There is SOOO much BS that comes along with this unfortunately. The addition pretty much guarantees that the parent software will adopt some sort of DRM protection and this ALONE is reason enough to avoid this at all costs. If needed Djay is the way to go IMO.
BTW just imagine you lost your internet connection during performance................

Furthermore you now have a "Internet connection required" policy.


I use this feature myself as a backup (ONE of my backups LOL) so I am not hating on the idea. I just feel there is a time and a place for this. Time being backing up or off chance (not so common) requests place being elsewhere other than Serato.

I thought you can play off line with a premium account? (it is in my case)
You just need create a folder which downloads the music you selected.
You just need to be sure to reconnect with the internet within 30 days in order to have it updated.

But I agree, there are certain pitfalls with this. to name a few:
- DRM: what if spotify changes DRM policy which makes it unusable for DJ use
- Spotify user policy : I don't think it is allowed to play their music in public
- What if spotify get out of business?
- Streaming quality?

Idea sounds good, but not sure all elements are there to make it actually work in a professional DJ environment.

deejdave It won't be mandatory. It could just be an add on for those extra track that you need but don't have in your hard drive.
Regarding losing the internet connection, if serato buffers the track when you load it on the deck you wouldn't need interent connection to play it. Just like when you make offline playlists on Spotify

For Spotify to even consider allowing its use it would most likely require this DRM protection across the boards which helps NO ONE!!

You CAN play offline with premium account. The thing is you obviously MUST select tracks beforehand and this defeats the purpose of having an online capability. Not for nothing you now have "borrowed" tracks of lesser quality than if you were to simply purchase and now you have forever internet connection or NOT with NO protections as it is YOUR file.
While I agree the issue is this little "backup" (user slectable) feature will affect EVERY user of SDJ no matter who you are.


This is Djay's policy on DRM protected songs ACROSS THE BOARDS:


"djay supports all songs bought in the iTunes Store, both DRM-protected and “iTunes Plus”.

Playback, looping, cue points, save settings, cueing, speed, pitch, MIDI control, etc. are supported with all songs from the iTunes Store (DRM-protected and “iTunes Plus”).

Please note though that DRM-protected songs don’t support recording, pre-cueing and Audio Unit plug-ins and the audio quality of some features (such as scratching) is somewhat lower than with non-DRM files. This unfortunately is a technical restriction imposed by Apple’s DRM. Finally note that DRM files will play through whatever is selected in System Preferences as the default audio output. The “lock” icon in djay indicates that these restrictions apply for a song."

Do you know anyone who would be interested in abiding by these rules? Again these rules would then apply to ALL users regardless of who uses Spotify................. this happens god help anyone who made it happen.

This is Apples rules though and not for Spotify. I'm sure we all know how Apple likes to limit everything that it's making.

Also Spotify has the ability to stream on 320kbps for Premium accounts so I don't see quality being a problem.

For song selection as I said before, it could be possible to use the search function in serato dj to search for tracks on Spotify. Once you load your track on deck it would buffer so it wouldn't matter if you lost connection.

Also would be awesome if you could sync your playlists with your serato crates.

I haven't done much programming but I am sure that this integration is doable but legalwise spotify might need to create a different tier of premium for djs.

Again this is if 320 is good enough for you. I try to keep everything WAV or FLAC (1000kbps+) for performances. 320 is decent as well but when it comes to recording or live performances................ then again recording is not really something that has to be worried about with Spotify/Djay being it is in no way allowed.
This solves temporary loss of connection. I am talking more of what if the internet goes out. Not likely nor often but it certainly happens.


Again this is not something I have to worry about as it would NEVER fly here at Serato. Community-wise alone this has been thrown around quite often and never even taken a hiccup of flight. I am personally quite content having my music be the basis of my sets. Spotify/Djay is a great backup system of mine but I have yet to actually use it in any live situation.

I don't mean to slam this as the worst idea ever but I just don't see it happening here. I personally am thankful for that though.

The search function is not working ATM but when it gos back check "Spotify"

I can understand where you come from, but Spotify wouldn't handle the whole music database. It would be as an extra for songs that you don't have.
I deff agree with you that no dj wouldn't be comfortable having all their songs streamed from Spotify, but I wouldn't say no to have the option to stream few songs during my set.

+1

Here a video btw:
Watchwww.youtube.com

Would also love to have the option to play some songs when needed from spotify.
I have so many tracks that I play once a year, I could completely wipe them off my hdd

I've read somewhere that Algoriddim is working with Serato and Traktor. Let's hope its from spotify integration.

So is this going to happen? Because it should. It's the future.

Spotify plugin, like it, want it!!!

I asked Serato support and they are working on streaming support.. so hang in there :D

Not trying to kill anyone's hopes or dreams but I would be very surprised if this were true and I don't need any other reason other than the fact that Serato NEVER leaks any information like this until the time of release or at the very least beta.

I also doubt it, though i definitley welcome it

They probably said they are considering it.

My guess is something like this

"There are no official plans as of now to support this although if it gains enough feedback it is certainly something we could consider adding in a future update."

That's usually the line we all hear but I was trying to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

That would boost sales for both Serato and Spotify, BUT
You'd have to be able to play your offline playlists from Spotify within SDJ.
As of now, djay2 cannot play anything from Spotify without an Internet connection and the minute you lose your connection the track stops playing even if already "loaded"

I highly doubt it would boost sales for Spotify....

And any major labels know they would make more money of DJ's buying tracks than spinning off a cheap streaming service.

To be fair Djay2 is an Ipad app. A more fair comparison would probably be Djay Pro which absolutely keeps playing the music streamed by Spotify regardless of whether the laptop loses connection or not which is good news.

damn you, yes you're right again, i was talking the ipad app, :-)

No worries. It is a good sign for our fight to bring this to Serato :)

i don't think anyone from Serato ever said they were even considering this.... ??

Correct. If they did say they were considering this there would be no fight necessary..............

+1

I won't say this is the future of DJ libraries, but it should be part of it!

Spotify, Apple music (Beats1), or hell I'd even take Google Play Music

Or Serato Whitelabel anyone?

Algoriddim has partnered with Spotify for Mac, iPad, iPhone, and Android. I am certain Serato could get a partnership like this. www.algoriddim.com

Here is Ian Golden explaining how well one could DJ with Algoriddim on some CDJs. Watchwww.youtube.com

As far as I can see, this is absolutely something Serato should be doing.

Aside from anything else they're already behind with the Stems format anyway (which is Open-Source btw). I'm often finding myself glancing at other DJ software (yes even Djay Pro with everything they're putting out) and wondering whether It's worth making the switch...

Say you're in the club and someone goes 'can you play this' - Occasionally I have to say no because I don't have it, which would (almost) never happen with Streaming service integration. I saw on another thread someone saying how part of the skill of DJing is having your own unique music library, but this is completely compatible through having playlists. Nobody is saying lets 'only' have Spotify/Apple Music/ whatever anyway.

Say you get a sudden moment of inspiration regarding a brand new song you've heard on the radio on the way to the club, and you really want to try some mix out. With integration you could.

Regarding the legal issues, it's clearly not a licensing problem since Djay already have this integration. It's not up to the software developer how their software will be used so, even if Spotify has this legal problem of commercial playing, that is not Serato's problem. Djay are supporting more and more professional controllers every month - they're hardly being secretive about the suggestion to use Spotify in a club.

I would NEVER trust this in a performance environement. Slow networks, drops, bad wifi, songs getting dropped... this just says high risk all over it.

These are good points. However, in djay currently when you load the song to a deck it buffers the entire track - this means that even if you get network dropout that song you loaded is still good. Obviously you also still have access to your local library.

Also, I'd personally find it SO much easier (and cheaper tbh) to be able to just download whatever I want for offline mode in Spotify and then use that in Serato - means you can far more easily get hundreds of new tracks on the fly wherever you are from your mobile - On the train, bus, whenever. Trawling through Beatport deciding whether to pay 1.49 for a track that I may or may not end up playing is a total pain anyway.

Yeah, but legally you can't without proper licencing, and that takes the cost right back up. For personal use at home, I think it would be fun to be able to try stuff out, before I buy it, but downloading files of unknown providence and depending on them for a live performance seems pretty risky to me.

Mind you, I'm old skool, I still like to buy most of my music on vinyl when I can. Hahaha.

But then you gotta think about beatgrids, cue points and so on, and would that even apply to streamed music, seeing as you won't be able to write the ID3 info?

As for your comment about the licensing, I'll just refer you to my post ;)



Djay costs about £50 (I think?) and you pay for the Spotify premium subscription. As for the files 'providence' surely you'd have just as much faith in a professional company like Spotify as you would as in iTunes or Beatport...?

Go try out the Djay demo! Beat grids, cue points, it's all fine.

DJs and Performers of derrivative works in the US and Canada require either a SOCAN membership ASCAP, BMI and/or SESAC for U.S. performers, and many venues are now requiring proof of membership to be allowed to play, to avoid any unfortunate "imperial entanglements" in the future. ;)

Spotifiy premium specifically excludes public performance for commercial purposes in the licence agreement for Premium membership. You're fine playing it at home or a private party, not in a club or public venue. I have looked into it for streaming in restaurants, clubs before the main act, and so on.

Seriously, go talk to your agent or lawyer if you're a pro, because you do not want to get fined, or lose your venue. You're not even allowed to play radio in most venues thanks to draconian copyright law changes.

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean that you're allowed to.

I note that you use a £, so you're likely not North American. The rules overseas may be much more reasonable. Unfortunately for many of us, the rules are very restrictive here in the gulag of North America. :)

The EULA for iTunes also expressly forbids public play or use for commercial purposes.

Beatport, for pro members ELUA includes limited licence to play publically. So when it comes to not getting my ass sued off, I prefer beatport.

Unfortunately, most DJs I know don't licence properly and I have seen even small time once a week nightclubs get hit with huge fines here for performers that are not licenced. So I'd say no matter where you are, check your licence rights carefully before playing streamed music. I don't like it when my brothers get screwed by the man.

While completely accurate I have never in my almost 20 years even heard of anyone (or anywhere) be affected in any way by lawsuits, fines or negative impacts in any way. As a matter of fact usually when I hear talk of this here on the forums it is from our northern neighbors in Canada who I do believe is where this really applies. As a matter of fact it falls on the venue (or business owner) alone to get the licensing from ASCAP here in the states www.ascap.com as they are the ones ultimately financially benefiting from the revenue.


This is what I have dug up in researching on my own but again this has never affected anyone I know in any way so if I am incorrect please tell me. In regard to nobody I know getting into any trouble I do agree with the above statement just because you CAN do something does NOT mean you should. It is on each of us to make the right choice with weighing out the consequences. Obviously if someone were to use Spotify publicly the chances are highly unlikely anyone would ever even know.

Well, I live in the UK and I haven't heard of anything like that happening here! (Not to say it never has of course). As far as my limited understanding of it goes, it's up to the venues to gain the licensing to play music in the UK. I've never been questioned on the source of the music I play, and I could very easily have been using 100% ripped off music and nobody would have been any the wiser!



Well, 'Just because you're not allowed to do something doesn't it should be that we can't'. You don't tie everyone up their whole life just in case they decide to walk somewhere they're not meant to - it's good to be able to move, even if that places the opportunity for them to go where they shouldn't.
You guys live in the US right? Just occurred to me - you're allowed to buy guns, but you're not allowed to murder people. Similar principle, except without all the potential death and ridiculousness.

Just because you're not allowed to in certain circumstances doesn't mean we should chuck the baby out with the bathwater. Being able to stream music has clear benefits for legitimate practices - experimentation, all of that - private non-commercial events as you mentioned, etc. I could very easily right now pick up that djay pro app and use it for my next gig - nobody would know. Djay aren't getting sued are they? It's not their responsibility.

I could, right now, go to Spotify and record songs straight off the sound card using one of the various softwares available that make this a synch (they even automatically ID3 tag and find album art for you). I could then use that in Serato to play at a gig, and there's nothing there to stop me. Not allowing streaming doesn't prevent licensing from being 'abused', and it's not really 'enabling' this abuse any more than is already enabled.

_______

Imagine two situations involving this guy, 'John'.

a) John decides he doesn't want to pay for his tracks on Beatport, so he rips them off and goes to play in the club.

b) John decides he doesn't want to pay for his tracks on Beatport, so he decides that instead he's going to use the Spotify functionality in the club.

In both of these instances John has 'done something bad'. He can break licensing law either way with similar effort, yet having Spotify integration offers a number of legitimate benefits (and in case B the artists are actually getting paid a little anyway, which is presumably a plus).

It's not going to encourage people to break licensing laws if they don't already, since the opportunities are already present and people either do or don't conform.
______

All I'm saying is that from Serato's perspective as the developer it is not up to them to police how we use whatever features they give us. Spotify wouldn't get sued if you used it in a restaurant, and the radio wouldn't get sued for being played either, yet you can access the internet and turn on a radio in a restaurant. (Incidentally, singing happy birthday in a restaurant is breaking copyright law if you didn't know).

Let us, the DJs, worry about what we're allowed to do and what not in certain situations - there aren't any physical restrictions on using music that's been ripped off piratebay on Serato are there? No. So why should it be any different when it comes to streamed music.

I think what you are trying to say is "Just because you're not allowed to do something doesn't mean that we can't."

While I know what you are trying to say just as Virtual DJ found out the hard way recently the LAST thing a company wants to get mixed up in is facilitating illegal activities. Djay has gone under the radar for now and this pleases me but this may not be the way of it forever. They have taken the head in the sand one eye closed approach and trust when I say this will catch up to them eventually. The absolute FIRST question asked few months ago when the shit hit the fan at VDJ is "well how come Djay can still stream?"

Just remember only one of your a/b instances DIRECTLY makes Serato an accomplice or a facilitator at the very least.
The word negligence comes to mind here and remember the saying "negligence of the law is no excuse". While the user may or may not get off for "not knowing" they are breaking the law the one providing the direct tool to break the law claiming the same status would never fly.


IMO until they clarify this "gray" area Serato is wise to hold off even if I too wish it could become a reality............. and I REALLY do wish it could become a reality.

deejdave is spot on. I'm not saying that what the recording industry has done here is right. It's bloody stupid in most regards, but it does open up liability and criminal negligence issues for people along the chain. Sure, the end DJ might not be hit, but I personally know 3 different venue owners here in Vancouver that have been hit by cease and desist orders to their operations and fines for having unlicenced performers, or not carrying the right venue level licences in the last year. One of them it bankrupted.

So, it's not always as innocent and honor system as you'd think, depending on where you are.

This is a business for me, so I do my level best to make sure that I have appropriate licencing and insurance, and I encourage others to do so just to cover their own butts. That's all. In the case of a streaming service, frankly I'd want to absolutely make sure that there was no liability in performing tracks off them before I'd drop it in the club.

Not hearing of anyone you know getting hit doesn't mean it doesn't happen (tho these days they tend to go after businesses like venues or software providers because there's more money). But if this is part of your livelihood, then it's always smart to be on the right side of the law in case it comes knocking.

Given the recent chaos around Soundcloud and the resulting ****show there courtesy of Sony, I think it would be really risky for a software vendor to release streaming integration until there is a clear legal and safe way to do it.

I'm not passing judgement on the way anyone gets their music. I'm just saying that it pays to be safe, and we're in the public eye, so it pays doubly so for us.

Basically, I missed out a word! I meant to say:
'Just because you're not allowed to do something doesn't mean it should be that we can't'.



I think you might have meant 'ignorance'! Unless you meant that just because they're not upholding certain laws particularly strictly in a certain area doesn't mean you should do it.



Yeah I got screwed over by that for some DJ mixes I'd uploaded when I first made my account. Had a bunch of my own stuff on there as well, hadn't uploaded any mixes recently, and BAM account removed (no warning either since there was more than one mix). Premium too! No refund. Bastards...

I'd personally be up for paying maybe a little more for a subscription service tuned for live performance. Not sure how much I'd be willing to drop on that, but it would definitely be something.

Now I'm just thinking... I've done a little bit of stuff for an internet radio station, and what happens there is that the station pays a certain fee for the licensing to play music commercially. Nobody, I repeat, nobody, gets their music from Beatport there yet they are careful with the legal stuff, so that would imply a certain situation regarding the law in this country anyway assuming they know what they're doing.

You'd think that the labels would appreciate the importance of DJs for their incomes. Club-Performing DJs are not a giant group in reality, and whether we pay or not it makes no difference to the exposure their stuff is getting when we play it.


Having a streaming service for club work, if supported properly by the industry, could actually work out extremely well for them - currently artists don't get paid per play in a club, they just get paid a small percentage of the fees when you purchase the track originally (and however it works with the licensing the venue pays). With a streaming service it'd make it far easier to keep track of what DJs are playing and to make sure the royalties go to the right parties, no?

Meant negligence being I don't think anyone of us here are unclear what the legalities are on this. Ignorance will still stand for the ones who have no idea though. Again it is our responsibility to know.


I also agree this is NOT the way it should be. There SHOULD be a way to get involved with this without breaking the law. It's really pathetic. We've seen huge entities get involved and end up just tying themselves in huge legal fees. Short of banding together and making an impact our options are limited.

Lastly I completely 100% with no doubt feel that some structure of payment SHOULD be implemented to get the proper funds through the proper channels to make this both a legal and profitable movement for the record labels. Trust I am in NO WAY on their side and trying to make them even more rich BUT realistically speaking it is the only way we will get this to see the light of day.



Last question: I Know Spotify has a "no public use" policy but what if this public venue has all their fees paid?

As for your last question, I don't really know so I'll leave someone else to answer that!

I've just been messing around with Djay and, to be honest, it's pretty impressive. There are certain things that Serato does that I prefer, but Djay Pro is definitely one to watch...

I think we mentioned previously, but Djay now supports the CDJ-2000NXS. You'll also notice that in all of the marketing stuff they've got they have graphics indicating club play. They've got the video mixing stuff also, and the name of it - 'Djay >pro<' is short for Djay Professional.



Now, from my playing around, Djay seems pretty crap at dealing with local libraries that aren't integrated with iTunes. This means that it's intended for use with Spotify and iTunes libraries. Interesting impact when you bear in mind comments made above about licensing...



In short, Djay Pro's marketing >clearly< aims at performing DJs. I've hunted all over their website, haven't found any mention of licensing problems playing live in a club. The only place I can quickly find online that says so is in the Spotify FAQ on their own website.

I'm sure that all the things said in this forum so far perhaps have been true at some point, or may be true for certain regions, but I really think we must be missing something here given the example of Djay.


Law is a business of technicalities, correct? I'm just thinking out loud here, but what counts as 'playing music from Spotify'? Could it technically mean Spotify's own software, things that are specifically mentioned in their Ts&Cs? If you're playing from the Spotify feature in a club it could come out that technically, in terms of licensing, you're not playing Spotify...? Just because the streaming address within the software comes from a Spotify-associated server doesn't necessarily translate to an offending situation.... :'(

Just found this on an algorridim forum posted by an admin:



*sigh*. Spotify reportedly just re-state that it's illegal if it isn't your own house.

HOWEVER

There's a little thing called ASCAP and BMI (which you've no doubt heard of) which seem to confuse the whole issue. In the UK at least, all of the venues you'd be playing at would have to have this licensing... so would this not cover what music is being played? You're already paying Spotify for the privilege to stream music through Spotify premium, so it's not like you're not paying them their dues, and the artists are being paid already through the medium of the ASCAP and BMI fees the venues are playing.

I'm pretty sure that it's not the case, and logically why should it be, that simply because the vibrations coming out of the speakers were translated from code that was streamed rather than downloaded you should have to pay for the right to play twice?

Just my two cents of thought.

Seems correct. My thoughts exactly and the only opposition would be Spotify's stance on no public play. Furthermore Djay's new release just added support for most of the DDJ controllers. I was part of that beta and actually the touch strip FX parameter thing was my idea :) but the software is really awesome. The ONLY real problem I have with it is the scratching in that the platter is not actively tied to the playback. In other words the actual playtime does not reflect the actual 360 degree resolution of the platter. In lamens if you backspin the platter of any device the music may play for a longer or shorter period than the platter actually spins.

I agree with the local library thing but then again it is not what I use it for. As a matter of fact I have yet to add or play a local file to the software. The Spotify integration though SPOT on!

Well I've just been trying the trial for about 30 mins and there are definitely some things that could do with being better. I find myself longing to be back in Serato, until I remember the whole point I'm messing around with Djay in the first place is because it's got Spotify whereas Serato doesn't! UI could be better I think - too much empty space for my liking, even on just my laptop - I adore the 'extended' waveform view for Serato for example.

On my DDJ-SX the mixer doesn't behave properly, the EQ doesn't go to -infinity, only the -24 the software goes to.

Time-shifting also DEFINITELY needs some work, completely sub-par compared to Serato. There also doesn't seem to be any obvious way to edit the beat grids, which for obvious reasons would become somewhat problematic...

Basically.... what we need.... is Serato, BUT WITH SPOTIFY.

From a sales perspective, if Serato adds Spotify perspective, then BAM you've immediately won over a majority of the more serious Djay users, a bunch of the Traktor crowd, everyone sitting on the fence, and you'd make us Serato loyalists feel good about our life choices - what's not to love?

Maybe I'll go have a conversation like this over on a Native Instruments forum, see which admins reply first... (do admins trawl these posts?)

BOOOM!!
HAH! Trust that they will not. They haven't even budged with video LOL.

Well i was just about to start this discussion in the forum area but then i saw that someone had already started it.
My lucky day 😍😍....
A connection between Serato and Spotify would be a dream cometrue.
I have a very large library and it would cost me a fortune to buy all these tracks.
Is there any software on the market that has this abillity? With the hardwareconnection available?

As mentioned above Djay has this ability but I am confused. If you have a large library didn't you already buy the tracks? Unless you are saying Spotify has a large library and it would cost a fortune to buy all those tracks.

so I guess you do not use Spotify . let me beak it down to you . Spotify create lists of songs to easily access them . if I then have a list of 100 songs on the list, yes it 's good , but if I want them into serato I have to buy all those songs at once, it becomes quite expensive to + that the list will grow. but for $ 9 a month this ensure that the list be available in offline mode additionally. this sounds like a simple solution .
You and I have the same interest but we do it in different ways.

I can assure you we all know what Spotify is, and we don't need your grace to explain it to us with your bad grammar.



People don't usually refer to Spotify playlists as their 'library', which is where the confusion has come from.



Since you're clearly new to this thread, I would humbly suggest that you bother reading up before you post.

Watchwww.youtube.com

Not only do I use Spotify but I also got involved with the newest version of Djay Pro using Spotify. Just to help in your future endeavors what you have is called playlists. The good news is what you are looking for is not different in any way. You are in fact looking to achieve the same things we were already talking about.

Is this program ok to use on my PC?

Incidentally, Djay Pro doesn't appear to let you use the Spotify offline feature... Which is a bit crappy for Club performance!

lmgtfy.com

No MAC ONLY.
Yeah this is quite the bummer.

BTW New version of Djay 2 released today.

Check out the release notes:

• Introducing Spotify saved songs in media library
• Enhanced Spotify media library integration with faster loads
• Added support for Spotify song saving


hmmmm........................

O.m.f.g. A COMPANY THAT LISTENED TO AND ACTED ON CUSTOMER FEATURE SUGGESTIONS? That is remarkable.

Well now I'm REALLY frustrated that Serato doesn't have this feature.

I don't get it, when someone else offers it, then use the other software product?!
As long as you just complain and still stick to Serato, they have a motivation around zero to make this happen.
I've switched around 60% of my bookings to rekordbox because of that reason and am happy. Just do it!

This is of course an argument people make all the time, however the point is (as discussed briefly above) that Djay doesn't do certain things well enough to warrant a switch.
It's exactly the same as if, say, audacity suddenly updated it's time-shifting algorithms to be 100x better than any DAWs stuff - we'd all have warrant to 'moan' to the other developers, and we wouldn't switch to using Audacity just because one element is improved.

As long as you class 'adding Spotify' as one change, there's less I'd want to change about Serato than I would about Djay.



I do see why some might think this, but surely it's just as likely that if all the people who want the Spotify feature, even just a little, (Not sure I can imagine there being a single DJ who wouldn't find a use for it sooner or later) went over to Djay or some other platform either Serato would die, or it would be left with only people who don't care about the implementation meaning therefore they wouldn't be pushed on it and hence have 'around zero' motivation to make it happen. If you consider that Serato hasn't added a number of important (to some) features which other leading DJ software added a long time ago (coughpitch-shiftcough) this indicates that they're really not working that hard to convert crowds from other developers.

Where did you find this? I can't seem to find it on their website. (Also not Djay Pro for Mac, Djay for iOS, right?)

On Apple App Store Itself and yes iOS. They do things this way every time. Even Spotify itself was supported by Djay 2 first then months later Djay Pro.

Serato needs Spotify. Its just that simple... All you who is against it dont use the feature dont use it and let the rest of us be happy...

The obvious answer seems to be that being diverse wins here as usual. I have used all software before this happened and I will use all after. I see NO point to play volleyball with my library or play-style just to follow the crowd or in this case support.

This is how it happened with Djay.
When Rekordbox DJ drops I will download it. Try it out (with my already 100% ready library) and if I don't like it I will not use it and continue to use Serato with my still 100% ready library. Why choose one?

BTW I just tried Flow8Deck due to its STEMS support............................. let me just say a big NAH!! No bueno and NOT for me. It worked with my S8 & X1 but NOT with my SZ, SX or anything else that is SUPPOSED to be supported.

I've just sent an email to Serato asking about whether its worth hoping for this feature, and I've given them a link to this thread in the hopes that they might come and take a look... so, fingers crossed...



Couldn't agree more. Only problem is when certain programs have varying library functionality - I've found it a total pain to try and sort out hot cues and all that in Djay in my brief experiments. Not sure I can really live with having to re-do ALL of my cue points in all of my songs :'(

Djay only worx on iOS. I have a pc myself. I dont know if djay is compatible with my hardwear Numark mixtrack PRO 3...

Awkward, we've been mentioning Djay Pro for Mac throughout this thread.

Djay 2 is for iOS or Android. Djay Pro (what we are mostly speaking of) is for Mac OS only. This is not the only sofwtware where this is the case though. Flow (by MIK, Mix Emergency (Inklen), Rekord Buddy), and even a few elements of Serato Video itself are ONLY for Mac.


I am an advocate for this LOL. I don't do ANYTHING beyond Serato. I have software do it for me. I have Traktor, Rekordbox, Serato, Mixvibes, Virtual DJ, etc. all SYNCed beat grids, cue points, keys and ALL. Even the crates (Serato) & playlists (pretty much everything else) match up and this is ALL done without ever touching the blasphemous software known as iTunes.

Serato to Traktor is done by N.I. SSL Database Importer tool. Traktor to Rekordbox is done by RekordBuddy (by Next). Cross (Mixvibes) reads Traktor & RB libraries and VDJ reads Serato crates...................... with no extra work.

Rekord Buddy is coming out with its 2.0 version any day now. This will eliminate the need for the SSL database importer tool PLUS add more software to the list.

I will add as mentioned above THIS is only for Mac as well unless they release a Windows version.

I've been desperately following this thread for months and months and just figured out I should at least post once to '+1' this feature. I'm a Spotify premium user with dozens of different playlists that took me ages to arrange, I use Serato controlled by my DDJ-SX and I just want this feature sooooo badly.. Serato if you hear me...

Spot on, i know excactlly what you mean. I have arranging my lists for about 6 years now and still collecting new tracks. Neverending story. 😂😂

True that! Anyway I'm now quite happy with Spotify and it became my most used source (not preferred but that's another audiophile story) for listening to music, should it be when chilling @ home, working, practicing sports, driving (through Bluetooth), traveling (through my BT speaker) etc.. Why? Because it is so easy to use! You discover new tracks and add them to your playlists so fast you don't want to go back to older systems (iTunes, Beatport.. w/e) hence my current reluctance to create playlists in Serato as 80% of the job is already done in Spotify, the rest being tracks you can't find on Spotify and for which I have to use real files and Serato's crate function.

Serato, please at least provide us with a statement regarding this new feature integration. Are you even thinking about it? From a financial POV I remain certain it would boost low-end Serato controlled devices sales as more and more people could begin dj'ing @ home for fun using their Spotify account and not having to go all over this heavy process of seeking tracks on dedicated websites then download them, unzip them, modify tags, storing them in the correct folder and finally adding them to the desired playlist.

Cheers

So what? You can cache tracks, no need for a permanent internet connection. If you *need* a certain track immediately you need internet, but there is no other possibility around it, so I don't see your issue here.

Also don't see your DRM issues.

+1 on Spotify support.

To be fair that was quite a long way back in the discussion before we talked in detail about certain possibilities...




I'm sure you know this already, but in Djay currently that is only required for the Spotify feature. We just found out via an update to Djay 2 that Djay Pro is probably gonna get offline track integration, and with offline integration it should all become a whole lot easier.



DRM issues can be a total pain, but only because you can't use the tracks in different software, right? Well, if it's in the software you want already, don't see the issue.


Adding native Spotify support from an industry perspective is also likely to greatly reduce piracy among DJs, if that's something they're concerned about. Making the tracks more convenient (and cheaper) to access through legit means results in less people bothering with piratebay and the likes to get their music.

As far as I can see, it's literally all positives for adding Spotify Support for those involved. Serato gets more business, Spotify gets more business, we get more flexibility, we save money, pirating is reduced, artists get paid per play, new music gets 'out there' faster.

That's offtopic: I agree with everything except the "all positives". I can't imagine artists getting more money then if we buy the tracks directly.

Ok but... since when did Spotify give two sh*ts about artists getting their due.

Taylor said Spotify totally takes care of here LOL.

Also, it's difficult to know whether the artists would get paid more in each situation - more people might end up DJing 'for the lols' what with Spotify being there. More random songs would get played that people don't think are worth buying, and artists would get paid for every play rather than just once when the track is bought (and licensing maybe).

People that used to buy tracks ok, but people that used to illegally download them, a small part will now go into artists' pocket as they pay for their Spotify membership.

Not saying it will magically balance the thing, but it might not be as "bad" as we think.

Anyway, off topic ;)

Little confused by the new Djay 2 release BTW. You saw the release notes I posted above yet:

1.) I can NOT get it working as it states as in the second I turn of internet connection Spotify shuts off within app.

2.) Others are wondering the same thing. community.algoriddim.com

3.) I will Quote as I won't be held responsible for the interpretation LOL
"Please note that due to “sandboxing”, a security feature on iOS, apps have absolutely no access to each other’s workspace. This means that djay has no access to the songs you download in the Spotify app. These songs are only available for the Spotify app itself. djay currently has no way to support offline playlists but we are aware of this request and we’ll be sure to keep an eye out. "

Agreed and furthermore this is the future so I believe artists should embrace yet mold the structure and agreements to benefit them.


Also agreed :)

Yeah but that's how iOS is designed, not sure it would be the case of using MAC OS or Windows.

Correct. I was just clarifying that the release notes do not mean Spotify offline support for Djay 2................... just getting closer is all.
In other words this is not the release we were hoping for and lastly does not shine any light on offline support coming for Mac. As I mentioned (somewhere LOL) they tend to release for Djay 2 first the Djay Pro (as was the case for Spotify support itself) as iOS is their bread & butter.


Either way baby steps. I would personally like to see Spotify support however they can with Serato then see what we can squeeze out of them at a later date haha.

I'd love this feature myself. It's basically like turning Spotify into a huge record pool, I'm sure it can be done from a licensing point of view. And if Spotify already signed exclusively with Algoriddim, maybe strike a deal with Tidal? They do flac streaming btw, for those who are concerned with those things... (I'm really not that concerned...)

As a matter of fact, I'm working an event for their local office tomorrow,
I'll surely bring it up with the guys there.

Oh lawd in heaven no, I can't face trying to deal with that train-wreck of a service (I should say, I've never tried it personally and my view has been influenced somewhat by various forums and reviews I've seen online). Apple Music maybe? Although then we'd be stuck using iTunes.

SO - As I mentioned above I sent an email to Serato about it and they sent me this predictable message:


For those of you who were wondering, I included a thing about key-changing ability as well.

IF this were to happen I certainly hope it would be with Serato. I have seen others ask for Deezer, Soundcloud & Apple Music as well.

Tidal does not have the user base or library from what I have heard.
Soundcloud just flat out sucks lately.
Apple Music has dies down and is OK but not Spotify.
Deezer is not only 1/5 the user base of Spotify but it is not even available in the US therefore alienating the majority here. Not the best move LOL.

+2 Spotify haha

Did you mean *Spotify by any chance? XD



Soundcloud is a jizzrag coated with the intestinal juice of a thousand demons.

Yahh that other S word LOL.
You speak too highly of Soundcoud!!!

I have to admit that I haven't tried Tidal yet myself either, but I did actually hear good stuff about it from friends. As for Apple music, it might have the biggest library, but I really dont like the GUI, either on my phone nor my computer. Hope they can clean up their act, Steve Jobs would turn in his grave!

I am a spotify user myself aswell... My one gripe with spotify though, all those crappy versions of 60s music in there. Lots of remakes and cover versions that sounds just terrible.

I hadn't even realized Spotify had older music available. I'll have to check it out myself :)

Yeah it tends not to be 'older music', as WarpNote alluded to it's plagued with loads of truly awful covers and remakes.

ehhh I can see that not being desireable (to say the least LOL) any idea of Tidal or Apple Music's representation of the same? I am assuming Apple Music has this nailed? I have still yet to even use the free three month trial hehe

I would pretty much guarantee you that Tidal won't have less 'popular' stuff like that if Spotify doesn't, Apple music can't really say.

To be clear I wouldn't consider this cover/remake situation a reason why Spotify integration wouldn't be the best of the bunch, it's not really a disadvantage just something that is the case.

Apple has a fairly good back catalogue.

Agreed. Not something that would bother me at all. I already have my classics & older collection and for some reason I doubt they will be releasing any new classics. As much as I wish it they just won't release any new 80's music damn it!!!

Agreed aswell, If I wanna dig deep, I go elsewhere anyway.

Still if Algoriddim DJ Pro could do it there is zero reason Spotify could not partner with Serato DJ. This should happen.

Then again it may be THIS ^^^ very reason stopping stopping a partnership with Serato. What if it is an exclusive partnership? Not saying it is nor do I hope it is but it is always possible.

Well if Spotify doesn't figure out where the DJ market is going then Pulselocker.com will correct this problem with not being able to stream to Serato by just making a system that fools the Serato library.

In the mean time I've been using github.com with some success.

Well if we think about this logically for a second, an exclusive partnership would have been suggested by Djay rather than Spotify - Spotify don't have that much >really< from a business perspective to gain from being streamed to Djay software, and any such deal would require a deal extremely favourable to Spotify. Given that Spotify is a far larger and more successful company than Algoriddim, it seems highly unlikely that Algoriddim would have been able to have the assets to close said exclusive deal if Spotify would even be open to such a thing. I suspect that if such a contract were written up then Algoriddim would be heavily milking that fact, plastering 'exclusive' over all their marketing, which they're not.

It's not in any way in Spotify's interests to have an exclusive deal with Algoriddim, anybody with business sense wouldn't make that deal in Spotify's camp given the vast untapped potential it would leave behind.

@ Davster - Not anymore!! LOL www.yahoo.com

Consider this a win for all!!

Hold on... It says there that the Judge ruled that the rights to the Lyrics weren't transferred across, yet the rights to the melody and piano arrangement based on said melody were...

So people can use the words but not the melody? Without the melody it's not the same song, so surely people still can't perform 'Happy Birthday' as we know it?

Just use the Spotify Ripper and get the tracks your audience is harassing you to play until this feature is officially available. github.com

I correct. They are stating that the melody was never an aspect of the lawsuit. Furthermore the melody of "Good Morning to All" is in the public domain meaning the copyright has expired.

commons.wikimedia.org

incorrect I meant LOL.

I am not sure if this helps our cause here TBH. We are looking to legally bring this to Serato and furthermore stay within the TOS of both Spotify and Serato.

Oh yeah I get that, but practicality sometimes takes precedent. I agree it would be nice but there is a somewhat viable solution before you right now.

I can understand that for sure.

Interesting... I've been looking at Audials One. Does this allow you to rip the tracks straight from the stream without having to record the audio off the sound card 'live'?

Yes, it's a stream ripper without any quality degradation.

Wait... do you mean 'no' instead? So... you can download 10 tracks with a playtime of half an hour in 10 seconds?

Sorry I wasn't clear. Spotify-ripper rips Spotify URIs to audio files. It's not as fast as I would prefer and it is sometimes quite buggy but yes you an rip 10 tracks in bulk within a short period of time.

Note that stream ripping violates the ToS. LOL.

More specifically Spotify uses a proprietary implementation of OGG with added Encryption. This script actually "plays" a track a little faster than realtime via the official library, but pipes the raw output to an encoder instead of your sound card.

o_O I'd been looking for something like that for a while o_O

I wonder... is it legal to play Spotify-Ripped songs in the club...?

It's certainly a violation of ToS but a ToS isn't legal doctrine. More importantly how would Spotify prove it?

Yah that legal thing! LOL. As far as I know it is legal to rip but only for personal use. So TBH I don't think playing for money in a public night club falls within these legalities.

So I'm trying to install this at the moment, can't find ANYTHING online to help with it. For the first step, installing libspotify, I type this in:



I'm then getting this:



What do I do from here?

Are you sure it does not simply rip the 160kbps mp3 files which are accessible through the webplayer?

Got it working, it seems to do what it says on the tin. The files I'm getting are generally around 250kbps, although you can change settings to get different formats...

What makes the Spotify Ripper "command line" method superior to the record function in Spotydl?

www.techspot.com

I already know the "download" option is trash; I can hear that much even over the computer speakers...

From what I can see of Spotydl, it seems to get its music from other mp3 download sites that host the content, rather than take it from Spotify. You give it the spotify link, it finds the song, and searches for it on various other sites.

Spotify Ripper downloads the track straight from Spotify itself, and writes it to a file rather than pushing it through the sound card. This means that in theory you're getting the same quality as you'd get through the Spotify player each time, with the correct levels.

SO just for a heads up, Pacemaker DJ for iOS now also has Spotify integration. And it's a free app with what I assume is a very small team behind it.

Just found this gem:


Made me lol.

Thanks for that. I missed this news.

+1 for me as well. Don't know how many times at a local bar, somebody requests some really new or off the wall shit and I have to kindly refuse. For that use alone it would totally be worth it to me. Case in point - had to DJ a Brazillian Day event. Had very little choices of were to download and curate music that Brazillians love to dance to - but spotify had tons. And I couldn't use them...

@Davster I am glad you got it working! It's a nice tool to have.

I have been having issues getting it running any chance on a little help? I thought I was getting up correct but it is acting as if it is not even running.

I'd suggest looking up the installation instructions for home brew first, as that needs to be installed before engaging Spotify ripper. The instructions seems to assume a base level of knowledge which I didn't have before I started, so just do what I did and research separately into each item mentioned in the installation instructions!

Serato is going to allow Pulselocker instead of Spotify. That's cool. Watch a live stream of Serato announcing this right now. serato.com

Pulselocker is cute, but I really don't need another monthly subscription fee.
I want Spotify!

Pulselocker is pretty sweet indeed but I would also rather see Spotify come to Serato. PL definitely is more underground/club DJ oriented while Spotify does a decent job of covering all areas. Hopefully when Pulselocker is up and running with Serato things will be where we want them to be. I saw a recent note stating where they were via PCDJ recently.

I am consistently disappointed in the library of Spotify and Apple Music. It's far too focused on mainstream releases and they ignore more independent labels. Pulselocker seems to want to focus on a mix of both which seems what I'm looking for.

They promised me on Twitter that they will have an IOS and Android application available a little after Serato 1.9.

Yah 2016 second quarter I believe.

Probably Pulselocker charges less than Spotify to allow integration...

The end user? Absolutely NOT. Pulselocker is $.19.99 a mo for Premium Spotify is $9.99.

Charlee is talking about the costs which Serato has to pay for the integration. These are most likely different to what the end consumer pays.

*Spotify is £5 a month for students. Definitely MUCH cheaper.

I'm also not sure why Pulselocker or Spotify would charge to allow integration given that it would expand their user base and any integration requires a subscription anyway... Perhaps Spotify is just not 'edgy' enough for Serato...

@Davster the Spotify library is terrible for anything other than top 100 songs and a handful of less popular (but still popular) labels. I'm a huge fan of using Spotify on a daily basis when I randomly want to hear a Journey song or listen to the NAS discography. But most DJs we need deeper cuts which Spotify ain't gonna even bother trying to find.

The question is ... Does Pulselocker have an extensive library worthy of $20/m? I have a hard time believing Pulselocker contains all the top 100 hits and all the Deep Cuts a DJ is gonna need. I could be wrong. I have no intention of signing up until they release an App for iOS or 1.9 whichever comes first.

I doubt they would which is why I assumed he was talking about end user. If there was a charge I would have to assume PL would still be the more expensive option due to Spotify's size and outreach.
TBH PL has the right record labels. They have all the right content placeholders. I am more than confidant they will be an excellent solution ONCE the bugs are pinned down. Browsing the PL website leads me to this conclusion. The thing is will it be ready in and what standard is this "ready" at?

I've never really understood why Spotify integration is any use in a commercial DJ application as the licensing appears to forbid any commercial/public performance?

Doesn't that make it pretty pointless?

Mike

Digital DJ Tips wrote an article about this earlier this month -
www.digitaldjtips.com

Sure is useless as is. I've used it at private gigs and this as far as I know falls within the legalities. I say as far as I know because I actually asked them about it. I am confident that IF serato signed with them it would only happen if they cleared it up for legal public use. It can be done in many regions but it would have to be discussed and figured out as I am not sure how much the legalities would come up (a la pulselocker) as much as the user agreement.


I for one as you mention would only have real use for this if it were allowed otherwise this would just be another djay pro in my life. In retrospect pulselocker is 100% fine with me as long as the content is there. I could care less about the name of the app it's all about function. The ONLY real drawback is Spotify is supported by my tv, PlayStation, car radio, iOS devices, etc. which brings the hope that if PL remains the exclusive serato streaming partner I would love to see support by the same devices. I know iOS is a definite but hopefully the other devices as well.

+1

So what happened with this?

if you don't understand why is't not going to happen then you need to educate yourself

Well, I guess Serato doesn't think like you DJ Sparky.

They released this year Serato Pyro, a "party app" that integrates Spotify and automatically beatmatches two songs to make a smooth transition. Not targeted at real DJs, but seems like a big move towards integration inside Serato DJ too.
seratopyro.com

Cheers!

Sparky is speaking of the fact that they chose an alternate Streaming Partner (Pulselocker).

Pulselocker really sucks. I am way disappointed.

Legitimately licensed streaming for DJs is still in its infancy.

Check back in 3 years, by then the libraries will be fleshed out.

Agreed. My only hope is that it won't be Pulselocker as the dominant streamer. Beatport or even Spotify would do SO much better.

Beatport?? Streaming?

Here is the loop (_________ ) and a little to the right here you are X

LOL blog.beatport.com

www.digitaldjtips.com

You are not anymore in the loop with other streaming services than you are Pulselocker haha

Just teasing but only a little :)

Spotify plugin, like it, want it!!

+1

+2

VDJ just added Spotify support 😂

Oh and Deezer.....

They both need work in regard to browsing (Djay Pro handles this very well) but the fact that VDJ offers this is nothing short of amazing..........

Still not legal to use publicly :/ but hey who is 100% legit, right?

This is true and I don't use either one but this new generation of kids are using these services as they're main source for they're libraries!!

To me that's just crazy!!

But hey to each they're own 👍🏾

A Spotify/Serato DJ partnership would be great. I am a long time premium user of Spotify. Pulselocker is garbage & I don't understand why Serato couldn't seek out Spotify if Virtual DJ could get it done. Seriously! Besides, DJs promote artists' music so, I am really confused about the legal issues. I have never understood why an artist wouldn't want a working DJ to play their music at their venue. LMAO! Makes no f_____g sense.

Spotify is the number one search and sort music.
You can be added and sort music in many ways and of many devices.
If SERATO integrates Spotify playlists, the world is relieved. There would be no lengthy administration and many steps with searching, sorting, and other places for shopping.

I agree.

I am not 100% sure what was even just said in order to agree or not but the reason Serato chose Pulselocker over Spotify is Pulselocker includes licenses to play music publicly (commercially) while Spotify does not allow this in any way. Furthermore you are able to download the music from PL for use OFFLINE while neither Djay Pro nor VDJ allow this via Spotify and they never will unless Spotify changes their end user agreements.

I feel you on that. That's why I don't understand why artists don't want DJs to play their music. It's free promotion. Makes no damned sense to me at all. But I do get the issue. I just wish Spotify could come to an agreement with the labels to have access for DJs so they can promote their music. It's not that difficult of a concept if you think about it. Pulselocker sucks ass and Spotify is the king of streaming music that we actually want to hear. Feel me?

Don't get me wrong, I have memberships to a few DJ pools & I shop at Beatport every once in a while. I just would like to have a streaming service that I actually use regularly to integrate with Serato and not an application that is garbage. That's my only gripe. For now, I am content to download all of my music beforehand. I like that I own my own copies so, I can play it whether or not I have internet access or not.

May I ask what you are not finding in Pulselocker? It DID have its problems and is still not perfect but in terms of content and quality it is pretty solid. It does seem to favor dance/electronic/mainstream and lack content in hip-hop/old school and especially lacks in international music (Latin etc) but if I am being honest I have avoided these type of gigs for years now due to pricing issues etc.


As far as streaming I feel like owning actual files should always be primary solution (at least for now) but having the ability to download the music to your laptop or device (PL on iOS) is a pretty useful option as well although if I am being honest I exclusively use PL for streaming.


DON'T get me wrong I am a Spotify premium, deezer premium, Pulselocker Pro & Amazon Music Unlimited subscriber and have been since day one for most and Spotify is my number one choice as well but I do 100% benefit from PL and its features. Especially being Rekordbox DJ uses the same library. I am able to browse and create/organize playlists on my iPhone during the day and by night I am ready to spin said playlist on either RBDJ or SDJ.......... not too shabby IMO.

You said it...Hip Hop & Old School tracks are what I am about. Mainstream & dance tracks are readily available & when I do spin House, Techno, etc., we don't take requests and I have a ton of dance tracks anyway...old & new. I do have a ton of Hip Hop, Funk, Soul too but, if I maybe skipped a new song, I find that Pulselocker most of the time doesn't have what I am looking for when I am spinning at the club. But, soon that won't be a problem. Requests aren't taken at the new place I will be DJing at so, maybe this problem doesn't apply to me after all. LOL! I just really like Spotify & would love to see some kind of integration into my favorite and only DJ software.

The licensing issues a funny one.
If you look at your vinyl you'll see a "public performance" disclaimer, forbidding you to dj with it. So technically dj'ing in front of people is illegal according to "the law."

I'm of the mindset, if I've payed, or paying for my music, don't tell me where or when I can or can't play it. That's far too authoritarian for my sensibilities.

I don't see how Serato can be held accountable for where we play our music. At home or (god forbid) out in public.

"Oh, baby lord jesus, how are we going to be able afford to have a music industry if dj's keep playing our tracks to more people than just themselves?!!!!!!?"
By that logic we need to do away with Spotify playlists.

*rant over*

They can not be held accountable just as gun manufacturers are not held accountable when people use them. Problem is this would be directly facilitating practices that directly violate policies set by Spotify which are agreed upon by the record labels and content providers.


Djay Pro is more of a home use solution and VDJ could care less about policies or agreements (just look what happened with grooveshark LMAO) but one thing Serato has that these companies don't are a good name for themselves regarding relations. They don't add hardware support without coming up with agreements, they don't allow the use of just any hardware, they don't add features without keeping things legit.............. or so it would seem.

^^^^^^^^^^ Otherwise why would they have gone through the trouble of signing with Pulselocker when Spotify is by far better and more widely used.

My problem's not with Serato. I think my issue's more with the whole 'public performance' licensing.
It just seems archaic to me. As long as the artist gets paid every time I play their track, whether it's in public or at home, there shouldn't be an issue. Stop being greedy and just let people *own* the sh!t that they've payed for.

I just realized I'm turning into a grumpy old man.

I agree with you 100%!

This is a case of the laws not keeping up with technology.

It's the same reason that in the US you can't stream local stations (CBS/FOX/NBC/ABC) on a lot of services (Vue, DirecTVNow, YouTube) in smaller markets because broadcasting rights don't cover streaming. The same issue with a lot of sports, yes it's dumb.

But using a physical copy of something like a record vs Spotify streaming you something realtime is a big difference in the current world. There is no disconnect between buying the record and what you do with it, most people however stream real time from Spotify and other services making them easier to nail by some butthurt legal team.

Good point!

Agreed
Which brings up this point.........

Yes.............. when you do in fact "own" it. You do not own anything with Spotify. The ONE thing stopping the freedom of public play with Spotify etc. is money. The proper licenses must be obtained which will in turn raise subscription fees for all or at least those who require said feature. Pulselocker offers two tiers one with public play allowed the others is not. The "pro" tier is double the price of the basic subscription.

Spotify should have a pro tier as well and follow suit. I don't understand why they wouldn't want to do that. So many DJs would rather use Spotify because of their huge library. Just a thought for Spotify to consider. I think the potential to make more money is there if this can be done correctly.

Absolutely and I agree. I would sign up as well. Not sure how many others would TBH (as I have found current DJ's to be frugal to say the least) but I could see it growing in the future.

There is legal license from spotify to play it public:

www.soundtrackyourbrand.com

Soundtrack business sounds interesting.. Could it be a potential replacement for Pulselocker?

"Available in Sweden, Norway, and Finland."

I'm in Norway :D

Get in deep with the Serato devs and see if they will make a regional version for you! (one can dream)

Off the FAQ:

"Can I search for a specific artist or track in a soundtrack/playlist?

You can’t search for a specific artist or track in a soundtrack or playlist. You can browse our music by genre and energy level to find the sound that fits your business best."




................. sounds awesome. Perfect for us DJ's!! LMAO

Furthermore I would love to see how many DJ's around here are willing to put up $35 a month for streaming. Most don't even see the measly $20/mo. worth it for Pulselocker let alone a MUCH less capable/useful solution for almost double the price..........

Lastly


"................. Finally, our licenses exclude performance at locations that have an admission fee, subscriber fee, or a similar charge."

AND

"Additionally, our PRO licensing covers our service only. This means that if your venue uses music from another source, our license won’t cover it. This includes DJs, live music, karaoke, and jukebox use."

I suppose if you are working for free or a wedding then having access to a radio for $35 a month is the answer ;)


In short no this is not the same and no this is not an ideal or legal solution for DJ's.

The Spotify Business license works exacly like spotify premium. All spotify premium compatible apps can use it.

Those who dont live in sweden, norway or finland. i could say that spotify is from sweden so ofcource they launch new product first on sweden.

There is a few restaurants that I know using Spotify's Soundtrack for Business and it's pretty damn awesome. I would pay $35.00 if thats what the fee would be for integration.

How does this differ from using regular Spotify for you though. Using Soundtrack for Business is no more legit than using the normal Spotify client. I can not vouch for Spotify for business either way but Soundtrack seems pretty straightforward in that it does not include licenses for live performances............ again unless you are talking mobile.

Basically any clubs or restaurants that have a fee to get in are excluded is what I am interpreting for this. So I guess its a per location basis.

Spotify Premium integration for me please 😁

VDJ just added Pulselocker support.

And Deezer.....

SO VDJ lost Spotify support? Apparently Spotify finally got fed up with their hacking ;)

Dang that sucks. You got a link?

www.virtualdj.com(Update_pr_Sept__2017).html?page=1

I saw that, Spotify should just let us purchase commercial accounts like restaurants have and let us go ape shit on the playlist. I don't see what the big deal is.

Spotify does offer b2b accounts but they still don't apply to dj's.

"But there are a few exceptions. If you play music in businesses that offer physical activity, such as dance studios, dance clubs, fitness instructions, roller and ice skating, and “rock-n-bowl,” you should contact your local collecting society to learn more."

"This means that if your venue uses music from another source, our license won’t cover it. This includes DJs, live music, karaoke, and jukebox use. Finally, our licenses exclude performance at locations that have an admission fee, subscriber fee, or a similar charge."
help.soundtrackbusiness.soundtrackyourbrand.com

I understand that but that's really not for Spotify to enforce. In the United States If a venue has a deal worked out with ASCAP or BMI we are covered. It's the venue who has the highest risk of a lawsuit, then us DJs and then possibly the music service provider.

One of the benefits of using smashvission I guess as well. Gives us a license for a single location for us to publicly play pre recorded music. I wish ASCAP or BMI would let us DJs pay that fee so we can cover a certain amount of liability if we play our music in public. A venue with around 400 capacity who charges entrance and has live or pre recorded music 4 or 5 days a week is around 6k annually for the license.

BMI/ASCAP/SESAC doesn't cover streaming services, that is still hammered out by the vendor and end user. It's the same semantics that cause issues when being able to view CBS on your tv, but the stuff is blocked on Sling/Vue/Hulu/YouTube's OTT streaming services.

The distinction between music you have purchased and physically own is very specific vs streaming.

Hit the ASCAP or BMI licensing portion of the website and download the fees schedule PDF for restaurants and bars. The lingo sounds like it covers any live or pre recorded audio which includes radio and televised broadcast. The fee is a formula x the maximum occupancy of the venue. The fee covers you legally from a lawsuit from a song writer and the union it's self.

The key is to make sure they are licensing for "Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings" and not just live and dj'ing stuff you already have. I hate the details, but you do not want to be the dude that gets sued because the venue isn't covering your ass.

But who are we kidding, unless you piss someone off and they have a bud who works in any of the licensing companies, chances are you'll be ok. BUT I AM NOT A DAMN LAWYER - even if I do work on a court :D

Does this mean Algoriddim DJay Pro will lose it too?

Wow that was just this month? Algoriddim sure advertised it as a feature, when you're part of an Apple keynote that brings his visibility. I can't imagine they did that with Spotify unaware.

No. Spotify is an actual partner of Algoriddims. From what I understand VDJ never was.

VDJ is not made by Algoriddim.

I see the old press releases, they certainly seem to be (Algoriddim and Spotify).

Fired up Deejay Pro on my iPhone 7 Plus for the first time in a while and damn if the Spotify integration isn't nice. If one of the compatible controllers fell in my lap I might have a lot of fun with it. Kinda insane that track analyzing, key detection (not sure HOW accurate it is) is a lot smoother than on my MacBook Pro. But I think they have said these ARM processors can run circles around Intel cpus in a lot of mobile settings.

Holy crap. Newest build of VDJ pretty much confirms Spotify will not be coming back. Pretty safe to say Spotfiy did not approve of their shenanigans.

All... I have to confess: I got hooked on Pulselocker and now I'm crying all over my SDJ library! What an unexpected loss. I'm getting over it slowly - i'll be ok. But seriously, it begs the question - and reopening the issue with Spotify/Serato: What's next?? What's the future?? Where do we go with streaming integration? It's a MUST for sure, no?? I certainly don't mind buying songs from Apple or curating my library with itunes... but being able to pull down a bride's last minute request with 10 minutes left in the night... out of 44 million pulselocker tracks available... that was really something. Maybe version 2.0 will have something wonderful in it! But for now, where do I spend the $19.99 I used to give Pulselocker? Is it Apple Music? Spotify? or maybe PromoOnly POOL???

You have a couple of options:

1. buy your songs a la carte of Amazon, iTunes, et al.
2. buy in to a music pool like PromoOnly, BPMSupreme, DJCity, DMS. Definitely shop around see who offers the edits you need (clean, mixshow, whatever).

Apple Music and Spotify may eventually come around and allow a more expensive tier for DJs to use but for right now stick to stuff you can download and doesn't need to authenticate via a subscription to play.

I am feeling you :( I loved Pulselocker

2 words, “Christmas Parties” give me Spotify integration PLEASE!

exactly. what's not on your disk is worthless.

so much time wasted having to go through the Spotify playlists and download the tracks that I don't have.

Also, imagine having a shared playlist on Spotify for anyone to drop requests in, which syncs with a Serato crate!

If Djay Pro can do it, Serato should be able to!

It's getting to the point where djay pro for mac has developed enough that I can seriously consider using it for gigs with a wifi connection, and have any track I like available on Spotify. So good for garden parties or background music before the main set starts.

Serato > djay

Come on guys. Serato is falling behind :(

DJAY PRO can't use it offline which is the ONLY way it would be useful. Also the integration isn't all that, spend some time in their forums and read about the issues many users have.

Let it die already, maybe in 5 years.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ To each his own. I find it useful even just needing wifi.

Why wouldn't it be useful to have the ability to use it sometimes rather than never. If you DJ professionally and regularly, particularly for corporate gigs and private parties then having Spotify integration saves you the biggest pain in the ass, which is acquiring all the weird requests you'll never play again.

Lets also remember that djay supports certain Pioneer CDJs now as well, natively, WITHOUT having to use additional hardware. Spotify on CDJs? Yes please.
Serato doesn't let you connect to CDJs without spending money on additional kit you have to lug around.



5 years is a long time to wait when your competition has already beaten you to it.

DO you use it regularly in DJAY PRO?

The iOS app version is better than both the Win or macOS one. It is BARELY working most of the time, tracks don't load properly at times in all sorts of conditions.

So no, it's not worth it. Accept the fact you can't have everything all the time and beef up your library with that you learn after the matter.

I do use it regularly in DJay Pro yes.

Getting into a big discussion about the merits of djay pro 2 isn't really for this forum - but suffice to say I suspect you either haven't used it yourself, or haven't been keeping up to date with it because yes it used to be crap and it's getting MUCH better. I've used it for several recent gigs, haven't had a single issue with it. It's not as reliable as Serato, sure. But it's getting there.

www.algoriddim.com

I've used DJPro on and off since 1.1 back in 2015 and bought/upgraded to 2.0 late last year. While I think it is a decent piece of software for mobile, low stress environments, the Spotify integration has not held up under heavy use/mixing situations.

Ok for cocktail hour or letting a playlist run - bad for quick mixing or intensive use situations. It does fine with songs and videos in my library, but without fail the Spotify tracks tend to choke at the worst time, even when it has completely downloaded.

Pulselocker integration at least let you have true "offline" usage even though their library sucked. And even VDJ worked decent with whatever workaround they had with Spotify before it got yanked.

So to compare a 75% baked feature in one piece of software and suggestion devs should do the same with a much more professional piece of software like SDJ is silly.

Lastly, it's been said in this thread and alllll over the internet. Algoriddim is the ONLY company Spotify has worked with or legitimately allowed their material to be used with. The relationship goes back to 2015 or earlier and if you read the fine print it's STILL not supposed to be used for public performance, but *wink wink* we are all just using it for house parties, right?

Just as technically speaking we're not meant to be using iTunes-bought songs for live DJing either as it has a similar clause in the T&Cs eh ; )

__________

Feel this is kinda missing the point - regardless of whether djay has got it perfect or not, I think we can all agree that the industry is moving towards streaming and that it is the future, or at least a large part of it.

It seems a shame for a company like Serato not to be pushing boundaries and innovating in areas such as this.


I wonder whether they have plans to reintroduce Pulselocker support when Beatport comes out with the new version.

This.

Above are all the reasons I am happy to have Djay on the iPad next to my Sans-Streaming Serato setup. After trying the Pulselocker (yuck) integration, I see no reason to add that wild card to my main setup. I do use Djay once or twice, every gig, and I'm glad for it, but no need to add that code to my main software.

Wanna add code? PYRO. FOR ANDROID ALREADY. With the ABILITY TO WORK CRATES THAT SYNC WITH MY GIG LAPTOP SO I CAN WORK ON MUSIC ON THE TRAIN/BUS/UBER/PLANE/PARK/BACKYARD/POOL/WHEREVER.

My ears are bleeding.

But wait... are you telling me that I can sync crates from Serato Pyro....?

Or are you saying they should add the code from Pyro to Serato...?

Pyro + a good Spotify playlist is amazingly fun. It's not perfect but I would love to see something like that make it as a plug in to SDJ (even if it only uses your own library vs Spotify).

No syncing that I'm aware of. It should be added. I picture using pyro as a media player on the road. Hear a track you think belongs in a crate? Crate it up right there at the grocery store or whatever. Then when you open up your gig laptop the crates sync up and update with your new tracks. If you've added Spotify tracks that you don't own, they show up in orange like any other missing file.

If any of you got Spotify please go vote for the idea

community.spotify.com

Let's make this happen!!

Great link. Did it. Nice and quick! Thanks Charlee1985!

spotify +1

Keep the votes going guys :D

But that is only true for the Mac version, the PC version sucks so just so hard, the Mac version is indeed fine and sounds really good. Especially the Djay Pro 2 version.

I still prefer Serato because it is more effective but having the possibility to mix with Spotify songs is just so great, i am just hoping one day for a decent PC Djay pro version...

In all fairness DJ software running better on Mac or only being offered for Mac is nothing new and only screams one solution IMO. I maintain that it should not be this way but here we are in 2019 and things are not all that different regarding this matter.

I am not going to get into the which is better argument as at the end of the day I believe a PC "CAN" be better but typically the cost to get there is not all that far off from. What I am saying is that if you look at most DJ apps there will be either shortcomings with PC or it will simply not be offered at all. Same applies for iOS over android regarding Music apps.

Regarding Djay Pro keep in mind that whole PC is stuck with a gimped Djay Pro Algoriddim has moved onto Djay Pro 2 for Mac. Same applies for Android/iOS as iOS is on Djay Pro.


As far as Spotify YES I would like to see this supported but again with Spotify's end user agreement you are not permitted to use it for live performances or commercial use this is how Algoriddim gets away with it as their products are marketed toward the consumer while Serato is geared toward the professional working DJ. In the meantime Tidal is an excellent substitute. I have a huge playlist in Spotify and I keep it synced with Tidal, Deeer and soundcloud via soundiiz.com and will say I was surprised when I converted to both Deezer and Tidal as almost all songs were found out of thousands.

Yes mate. good work. Let's keep this going!

Gonna need a LOT more votes to get that visible to the licensing people. A year and not even 200 :/

Totaly agree!! Good suggestion!

BR
Andreas

Agreed and I'm pretty sure there are more than 200 DJs that use Serato and Spotify. Stop being lazy people, go vote :D

Spotify has been pretty clear about the licensing. So far the story is Serato has attempted but Spotify shows no interest and with that move against Virtual DJ kind of shows they are against it. They allowed dj pro but i think they just closed the gate for everyone else.

Done !

Just added my vote.
Thank guys

It's 2020 and Spotify has Stop Supporting Serato. I ended up download songs with TunesKit Spotify Music Converter and put the local files on the app.

Serato never supported Serato.

Domestic squabbles. lol