4 ms·

> My point is this: most people who want to be musicians will NEVER make a living from sales of anything related to their music. Not from streaming. Not from to

> My point is this: most people who want to be musicians will NEVER make a living from sales of anything related to their music. Not from streaming. Not from touring. Not from merchandise. So, if I understand correctly, your point is that people shouldn't try to make a living off music, period. That's fine, but art has always been a difficult road for a career; the advent of streaming has little to do with this. > So why settle for an absolute pittance from streaming sales, when you could instead adopt a strategy that accepts the (likely) limits of your success, but maybe gets you a couple of hundred dollars a month extra, at least some of the time ? That's not unlike asking, "Why start a business when you could instead work a 9-5 and probably make more money?"

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
> That's fine, but art has always been a difficult road for a career; the advent of streaming has little to do with this Oh, in the realm of recorded music, it absolutely has a LOT to do with it. From the early 1950s until the advent of streaming, record labels played an important role as cross-subsidy systems. You might not like Brittney Spears, but the cut of her album sales that went to her record company allowed her label to continue to work with many artists who were barely profitable (if at all). Streaming (and to a lesser extent, megastars forming their own vertically integrated corporations) has ended that model entirely. If you make "niche genre" music, you're going to be operating without any potential cross-subsidy from more popular music, which translates to either working without a record label at all, or working with a "niche genre" label that helps with marketing but also has extremely low cash flow. > That's not unlike asking, "Why start a business when you could instead work a 9-5 and probably make more money?" I see it as a very different question. I'm acknowledging the appeal of pursuing your artistic inclinations, and I think we should encourage as many folks as possible to do that. But I'm also saying "if you think you're going to make a living from this, you're almost certainly mistaken". There are plenty of things people keep doing in their lives without the prospect of making money from it. I'm suggesting that it would be better if more people understood that in 2023, music probably ought to be one of those things, rather than the basis of a dream way of making a living. It's more like "should you start a business based on your hobby, that almost certainly will not make enough to live on and stands a good chance of destroying your interest in the hobby, or should you accept that it's a side-gig that bring s you joy and occasionally a little bit of extra income?"
bruce511 3y ago
Well it's kinda like it, and kinda not. You can make a living with a job, or a small business. One will end up making more, but fundamentally both are viable approaches to living. Alas its not really possible to make a living from music. Sure some rounding error of people can, working terrible hours, always on the road, grinding away. It's a pretty bad lifestyle for pretty bad money. Yes there are successes, but the fact you can -name them- is a bad bad sign for an industry. If you like to play music, then do it got fun, not money. If you accumulate enough for a meal out, then great. Get a job, pay the bills, and enjoy making the music, even if no-one listens. Stream if you like, sell albums if you like, either way it's gonna be a pittence. Arguing over which is better is meaningless in the sense that they're both bad. Focus on the fun. Don't let the money rob you of the joy. Oh, and starting a record label? Good luck with that... but it's a daft idea.
- fragmede 3y ago
  I mean there's record label and, then there's record label. I know of one friend that has a record label, but there are probably more. There's no illusion that it'll grow to be RCA or Atlantic. These days it's more of a way to collect a bunch of artists in the same genre than it is compared to the days of yore. Some people really like the adventure of finding new artists, up and coming talent.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago

> That's fine, but art has always been a difficult road for a career; the advent of streaming has little to do with this Oh, in the realm of recorded music, it absolutely has a LOT to do with it. From the early 1950s until the advent of streaming, record labels played an important role as cross-subsidy systems. You might not like Brittney Spears, but the cut of her album sales that went to her record company allowed her label to continue to work with many artists who were barely profitable (if at all). Streaming (and to a lesser extent, megastars forming their own vertically integrated corporations) has ended that model entirely. If you make "niche genre" music, you're going to be operating without any potential cross-subsidy from more popular music, which translates to either working without a record label at all, or working with a "niche genre" label that helps with marketing but also has extremely low cash flow. > That's not unlike asking, "Why start a business when you could instead work a 9-5 and probably make more money?" I see it as a very different question. I'm acknowledging the appeal of pursuing your artistic inclinations, and I think we should encourage as many folks as possible to do that. But I'm also saying "if you think you're going to make a living from this, you're almost certainly mistaken". There are plenty of things people keep doing in their lives without the prospect of making money from it. I'm suggesting that it would be better if more people understood that in 2023, music probably ought to be one of those things, rather than the basis of a dream way of making a living. It's more like "should you start a business based on your hobby, that almost certainly will not make enough to live on and stands a good chance of destroying your interest in the hobby, or should you accept that it's a side-gig that bring s you joy and occasionally a little bit of extra income?"

bruce511 3y ago

Well it's kinda like it, and kinda not. You can make a living with a job, or a small business. One will end up making more, but fundamentally both are viable approaches to living. Alas its not really possible to make a living from music. Sure some rounding error of people can, working terrible hours, always on the road, grinding away. It's a pretty bad lifestyle for pretty bad money. Yes there are successes, but the fact you can -name them- is a bad bad sign for an industry. If you like to play music, then do it got fun, not money. If you accumulate enough for a meal out, then great. Get a job, pay the bills, and enjoy making the music, even if no-one listens. Stream if you like, sell albums if you like, either way it's gonna be a pittence. Arguing over which is better is meaningless in the sense that they're both bad. Focus on the fun. Don't let the money rob you of the joy. Oh, and starting a record label? Good luck with that... but it's a daft idea.

fragmede 3y ago
I mean there's record label and, then there's record label. I know of one friend that has a record label, but there are probably more. There's no illusion that it'll grow to be RCA or Atlantic. These days it's more of a way to collect a bunch of artists in the same genre than it is compared to the days of yore. Some people really like the adventure of finding new artists, up and coming talent.