[MLA] 95% normalized

[Bob Katz]

Dear Ian:  Well, I speed read your post and obviously did not get the nuance. 

I am rather prejudiced against You Tube because I find You Tube’s audio fidelity to be horrid and I don’t subscribe to Spotify. So I tend to avoid listening to platforms whose sound quality sucks. I flirted with Apple Music but MFIT was overrated. 

That’s why Apple has just improved its lossy service to be able to stream at either 44.1 or 48. The 48k material will be reductions Apple will perform from high res that was submitted. I haven’t done the shootout but I suspect that AAC at 48k will be an audible improvement over 44


Bob

My iPhone made me write this. Quotes only below this line. Nothing more to see here. 
----------------------------------------------------

> On May 3, 2022, at 5:53 AM, Ian Shepherd <ian at mastering-media.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Bob,
> 
> Ah OK, I see we have crossed wires. The 2 billion users number is YouTube’s own reported figure for the number of people who consume music on their video platform. In other words I’m not comparing YouTube users with music streaming service users, I’m comparing YouTube users who use it to listen to music ! And that’s the whole point of my post. No-one is taking YouTube into account and they absolutely should. The number of users watching and listening to music on the YT video platform swamps the dedicated streaming services.
> 
> This rings true for me - when I hear about new music I usually go to YouTube first. Partly because I’m interested in the stats for nerds but mostly because it’s almost always the first hit when I Google for anything. That first reason is obviously specific to me, but I think the second one is universal and really important. We all know that ease-of-use is what drives most people’s behaviour online, and if you get to see the artist you’re curious about as well as hear them, why not click on YT first ? (And then when you’re there the algorithm helpfully auto-plays other stuff you might like, so there’s not much reason to leave…)
> 
> Hopefully my post makes this important distinction clear, but your question makes me realise you haven’t read the actual post, and that’s a problem because if you didn’t read it, many others won’t have either ! And my image didn’t make this detail clear, so I’ve updated it to try and add this context.
> 
> (Also since you ask, my diagram is to scale, including the smaller circle which represents the dedicated music streaming services, so as you can see even there over 50% is normalised by default, and this will only increase over time because of Apple’s change)
> 
> And thanks for the kind clarification about my “marketing” of the topic, I appreciate it. I always try and make the information I “sell” something real and important, it’s really important to me 👍
> 
> Ian
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 29 Apr 2022, at 21:58, Bob Katz <bobkatz at digido.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 4/29/22 7:03 AM, Ian Shepherd wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Bob,
>>>> Ian: I for one appreciate your incredible enthusiasm on your blog. 
>>>> 
>>> Thanks - I think...
>>>> Well.....    using YouTube as justification for what is ultimately an estimated uni-dimensional statistical value doesn't impress me.
>>>> 
>>> Can you say more about this ? The two different sources in the blog post I link to show both show the total reported number of streaming service users is (was in Q1 2021) about 500 million, and YouTube reported that 2 billion of their users consume music on the platform. So that’s a ballpark of 80% normalization as a minimum, in terms of where people are exposed to new music. (Which is the key - once someone has decided they like something they’ll do so regardless of the loudness)
>>> 
>>> So yes there is going to be plenty of inaccuracy in those figures, but the bottom line is that YouTube vastly outweighs the dedicated music platforms. And since YouTube is entirely normalized, that makes all the quibbling about default settings, users who disable it and the actual number of users on each particular service kind of irrelevant, doesn’t it ? I mean the “real” number might be 90% or even as low as 80% perhaps but that’s still a massive proportion.
>>> 
>>> Or have I missed something and made an embarrassing error ?
>> 
>> Not embarrassing. But I don't get how you are counting in what is largely a video streaming service.... I can see musicians completely ignoring YouTube. They want to know what Spotify and Apple are doing. And yes, since they are normalized (with Apple slowly getting there).. you've made your point. But statistically I would NOT include YouTube in a percentage of MUSIC streaming services. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> What impresses me is your marketing ability. I am so tempted to tell people that Ian Shepherd says that music platforms are already 95% normalized! 
>>>> 
>>>> 9 out of 10 doctors say so, too!
>>>> 
>>> I think that’s an unfair comparison, “9 out of 10 doctors” is a deliberately manipulated figure, the numbers I’ve used are a genuine attempt to compare how many listeners are on each service.
>>>> At least we are moving forward and thanks for the article. 
>>>> 
>>> Do you know the phrase “damned with faint praise” ? I regularly get comments from major-name mastering engineers telling me everything I say about this topic is nonsense, so if all I’m doing is a great sales job on something that is actually flawed logic, maybe I won’t bother 😕
>>> 
>>> Ian
>> 
>> I really mean what I said, you're doing a great job! And yes, you're practicing the best kind of marketing: putting a good face on the current situation. That is marketing....  on behalf of and for the benefit of us critical music producers. I just don't think it's fair to create a % number of MUSIC streaming. I think to be fair you must not include YouTube in your statistic. YouTube videos are often amateur productions with amateur soundtracks, and they must be accompanied by video. What's the % if you don't include Youtube?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> 
>> If you want good sound on your album, come to
>> Bob Katz 407-831-0233 DIGITAL DOMAIN MASTERING STUDIO
>> Author: Mastering Audio
>> Digital Domain Website
>> 
>> No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number
>> of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20220503/bd139e83/attachment-0001.html>