If I really like an album, I'll buy it. As I did with a couple Radioactive Watermelon releases. (Hat tip to you, epsons)
But Spotify is nice for "trialing" music (Listening to an album without the hassle of YouTube) and managing my music library. And the artist at least gets some compensation (Albeit not very much), whereas with YouTube it's a little less clear who gets ad revenue.
And a hat tip to you sir.
I have no problem with using Spotify that way (it just released in Canada, and I've started using it myself); I'm just wary of people increasingly using it instead
of buying music, and that's why they all should be aware of how little artists actually get from it. It may not make much of a difference to someone as small as me in the grand scheme of things, but more or less anyone who makes a living from music has reason to be gravely concerned about the shift towards streaming... streaming sites can provide artists with an enormous potential for exposure, but they really should start paying more reasonable royalty rates.