The Free For All: Music in the Day of Spotify
People in life generally just go for what is free, even if there are repercussions. This can be applied to many sectors in life like free samples, free trials, and free music.
With the creation of new technologies like music streaming services, there is not a time where this free for all has ever been more true. Despite the low royalties artists are being paid from these streaming services, even their biggest fans still would choose to listen on services like Spotify or Pandora, rather than pay for the artist’s album.
For example, according to an article published by The Guardian in April 2015, Spotify’s payout to the label per stream is between $0.006 and $0.008. After that the label pays the artist just a mere $0.00112. Split that up with all the musicians playing on the track, and what you have is a number so low most people don’t even know how to correctly say it.
The creation of these free streaming services has rapidly changed the value of music to little to nothing. Those who go for streaming services instead of purchasing music are now renting it, instead of a full time commitment. Artists are forced to find yet another way to support themselves.
Among musicians there is an extremely varied climate of opinions towards the benefits and the harms of streaming services. For example when I interviewed Vermont musician, Jer Coons, about music streaming services he discussed the benefits and the harms of it.
“I think streaming has as much of a potential to help artists and as much as hurt them. The current royalty payments are very low, and I don't feel that they compensate performers and/or songwriters adequately,” Coons writes. “However, the platform for global, instant access to your music is a benefit that shouldn't be taken lightly.”
I also asked Tommy Siegel, the guitarist of the band “Jukebox the Ghost”, about music streaming and he spoke of the drop in album sales his band has been experiencing over the last few years, while he himself is a user of Spotify.
“As a listener, it's incredible! I'm a Spotify user and I've gotten turned on to so much incredible stuff through it”, Siegel wrote. “As a musician...it's daunting. I can't exactly complain because I'm a user myself, but the difference in music sales in the last few years is astounding. physical music sales are no longer a significant source of my band's income.”
Taylor Swift’s opinion is completely against free streaming of music. Swift does not have her music on Spotify, and only allows it to be played on non-free streaming services. When Apple Music was going to offer a 3-month free trial without paying royalties to artists, Swift spoke out against them in an article in The Wall Street Journal. Ironically when trying to access this article I was unable to read it because I did not want to pay for a subscription. Luckily, Swift also wrote about this topic on her tumblr.
“We don’t ask you for free iPhones”, Swift wrote, “Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.”
Following this, Apple Music agreed to pay artists royalties during the three-month free trial. Many critics of Swift argue that she doesn’t need the money that she would lose through streaming services. But, Taylor Swift and other big artists do not face financial problems from music streaming services. It is smaller musicians who don’t have sold-out stadium tours to pay their bills that suffer.
Luckily, things are looking up. Spotify and other music streaming services are evolving their platforms to help the musician. Jer Coons writes about one of these improvements.
“In the coming months, streaming services such as Spotify and Pandora will begin rolling out back-end platforms for artists that will allow access to their listener's data - i.e., where they live, what other bands they listen to, etc,” Coons wrote. “In the right (organized and motivated) hands this data could be incredibly valuable for artists and labels alike.”
This data can help musicians when planning their tours. They can see where they have large audiences, save them the trouble of going to a city where they don’t have an audience.
According to an article published by The New York Times, in April 2015, Pandora replaced two of its board members with music-industry officials. This will allow the streaming company to have board leaders who understand the struggles of musicians.
Additionally, according to an article published by The Wall Street Journal, in December 2015, Spotify is also considering to allow some artists to only let their music be streamed by paid users.
While these changes will hopefully improve streaming services for musicians, nothing can change the fact that artists are mostly no longer receiving funds from people buying their music. Instead they have to hope that people will stream their music, so they can receive tiny compensations for an extreme loss.
Sources
Dredge, Stuart. "How Much Do Musicians Really Make from Spotify, ITunes, and Youtube?"
The Guardian. The Guardian, 3 Apr. 2015. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.
Karp, Hannah. "Spotify Considers Allowing Some Artists to Withhold Music From Free
Service." The Wall Street Journal. The Wall Street Journal, 8 Dec. 2015. Web. 10 Dec.
2015.
Sisario, Ben. "Pandora to Replace 2 Board Members With Music-Industry Figures." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 20 Apr. 2015. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.
Swift, Taylor. "To Apple, Love Taylor." Taylor Swift. Tumblr, 19 June 2015. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.
