Thanks a lot for taking the time. Interesting.
<waffle>
TomViolenz wrote:
Certainly, if you still manage to find people in the future to buy CDs (or digital whole albums) at all that might work. But that's the issue though, isn't it?! Positions voiced even in this thread indicate that this might be an uphill battle. And that is on a forum of musicians!!!
Everyone seems to think signing up to Spotify and paying 10 bucks a month absolves them from paying anything more.
In so far the whole "Spotify is a way to advertise for unknown acts" is a scam. If you advertise you normaly advertise for something, that you can then sell later.
Yes, that really is the point though. It's already gone. It's over. Kids want music on their phones, immediately.
Who wants to own music anymore? What is there to own even? Merchandise I can understand.
Do you feel that a true fan, if they discovered you on Spotify, would then search out some ltd edition physical version of your music? Get them of Spotify and on to your own webiste/sales funnel.
Are the kind of fans that feel absolved from paying anymore, ever going to buy your music anyway? Regardless of cost/format.
The few cents you get from them is all you'll ever get.
Maybe. Can we also say this for someone that buys a file or CD? It's all you'll ever get.
They may play that file 1000 times and share it around. Surely the 1000+ paid plays on Spotify end up being more valuable... assuming you aren't in a crappy label deal and assuming you want to satisfy your listener with convenience and instant gratification.
This at least leaves me with the chance that if they become fans that they decide to support me in making more music. With Spotify they think they already paid!
They did already pay, and keep doing so every time they listen to your music. The more people join Spotify (or any other service) the more they are supposedly paying you, per play... no idea if that's what they actually do with the money, but it's supposedly the idea. If anyone can confirm it's BS then this changes the whole deal.
If we are aware that no one cares about physical product/CD etc any longer, then what will our pirates buy to support us making music?
Maybe it's just easier to flat out ask for a donation.
Like busking.
The only thing that could stop this is exactly what Taylor Swift did, if artists start to understand the rotten deal they are getting and opt out in troves, Spotify without content will wither.
If it was her decision as a music maker, then cool. I support her view, even if I don't know whether I agree totally.
"Music is art, and art is important and rare." - is what she said, but is all music art? Art is rare... commercial lacklustre music is two a penny.
And then what if everyone boycotts? What do we go back to or enforce on people? Who decides the pricing? It's only worth what people will pay... and now that is $10 a month
Yeah that was a joke
It does solve it though
if they don't pay enough for your product for you to sustain yourself, you're still fucked.
As has always been the way for artists, poets, musicians, painters, writers... and other self indulgent characters among us.
I know that when I start producing things that I think could have any chance of commercial success, I will make a point of boycotting Spotify and the like. Not only for economic reasions btw. I also refuse to be part of an "all you can eat" buffett.
I do understand. I don't know if I feel the same any longer.
The flip to that surely is your music has MORE chance of commercial success... whatever that is defined as, if it IS on the format that everyone wants to hear it on. It's kind of like saying that you have now made some music you are proud of, is not a total copout, still remains commercially viable but you are only going to release it on Ampex 456 for the people that really care.
Streaming is pretty much established, the suppliers will change I'm sure, but you cannot convince the kids to not listen via Youtube... forget Spotify even, they don't know what it is... YouTube yes. Multiple daily views for their favourite tunes.
The funny part in all this is that I would bet the majority of people making music 'popular' these days are 10 year old kids. All the kids of that age round here know the words to 'Anaconda'....
... it's kids.. they don't even have money for buying records... but nicking their parents phones (or they even have their own phones!) and watching dodgy videos is the order of the day.
It's a little hard for me, as an old vinyl creator to watch it happen... but again, the flip side to this is I do have a Spotify account. It's great for researching and finding music I never knew about. I still by CD/Vinyl and files... it's not mutually exclusive.
Something people rarely mention. I find that most of the things I play on Spotify I would never actually go out and buy. I enjoy listening to some awful crap every now and then, but I would never think to own it. It's like having a radio station that just plays all your favourite drivel, when you want it to. You're not paying the artist when you tune in to your FM station. They can't genuinely quantify you as a listener.
But the artists ARE getting paid something from me (I hope?)... no matter how small, it's more than they would get if I had to buy a product from them, because it wouldn't happen, ever. That is, assuming Spotify pay up correctly.
Long term effect of that I don't know, other than the record labels and Spotify are earning way more than the artists... that's possibly the most messed up part of the situation.
I have a Netflix account too, but it doesn't mean I don't support independent filmmakers. I don't care to unnecessarily fill up hollywood coffers with my money. So blanket payment for hollywood dross and save my money to watch indie films in the cinema.
In the same way, I don't want to unnecessarily fill up major labels banks with my cash... because you and I both know that since time, the artist has always made less than the labels, Spotify is not to blame. The labels invested and own shares in Spotify no? So they are getting paid from the artist AND getting paid by the listener.
If an artist I like has the balls to go it alone, then I will do whatever it takes to support that decision, in the way that they prefer. Happily.
If someone signs up to a major label, they are already kind of opening themselves up to being whored out and are doing so, nowadays in the full knowledge that they are expected to use streaming. I can understand the Eagles saying 'hang on... this wasn't in the contract we signed in 1901" but anyone dealing with majors these days knows the game. I guess she signed on before streaming existed?
So I will probably go the CD Baby route, make my own website/blog to advertise and try to play out if enough people care to listen to me.
Another option, many people are doing now are Kickstarter campaigns for the production of their albums. I think that's not a bad idea and I will look into this too, when the time comes.
That does seem for now to be the only genuine option as far as I can see. Infect, cut out CD Baby too no? Keep it all in house, make what you can from a true core of fans and hope that you have a good pension plan in place.
Audio crofting.
Taylor is game playing though right? Trying to force Platinum sales and be the first this year?
</waffle>
) in iTunes, you get to stream it to all your devices for just the service charge that is applied in addition (I think it's 50 per year or something 
, for Apple to provide the network.)