4 ms·

From a revenue point of view, streaming is not a very good way to support an artist[1][2]. The Verge article I linked to states that artists are paid "somewhere

From a revenue point of view, streaming is not a very good way to support an artist[1][2]. The Verge article I linked to states that artists are paid "somewhere between $0.006 and $0.0084" per stream. If we are very pessimistic about the royalties of a CD sale - let's call it 20%, and say a single CD costs $10, that's ($10 x 20%) / 0.0084 = 238 streams to cover the cost of a single CD. If you take audiophile-level paranoia like buying vinyls, SA-CDs or FLAC masters, I think there's an argument to be made that an artist could make more money from people buying high-quality editions of their work to pirate than from people streaming their music. It's food for thought. Disclaimer: I am a music student. [1]: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/how-much-do-music-artists-earn-online-2015-remix/ http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/how-muc... [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9861372/spotify-year-in-review-artist-payment-royalties https://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9861372/spotify-year-in-r...

mehwoot 9y ago
238 streams to cover the cost of a single CD Justin Bieber has very roughly 5 billion plays on spotify. Using your math, that would equate to 17 million CDs sold. Seems pretty reasonable. I'm sure he would have been better off before the internet, but it still seems doable. Besides which I think youtube celebrities and twitch gamers have shown it is clearly possible to make a decent (if not quite profitable) living off creating content to be streamed. It's just music doesn't have the pre-eminent spot and advantages over other media it used to.
scooble 9y ago
If a single CD contains (say) 10 songs, then it seems odd to compare the cost of a listening to a cd to streaming a single song. Listening to the whole CD would be the equivalent of 10 streams. And if we divide those 238 streams by the 10 songs on the CD, it seems as though we only need to listen to a cd about 25 times before streaming becomes a better option for the artist.
- FelipeCortez 9y ago
  We "only" need to listen to a CD about 25 times? That's ~25 hours of listening to a single album.
  - scooble 9y ago
    Over a lifetime of owning a CD, that doesn't sound too crazy. I think it is a safe bet that there are albums I've listened to 25 times this year. And if I bought an album today, I would think it unlikely that I wouldn't average 2.5 plays per year over the next 10 years. I'd probably burn 10-15 of those plays in the first few weeks, and then only need 1-1.5 plays per year to break even. Of course, I won't listen to all my albums this much. Some might only get a few plays. So I suspect that the Miles Davis estate would be better off if I streamed 'Kind of Blue' rather than owning the CD. Conversely, Creed have done relatively well from my ill-advised CD purchase because I can guarantee I'm not going to hit 25 plays on that. So I guess the moral of the story is that I should stream from artists that I love, and buy albums from artists I am on the fence about.
zolthrowaway 9y ago
I disagree with this. Labels are the main beneficiaries of music distribution[0]. In addition, the non-committal nature of streaming makes it so much easier to get people to listen to your music. There are tons of artists I love with <10,000 plays that I never would have even heard of if not for music streaming services. Even if royalties are the biggest source of income (which I don't believe to be true), I still think streaming is beneficial to small artists. Using your math of 238 plays per CD, at 10,000 listens they would have to sell more than 50 CDs for CDs to be more profitable for them. There are an incredibly high number of artists on Spotify who have 10k plays on a single song who probably couldn't have given their CDs away. I've gone to shows to see the opening acts and co-headliners because of streaming services. I've bought merch from plenty of small artists that I never would have even known existed. I've listened to genres I had no interest in and found artists I like and support because of streaming services. I feel like the exposure and the ability to produce your music (and actually have people be able to find and listen to it) massively outweighs any potential loss of revenue. There are potentially some medium sized artists who would have done better in the CD model, but probably not with how prevalent music piracy was in the 2000s. [0]https://splinternews.com/buying-an-album-isnt-the-best-way-to-support-a-recordin-1793852977 https://splinternews.com/buying-an-album-isnt-the-best-way-t...
- baldfat 9y ago
  This is why Independent Music is the only way to go and have grown almost 500% of full-time musicians. Labels are nothing but dead weight unless you are making millions.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
criddell 9y ago
> From a revenue point of view, streaming is not a very good way to support an artist I wonder what percentage of the top 100 artists on streaming services even own their rights? I don't know for sure, but I suspect more money flows to the rights holders when I listen to a Pandora station while I work than if I turned on an actual radio. > 238 streams to cover the cost of a single CD This is just one data point, but before I signed up for Google Music, I was buying two CDs a year and spending around $35. Now I'm paying $10 / month. How does the amount spent on streaming today compare to the spending on CDs in 1990? Does the equation change if you consider environmental costs of making those CDs and getting them to consumers?
Avshalom 9y ago
Oh you're not nearly pessimistic enough: >>In the U.S., recording artists earn royalties amounting to 10%–25% (of the suggested retail price of the recording[37] depending on their popularity but such is before deductions for "packaging", "breakage", "promotion sales" and holdback for "returns", which act to significantly reduce net royalty incomes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty_payment#Mechanical_royalties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty_payment#Mechanical_roy...
devonkim 9y ago
Buying music is primarily supporting the distribution network that supports the artist, which has its pros and cons. I normally go to live shows and buy shirts or merchandise to support an artist because the margins on shirts, for example, are a lot better for the artist compared to the CDs. The label may pay for touring needs but a ton of artists not named Taylor Swift have to pay for almost everything themselves either because the label fronts no money or because the label will force a loan on the artist by having them pay it back in the form of ticket sales. Meanwhile, the label oftentimes works with venues to get a cut of, say, alcohol sales from them too. LPs and such, while coveted by hipsters, is really tough to recommend as a revenue stream for more mainstream genres. The music business has devolved back for many cases where it’s possibly better for an artist to experience play local shows and promote themselves as an entrepreneur rather than to be an employee of a label as almost an unpaid intern.
foobarchu 9y ago
Depends on how much you listen to as whether you're contributing more or less. I listen to spotify all day while I work, cycling through songs that I like often once every day or two. An artist that I like enough to have purchased a cd in the past will get multiple plays a day. That means less than a year to generate one cd's worth of revenue from me, and it's going to keep paying out after that because I'll keep listening to it years down the road if I really like it. Also worth noting that 238 streams is ~20 playthroughs of your average 12 song album, for those who frequently listen to entire albums. Add to that the fact that streaming services have made discovery a much bigger thing. The less mainstream artists are now getting the benefit of appearing on streaming radio and such, making their growth that much easier (after they've passed a certain threshold of course).

mehwoot 9y ago

238 streams to cover the cost of a single CD Justin Bieber has very roughly 5 billion plays on spotify. Using your math, that would equate to 17 million CDs sold. Seems pretty reasonable. I'm sure he would have been better off before the internet, but it still seems doable. Besides which I think youtube celebrities and twitch gamers have shown it is clearly possible to make a decent (if not quite profitable) living off creating content to be streamed. It's just music doesn't have the pre-eminent spot and advantages over other media it used to.

scooble 9y ago

If a single CD contains (say) 10 songs, then it seems odd to compare the cost of a listening to a cd to streaming a single song. Listening to the whole CD would be the equivalent of 10 streams. And if we divide those 238 streams by the 10 songs on the CD, it seems as though we only need to listen to a cd about 25 times before streaming becomes a better option for the artist.

FelipeCortez 9y ago
We "only" need to listen to a CD about 25 times? That's ~25 hours of listening to a single album.
- scooble 9y ago
  Over a lifetime of owning a CD, that doesn't sound too crazy. I think it is a safe bet that there are albums I've listened to 25 times this year. And if I bought an album today, I would think it unlikely that I wouldn't average 2.5 plays per year over the next 10 years. I'd probably burn 10-15 of those plays in the first few weeks, and then only need 1-1.5 plays per year to break even. Of course, I won't listen to all my albums this much. Some might only get a few plays. So I suspect that the Miles Davis estate would be better off if I streamed 'Kind of Blue' rather than owning the CD. Conversely, Creed have done relatively well from my ill-advised CD purchase because I can guarantee I'm not going to hit 25 plays on that. So I guess the moral of the story is that I should stream from artists that I love, and buy albums from artists I am on the fence about.

zolthrowaway 9y ago

I disagree with this. Labels are the main beneficiaries of music distribution[0]. In addition, the non-committal nature of streaming makes it so much easier to get people to listen to your music. There are tons of artists I love with <10,000 plays that I never would have even heard of if not for music streaming services. Even if royalties are the biggest source of income (which I don't believe to be true), I still think streaming is beneficial to small artists. Using your math of 238 plays per CD, at 10,000 listens they would have to sell more than 50 CDs for CDs to be more profitable for them. There are an incredibly high number of artists on Spotify who have 10k plays on a single song who probably couldn't have given their CDs away. I've gone to shows to see the opening acts and co-headliners because of streaming services. I've bought merch from plenty of small artists that I never would have even known existed. I've listened to genres I had no interest in and found artists I like and support because of streaming services. I feel like the exposure and the ability to produce your music (and actually have people be able to find and listen to it) massively outweighs any potential loss of revenue. There are potentially some medium sized artists who would have done better in the CD model, but probably not with how prevalent music piracy was in the 2000s. [0]https://splinternews.com/buying-an-album-isnt-the-best-way-to-support-a-recordin-1793852977 https://splinternews.com/buying-an-album-isnt-the-best-way-t...

baldfat 9y ago
This is why Independent Music is the only way to go and have grown almost 500% of full-time musicians. Labels are nothing but dead weight unless you are making millions.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

criddell 9y ago

> From a revenue point of view, streaming is not a very good way to support an artist I wonder what percentage of the top 100 artists on streaming services even own their rights? I don't know for sure, but I suspect more money flows to the rights holders when I listen to a Pandora station while I work than if I turned on an actual radio. > 238 streams to cover the cost of a single CD This is just one data point, but before I signed up for Google Music, I was buying two CDs a year and spending around $35. Now I'm paying $10 / month. How does the amount spent on streaming today compare to the spending on CDs in 1990? Does the equation change if you consider environmental costs of making those CDs and getting them to consumers?

Avshalom 9y ago

Oh you're not nearly pessimistic enough: >>In the U.S., recording artists earn royalties amounting to 10%–25% (of the suggested retail price of the recording[37] depending on their popularity but such is before deductions for "packaging", "breakage", "promotion sales" and holdback for "returns", which act to significantly reduce net royalty incomes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty_payment#Mechanical_royalties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty_payment#Mechanical_roy...

devonkim 9y ago

Buying music is primarily supporting the distribution network that supports the artist, which has its pros and cons. I normally go to live shows and buy shirts or merchandise to support an artist because the margins on shirts, for example, are a lot better for the artist compared to the CDs. The label may pay for touring needs but a ton of artists not named Taylor Swift have to pay for almost everything themselves either because the label fronts no money or because the label will force a loan on the artist by having them pay it back in the form of ticket sales. Meanwhile, the label oftentimes works with venues to get a cut of, say, alcohol sales from them too. LPs and such, while coveted by hipsters, is really tough to recommend as a revenue stream for more mainstream genres. The music business has devolved back for many cases where it’s possibly better for an artist to experience play local shows and promote themselves as an entrepreneur rather than to be an employee of a label as almost an unpaid intern.

foobarchu 9y ago

Depends on how much you listen to as whether you're contributing more or less. I listen to spotify all day while I work, cycling through songs that I like often once every day or two. An artist that I like enough to have purchased a cd in the past will get multiple plays a day. That means less than a year to generate one cd's worth of revenue from me, and it's going to keep paying out after that because I'll keep listening to it years down the road if I really like it. Also worth noting that 238 streams is ~20 playthroughs of your average 12 song album, for those who frequently listen to entire albums. Add to that the fact that streaming services have made discovery a much bigger thing. The less mainstream artists are now getting the benefit of appearing on streaming radio and such, making their growth that much easier (after they've passed a certain threshold of course).