I’ve never really used the radio but last.fm is really great even if you don’t, I’ve found tons and tons of great new stuff through it.
11 years later and the company still don’t earn a profit, gives crumbles to musicians while giving themselves the highest wages, bonuses and lavish offices in the industry. I don’t really like that company behavior but sadly the masses have decided it’s the place for music
2 Likes
Pretty surie thats an old myth they make a profit these days
They have negative net income while growing their revenue on a digital product for years, something isn’t right with that company but of course they’ll earn profit once they stop giving it to themselves in spades.
I used to use Spotify a lot, but after 5 or 6 years of a premium sub, I owned nothing and it just felt like pouring money away, On top of which, they pay pennies to any artist that isn’t multi-platinum award winning etc.
Much more ethical now to just buy music, either Physically or via places like Bandcamp. In addition, Spotify doesn’t have many older DJ mixes that I like to collect and some newer albums (like the numbered Fabric mixes) don’t stay on there for long.
By all accounts I regret being a customer for so long. Exacerbated by them bunging millions of currency at Joe Rogan and his unique brand of bullshit. I will happily pay money for music, but more than 0.0000001% (hyperbolic, I know) needs to go to the artist.
2 Likes
Right, large labels also have special contracts paying them more essentially screwing independents and maybe even forcing them to sign with a popular label when everything is said and done. Screwed.
They try grow the market share and it certainly help them explain their losses. I used to like Joe Rogan because he let all voices be heard but he has sold out ($100m) and is now willingly letting himself being censured, Spotify have removed 42 of his episodes to date.
Serious question: Who needs Spotify and what for?
If I’m a musician willing to sell my music, I go to Bandcamp.
If I’m a customer willing to buy music, I go to Bandcamp.
If I’m a user willing to listen to music online, I go to Bandcamp, Youtube or Soundcloud.
Why should I pay for something, which is not fully supporting every music style and its musicians? Why should I pay for music streaming if I could stream for free? Why should I pay for music I won’t own? Why should I pay for music if the musician being responsible for this music gets nothing? Why should I pay for music if I couldn’t listen to it anytime anywhere I want? Me, as a musician, customer and user, would NEVER use Spotify or similar. That’s what I just wanted to have said once. There are way better options! Not to mention all the other music portals, which are not as good as Bandcamp, but in any case better than Spotify or any other streaming things…
So my call for all:
Don’t support breadheads and companies who treat you like shit!
You deserve something better! You don’t need this shit, this shit needs you!
2 Likes
For exposure since the masses have decided it’s the go to streaming platform, it just sucks it has become this popular.
Purely from an user experience perspective:
- bandcamp is a super slow website compared to spotify.
- I have to “buy” music before being able to do playlists. I don’t even find playlists. The website looks like myspace from 2005.
- The subscription model to get all music that you want is the model that prevails: see netflix vs renting movies.
So maybe “the masses” just do what is the most practical for them ?
Even if the subscription model would be the model that prevails (which I don’t think is the case at this point, maybe in future), why should an artist who wants to earn money be interested iin publishing his music on a website which pays 0,003 USD average per stream? And if you’re not popular, you earn nothing, because you don’t create that much streams. So to me it seems not to be worthwhile wasting my time with it. And if the “masses” would prefer the subscription model in any case, you also wouldn’t get anything out of “exposure”.
Spotify virtually lured in the masses with free legal popular music by paying labels to put their songs on their platform to get popularity, 5 large labels now own a stake of Spotify and of course they don’t have us independents in mind. Spotify really is a terrible thing that has happened to musicians but great for the masses (listeners).
It’s the most popular streaming music service with 155m subscribers and growing fast, you can use it as a PR tool or something but it’s immensely ridiculous that they pay crumbles compared to TIDAL, Napster, Amazon, Apple etc. when you know what the money goes to and even Youtube Music pay over 50% more per stream.
We’re screwed if we do and we’re screwed if we don’t.
I feel your pain. Unfortunately if one does not adhere to today´s crappy mainstream standards there is little to no room for actually earning money as an independent artist on those kind of platforms.
It does not matter how good your music is. They just want it to fit into the current format.
Even on music markets like AudioJungle your music will get rejected if you do not follow the hype.
And then basically everyone sounds like everyone else.
But there are other ways. Take freemusicarchive.org for example.
One might upload tunes under CC BY-NC-ND licensing model there and wait.
People also go there to find music for their YouTube channels.
But you need to register a YouTube content ID which can be done easily via DistroKid.
This stategy is atleast better than using Spotify monetarization or SoundCloud for that matter.
Anyways, do music the way you want it because it is your personal passion.
Why are we screwed if we don’t? Because we wouldn’t earn 2 Dollars on Bandcamp with our non mainstream music after “exposure” on Spotify? I don’t think so. Apart from that I’m a man with principles, and I will always stick to my principles, even if it means there’s a disadvantage for me. And one of the principles is “Treat others like you want to get treated”, what means in reverse that I shit on people and things shitting on me. And if Spotify is shitting on me as an artist I shit on Spotify as a platform. It’s that easy! As I said, I don’t need to sell music, especially not on platforms which are not supporting its artists. The world won’t get better if we put up with everything. The “masses” wouldn’t use Spotify if there wouldn’t be any content delivered by the “masses” of musicians. And if every musician would fight for his right, Spotify would have exactly two options: Make a change or die. So, for me Spotify can have as many users as they want, millions, billions, it doesn’t matter, I won’t use it for sure, because I don’t need to! Nobody needs to! 
1 Like
It wont run in non-spyware-laden browsers. It want’s me to install some data-collection sofware just to hear some music; so just can’t be bothered with it.
I thoroughly admire your steadfastness and love your principles, I’ve been a vocal proponent of boycotting Spotify for many many years so it’s hard to give in, but I have done it due to its popularity among friends and so I decided to use Spotify as a PR tool to kick start my Shockbroker project.
I believe streaming is the way of the future and if there was a legit alternative I’d quit Spotify in a heartbeat, hopefully they come to their senses some day. As of now at least it gives me almost a handful of listeners per day where as I see nothing from anywhere else, well Bandcamp gave me 2 sales and 1 play the last 30 days so at the end of the day Bandcamp is more lucrative 
but I am more interested in getting the music out there at this stage.
I have been toying making a competing streaming service for musicians but the thing is Spotify have first-mover advantage and are in a strong position as they have reigned in all popular artists by selling out to the big labels, so the masses get what they wants making competition almost futile, then labels can go scavange artists on bandcamp, soundcloud etc. and give them a deal, it’s almost as if this was pre-planned to screw musicians from the get-go.
I don’t think so. Streaming will never replace vinyl and else. But surely there’s a market which will grow until a specific point (yes, there will be an end, the growth won’t last forever), but I don’t care about mainstream for the masses. If the whole world would think the sky is green, I still know it’s not.
Then you have to do a lot of social media activity, not Spotify. Being on Spotify isn’t enough to get attention. If you want to get your music out there you have to work for it. But this means you have to use platforms which aren’t any better than Spotify just like Facebook. That’s where you can find access to the masses, if you’re interested. Or you can communicate on Soundcloud or else. But as you already know, it’s very time consuming. I know a lot who did it for years, and the result is 1000 to 2000 followers, some plays here and there, but still earning pocket money. I wouldn’t want to do that, time is short. Better create new songs and have some fun. 
That’s why I shit on it. They have to get on without my music. No problem at all.
1 Like
You both raise some good points, I agree with both of your points of view, however in terms of my own actions I follow the same path as TNT and I just refuse to engage with it now. Like a great many things, as I get older I am finding that what “the mainstream” do is counter to my own beliefs and values. At some stage, the constant compromising of principles becomes utterly galling and the only option is to reject what you can’t tolerate.
I have got my two daughters collecting physical music now and they (aged 10 and 6) are loving having a little shelf full of music they love rather than when we used to have a family Spotify sub, they are more engaged with music now.
Off-topic, in a topic in the off-topic sub, but I reject a lot of the mainstream video gaming trends now where everything is a service that never ends and most large games want you to invest in them 100% both in terms of time and money, to the detriment of all others. Another trend that is anti-consumer. We live in a really shitty time in terms of consumer options and the monetisation of absolutely everything, with advertising rammed down our throats at every possible opportunity. I mean, look at how many music production software platforms are moving towards subscriptions - is this really the best way forward? Pay 10-15 subscriptions a month for every hobby or interest under the sun, Netflix, Amazon, Spotify, Xbox Live, Game Pass, Nintendo Online, PS Plus, Reason Subscription, Splice etc. ad nauseum.
Anyway, tangential rant over.
2 Likes
US Revenue stats for 2020 from RIIA.
- Streaming: $10 B (Spotify has 35% market share)
- Downloads: $674 M
- Vinyl: $619 M
- CD: $483 M
I am impressed by the Vinyl numbers, it’s here for longer than I thought. I remember a friend collecting exotic marble Depeche Mode vinyls, it was fascinating and I’m sure it’s the collectibles that keeps vinyl going and that some people like you guys just loves tangibles… but streaming is already “the future” 
I have no doubt that streaming is the future, well the present I think, but in the same way that Kindles became ultra popular and people predicted the demise of the paper book - that trend has now reversed as people love collecting books again. Almost everything in life is a cycle of sorts, what is true one minute is not the next - I think as the environmental impact of the electricity burning data centres and servers becomes more starkly prominent in people’s minds then perhaps the lower environmental impact of CD’s or one-time paid downloads might pick up again. Vinyl is, sadly, an environmental disaster in terms of production and I suspect has reached an equilibrium in popularity and will probably hover where it is for a good amount of time yet. I’m not saying that any of this is right of wrong (apart from the environmental impacts of streaming and vinyl - which is wrong) just offering my view for whatever it’s worth.
Well, that’s the US. This is the whole world. As you can see physical is still at 25%, and I’m pretty sure this will grow again in future. At the moment digital is more common, but I think Sam is right saying that it’s a trend. Trends come and go. Watch this:
Do you think this is just a short flash in the pan? I don’t. Most people I know are collecting vinyl. Of course they also download digital music and some of them also stream, but it’s still all about vinyl. Everybody wants to have really good music in their physical collection. Streaming is just for fast consumption. People don’t know what they’re listen to, all they know is that it’s some kind of music they like. The greater the quantity the less interesting are the songs. People are “zapping” like they do while watching TV, they don’t LISTEN anymore. In my opinion people who stream don’t appreciate the music. I don’t want to be part of that, I prefer listeners who appreciate the music. But I also could live without it. The bottom line is not being part of a business which isn’t a business for a musician, just a waste of time without any profit. I will continue creating music, but not because of some pocket money. It’s all about the fun.
By the way, this is Germany:
Still more than 35% physical music and 55% streaming.