Artists fighting Spotify over royalty rates

[Guy]

Spotify and other music streaming services pay artists next to nothing.
https://www.musicbusinessworldwide....potify-google-amazon-pandora-streaming-rates/

 

[RogueWarrior]

Thanks, Guy. This is not new. It's been known for quite a while that streaming is not lucrative for artists.

Support live music. Go to shows. Buy merch. If you don't want merch, throw a 20 on the merch table.

Jason Isbell said it best in tweet "Don't mind you streaming my jams, but keep the jams playing when you go to sleep" (paraphrasing a bit, but the gist is there.)

 

[Guy]

Thanks, Guy. This is not new. It's been known for quite a while that streaming is not lucrative for artists.

Support live music. Go to shows. Buy merch. If you don't want merch, throw a 20 on the merch table.

Jason Isbell said it best in tweet "Don't mind you streaming my jams, but keep the jams playing when you go to sleep" (paraphrasing a bit, but the gist is there.)

I still buy music from iTunes. From what I undserstand, the only music streaming services that pay artists well are Tidal and Groove Music.

 

[RogueWarrior]

I still buy music from iTunes. From what I undserstand, the only music streaming services that pay artists well are Tidal and Groove Music.

I pay for Spotify premium. I know they pay shit for the artists. But I get to listen to everything new that comes out and decide what is worth purchasing. I'm on the side of the artists, but as a consumer, if it's available I'll use it.

Side note, story time.

Went to a free show/acoustic thing not long ago. I don't think the artist thought it would be a big deal. Huge turnout. That's on her, always a good turnout at this local thing. She didn't bring merch. Big mistake. I talked to her after the show. She really thought it was gonna be a corner stage in a smokey bar. I blame the venue and the artist for not communicating better. She had mentioned during her set that she was recording a new album, slowly, as she could afford studio time. I know it's not much, but I gave her a 20 and said go make more music. She apologized and said she should give me something.

Good for Taylor Swift and all those can afford to not make their music available. And hopefully it will help the little guys, because it's not going to hurt the major players. But reality is that these artists go on the road so they can afford to make the next record. So, go see live music, buy merch. Sometimes, that's all they have.

 

[Vera]

Yuuup. My other half is a musician and the rates Spotify provides are abysmal. Supporting local music by going to shows and buying merch is what keeps most artists afloat. Most moderately successful indie acts still have day jobs and pay for touring out of pocket. It's a tough business.

That said, if people are able and inclined, supporting acts by going to shows is 1000% more fun than listening to it on a streaming platform. BandsInTown is a pretty nifty app that lets you keep up with your favorite musicians' dates near you. I am a music nerd and it saves my bacon.

Spotify provides exposure. I can't help but liken it a little to Pornhub's model program. Yes, it provides exposure and a small payout, but not nearly as much as if fans purchased directly. It's a total mixed bag but I do really think Spotify is beneficial. I've found lots of artists I wouldn't have otherwise, and gone to shows where I've bought merch.

It's no secret. Most rock shows vary from $7-25 and it's well worth the money to go out and have some fun while supporting the artists you enjoy.

 

[Guy]

Yuuup. My other half is a musician and the rates Spotify provides are abysmal. Supporting local music by going to shows and buying merch is what keeps most artists afloat. Most moderately successful indie acts still have day jobs and pay for touring out of pocket. It's a tough business.

That said, if people are able and inclined, supporting acts by going to shows is 1000% more fun than listening to it on a streaming platform. BandsInTown is a pretty nifty app that lets you keep up with your favorite musicians' dates near you.

The other side is, Spotify provides exposure. I can't help but liken it a little to Pornhub's model program. Yes, it provides exposure and a small payout, but not nearly as much as if fans purchased directly. It's a total mixed bag but I do really think Spotify is beneficial.

It's no secret. Most rock shows vary from $7-25 and it's well worth the money to go out and have some fun while supporting the artists you enjoy.

Why dosent the fact that Spotify`s rates are incredibly low prevent people from using the service?

 

[Vera]

@Guy Because it's valuable in terms of product distribution and gaining a following. Spotify has automated playlists that generate content based on users' listening history and offers recommendations based on your taste. I've found a TON of bands that way. It is almost universally used and is easy to publish to.

I am speaking from the POV of smaller acts as that's all I have experience with. I am sure Taylor Swift's grievances are relevant proportionally to her earnings elsewhere, but for artists on smaller labels or who are unsigned Spotify is something of a boon.

 

[EspiKvlt]

Even before streaming, most artists have always made more money off going to their shows and buying their merch. So you should be doing that anyway.

 

[Dan Epstein]

I'm using Tidal, and I'm gladly paying for it. I heard artists like it too.

 

[Gen]

Why dosent the fact that Spotify`s rates are incredibly low prevent people from using the service?

I will speak from a different perspective than most have shared before. I don't buy very much music, so before Spotify, I'd torrent or rip from YouTube most of the time. I think my iTunes library has about 5 albums I've bought and 10 individual songs, so not a lot. Spotify is, to me, a nice option because it gives me a way to pay *something* rather than the nothing I would've otherwise paid. I don't personally allocate my entertainment budget to music but $10 is reasonable to me. As far as I know, artists can opt out of using it if they want, unless maybe their label makes them and if so I assume that's because the label realizes it's an investment in making fans. A friend of mine is in an indie band with growing success and said that Spotify has been a huge part of that.

I do think it's smart that they're finding a way to capitalize on people like me, who were pirating but would stop for a low price. I rarely torrent movies because of Netflix, I don't torrent Marvel comics because of Marvel Unlimited. It's not uncommon to perceive digital items as less valuable so services that let you stream for cheap have more appeal for many people than owning a digital copy.

 

[WickedTouch]

Yeah its a well known fact that Spotify pays buttons in royalties to songwriters. The guy who co-wrote "It's All About That Bass" a few years ago... a song that was a number 1 in 78 countries and streamed 178 million times on Spotify, (Sept 2015 figures) personally made only a measly $5,679 from it. That is criminal.
At least Dick Turpin had the decency to wear a mask!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/artic...ass-writer-says-he-got-5679-from-178m-streams

Personally, I'll never use a streaming service because of this. Digital downloads or hard copy for moi!

Gracias por la música

 

[RogueWarrior]

Yeah its a well known fact that Spotify pays buttons in royalties to songwriters. The guy who co-wrote "It's All About That Bass" a few years ago... a song that was a number 1 in 78 countries and streamed 178 million times on Spotify, (Sept 2015 figures) personally made only a measly $5,679 from it. That is criminal.
At least Dick Turpin had the decency to wear a mask!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/artic...ass-writer-says-he-got-5679-from-178m-streams

Personally, I'll never use a streaming service because of this. Digital downloads or hard copy for moi!

Gracias por la música

I get it. But on the flip side, I have purchased more music since I started using a streaming service, plus the artist gets 1/10 of one cent as a bonus (sarcasm). I grew up in the 80s. I would buy albums (cassettes) based on album covers, one song on the radio, a recommendation from someone's cousin. I was often disappointed. Now, I buy (physical copies) of the albums I know I like.

 

[RogueWarrior]

Why dosent the fact that Spotify`s rates are incredibly low prevent people from using the service?

See my reply to @WickedTouch for one reason.

The business of music has changed so much and is changing almost daily. If you are not a Taylor Swift, you can't afford to NOT be on the streaming services unless you have an incredible grass roots following. And even at that, to grow, you need to stream. Consider this: Two bands/artists similar in every way. Talent, fan base, genre, national/international reach. I tell someone, "you should check out X and Y. Both are in your wheelhouse." X streams, Y doesn't. Guess who my friend is checking out?

It's not ideal, but it's reality.

 

[Guy]

I'm using Tidal, and I'm gladly paying for it. I heard artists like it too.

Ive read that Tidal has issues with buffering at the start of tracks and in the middle of tracks.
Have you experienced that with the service?
https://www.slant.co/options/17528/~tidal-review#cons