For music enthusiasts, it’s not always about sound quality, even though audiophiles tend to prioritize superior audio fidelity. In search of that perfect unicorn of music streaming apps, it’s the overall listening experience that strikes a chord with discerning listeners, and that’s something that still feels lacking inYouTube Music.
There’s no app mojo, no pop culture buzz surrounding YouTube’s music platform, not likeSpotifyorApple Music. Both of these music streamers dominate and are held in high regard thanks to the feature sets they offer. So, the question begs, what exactly are the killer features missing from YouTube music? Are there personalized recommendations, like Spotify? Does the app feature over 30,000 expertly curated playlists, like Apple Music?
Enough with the questions; let’s dig directly into all of the features YouTube Music is missing in its secret sauce so that it can compete more earnestly with the most popular music streaming platforms on Android.
Lacks in-demand enthusiast-level high-fidelity playback
A huge thumbs up goes out to the internet’s biggest video-sharing platform for providing seamless connectivity. From listening to a favorite song, you’re linked by their algorithm to music videos and concerts by the same artist.
The problem, though, is the music isn’t lossless or encoded with the latest and greatest surround sound standards like Dolby Atmos.Spatial audio experiences, as already available in both Spotify and Apple Music, are gaining traction. It’s no longer good enough to have a low bitrate, MP3 quality music clip, not in this age of high-bandwidth media.
Left behind by real-time song lyrics feature
It is possible to find just about anything on YouTube Music, from podcasts to user-uploaded videos with lyrics embedded. The library on the platform is unrivaled, yet there are no guarantees of anything, including default song lyrics. The entire interface feels patchwork and bolted together, not clean and thoughtfully designed, almost like the music functionality was tacked onto an existing video service.
But there are no surprises when it comes to competitors; Apple Music provides aLyrics buttonat the bottom of the app screen, and it gets even better, with many songs offering time-synced lines. Sing along to R&B divas like Rihanna or Beyonce as the lyrics swim into focus, line by line. Alternatively, sing along withSpotify lyrics, as it incorporates song words, too, synced live to your personalized jam.
However, the winds of musical wordsmithing are turning. YouTube Music has, as of April 2023, started pushing out a server-side lyrics syncing feature that proves that it’s capable of stepping up to the game, thanks to a deal withMusixmatch. But theystill don’t work everywhere, which means Apple Music and Spotify still come out ahead.
User-focused features are at a minimum
Sometimes, it just feels like the execs over at the YouTube offices don’t listen to user requests. For example, an offline mode is fundamental in music streaming. If you’re going through a tunnel while commuting on a train, or maybe you’re deep underground in the NYC subway, then your 5G network might throw in the towel until you resurface. Spotify and Apple have you covered. With Youtube Music, though, not so much.
There is an option foroffline YouTube music playback, but there are plenty ofreportsof it beingdifficult to usewhere the function is unreliable. And what about playlists and community integration? This is an area that’s sadly underutilized on YouTube. Its library is huge, and there’s a matching user base that reaches into the many millions, yet you’re limited to comments and likes. Sharing, subscriptions, and radio station creation exists, but there’s no way tofollow friends, like on Spotify. While not quite as robust as Spotify in this department, even Apple Music offersfriends followingandplaylist sharing.
YouTube Music needs to embrace its community and build an identity
Basically, Spotify wrote the book on social interactions within its music streaming app, even going so far as becoming the go-to landing strip for information seekers who need their latestpodcast fix. Your listening history enriches the whole process, contributing to collaborative playlists and new music discoveries that will expand your musical boundaries. There’s a natural feeling when directed to old and new music, towards curated playlists and audiobooks; your habits pay off the more you use the app.
As for Apple Music, it wrote the follow-up novel on social interaction, backed by its titanic electronics and music empire. Apple has been serving up music for a long time now, so it was a natural progression to move to streaming, which is why the service feels so fleshed out; it’s been around since 2015.
On balance, both Spotify and Apple Music offer a polished, professional, and, most importantly, focused design that appeals to users, which YouTube Music clearly lacks. They feel more structured, more socially integrated, and just cooler. There’s no reason YouTube Music shouldn’t be more popular and shouldn’t be a fixture on the home page of most Android devices, but Google clearly has more work to do to catch up to its competitors. Perhaps if it didn’t continually relaunch its services, Google could finally build a stable base filled with the features users are clamoring for.
