5 ms·

Yet, artists are only receiving .00001 or some ridiculous amount per play per song. Sounds like it isn't these "evil services" that are cutting them off a the

Yet, artists are only receiving .00001 or some ridiculous amount per play per song. Sounds like it isn't these "evil services" that are cutting them off a the knees, but the predatory contracts the labels set up with artists.

ryusage 14y ago
Anyone know what the real number is? I can't seem to find it anywhere.
- mrmanfitz 14y ago
  A fairly popular and modern classical artist recently posted a spreadsheet showing 6 month of digital revenues. They are broken down by service. She averages $0.004 per stream on Spotify. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkasqHkVRM1OdEJFUnhyNFFkZjVSUWxhWGl1dE9lQXc#gid=4 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkasqHkVRM1OdEJ...
  - nodata 14y ago
    Any idea what the record company takes per stream?
    - ryusage 14y ago
      It mentions in that spreadsheet that the $0.004 the artist gets per stream is minus the 9% that CDBaby takes off the top. So, it's really like CDBaby gets $0.0045 per stream, and they give 90% of that to the artist. It occurs to me now, though, that I've read in the past that Spotify doesn't actually pay the same amount per stream to every artist or label. Apparently it doesn't even pay the same amount to the same artist each quarter.
evertonfuller 14y ago
It's not the artists receiving that, but the actual label themselves. Perhaps get a bit more clued up rather than attacking labels. They are a business after all. Artists do not need to sign with them.
- windsurfer 14y ago
  > Artists do not need to sign with them. Anymore. People resent record labels for the past, when signing with them was practically the only option, and the terms of the contract were cryptic and frequently misunderstood by signers. When artists were promised 15% royalties, cryptic "breakage" fees and other deductions brought that number closer to 5%, and forced the artist to incur costs such as tours, concerts and marketing, leaving the record labels only responsible to print records.
  - evertonfuller 14y ago
    Who's problem is that though? The artists should have had better legal representation then and made sure they thoroughly understood what they were signing. Not go and complain afterwards.
    - duaneb 14y ago
      Sure, doesn't mean the record labels are any less evil for it. They could have made profits without screwing over people who didn't know any better.

ryusage 14y ago

Anyone know what the real number is? I can't seem to find it anywhere.

mrmanfitz 14y ago
A fairly popular and modern classical artist recently posted a spreadsheet showing 6 month of digital revenues. They are broken down by service. She averages $0.004 per stream on Spotify. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkasqHkVRM1OdEJFUnhyNFFkZjVSUWxhWGl1dE9lQXc#gid=4 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkasqHkVRM1OdEJ...
- nodata 14y ago
  Any idea what the record company takes per stream?
  - ryusage 14y ago
    It mentions in that spreadsheet that the $0.004 the artist gets per stream is minus the 9% that CDBaby takes off the top. So, it's really like CDBaby gets $0.0045 per stream, and they give 90% of that to the artist. It occurs to me now, though, that I've read in the past that Spotify doesn't actually pay the same amount per stream to every artist or label. Apparently it doesn't even pay the same amount to the same artist each quarter.

evertonfuller 14y ago

It's not the artists receiving that, but the actual label themselves. Perhaps get a bit more clued up rather than attacking labels. They are a business after all. Artists do not need to sign with them.

windsurfer 14y ago
> Artists do not need to sign with them. Anymore. People resent record labels for the past, when signing with them was practically the only option, and the terms of the contract were cryptic and frequently misunderstood by signers. When artists were promised 15% royalties, cryptic "breakage" fees and other deductions brought that number closer to 5%, and forced the artist to incur costs such as tours, concerts and marketing, leaving the record labels only responsible to print records.
- evertonfuller 14y ago
  Who's problem is that though? The artists should have had better legal representation then and made sure they thoroughly understood what they were signing. Not go and complain afterwards.
  - duaneb 14y ago
    Sure, doesn't mean the record labels are any less evil for it. They could have made profits without screwing over people who didn't know any better.