KVR Audio

RichardSemper · Post by **RichardSemper** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:37 am

In light of the change to Upload limits on Soundcloud:

"On December 9, 2019, SoundCloud's introductory upload limit for free users will change. As a free user on a Basic plan you can upload a total of 3 hours of audio or 15 tracks, whichever comes first. "

I would like to get the views of OSC participants about the viability of continuing to use Soundcloud for our uploads, and ideas about other options, platforms etc. which may be available.

Hanz Meyzer · Post by **Hanz Meyzer** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:42 am

Nope, I don't think so.

This looks like the alternative which comes the most close, but with better conditions of course:
https://audiomack.com

Also has comments.

ilmai · Post by **ilmai** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:48 am

I'm personally fine with whatever, but the new Soundcloud policy is both very limiting and feels like a last grasp for some money before they run out again (like they did last year before they got a new loan). I wouldn't be surprised if Soundcloud just disappeared.

I'm using https://clyp.it/ for posting my stuff for now but honestly I'm not sure what's the best option.

Hanz Meyzer · Post by **Hanz Meyzer** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:50 am

Also here https://audius.co/ , but as far as I can see, no comments.

ilmai · Post by **ilmai** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:53 am

Hanz Meyzer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:50 am Also here https://audius.co/ , but as far as I can see, no comments.

I don't see Audius having a bright future.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/9/2090 ... ent-piracy

New startup Audius says its blockchain-based music streaming service is the solution that finally pays attention to indie artists’ needs. It’s also full of pirated material.

Demuvi · Post by **Demuvi** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:59 am

No. Soundcloud has horrible quality. Better use clyp.it.

exponent1 · Post by **exponent1** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:24 am

No, Soundcloud doesn't seem like a sustainable platform for OSC. I second https://clyp.it and https://audiomack.com.

Although, Audiomack seems like an identical alternative with no upload/stream restrictions, has commenting, playlist features and is probably sustainable too as it seems to be backed by some networks & labels. I tried it yesterday, I think the audio conversion is decent and there are no noticeable artifacts. (Sample linked here https://audiomack.com/song/the-exponent/lights)

Carl_saved · Post by **Carl_saved** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:32 am

I had to look for a while to find the info of the changed upload limits first hand online ... it's well hidden in the SoundCloud FAQs --- not in their news, although it is breaking news.

I understand that online services must be provided by someone who wants a living, too. So it doesn't surprise me that living on a "free services bubble" won't work out eternally...
I might suggest archive.org. It supports likes and reviews (although I think you don't know WHO liked something). However ... they prompted me for financial help in the Wikipedia manner. No surprises here.
P.S.
archive.org is used for the Open Source Music Challenge last year and this year, that's how I came up with that...

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:35 am

Depends doesn't it? I don't know how exactly the OSC tracks are hosted. If they're all hosted by the OSC hosts themselves, of course, the free data limt will soon be exceeded. If those tracks come from the Soundcloud accounts of the participants, it will be less of a issue.

TBH, i don't know why peeps are so reluctant to pay for the service, when they spend so much money for their gear. Soundcloud has a massive amount of servers and bandwidth which has to be paid, it really doesn't run for free by itself... EVERY service you use will have to be paid the one way or the other. By advertising, by collecting and working with your data, or, by payments for the service.

exponent1 · Post by **exponent1** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:51 am

chk071 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:35 am TBH, i don't know why peeps are so reluctant to pay for the service, when they spend so much money for their gear.

Not everyone of us spends too much on gear. Besides, OSC tracks are typically made with free tools/plugins and the SoundCloud subscription becomes sort of a $12 or $16 fee (depending on how you're billed for the subscription) to enter this monthly contest (which is fine) but should not be the case for a challenge of this nature. Also, many contestants don't enter this contest every month, nor make/upload music very often, making this cost overhead a bit redundant and a probable barrier to entry.

Carl_saved · Post by **Carl_saved** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:55 am

chk071 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:35 am Depends doesn't it? I don't know how exactly the OSC tracks are hosted. If they're all hosted by the OSC hosts themselves, of course, the free data limt will soon be exceeded. If those tracks come from the Soundcloud accounts of the participants, it will be less of a issue.

Every contributor hosts their track in their own SC account. So technically you're right. As it is, everyone is responsible to either get a paid account or get under the upload limit (or get a second account). It's not OSC's problem. But there's people like me who now will think twice about participating because of this new hurdle. I'm way over the new limit with my track count. So in fact it might be a problem for OSC anyway.

Mushy Mushy · Post by **Mushy Mushy** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:55 am

exponent1 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:51 am
chk071 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:35 am TBH, i don't know why peeps are so reluctant to pay for the service, when they spend so much money for their gear.
Not everyone of us spends too much on gear. Besides, OSC tracks are typically made with free tools/plugins and the SoundCloud subscription becomes sort of a $12 or $16 fee (depending on how you're billed for the subscription) to enter this monthly contest (which is fine) but should not be the case for a challenge of this nature. Also, many contestants don't enter this contest every month, nor make/upload music very often, making this cost overhead a bit redundant and a probable barrier to entry.

But you only need to pay if you exceed the track threshold. It’s business as usual otherwise.

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:57 am

Carl_saved wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:55 am
chk071 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:35 am Depends doesn't it? I don't know how exactly the OSC tracks are hosted. If they're all hosted by the OSC hosts themselves, of course, the free data limt will soon be exceeded. If those tracks come from the Soundcloud accounts of the participants, it will be less of a issue.
Every contributor hosts their track in their own SC account. So technically you're right. As it is, everyone is responsible to either get a paid account or get under the upload limit (or get a second account). It's not OSC's problem. But there's people like me who now will think twice about participating because of this new hurdle. I'm way over the new limit with my track count. So in fact it might be a problem for OSC anyway.

Ok, fair enough.

I wonder if you can have multiple Soundcloud accounts.

exponent1 · Post by **exponent1** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:59 am

Mushy Mushy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:55 am But you only need to pay if you exceed the track threshold. It’s business as usual otherwise.

The threshold is 15 tracks and a lot of folks over the past year or 2 have probably exceeded it already before this policy change, with or without having participated in OSC.

ilmai · Post by **ilmai** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:02 pm

Yeah I was definitely over 15. I don't want to support SoundCloud since I don't agree with their direction and value proposition, also I'm already paying for Dropbox and Clyp for storing and sharing my clips... so I'm keeping my SoundCloud account only for OSC for now, until/if it changes.

Is Soundcloud still the best option for posting One-Synth-Challenge tracks?