Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Music The Internet

Neil Young Says His Music Is Too Good For Streaming Services 574

An anonymous reader writes: After years of complaining about modern music formats Neil Young today announced that he's pulling his music from all streaming services. He made the announcement on his official Facebook page saying: "Streaming has ended for me. I hope this is ok for my fans. It's not because of the money, although my share (like all the other artists) was dramatically reduced by bad deals made without my consent. It's about sound quality. I don't need my music to be devalued by the worst quality in the history of broadcasting or any other form of distribution. I don't feel right allowing this to be sold to my fans. It's bad for my music. For me, It's about making and distributing music people can really hear and feel. I stand for that. When the quality is back, I'll give it another look. Never say never."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Neil Young Says His Music Is Too Good For Streaming Services

Comments Filter:
  • Who? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:13PM (#50120677)

    Who?

    • Re: Who? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Neil Young is the son of noted Canadian sportswriter Scott Young. The younger Young is mainly known for having produced a movie starring members of rock group Devo, and more recently for dating Daryl Hannah. Like the Kardashians, Young is famous for being famous rather than having accomplished anything in his own right.

      • Re: Who? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Y2K is bogus ( 7647 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:30PM (#50120821)

        Hmm, are you trying to sound like you AREN'T dissing Neil Young, but really are?

        Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young

        I'd say that makes him famous to anyone who's heard classic rock.

        Then there's those little songs "Old Man" and "Rockin' in The Free World", to name a couple.

        • Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young

          Neil Young has always had a bit of an "I'm not getting enough attention" attitude - which is why quite a few of the songs people credit to the afore-mentioned group were actually recorded by Crosby, Stills, and Nash.

          In all seriousness, these guys were important artists in their day. I'm a big fan of the late 60s counterculture rock scene, and like (and own) a number of their songs. But I'm not sure how many of their retirement-age fans are going to be into streaming music services.

          (also - the Wailin' Jennys

          • Re: Who? (Score:4, Informative)

            by budgenator ( 254554 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @10:41PM (#50122137) Journal

            (also - the Wailin' Jennys' version of "Old Man" is far superior to Neil Young's own...)

            That's because Waylon Jennings can sing in key, in time and his voice doesn't sound like a tomcat being gang-raped; his complaints about the lack of sound quality on streaming services is likely self-delusion. Most of the air play he still gets is due to CanCon [wikipedia.org] regulations.

            • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

              by Anonymous Coward

              Sadly, the poor sound quality of online music steaming would likely help Neil by masking his bad singing and guitar playing.

              The streaming services don't need him around anyhow.

        • Re: Who? (Score:4, Funny)

          by aevan ( 903814 ) on Thursday July 16, 2015 @02:56AM (#50122997)
          Meh, a southern man don't need him around anyhow.
    • Re:Who? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @08:00PM (#50121113)

      That guy who's songs are on the AM radio stations, usually the ones that are nearly out of range.

  • there. i said it.
  • Tidal? (Score:4, Informative)

    by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:18PM (#50120709)

    Tidal streams losslessly. What his excuse for not putting his music on there?

    • This must have something to do with the FLAC player he's been trying to hawk for a few years now. It's his music, and he's free to do what he wants with it, but all the MP3s are available for torrents, so all he's doing is narrowing his revenue stream down.

      • Not that I'd consider streaming sites much of a revenue stream.
      • The store associated with his player thing specifically pushes 24 bit 192kHz FLAC tracks, not just FLAC-as-in-lossless-reproduction-of-the-CD. It's entirely possible that he is hoping to push more sales there by cutting streaming availability; also possible that he dislikes even Tidal's filthy, proletarian, glass-shards-in-one's-ears 16 bit 44kHz FLAC streams.

        The former would be more pragmatic; but believers in superhuman auditory perception are not always defined by their pragmatism.
        • Cool so when someone blows a dog whistle in a song, it will be accurately reproduced for my hound to enjoy.

          44kHz just isn't suitable for dogs in the slightest.

          • Re:Tidal? (Score:4, Informative)

            by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @09:52PM (#50121855)

            Most studio microphone frequency charts typically drop off before or near 20kHz anyhow [sweetwater.com], so it's unlikely it would even be captured in the first place.

            Pfft. Not that I care if people want to blow their money on formats or equipment that's over-engineered by several factors beyond what they could possibly hear. And if they feel a bit more special believing that, unlike most other humans, they alone have "golden ears" that can hear the difference... well, that's fine with me too. Just don't try to shovel that shit in my direction [xiph.org]. Prove it to me with a blind A/B test, and then I'll take your claims seriously.

            It's pretty telling when you actually hear what Neil Young thinks about compressed audio file formats:

            “We’re in the 21st century and we have the worst sound that we’ve ever had. It’s worse than a 78 [rpm record]. What happened?

                    “The MP3 only has 5 percent of the data present in the original recording The convenience of the digital age has forced people to choose between quality and convenience, but they shouldn’t have to make that choice.”

                    “If you’re an artist and you created something and you knew the master was 100 percent great, but the consumer got 5 percent, would you be feeling good? “

            It's clear he doesn't really understand the technology, and thinks that compressing a song to 1/20th of the original size means that it's only 5% of the value of the original. Yes, you can overcompress audio until it sounds like crap, and MP3 is getting a bit long in the tooth. That's why most people have switched to 256kbps AAC (Apple music streams at this quality, btw), and the overwhelming majority of people in A/B tests can't tell the difference between compressed and non-compressed audio, nor between 16-bit/44.1kHz vs high resolution audio.

            • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              There is another benefit to high-res audio that most people seem to overlook. Young also isn't entirely wrong about streaming sounding crap.

              Many high-res formats mandate proper mastering. With CDs you can do pretty much whatever you like, cranking up the audio compression and making everything clip like crazy. A lot of otherwise good albums from the 90s and 2000s were ruined by that, and then a decade later re-released in "remastered" form with the loudness turned down a bit.

              Formats like DVD audio and other

    • Not enough audiophile rubes.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by zieroh ( 307208 )

      What his excuse for not putting his music on there?

      Because it's not really about the sound quality, as he asserts.

      As it happens, I've listened to Neil Young on and off over the years. Excellent sound fidelity is definitely NOT especially noticeable on his records, nor is excellent sound fidelity something that his music particularly benefits from. His strengths lie elsewhere, which is why this whole PONO thing and now his fake streaming protestations ring especially hollow.

  • by riskkeyesq ( 709039 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:20PM (#50120739)
    In no way did Neil say he music was too good for streaming. Read your own darn summary. The false headline is beneath even the Dice crowd.
    • by rtb61 ( 674572 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:45PM (#50120973) Homepage

      From the facebook page "It's bad for my music". Face it a music geek with his head up his ass, lives in the delusion that people must worship them and their creations. Most people buy music to bring the emotions back associated with memories when they first heard that music and does not have that much to do with the music itself.

      For me all dead music is shite compared to a drunken sing along with a happy crowd, that's real music. Being a nothing passive consumer of main stream media marketing about what you have to listen to, what makes you lame if you do not listen and how laughably you protest the oldies by conforming to marketing and buying the currently most marketed music.

      You do realise by far the majority of marketing shite associated with performance industry, is just that, marketing shite targeted at minors because they are readily manipulatable and then they are either stuck with it as they grow older or realise they have been scammed by professional con artists. You really want the best music, then create it with others don't passively listen to it thinking you are achieving something because modern hugely manipulative marketing has convinced you that you must or you are a uncool loser.

      Would the world be a lessor place if non of that now not good enough for streaming music never existing, no, not in the least. Would the world be a lessor place if lessor no quality drunken sing alongs never existed, of course it would, those a real moments of shared creativity and happiness.

    • Mod parent up. There have been too many click-bait headlines like this lately on slashdot.

  • Worst? Heh (Score:3, Informative)

    by taustin ( 171655 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:26PM (#50120781) Homepage Journal

    I'll bet a steak dinner that he couldn't tell the difference between any of the streaming services and a CD, or any other commercially produced medium, in double blind test. Most sound engineers can't tell the difference between $11,000 speaker cables and wire coat hanger.

    The reason most music sounds like shit is because the sound engineers compress the hell out of it, and balance it to make it sound louder. The streaming services can only stream what they're given.

    • Re:Worst? Heh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Mr D from 63 ( 3395377 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:33PM (#50120845)
      The wire/coat hanger point is irrelevant.

      Compression used for streaming certainly affects quality. There is no debate. I can easily tell the difference between low bitrate and high bitrate MP3. It not even close. So you need to be more specific.

      320Kbps MP3 can sound great, but often has clipping due to improper gain setting. So as a medium it has its problems.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        Where's the results of the ABX test you took to prove your claims? Numerous ABX tests over decades have backed up what the GP says.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          What are you claiming, that under certain conditions you can have a compressed music file sound like and uncompressed one? That I would agree with, but unless ABX tests show detailed audio results of compressed music across the board, at low bitrates as well as high, compared with master copies, I'd say you totally missed my points.

          I agree there are ridiculous audiophile claims out there, and a lot of psychology at play, but to broadly claim that lossy compression cannot degrade quality is just is ridicu
          • Re:Worst? Heh (Score:5, Informative)

            by ttucker ( 2884057 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @08:12PM (#50121207)

            To be perfectly fair, nobody is talking about bit rates that would be considered low in any universe.

            Most streaming services use at least 256kbps, and some use much more. Most streaming services use vastly superior codecs to MP3, such as Vorbis or AAC, that fully eliminate any rational complaint about lossy compression, even at low bitrates (which is irrelevant still, because we are literally only talking about extremely high bitrates).

            Nobody has made the claim that lossy compression never perceptively degrades quality. You argument is a straw man.

      • by zieroh ( 307208 )

        I can easily tell the difference between low bitrate and high bitrate MP3. It not even close.

        It's not enough to tell the difference. You must also determine which is actually better.

    • Depending on bitrates and content that is not particularly difficult to do, given good equipment (high quality headphones), however any claim that stream is the worst medium is just laughable.
      Both vinyl LPs (once used a few times) and FM radio are often significantly worse, not to mention AM radio.
      Just about all broadcast TV and satellite radio are also compressed as much, if not more.

      So I figure he is limiting his music purely to CD and the rare 'HD' versions of that?

      He is of course just trying to get some

      • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @08:50PM (#50121521)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          You are confusing sample rate and bit depth. Increasing sample rate doesn't lower the noise floor, raising bit depth does by increasing the dynamic range of a recording. Increasing the sample rate permits one to capture and reproduce higher frequencies, however this in practice has a collateral affect of RAISING the noise floor. This happens because although there is practically nothing musically interesting happening in the ultrasonic range, you do end up picking up electrical noise from your equipment, th

    • Wire coat hanger ain't a bad DIY fancy speaker cable. It's good heavy wire, and an air dielectric, and depending on how the coathangers are twisted it might be very little inductance. It's fine to tease overly-wealthy people waving magic rocks at their stereos, but there are a lot of things you can do WITHOUT spending silly audiophool money that will help your monitoring system perform. The stuff worth having tends to work on basic concepts like capacitance, inductance, adequacy of power supply, isolation f

    • I'll bet a steak dinner that he couldn't tell the difference between any of the streaming services and a CD, or any other commercially produced medium, in double blind test.

      I'll take you up on that. I l like a nice Delmonico steak, rare, with all the fixins. I can tell the difference, and so can every audio engineer I've ever met. People who make their living from their exceptional hearing tend to take their music seriously.

      As for Neil Young , I've never met the man but I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, given that his considerable career is based on his ability to produce sound others pay for. He's done things I don't care for, but he's probably not losing a

    • by Trogre ( 513942 )

      +1 for mentioning over-compression, which should be punishable with stocks and public fruiting.

    • The reason guns kill people is because of a spring mechanism in guns, causing the hammer to fall, causing the primer to ignite, causing the projectile to ....

      The reason most music sounds like shit is because the sound engineers...

      must obey the artist they are recording

      FTFY

      Though there are sound engineer unions, there has never been any movement within these groups to ruin music with dynamic nor bit compression. The trend of national music, known as the Loudness Wars, made possible by audio technology (not necessarily new or cutting edge, either) and those that competantly op

  • Interesting that the headline here is butchering what Neil Young actually said in the summary:

    For me, It's about making and distributing music people can really hear and feel. I stand for that. When the quality is back, I'll give it another look. Never say never.

    Being as Neil Young recently called out Donald Trump on using his music without permission in a rally (and went on to say he would never support Trump for president) the awful misquoting in this summary suggests sour grapes. Being as "failure machine" Samzenpus has an established history of posting pro-conservative gibberish to the front page of slashdot, it wouldn't surprise me if this was done for that reason.

    • by MightyYar ( 622222 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:40PM (#50120917)

      No, Neil Young is not being misrepresented. Straight from his Facebook page:

      I was there.
      AM radio kicked streaming's ass.
      Analog Cassettes and 8 tracks also kicked streaming's ass,
      and absolutely rocked compared to streaming.

      Streaming sucks. Streaming is the worst audio in history.
      If you want it, you got it. It's here to stay.
      Your choice.

      Copy my songs if you want to. That's free.
      Your choice.

      All my music, my life's work, is what I am preserving the way I want it to be.

      It's already started. My music is being removed from all streaming services. It's not good enough to sell or rent.

      Make streaming sound good and I will be back.

      Neil Young

      I hope for his sake that he is really just trying to push his magic sound machine and doesn't believe any of this.

      • Do you see no difference between "streaming services are not good enough to sell or rent" and "my music is too good for streaming services"? The former is about the quality of the output. The latter is about the quality of the input. See the difference? He said the former, not the latter.

      • by kimvette ( 919543 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @08:41PM (#50121441) Homepage Journal

        > Analog Cassettes and 8 tracks also kicked streaming's ass,

        This is where he proves to be full of shit.
        Have you ever listened to an 8-track? AWFUL SHIT.

        Cassette? Perfectly fine - if it was encoded with HX Pro and Dolby C, and you have a deck with Dolby C decoding, AND you've aligned the heads properly, AND demagnetized and cleaned them regularly. In that case it would sound near-CD-quality--- the first few times you play it. Cassettes degrade over time. Streaming already sounds way better than 8-Track (even if highly compressed, low bit rate), and as far as cassettes are concerned... I don't miss them.

        Neil Young is obviously deranged from the Damage Done.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Personally, I find that hard to believe. Does he allow his music to be sold as non-streaming MP3s? Does he allow it to be played on FM radio? What about AM radio?

        Yes, he even considers AM radio better, which is provably false... using math!

    • The whole quote is not on your side here, find it!

  • by Snotnose ( 212196 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:34PM (#50120847)
    AM quality is horrendous, and FM isn't as good as the average MP3 file. So, Neil, you gonna make radio quit playing your songs?
    • As soon as they start charging people. He said he doesn't want people paying for inferior quality.
      • by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

        I'll let you know if the BBC stop playing Neil Young on local radio. It is funded, after all, by the TV Licence.

  • by NoNonAlphaCharsHere ( 2201864 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:35PM (#50120857)
    My ears are too good for Neil Young's singing. That guy couldn't carry a tune in a bucket.
    • Yeah, but his songwriting is elite. Few can overcome rough vocals with their words and music like Young. Dylan did it.
  • It's okay for radio to play it but not stream it? Stupid and ignorant.
    I already have everything he has done. for a long time. I will listen to it how I want to listen to it when I want to listen to it.
    On my phone, tablet, radio, 8-track tape, via my cat ... he sounds good by the way...

    • Well, to be fair he did say he didn't feel right having consumer pay for his streamed music. The radio is free, and FM radio was considered high quality in its day.

      But I agree his music overcomes the medium, so he might be one of the least to need to worry about it.
  • Suck it, Neil (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Just Some Guy ( 3352 ) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:39PM (#50120909) Homepage Journal

    A 256Kbps AAC is objectively equal to CD sound quality, as confirmed by double-blind test after test. Furthermore, a huge portion of listeners will be hearing your angel's choir over cheap-ass ear buds or crap laptop speakers. Maybe you have a golden ear and can tell the difference between a CD and a FLAC file (are those good enough for you, or do they lack the sharp ones and smooth zeros of the digital masters?). Maybe you're not actually a delusional once-great who has lousy hearing and permanent tinnitus after years of playing rock concerts, and, well, being almost 70. Maybe your home hi-fi (do you still call it that?) was hand-wired by a wizened master of recording engineering fame. Maybe you have your own private anechoic chamber so you're not exposed to anything but the pure and sweet sounds of your own singing. But the rest of us listen to normal-person music with a dynamic range that's been shot to hell in the loudness wars, via normal-person audio formats, through normal-person digital-to-analog converters, into normal-person speakers, in a normal-person environment with kids playing and horns honking and dogs barking and coworkers chattering.

    Your music, pristine to the heavens though it may be, sounds no better than Miley Cyrus when piping out of my MacBook. You've become a crotchety old curmudgeon trying to remain relevant to those kids who won't stay off your lawn, and maybe it's time to sit down with a hot cup of keep your yap shut and enjoy a nice book.

    Good day, sir.

    • Re:Suck it, Neil (Score:4, Informative)

      by Chris Johnson ( 580 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:58PM (#50121093) Homepage Journal

      Ah, another vintage slashdotter! We're coming out of the woodwork here.

      The crappiness of your Macbook isn't Neil's fault, and he didn't make you buy it. Nice burn on the FLAC file, we both know that's lossless and there will be no difference (unlike anything where data's truncated or lossy-compressed). And you can still get tons of music which isn't all 'loudness war', across the entire range of recorded history in fact. If people aren't making good recordings anymore, listen to something else, over headphones that block some of the distracting noise.

      If you don't want Neil or his music, he's done you no injury. If you are mad at him continually suggesting that the digital formats we're using are inadequate, or that your playback stuff is plebian and lame, you should tell him to go make his own. Oh, wait, he did! And put it up for sale at a price that strikingly undercuts most of the 'audiophile' world. And nobody is making you buy that, though it's markedly cheaper than your MacBook. I'm given to understand there are computers running Windows and Linux that will also play your Miley Cyrus.

  • by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:41PM (#50120929)
    If he's concerned about sound quality does he prohibit people who are hard of hearing from listening to his music as well?

    Joking aside, I'll admit I'm a Neil Young fan and I enjoy a lot of his music, but this is just silly. The quality difference between a lossless and compressed stream isn't going to be noticeable at all to most people because of the low quality earbuds or headphones that they're wearing.

    What makes it even funnier is a previous /. story from several years ago about research that found young people who grew up with digital music prefer the compressed versions of songs. [slashdot.org] The people who grew up listening to Young's music probably prefer listening to his music on old vinyl albums. Are those still okay? Apparently so because he's still selling those on his store [warnerbrosrecords.com] or at least the store he links to from his website, which I presume he owns.
  • by c ( 8461 ) <beauregardcp@gmail.com> on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:42PM (#50120947)

    I don't need my music to be devalued by the worst quality in the history of broadcasting or any other form of distribution.

    Eh? Worse than mono AM radio? Worse than cassette tape? Yeah, we believe you Neil...

  • by O('_')O_Bush ( 1162487 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @07:43PM (#50120957)
    ... I can definitively and objectively say...

    That claim is not true.

    In fact, I said "When the quality is back, I'll give it another look." just the other day... about Neil Young's music.
  • I'm somewhat amazed that a 69 year old man, with a long history of exposure to hazardously loud sound(to the point of tinnitus), has managed to remain true to the belief that limited bitrates are killing music; between his own aural limitations and the well known fact that most DACs, amplifiers, and speakers and headphones are...value oriented...at best.

    It's his catalog, he can do whatever amuses him; but I have to wonder if he could actually tell which is which in a suitably blinded test.
  • Lots of people listen in the car, on crappy earbuds, in a crappy room..etc

    VERY FEW people listen in a treated room with excellent, calibrated monitors

    Yes, trained, critical listeners, in a great room, with great equipment and great ears can tell the difference

    No..it doesn't matter for most people

  • To make sure the consumer is getting 100% of his product. He's was endorsing a digital player earlier this year. He's pissed that the consumer has NO IDEA what the compression is doing to the art.

    http://nypost.com/2015/01/11/d... [nypost.com]

    He's still got it.. Incredible!!

  • For my money, 320kbps Ogg Vorbis is just a *slight touch* better than cassette tapes!

  • It sounds fine if you use Monster HDMI cable
  • by swamp boy ( 151038 ) on Wednesday July 15, 2015 @08:19PM (#50121273)

    Stubborn man
    better keep your head
    Don't forget
    what your pocketbook said

  • by Bugler412 ( 2610815 ) on Thursday July 16, 2015 @10:22AM (#50124631)
    "worst quality in the history of broadcasting or any other form of distribution"?! Neil seems to forget that AM radio was the prevalent listening method when his biggest hits were first released.

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Working...