The official Bandcamp blog announces company news, policy changes, and features for the music platform for artists and fans.
HN links it for ownership and policy news, including the Epic Games deal, the union vote, and the 'Keeping Bandcamp human' post on AI music.
> Can Spotify actually become human- and artist-first?
No, it can't. Its founder Daniel Ek is a war profiteer. He is by definition anti-human.
Spotify itself is actively anti-artist. It has the lowest pay rates in the industry and is embracing AI replacing humans so they can pay humans even less.
Stop using it and vote with your wallet. Literally any alternative you choose is an improvement for artists over Spotify.
If you are strict about anti-AI, you might find Bandcamp appealing. https://blog.bandcamp.com/2026/01/13/keeping-bandcamp-human/
More info:
https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/a-complete-guide-to-quitting-spotify
https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/artists-left-spotify-ceo-daniel-ek-military-tech-1235425098/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Spotify
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helsing_(company)
For me the big one is playlists. I'm absolutely an album listener (call me old school), but I like to build thematic playlists of multiple albums that I listen to in rotation (for example, I have a background electronica playlist I love to use when I'm working), and the player lacks that capability.
Notably, Bandcamp absolutely encourages purchasing individual tracks, so for folks who, unlike me, tend to build mixed playlists, it's even more annoying that this feature doesn't exist.
In fact, they only very recently (as in last month!) added basic queuing support:
https://blog.bandcamp.com/2022/02/10/the-bandcamp-app-now-supports-queueing/
Which is pretty incredible as I view that as a core feature of any music player.
It also could be a purely financial decision. Bandcamp claimed $51m in revenue (I assume gross?) in 2016 [1] and, per reporting, had about $20m in net revenue in 2022 [2]. With the reported 210 employees, that's $95k in net revenue (not profit -- wages / costs are not yet accounted for) per employee. That is very low. You could easily see an acquirer wanting to be more profitable and cutting things like editorial.
[1] https://blog.bandcamp.com/2016/05/19/bandcamp-downloads-streaming-and-the-inescapably-bright-future/
[2] https://www.fastcompany.com/90951664/bandcamp-spotify-vinyl-renaissance
Direct link to the blog post which I would have posted instead had I thought to check: https://blog.bandcamp.com/2023/05/19/bandcamp-and-bandcamp-united-release-joint-statement-on-union-vote/
They're on Mastodon if you want to follow them there: https://union.place/@bandcampunited
And a Twitter version of the announcement: https://twitter.com/bandcampunited/status/1659657600386867206
Yes, Bandcamp has been profitable for 13 years so this discussion is irrelevant.
https://blog.bandcamp.com/2016/05/19/bandcamp-downloads-streaming-and-the-inescapably-bright-future/
Either things changed and Bandcamp suddenly was no longer profitable, which makes no sense, or the owners sold out for their own profit.
https://blog.bandcamp.com/2014/01/30/bandcamp-app-now-with-music-feed/
Bandcamp's Music Feed feature is basically the streaming radio bit you're after, and Bandcamp itself will let you purchase and download lossless copies of the music. I wish Bandcamp was even bigger than it is, because it totally deserves to be.