16 Replies to “November 2 (Part I)”

  1. Streaming is now the way artists make money. Just putting a song on repeat on a streaming service like Spotify can get revenue for the artist. Things like YouTube are to use to just reprint for free which can be a problem for copyright. I like how it shows lots of statistics to display how streaming is today.

  2. I agree that streaming is now, and not the future. I pay for Spotify and I like that music is available to me at any time and anywhere and I find it easier to connect with artists. I do wish the rates on Spotify become better for artists and I realize that much development in the business model is needed. This article from Billboard talks about why indie artists should not ignore streaming because the consumer wants to stream music and it gives the artist great exposure.

    http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7702034/tracy-maddux-oped-streaming-distribution-cd-baby

  3. Artists make their money from different areas of revenue, with the biggest ones being streaming and live shows. However, both leave a lot to be desired in regards to how much an artist makes from either. Money from live shows gets divided up among promoters, venues, and other middlemen before an artist gets his/her cut. Streaming may not have this same sort of issue, but artists make literal pennies after the label and publisher take their share of the revenue. This is considerably less than the amount they would make selling albums digitally or physically, but pretty much no one buys music anymore. According the link I posted, digital download sales are down by 24% and physical sales decreased only 1%. Link: https://www.recode.net/2017/9/20/16339484/music-streaming-riaa-spotify-apple-music-youtube-2017-revenue-subscription

  4. This article reminded me of what we talk about a lot in class which is that in the music industry all the money is in ticket sales. Which is clearly very true. Music streaming does help in the sense that it gets people listening, and then it helps them decide whether or not they like your music enough to see you live. Streaming is just the way of the world, and it’s going to continue to be the future hence why Spotify and Apple Music are going in that direction versus beating a dead bush. The link I included shows a chart dated back from 1980 to 2014 on album sales vs ticket sales very huge difference.

    https://seatsmart.com/blog/concert-tickets-vs-album-sales/

  5. I enjoyed reading this article very much because it mentioned The Weeknd multiple times!

    But anyways, I do believe that streaming is not the future of the music industry. It’s all in live music. And artists are going to have to evolve in order to sell more tickets and spark more interest. Just last night I went to see Flying Lotus and the concert was 3D. We were given 3D glasses at the door and during the show visuals and graphics were put up on a giant screen giving us a whole new concert experience. I feel like more artists are going to attempt to make concerts more interactive and exciting in order to keep live music alive.

    http://pigeonsandplanes.com/interviews/2017/10/flying-lotus-3d-tour-interview

  6. The article talks about streaming as the future market for artists to explore. Coincidentally it mentions artists Drake and The Weeknd, two artists that have realized that releasing more content makes it so that there more for fans to stream. This method of releasing a constant stream of content on streaming sites seems to be the method artists are beginning to use to profit.
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/music/2017/oct/31/why-albums-are-getting-longer-chris-brown

  7. YouTube is a huge company and has a monopoly over video content sites. I tried thinking of other website that has all the possibilities and options that YouTube provides, plus more that would make it better and I can’t. There’s not one even close to as good as YouTube, which means the company can do whatever they want and get away with it. This could bad for any artists that like to upload their music or performance on YouTube because YouTube doesn’t owe them anything so they probably wouldn’t get paid for it. Here is a site that rants about YouTube’s monopoly and they make some valid points : https://dinnerbone.com/blog/2014/01/01/monopolies-youtube/

  8. I agree with Sydnee that YouTube is probably the biggest online video markets out there. YouTube is free, and allows anyone to upload, and stream any video. Independent artists may struggle making revenue in the streaming market because of YouTube demands of an effective Most Favored Nation Clause. This is a binding contract for 5 years that states if an artists uploads any music on any online website they must also upload it on YouTube at the same time. This will cut into the artists streaming views on any subscription based site since they will be able to stream it on YouTube for free. Consumers will just stream on YouTube instead of other websites that may pay higher rates than YouTube. However, YouTube are one of the highest, it may drain revenue streams from other potential streaming platforms.
    Here’s a link that explains how the pay rates work for YouTube.
    https://www.quora.com/How-much-money-will-YouTube-pay-for-100-views

  9. I don’t think there’s anything that compares to live music. I went to my first actual concert this summer to see John Mayer and it. was. amazing. There is something about seeing the physical voice that is usually in your headphones and the thrill the audience feeds off of each other. For an artist to truly be successful, they are going to have to reach out to the fans and do the touring that the people want. Streaming is great and can reach many people but with the current royalty rates, it is not quite sustainable.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/music-industry-sees-growth-in-concert-revenue-1474250642

  10. Freemium. That is an interesting term I decided to look further into. Free streaming services are the most accessible and affordable for music lovers but still does not offer the On Demand aspect that people would prefer. Freemium platforms are also reducing (but not eliminating) the rate of P2P piracy on the web.

    Below is an article of how Apple and Beats hope that the Freemium models will dwindle down and promote subscription-based services for music.
    https://www.inc.com/jill-krasny/can-apple-kill-the-freemium-model.html

    1. All of the articles here were interesting reads. In particular, I find the shift from album to playlist to be very interesting. I remember listening to entire albums as a young kid with a Walkman. Remember those???! I’d listen to one album for months at a time. Then, I’d move on to another album. It’s great to see how far the industry has come and where it’s going. I guess burning CDs with our own playlists was something of a start of the “playlist era”, although the idea had been around for decades already. Even though the albums aren’t being bought as much, they are becoming longer. This article details why. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/oct/31/why-albums-are-getting-longer-chris-brown

  11. Perhaps it’s because I am commenting quite late, but I feel as though this article goes over a lot of things that we should expect as our world becomes increasingly more digital. It’s only natural income for artists will therefore become more digital as well.
    I feel this is a good thing and has great implications. When we discussed the music industry in China, we mentioned how much potential the country has for music streaming platforms. As soon as the issue of piracy is resolved (as much as it can be; piracy will never fully stop), you can expect incomes from streaming to skyrocket, especially for well-known international artists.

    https://www.economist.com/news/business/21725529-market-dominated-one-company-tencent-biggest-countrys-online-giants

  12. Like we talked about in class, when a person puts their playlist on shuffle, they can come across any song on spotify. That alone can generate revenue for certain artists. Streaming has effectively changed the world of music and I suspect this is only the beginning. I was reading an article on what some professionals thought : http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-33526045

  13. Well, according to the data it is true that live music makes the most money and some people are arguing that the new era of streaming is going to make them the most money but as in today, you have to be extremely famous I order for you to make decent money through streaming, why do you think big artists start clothing lines or other type of companies? Yes, streaming might be the future but not the present http://www.howcoolbrandsstayhot.com/2016/12/15/the-growing-popularity-of-the-streaming-economy/

  14. Streaming would work if it was able to be controlled, once digital music came out there were lots of illegal ways to get music. Web-sights like youtube do nothing as far as streaming. Even billboard changed their chart rules to include streaming.
    Nicki Minaj just won a major fight for streaming
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjdsJ3Op9_XAhVLyoMKHQsWApoQFggwMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Friaa-streaming-certifications-2016-2&usg=AOvVaw1BCn9LWYtinQeX0y4dlOdT

  15. So in my opinion streaming can go either way. The artist doesn’t seem to get paid a whole bunch, but it does get them exposure. I think once they are able to adjust the amount the artist is paid due to streaming since it is now so popular then it would benefit not only the artist but the customer as well. I love the ease of streaming music and the fact that so many artists are in multiple places, but if you truly think about it these artists are getting pennies for streams after dividing the money with everyone else that gets a piece. I think this is worth taking a look into, but definitely have other options other than streaming, because streaming alone is not a good income.

Comments are closed.