34 ms·
It's clearly a hobby for OP, not everything needs to be optimized for profit.
by dahfizz 3y ago
It's clearly a hobby for OP, not everything needs to be optimized for profit.
- RussianCow 3y agoThat part is fine. What's not fine is the OP extrapolating that experience to Streaming Is Bad™ simply because they made some small (insignificant) amount of money taking a different path.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y agoI'm no extrapolating. I'm saying two mostly unconnected things: 1. streaming is bad because musicians get paid a pittance for it. This remains true whether musicians could make more elsewhere or not. 2. there are other ways for musicians to get paid for their music (but many contemporary musicians do not bother to explore them, believing that streaming is the only answer).
- RussianCow 3y ago#2 was not clear to me from the OP. Thanks for clarifying, as I do agree with that point. With that said, my argument is that none of the options are mutually exclusive. You can have your music on Spotify and sell albums and do tours. Why rob yourself of a great marketing tool for bringing in new listeners?
- ixwt 3y agoOne could argue that the pittance that musicians get paid for streams is really them getting paid for their content getting marketed for them. This leads to concerts, where they get paid more for performing their content. Yes, I agree with you that I would love to support more artists directly through things like Bandcamp or a similar platform rather than streaming platforms. I actually did look into doing it. Many of the artists I enjoy don't have any way for me to easily purchase their music directly. And I can only enjoy them through streaming.
- jrflowers 3y agoI see, the question was rhetorical to highlight the pointlessness of trying to make money off of music categorically while expressing that money is meaningless to them. It is a sort of zen koan about business.