SoundCloud is great. You really get the feeling that you're being empowered as a content consumer and creator. This is because SoundCloud really doesn't give a shit about the making people listen to what the copyright monopoly wants people to listen to (ie J Bieber/M Cyrus). YouTube is the complete opposite. You log onto Youtube and it feels like MTV all over again.
SoundCloud will become HUGE for this ability to empower its users in a way that no other streaming platform has done before. But as VC money flows into SoundCloud it will become crappy like YouTube, Deezer, Skype, Tumblr, and most other start-ups that end-up loosing the original spirit of their founders.
> But as VC money flows into SoundCloud it will become crappy like ...
I hear you, but I'm quite confident the site is going to stay good for a while. Then, given that storage and bandwidth might become cheaper, we would see some startups emerge and target those who would have been "abandoned" by this hypothetical evil, VC-funded Soundcloud. Musicians would then leave Soundcloud like they left Myspace, so let's not worry too much and enjoy Soundcloud for the moment, because it's still a good product.
Let's not forget that we're talking about D series, and if they could keep this focus so far, I'd say we can at least try to have a bit of faith in them.
Youtube has become very commercialized, true, but you can still use it exactly like SoundCloud, can you not? Just ignore the ads and recommendations and it's basically the same experience.
Although, it does seem like SC is a cleaner, more targeted audio platform.
As I mentioned below, SC is limited to 128 mp3. Put youtube in 720p and the audio is decent-bitrate AAC, pretty much transparent. This is SC's most glaring and easily-fixed problem.
The low quality is actually a boon to established artists, it gives people an incentive to buy the record rather than streaming it again and again. For unknown people trying to promote their sound, not so much.
Part of the problem is Google's stinginess over bandwidth. They keep hiding the stream quality option more and more (referring to Google Play Music as well as Youtube) and they are literally RUINING the music. I've had to put HOURS of manual effort into changing stream quality on Google's products.
I wouldn't say it's the same experience. Youtube is cluttered and music is a side offering, primarily in the form of music videos. Song-only videos have been notorious for being posted by somebody other than the owner and not existing reliably (copy infringement). Soundcloud makes a home for your song that can be shared forever, is pleasant to visit, and links you to tons of related music and explore the musical interests of other people that like that music.
Hmmm. I've been in the trap scene myself lately, and this is the trend I see. Soundcloud just works so much better because of the community, the ease of linking artists together (I love how rappers will feature other rappers, then you can go listen to that other rapper and explore an entire new world of music), the overall presentation of audio with waves, similar to an audio player (Google tries to do this more with Google Play Music rather than Youtube). Souncloud is just a much more polished experience for music.
Having a cleaner more targeted platform goes a long way. The bandwith consumption is a lot less on mobile and content specific communities often provide a more-targeted user-centric experience. They are quite similar, but sometimes being a little different, a little more focused, and more niche can go a long way.
edit: I also do not think these services are mutually exclusive.
> But as VC money flows into SoundCloud it will become crappy like YouTube, Deezer, Skype, Tumblr, and most other start-ups that end-up loosing the original spirit of their founders.
I think that this mania for getting bigger with no bounds (a company never being happy with their revenue) leads to destroying all consumer-friendly values in the end.
In older times, companies could run for decades, and build steadily. They would also be content to have certain constant revenue/profit.
I wish there were more people content with running a steady web business -- something like 37 Signals, instead of "aim for the sky" startups. Nowadays it's all about getting from $10 millions a year to $100 millions or a billion, as quick as you can, and screw your original services and customers.
We'd have far more depandable and non hostile web services that way.
I agree about SoundCloud and use it for most of my music listening but I don't agree about YouTube. If you're into EDM YouTube is great as long as you follow the channels that promote the music you listen to. Very similar to SoundCloud actually.
Youtube has a much higher diversity than SoundCloud, regarding both mainstream and non-mainstream music. Obviously there are some really good niches they work in, Drum&Bass for example, but in other categories they kind of suck.
Not really sure why one would prefer a music platform that celebrates low diversity.
the long standing problem of such new media companies such as soundcloud is a revenue model. What is their revenue model? ads? sale of music (ala itunes style)? Mix of both? sponsorship from artists trying to promoting themselves?
As an artist SoundCloud is something you want to pay for. You get better stats (location, source if it's an embed, soundCloud users who have listened to you), customisable embed widgets, and more storage space for your uploads (them limit if by time, not file size). If you see a SoundCloud user with a little orange star beside their name they are a paying member and there seem to be quite a lot based on what I see when using it.
SoundCloud will become HUGE for this ability to empower its users in a way that no other streaming platform has done before. But as VC money flows into SoundCloud it will become crappy like YouTube, Deezer, Skype, Tumblr, and most other start-ups that end-up loosing the original spirit of their founders.