3 ms·

The linked source data from the RIAA is presented much better: https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ Positive money

The linked source data from the RIAA is presented much better: https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ Positive money is up on the y axis

auggierose 3y ago
Oh, thanks, was wondering about how to interpret these graphs as well. Really weird design.
doublepg23 3y ago
Huh, viewing the graph "adjusted for inflation" this seems to suggest to me streaming has solved the crisis of making money for artists? It seems like there's a sharp jump for the 20s and it's reaching 70s highs again.
- 8ytecoder 3y ago
  I believe it's extremely lopsided. The top artists take up a lion's share of the revenue while smaller artists make much much lower than what they used to make in sales. Smaller artists mostly use the streaming platforms for publicity and then make most of their money from their performances.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- eduction 3y ago
  1. That graph shows adjusted revenues lower than the 90s and early 2000s and even one or two years in the 70s. 2. It’s not a chart of what artists take home, but rather raw top line revenue, and it seems clear from all available evidence that the economics of Spotify et al are significantly worse for artists than they were with CDs. People have accepted this because it seemed better than piracy where revenue is zero.
- wwweston 3y ago
  Nope. Streaming cannibalized recording sales, where artists got more of that revenue. Payouts for artists on streaming are fractional and arguably opaque than per recording sales (most of the problems of record company contracts & accounting and then a few more to boot). They don't take home the revenue you're seeing here. We had a missed opportunity to let digital recording retail replace media sales, the Bandcamp model could have been bigger. Spotify moved fast and broke a lot of things and did more goddamned damage to the sector than "piracy" by adopting the fundamental business model with a bit of convenience and veneer of legitimacy.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    Yeah. One striking conclusion from the data is that MP3 sales never really took off in an appreciable way and only for a short period. Some of that is perhaps obscured by "Buy the CD and rip" but, given the decline in CD sales, not really. An analyst friend of mine once said that the Napster win was about convenience, not cost. I was skeptical at the time but there's some evidence of that.
  - musicale 3y ago
    > Spotify moved fast and broke a lot of things and did more goddamned damage to the sector than "piracy" by adopting the fundamental business model with a bit of convenience and veneer of legitimacy. For broadcast radio, songwriters received royalties and record companies got nothing. This changed for satellite and internet radio, and I don't think Spotify is to blame.
    - wwweston 3y ago
      The changes for satellite and internet radio had their own problems that I do think should be addressed, but you're right, that's not Spotify's fault. But Spotify bears the brunt of the responsibility for building a product that was on-demand recording buffet that essentially exists to replace recording collections while yielding broadcast-order payouts rather than being an honest broadcast product.
sys_64738 3y ago
Seems to keep crashing for me in Vivaldi.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
alok-g 3y ago
Seems like the data is US only, i.e., not worldwide. While the RIAA charts prominently mention this, the OP for some reason does not.

The linked source data from the RIAA is presented much better: https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/ Positive money is up on the y axis

auggierose 3y ago

Oh, thanks, was wondering about how to interpret these graphs as well. Really weird design.

doublepg23 3y ago

Huh, viewing the graph "adjusted for inflation" this seems to suggest to me streaming has solved the crisis of making money for artists? It seems like there's a sharp jump for the 20s and it's reaching 70s highs again.

8ytecoder 3y ago
I believe it's extremely lopsided. The top artists take up a lion's share of the revenue while smaller artists make much much lower than what they used to make in sales. Smaller artists mostly use the streaming platforms for publicity and then make most of their money from their performances.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
eduction 3y ago
1. That graph shows adjusted revenues lower than the 90s and early 2000s and even one or two years in the 70s. 2. It’s not a chart of what artists take home, but rather raw top line revenue, and it seems clear from all available evidence that the economics of Spotify et al are significantly worse for artists than they were with CDs. People have accepted this because it seemed better than piracy where revenue is zero.
wwweston 3y ago
Nope. Streaming cannibalized recording sales, where artists got more of that revenue. Payouts for artists on streaming are fractional and arguably opaque than per recording sales (most of the problems of record company contracts & accounting and then a few more to boot). They don't take home the revenue you're seeing here. We had a missed opportunity to let digital recording retail replace media sales, the Bandcamp model could have been bigger. Spotify moved fast and broke a lot of things and did more goddamned damage to the sector than "piracy" by adopting the fundamental business model with a bit of convenience and veneer of legitimacy.
- ghaff 3y ago
  Yeah. One striking conclusion from the data is that MP3 sales never really took off in an appreciable way and only for a short period. Some of that is perhaps obscured by "Buy the CD and rip" but, given the decline in CD sales, not really. An analyst friend of mine once said that the Napster win was about convenience, not cost. I was skeptical at the time but there's some evidence of that.
- musicale 3y ago
  > Spotify moved fast and broke a lot of things and did more goddamned damage to the sector than "piracy" by adopting the fundamental business model with a bit of convenience and veneer of legitimacy. For broadcast radio, songwriters received royalties and record companies got nothing. This changed for satellite and internet radio, and I don't think Spotify is to blame.
  - wwweston 3y ago
    The changes for satellite and internet radio had their own problems that I do think should be addressed, but you're right, that's not Spotify's fault. But Spotify bears the brunt of the responsibility for building a product that was on-demand recording buffet that essentially exists to replace recording collections while yielding broadcast-order payouts rather than being an honest broadcast product.

sys_64738 3y ago

Seems to keep crashing for me in Vivaldi.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

alok-g 3y ago

Seems like the data is US only, i.e., not worldwide. While the RIAA charts prominently mention this, the OP for some reason does not.