Does streaming really help?

[mrdelurk]

An episode worth mentioning: I got a "Your music needs to be on Apple Music" email from CD Baby. I visited the blog post it linked to and answered it with my usual maths summary posted in this thread too: streaming membership size / music catalog size = less than 1 listener per day average.

They did not publish the post. They always published everything I wrote, but not this. Interesting, isn't it?

[Update: a day after I posted this on Ableton Forum, the post appeared, out of nowhere.]

[owlmerlyn]

Isn't the question a bit moot? The challenge is that streaming is already here and isn't going to go away. The whole industry has changed. I prefer the question: how do you make money in the new dispensation? Which I don't have a neat answer for. Bob Lefsetz says income shifts from recordings to live performance, which I tend to agree with. This might work in some musician's favour, but definitely not for record producers etc. and will therefore affect the quality of recordings...

Having said that, my band released an album about 6 months ago. We are not very famous and hardly did any marketing so perhaps we are not a good example. We have, however, made $50 worth of sales... practically all of those sales were from Spotify. In other words, streaming was the main source of the sales in our case. I don't know whether this is good or bad. If we had made the same number of sales on "traditional" mediums (iTunes, CD's) we would have earned more. But I am not convinced that we would have made the same number of sales on those platforms, so you can't really compare.

It is an unfortunate fact that consumers have devalued music product so that they expect an album that took $$$ and 6 months in the studio to make to be available to them for "free". Its sickening, in fact. But here we are. Lefsetz says that because the world is saturated with music, what people look for now is a quality "experience". I.e. good live show. I suspect that if you build a rapport with your audience they will more likely spend money on your recordings, whether through streaming, iTunes, CD's... I guess what I am saying is connecting with your audience is key.

[Stromkraft]

If Spotify, eg. has 20 million paying subscribers and each of those subscribers discovers 26 new works in a month, as Spotify boasted the other day... with 26 million works in the catalog, this averages to less than 1 listener a day for the work you upload.

How is that average interesting? You could easily have zero or 37 depending on many many factors. How is a theoretical average relevant at all here?

After all, your target audience is not all of the subscribers, but only that subgroup potentially interested in music close to what you release and what these people will listen to will naturally vary with time.

I'm not sure if the model to make initial releases on streaming and leaving some outside is possible, but some seem to have adopted that model on Spotify to have presence on the platform, get some plays and still generally be unpaid, but perhaps in addition gain some interest by the potentially interested audience that falsely think "everyone is on Spotify" and won't look further. That lock-in is the real danger for artists staying out of Streaming services. Some think staying out raise their value.

[Stromkraft]

It is an unfortunate fact that consumers have devalued music product so that they expect an album that took $$$ and 6 months in the studio to make to be available to them for "free". Its sickening, in fact. But here we are. Lefsetz says that because the world is saturated with music, what people look for now is a quality "experience". I.e. good live show. I suspect that if you build a rapport with your audience they will more likely spend money on your recordings, whether through streaming, iTunes, CD's... I guess what I am saying is connecting with your audience is key.

Yes, this is true. That and actually making products you can covet. Records can be coveted not only because of the music on them but also of the totality of the product and the sense of ownership. If you can sell that feeling again you can make money. Music is only part of the product! Exactly why do music producers and musicians keep forgetting that?

All the way since the widespread use of the cassette deck, CD burners and so on people could make copies and yet they bought records that they could interact with. This may be a forgotten or lost practice to a large extent but it's still what sales were all about. It was strikingly seldom about "supporting the artist" but about ownership and relationship.

Ownership, i e being a part of something and some kind of relationship as well as the potential emotional qualities associated with these concepts are something you can sell. If you're smart and not only focused on making as good music as you can (us perhaps).

[owlmerlyn]

Yes, this is true. That and actually making products you can covet. Records can be coveted not only because of the music on them but also of the totality of the product and the sense of ownership. If you can sell that feeling again you can make money. Music is only part of the product! Exactly why do music producers and musicians keep forgetting that?

All the way since the widespread use of the cassette deck, CD burners and so on people could make copies and yet they bought records that they could interact with. This may be a forgotten or lost practice to a large extent but it's still what sales were all about. It was strikingly seldom about "supporting the artist" but about ownership and relationship.

Ownership, i e being a part of something and some kind of relationship as well as the potential emotional qualities associated with these concepts are something you can sell. If you're smart and not only focused on making as good music as you can (us perhaps).

Yep, in addition to LP's there is also merchandising. I am not sure, but I don't think the market for vinyl, cassette is that big, so promoting a "retro" approach to distributing and earning from your music will have limited impact. Digital sales and streaming (and piracy) is where the action will be for the conceivable future.

Interesting point you make regarding punters spending money to own something cool vs. wanting to support their favourite artist. Perhaps those two concepts are not too far apart. I.e. what can make something "cool" is that it comes from you fav artist.

I don't think making good music can ever be superceded by any other aspect of the music business (whether branding, sex appeal, marketing etc), but certainly our success as artists depends on marketing it, and giving the audience the emotional experience they want. Only with that emotional connection will we be able to sell anything... CD's, digital sales, merchandise, concert tickets. Thing about it though, is you can't fake connection.

[owlmerlyn]

Ownership, i e being a part of something and some kind of relationship as well as the potential emotional qualities associated with these concepts are something you can sell. If you're smart and not only focused on making as good music as you can (us perhaps).

Sorry, just re-read, and I think we agree on this point. Just saying it differently

[Stromkraft]

I am not sure, but I don't think the market for vinyl, cassette is that big, so promoting a "retro" approach to distributing and earning from your music will have limited impact. Digital sales and streaming (and piracy) is where the action will be for the conceivable future.

Just to make it clear I'm not talking about this. I'm talking about inventing new music products that the fans can covet (and purchase). The music itself is not enough. You need context and meaning, i e a total product. This is missing from streaming and digital sales to a very large extent.

[Stromkraft]

Interesting point you make regarding punters spending money to own something cool vs. wanting to support their favourite artist. Perhaps those two concepts are not too far apart. I.e. what can make something "cool" is that it comes from you fav artist.

Obviously. But having spent ghastly amounts of my income on records and music I can vouch for I didn't think for one minute whether I was supporting the artist or not. I just wanted the whole product and the full experience of owning it. This craving is something that must be learned, but I learned this effortlessly. If it's not records per se it can be something else.

Lately when I make purchases on Bandcamp or Kickstarter I do think about supporting artists, but not very much. Never on Beatport.

[TomViolenz]

We are musicians, we make music. If I had wanted to become a T-Shirt designer, I would have done that. I didn't!

But sure, why not give out a blow job with every download?
All for the low, low price of...........my dignity

[Stromkraft]

We are musicians, we make music. If I had wanted to become a T-Shirt designer, I would have done that. I didn't!

Exactly and this is part of the bigger problem. But there is co-operation. I think you need to be part of a collective of some sort to get somewhere. That and/or being single-minded as far as goals go and smart about it too. If you provide the music someone else can provide other parts.

And how it is for musicians isn't necessarily that relevant for the fans. It can be I suppose. Nothing wrong being open about it.

[owlmerlyn]

We are musicians, we make music. If I had wanted to become a T-Shirt designer, I would have done that. I didn't!

But sure, why not give out a blow job with every download?
All for the low, low price of...........my dignity

I think its kinda missing the point. Anyone is free to be a musician and just make music. But to be a professional musician where you survive off your music means you have to think at another level. Characterising connecting to your audience and / or making money off other income streams as akin to offering blow jobs or being a "t-shirt designer" isn't an accurate reflection of what we have been saying. Whether we like it or not, piracy has killed the old way. What is the new way? And how can we think creatively about that?

[owlmerlyn]

Just to make it clear I'm not talking about this. I'm talking about inventing new music products that the fans can covet (and purchase). The music itself is not enough. You need context and meaning, i e a total product. This is missing from streaming and digital sales to a very large extent.

Gotcha. Streaming and digital sales present a (compromised) income stream rather than a touchable product

[TomViolenz]

Characterising making money off other income streams as akin to offering blow jobs or being a "t-shirt designer" isn't an accurate reflection of what we have been saying.

Keep telling yourself that, if it helps you swallow down that bitter taste.

But the fact is, all this branding and merchandise selling and all these corporate gigs are nothing else.

And the more you move away from living off your music and move towards earning a living with these methods, the further away you move from being an artist and come closer and closer to being a nice little corporate slave.

But hey, five hipster with a free Spotify account are wearing a T-Shirt with your face on it, so it must have been all worth it. Right?!

[H20nly]

But hey, five hipster with a free Spotify account are wearing a T-Shirt with your face on it, so it must have been all worth it. Right?!

it's a start.

i'm confused about your expectations here. do you think that you should write your best track and that streaming services should take note of the extreme quality of this track and pay you handsomely to live off of the the proceeds of this one (or even 21 one tracks) happily ever after?

it kind of sounds like you do. one dollar a month per subscriber just for you! wouldn't that be just swell...

on the one hand you say something akin to "fuck Spotify! i'm trying to make a living here!". on the other hand you say:

the more you move away from living off your music and move towards earning a living with these methods, you move further away from being an artist and closer and closer to being a nice little corporate slave.

meanwhile you fail to realize that this is part of making a living off of your music in 2015.
unless you have a better idea... i don't think you do though... because if you did, your music would probably be more accessible.

i think you're failing to realize that gathering a large enough following to reap the kind of benefits you expect from Spotify make you a slave to plenty of other shit along the way... if you want the kind of plays that pay well, you need to bring the number of subscribers that push the model. like it or not.

[mrdelurk]

Obviously. But having spent ghastly amounts of my income on records and music I can vouch for I didn't think for one minute whether I was supporting the artist or not. I just wanted the whole product and the full experience of owning it.

I guess we are all different. I spent a mind-boggling amount on cassettes and CDs too but the ownership aspect never preoccupied me much. What drove me is the excitement of finding out what music I'll find inside that beautifully designed cassette or CD box. Each new record was like opening a stylish gift box to discover the dream inside. Frankly, I didn't consider it much whether I'm supporting the artist or not, either

Now I'm up to my *** in CDs, they are stacked in endless columns taller than me, the CD player is dead. It haven't had a speaker connected to it for at least a decade anyway. I ripped my 400 most-liked discs to computer then my patience ran out... (and online streaming sites look as exciting to me as a 1992 vintage web search engine.)

Maybe streaming sites will improve. I was just curious if you guys found it financially beneficial (yet) to send your music their way.