Though we’re all eager to put 2016 in the rearview mirror, Rob, Sara, Marisa, and Jesse nonetheless got together to discuss the year in music on its way out: musician deaths, long-awaited returns, scrappy little sisters, and everything in between. This is our Best Music of 2016 podcast and it’s a good one, but we are glad it’s over.
How To Listen
We are now up to SIX (6) different ways to listen to a SportsAlcohol podcast:
- You can subscribe to our podcast using the rss feed.
- I’m not sure why they allowed it, but we are on iTunes! If you enjoy what you hear, a positive comment and a rating would be great.
- I don’t really know what Stitcher is, but we are also on Stitcher.
- SportsAlcohol.com is a proud member of the Aha Radio Network. What is Aha? It’s kind of like Stitcher, but for your car.
- You can download the mp3 of this episode directly here.
- You can listen in the player below.
Jesse is a cofounder of SportsAlcohol.com even though he doesn't care for sports or alcohol. His favorite movie is Ron Howard's The Paper. I think. This is what happens when you don't write your own bio. I know for sure likes pie.
Latest posts by Jesse (see all)
- The SportsAlcohol.com Podcast: The Biggest Holiday Movies of 1995 - December 22, 2025
- The Long-Awaited SportsAlcohol.com Anniversary Podcast Double Feature: 1985 and 2005 - November 30, 2025
- The SportsAlcohol.com Podcast: Oscars Special 2025! - February 25, 2025
Lesson from this podcast: Jesse spends $ on music in the wrong places and should surrender to Spotify Premium. (They curate personalized new music playlists every week to fill that void left by the opening acts you’re no longer seeing!)
Also: JESSICA RABBIT yaaas
This might sound crazy but I think if I pay for music, more than a couple cents should be funneled toward the people who actually made that music. Those cool playlists are just Spotify saying “check out these great new bands who receive $17 a year from us.”
It’s fine if what makes you happy is to keep buying albums from bands you’re well-acquainted with and get most of your music that way, but I think you’re missing out and in some cases dating yourself a bit by only talking about well-established artists (though I’m sure Weezer would appreciate the consideration).
I didn’t realize Spotify had such strong connections to the musical underground.
I bought ~30 albums last year. At least a third of them were from artists where I didn’t have any of their previous albums, and in some cases artists who I’d literally never heard before I bought their album.
Is the snark really necessary? Yeah, Spotify features tons of bands I would normally not be exposed to from satellite radio/music blogs I occasionally read. It’s cut down tremendously on the time I used to spend looking for new music. But if you really have an aversion to it, it must not be for you.
Like I said… Spotify gives very, very little money to those new bands, no matter how many people they expose them to. It’s the most established acts, in fact, that make any kind of money from that service. I use it at work sometimes, or to try out a band if I’m not sure if I want their whole record, but I don’t think a model that encourages people to assume they should be able to listen to as much music as possible for as little money as possible (or, if you can stomach the ads, for nothing) is a super positive one for people who want to make a living making music.
I don’t doubt that it’s an enormous service as a consumer. How could it not be? But unlike people who make movies or TV, most people who make albums (especially at a non-superstar level) aren’t paid upfront for that work (and if they are, they aren’t paid much). So it seems like kind of a bum deal for artists as I understand it.
I just want to point out that the fight you two are having is the fault of the labels who make these deals for streaming royalties. This is basically a point on made on the podcast. I am the smart boy.