Just a few years ago, we were all listening to our iPods and purchasing songs from iTunes or albums on CDs. When streaming came into the picture, we were suddenly able to get every album possible through a simple app on our phones. Streaming is changing the music industry completely because music fans are able to have access to a large variety of albums without taking up the space on their phones. However, the real question that arises is what type of impact streaming truly is having on the music industry.
Taylor Swift was the first artist to pull all her music from
Spotify and fight against Apple Music because artists were not getting paid.
Her album, 1989, ended up being
extremely successful because the only way people could get access to her music
was through purchasing it. Recently,
more artists are starting to not put their music on Spotify for the benefit of first
week sales. For example, Adele did not release her music to Spotify, and she
sold almost four million albums in the first week, breaking N’Sync’s record of
the most albums sold in a week from over ten years ago. The 1975 and Future,
both newer artists, did not put their music on Spotify for the first week, and
they both ended up going number one on iTunes and Billboard (Sisario). This just
proves that having not putting music on a streaming service actually benefit
the artists when it comes to sales.
(Risley)
On the other side of the spectrum, there are some artists
releasing their music exclusively to streaming services. Kanye West released his
latest album to Tidal, the streaming service owned by Jay-Z. Doing so actually
hurt his sales because people just illegally listened to the album online.
Kanye later went on a Twitter rant about how he will never release his music to
anything but Tidal, so people should subscribe (Ryan). This just made it
inevitable that Kanye was not going to make money. Tidal is one of the somewhat
failing streaming services with less than a million subscribers, while Spotify
has over 20 million and Apple Music has 11 million (Willens). Also, by
releasing music exclusively to a streaming service, it becomes impossible for
fans to get access to the music because of the cost of the service. In the graphic above, there is a small
indication about how many streaming services there are out there. By releasing
exclusively to one service, there is a limited audience.
Streaming is changing the way artists make their money.
Before, artists could count on a large chunk of revenue coming sales royalties.
Now, with a streaming service like Spotify, the artists are receiving virtually
nothing. According to Touve, 137 streams gain 0.986 cents, and the record
labels take 0.822 cents of that. From those 137 streams, the artist gets 0.15
cents (Peoples). Because of this, the
only way artists are making money is through touring and merchandising. That is
why it is no surprise that, according to Forbes, the highest paid artists are
Katy Perry, One Direction, and Taylor Swift (Kenneally). One Direction and Katy Perry both were
in the top grossing tours of 2014 making it clear that they make their
money from touring (Morgan). I have even seen some smaller bands releasing
their music for free through apps because they are not making money through
streaming services.
One positive change coming from streaming is the diversity
in genre and style of music nowadays. With the playlist aspect in Spotify,
users can listen any genre of music in one place. People can switch genres from
alternative to hip/hop to classic rock in seconds. One article writes, “While
all the major streaming services, and Tidal, offer genre-specific playlists, a
huge number of the most-subscribed playlists are themed, multi-genre offerings”
(Robinson). This seems like the reason why there are so many different types of
collaborations or changes in music. People are listening to all types of music,
so artists are inclined to experiment with different genres to appeal to newer
audiences. Top 40, R&B, and Adult Contemporary stations are all playing
“Sorry” by Justin Bieber because it spans across more than one type of genre. You have live performances and collaborations
between artists like Ronnie Wood and One Direction and Twenty One Pilots and Asap Rocky. You
even have Kendrick Lamar using old jazz artists on his albums,
while Paul McCartney has a song with Rihanna and Kanye West. Even Ed Sheeran, a
singer-songwriter, has hits like “Don’t” where he is essentially rapping. Because
of streaming, people are able to diversify their music interests so much that music
itself is becoming more eclectic through cross genre tunes.
I know I love using streaming services, but it is clear that
streaming is changing the game of music. I’m interested to see how it
progresses.
Works Cited
Kennealy, Tim.
“Katy Perry Tops One Direction, Taylor Swift on Highest-Paid Musicians List.” The Wrap. 08 Dec. 2015. Web. 20 Mar.
2016.
Morgan, Richard.
“One Direction Rakes in Years Highest Grossing Concert Tour.” New York Post. 31 Dec. 2014. Web. 20
Mar. 2016.
Peoples,
Glenn. "That Study on Spotify Everyone's Talking About? It's Wrong, and
That's Not Even the Point." Billboard. 30 Oct. 2015. Web. 20 Mar.
2016.
Risley,
James. "24 Hours with Apple Music: It's the Best Streaming Music Service
for Apple Users, but Not worth Switching - GeekWire." GeekWire. 01
July 2015. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Robinson,
Peter. "Pop, Rock, Rap, Whatever: Who Killed the Music Genre?" The
Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 17 Mar. 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Ryan,
Patrick. "A Tale of 2 Albums: Kanye Stumbles, Rihanna Soars." USA
Today. Gannett, 18 Mar. 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Sisario,
Ben. "The 1975’s Album Isn’t on Spotify, but It’s Still No. 1." The
New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Willens,
Max. "Is Tidal Failing? Music Industry Executives Put Jay Z's Embattled
Streaming Service On Deathwatch." International Business Times. 27
Aug. 2015. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
I think it is crazy how the music industry has changed just over the past few years. I remember buying music off of iTunes and before that going to the store to get the actual album. The music industry is really evolving by introducing all these different streaming applications that are available to us. That being said, I do not find myself buying a CD or even using iTunes anymore because I enjoy using Pandora and Spotify more.
ReplyDeleteTaylor Swift was very smart for removing her music from Spotify in order to make more money. Although it may be inconvenient for the public, I think Swift did the right thing in her situation. “In the concert business, 2015 was a banner year for 1989, as Taylor Swift and her blockbuster “1989” tour topped Pollstar’s annual ranking of the most popular concert attractions globally” (Lewis). Although this may have been a bummer to some fans to not be able to hear her new album on a streaming service right away, this decision did not affect her sales at all. If anything like Noshin points out, it only made her sales of this album even better! As nice as it would be to get free music, it is not always fair to the artists. Many of us could probably remember downloading music illegally by using LimeWire or some of those other sites. When we download music illegally like that, the artist is not making any money off their song. Therefore, Swift was smart by doing this and I think we will continue to see artists doing this more often when they are releasing a new album.
Noshin mentions a newer streaming service called Tidal, which I have never even heard before. Kanye West would be silly and ridiculous to only release his music through this streaming service. I do not think people will want to subscribe to another streaming service as well as pay for it only to get his music. What is good about Spotify and Pandora is that there are the free versions! We then have the option to pay to get the upgraded services, but there is that option to stick with the free version and deal with the commercials as well as limitations. “Ranging in price from free to $19.99 a month, different streaming services offer varying levels of control to the user — from customizable radio stations to on-demand listening, in which users can pick the exact song they want to hear. Some services require listeners to be connected to cellular data or Wi-Fi, while others allow them to save songs to their devices for listening offline in places like airplanes and the subway” (Alexander). The only downside to the streaming services could be the price for some people as well as the aspect that uses Wi-Fi or data if one is not connected. Listening to this streaming services while driving or while not connected to the Wi-Fi could end of being a hassle for some. However I do believe the streaming services are evolving so who knows what will be required or how they will work in the future!
I am new to using Spotify because I am more familiar with Pandora. I think they both have great features; it is cool how we can individually create our own playlists. This is great because we can select what types of genres of music we would like to listen to in that current moment in time. It is very easy to change as well as add new stations according to what type of music we like to listen to. I think this caters to each person’s likes and interests regarding the music that every user enjoys.
Works Cited:
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/posts/la-et-ms-taylor-swift-1989-tour-highest-grossing-concerts-pollstar-20151230-story.html
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/30/business/media/music-streaming-guide.html?action=click&contentCollection=Media&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article
I agree with your point that streaming mixed everything up when it comes to the music industry because the way it worked was pretty easy. You release music and people would then buy the music but with streaming in the mix there are fewer people buying music, and more people are streaming the music. Many artists have gone back to the old ways of having only albums sales and not on streaming, and it has worked out really well for them. Adele, for example, set the record for album sales in a week breaking the record that was last set by N'Sync. (Sisario) This was a very smart move by Adele because she knew how highly anticipated her album was going to be because it was the third one four years after her blockbuster second album. Like Taylor Swift, she already had a big enough following and the fans were eager to get the music any way it was released. She probably would have done well on streaming but being a smart business person is really the key to elevating one's success.
ReplyDeleteThis however does not mean that all artists should do this because it is not always in the best interest when looking at one's main demographic. Streaming might not be necessary for a number one hit but for a lot of bands, they can't go with out it.
What happens when an artist thinks they have a loyal enough fan base to kickstart a subscription streaming service? Well, An interesting example of an artist that went streaming only is Kanye West with his new album the life of pablo. Kanye West has had his new album exclusively on tidal, which is the music platform from Jay Z, and he says that it would only ever be on tidal for streaming. (Rys) This is an odd move from an artist, but one has to wonder if he is getting a much better deal from Jay-Z for this arrangement. Tidal is not doing so well, and Jay Z might be banking on the fact that having kanye's album be exclusive forever would increase the subscriber base of tidal. That might have worked if the release was not so bad.
Another interesting point that you were talking about is the mixing of music genres. I definitely agree with this as I have a hard time telling people what kinds of music genres I like so I just tell them the bands I listen to. I like EDM but not the kinds of EDM that are at the music festivals, and it makes me wonder if what I like is really EDM to begin with. I like the electronic music that does not depend on when and how the bass drops, but that is not really a genre. I have also found music that I don't know what genre I would apply to it. For example, I recently found Hibou and even in the comments on youtube people were asking what the genre was. People said it was either Dream pop or Shoegaze which are pretty niche genres to begin with.
Works Cited
Sisario, Ben. "The 1975’s Album Isn’t on Spotify, but It’s Still No. 1." The New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Rys, Dan. "Kanye West Says 'The Life of Pablo' Will Never Be For Sale and Only on Tidal, Sources Express Confusion." Billboard. 15 Feb. 2016. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
Ally D’Alia
ReplyDeleteI think the shift from buying music off of iTunes to now receiving music by streaming has been huge within the past 5 years or so. When the iPod came out in 2001 and gained a lot of interest and sales for Apple, I remember being consumed and obsessed with going onto my computer and listening to music right when I wanted to rather than waiting for the song to play on the radio. (Not to mention the Limewire craze!) Because iTunes was one of the first outlets for people to get their music, this was huge – huge for Apple, for the artists, and for music listeners everywhere. As Noshin mentions nowadays, listening to music is much different and people go about it in different ways – free ways. Outlets like Pandora, Spotify, Soundcloud, iHeartRadio, and so on have drastically changed the platform in which artists release music and people consume it.
When Taylor Swift took all her music off of Spotify I remember everyone being really angry, and being a little annoyed myself. Twitter really blew up over that one. However you have to think about it, if Taylor’s not making money off of that and it’s her own music being distributed, there’s some sense to wanting it off Spotify. Sure, it may have upset some fans and forced them to spend the $11.99 (or whatever it was) on her album off of iTunes, but for Taylor as an artist, this was clearly a smart move, allowing her album to be a huge success in sales. Another smart tactic, though that an artist can go about doing like many are now doing is not allowing the music to be on other streaming outlets until after the first week or so of sales. “Adele is the first artist to earn the top selling album of a calendar year three times since Nielsen Music’s first full year of tracking in 1992” (Billboard) This clearly wouldn’t have happened had Adele allowed her music to be streamed off of Spotify when it was first released.
As for Kanye’s weird, crazy, and never dull actions in regard to his music, after his website crashed it makes sense why he chose to only make his album available on Tidal because Jay Z owns it. “Currently, Pablo is only available for streaming via Tidal and is not available for purchase or download.” (Billboard) He clearly wanted to help his good friend out by basically forcing people to subscribe to Tidal in order to boost its popularity and gain more subscribers. He’s also in attempt to make some bizarre point and statement to iTunes and other streaming outlets by doing this.
I remember learning about touring and merchandising sales for artists in one of my first Comm courses at Quinnipiac. It was crazy to me (and still is) how expensive sites like Ticketmaster charge for concert tickets. It’s unfortunate how because artists are making less money on sales royalties that ticket prices and merchandise are going way up. I have attended 4 Katy Perry concerts and I don’t even want to think about the total of what those tickets cost, not to mention a poster or shirt I purchased as well. Our access to albums, concerts, and streaming has changed dramatically within the past decade and I’m very interested to see how it will continue to change.
Caulfield, Keith. "Adele's '25' Rules as Nielsen Music's Top Album of 2015 in U.S." Billbiard. N.p., 5 Jan. 2016. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
Rys, Dan. "Kanye West Says 'The Life of Pablo' Will Never Be For Sale and Only on Tidal, Sources Express Confusion." Billboard. N.p., 15 Feb. 2016. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
I agree with your point that streaming mixed everything up when it comes to the music industry because the way it worked was pretty easy. You release music and people would then buy the music but with streaming in the mix there are fewer people buying music, and more people are streaming the music. Many artists have gone back to the old ways of having only albums sales and not on streaming, and it has worked out really well for them. Adele, for example, set the record for album sales in a week breaking the record that was last set by N'Sync. (Sisario) This was a very smart move by Adele because she knew how highly anticipated her album was going to be because it was the third one four years after her blockbuster second album. Like Taylor Swift, she already had a big enough following and the fans were eager to get the music any way it was released. She probably would have done well on streaming but being a smart business person is really the key to elevating one's success.
ReplyDeleteThis however does not mean that all artists should do this because it is not always in the best interest when looking at one's main demographic. Streaming might not be necessary for a number one hit but for a lot of bands, they can't go with out it.
What happens when an artist thinks they have a loyal enough fan base to kickstart a subscription streaming service? Well, An interesting example of an artist that went streaming only is Kanye West with his new album the life of pablo. Kanye West has had his new album exclusively on tidal, which is the music platform from Jay Z, and he says that it would only ever be on tidal for streaming. (Rys) This is an odd move from an artist, but one has to wonder if he is getting a much better deal from Jay-Z for this arrangement. Tidal is not doing so well, and Jay Z might be banking on the fact that having kanye's album be exclusive forever would increase the subscriber base of tidal. That might have worked if the release was not so bad.
Another interesting point that you were talking about is the mixing of music genres. I definitely agree with this as I have a hard time telling people what kinds of music genres I like so I just tell them the bands I listen to. I like EDM but not the kinds of EDM that are at the music festivals, and it makes me wonder if what I like is really EDM to begin with. I like the electronic music that does not depend on when and how the bass drops, but that is not really a genre. I have also found music that I don't know what genre I would apply to it. For example, I recently found Hibou and even in the comments on youtube people were asking what the genre was. People said it was either Dream pop or Shoegaze which are pretty niche genres to begin with.
Works Cited
Sisario, Ben. "The 1975’s Album Isn’t on Spotify, but It’s Still No. 1." The New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2016. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Rys, Dan. "Kanye West Says 'The Life of Pablo' Will Never Be For Sale and Only on Tidal, Sources Express Confusion." Billboard. 15 Feb. 2016. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
Chris La Bella
ReplyDeleteThe music industry is in a complex situation at the moment. While the traditional tactic of releasing albums, touring worldwide, and profiting off merchandise seems to remain the best approach in terms of earning revenue for artists, especially considering the success of Taylor Swift and Adele, there has been a major shift towards streaming as a whole. With this said, there may be a trend moving forward. It is possible that streaming services will be primarily used as a stepping-stone for artists as they gain a greater following. Essentially, streaming services may remain platforms used by artists to increase their popularity and fan base until they can eventually abandon the streaming service, and ultimately flourish within the music industry in a more traditional sense. If one thing is clear, it is that solely earning revenue off streaming services is fiscally undesired by artists at the moment, despite efforts to make streaming the future of music.
Presently, when one reflects on the music industry overall, he or she may find it hard to find an overwhelming amount of instances where artists ditch streaming as a whole in an attempt to succeed the “old fashion way.” Noshin mentioned Future and the 1975, but like she said, these artists only withheld their music from streaming for a week. That’s because there has been an unfortunate vacuum in the music industry, making it so that artists basically need a streaming service to stay relevant. Taylor Swift is the main example of an artist pursuing traditional tactics. But, what needs to be remembered is that she was easily able to abandon Spotify due to her massive existing fan base, and the incredible level of fan loyalty and commitment that was built up over the course of her music career. Only a handful of artists can do this without upsetting too many individuals to the point where it drastically hurts them. With this said, I would not be surprised if the level of frustration expressed among artists towards streaming services leads to an increasing number of individuals ditching streaming, like was the case for Swift. Artists have basically become indentured servants for listeners, which is why the “traditional” approach may find it way back into the industry.
As I mentioned above, what artist actually believes that he or she can thrive solely off of streaming? While it may be beneficial for listeners, artists seem to be suffering. Taylor Swift earned $80 million in 2015 despite rejecting music streaming (Kenneally). On the other hand, Spotify told Swift she would have been on track to make an astounding $6 million in royalties in her contract with the company (Bereznak). Here we have a clear view of the drastic difference between streaming and pursuing traditional tactics. Had Swift decided to stay with Spotify, she would have seen an extreme reduction in revenue for 2015. While it may be more of a risk for lesser-known artists to ditch streaming moving forward, I wouldn’t be surprised if an increasing number of artists begin to speak up and fight for reform within music streaming. Considering the fact that artists receive just .15 cents for every 137 streams on Spotify (as stated in Noshin’s post), there is no chance that artists will remain content given the tremendous level of exploitation taking place here. All in all, don’t be surprised if we see more artists challenging streaming services in the near future.
Works Cited
Bereznak, Alyssa. "How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists." How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists. Yahoo, 21 June 2015. Web. 28 Mar. 2016. .
Kenneally, Tim. "Katy Perry Tops One Direction, Taylor Swift on Highest-Paid Musicians List." The Wrap. The Wrap News Inc., 8 Dec. 2015. Web. 28 Mar. 2016. .
I honestly can’t remember the last time I actually paid for music. I remember just a few years ago, I would get so excited when I got an iTunes gift card for a birthday or holiday. Today, if I received one of these gift cards I most likely still wouldn’t buy music. I would buy or rent a movie. I can understand the common argument in favor of paying for music, which is everyone should pay for music out of support for the artists. In this day and age, it is so easy to have access to music without paying for it, whether it be illegally downloading the music or streaming the music through the several available services.
ReplyDeleteI think that the music industry as a whole is currently in the midst of some disorder. The traditional revenue streams have gone through some serious changes in the past decade both for the artists and the record labels. I also thought it was very interesting to read about how some popular artist have had issues with the current music industry platform in regards to streaming services. For the artists, I think it is a brilliant business move to hold off on releasing music to these services for the first week in order to capitalize on first week album sales. I think this business model is very comparable to the film industry, and how movies typically earn a majority of their money in the first week. It certainly paid dividends for the leader of this movement. “Taylor Swift’s 1989, which was 2014’s top selling album (3.66 million sold that year), continued to perform strongly in 2015: it’s the No. 2 best-selling set of the year, with 1.99 million sold.” (Caulfield, Billboard) Swift specifically pulled her 1989 album from the streaming service Spotify. “Her explanation then was that she wasn’t willing to contribute her life’s work to an experiment…Swift was on track to make $6 million in royalties from her contract with the company.” (Bereznak, Yahoo Technology) I believe that this was the right move for megastar Taylor Swift, but I don’t think other artists, who aren’t near the popularity that Swift is could afford to deny the royalties pay check.
I thought that Noshin’s example with Tidal and how some artists are exclusively releasing their music to individual streaming services. This idea of only releasing an album on Tidal would only benefit Tidal, and not the musician. This is why I don’t understand why an artist would decide to release an album on only one service. I also agree with Noshin’s point about how Kanye West, for example, releasing his album exclusively on Tidal would result in a limited audience with the ability to hear the album. If I were an artist, which I am sure will never happen, I would want the most amount of people possible to hear my work. As I mentioned before with choosing to withhold music from streaming services for the first week and strictly releasing music to one streaming service is only a viable business decision for the top five percent in the music industry. These few artists can afford to make these decisions, but for the majority of artists this isn’t possible.
Works Cited
Bereznak, Alyssa. "How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists." Yahoo Technology, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
Caulfield, Kieth. "Adele's '25' Rules as Nielsen Music's Top Album of 2015 in U.S." Billboard. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
Gina Albano
ReplyDeleteIt’s crazy to think how far the music industry has come. Ten years ago, we were walking into an F.Y.E. to purchase a CD. There were stores dedicated to selling hard copies of music. The last CD I purchased was Britney Spears’ album In The Zone in 2003. There’s no need or incentive to go out and buy hard copies, and the more streaming becomes available there’s no need to even purchase digital copies. As streaming services progress, It’s changing the music industry as well as how consumers get a hold of their music.
Being a fan of a band like One Direction, I was hesitant to purchase ZAYN’s new solo album Mind Of Mind. I wasn’t sure I was going to like the sound or feel knowing he was branching out from the boy band he left. I immediately went to Spotify the day of his album release so I could somewhat sample the music he had to offer. These streaming services are making music more accessible, and that drives traffic to the sites. In the last year alone, streaming has sky rocketed. Some big names are trying to get in on the competition. Spotify, which once held a top spot in streaming, is going to have to fight against Apple Music, which was able to gain more the 10 million paid users in less than a year. (Sisario). It’s not just about streaming the music, but getting artists to want to use your service over any other.
Streaming services are still so new. No one can really predict how the music industry is going to adapt to this new revenue. With so much competition now were not just looking at artist and record labels we are looking at these streaming sites. There are dozens making their way into the music industry, and no streaming services is the same. In an article from the New York Times, Author Madi Alexander breaks down the services and what they can offer music consumers. Tidal, the streaming service from big artist Jay Z, offers over 30 million songs and 75,000 videos, and longtime heavy hitters of streaming like Pandora have more than a million songs (Alexander). The biggest difference between these two services is the cost. Pandora’s basic service is free, and the premium is only $4.99 a month, and they have over 80 million users. Tidal doesn’t offer a free service. You can purchase Tidal Premium for $9.99 a month or $19.99 a month for Tidal Hifi, which offers high sound quality. Tidal only has over 1 million subscribers (Alexander).
Jay Z and a number of other artists preached that Tidal would be for the artists by artists, but I think they forgot they are supposed to be catering to consumers. It’s great that these artists are getting paid for their music, but a consumer isn’t going to want to access your streaming service if it costs too much. As a lover of free music, I’m still able to access Pandora and Spotify without having to pay. Streaming is still developing, and I think if a service wants to be successful they need to cater to their listeners. Without subscribers they aren’t going to last long, and Tidal seems to be running into this situation. Sure, they are releasing albums early, but that’s little incentive for a $9.99 subscription. We are in the age of free media, and it’s important for companies to look at this. Streaming services need to build their audiences and go from there.
Work Cited
Alexander, Madi. "Apple Music, Spotify and a Guide to Music Streaming Services." The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 June 2015. Web.
Sisario, Ben. "Spotify Is Said to Be Seeking $500 Million in New Funds." New York Times. New York Times, 27 Jan. 2016. Web.
I personally love music streaming services. I am someone who is a true music nerd, once I filled up my 80 gb Ipod all the way (around 20,000 songs) I needed somewhere to turn where I could store more of the music I like and I was starting to feel guilty about pirating most of my music, so I subscribed to Spotify. The price of 10 bucks a month is totally affordable to me (which comes with high quality streaming, btw, which leaves me scratching my head in absolute confusion when I think about how Tidal costs $19.99 for high quality and there is no free version). The only problem I ran into is when I hit the 10,000 song limit for my library in Spotify and then had to add on Apple Music as well. Currently I am paying for both as they each offer some music that the other does not.
ReplyDeleteAnd Spotify is currently crushing it with 75 million users overall, 30 million of which are paying subscribers (New York Times, Alexander). To your point about how artists now have to get most of their money from touring and merchandise; that is how it has always been, actually. 99% of CD profit sales go straight to the record company and the artists themselves get their money from signing record deals, touring, and selling merch. Yes, streaming services may be paying a little less then the percentage they would get from each album sold, but it is not a significant stray from the current industry model, in that regard.
I also think that streaming services have vastly opened up people's interests in different kinds of music through ease of access and the tons of curated playlists and recommendations generated by the services. I also think that withholding an album from streaming services really only benefits established and well known artists, as lesser known artists or artists just starting out need all the publicity they can get and need to get their music into as many ears as possible.
“I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months. I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.” (Yahoo Technology, Bereznak) I was actually shocked to read that and find it to be kind of a despicable move on Apple's part. No matter what your corporation is, the artists deserve something, and surely such a large corporation as Apple should feel some inherent responsibility to compensate the artists in some way for promoting their service. I was really happy to hear that Taylor Swift was able to turn this around and I commend her for that. No matter how little, the artists deserve some sort of compensation, there is no such thing as free labor.
Works Cited:
1.Alexander, Madi. "Apple Music, Spotify and a Guide to Music Streaming Services." The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 Jan. 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
2.Bereznak, Alyssa. "How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists." How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists. Yahoo, 21 June 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
Noshin,
ReplyDeleteI think this was a great lead blog choice. My first experience with streaming music was with Pandora. When I discovered this, well after everyone else had I might add, I felt like I was on top of the world. I could listen to music similar to artists that I love and my music library was on fire! Actually, wait. No it wasn't. I became so engrossed in the services that Pandora had to offer that I didn’t touch my iTunes library. If I wanted to hear a song that I liked I would type it into YouTube instead. So, because of this mini study that I conducted on myself I believe that streaming music is changing the music industry. While this switch may benefit consumers, it is not benefiting the artists.
Although Taylor Swift’s decision to not stream 1989 on Spotify irked me (even if I don’t use the site), I believe that her choice proved to be a good indicator as to how wiling people still are to purchase an album. One very accurate description of her actions is this, “If the idea is revenue generation, Taylor gets an A. If we’re grading her on lessons that are applicable to the rest of the music industry, it's a D minus” (Kamps). When she announced that she was not going to be including her music on any streaming service the first thought I had was how selfish she was being. Why would she deprive the people that love her music…of her music? Then, after doing some more research into the matter, I realized that her decision really wasn’t that bad. Granted she was benefitting from it, but so was everyone else that worked to put the album together. Apparently, “Radiohead’s Thom Yorke [has] complained vehemently about Spotify’s business model, insisting they receive low royalty payments while fans get the music for free” (Knopper).
This is not surprising as, “the public’s consumption of music has never been greater, [but] the ability of artists to monetize that demand has been in a steep decline” (2014 Pollster Year End Business Analysis).
So, while streaming is extremely beneficial and convenient for users to discover and engage with new music, it may be causing more harm than good with established artists. I specify established, as up and coming artists have a better chance of getting discovered on a streaming site than they do in the iTunes Library. When I used to purchase music on iTunes I would buy songs that I heard in the top 40. I had no patience to sit on iTunes and delve deep into the depths of finding new artists. However, with streaming I’ve discovered a bunch of new artists that I never would have heard of had I not used Pandora or 8tracks. Therefore, streaming is as equally beneficial as it is detrimental to the music industry.
Works Cited
Kamps, Garrett.”How Mobile Finally Took Over the Music Industry in 2014.” Billboard. 16 Dec. 2014. Web.
Knopper, Steve. “Islands in the Stream: The 10 Biggest Holdouts in Digital Music.” Rolling Stone. 2 Jan. 2015. Web.
Noshin,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you bringing to light the most controversial yet progressive aspect of the music industry in streaming. Outlets such as Spotify and apple music have greatly changed music, in my opinion, for the better. It wasn’t all too many years ago that the only music I had on my iPod originated from my Dad’s old CD collection or a few songs that I bought on ITunes from a gift card. Streaming has been and will continue to be the epicenter of the music industry, giving fans access to artists they otherwise would not have had without the availability of streaming services.
I am a very devout and loyal user of Spotify. For about a year I utilized their free streaming service, eventually switching to the paid version of Spotify Premium, which gives me an unlimited amount of music ranging from EDM to Broadway show tunes, wherever and whenever I want. I am clearly not the only person who has realized the convenience and accessibility that Spotify offers to its users either. “Spotify announced in June that it had 75 million users, 20 million of whom pay, but its numbers are thought to have grown substantially since then. By August, Spotify told record distributors that it had as many as 22 million paying users.” (Sisario). Despite its success, some users are still reluctant to pay the premium fee, remaining loyal to ITunes. Two separate arguments come to mind as to why people should switch to the streaming medium. First, it is 120 dollars a year to subscribe to Spotify. On ITunes that is about 85 songs. That’s it. 120 dollars for unlimited music or 120 for 85 songs through apple. Fiscally, streaming services like Spotify are the answer.
The second and most important reason that streaming services are great is that THEY ARE LEGAL! It is incredibly easy to download and torrent music today, ripping off artists and companies in the process. I am a big supporter of artists receiving the pay they deserve. Some would argue that streaming takes away from the artists almost as much as the torrent industry does. Taylor Swift is a major advocate of artist’s compensation, as noted in her public letter to Apple. But I say to Apple with all due respect, it’s not too late to change this policy and change the minds of those in the music industry who will be deeply and gravely affected by this. We don’t ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation” (Bereznak). Taylor brings up a very valid point about the free iPhones, yet I don’t find her words valid enough for her to pull her music from streaming services. The fans have made the move to streaming, so should Taylor.
Streaming services have above all else given fans an outlet to listen to fantastic artists do what they love. For that, regardless or the discrepancies, should make us all grateful.
Works Cited
Bereznak, Alyssa. "How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists." How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
Sisario, Ben. "Spotify Is Said to Be Seeking $500 Million in New Funds." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Jan. 2016. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
It used to be the giant record labels or company's that set the tone for industries. In the last few years startups have taken the lead in many areas-- the music industry being one of them. People have opted against buying CDs and records directly from labels/artists for quite some time now. We first saw Limewire and other platforms that allowed for illegal downloading of music. Around the same time iTunes Store was introduced giving people a streamlined platform for their music to be stored on their Apple product. It was then that we saw the significant shift in people buying cds to buying their favorite songs on the album for ninety-nine cents on iTunes. But the majority of people were still opting to risk finding their music online for free-- either converting it to mp3 downloads from YouTube videos or using Pandora as their main source. Spotify came along and gave people the app that allowed them to have their music their way. The free version of Spotify allows you to create playlists with your favorite songs, like you can do in your iTunes library, and also find playlists already created based on genres, mood, etc. much like Pandora. If you wanted to skip out on the advertisements and listen to songs directly rather than just playlist mode then you can pay for the premium service for just ten dollars. They have "more than 75 million (users), including 20 million pay subscribers," (Alexander, 2). Based off of that its easy to conclude that the artists and record labels are taking a huge hit, "Spotify says it pays 70 percent of its revenue to labels -- which will amount to about $1 billion this year -- but some artists feel they don't get a big enough cut. The streaming service revealed last year that it pays artists an average of less than a penny per day," (Engel).
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't long before the labels and artists realized that the music streaming craze was something that they couldn't stop, despite many attempts by the government and the infamous Taylor Swift dispute when she pulled her music from Spotify. When Apple tried dipping their toes in the streaming water she wrote a letter published on her blog about how Apple wouldn't pay the artists for the 3-month free trial for Apple Music and changed their payment policy (Bereznak) . "The rise in the popularity of streaming music has prompted names to enter the competition. The Jay Z venture Tidal, Google Play and, most recently, Apple Music are the latest paid services for streaming songs, creating serious competition for companies like Pandora and Spotify," (Alexander, 1). Giant record label Sony Music has even jumped on the bandwagon, "All of our content, including Beyonce, is available through the Tidal service, and we have announced no plans to remove our catalog from Tidal. Like all of our other partners, we are rooting for Tidal to succeed," (Kreps,1). So while the music industry has changed tremendously since the introduction of streaming services, I don't think that the artists will ever stop profiting from it. While the big players have been slow to come to the scene, I have no doubt they will triumph in the end.
Alexander, Madi. "Apple Music, Spotify and a Guide to Music Streaming Services." The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 Jan. 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
Bereznak, Alyssa. "How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists." How Taylor Swift Convinced Apple to Pay Independent Artists. Yahoo, 21 June 2015. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.
Kreps, Daniel. "Sony Music CEO: No Plans to Pull Beyoncé Off Tidal." Rolling Stone, 30 May 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
Engel, Pamela. "Taylor Swift Pulls All Her Albums from Spotify." Taylor Swift Pulls All Her Albums from Spotify. Yahoo Technology, 3 Nov. 2014. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.
ReplyDelete