Bear in mind that it takes circa 230 Spotify streams to make 1 US Dollar.
Approximately 280,000 streams to pay the average apartment rent in the USA.
Nadine Shah is a Mercury Prize-nominated musician. She's over 100,000 monthly Spotify listeners. She's alright, right?
Right?
I was foolish. The situation was such that I temporarily had to move back in with my parents over the summer. Not the worst thing to happen, but still not a great look for a thirtysomething pop star. Like most of my musician friends who rely on gigs, I found myself in dire straits. (If only I actually were in Dire Straits.)
Streaming only really works for superstars and super record labels. Instead of receiving a direct amount per sale, as with downloads or physical purchases, it’s a “winner-takes-all” system. The way it works is the combined revenue of every streaming subscriber is divided by by “market share”. For example, suppose Bruno Mars releases an album and – rightly, because he’s amazing – Bruno appears on the surface of every phone, on every playlist, pushed by every algorithm. He could potentially end up with 5% of the whole world’s streaming money. Or, to be accurate, his record label will pocket that 5%. Bruno might see about 20% of that if, and only if, he’s repaid his recording costs. Pre-digital artists may be on pre-digital deals, so they may see nothing.
Even before Covid, the major labels were making almost $20m a day from streaming. And this year has seen a a huge increase in streaming subscriptions, as fans turn to platforms such as Apple Music and Spotify to help ease their locked-down minds. The three major music groups, Sony, Warner and Universal own about three-quarters of the music ever made so, by this system, they’ll pocket about three-quarters of streaming revenue every month. Independent or self-releasing artists share the rest.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/03/music-streaming-major-labels-musicians-uk-government?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
The above is from this article that is published today. Read more:
Musicians are revolting. They’re rising up around the world to draw attention to the microscopic earnings they make from streaming. Songwriters, artists, players and producers of every kind have started scrutinising the industry, calling for reform, transparency, fairness and rights. It’s dead exciting.
Musicians fear reprisals for speaking to MPs' streaming inquiryRead more
You see, during lockdown, a chorus of freshly grounded musicians took to social media to share their stories of paltry remuneration. Using the hashtags #BrokenRecord and #FixStreaming, they and their fans turned the spotlight away from themselves and on to the industry. Four hundred masked orchestral players even took part in a recital-cum-protest in Westminster Square in central London on 6 October.
There's also this:
On October 26, the Union of Musicians and Allied Workers launched an initiative called Justice at Spotify, publishing a detailed list of demands with the goal of making streaming fairer for artists, labels, and rights holders. The main points can be boiled down to three. First, they're asking the streaming giant to pay out at least a penny per stream, which is about three times the $.0038 payout artists receive on average for their music. Second, they are demanding greater financial transparency from the company, including around its contracts with major labels, distributors, and management companies. Lastly, they want Spotify to put an end to its legal battles over royalty rates, which the union describes as being "intended to further impoverish artists." Justice at Spotify follows 2020 initiatives in the U.K. like the #KeepMusicAlive and the #BrokenRecord campaign, which looks at inequities in record label and licensing deals on top of streaming.
So far, over 18,000 musicians have signed the U.M.A.W's letter, which arrives as artists continue to struggle with the economic fallout of COVID-19. But as grassroots support for U.M.A.W.'s initiative soars, Spotify has yet to address or respond to the union's concerns. Since U.M.A.W. posted its demands, the company sparked criticism when it announced a new feature enabling musicians to promote their songs on algorithmically generated personalized playlists; in exchange for the service, rights holders would be paid at a lower royalty rate. And just this week, amid revelations that Spotify had lost over $500 million since the start of the year, it announced that it was purchasing podcast ad-tech company Megaphone for a whopping $235 million. VICE reached out to Spotify but did not get an on-record comment about the union's demands.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7awev/union-of-musicians-want-penny-per-stream-from-spotify
So, what to do?
What can we do to fix it? Last week, I appeared beside Guy Garvey of Elbow, Ed O’Brien of Radiohead and Tom Gray of Gomez, to give evidence in front of the DCMS inquiry. It was terrifying. Music and politics rarely come face to face. Musicians are supposed to rail against politicians, not testify in front of them. But now we’re asking the government to intervene and correct the streaming market where it’s failing.
Guy, Ed, Tom and I suggested the government grant musicians rights to income from streaming, so they can earn a percentage from every stream regardless of the system. The same is already true of TV and radio broadcasts, so it’s hardly a revolutionary idea. It works well. The government could also look into the market dominance of the major music companies.
There are solutions.
Look into other streaming platforms:
I love both of those.
Today, I rediscovered Datach'i via Resonate, then bought his latest album via Bandcamp; I could pay it for any price above £7. I can now stream it whenever I want, can download it whenever I want in a variety of formats, play it without fear of it being removed from a streaming platform whenever I want.
And I'm not giving money to transphobic and musican-hating platforms.
Thanks, Resonate and Bandcamp.
Money goes directly to the label, the artist, and the kind platforms.
Must say, I dig how Resonate's playing works:
Our unique Stream2own model splits the cost of a digital download into 9 plays.
Plays start off cheap when you're discovering and as you fall in love with a song, you come to pay the full price.
There's no transition out of Resonate to buy a song or album. Purchase it directly, or just keep listening.
Resonate pays artists directly and per-play. For listeners, the overall cost is similar to that of the average monthly streaming subscription.
https://resonate.is/stream2own/
Check their manifesto.
Let the music play.
Posted from my blog with SteemPress : https://niklasblog.com/?p=25574