Talented British singer announced exciting Glasgow gig
The star will host her gig at the Southside venue on Sunday, October 12.
The 24-year-old, from England, began her music career in 2020. She has since gone on to make several hit tunes, including Good Without, House On Fire, Red Flags, and Love Language.
She also boasts an impressive 2.7million monthly listeners on the music streaming app, Spotify.
READ MORE: Music legend cancels Glasgow gig just weeks before it was set to take place
READ MORE: 'One of the UK's biggest bands' announce exciting Glasgow concert
Tickets for the concert will go on sale from Friday, June 20 at 9am. However, fans will be able to grab presale tickets for the gig from 9am on Thursday, June 19.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
20 hours ago
- Scotsman
Spotify: Why I'm giving the service a rest to go back to basics with music listening
This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission on items purchased through this article, but that does not affect our editorial judgement. I might have all the music in the world at my fingertips - but do I need it all at once? Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Spotify has faced criticism in recent months over its CEO's investment in an AI military defence company. But that isn't the only issue - the choice on the platform has also become overwhelming for some. Benjamin Jackson writes about why he's giving up Spotify in favour of going back to basics. The idea of having millions of tracks at my fingertips became a reality when Spotify first launched in 2008. No longer did I have to contend with how much space I would need on my Zune (ask your parents), as the catalogue the Swedish-based streaming service offered meant that I could retain hard drive space for… well… did I need hard drive space from there on in? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But 17 years later, Spotify has grown from that weird app on your phone that not too many people were familiar with, to part of everyday language. 'Did you listen to that new Chappell Roan song?' 'No, it's on Spotify - I'll Spotify.' But a lot has changed over those years; the company has been hit with numerous complaints, from hosting Joe Rogan's podcast to how much artists actually earn from royalties through the service. That's not mentioning the most recent problem; Daniel Ek investing money into Helsing, a European defence technology company focused on developing AI systems for military applications, including those for drones and battlefield targeting. That's led to artists, such as Deerhoof, to decide that the money they help Spotify make is something they cannot do in good conscience. I've also had a few bands, from back in the days I used to release music, ask if I can remove their stuff from Spotify - despite the ubiquity of the service. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But the reason I am forgoing Spotify is far simpler. Although I am also not a fan of paying for a subscription that may help fund a war machine (for lack of a better term), it isn't merely that. For the life of me, I don't think I need that amount of music at my disposal - and therein lies two operative words here: disposal and disposable. Choice overload and the problem with Spotify While Spotify has become the 'king' of music streaming services, is too much choice and never-ending algorithms making music 'disposable'? | Canva You might be familiar with the concept of choice overload, as we've written about it before. For me, it is a real problem. It's why when at the end of the working day I put on Netflix or Prime Video, I'm met with numerous options, and I instead spend most of my time thinking about what I want to watch, rather than going in committed to what I do want to watch. It's very much the same when it comes to music; maybe I'm getting old and my patience with technology is changing, but I find myself more often than not sitting in silence during the day rather than putting Spotify on. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It never used to be that way, and as someone who has previously belittled the importance of radio for artists owing to the way we all access music this century, I actually am a hypocrite – I have been enjoying the radio again. Why? Because the choice has been taken away from me and instead 'curated' by music programmers. It still all boils down to what artists are considered 'du jour' this week, but to have hours of music with conversations between moments is the respite I think I require these days. I don't get that same feeling from Spotify, and before people sound out 'that sounds like a you problem,' I am happy to admit it is. My patience for some reason is getting thinner the greyer I get. I've been called a boomer for my attitude sometimes. Great. But for all the recommended, customised, curated playlists created for me based on what I have been listening to, my Spotify Wrapped will demonstrate there's only a handful of acts I still use Spotify for. Is it worth £16.99 per month when that money could be used towards a CD or a vinyl from a local act? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There is a reason I've been extolling the virtues of compact discs since the beginning of the year: unlike Spotify, an album on CD, vinyl, or cassette tape has a definitive start and a definitive end. The wall of noise that is Spotify's algorithm To put it into some perspective, let's say I end up listening to Nirvana's Nevermind; I'll enjoy the album, but then, when the album is finished and it segues into the 'recommendations' based on Spotify's algorithm, it all just becomes a wall of noise. It's akin to just having non-descript sound on at times, and hence why the operative word is 'disposable.' Am I enjoying the fact that I can listen to whatever I want free from commercial interruptions or discussion about upcoming releases, or is it just a disposable form of entertainment that is just put on for the sake of 'having something on in the background'? It used to be, and still is in many respects, an event when an album finally dropped, and those of us of a certain age can remember lining up outside of HMV or Fopp to pick up the latest album we've coveted since reading about it in magazines and following their music videos on television. It was a full package. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Now? I can pre-save an album to Spotify, and it'll just appear in my library; there is no pomp and pageantry anymore. Instead, it just feels like I've ordered my meal on a flight and, low and behold, there it is… not quite nourishing but just doing the job to keep me sustained. That's why I think people are turning back to having tangible items with music on them, be it vinyl, cassette, CD, or Minidisc. Whatever takes your fancy. Maybe part of that is the realisation that royalty rates for physical items still command more than streaming services, or maybe this post-internet movement of removing ourselves more from the digital world has led us back to a halcyon era where we could hold the album we've been waiting for. For me, it's that combination of still enjoying the 'ritual' of pulling a CD sleeve out, reading the inlay, and allowing myself the time to digest an album once it has finished. Rather, as it were, not allowing myself that moment and instead gorging myself, without reason, on more music. Okay, there might be a reason – that Spotify Wrapped can't have Bush as a top-rated artist for another year in a row. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Interestingly, when I posited the notion on Facebook of cancelling Spotify in favour of buying CDs, an overwhelming number of people agreed with it. Some asking why that opinion was so popular, others offering advice such as supporting artists directly using Bandcamp might be more of a viable way to support people. But for me, as I pop on Charli XCX's remix version of 'brat', on CD, it's that content moment after an album has finished that has led me to eschew Spotify for now. It might sound like I have a lack of self-control regarding the use of the streaming service, but as it stands, I've been enjoying music way more this way in recent months than the 'onslaught' of options Spotify has. As my father used to say – you can only listen to one thing once. He's right – so maybe it's time to give up the subscription permanently and instead go back to basics, discovering music through word of mouth instead of what an algorithm is pushing, and adorning my shelves with CDs once again. Something you can't do with streaming tracks. Are you still a fan of Spotify or are you too finding yourself looking at other services and other ways to listen to music? Share your thoughts by leaving a comment below.
Scotsman
21 hours ago
- Scotsman
Spotify: Why I'm giving the service a rest to go back to basics with music listening
This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission on items purchased through this article, but that does not affect our editorial judgement. I might have all the music in the world at my fingertips - but do I need it all at once? Sign up to our Arts and Culture newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Spotify has faced criticism in recent months over its CEO's investment in an AI military defence company. But that isn't the only issue - the choice on the platform has also become overwhelming for some. Benjamin Jackson writes about why he's giving up Spotify in favour of going back to basics. The idea of having millions of tracks at my fingertips became a reality when Spotify first launched in 2008. No longer did I have to contend with how much space I would need on my Zune (ask your parents), as the catalogue the Swedish-based streaming service offered meant that I could retain hard drive space for… well… did I need hard drive space from there on in? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But 17 years later, Spotify has grown from that weird app on your phone that not too many people were familiar with, to part of everyday language. 'Did you listen to that new Chappell Roan song?' 'No, it's on Spotify - I'll Spotify.' But a lot has changed over those years; the company has been hit with numerous complaints, from hosting Joe Rogan's podcast to how much artists actually earn from royalties through the service. That's not mentioning the most recent problem; Daniel Ek investing money into Helsing, a European defence technology company focused on developing AI systems for military applications, including those for drones and battlefield targeting. That's led to artists, such as Deerhoof, to decide that the money they help Spotify make is something they cannot do in good conscience. I've also had a few bands, from back in the days I used to release music, ask if I can remove their stuff from Spotify - despite the ubiquity of the service. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But the reason I am forgoing Spotify is far simpler. Although I am also not a fan of paying for a subscription that may help fund a war machine (for lack of a better term), it isn't merely that. For the life of me, I don't think I need that amount of music at my disposal - and therein lies two operative words here: disposal and disposable. Choice overload and the problem with Spotify While Spotify has become the 'king' of music streaming services, is too much choice and never-ending algorithms making music 'disposable'? | Canva You might be familiar with the concept of choice overload, as we've written about it before. For me, it is a real problem. It's why when at the end of the working day I put on Netflix or Prime Video, I'm met with numerous options, and I instead spend most of my time thinking about what I want to watch, rather than going in committed to what I do want to watch. It's very much the same when it comes to music; maybe I'm getting old and my patience with technology is changing, but I find myself more often than not sitting in silence during the day rather than putting Spotify on. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It never used to be that way, and as someone who has previously belittled the importance of radio for artists owing to the way we all access music this century, I actually am a hypocrite – I have been enjoying the radio again. Why? Because the choice has been taken away from me and instead 'curated' by music programmers. It still all boils down to what artists are considered 'du jour' this week, but to have hours of music with conversations between moments is the respite I think I require these days. I don't get that same feeling from Spotify, and before people sound out 'that sounds like a you problem,' I am happy to admit it is. My patience for some reason is getting thinner the greyer I get. I've been called a boomer for my attitude sometimes. Great. But for all the recommended, customised, curated playlists created for me based on what I have been listening to, my Spotify Wrapped will demonstrate there's only a handful of acts I still use Spotify for. Is it worth £16.99 per month when that money could be used towards a CD or a vinyl from a local act? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There is a reason I've been extolling the virtues of compact discs since the beginning of the year: unlike Spotify, an album on CD, vinyl, or cassette tape has a definitive start and a definitive end. The wall of noise that is Spotify's algorithm To put it into some perspective, let's say I end up listening to Nirvana's Nevermind; I'll enjoy the album, but then, when the album is finished and it segues into the 'recommendations' based on Spotify's algorithm, it all just becomes a wall of noise. It's akin to just having non-descript sound on at times, and hence why the operative word is 'disposable.' Am I enjoying the fact that I can listen to whatever I want free from commercial interruptions or discussion about upcoming releases, or is it just a disposable form of entertainment that is just put on for the sake of 'having something on in the background'? It used to be, and still is in many respects, an event when an album finally dropped, and those of us of a certain age can remember lining up outside of HMV or Fopp to pick up the latest album we've coveted since reading about it in magazines and following their music videos on television. It was a full package. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Now? I can pre-save an album to Spotify, and it'll just appear in my library; there is no pomp and pageantry anymore. Instead, it just feels like I've ordered my meal on a flight and, low and behold, there it is… not quite nourishing but just doing the job to keep me sustained. That's why I think people are turning back to having tangible items with music on them, be it vinyl, cassette, CD, or Minidisc. Whatever takes your fancy. Maybe part of that is the realisation that royalty rates for physical items still command more than streaming services, or maybe this post-internet movement of removing ourselves more from the digital world has led us back to a halcyon era where we could hold the album we've been waiting for. For me, it's that combination of still enjoying the 'ritual' of pulling a CD sleeve out, reading the inlay, and allowing myself the time to digest an album once it has finished. Rather, as it were, not allowing myself that moment and instead gorging myself, without reason, on more music. Okay, there might be a reason – that Spotify Wrapped can't have Bush as a top-rated artist for another year in a row. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Interestingly, when I posited the notion on Facebook of cancelling Spotify in favour of buying CDs, an overwhelming number of people agreed with it. Some asking why that opinion was so popular, others offering advice such as supporting artists directly using Bandcamp might be more of a viable way to support people. But for me, as I pop on Charli XCX's remix version of 'brat', on CD, it's that content moment after an album has finished that has led me to eschew Spotify for now. It might sound like I have a lack of self-control regarding the use of the streaming service, but as it stands, I've been enjoying music way more this way in recent months than the 'onslaught' of options Spotify has. As my father used to say – you can only listen to one thing once. He's right – so maybe it's time to give up the subscription permanently and instead go back to basics, discovering music through word of mouth instead of what an algorithm is pushing, and adorning my shelves with CDs once again. Something you can't do with streaming tracks.
Metro
a day ago
- Metro
Mystery AI rock band with over 1,000,000 streams sparks confusion and warnings
A mysterious new band is climbing the charts on Spotify, racking up over over a million listens in just a few weeks. The Velvet Sundown sound familiar, and their songs are perfectly listenable, if not the next Sweet Jane. But they're causing controversy because they're entirely AI-generated – and the streaming platform isn't making it obvious to listeners. When they first appeared on Spotify at the end of June, they had a 'verified artist' profile claiming that the band was 'formed by singer and mellotron player Gabe Farrow, guitarist Lennie West, Milo Rains, who crafts the band's textured synth sounds, and free-spirited percussionist Orion 'Rio' Del Mar'. But some soon became suspicious that none of them had any social media presence or evidence of existing outside of this bio. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Not quite what you'd expect if they'd been gigging and promoting themselves for years before their big break. The Velvet Sundown have now admitted that both the 'bandmates' and the music are AI generated. Even before this, Deezer, a rival music streaming service, had tagged their music as such. This had nothing to do with the images or promotion surrounding them, but was down to analysis of the music itself. Aurelien Herault, Chief Innovation Officer at Deezer, told Metro: We have trained our detection tool using datasets from a number of generative models, including Suno and Udio, which means that our detection tool is able to recognise the signals and sounds in fully AI-generated music that you don't find in authentic tracks. 'We have also made significant progress in training our detection tool to identify AI tracks even without a specific dataset to train on. 'Thanks to our tool, we are confident that the album pages that are currently tagged generated by AI on our platform are generated by AI.' Their software flagged The Velvet Sundown as being AI before the contoversy erupted, and so a label is now shown to users warning 'AI generated content. Some tracks on this album may have been created using artificial intelligence.' After speculation across news organisations, the 'band' admitted they were not real humans. Their Spotify profile now refers to them as 'a synthetic music project guided by human creative direction'. But their online presence is even odder than this, as there are multiple accounts claiming to be them on both X and Instagram. The band have ironically now accused one of these accounts of trying to 'hijack' their identity by 'creating fake profiles claiming to represent us'. An unofficial X profile wrote many posts such as: 'This is not a joke. This is our music, written in long, sweaty nights in a cramped bungalow in California with real instruments, real minds, and real soul. Every chord, every lyric, every mistake — HUMAN.' This prolific poster later unmasked themselves as 'Andrew Frelon', claiming their account was an art hoax making up posts using ChatGPT, and admitting they were still using a fake name. They wrote in a long post on Medium that they were interested in disinformation and generative AI, and saw an opportunity for mischief as the newly buzzy 'band' had no social media presence. The fake X account has more followers than the official X account, and also started posting first, so you can see why people got confused about all of this. We also sent them a message after they claimed to be a spokesperson for the band, but they did not respond when we asked for a video interview. The band also has at least five Instagram accounts claiming to be them, one of which is filled with what looks like AI generated images. These images were part of the reason the band was identified as fake in the first place, with oddities in the images like fudged fingers or a guitar with disappearing strings. But again, the band now say these are not from their official account. It's growing, and Deezer say they now see 20,000 tracks which are 100% AI generated submitted every single day, which has doubled from the start of the year. Mr Herault told Metro that artifically generated music now makes up approximately 18% of all tracks delivered to the platform. He said: 'At Deezer we want to prioritise revenues going to real artists, which is why we remove fully AI-generated tracks from algorithmic or editorial recommendations. 'We don't believe AI music is inherently good or bad, but we believe music fans have a right to know what they are listening to, which is why we opt for a transparent approach and tag AI-generated music on Deezer, in order to build trust with our users.' As the tech continues to improve, we will no doubt get tracks which sound great and are made by AI, at the same time as becomes more integrated in filmmaking and yes, maybe takes your white collar job. Spotify has been investing heavily in AI, and you can now use it to make you playlists or listen to a DJ curating songs for you. But it has also been accused of adding AI generated music to popular playlists like Ambient Chill and Peaceful Piano, without it being obvious to users. The company has not commented on this, but previously said it was 'categorically untrue' that it was creating AI music itself to fill playlists. Instagram has introduced a tag to show if something is made using AI, and videos made by Google Veo are watermarked. However, the industry standard is less clear when it comes to AI music, with Deezer currently the only streaming platform to tag it as such. One way scammers might benefit from uploading AI music to streaming platforms is by getting enough streams to earn them royalties. There are even so-called 'streaming farms' where tracks are listened to over and over again to try and game the system. So a song could be made by AI and listened to by bots on repeat, with humans barely part of the musical process at all. It would be too obvious if an unknown artist suddenly racked up millions of streams (much like with the Velvet Sundown). So to get around this, fraudsters flood streaming platforms with lots of fake songs which are each streamed just a few thousands times: enough to make money, but less likely to make people suspicious. Explaining the problem, Mr Herault said: If an artist is able to gain a significant number of users streaming their music, they then become entitled to a bigger share of the royalty pool. 'This is true whether an artist is using AI or not; the only difference being that AI music is significantly easier to produce.' More Trending He said that fraudulent streams 'are often generated by streaming farms or bots, which repeatedly 'listen' to tracks in order to inflate their streams and increase their share of the royalty pool.' Deezer said that up to 70% of streams of fully AI tracks are fraudulent, though currently AI tracks only make up 0.5% of overall streams. The company added: 'When detecting stream manipulation of any kind, Deezer excludes the streams from the royalty payments.' Although the Velvet Sundown profile on Spotify now tells listeners the truth, there is still no general system to flag AI content to users. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Gavin Rossdale clears up decades-long misconception about his band Bush MORE: AI will replace these 10 jobs — but here's what workers can do instead MORE: Games Inbox: What is the next big game for Nintendo Switch 2?
