3 ms·

I also lack the vision to see what could ultimately replace streaming as the primary delivery mechanism for music. It delivers an ongoing revenue stream, the mo

I also lack the vision to see what could ultimately replace streaming as the primary delivery mechanism for music. It delivers an ongoing revenue stream, the monthly nature of which beats the old "put it out in a new format every few years so everyone has to rebuy everything" in terms of cash flow, although obviously not in overall revenue. I could definitely see streaming wars in music happening like they are in video, although so far the music labels are content to watch the video labels hurt each other. But consider: Spotify's payouts are infamously low, lower than Google's or Apple's and I can imagine some labels deciding they can do better by providing their own streaming app. Since it's only a few labels, each will believe they have enough of a library to draw subscribers, and away we'll go. But still: aside from the margins and market share concerns, what delivers a steadier income than streaming? Streaming doesn't mean they can't experiment with additional revenue streams, including physical media sales and licensing opportunities, but it's hard to imagine something displacing streaming as a concept to the degree which streaming has displaced physical media sales.

l72 4y ago
I think bandcamp shows that there are people who still want to purchase and download a digital version and contribute directly to artists (on top of purchasing physical media). I personally, want a lossless version that I can archive, have on my offline portable music player, stream to my phone, and stream through jellyfin to my stereo. That fits better to the style of music I listen to, and how _I_ listen to music (I don't shuffle and listen to full albums only)
lelag 4y ago
Sorry for the late reply. The idea was to create a true streaming service in term of UX. All the same features as you are used to, except you start with the empty catalog and you purchase individual albums and you get the streaming service for free forever (no subscription). The service operating cost being funded by newer purchase. That's why I'm talking about Steam as the model, it's how they operate: you have access to your library forever even if you only pay for games once. (And mostly, you never play much to most of your purchases). The steady income of subscription service is nice for the streaming platform but it's not nice for the classical music artists: they receive nothing.

l72 4y ago

I think bandcamp shows that there are people who still want to purchase and download a digital version and contribute directly to artists (on top of purchasing physical media). I personally, want a lossless version that I can archive, have on my offline portable music player, stream to my phone, and stream through jellyfin to my stereo. That fits better to the style of music I listen to, and how _I_ listen to music (I don't shuffle and listen to full albums only)

lelag 4y ago

Sorry for the late reply. The idea was to create a true streaming service in term of UX. All the same features as you are used to, except you start with the empty catalog and you purchase individual albums and you get the streaming service for free forever (no subscription). The service operating cost being funded by newer purchase. That's why I'm talking about Steam as the model, it's how they operate: you have access to your library forever even if you only pay for games once. (And mostly, you never play much to most of your purchases). The steady income of subscription service is nice for the streaming platform but it's not nice for the classical music artists: they receive nothing.