aspects) anyway.
> No way I'one thousand ever giving up my local lossless audio collection.
Good news: You lot don't take to. Streaming services are called "streaming" services for a reason. Yous are apparently not the target audition and that's completely fine.
What do yous expect? A streaming service that gives you an "Export/Save as..." feature?
In addition, DJ pools often contain music and extended club mix friendly edits of songs.
Radio tracks that might start off with just vocals might accept a "extended social club mix" which has a clean 16/32/48 bars of instrumentals before the vocal kicks in. The aforementioned for the outro.
There is a place for both. I take nigh of my favorite albums in FLAC for listening on my home receiver with decent speakers. Only I'thou not fifty-fifty going to carp with buying every anthology/vocal I want to mind to in the car, on mobile, in the office etc. Spotify is nifty for that. ten-15 euro/month and I accept access to a huge collection of songs in good enough quality that syncs playlist across all my devices.
to play devil'due south abet, what happens when your lossless audio files (which take upwardly a fair amount of infinite) no longer all fit on your mobile device? Practice you take software to rotate them out? What about when yous want to listen to a vocal that isn't local anymore? Sounds like you lot need to invent streaming with caching
Kodi+yatse over vpn is an amazingly adept and easy to setup Spotify+Netflix for your own collection.
Stream or Download albums/movies from your home server to your telephone from anywhere.
Or just get old school, and use something similar Icecast from your home server.
Years agone, I used to have a MPD + Icecast setup that streamed audio to my phone over OpenVPN, and it worked flawlessly.
>what happens when your lossless audio files (which have up a fair amount of infinite) no longer all fit on your mobile device?
A non-consequence. I don't take music with me, or mind to music on the go. I'm non glued to a telephone'due south screen either.
Spotify on my machine has a 1GB+ enshroud. If yous heed to the same vocal more than one time, it will be most probable cached already.
Plus they tin track the plays and pay the artist (even if it's pennies). If you just rip them there'due south no way for Spotify to track plays and pay the artists
I used a different piece of software to do this for DJing (Sidify) and my business relationship got locked. I was given a warning and my account was unlocked the side by side day, but, Spotify tin can observe this
Afaik information technology uses its own recording aqueduct, which tin can be fingerprinted past them.
Big stardom from Oggify, as Spotiflyer downloads from Deezer/YouTube, so some songs may not be available
And it sometimes gets it incorrect too. The incorrect song, or a alive version or remix instead of the original.
I don't know if they still support it, just their premium service used to accept an open API that included streaming the audio to your program, which you could write as a wav then convert to your format of selection. This was over 5 years agone at least. And I have to presume (storing/converting) it was confronting the T&Cs so as well, rather than the intention of streaming.
Artists already get paid peanuts from listens on Spotify. It's a shame to encounter projects similar this sucking more acquirement abroad from them. If yous actually want a quality digital recording, they are generally available for purchase and without violating Spotify's ToS.
This requires premium business relationship to work so for this aspect it isn't any different than downloading for offline usage in Spotify app.
It is dissimilar because even in offline-way Spotify keeps track of the number of times the song has been played in order to pay the creative person the correct amount.
I'd be surprised if Spotify doesn't rail plays even when yous've downloaded music for offline listening. Also, using official features of the app doesn't violate their ToS.
Yes, how dare those paying users download the songs. Fuck them! They should pay for every byte every fourth dimension, forever!!! /due south
If you're paying for a streaming service, then yes. If you want to pay to download the songs, then practice that. Most artists have avenues where you can practise so. You seem to think that if users are paying for a streaming service that explicitly disallows making copies, those users should withal exist entitled to brand copies.
Why is this word full of comments which sound like RIAA sponsored shills? The RIAA will be creaming in their pants when they read comments like yours.
People should feel entitled to do whatever they tin can get away with. Why, you ask? Well read on..
The record labels are extremely greedy, and Spotify et. al. are merely a thin proxy wrapper in front of them. Oh yeah, and Spotify barely pays the artists anything at all. So if y'all "pay" for Spotify, the degree to which you're providing back up to the musicians you love so much is questionable. At least with Deezer, they allocate more of the revenue to actually go back to the artists.
Dorsum to the point, Spotify and Deezer aren't looking out for me or yous. Downloading is an highly-seasoned alternative to hoping songs don't disappear when licenses alter for no discernable reason.
Life is short, I abet for individuals to exercise what they desire when it doesn't measurably damage anyone else. Going into the grave knowing I committed few or no music license violations is such a low value goal, how do people non realize this?
Nowadays there isn't a shortage of music, at all. Especially non due to folks downloading songs, in fact this makes the artists even more than pop. They should be grateful for getting pop enough to warrant any form of piracy. Lots of music creators would honey to have this "problem".
A lot of people recollect in that location's a shortage of skilful music and the pipeline for musicians (people who actually learn to play instruments and main limerick) is dwindling.
Honest question: How does this relate to "illegally" downloading songs vs perpetually streaming them?
I have enormous respect for professional Craftsman musicians, but I don't know if they make a existent paring in the numbers when compared to the trendy Biebs and Gagas.
Depends what stage you're at in the pipeline.
I of the biggest bug facing new artists is local live music is dying. I'm talking about music at bars and clubs. It'southward not completely dead, only information technology's non what information technology once was. At present people are happy, or possibly fifty-fifty happier, to have a DJ. Unfortunately the best way to improve your musical skills is to play with other musicians in a live setting - and there'southward less opportunity for that. There's simply fewer musicians able to even become started.
You've gotten started, you're playing with a group of people, been playing some gigs - now what? You desire to tape! Get your music out there! I'm not going to go into all the details of recording but let me just say information technology'southward neither piece of cake, nor inexpensive. It's gotten fifty-fifty more expensive these days because while the quality of the music itself may be suffering, the quality of the production is skyrocketing. This is similar to the gripe in movies where people complain the special effects are crawly just the actual story kinda sucks. But people don't want movies having crumby special effects - they want both: bully special furnishings and a great story line. And then it is with music. People desire dandy production and great music. Well, yous're going to pay to get that great production!
Possibly that'due south a bit of the modern music biz y'all don't know much about. The producers go paid up front end. So exercise the distributors. Who pays for it? The musicians. The musicians now take their recording in hand, they've distributed their music to Amazon Music, Apple Music, Google Play, Spotify, Pandora, and a host of other lesser-known platforms. What happens? They get pirated. Most of the time they don't even break even. For nearly musicians, recording and distributing your music is a internet financial loss. If you're lucky it may increase traffic to your live gigs.
Honestly, when you throw in the cost of gear and the years spent practicing and playing to get good enough to be presentable to the public - it's no wonder fewer and fewer people are going into music. That'due south our loss.
Does illegally downloading songs in and of itself cause this collapse? Probably not. But I wouldn't be surprised if it's the concluding straw breaking the camel'southward dorsum.
I wasn't intending to propose that Spotify is looking out for me…or for the artists. I know the pay artists get from Spotify is more often than not terrible. If you're not happy with Spotify, switch to Deezer or another service. But I'grand generally a proponent of abiding by the terms of service of whatsoever service you lot choose to use.
There are a number of projects that do this, and some are paid.
Do they piece of work? Yes.
Do you desire to do this? Probably non.
Why not? Spotify does non have lossless / Howdy-Fi audio nevertheless and what y'all're getting is a lossy transcode. You lot would exist amend doing something like this with Deezer or Tidal (insert other competitors hither) that offering a lossless format.
Whilst I've non done this, I would probably advise that if yous are doing this that you strip the resulting file of all meta-data (everything!) and then apply MusicBrainz Picard to add make clean metadata back.
Sometimes music disappears from Spotify for various reasons.
Besides, I listen with bluetooth headphones, and bluetooth has its ain lossy compression on top of the original anyway.
Aforementioned for YouTube simply with Spotify you lot at least know what has been deleted. With YouTube such metadata is axed, too. Pathetic. A practiced reason for Oggify and YouTube-dl (or a fork).
The disappearing tracks is really the chief trouble with Spotify. I think at some point licensing to streaming services needs to be compulsory, similar licensing to radio is, so that there aren't "exclusives."
> Too, I listen with bluetooth headphones, and bluetooth has its own lossy compression on top of the original anyway.
The effects of lossy pinch exercise stack, and so y'all're making a bad problem worse.
I absolutely don't listen lossy compression, until I can actually hear it, at which signal I can't bear to continue listening.
Oh, get off your loftier horse.
I played a lot of cheap tapes back in the twenty-four hours. That's far worse quality than whatever MP3, especially if you're immature and buy cheap, normal C120 tapes, and play them on a cheap device over and over.
When MP3 players were a new thing, I had ane with all of 64MB wink on which I played 64 kbps music with dirt cheap earbuds. That wasn't perfect, but I still constitute information technology useful.
Today Spotify offers 320kbps, which is far superior to a lot of stuff I listened to, and my hearing certainly didn't get whatsoever better over the decades. I don't think I detect much departure above 128 kbps these days anyway.
Yeah, certainly I'll go for quality if I can take information technology, but less than perfect is better than nothing and I'1000 very far from being a crazy audiophile. Modern tech is far beyond the point where I stop caring near farther improvements.
I call up you are actually making the same betoken equally the parent, given the question marker at the end of the first sentence (which I heard in a rhetorical slightly sarcastic tone)
Spotify contains a watermark as metadata. I am not sure if information technology tin can be removed cleanly simply either way: the produced OGG Vorbis is of inferior quality (as is Spotify) due to watermark. If you were to redistribute the data with watermark you should use an anonymous Premium account and computer and network connection (Whonix with Tor?) which cannot be traced dorsum to y'all.
Most people don't intendance virtually audio quality. Await at what they're playing music on. Shitty tinny speakers built into phones most of the time. $30 PC speakers. Earbuds. Laptop speakers. Certain, some people take bodily loftier quality sound systems, but not plenty people to affair.
Back in the day I wrote a tool to save songs from Pandora. It was basically an http proxy server, and then I'm sure there were dozens of like tools floating around. However, I never ended upwards listening to whatsoever of the songs I downloaded considering it was never every bit convenient as listening to Pandora. I imagine the same thing with Spotify. Even if I had every song in existence downloaded in lossless format, I'd still utilize Spotify to heed to music.
I used to exist in the same boat, mostly due to Spotify'southward recommendation algorithm. Unfortunately they've since removed all ways of giving it feedback about what I like, and now it just recommends the same few songs over and over and over.
Might take to go back to downloading, at least playback volition be more reliable.
You tin can cache them in the spotify client. I was referring to the other kind of downloading.
I've noticed that the offline experience on Spotify is utterly broken and has been for a while. I remember it being quite expert when I first started using it, only it just seems to take got worse to the point of being unusable. I figured it was maybe just Android merely my kids who are iPhone users said the aforementioned. Nosotros live in a rural area and use Spotify on the move a lot (on buses, auto journeys, bike rides) and are often without point so offline is essential. Mayhap Spotify devs assume everyone has good 5G/Wifi and never really test information technology out? Whatsoever the reason, having the option to brand my ain offline library to work effectually deficiencies in the service I'm paying £16.99 a calendar month for seems like off-white utilise to me (yes, I know UK law has no such concept but I can sell the thought to myself at least). I might fifty-fifty dig out my erstwhile MP3 player equally mentioned in other comments.
Offline? Attempt listening to a podcast. Information technology has to be 1 of the worst pieces of software I have to interact with regularly. The second terminal podcast would skip dorsum to the same timestamp every time I switched audio or exited the app. If they are going to charge coin and still button adds at least requite me the option to utilize an alternate client.
You didn't really specify how it's "utterly broken". Equally an anecdote, I've been listening to Spotify a lot whenever I drive or go jogging, all offline since I don't take data and it'south been working well for me.
So you just create another ane? :) I don't retrieve it'due south much of a deterrent. At worst yous lose upwards to $x if you are paying for it.
Wouldn't that be kind of bad for Spotify? They lose a customer.
Maybe they don't care losing 1 customer for making sure their music stays private.
Spotify has to exercise something against things similar this, or else they risk losing their music suppliers. Which is manner worse for than losing 0.001% of their customers.
(I don't like that it is this way, simply you lot cannot argue from an economical perspective without because the other economical pressures on the company).
> Spotify has to practice something confronting things like this, or else they risk losing their music suppliers.
Why should the music industry intendance? Their utter majority of non-live gig income is the streaming services [1], and cut off the biggest thespian would be a completely dumb movement. Piracy of music is all but gone anyway since Spotify, Apple Music and others made music extremely affordable for big parts of the Western populations - one might contend that Spotify and the few pirates that remain are both needed as funnels towards live gigs. Ane tin say, the music industry, the fans and pirates are in sort of an equilibrium.
In contrast, the picture industry is in a different bind... many people who watch a pirated film won't go to a cinema (the closest equivalent of a "live gig"), and then every instance of movie piracy is a direct hit towards their profits - and the motion-picture show manufacture largely can't make these losses up by selling merch instead, and unlike the music industry which has a lot of dedicated whale fans going to all gigs on a band'due south bout the movie manufacture can't fifty-fifty accept that unless the flick is really good (Avatar) or culturally significant (Avengers Endgame).
[1] https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/with-15bn-revenue-202...
It looks like this repo is a few years old. Does it still work? If not, are there other alternatives that download directly from Spotify?
I've looked for something similar this on-and-off the final few years, and virtually viable options seem to use a Spotify reference to find the correct metadata to download off another service, like Deezer.
You might as well go all the manner and search your favorite BitTorrent trackers for some lossless rips.
If you're willing to indulge in piracy you might likewise get something better out of it.
Spotify does have a lot of tracks on there that i cannot find elsewhere (non on whatever trackers, not on deezer, not even on youtube for that crisp 128kbps).
While they did, a detail site notwithstanding appears to be able to bypass that (though they perchance have a premium account themselves).
I used this to download podcasts off Spotify, since the official mobile customer is pretty horrible.
But podcasts are just RSS feeds of audio files, so the customer of choice should be able to have intendance of the download without needing to have a trip through Spotify.
Okay, could you point me to the RSS of, say, The Joe Rogan Experience?
Foreign that your definition of what a podcast is supposed to be doesn't fit what I notice at result #1 when searching for "The biggest podcast in the earth".
Simply I know where you're coming from. It sucks that Spotify is trying to plough this into a walled garden. Hence downloading the episodes, and listening to information technology in a better customer
I now merely record the chip stream from digital out to mini disk from good quality streams! Lol.
Somewhat related, is there a way to export all playlists from Spotify?
The one thing I'd like all spotify like services to accept is a way to consign play/similar history in a standard format.
I've listened, liked and disliked so many songs in so many services similar pandora, rdio, grooveshark, terminal.fm, spotify, tidal. But all that information about me is locked and I cannot use information technology.
If these companies offered exporting of this information in some standard JSON format, nosotros could develop open up source apps that analyzed the history and provided recommendations.
They have the scripts to generate these exports, then they probably will give y'all an export. Yous can ever claim to temporarily reside in a hotel in the EU, it's not like they can smell this isn't the instance.
You tin consign your account and at that place is besides an API. A few API clients in diverse languages tin can be plant on Github.
That is truthful, only sometimes YouTube versions are different and sometimes the songs are non fifty-fifty available on YouTube
How do you know that it'due south amend? In my experience, everything is reencoded and lossy.
YouTube uses Opus these days.
This is currently the all-time lossy codec available.
Opus can save you a flake of bandwidth for the same sound quality, but if the bit rate is high enough, every codecs sound the same/transparent.
Practice we really need to steal music from artists? Spotify and Apple Music is already cheap enough. Not to mention the convenience of not wasting my time managing illegally downloaded music. People really have time for this in 2022?
How do yous nonetheless music from an creative person? Are they no longer able to perform the song anymore subsequently it is stolen? Isn't piracy about making copies of a file instead of theft?
Why do I want a pile of .ogg (or .mp3) files? ? Back in the day, having a huge library of files on a deejay, a carefully curated collection from which to burn a mix CD to nowadays as a gift to a romantic (or platonic) interest was worth the world. Times take changed though, and that carefully curated mix CD full of mystery - what will the side by side rail bring? - these days it's still simply as carefully curated, simply it'south a link to a Spotify playlist. Music hasn't (quite) fragmented the aforementioned way video has, with Netflix, Hulu, Disney, Paramount, CBS, HBO, YouTube and so on all having paid options, just having a spotify account with apps on all devices is only then much easier.
I am gonna tell you why. I got a Porsche Taycan last year with Burmester. Its audio quality is excellent, however there are limitations. I can play Spotify from my telephone over bluetooth, which ways reencoded lossy sound. It sounds awful. I can even so play music direct from a usb memory stick, which sounds great, just equally it should.
This is more a problem of Porsche, not having Spotify integrated into their PCM. It is coming on future models though. Simply we with a Taycan 2020-2022 model, will not get this.
So having a pile of ogg files is currently a great option.
Practice non really care about the Porsche only having the ear to tell lossy pinch over bluetooth sounds superhuman to me.
Not super human. Only placebo. Unless it'southward using a weird Bluetooth mode like HSP only that'southward unlikely because it would exist horribly compressed.
It's hard to tell if it'southward just HN imaginary "horrible sounding" or if the mic is on for some reason which makes information technology actually sound that bad.
I don't know annihilation about the auto's sound system, but aptX is a pretty common Bluetooth audio codec for music and these days information technology can run up to 420kbit/south with the adaptive codec, or 576kbit/due south with Hard disk, 24 fleck at 44.i-96kHZ, then it'southward non unreasonable to call back y'all could hear the difference between high and low quality sound sources with that (since even high quality compressed audio tends to exist less than 420kbit/s)
What has been heard cannot be unheard. Dorsum in the mean solar day I did some ABX comparisons of various mp3 encoders. I unwillingly trained my hearing to spot encoder artifacts forever. I tested encoders more than fifteen years agone. I still hear mp3 compression without trying. Bluetooth SBC codec is even worse. Wish I could plough this off but I can't.
Because music has a tendency of suddenly disappearing on Spotify. Either labels determine Spotify isn't giving them enough in render, or artists are angry at Spotify for their stinginess or because they have a podcast which they disapprove of. Look at your playlists that are over a year former. If you are like me you'll run across that 10% or 20% of the tracks are unavailable now. This is the downside to streaming -- null is permanent.
I was thrilled when I read Spotify was coming to my country. Then the primary genres I heed to (Reggae and Dancehall) have many tracks unavailable as the labels (VP Records is the worst) whitelist countries. I reverted back to local files.
- Doesn't require an internet connection.
- Online services are unreliable: They tin can go offline at any minute, leave of business concern, ban your for any reason (including from automated ban systems tagging you for "suspicious activeness" if you login from dissimilar counties, use vpns, etc).
- Costs money forever (or need to heed to ads).
- Their itemize of music can change: Songs can be deleted at any fourth dimension.
- Better performance: searching local storage is faster, skipping around is faster, better battery life by not needing to ability upwards the 4G radio/wifi.
I was a Google play music user for the unabridged life of the service. Lots of playlists, play history, ratings, etc. All of that is gone now. I tried multiple different apps to convert my playlists and library to Apple Music and even the official conversion to YouTube music but they all messed up my library and filled up with songs with similar names that are completely different genres and artists. Some music didn't carry over at all and I have a vague sense that my playlists are not complete but no thought what's missing. And while I liked the user interface of Google play music, I detest the interface of YouTube music and I'thou non a fan of the interface of Apple Music. I lost control over how I play my music. I regret jumping on the streaming music bandwagon a decade ago.
"Why do I desire a pile of .ogg (or .mp3) files? "
- In times with no cyberspace, or traveling to places with bad connectedness. (offline features are very limited)
- have your music forever and not just equally long the company offers it (see Neil Young)
- play your music with a amend thespian (I recollect spotify works atrocious). Fine control fade in, fade out etc.
- privacy, I do non like the world to know at what times I listen to what music and how long
..also, songs/albums beingness removed from spotify. Go to settings -> testify removed (unavailable?) tracks to see what yous are missing. Sometimes you tin can search for the song and find it again in another album, merely this step is cumbersome and not always working.
> Why do I want a pile of .ogg (or .mp3) files?
Because all listeners are not the aforementioned. I for 1, accept two high quality listening systems (one is in the form of high terminate sound card, and other in the form as a proper Hi-Fi organization), and am a former symphony orchestra histrion.
I personally appreciate the added resolution of lossless files and love to listen my favorite albums in lossless formats. When ane gives the time and ear deserved by an album, the perception is very different, and the added resolution on the highs add a lot of immersion to the album in question.
I have a spotify membership, and it's convenient, yes. But it'south not same equally "listening to music" for me. Non shut.
Also, opening your Spotify playlist and seeing some of your favorite songs missing due to license expiration is not nice. Been there, seen that.
Same for movies, simply I'm not that of a movie nerd.
Collectors, DJs, artists and music enthusiasts all withal have a great demand for actual files. For the average user it might seem dumb, only to me, my Spotify/Apple Music/YouTube Music libraries all seem frail and there are multiple instances of songs being remastered and replaced, as well as artists irresolute the final versions later on initial release (Kanye West comes to heed for ane).
> > DJ'southward should be paying for the music they're playing.
They are, separately from obtaining the material. Look upwardly "performing rights" (which is specifically for songs; it's analogous for recordings, tin can't call back the exact name now).
> Likewise, using .mp3 as DJ is unwritten crime.
I would similar to meet the person who can hear problems with well-encoded 320kbps mp3 when played in a crowded and noisy club.
Authors get paid. The indicate stands, unless yous want to argue that both the venue and the DJ should pay.
TL; DR: Music quality > Audio quality for me.
Ane DJ, Errorhead IIRC, recorded a track from a taxis stereo in colombia, oversupply goes bonkers every time he plays it. I one time had a DJ spinnin vinyl bore me to expiry, fabricated me distressing to recollect near how much he spent for those records. I much rather have bangin tunes in mp3 than that. Physically there might exist a difference, mp3 filtering out stuff you "tin can't hear". Should affect the deep bass you can only hear and feel on a clubs PA.
I discovered awesome music in the worst quality you could imagine, midi files via a cheap soundcard. Even with plastic guitars, Led Zeppelin however sounds awesome.
I doubt you lot tin tell the divergence with lossy and lossless with a constantly clipping club sound arrangement.
I have an "old" flash mp3 player that I just make full up with a pile of mp3 files for practice. Information technology weighs 70g, can be navigated blind in a pocket, is impervious to the ways smartphones break (falling damage) and the battery lasts a week. People might too have other motivations, such as wanting to decouple from a service that each week picks a new favorite vocal to make unavailable.
Well one reason is because Spotify'due south catalogue is constantly expanding/contracting so a song that y'all added to a playlist yesterday might be gone tomorrow.
It's easier until information technology isn't. That dvd volition probably nonetheless be around 50 years after. Your spotify playlist? I highly incertitude it.
I don't even know where the DVDs I had x years ago are. Lost in moving I guess. And I don't have any devices to play them on. While my data online accounts are nearly all still intact with all the information I left on them.
The data maybe. The dvd wont be playable in 50 years. Not necessarily disk degradation only hardware obsolescence. You lot will demand to proceed copying every 10-20 years to supported media.
Well it's been thirty years for some of my cds and new hardware with cd support is nevertheless being created today. Only maybe in another 20 years I will be too busy enjoying my flying automobile to intendance near my cds.
My utilise case for trying download mp3s was for DJing since Spotify no longer works with mixing software. I didn't want to purchase my entire collection per vocal and Beatport only offers dance/edm genres
Files are liberty. Custody of the bodily data represents a key level of control that you don't become with streaming. All the other responses give examples that are underpinned by this freedom.
My niece is one year old and has a unproblematic speaker with hard bulldoze full of baby music, a straightforward device she can use even by herself. Music helps her calm downwards whenever annihilation mildly upsetting happens and is frankly a lifesaver whenever I babysit (absence of parents is highly upsetting). Before buying this device and filling it with baby music MP3s, my sibling used a simple Bluetooth speaker and Spotify telephone app with disastrous results.
A solid point. This reminds me the quondam days when I advisedly programmed my VHS video to record Blade Runner from a public broadcast on Goggle box. How happy I was. "At present I volition exist able to lookout Blade Runner whenever I want!" I even remember having purchased a more expensive VHS record merely for that, I didnt want to have no image quality issues in the future.
In that location are places where files are useful. Beingness a DJ for example. You lot'll show up to a gig with a flash bulldoze, plug it into the club equipment's USB port, and practice your thing. Yous'd ideally be compensating your young man artists for their work by ownership files off of Beatport (or wherever) anyhow. Seems a bit niche.