# SoundCloud Alternative - SongBox



## SongBox (Oct 16, 2019)

Hi everyone. My name is Mick and I'm the creator of SongBox. You may have seen my ads running on the forum for the past several months.

Sadly, just after I paid to take out the ads on VI-Control my life went a little bit crazy and I wasn't able to nurture the product the way I wanted to and there were bugs in the system that probably made anyone who signed up think the service was sub-par.

Well... I'm back on SongBox full time (with investment!) and there have been a tonne of improvements over the past few weeks. I'm dead set on making SongBox a viable alternative to Soundcloud for professionals who value privacy and security (and no bots, and no ads, and no clutter etc).

https://songbox.rocks

Thanks so much if you've read this and I'd love to hear any feedback (even the bad stuff if you signed up over the past few months).


----------



## JohnG (Oct 16, 2019)

Really happy to see an alternative to You-Know-What available. Welcome Mick.


----------



## SongBox (Oct 16, 2019)

Thank you John. I'm very happy to be back working on SongBox as a full time concern. I'm a tiny fish in a gigantic pond but I believe there's value here for professionals.

One of the users of the platform emailed me to say that he felt that SongBox was to Soundcloud what Vimeo is to Youtube and that really inspired me to press on. I feel like that's exactly what I'm going for; if Soundcloud is for the squabbling masses, then SongBox is for professionals who know better.


----------



## erica-grace (Oct 16, 2019)

Welcome Mick! 

Why is SB better than SC? Not trying to insinuate it isn't - I just would like to know why people should use your service over the other.


----------



## ArtTurnerMusic (Oct 16, 2019)

Nice feel to the site. Best wishes going forward!
Have you considered offering a trial period at the Pro level? It's kind of difficult to evaluate at the Free level.


----------



## Polkasound (Oct 16, 2019)

I have to be honest -- the concept of _"John Smith listened to Aftermath for 53 seconds"_ disturbs me. Stats are great, but not when they're personally identifiable. It's too invasive in my opinion. When someone joins SongBox, is their listening activity private or shared by default? Can they opt out of sharing their activity?


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 17, 2019)

No good for me.

I currently pay £75 a year for my SC Pro Unlimited account.

I can upload as many files as I want.

I can upload files up to 4GB in size.

Typically, my pieces are ten minute long 24 bit 44.1kHz WAV files = 151MB

I occasionally create tracks over 250MB

Your lowest paid tier is $62.40 per year which for me, at the moment, equates to around £75 and there will probably be VAT to be added to that. The top tier is around £132.60 per year, plus VAT.


What does "Remove branding from embeds" mean?

I don't like the ability to see that everyone who listens to my crap clicks away after two seconds. Does nothing at all for my ego.


As bad as SoundCloud is said to be, I do not see SongBox being a viable alternative to me at the moment.

Sorry, but kudos to you for getting into the hosting/streaming game.

cheers

andy


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

This is awesome feedback and I really appreciate you taking the time. SongBox absolutely won't be for everybody (is any product?) but it's still great for me to understand exactly why it's not for you. Really helps me understand and shape future development.

In a former life I was a professional musician signed to a major label and I would have really valued the thing which you seem to dislike the most (seeing people stop listening after X seconds), because to me that's exactly the info I need to see which tracks are resonating and which aren't. Not for everyone though - totally get it.

Regards your comment about taxes - no. The price you see is the price you pay. I've been thinking about opening up the top tier to unlimited tracks etc. You may have just convinced me to push the button on that.

Something i'd like to make clear is that SongBox is a small startup with big intentions and nothing is set in stone. I will constantly be evolving and making changes based on feedback exactly like this. The one and only thing I can't and won't do is have a massive free tier. I need to keep the lights on and I'm not subsidised by ads and other external revenue in the same way that a mega company like Soundcloud is.

The SongBox logo is on our embed widget. Some folks may not like this so at the paid levels this can be removed so you just have a plain white player.

Thanks again!



synkrotron said:


> No good for me.
> 
> I currently pay £75 a year for my SC Pro Unlimited account.
> 
> ...


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Hello! and thanks, that's a great question.

I don't know if I would say SongBox is "better" so to speak; Soundcloud is obviously a very successful platform and there's a reason for that.

I'd say SongBox is different. I feel like Soundcloud for many is about exposure and discovery. Songbox does have that element but it's core use is for the private sharing of tracks between individuals. I'm coming from a background of being a professional songwriter (10+ years ago) and in that situation it's not a great idea to stick your work up on a social network (which is what Soundcloud is).

Further to that (the differentiating factors IMO) when you add tracks to SongBox they are completely private. We will not - in any capacity - use or share your work. That's explicit. All we do is host and provide the reports on usage. There are also no bots, no ads or anything like that. Focus is on clean, elegant design.

More stuff - our reporting is pretty good I believe. You can create a SongBox and send it to Mr A, another for Mr B and another for Ms C - our reporting tells you exactly who listened, what tracks they listened to, and for how long. This is great for getting to the bottom of who your music is resonating with and who it isn't. You can also see really clearly thanks to the average listen time if your tracks are drawing people in, or if people are tuning out 15 seconds in.

As I said above (or below?) I absolutely don't intend this to be for everyone. I believe that those who find value in it will really find value in it, and other won't - and that's fine. 

I'm also constantly evolving and iterating based on feedback from folks like yourself on VI-Control.

Thanks so much.




erica-grace said:


> Welcome Mick!
> 
> Why is SB better than SC? Not trying to insinuate it isn't - I just would like to know why people should use your service over the other.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 17, 2019)

SongBox said:


> SongBox absolutely won't be for everybody



Absolutely 

And I am no "pro" in the music industry and make very, very little from my art (£200 gross since 1979). So I have to be a little bit careful with the cash and all these little subscriptions would add up.



SongBox said:


> I need to see which tracks are resonating and which aren't



I understand that. My own personal experience, based on my Bandcamp stats, which gives you skip/partial/full data, most of my stuff will be, "John Smith listened for 2s" and I would prefer not to see that.

On SoundCloud my most important stats are the number of downloads.



SongBox said:


> Regards your comment about taxes - no. The price you see is the price you pay.



Thanks for confirming that.



SongBox said:


> Something i'd like to make clear is that SongBox is a small startup with big intentions and nothing is set in stone. I will constantly be evolving and making changes based on feedback exactly like this. The one and only thing I can't and won't do is have a massive free tier. I need to keep the lights on and I'm not subsidised by ads and other external revenue in the same way that a mega company like Soundcloud is.



I will definitely keep my eye on how things develop at SongBox.



SongBox said:


> The SongBox logo is on our embed widget. Some folks may not like this so at the paid levels this can be removed so you just have a plain white player.



Thank you for confirming that also.


cheers,

andy


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Oh no EVERYTHING is private - that thing on the homepage is just an example of the types of information you can get from SongBox.

The whole concept of SongBox is based around privacy. It is not a social network. No-one outside of you would even know you had an account.





Polkasound said:


> I have to be honest -- the concept of _"John Smith listened to Aftermath for 53 seconds"_ disturbs me. Stats are great, but not when they're personally identifiable. It's too invasive in my opinion. When someone joins SongBox, is their listening activity private or shared by default? Can they opt out of sharing their activity?


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Cheers andy! 



synkrotron said:


> Absolutely
> 
> And I am no "pro" in the music industry and make very, very little from my art (£200 gross since 1979). So I have to be a little bit careful with the cash and all these little subscriptions would add up.
> 
> ...


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 17, 2019)

Actually, I have one other quite important question;

What quality does SongBox stream at?

Bandcamp, for instance, requires you to upload lossless files and then converts them to a 128kbps lossy file for streaming.

SoundCloud is similar in that you can upload a higher quality file but you have to subscribe to their Go+ service in order to listen to a slightly better 250kbps lossy file.

I had a look at your site again and I could not find any information regarding that.

cheers

andy


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Cheers Andy, right now whatever file you put up is what comes down but sorting out streaming properly is the next big thing on the roadmap.

Tell me this.... (I already feel like I know the answer) Is this a deal breaker do you think for most folk?

What would you like to see from a streaming solution?






synkrotron said:


> Actually, I have one other quite important question;
> 
> What quality does SongBox stream at?
> 
> ...


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Also.... since we're here.... the track here (https://songbox.rocks/songbox/?ref=vicontrol (https://songbox.rocks/songbox)) was recorded and performed by me in my home studio. Well, except the vocals obviously, but all guitars, bass, drums, strings etc are me.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 17, 2019)

SongBox said:


> Is this a deal breaker do you think for most folk?



No, not a deal breaker.



SongBox said:


> What would you like to see from a streaming solution?



Personally I am happy enough with 128kbps.

Years ago, before I knew what I know now about mastering for steaming, 128kbps files could sound terrible, especially things like cymbals.

Most of the stuff that I stream nowadays sounds much better, even though the bit rate is the same. I'm not technically up on the conversion process but perhaps that has also improved over the years.

But if you wanted to rise above the norm then I suppose 250 or even 320kbps would be a good draw to some.



SongBox said:


> but all guitars, bass, drums, strings etc are me



Nice  

Okay... Now that I am streaming that I notice that in your player it doesn't give an indication of how long the track lasts and where the play position is along the track.

If you are just checking in to listen then that doesn't matter but I, personally, like to know how long a piece is before I listen.


cheers

andy


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Great feedback again. I'll look at exposing that this evening! Thanks!



synkrotron said:


> No, not a deal breaker.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Scalms (Oct 17, 2019)

Very intriguing company, i would certainly be interested in an alternative to SC. Just some comments, your website looks good but I had just a small suggestion--increase some of the metrics of the "free" plan, like more songs (10-15) and slightly higher file size, etc. I realize you need to make a profit from this, but to grow your company I would think you would want a more attractive "foot-in-the-door" plan (5 song limit is just too low for me). 

I am a hobbyist, by no means a professional (maybe one day) but I certainly am a serious musician. With that said funds are limited and paying to share songs right now is not in my plans, especially with free reputable companies like SC out there. With that said, your vision is good, marketing looks good, plans just need some tweaking, but's that just my 2 cents. 

Good luck!


----------



## SongBox (Oct 17, 2019)

Thanks for taking the time to look at the site and have some input. Up until last week the free tier was FAR too generous and this was killing me as i need to pay for the hosting and the streaming bandwidth.

I'm taking onboard your comments and I when i made the change i was thinking "5 or 10?". In the spirit of good product development practices I'm going to stick with 5 for a couple months then switch it up to 10 and see what the conversions look like. Let science decide.

Honestly though, thanks for the feedback. I take it all seriously.





Scalms said:


> Very intriguing company, i would certainly be interested in an alternative to SC. Just some comments, your website looks good but I had just a small suggestion--increase some of the metrics of the "free" plan, like more songs (10-15) and slightly higher file size, etc. I realize you need to make a profit from this, but to grow your company I would think you would want a more attractive "foot-in-the-door" plan (5 song limit is just too low for me).
> 
> I am a hobbyist, by no means a professional (maybe one day) but I certainly am a serious musician. With that said funds are limited and paying to share songs right now is not in my plans, especially with free reputable companies like SC out there. With that said, your vision is good, marketing looks good, plans just need some tweaking, but's that just my 2 cents.
> 
> Good luck!


----------



## colony nofi (Oct 17, 2019)

I'm sure you have done a full competitor analysis. I guess I'm a little confused after looking at alternatives that are out in the market and the cost.

Take a look at Disco. While it is definitely not "social" like songbox and soundcloud, what it does do with keeping copies of all your tracks, libraries, playlists and the like, and the fine grain control you have with sending tracks to people is amazing (as are the stats it provides for listens!) . Plus it works on video as well as music - and hosts other associated files with projects too. 
Now obviously it is aimed at larger music houses / music supervisors and the like - but the value proposition is on another level compared to where songbox is. 

Part of the problem you face has to do with the way market share / markets are generated within the tech/online world. Its problematic going up against a seasoned player like soundcloud when they have the lions share of the market sown up, and yet a lot of the features you are pitching are based around social (therefore needing the social network for that to be valuable for your paying customers). I'm not sure how I'd proceed. I'd guess this is why a company like disco has gone the route of a more b2b model. I really don't see a way for you to move forward and gain market share without following other tech companies, grabbing a tonne of runway cash and burning it to gain market share BEFORE setting a value proposition that professionals can come in and understand / choose to use.


----------



## SongBox (Oct 18, 2019)

Yeah I must not be explaining this correctly.

Only you, the account owner, can see your listening data. No-one else can. It can't be shared.

Only you see how your tracks have been listened to.








Polkasound said:


> Thank you for the reply, but I'm a little confused by it. The concept of being able to see who listened to your track and for how long seems to be one of your site's key selling points. If users are able to disable their listening activity from being shared, to me, that's an equally important selling point.


----------



## SongBox (Oct 18, 2019)

I'm finding this really interesting! Thanks so much - it's really helpful to me.

You see.... songbox is not social, at all. No-one in the world except you, the account owner, sees your data like number of plays, average time listened etc. That's just for you.

I'm curious to know what makes you think that songbox has a social network element?






colony nofi said:


> I'm sure you have done a full competitor analysis. I guess I'm a little confused after looking at alternatives that are out in the market and the cost.
> 
> Take a look at Disco. While it is definitely not "social" like songbox and soundcloud, what it does do with keeping copies of all your tracks, libraries, playlists and the like, and the fine grain control you have with sending tracks to people is amazing (as are the stats it provides for listens!) . Plus it works on video as well as music - and hosts other associated files with projects too.
> Now obviously it is aimed at larger music houses / music supervisors and the like - but the value proposition is on another level compared to where songbox is.
> ...


----------



## Polkasound (Oct 18, 2019)

SongBox said:


> Only you, the account owner, can see your listening data.



OK, but when it comes to _"John Smith listened to Aftermath for 53 seconds" _my concern is whether or not John Smith can opt out of his listening activity being shown to the account owner.


----------



## SongBox (Oct 18, 2019)

Ahhh ok I get you now. In short, no they can't. It was a consideration very early on in the product development cycle.

I spoke to many folk in the industry (as an aside, I was a professional musician signed to a major label for a couple of years and after that I worked in music media for a couple of global brands for several years), amongst whom were editors of well known magazines and grammy winning songwriters. The general consensus was "Don't really care if people know I only listened for 10 seconds".

Further to that - I've updated the copy on the page based on your feedback to make it more clear. You only know the listening information for a specific SongBox. So in theory if I only send it to you, then yeah I will know that you specifically listened twice, for 10 seconds and 46 seconds.







Polkasound said:


> OK, but when it comes to _"John Smith listened to Aftermath for 53 seconds" _my concern is whether or not John Smith can opt out of his listening activity being shown to the account owner.


----------



## colony nofi (Oct 18, 2019)

SongBox said:


> I'm finding this really interesting! Thanks so much - it's really helpful to me.
> 
> You see.... songbox is not social, at all. No-one in the world except you, the account owner, sees your data like number of plays, average time listened etc. That's just for you.
> 
> I'm curious to know what makes you think that songbox has a social network element?


Oh - my bad assumptions from looking at early copy / reading forum posts (and it being called a soundcloud alternative, which is social)... more than actually trying it out. So this *is* a disco competitor then? 


In which case, I feel my criticism over value then stands. Look at what disco offers for the price. I'm not sure if their model is sustainable from a $ perspective, but it seems to offer the user more value. Its newest incarnation (its just had a redesign) is really quick slick, and the feature set for sharing playlists / individual tracks seem very well thought out and thorough (though you definnitely have some interesting new features in the mix they don't have in regards to how *much* of a song has been listened to. They include videos - which for people in sync is 100% necessary, and an increasinly important part of record company revenue streams) 

But the big difference is value. Their minimum solo account (they scale to teams, which will be necessary for your business I would imagine in the future) has 500 songs for $1 more a month (over 300% more), allow downloads (and you can style your own download page with templates), allow downloads in multiple formats (again, extremely useful for deliveries - they auto-make the alternative formats). 

So for me as a potential user, I'm not sure I see the value proposition. Where would you see your site sit alongside something like disco?


----------



## Alex Niedt (Oct 18, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Personally I am happy enough with 128kbps.
> 
> Years ago, before I knew what I know now about mastering for steaming, 128kbps files could sound terrible, especially things like cymbals.
> 
> Most of the stuff that I stream nowadays sounds much better, even though the bit rate is the same.


Where are you streaming that the 128kbps streams sound acceptable? Soundcloud sounds absolutely awful to me. Bandcamp's encoding might sound a little better, but still not good. I wish all these sites would default to 320kbps. I would probably listen to some music on Soundcloud once in a while if it sounded better.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 19, 2019)

Hi Alex 



Alex Niedt said:


> Where are you streaming that the 128kbps streams sound acceptable?



SoundCloud, Bandcamp and YouTube are my main sources of listening nowadays. In order of preference is SoundCloud and Bandcamp with YouTube coming last. Although that is based mostly on how I think audio is processed by YouTube. The reality is I can hardly discern any real difference in sound quality of my own music which I post across all three platforms.



Alex Niedt said:


> Soundcloud sounds absolutely awful to me.



I am sure we all have different expectations.

I have had a poke around your website to find out more about you as a person. You appear to be a professional mixing/mastering engineer. So that, alone, suggests to me that you have had the necessary training to be able to carry out that work and you would have developed a more critical ear in the process.

You also look like a young person. Although I cannot find an article in the internet to back this up, youger people hear higher frequencies, 10kHz and above, better than older people. I did, however, find this article, which may be related:-









The Mosquito - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





I am 59. About eight years ago I had a hearing test for work. I have a marked problem in one ear, which doesn't hear much over 10kHz. And my other ear isn't much better... Anything about 14kHz is lost to me. I am guessing that that is a problem brought around by listening to music turned up to eleven and never wearing ear protection at heavy metal gigs.

I am also very much a hobbyist and totally self taught in everything I do, music related.

In that part of my post you quoted I mention that "Years ago, before I knew what I know now about mastering for steaming, 128kbps files could sound terrible, especially things like cymbals." That may be in partly because at that time my hearing hadn't deteriorated to the point that it has now.

I will point you to a recent post that was raised about this very subject on the ambientonline.org website, where I am an active member:-






SC never sounded better. - Ambient Online Forums


Tonight I was in the rare mood to listen to my oldish tracks on Sound Cloud. After some time really enjoying the music I suddenly realized I was hearing all the detail and nuances I don't remember hearing when streaming off SC. I really think they have improved their streaming quality 100%. My...



www.ambientonline.org





It is suggested by one member there that, in his opinion, SoundCloud is now sounding better than ever. Better than Bandcamp.



cheers

andy


----------



## SongBox (Oct 19, 2019)

Once again thanks for taking the time to input  

Well I still stand that it's a SoundCloud alternative. Artists use Soundcloud for discovery, yes, but they also use it to send private links to magazines, radio, industry folk etc. That's the part that I see SongBox as an alternative for.

Regards Disco... I didn't know this platform existed and I've been researching this space for a while. May I ask, have you heard of or used Haulix (http://haulix.com)? This is what we used when I was with Universal and I see it's still going strong. There is also DemoBox and a few others (however please check out Haulix if you haven't already). 

For me all of these alternatives simply validate the market. Each has a similar core function but offer different things that will be valuable to different people. As you said, SongBox has more in depth reporting and I will continue to refine that. In my opinion, it's also a nicer experience. Some will agree with that and some won't, but as an example, I just signed up to Disco and I found the signup form laborious and a bit off-putting (lots of form fields to fill in and boxes to tick). 

Also, upon completion of signing up I got a screen which told me my account was being setup and it would be ready in approx 4 hours. I find this unacceptable and unnecessary for a digital product (and I mean that from a user's perspective as well as a software engineering perspective). 

Regards monetary value... with these things you need to set your stall out and see what happens. If everybody worried about what everybody else was charging it would just be a race to the bottom and no-one would prosper. 

So in answer to the big question "Where would you see your site sit alongside something like disco?" - Honestly, I see it as one of a few apps of this type and I think it sits alongside it as a competitor just fine. Some people will choose Disco, some will choose SongBox. Some will choose Bandcamp and others Haulix. That's just the way the game works.






colony nofi said:


> Oh - my bad assumptions from looking at early copy / reading forum posts (and it being called a soundcloud alternative, which is social)... more than actually trying it out. So this *is* a disco competitor then?
> 
> 
> In which case, I feel my criticism over value then stands. Look at what disco offers for the price. I'm not sure if their model is sustainable from a $ perspective, but it seems to offer the user more value. Its newest incarnation (its just had a redesign) is really quick slick, and the feature set for sharing playlists / individual tracks seem very well thought out and thorough (though you definnitely have some interesting new features in the mix they don't have in regards to how *much* of a song has been listened to. They include videos - which for people in sync is 100% necessary, and an increasinly important part of record company revenue streams)
> ...


----------



## SongBox (Oct 19, 2019)

Art - thanks for the comment. I've just finished implementing some ideas by other folk on here. Today I'll look at a free trial for pro! Thanks so much.



ArtTurnerMusic said:


> Nice feel to the site. Best wishes going forward!
> Have you considered offering a trial period at the Pro level? It's kind of difficult to evaluate at the Free level.


----------



## SongBox (Oct 19, 2019)

@synkrotron - I've just implemented your suggestion about showing total time and current time on the tracks.

Here's a link to a test SongBox so you can see it: Test SongBox




synkrotron said:


> Okay... Now that I am streaming that I notice that in your player it doesn't give an indication of how long the track lasts and where the play position is along the track.
> 
> If you are just checking in to listen then that doesn't matter but I, personally, like to know how long a piece is before I listen.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 19, 2019)

SongBox said:


> @synkrotron - I've just implemented your suggestion about showing total time and current time on the tracks.
> 
> Here's a link to a test SongBox so you can see it: Test SongBox



Hi, Mick,

I get the following with that link at the moment:-

"This user's account is currently inactive"


----------



## SongBox (Oct 19, 2019)

Ugh... that's me being an idiot. gimme 5 mins.



synkrotron said:


> Hi, Mick,
> 
> I get the following with that link at the moment:-
> 
> "This user's account is currently inactive"


----------



## SongBox (Oct 19, 2019)

@synkrotron - should be good to go now on that same link. Apologies.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 19, 2019)

SongBox said:


> @synkrotron - should be good to go now on that same link. Apologies.



Excellent, works as expected


----------



## midiman (Oct 19, 2019)

@SongBox
This platform sounds all very interesting, especially the great stats of how long each track got listened to. 

I tried to create a free account to see how I would like the platform but I get the following error after inserting a user name and password and clicking "Get Started" button....

"Error 500
Whoops, something went wrong on our servers."


----------



## SongBox (Oct 19, 2019)

Hi @midiman - I'm delighted you wanted to try out SongBox, thanks so much.

I've just signed up to a new account myself and others have signed up successfully since this message. The only thing I can think is that you signed up while I was in the middle of rolling out new code. And given that I've been doing that all day it's not out of the question.

Would you mind trying again? sorry - I know that's annoying.





midiman said:


> @SongBox
> This platform sounds all very interesting, especially the great stats of how long each track got listened to.
> 
> I tried to create a free account to see how I would like the platform but I get the following error after inserting a user name and password and clicking "Get Started" button....
> ...


----------



## sin(x) (Oct 21, 2019)

I'm in much the same boat, and also privacy-minded enough in general to just keep my distance from a site that doesn't let me choose if I want it to share these details. What have you got to lose if you let users opt out of that?


----------



## SongBox (Oct 25, 2019)

Are you referring to the fact that you email address is in the SongBox? If so then I've listened and I'm adding that as a toggle-able (spelling?) feature within the next few days. 



sin(x) said:


> I'm in much the same boat, and also privacy-minded enough in general to just keep my distance from a site that doesn't let me choose if I want it to share these details. What have you got to lose if you let users opt out of that?


----------



## SongBox (Oct 25, 2019)

I've had a tonne of feedback in the past week or so. A lot to process, but something that was mentioned enough to make me take notice was how the reporting could be better. So I've made some significant changes.

SongBox used to show you an activity feed of all engagement. However no rather than a feed I just list your SongBoxes with the top line stats in a really easily glanceable way. Hopefully these screen grabs will help illustrate.

Before:





After:





And if you click into "Report" you get track activity:






Does this make sense?


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

Hi Mick 

A few more random things:-

Are those stats "all time" stats? Is it possible to see daily, weekly and monthly stats too?

What about download stats?

Apologies if you have mentioned this elsewhere.

cheers

andy


----------



## SongBox (Oct 26, 2019)

Yeah they are all time but it would be easy enough for me to add in date time pickers. Would that be valuable do you think?



synkrotron said:


> Hi Mick
> 
> A few more random things:-
> 
> ...


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

SongBox said:


> Would that be valuable do you think?



Possibly... I suppose that I am used to reading my SoundCloud stats (as a Pro Unlimited artist) and Bandcamp stats. They both give a breakdown based on history, so, today, this week, this month, this year etc.

It could be argued that we should be agonising over stats, but I'm kind of used to it now.


----------

