6 ms·

Your friend was absolutely right. I never cared if people pirated my bands music (or later the bands that I was managing) because the real thing I wanted was th

Your friend was absolutely right. I never cared if people pirated my bands music (or later the bands that I was managing) because the real thing I wanted was them showing up at shows, buying merch, posting us on facebook, asking events to bring us on, etc... At a certain point, Taylor Swift and larger artists _do_ make a good chunk of change from their actual music sales, but it isn't a feasible strategy to rely on that for indie and DIY artists.

chrisseaton 6y ago
I listen to a lot of music but I’d never go to a live show (can’t think of anything worse) and I’m not going to wear a branded t-shirt. How do they capture revenue from people like me in your model? Now I think about it I did once buy a video log of the production of an album. But that’s one artist from the thousands I listen to.
- shakezula 6y ago
  To be honest - they don't. You're not the target demographic for them, and that's fine! But for this approach is optimized for the audience that will wear those shirts, go to those shows, buy the posters, follow them on instagram, etc...
  - ksec 6y ago
    I think these people may still provide some value in the form of Retweet, Gossip, Views, Media, Hype, Clicks that helps marketing. In the world of Social Media just having your name known is better than totally unknown. And will funnel back to other places.
- gen220 6y ago
  It's been mentioned a few times in this comment graph, but just in case: Bandcamp is where you should be putting your money. 80-85% of revenue from goods sold go to the artists [0]. [0]: https://bandcamp.com/about https://bandcamp.com/about
- ZoomZoomZoom 6y ago
  >How do they capture revenue from people like me in your model? It's not like bands stopped selling CD's/BluRays's, collectible box-sets, stickers, pins, access to behind-the-scenes videos and mailing lists. But the most someone like you can do for an average band/performer is promote their art through any channels available. The most valuable resource you have is your attention.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    > selling CD's/BluRays's, collectible box-sets, stickers, pins Hmmm... it's a shame they're trying to sell stuff like this. I want to support artists but the last thing I want is junk.
    - sukilot 6y ago
      This is silly. If you want to support an artist, give them money.
      - lmm 6y ago
        So set up an organised way for me to do that, e.g. Patreon. Some artists already do.
        wwweston 6y ago
        This is crazy but we used to have this scheme where you actually just paid them for access to the recording. Weird, right? Then we Spotifyd and that was the end of that and people got a new hobby coming up with justifications for why it's good that we replaced a revenue source for musicians with ... maybe giving them money? Or maybe having them run a T-shirt business?
        olyjohn 6y ago
        Maybe they can work for a living. Like go on tour and perform live. Selling tickets and such. If they are any good, people will want to go see them live. Look at the Grateful Dead, they allowed people to copy their music. There are massive sites dedicated to archiving all of their music recordings and you are free to download and listen to it. Yet they made a fortune on touring and performing. Not playing the song one time and then trying to sell copies of it.
burntoutfire 6y ago
> Your friend was absolutely right. I never cared if people pirated my bands music (or later the bands that I was managing) because the real thing I wanted was them showing up at shows, buying merch, posting us on facebook, asking events to bring us on, etc... This model breaks down for people like me who are neither interested in merch nor in going to concerts. I just like the music.
- brandonmenc 6y ago
  You can always send money to your favorite musicians.
  - err4nt 6y ago
    Can confirm! I've sent tips to musicians who put up music under free/Creative Commons music! My theory is if you want to see something tomorrow, the best insurance you have it is to make it profitable for the people doing it today, so giving my money to musicians means a better chance there will be more music in the future <3
    - jokethrowaway 6y ago
      Totally agree! That's also why I don't give money to homeless (but my country support for homeless is outstanding; when I lived elsewhere I donated to a homeless organisation - which hopefully meant that money didn't go on drugs).
- lubos 6y ago
  You always represent value even if you don't pay. You might introduce the music to someone who will pay. It's freemium model applied to music industry.
ganfortran 6y ago
Even Taylor Swift releases the full new Album on youtube the first day, which is unthinkable even 5 years ago. I think the industry already accept it is the way forward.
- ksec 6y ago
  >I think the industry already accept it is the way forward. Yes but this sort of makes me question, if it is on Youtube for free, why are we paying for it on Spotify and Apple Music?
  - Ma8ee 6y ago
    Because on YouTube we pay for it with time and attention to ads. Most people on HN have much more money that time and attention to spend.
    - joombaga 6y ago
      Don't most people on HN have an ad blocker? My intuitions on this are weak.
  - ClikeX 6y ago
    Both Youtube and Spotify allow you to listen for free with ads. But to humor you. Youtube is for video content primarily. Youtube Music is a premium service that costs as much as Spotify does and has a whole lot less content. As someone who listens to a lot of music. Spotify offers me a way better UI/UX for consuming music than Youtube Music does.
orthoxerox 6y ago
The model breaks down for people who write purely electronic music and are thus composers, not performers.
- ClikeX 6y ago
  Or just bedroom musicians.
  - redwall_hp 6y ago
    The simple truth is that success in any creative field is based more on chance and mass appeal than any creative merit. For every JK Rowling there are hundreds of published novelists who barely make a living, and thousands who a publisher wouldn't even take a chance on. If you're in it for the passion, you'll do it whether you make money or not. Big successes are an anomaly, regardless of which mechanism the industry chooses to split up the loot. (Always in the favor of the publisher/label/whatever.) If we want to encourage creativity, UBI is a better deal than worrying overmuch about trying to shoehorn creativity into revenue models. Because then at least the extra money, however much, would be extra on top instead of wholly inadequate.
- britr 6y ago
  A lot of electronic musicians perform at clubs and parties

chrisseaton 6y ago

I listen to a lot of music but I’d never go to a live show (can’t think of anything worse) and I’m not going to wear a branded t-shirt. How do they capture revenue from people like me in your model? Now I think about it I did once buy a video log of the production of an album. But that’s one artist from the thousands I listen to.

shakezula 6y ago
To be honest - they don't. You're not the target demographic for them, and that's fine! But for this approach is optimized for the audience that will wear those shirts, go to those shows, buy the posters, follow them on instagram, etc...
- ksec 6y ago
  I think these people may still provide some value in the form of Retweet, Gossip, Views, Media, Hype, Clicks that helps marketing. In the world of Social Media just having your name known is better than totally unknown. And will funnel back to other places.
gen220 6y ago
It's been mentioned a few times in this comment graph, but just in case: Bandcamp is where you should be putting your money. 80-85% of revenue from goods sold go to the artists [0]. [0]: https://bandcamp.com/about https://bandcamp.com/about
ZoomZoomZoom 6y ago
>How do they capture revenue from people like me in your model? It's not like bands stopped selling CD's/BluRays's, collectible box-sets, stickers, pins, access to behind-the-scenes videos and mailing lists. But the most someone like you can do for an average band/performer is promote their art through any channels available. The most valuable resource you have is your attention.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > selling CD's/BluRays's, collectible box-sets, stickers, pins Hmmm... it's a shame they're trying to sell stuff like this. I want to support artists but the last thing I want is junk.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    This is silly. If you want to support an artist, give them money.
    - lmm 6y ago
      So set up an organised way for me to do that, e.g. Patreon. Some artists already do.
      - wwweston 6y ago
        This is crazy but we used to have this scheme where you actually just paid them for access to the recording. Weird, right? Then we Spotifyd and that was the end of that and people got a new hobby coming up with justifications for why it's good that we replaced a revenue source for musicians with ... maybe giving them money? Or maybe having them run a T-shirt business?
        olyjohn 6y ago
        Maybe they can work for a living. Like go on tour and perform live. Selling tickets and such. If they are any good, people will want to go see them live. Look at the Grateful Dead, they allowed people to copy their music. There are massive sites dedicated to archiving all of their music recordings and you are free to download and listen to it. Yet they made a fortune on touring and performing. Not playing the song one time and then trying to sell copies of it.

burntoutfire 6y ago

> Your friend was absolutely right. I never cared if people pirated my bands music (or later the bands that I was managing) because the real thing I wanted was them showing up at shows, buying merch, posting us on facebook, asking events to bring us on, etc... This model breaks down for people like me who are neither interested in merch nor in going to concerts. I just like the music.

brandonmenc 6y ago
You can always send money to your favorite musicians.
- err4nt 6y ago
  Can confirm! I've sent tips to musicians who put up music under free/Creative Commons music! My theory is if you want to see something tomorrow, the best insurance you have it is to make it profitable for the people doing it today, so giving my money to musicians means a better chance there will be more music in the future <3
  - jokethrowaway 6y ago
    Totally agree! That's also why I don't give money to homeless (but my country support for homeless is outstanding; when I lived elsewhere I donated to a homeless organisation - which hopefully meant that money didn't go on drugs).
lubos 6y ago
You always represent value even if you don't pay. You might introduce the music to someone who will pay. It's freemium model applied to music industry.

ganfortran 6y ago

Even Taylor Swift releases the full new Album on youtube the first day, which is unthinkable even 5 years ago. I think the industry already accept it is the way forward.

ksec 6y ago
>I think the industry already accept it is the way forward. Yes but this sort of makes me question, if it is on Youtube for free, why are we paying for it on Spotify and Apple Music?
- Ma8ee 6y ago
  Because on YouTube we pay for it with time and attention to ads. Most people on HN have much more money that time and attention to spend.
  - joombaga 6y ago
    Don't most people on HN have an ad blocker? My intuitions on this are weak.
- ClikeX 6y ago
  Both Youtube and Spotify allow you to listen for free with ads. But to humor you. Youtube is for video content primarily. Youtube Music is a premium service that costs as much as Spotify does and has a whole lot less content. As someone who listens to a lot of music. Spotify offers me a way better UI/UX for consuming music than Youtube Music does.

orthoxerox 6y ago

The model breaks down for people who write purely electronic music and are thus composers, not performers.

ClikeX 6y ago
Or just bedroom musicians.
- redwall_hp 6y ago
  The simple truth is that success in any creative field is based more on chance and mass appeal than any creative merit. For every JK Rowling there are hundreds of published novelists who barely make a living, and thousands who a publisher wouldn't even take a chance on. If you're in it for the passion, you'll do it whether you make money or not. Big successes are an anomaly, regardless of which mechanism the industry chooses to split up the loot. (Always in the favor of the publisher/label/whatever.) If we want to encourage creativity, UBI is a better deal than worrying overmuch about trying to shoehorn creativity into revenue models. Because then at least the extra money, however much, would be extra on top instead of wholly inadequate.
britr 6y ago
A lot of electronic musicians perform at clubs and parties