3 ms·
Honestly, it depends on how many albums the artist actually sells VS how large of a draw you are(there is a correlation between both). Say for example an arti
by mgrouchy 17y ago
Honestly, it depends on how many albums the artist actually sells VS how large of a draw you are(there is a correlation between both).
Say for example an artist makes 1.35/album and sells 2 million(which is not too bad) and then does 100 shows (which certainly is not out of the realm of possibility)commands 40k fee + merch sales at the venue.
1.35/album * 2,000,000 = 2.7 million
100 shows * 40k = 4 Million + merch sales - costs
So it really depends, the more albums you sell the more money you make from albums. The less albums you sell but the more you tour, so for a middle tier artist who generally doesn't sell an obscene amount of albums but does a lot of gigs, they would certainly make more touring.
Someone like U2, probably makes more from album sales.
- Kuytu 17y ago"1.35/album * 2,000,000 = 2.7 million" It should be noted that especially new artists often start getting royalties after the costs of making the record and music videos have been paid. I believe that is a big reason why many one-hit wonders might sell millions world wide and go broke soon after the success fades.
- mgrouchy 17y agoyes, that's very true too. So after costs, it might be a break even proposition(or not as much as it might seem anyway) on an album.