How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?

[yngwie666]

You would need a few hundreds of millions plays to get Sammy's car pool:

[MAdX]

Spotify has payed out $500 million in royalties this year. Remember that Spotify is not available in most countries outside Europe.


I think they give a pretty good overview of their business here: http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/


In fairness I would be willing to pay more than €9.99 a month for Spotify Premium.


Unfortunately it would be suicide for them to charge more since the competition is so tough. This competition has resulted in a great situation for the music consumers who can access millions of songs with just one click. Great for the consumers, not so great for the artists.


However, I don't see this new era as the downfall of musicianship. Quite the opposite. With technology, people no longer need all the money and expertise that used to be the only way to get professional recordings. This is an amazing opportunity for all aspiring musicians.


Streaming also offers a platform to distribute your music and make an income. Too bad that this income is nowhere near the income artists used to make from selling records (yet).


I say yet because the music business is in a state of transition right now and I think there's still a lot of room for development.


Though its unfortunate that right now the losers are the artists, I hope that streaming will be the death of big record labels and the artists in the end will get their fair share of the cake.

[mr_crowley]

Streaming also offers a platform to distribute your music and make an income. Too bad that this income is nowhere near the income artists used to make from selling records (yet).


I say yet because the music business is in a state of transition right now and I think there's still a lot of room for development.

I think you're hitting on the most important thing here. We have already been at rock bottom and things are slowly turning around and looking better... there is a long way to go and I doubt music ever will ever gross as much as it did in the late '90s but I am fine with that. I rather earn enough to buy myself a cheese burger than nothing at all.


Give it some time, I think in 10 years, when I believe streaming will be the way we consume music almost exclusively this discussion about artists not getting paid enough won't exist 'cause you will be able to get by on the royalties from Spotify and their likes

[Agrippa]

http://www.classicrockmagazine.com/news ... h-spotify/

[The Seeker]

Truth in shredding.

Frank Gambale has his say:


http://www.truthinshredding.com/2013/09 ... d-its.html

A couple of points


The BBC report Spotify at 0.007 dollars per play whilst Frank quotes 0.0009 dollars, Maybe there isn't a standard fee, but if his team have negotiated a return of 10% less than the average, then who's fault is that.


He also seems not to realise that if we paid 10x as much as we do now ($100 per month), then he would still only be getting 0.009 dollars per play, even if the entire increase went to the artists.


And who is going to pay $100 month? Easy to answer, virtually no-one.


To me, cheap streaming is the answer to the piracy issues. I cant be bothered to borrow and copy or ftp music between friends or go to free Russian download sites BECAUSE I CAN STREAM LEGALLY.


If the cost of streaming was to dramatically increase, then people will stop using it and all the old piracy issues will just grow again and become the norm.

[Dinosaur David B]

If the cost of streaming was to dramatically increase, then people will stop using it and all the old piracy issues will just grow again and become the norm.

I wonder who would make out best in that scenario.


The streaming companies would go under.

The record labels and artists would have to deal with piracy again, but I bet they lose more $$ in the streaming scenario.


If streaming went away, I WOULD go back to buying more albums, and yeah, occasionally someone copies something for me. But I'd listen to a lot less variety. I get a whole of of music legally for $10 a month -- even if it is stiffing the artists. :036:


If you are an highly established artist that still moves a lot of physical media like the Stones, streaming can be another income stream (though other acts like Zeppelin and AC/DC don't do it, because they likely feel it would cut into their album sales).


But if you're an unknown act:


Streaming = giving your music away in return for exposure.


And it doesn't work (much beyond friends and local fans) unless you get some kind of major PR Buzz -- of the kind created if you land a TV commercial.


And even then, you probably have a better chance of going viral on YouTube.


I think most unknown artists are probably better off NOT streaming through one of these services.

[mr_crowley]

On the other hand, everytime I meet someone and mention I am in a band and say: "You can check us out on Spotify if you'll like".

They log onto Spotify and put us into one of their playlist and occassionaly these people shows up at a show or something. I think you gain fans if you're easy to get access to. If I can't find the songs of a band in one search on Spotify and YouTube I usually ditch the idea of them and move on.. Kinda sad but that is how I (and I guess many others) work :036:


EDIT:

And I rather have 50 people at our show only listening to us through Spotify than 10 that have actually bought our album...

[Dinosaur David B]

Yes, but if some of those 50 people buy your album, you'll make more than if those same people stream you on Spotify.

[deanulve]

This is a bummer for all musicians, that they will likely never make a dime, at something they are very talented at.

Have been a musician and seen it go from paying well, to pay to play

I am sure the time frame is different for for different places but for me it was:

80's clubs payed amazingly well, acted like you were human and catered to the bands some what

90's early on were the cheaper and cheaper gigs, then the pay to play scene started to happen, late 90's pay to play and fewer clubs to do it in

In the early 90's almost had a record deal w geffen, but then the nirvana thing was really getting huge and all labels made change of direction bottom line: rock, hard rock and metal were out, grunge was in

My son now is in a band, he writes, records, plays guitar, keyboards, ( quite good on the producer / production thing ) and is a fantastic drummer ( he plays drums when they gig ) and expects to make it big

My thoughts are ( even though I have always, and always will, encourage him and the boys ) that its a very very very long shot at best

He dosent even realize that it is pay to play!!!

He thinks selling tickets and then giving the money to the club is how its supposed to be!!! Yikes!!

[mr_crowley]

Yes, but if some of those 50 people buy your album, you'll make more than if those same people stream you on Spotify.

Very true.


What I mean though is that for a small bands, like those we are in, the money we would make on selling records is quite small so the exposure and accessibility that the streaming means far outweighs the loss of money.


EDIT:

Say you're on a festival bill. Say it is even quite big, like 30 000 people coming (that is HUGE by Swedish standards though...). You're playing an pretty early set at a small stage about 2PM. Some people will surely just walk by and give you a shot and maybe a few are hooked.

Others, like me, check out bands before the festival on Spotify and YouTube ('cause buying 15 albums when maybe 5 of them are good is just right down stupid) if I like I make sure to catch them at their 2PM slot.

Then I rave about them and go to their next club show buy a t-shirt and a vinyl copy of their album... Still they have made quite a few bucks off me, probably I have been able to drag along two friends as well that maybe buy one shirt each.

People ready to buy 15 albums by chance I would say are maybe 0,5 out of 100. People checking out stuff on Spotify beforehand is maybe 10/100. Say that every third person likes you.

Say that out of those 30,000 you already had 500 fans. That leaves you with 29500 people, if they had to BUY your album about 49 people would end up at your show (0,5/100 * 29500 / 3).

Streaming would generate 983 people (10/100 * 29500 / 3).

I know - this are just numbers I am grabbing out of thin air but I don't view them as unlikely in any way.

Say that 983 people rave about you and drag two friends each to your next show, ain't gonna be at a club



But that is just what I think :036:

I don't know how it worked in the glory days so maybe I just don't understand how badly fucked we are by these companies...