EP05:Deep Into - Mood Machine
21:05 Share

Welcome back deep divers. Today we're going deep on Spotify, like really deep. Yeah, it's more than just hitting play on your favorite playlist this time. Right, we're going all the way unpacking how this streaming giant has kind of reshaped music. From how artists create it to how we actually experience it as listeners and to guide our deep dive. We've got Liz Peli's Mood Machine, a book that pulls back the curtain on the whole Spotify machine. It's a look at the company, the tech,

the impact on music culture, and the artists trying to make it in this new landscape. All right, so Spotify, right. Where do we even begin, I guess, with the origin story? Yeah, their origin story. It's actually kind of a wild one. Okay, give me the SparkNotes version. Well, it all started with two guys, Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzen. Yeah, the founders. And their big idea, they wanted to create something like

Way better than Pirate Bay. You mean that infamous file sharing site? The one that was, you know, not exactly legal. Yeah, that one. But here's the ironic part. Well, there's always an ironic part. They actually admitted to using pirated music during Spotify's early days, like in development. No way. So they were kind of fighting fire with fire. Wow. That's kind of hypocritical. No. It definitely raises questions about their philosophy back then. And.

The book really digs into that. Like how so? Well, it brings in voices from the Swedish piracy scene. People like Rasmus Fleischer and Peter Sunday. So what was their take on all this? They had a really interesting perspective. They saw free as more than just about cost. OK, yeah. Free as in no money. Right. But they saw it as something much bigger.

It was about freedom of access, like challenging the way culture gets commodified. So free as in liberation, not just freebie. Exactly. I never thought of it that way. So all these debates about piracy were going on. And at the same time, the music industry was imploding, right? Yeah. Total chaos. Napster had just blown up. Right. And all those major labels were scrambling, trying to regain control after the whole Napster thing. And that's where Spotify swoops in, right? Yeah.

Positioning themselves as the savior of the music industry, the knight in shining armor. Yeah, I remember that. Spotify will save music. Was that all just hype? Well, Pelly's book challenges that narrative pretty directly. So not the hero they claim to be. Not quite. Pelly argues that Spotify ended up rescuing the major labels. You mean those big companies like Universal, Sony, Warner? Yep, those guys. And often it was at the expense of independent artists. Huh.

So not exactly a level playing field. Not really. The book argues that those major labels had a lot of influence from the start. Really? Like how? Well, they secured equity in Spotify, got these huge advances, and they really shaped how the platform actually developed. Interesting. So by the time Spotify went public in 2018,

Did those major labels have a big piece of the pie? Oh, yeah. A pretty substantial slice. They owned almost a fifth of the company. Wow. OK, so maybe Spotify didn't really disrupt the music industry. Maybe they just shuffled the deck a little. It makes you think, doesn't it? And to really solidify their control, they even started using some of the music industry's more controversial tactics. OK, spill it. What kind of tactics? Well, there's this thing called discovery mode.

Basically, it lets artists and labels pay for algorithmic promotion. Wait, what? So they take lower royalty rates in exchange for more exposure.

Sounds kind of like payola, just with a tech makeover. Exactly. And for independent artists who are already struggling with those tiny screaming payouts, it adds this whole other layer of pressure. Right. It's almost like Spotify saying, hey, we'll help you get heard, but it'll cost you. Not very artist friendly.

Speaking of changing things up, I remember when Spotify was all about the search bar, like you'd go on there to find specific songs or albums. Yeah, you were in control. You searched for what you wanted to hear. Right. But then things shifted. They definitely did. The focus went to curated playlists. It became more about lean back listening. Exactly. And that's when the major labels really seized the opportunity. They saw how powerful these playlists could be. So they realized that they could control what people were listening to.

Just by putting certain songs on certain playlists. Pretty much. They even started their own companies to promote their artists on these playlists. So they were really controlling the whole curated experience. It's like they said, forget searching. We'll just tell you what to listen to. That's pretty sneaky. But to keep costs down while they were filling all these playlists, they came up with this idea. They called it Perfect Fit Content or PFC. What is that PFC?

Basically, it was all about flooding Spotify with low budget generic tracks made by, you know, anonymous musicians. So it was all about cutting costs and meeting that demand for background music. Exactly. Think about those chill vibes playlists or the focus mixes. A lot of that is PFC. Interesting. But what about the real musicians?

the ones trying to make it, to build a career, what happens to them in this system. It definitely makes it harder to break through. And it also raises questions about how genres get shaped and even redefined by streaming. You know, it's kind of funny. This whole idea of mood music, it's not new.

Even Thomas Edison was selling mood music back in the 1920s. Really? Yeah. He had this pamphlet called Mood Music, where he promised certain records would, like, evoke specific emotions. Huh. Sounds a lot like those Spotify playlists today, right? Totally. Like chill vibes or focus. It's the same idea. It's like Spotify took Edison's idea and put it on steroids. Right. They convinced us we can control our entire mood with a click.

And it's not just about amplifying the idea. It's about reshaping entire genres along the way. Ooh, okay. Tell me more about that. Well, take ambient music, for example. Ambient music. Okay, I'm listening. Brian Eno, considered like the godfather of ambient music, he created this album called Music for Airports. I've heard of that. It was meant to be deeply immersive, right? But now, thanks to Spotify, ambient often means like...

Generic background noise. Just something to fill the silence. So they took this rich artistic genre and kind of stripped it down to its bare bones to fit on a playlist. It's a pretty common critique. And then there's lo-fi beats. I mean, that whole phenomenon. It started as this underground movement, super DIY. Yeah, artists just sharing beats online. Right. But now it's this mass produced product like study music, chill music, background music. Pelly even interviewed this one producer who had like 100s

hundreds of thousands of monthly listeners on Spotify, but could barely draw a crowd for a live show.

Wow. So the streaming popularity doesn't always translate to real world engagement. Not necessarily. It's kind of like we've entered this era of functional music. Functional music. What does that even mean? It's less about artistic expression and more about filling silence or, you know, enhancing productivity, like just background noise. I see what you mean. And that makes sense considering what a former Spotify employee revealed. What was that? They said that Spotify's biggest competitor isn't Apple Music or Amazon Music. It's... Silence. Wow.

Wow, that says a lot about us, about our culture. We're so terrified of quiet, of being alone with our own thoughts. We fill every moment with music, even if it's just generic, you know, background noise. And Spotify has built a billion dollar business on that fear. Okay, so we've covered their origin story, the rise to power, that shift from search to playlists. But there's a whole other side to this story. Oh, yeah. A shadowy world that Peli uncovers in Mood Machine.

And it all starts with ghost artists. OK, now you've got my attention. Ghost artists. I got to hear. So get this. There's this whole network of production companies and musicians, and they're creating generic tracks specifically for Spotify playlists. Really? Like on purpose? On purpose. It's like a secret music industry operating behind the scenes. Churning out these like bland tracks designed to just blend into the background. Exactly. But what does this mean for real musicians?

The ones with names and artistic visions. And what about genres like jazz, which are already being kind of targeted for this whole background listening thing? That's what we'll unpack next. And it's not just like background music that's being affected by all this. This whole system is impacting mainstream pop too. Wait, really? Pop music? I always thought pop was all about the big names and those catchy hooks.

What does Spotify have to do with that? Well, Peli argues that streaming data is actually influencing how pop music is being made. Okay. How so? It's led to this kind of homogenized Spotify sound, what she calls stream bait pop. Stream bait pop. I kind of love that. Okay. So break it down for me. What exactly is stream bait pop? Think of it as music that's engineered to like perform well on podcasts.

playlists, you know? Yeah. It often prioritizes algorithmic appeal over artistic vision. Huh. So less about the art, more about the algorithm. It's all about grabbing attention quickly, fitting neatly into those curated playlists and just racking up streams. Wow. So you're saying artists are feeling pressure to create music that's basically tailored for Spotify, even if it means

compromising their own artistic voice. Yeah, that's the argument. Pelly gives examples like Post Malone's Rockstar. That song starts with the chorus to hook listeners within those like crucial first 30 seconds, you know, when the streams start counting. Oh, yeah. Or Khalid's location. Super chill, super adaptable, fits on pretty much any playlist. So is there like a formula now for creating a Spotify hit? It's starting to feel that way. What's the formula? Well,

You often hear that soft kind of emo-y vibe, minimal versus big catchy chorus, maybe some vocal samples thrown in. Okay, yeah, I can hear that. And it's a sound that's become super prevalent, especially in genres like indie pop.

Peli even noticed this trend towards what she calls the playlist voice. Playlist voice. OK, I'm intrigued. What's that? It's this whispery, soothing vocal style that seems to be rewarded by Spotify's algorithm. So it's not just the music itself that's being shaped by the platform, but the way it's sung. This makes me think about those songwriting camps Spotify puts on.

where they like bring artists and producers together to write songs specifically for their playlists. Yeah. Peli talks about one camp where the goal was to write beautiful songs for this playlist called The Most Beautiful Songs in the World. And guess what? What? The song they created was added to like multiple playlists the day it was released. Wow. It's like, you know, a self-fulfilling prophecy. The music designed for playlists...

is the music that gets promoted on playlists. It's a pretty closed loop. And then just when you thought things couldn't get more complicated, TikTok enters the scene, right? Right. Suddenly, it's not just about grabbing listeners in the first 30 seconds, but the first three seconds. Got to create that viral TikTok hit. Exactly. Artists are having to become meme makers, dancers, influencers, whatever it takes to get noticed on this new platform. It's a whole different game. And it all feeds back into Spotify because...

TikTok doesn't actually pay artists much. Right. It's more like a promotional tool to drive listeners to streaming services. It's kind of mind boggling how these platforms are influencing each other and how artists are constantly having to like adapt. It's a whirlwind. But here's something I'm kind of wrestling with.

Spotify is all about personalization, right? Yeah, they give you Discover Weekly, all those curated playlists. Right. Isn't that like a good thing? Yeah. Shouldn't I want to discover music I'll like? It's a fair point. Personalization can definitely be enjoyable, convenient.

But Peli argues that this whole focus on algorithms and personalized playlists might actually be narrowing our musical horizons. Hold on. How can that be? I'm constantly being introduced to new artists on Spotify. Think about it. You're often being fed more of what you already like. It's like the filter bubble effect, but, you know, applied to music. Instead of being exposed to a wide range of genres and artists,

you're stuck in this echo chamber of your own preferences. So instead of expanding my taste, I'm just kind of reinforcing it. It's a real possibility. It's a trade-off for sure. Personalization has its perks. But it can also limit our exposure to new, more challenging music. That's a really good point. And this brings us to one of the most

thought-provoking aspects of Mood Machine. The whole idea of streaming as surveillance. Okay, now you've got my attention. Spotify's watching me. That's kind of creepy. Well, it's not about cameras or anything, but Peli does delve into the vast amount of data Spotify collects on its users. Okay, yeah, I can see how that could be a problem. It raises concerns about data privacy.

and how all that information might be used in ways we haven't even considered. So it's not just about knowing my favorite songs. They're tracking every click, skip, playlist addition. Yep. Building incredibly detailed profiles on our listening habits. And that data is valuable, right? Not just to Spotify. Oh, yeah. To advertisers, data brokers, who knows who else. But what could they do with all that data? Well, Peli points out it can be used for everything from like

targeted advertising to credit scoring to even military applications. Whoa. Okay, now that is creepy. It's a reminder that our digital footprints are constantly being monitored and monetized.

Often without our full awareness or consent. Right. Okay. That's unsettling. And speaking of unsettling, let's talk about the whole royalty situation. Royalties. Always a fun topic. There's that whole myth floating around about artists getting like .00035 total per stream. Yeah, you hear that one a lot. Is it true? Well, Peli debunks that right away. Mm-hmm.

Spotify doesn't pay artists directly for each stream. They pay rights holders, like record labels and distributors. Okay. And they pay them based on the system called pro rata. Right. You got it. Okay. So what does that mean? Explain it like I'm five. Okay. Imagine a giant pie and that pie represents all of Spotify's revenue. Okay. Delicious pie. Got it. So instead of slicing up that pie and giving each artist a piece based on how many times their songs were streamed. Right. Spotify looks at the total number of streams.

And then they divide the pie among rights holders based on their share of those streams. OK, so if like.

A major label artist, someone like Taylor Swift, gets billions of streams. They get a huge slice of the pie. Leaving very little for everyone else. Pretty much. So this system favors major labels and superstar artists. Yeah. The ones who generate the most streams. Exactly. Independent artists and smaller labels end up with like a tiny sliver. No. Pelly highlights that a lot of musicians are really struggling to make a living in this streaming era.

That's rough. They're forced to take second jobs, find other sources of income just to, you know, survive. And it gets even worse, right? Didn't Spotify change their royalty system recently? They did. Now, tracks that receive fewer than a thousand streams per year are essentially demonetized. So certain types of music are basically worthless. It sends a pretty clear message, right? It further marginalizes these already vulnerable artistic communities.

It's kind of hard to reconcile that with Spotify's whole image, you know, as this platform for creators, this champion of artistic expression. It's definitely a contradiction. So Peli digs into that tension. Yeah. She highlights how Spotify tries to position themselves as a platform for creators. But at the same time, they're monetizing artists' work through promotional tools and ads. So they're encouraging artists to, like, build their careers on Spotify.

But they're also profiting from their work. How does that even work? Well, she introduces this concept called hope labor. Hope labor. OK, what's that? It's like when you work those extra hours for the hope.

of a promotion, even though your boss keeps changing the rules and making it harder to get ahead. Artists are being incentivized to constantly chase the dream of, you know, streaming success. Yeah. Even if the odds are stacked against them. So it's this never ending cycle. Yeah. Of hustling, promoting, always chasing that big break. It's the reality for a lot of artists, but it's not all doom and gloom. Oh, good. There's hope. There's definitely hope.

Pelly also explores this growing movement for music labor rights and the potential for a more equitable future. OK, yeah. Tell me about that. Organizations like the Union of Musicians and Allied Workers, UMAW and the Music Workers Alliance, they're advocating for fairer pay, better conditions for musicians in this whole streaming era. Yeah, I've heard about UMAW's Justice at Spotify campaign. They're demanding a penny per stream for artists, right? Yep.

That's their big ask. And it's gained a lot of traction. Thousands of musicians have signed on. Even some lawmakers are starting to pay attention. So it's not just

Like a fringe movement. Not anymore. And they've also been working with Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's office on this bill called the Living Wage for Musicians Act. Oh, interesting. What's that one about? It aims to create a new royalty stream for artists paid directly by streaming services. It's pretty inspiring to see musicians coming together like this, demanding change, challenging those power dynamics in the music industry. It's a reminder that things can change.

But it takes collective action. And that's what Mood Machine emphasizes, right? It's not just about individual artists. Right. It's about building a more sustainable, more just music ecosystem. It's about demanding transparency from these streaming platforms. Yeah, that's important. Supporting initiatives that value music not just as a commodity, but as a vital part of our culture, our lives. Okay, so we've explored the dark side of streaming.

the data privacy concerns, the complicated world of royalties, the pressure on artists, and this rise of music labor activism. But where do we fit into all of this? You know, as listeners? That's the big question, right? What role do we play in shaping the future of music? So we've explored the dark side of streaming, the data privacy concerns, the complicated world of royalties, the pressure on artists,

and this rise of music labor activism. Yeah. But where do we fit into all of this, you know, as listeners? That's the big question, right? What role do we play in shaping the future of music? Peli argues that we have a responsibility to be, like, informed consumers. Informed consumers. To understand how these platforms work and to support artists in ways that go beyond just...

you know, pressing play. So what can we actually do? It feels like such a huge, complex system. It can feel overwhelming for sure, but there are definitely actions we can take. Supporting organizations like UMAW and MWA is a great start. Those are the musician unions, right? Those guys, they're advocating for like systemic change, fighting for musicians' rights. Okay, so that's one thing. What about on a more, you know, individual level?

As a listener, what can I do? Well, you can be more intentional about how you consume music. Seek out and support independent artists. Like how? Buy their music directly. Go to their shows. Spread the word about their work. Every little bit helps. So it's like voting with your wallet.

Yeah. Choosing to support the artists and the system you believe in. Exactly. And don't underestimate the power of conversation. You know, talk to your friends about these issues. Start a dialogue. Right. Challenge the narratives that streaming platforms are putting out there. Demand greater transparency. Accountability. Mood Machine has definitely given me a lot to think about. It's a wake-up call. It's easy to get caught up in the convenience of streaming, but we need to be mindful of the impact it's having, you know? Mm-hmm.

on music and the people who create it. It's a powerful reminder that music is more than just a commodity. It's a vital part of our culture, our lives, and we have a role to play in shaping its future. This deep dive has been a real eye-opener. Spotify's impact goes way beyond just listening to music. It's influencing how music is created, how we consume it, even how we think about art itself.

So what's the takeaway for our listeners? What do we want them to walk away with? I think the biggest takeaway is awareness. Understand how these systems work. Be conscious of the choices you make as a listener. Ask yourself, do I want to support a system that prioritizes profits over artists or

Or do I want to be part of something different, something that values creativity, fairness? Liz Peli's Mood Machine is a fantastic starting point for anyone who wants to dive deeper into all this. It's a must read for anyone who cares about the future of music. And if you're interested in like exploring even further, check out Spotify Teardown and the Spotify Play. Those books by the Swedish authors we mentioned earlier. Right. The ones from the piracy scene. Yeah. They offer this fascinating look at the company's history and global impact.

So as you listen to your favorite playlists, discover new artists, navigate this crazy musical landscape, keep those questions in mind. Because the choices we make today will shape the sounds of tomorrow. That's a wrap on our deep dive into the world of Spotify and Mood Machine. Thanks for joining us. And until next time, keep exploring, keep questioning, and keep listening.