HomeForumsOther TopicsSpotify and the music biz

This topic contains 31 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by  superblonde 8 months, 4 weeks ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #564

    Top Gun
    Participant

    How does the artist get paid fairly or do they not as I presume from Spotify or any other music streaming device for that matter?

    I get Spotify for free with my computer tablet and smart phone and I grew up with radio so not paying for the service but having to deal with ads is like no big deal to me.

    The reason this got me to thinking about it was reading about Ace’s new album on here and Doug mentioning that he was going to check it out later thru Spotify.

    I’m the same way I’d love to own the new Zeppelin reissues on Vinyl but at the moment I don’t even have a record player and I can go right to spotify to listen to them and whatever new mixes of the songs which were a big selling point to me at least for free.

  • #567

    metalj
    Participant

    Spotify is great and provides bands with statistics on their fans. Without Spotify since the tragic loss of MTV I wouldn’t buy any music because I wouldn’t be aware of it. Also it has opened me up to buying mp3’s. There is too much crappy music out there to not listen to it first on Spotify.

    Jay aka the letter J

  • #578

    vinay
    Participant

    I just buy the music I like on cd or vinyl. It just sounds better to me, less compressed, less fatiguing. I agree that some audio stream could help you discover stuff you never tried before. We’ve got a tv now which runs apps. One app was from a deezer streaming service. I discovered Scale the Summit there. So I bought The Migration and like it a lot. When we got our new desktop computer and installed MS Windows 8.1, I noticed that there was a music app which had some new albums to listen to for a limited time. I knew from Epica back from when they started, but never listened to them. I did like their latest effort and also ended up buying the album.

    Back in the day, I just recorded my favourite metal program on the radio so that I could listen to it later. To me, it is not any different. Quality on mp3 or radio broadcast is not as great as having the cd or record, but it helps to discover new stuff.

    I don’t mind MTV. I’m not going to watch music on tv. It is good just as long as they play metal on the radio :).

  • #583

    metalj
    Participant

    I really can’t see a big difference between CD and mp3 except cymbals and over all volume. Records sound amazing but take up space. I listen to music on my phone and smart TV through apps.

    Jay aka the letter J

  • #584

    vinay
    Participant

    Maybe there isn’t even that much of a difference really, but the quality obviously depends on the components used. My audio set consists of a Pro-Ject debut 3 turntable and a cd player from Denon, both I believe are pretty decent for the job. I’ve also got an Asus EEE-pc netbook connected which caters for the mp3 stuff. Obviously this is not a high end device and doesn’t come with a good soundcard. So doing an A-B test through the same amp, cables and speakers, playing the same song, the mp3 loses. Now, Apple hardware is said to be so amazing at audio and video. Well, I’ve got this Apple MacBook Air, mid 2013 laptop computer I’m using for work. Using that one through the same set doesn’t matter much, it doesn’t sound much (or any at all) better than that Asus netbook. I do believe that it could be better, but that would probably require better, maybe even dedicated hardware for the job. I’m just not willing to invest in that. The turntable and cd player will probably still be considered pretty decent a few years from now as they were a few years ago. The same can’t be said for mp3 hardware. Maybe someday it levels out, but not yet.

    Yeah it probably are the cymbals which suffer most. But if it happens to the cymbals, it happens to everything in that frequency range, right? The presence, probably the thing that gives it more room, something higher than that crowded vocal range where everything. It is important to me. I do appreciate hearing this as well.

    Still I agree, I still rip my cd’s for convenience, I can play my music while at work. Similarly, the lower quality of (digital) radio doesn’t bother me if it allows me to discover something different. But it has got a different purpose for me. It doesn’t compete with cd and vinyl.

  • #591

    metalj
    Participant

    Another thing I found like Spotify and Netflix is kindle unlimited which helps me to discover books I normally wouldn’t purchase. I found this drum book that I liked so I ordered the paperback version. It’s called start playing drums by john lamb and it has little pictures of drum sets in it. So practical for me who knows nothing. I’m going to be able to read rhythms and the staff before my first official drum lesson! Here is the book:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1500413399?cache=54aa686369a051ec5fd48bcbfdc659b4&pi=SY200_QL40&qid=1409811182&sr=8-1#ref=mp_s_a_1_1

    Jay aka the letter J

  • #6688

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    Finally a new player in town..

    Apple Music Is Unveiled

    Apple Music allows users to search for songs and stream them over the Internet, similar to Spotify. The streaming service makes recommendations for other playlists and albums for people to listen to. The service will cost $10 a month or $15 a month for up to six family members.
    The music app, which will be available June 30, also includes an overhauled version of iTunes Radio, the Pandora-like radio service Apple released in 2013. The radio service has added a live station, called Beats 1, that is curated by major names in the music industry, like the former BBC producer Zane Lowe.

    Apple has also integrated social media elements into Apple Music, enabling artists to publish posts about their albums and concerts, and allowing customers to post comments. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/09/technology/apple-wwdc-2015.html

    Also there was a news article recently that Metal is the most visited genre of streaming music, by far, on Spotify.. much larger than Pop or Rap.

     

     
    Metal fans are the most loyal, Spotify finds
    The latest example of this is a study by Spotify that found the unsurprising news that metal fans are the most loyal of all genres.  http://www.metalinsider.net/streaming-music/metal-fans-are-the-most-loyal-spotify-finds

     

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #6690

    MotleyCrue81
    Participant

    That’s because metal is the best! At least the metal bands with decent singers.. Hate that annoying growl stuff.. learn how to sing. I think that bands that are on Spotify might have to give consent to be on there and each one maybe gets a really small percentage of the advertisements and people that pay for it. And metalj, you are totally right, there are A TON of completely terrible and bland poser bands out there.

    Bring hair metal back!

  • #6694

    Doug Marks
    Keymaster

    I really like Spotify.  I learn about new music on Sirius XM, primarily on the Octane channel.  Then I take my favorite songs and put them in play lists on Spotify.  When I’m driving my car the my iPhone with Spotify plugs directly into my car’s sound system via USB.  When I’m listening to Sirius XM I have 6 presets that I cycle through constantly and rarely hear anything that I want to listen to.  When I play my Spotify play list I like everything.  I also have the paid premium Spotify service.  It’s great.  Any time I read or hear about new music I have access to it instantly.  For example, I was listening to Howard Stern Interview Royal Blood this morning.  Royal Blood consists of a drummer and bass player.  The interview was interesting but I didn’t hear their music because I had to shut off the radio and I’m unfamiliar with them.  So, just a few minutes ago I checked ’em out on Spotify.  I also share the service with my wife so she has her play lists too.

    Metal Method Guitar Instructor

  • #6984

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    Sounds like the next technology step is to go retro and consolidate individual playlists into.. ‘monoculture‘.

    To keep Beats 1 sounding fresh around the world, the station will alternate one- and two-hour programming blocks by established broadcasters with those by musicians and celebrities, who will host and plan the shows themselves. Among the names on board: the teen actor Jaden Smith, the alternative singer St. Vincent, Josh Homme of Queens of the Stone Age and the British electronic duo Disclosure.

    Dr. Dre, who founded the original Beats headphone company with the music executive Jimmy Iovine, will have his own show, “The Pharmacy.” Mr. Lowe, broadcasting from Los Angeles, will share weekday anchor duties with two other professional D.J.s: Ebro Darden (of the hip-hop station Hot 97) in New York and Julie Adenuga in London.

    “Part of the last three months has been desperately trying to come up with a new word that’s not radio,” Mr. Lowe said. “We couldn’t do it.”

    …The idea for Beats 1 came from Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, who was the chief creative officer at Beats Music and has continued as one of Apple Music’s key designers. With the limitless choices offered by digital music, and listeners’ ability to create their own individual playlists, Mr. Reznor said, “you can feel way down in a crevice — everything gets so nichey.”

    Hearing Mr. Lowe’s BBC show while on tour, Mr. Reznor considered the live, communal experience of an audience tuned in to the same songs. “I wondered if in today’s world there is still a place for monoculture,” he said. “Can that still exist?”

    …“Right now music is locked behind a wall, even though everyone thinks it’s all free,” Mr. Iovine said. “Because there’s a lot of great music that can’t break free — there’s no one helping, no ecosystem. But we decided to put it all together.” http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/arts/music/zane-lowe-the-dj-scratching-out-beats-1-for-apple.html

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #8913

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    CD sales down.. vinyl and streaming up.. “new independent record shops”, say what?

    Sales of CDs in the US dropped by 31.5% in the first half of 2015, according to music industry figures.

    Just 41 million CDs were bought between January and June, down from 56.8 million in the same period last year.

    But the losses were largely offset by a growth in streaming revenues, which grew 23% to reach $1.03bn (£697,000).

    Streaming now accounts for one-third of the US music industry’s income, which remains relatively flat, with total revenue down 0.5% to $3.17bn (£2.05bn).

    Wholesale revenues – which reflects what distributors and record labels actually receive – rose 0.8% to $2.32bn (£1.5bn).

    The vinyl resurgence continued apace, amid a surge in new independent record shops.

    Sales of LPs grew by 52% in the first half of the year, raking in $221.8m (£143m) – roughly half as much as CD sales. http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-34323530

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #8923

    rorygfan
    Participant

    Big Tech has gotten too powerful  Superblonde, good article 9/20/15 in the NYTimes, echoing your comments on Google, Amazon, Apple, et al on the other posts and Youtube, etc..

    “The White House intellectual property adviser Colleen V. Chien noted in 2012 that Google and Apple were spending more money acquiring patents (not to mention litigating them) than on doing research and development.”

    The court system is the new R&D operation….</span>

    At least the EU has balls to go after all these tech giants.

    GOOGLE is heading into a major fight with antitrust officials in the European Union for some of the same reasons the F.T.C. staff went after it. Not incidentally, Europe is also investigating Amazon for allegedly stifling competition in e-books, and Apple for doing the same in music. While many on this side of the Atlantic believe Europe is taking on these tech giants because they’re American, another possible explanation is that Google, Amazon and Apple lack as much political clout in Europe as they have here.</span>

    Read the article, it’s pretty good.

     

  • #8924

    rorygfan
    Participant

    Regarding Spotify, This was cut from  Bob Lefsetz.com newsletter on Spotify and it’s impact on current market conditions, he is strongly opinionated at the direction and trends in the music marketplace, I was just turned on to his column yesterday by a friend originally from NYC.

    A funny thing happened on the way to streaming… Acts became bigger than their singles. The truth is if you’re popular today, people want more of your music. And if it’s good, they’ll continue to play it. Even if it didn’t all come from the same LP. Look at Drake, famous for dropping new tracks all the time. But the truth is his audience is listening.

    Furthermore, radio is out of the loop. At best it’s a place you get started. Kind of like the FM of yore.

    For evidence let me point to the big winner, the Weeknd.

    It’s all about “Can’t Feel My Face,” right?

    Wrong. The Weeknd has six tracks in Spotify’s United States Top 50. That brings us right back to 1964, when the Beatles dominated the radio chart. Only today, you get paid when people listen. That’s right, Capitol sold “Meet The Beatles” and the band only got paid once. Today, the Weeknd is cleaning up, as fans are streaming his tracks over and over again. The Weeknd dominates listening patterns in a way we either haven’t seen or haven’t been able to measure in eons. He’s the biggest star in music listening. If anything, the hype has been too small. This guy is GIGANTIC!

    As is Justin Bieber. He’s only got two tracks in the Top 50, but “What Do You Mean” is sitting at number one. You lead with the track, without a hit you’re nowhere. That’s what got everybody interested in the Weeknd’s album.

    But you know who else is every bit as big as the hype? Lyor Cohen’s Fetty Wap. It may have taken a long time for “Trap Queen” to break through, but listeners can’t get enough of Fetty, he’s not a one hit wonder on Spotify, Fetty has FIVE tracks in the Top 50!

    And then there’s Drake. The supposed downfall of Serena Williams. The Canadian has SIX tracks in the Top 50.

    Ed Sheeran has three, although one is with the Weeknd, “Dark Times,” you should listen to it, it’s so far from Top Forty fodder you’ll find yourself reconsidering your hatred of pop music. “Dark Times” is closer to underground FM than iHeart.

    Not that every act has multiple tracks in the Top 50.

    But what we’ve learned is if you’ve got the goods, the audience wants more than the single. You’re only handcuffed by your ability to create great tracks. We’ve got listeners galore.

    And then you wonder why everyone’s bitching about Spotify payments…

    The truth is acts like the Weeknd, Drake and Ed Sheeran are dominating listening. Don’t argue with data, Nate Silver said no one had run for President this late and won but the press keeps telling Biden to jump in. The same way the press keeps trumpeting the low Spotify payment story. You don’t hear any of these acts bitching about their Spotify payments, nor their cowriters. Max Martin is all over the Weeknd album…do you see him in the press complaining he can’t make enough money? OF COURSE NOT!

    The rich are getting richer and the marginal are being squeezed to the periphery.

    Everything you know is wrong. Everything you’ve based your precepts on is kaput.

    Once everything is available for one low price, or via a freemium tier, it turns out listeners want more than the hit. Look back, in the old days you had to wait for your favorite to come on the radio. And needless to say, ACTS DIDN’T GET PAID FOR RADIO PLAY! Most people never purchased the single, never mind the album. But once the act’s repertoire has been unlocked online, people not only want the hit, they want so much more!

    And sure, right now payments are relatively low, but they’re only gonna grow as more people subscribe. And then the winners are gonna get paid ad infinitum, as long as you’re listening, they’re making money. With no shipping and no billing and no preorders, none of the junk clogging up the system in the past.

    Drake puts out a steady stream of music. Bieber doesn’t wait until he has an album to put out a track. The Weeknd started off without a label, giving away his music for free. They’re harnessing the new system while idiots like Keith Richards are missing what’s going on.

    In the old days, it was all about the first week number. To get press and reorders. But today press means ever less. And physical retail is essentially irrelevant. The only criterion is whether people listen. And by that standard Keith Richards’s new album is an abject failure. Many of the tracks on “Crosseyed Heart” don’t even have 100,000 listens. The Weeknd has multiple tracks with TRIPLE DIGIT MILLION LISTENS! Keith’s got 17,242 followers on Spotify. The Weeknd has 1,768,752. As for the demo… Let me remind you, it’s oldsters with deep pockets who can pay for Spotify. As for physical…where are you gonna find it? As for digital, Keith’s album is number 11 at the iTunes Store, but we’ve got no idea how many people are actually listening to it, never mind that sales of albums at the iTunes Store are anemic.

    So it all comes down to listens. Which are not about the first week but the long term. If Keith Richards’s album is in the iTunes Top 50 six months from now I’ll eat my hat, but Major Lazer’s “Lean On” is still number 7 on Spotify and it came out MARCH 2ND! Proving if you make it, you’ve got a long listening life, a long time to make money. It’s not like the old days where when a record fell off the chart its financial life was history.

    As for Major Lazer… Diplo is also represented at number 13, with Bieber and Skrillex. Turns out the public is not stupid. They know it’s the same guy. Or maybe they don’t, maybe they just know a hit when they hear it.

    And it’s always been about hits. Cream did not break big until “Sunshine Of Your Love” crossed over to Top 40. You may love the niche act, and that’s fine, but when they complain they’re broke the truth is not that many people are listening to them. And if not that many people “buy” a product it makes little money, it fails in the marketplace. Windows Phone is pretty good, although stiff in the marketplace, are you complaining that Microsoft has been treated unfairly, railing against app makers who won’t write for the platform?

    Of course not.

    This is the reality.

    Repeating once again…

    1. It’s about listens, everything else is irrelevant.

    2. It starts with the hit.

    3. If you’ve got a hit, people will check out more. If it too is good, they’ll play it, irrelevant of whether radio or any other gatekeeper has anointed it and is exposing it.

    4. Longevity counts. That’s how you make money in the new world. A rocket ship to the moon is not a good financial plan. Used to be, you could move tonnage/sell product for a week or two and who cared what happened thereafter. But now there’s little upfront bump and if you can’t sustain… You’re Keith Richards and Tom Petty and every other has-been who gets old media ramped up and then fails in the marketplace.

    5. Old media is dumb and beholden to the marketers who are also antiques in many cases. Just because they write about it, that does not mean anybody cares. You don’t get paid for press, you get paid for listens.

    6. With enough listens you end up with sponsorship and live/touring opportunities. It’s not what feels successful, but what IS successful. You point to your listens and the game begins. Then again, if you’ve got the listens the advertisers and promoters will be beating down your door, they understand numbers, they know more about the new paradigm than the labels, never mind the acts.

    7. You’re a winner or a loser. You’re on the chart or you’re not. Complaining is worthless. Everyone can’t be a doctor and everyone can’t be Mark Zuckerberg. Stop bitching when you can’t make it in music and do something else.

    8. Good is not good enough. The Spotify Top 50 is laden with hooks. And that’s why they call them hooks, BECAUSE THEY HOOK THE LISTENER! This ain’t gonna change, if you’re making music today it must hook the listener instantly, otherwise people push the button and move on. If you can’t make me pay attention in five seconds, I’m outta here. Don’t shoot the messenger, face reality.

    9. Bigger acts are coming. You can go to the record store and feel left out, no one can buy everything. Same deal at the iTunes Store. But on streaming services everything is available. And once the charts become more well known, people are gonna click over to find out what’s going on. And what is happening will become even more successful. In an era of chaos, we gravitate to the winners. The oldsters complain, but the youngsters know this is the game.

    You’re not limited. The single is just a starting point. People want more if you’re great. Very few are.

  • #8936

    rorygfan
    Participant

    The book he mentions Seabrook book coming out- The Song Machine… that will be released in October- here this I snipped from Amazon.  So new music will be computer-robot generated bullshit, generated from spotify users listening preferences.  Great, I imagine that is why so much of the current stuff is so lifeless.

    <span class=”Apple-style-span” style=”font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22px;”>Going beyond music to discuss money, business, marketing, and technology, <em style=”font-style: italic;”>The Song Machine explores what the new hits may be doing to our brains and listening habits, especially as services like Spotify and Apple Music use streaming data to gather music into new genres invented by algorithms based on listener behavior.</span>

  • #9022

    Axe
    Participant

    I am NOT a fan of Spotify.. Or any of the streaming services be it Lastfm or any of the other cookie cutter copy cats. My POV is that of one that has material out on the market and one that wades thru page after page of monthly or quarterly  reports listing these streaming services paying all of $0.001 per play/stream..  Think about that for a minute if you are an artist.. $0.001 per stream…. That’s NOT a typo

     

    Now, if a number of those streams led to someone buying my/our works then I’d say it’s worth the ass raping Spotify gives us on the streaming end but I’ve yet to see ONE instance where I could with out a doubt attribute a physical cd sale or a digital download to a Spotify stream.. The sales are always generated by the track samples on the particular hosting digital outlet be it Amazon, Cd baby, Itunes, etc etc..

    My POV may be different than most here but it is what it is.. :-/ I’ll step off my Lars soap box now 😀

     

    Oh, and don’t get me started on the absolute rip offs from S America, Russia and the far east.. Where your stuff is played on internet radio or maybe FM and you don’t see even $0.001 per play…And BMI or Ascrap does nada….  Yeah, the music industry is in a weird weird place..

     

     

  • #9027

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    Very timely to bring that up because a big news article this week in the news proves exactly that artists are making pennies.

    Here is the real money numbers discussion snip

    Kevin Kadish, who wrote All About That Bass, says he made just $5,679 (£3,700) from 178 million streams of the song. http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34344619/all-about-that-bass-writer-says-he-got-5679-from-178m-streams

    “I’ve never heard a songwriter complain about radio royalties as much as streaming royalties,” Mr Kadish said.

    “That was the real issue for us, like one million streams equals $90 (£59).”

    Speaking to a meeting hosted by the US House Judiciary Committee at a university in Tennessee, he explained that many songwriters face a challenge when it comes to streaming services.

    “For a song like All About That Bass, that I wrote, which had 178 million streams. I mean $5,679? That’s my share,” he is quoted as saying in a report from The Tennessean.

    That’s as big a song as a songwriter can have in their career and number one in 78 countries. But you’re making $5,600.

    “How do you feed your family?”

    This was the song that broke all previous records for number of streams and still didn’t make money!

    Mr Kadish co-wrote All About That Bass with singer Meghan Trainor. After offering the song to other artists and being turned down, Trainor went on to record the track herself.

    It became one of the biggest-selling digital singles of all time and launched her singing career.

    She also became the first act to enter the UK top 40 based purely on streams; and the song then spent four weeks on top of the chart.

    Even if I don’t like the song – the artist made a hit, the artist should get paid.

    Deborah Annetts, chief executive of the Incorporated Society of Musicians, said: “It is galling that Kevin Kadish, the writer of one of the biggest-selling digital singles of all time, has been so poorly compensated.

    “While radio plays come with guaranteed payment for all the musicians involved, streaming almost always underpays the individual musicians.

    “Musicians need a right to fair pay, and as streaming grows, global copyright laws need to catch-up or risk destroying the musicians who underpin the value of music. The current situation is unacceptable.”

    What I find most surprising is that artists themselves are not taking matters into their own hands, since this ripoff has been obvious for a while. Sure they try boycotting the service (does not work well.. because then there’s no artist exposure either). But are they trying other things, like: making cut-down versions only for streaming to incentivize fans to buy the full versions, or adding lyrics to the streaming versions like “support the artist buy the track” at the outro, or only streaming a remix version instead of the original, or cutting out verses in the streaming version to make long instrumental sections (most pop people want the lyric version primarily), or any number of things to change the product slightly. Since all the audio is produced in a digital studio these multiple versions of tracks should be easy to produce and not expensive. It would only take a few minutes (!! right?) to master a track that keeps one vocal verse and one vocal chorus and cuts the rest, or cut the entire length of the song form in half while still making it sound like a complete shortened song. Or how about merging two songs (like the “A” side and “B” side what would be a 45 record) by cutting their lengths down, and make that the streaming version, so the artist gets 2-for-1 exposure time yet entices fans to buy the full length versions of one or both songs. People spend ridiculous money on music they love, even if it’s momentary pleasure, look how much bank was made from custom ring tones in the past, tiny snips of favorite songs, that was a multi-multi-million dollar market in the flip-phone days.

    The problem is not the technology.. it’s the industry gatekeepers and people in general. Somehow taking digital goods seems perfectly acceptable to everyone but if you take a loaf of bread from the store you get arrested. Yet they are the same thing and both are not acceptable. Technology-wise, there could easily be digital cookies passed around between the streaming services or youtube, and the artists’ agents or unions to ensure proper royalties immediately. On the flip side there’s some fake lawyer corporation claiming royalties and suing every time someone sings “Happy Birthday” because they bought the copyright from a 200 year old song (recently and finally overthrown in court), that’s clearly out of line too.

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #9079

    rorygfan
    Participant

    Oh, and don’t get me started on the absolute rip offs from S America, Russia and the far east.. Where your stuff is played on internet radio or maybe FM and you don’t see even $0.001 per play…And BMI or Ascrap does nada….  Yeah, the music industry is in a weird weird place..

    I have to mention something here about that payment per country issue to keep it in perspective, allow me if you don’t mind.

    Here is a chart:  GDP per Capita list by country

    As a US taxpayer (assuming you are), you have to realize that the rest of the world does not enjoy the same income level of the USA.  You have to take into account these countries pay scales.  The median GDP (half population above and half below this amount) of the USA in 2014 was like $54,000 a year.  The median GDP where I live now OUTSIDE of the USA is like $10,000 a year… and that is higher than most other countries around here, but many neighboring countries it is much less like my neighbor to the north at $1900. a year in next to lowest in the western hemisphere, YES, they make in an entire year rolling cigars what many US citizens living in places like LA pay for their apartment rent in one month.  So, if Spotify pays the artist the bleak amount of 1/6 cent USD per stream in the states, how are advertising and other royalty business’ whose advertising is cheaper, operation costs and profit less supposed to pay the same amount around the world?

    I just started using Spotify  2 days ago, for the first time just to see what all the hoopla is about.  I’ve relied on youtube for listening normally trying to discover anything new… but decided to give it a try.  It’s ok, I am not convinced to use it continually yet but I will see.  I will keep using the free version until I decide if it’s worth it.  As far as I am concerned there is so much crappy, boring, non-music being produced and created, plowing through it all is alot of work especially on a stupid small smartphone screen.

    So I started looking into the origins of this Spotify service, and other streaming too just for my own information.  What I discovered I found pretty shocking.

    I don’t and am sure you don’t condone a business being started based on “stolen inventory” and nobody really should be allowing them to do what they did, I’m surprised this actually happened, well sort of only as the entire world is a mess anyway.

    Listen to this interview:

     Mr. EK, of Spotify actually admits himself being a pirate... in a lecture to students in Stanford University in 2012 (EK was btw- previously the CEO of Utorrent)…. they most likely didn’t start their company in Sweden and THEN go out and buy all his early initial inventory on CD and copy to MP3 and upload to Spotify servers.  Sounds like they probably held the music industry hostage to technology and change, etc.  and negotiated with music industry to legitimize it.

     

     

  • #9512

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    FEAR FACTORY frontman Burton C. Bell says that streaming music services like Spotify and Pandora are “getting away with murder”

    “I’m part of ASCAP, which is a royalty collection company, like BMI. ASCAP collects my royalty [for songs] that are played live [and on] radio [and used] in movies, commercials… whatever.

    “Streaming is a very debated issue right now, because companies like Pandora and Spotify are getting away with murder, basically, because they are going with a contract… they are going with a trademark agreement written in the 1940s to pay the artists the least amount of royalty possible, because in the 1940s, there was no such things as the Internet, and they never expected it. So, because of that, they’re using this copyright/trademark law that was written to get away with paying the artist literally nothing. For instance, an artist like Adele — multi-platinum artist. One of her songs, ‘Someone Like You’ or whatever, had over 11 million listens on Pandora. The person who wrote that song, because of the royalty rate, only got paid 11 thousands dollars. For over 11 million million hits [or] listens on Pandora! That’s fucking ridiculous! And that’s what they’re getting away with, and Pandora is fighting to keep it that way.”

    He continued: “ASCAP invited me to a conference. I live on the East Coast, in Pennsylvania, and it just so happens that the area that I live in, my state representative, named Tom Marino, he is on the board to rewrite these trademark laws, to change them. And so ASCAP had a bunch of local artists — I happen to be one of them — who are signed up to ASCAP, who, basically… it’s important for them to get a proper royalty rate to survive. So we met with this representative and we all sat and discussed, like… ‘This is our living. This is what we do.'”

    Bell went on to say: “Pirating is bad enough. People think it’s okay to steal downloads and music for free — they think it’s okay — but would they enjoy it if I walked into their house after they created a meal for their family, I’d just pick it up and take it? It’s, like, ‘Oh, it’s free.’ It’s the same thing. You just made this for your family to survive.

    “I do records, one, because it’s my passion, and two, so me and my family can survive, and you’re just gonna take it? For free, without paying for it? That’s the analogy we give.

    “We are actively fighting this to make sure that all recording are properly… We’re not asking for the world, we’re not asking for a million, we are asking for a decent royalty rate. Because with a decent royalty rate, it makes sense to continue writing, it makes sense to continue being in a band.”

    Bell added: “Taylor Swift… She’s a fine example. I’m not much of a fan of her music, but I respect the woman immensely, because she is one of the fiercest fighters for artists about this… over this situation. So I highly respect Taylor Swift, ’cause she fiercely fights for us, and it’s amazing.”

    According to Bell, the solution to the complex issue of illegal music downloading is simple. “I just think that people need to be educated,” he said. “Especially the younger generation that feel that they’re entitled to everything for free — free Internet. Which is not the case. People work hard to make this. And there needs to be stipulations and things put into place so people start paying for things again. ‘Cause it needs to happen.”

    He continued: “Napster, as genius of a technological revolution it was, it fucked a lot of people — it really did. And it created a mentality of, ‘Oh, shit! It’s free. Everything’s free. Wooo!’ It really created a negative impact. And it’s really sad. But at least there is one aspect of the metal community… The metal community is one of the communities of music that do continue to buy albums — CDs and vinyl — which is pretty strange. The metal community is very passionate about the music. And every day on stage, I’m announcing that we have a new record coming out and I’m also saying, ‘If you love the music, you need to support your favorite artists. Because if you do not support your favorite artists, there’s no way that your favorite artists will be able to come out here and play for you.’ And I put it that way. ‘Cause if you put it in that context, it’s, like, ‘Well, if I don’t support them, they won’t be here for me? What?’ Yeah. It’s true.”

    http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/fear-factorys-burton-c-bell-pandora-and-spotify-are-getting-away-with-murder

    It’s odd to me that artists are not writing songs about this huge problem. Pink Floyd wrote an entire album based off of anger towards band management. WASP wrote an entire album about the love-hate of being a rockstar (Crimson Idol). GnR and Nirvana both wrote songs directly as responses to bad rock journalists and their sensationalism (“Get in the ring!” and “Rape me!”). Neil Young rages about many political and social issues in his songs. The Doors spent months to finely craft the perfect anti-war pop rock song so it could be a radio hit (Unknown Soldier). However I have never heard any strong rock song that purposely screams “fans should stop stealing my music!” or “buy my album dag nabbit or I’m gonna starve!”

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #9516

    safetyblitz
    Participant

    It’s odd to me that artists are not writing songs about this huge problem. Pink Floyd wrote an entire album based off of anger towards band management. WASP wrote an entire album about the love-hate of being a rockstar (Crimson Idol). GnR and Nirvana both wrote songs directly as responses to bad rock journalists and their sensationalism (“Get in the ring!” and “Rape me!”). Neil Young rages about many political and social issues in his songs. The Doors spent months to finely craft the perfect anti-war pop rock song so it could be a radio hit (Unknown Soldier). However I have never heard any strong rock song that purposely screams “fans should stop stealing my music!” or “buy my album dag nabbit or I’m gonna starve!”

    It’s because of the old expression about “hands that feed” and “biting”. When Lars Ulrich attacked Napster, hating on Metallica became the internet’s favorite sport for a few years. Even at the best of times, nobody wants to be compared to Lars Ulrich.

    And Bell’s “$11,000 for 11 millions listens” point comes with a giant asterisk. Back when someone bought a CD, or a cassette, or an LP, they weren’t paying for the right to listen to each song just once. For songs sold on physical media, the number of “listens” would be hundreds or thousands of times higher than the number of sales. I still have the Appetite for Destruction CD I bought in the 80s. You have any idea how many times teenage me listened to the intro to “Welcome to the Jungle” for a flat $12 or whatever it was? And I haven’t checked it for disc rot lately, but I bet I could still play it 100 times today if I felt like it.

    Boo friggin’ hoo, Burton C. Bell. Since even before the days of electronic recording, on any given day there are hundreds of thousands of classically trained musicians who can’t make a living playing music because people don’t want to pay to hear them. But now that pop music is affected, we should start caring? People love making music because it’s more fun than getting a “real job”. The fact that under today’s system there are still zillions of bands trying to get people to listen to their music, shows that paying “fuck all” for music is just “supply and demand” writ large. For CONSUMERS of music, the only potential problem with the current system is “if people can’t make more money, they’ll stop making music”, but the fact that musicians are still about as scarce as atmospheric nitrogen shows that’s not happening.

  • #9519

    vinay
    Participant

    I’m not going to discuss about economics of this kind of matter. The difference between streaming music and buying physical media seems like the difference between renting and buying respectively. If I would want to support a car manufacturer (don’t ask why…) should I rent of buy their car? Not sure how good of an example that is but it seems similar. Again, I’m not into the economics of this kind of stuff but if artists claim that I’d better just buy the physical album I’ll do that. I like them. I like to support them to grow bigger than they already are. I like their music so apparently they have feelings like mine. It would feel very wrong to enjoy their work and not compensate them properly.

    I just ordered “Retrospect” from Epica a few minutes ago. I already have their latest release “The Quantum Enigma” but didn’t own any of their earlier stuff. This gets me a live concert (their ten year anniversary) with stuff released earlier on three cds and two dvds for thirty euros. Still seems like a steal to me. And yes, I did use youtube to find out whether it was for me. I found this. It gets more metal later on. And no, if you were planning to say “guitarist Mark needs to learn to sing properly”, open your mind or just don’t bother.

    I don’t own any stuff from Dream Theater yet, but they have eleven of their albums (until 2011) for 46 euros. That’s so insanely cheap, I wonder if they’re actually being properly compensated if I’d get that!

     

  • #9520

    safetyblitz
    Participant

    I like their music so apparently they have feelings like mine. It would feel very wrong to enjoy their work and not compensate them properly.

    That’s just it though. Who decides how much compensation is “proper”? It used to be that record companies and pop musicians reaped the benefit of charging music consumers for extra songs that we didn’t care about (be it on recordings, or as still happens today, in concerts). Now, as far as recordings are concerned, the balance of power has shifted.

    But if I want to hear Adele sing “Somebody Like You” in person, I’m required to pay through the nose for a full concert consisting mostly of songs I’m not interested in. Because producers/performers economic interests are frequently in conflict with consumers interests, it is virtually impossible to reach a universally agreed on system of “fair”.

    • #9524

      superblonde
      Keymaster

      That’s just it though. Who decides how much compensation is “proper”?

      the lawyers and biz execs, which is the original problem. The free market should be able to decide. That is the ideal. Free market economy would fix things for established artists. But there are walls in the way, and it is also an investment biz too, for new bands. The artist isnt biz savvy and just wants to have fun, so doesn’t/can’t negotiate their own worth. That recent interview from Fear Factory was the first I heard of this “they are going with a trademark agreement written in the 1940s to pay the artists” deal – that’s some lawyer’s loophole, or the Spotify CEO’s pirate loophole.

      vinay has a good analogy though.. like buying & renting (leasing).. I like the Skid Row idea, they said they’ll try to release frequent EP’s instead of the longer wait for full albums. Kind of like roryg’s article posted before, bands need a faster cycle, to keep on the streaming hot lists. I don’t think the old “charging music consumers for extra songs that we didn’t care about” argument holds any water at all, because an artist can’t know what is a popular hit in advance, before it gets to consumers. The consumer decides that. So many examples of songs the artists wanted to cut, yet turned out to be surprise mega-hits. Artists always say “We’re going into the studio, we’ve got 27 songs to work with” then they end up with 10 tracks on the album that they believe are the best of those.. Look at the post-mortem releases of Kurt Cobain, some great now fan-favorite tracks were ones that were put in the trash instead of making it to an album anyway (like “Sappy”, another re-released demo is out according to the news).

      Makes me wonder about the usefulness of the artist unions like ASCAP. Join the union to get representation and negotiation leverage as an artist. But what have they done all these years prior, to prevent this crisis? Whatever they did, it didn’t work.

      I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
      And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #9526

    rorygfan
    Participant

    It’s odd to me that artists are not writing songs about this huge problem.

    Actually here is good theme song, The Doors Ray Manzarek produced… abeit written to usher in the 1980’s, but just as relevant today.  Practically applicable for just about everything: Thanks to John Doe and Exene Cervenka

    Lyrics: no one is united, all things are untied, perhaps we’re boiling over inside, they’ve been telling lies, who’s been telling lies? there are no angels there are devils in many ways take it like a man…. the world’s a mess it’s in my kiss you can’t take it back pull it out of the fire pull it out in the bottom of the ninth pull it out in chords of red-disease drag on the system drag on my head and body there are some facts here that refuse to escape i could say it stronger but it’s too much trouble i was wondering down at the bricks hectic, isn’t it? down we go cradle and all the world’s a mess it’s in my kiss go to hell, see if you like it then come home with me tomorrow night may be too late both moons are full dirty night dying like a lovely wife goodbye my darling how high the moon well i wish i was

  • #9527

    rorygfan
    Participant

    Aurous- Looks like Spotify has offspring, here is a illegitimate son of Spotify, posted 4 days ago in the news.

    http://qz.com/523982/the-record-industry-is-already-suing-aurous-the-new-spotify-for-pirated-music/

    Here when discussing this, we need to remember the past- From the 80’s, Home Taping radio or your Albums to Cassette to play in the car.  Then later the Betamax/VHS wars.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Taping_Is_Killing_Music
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Valenti

    Valenti on new technologies
    During the late 1970s and early 1980s, Valenti became notorious for his flamboyant attacks on the Betamax Video Cassette Recorder (VCR), which the MPAA feared would devastate the movie industry. He famously told a panel in 1982, “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone. Despite Valenti’s prediction, the home video market ultimately came to be the mainstay of movie studio revenues throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

  • #9554

    rorygfan
    Participant

    I have been doing some reading about the history of the music business, and this current situation is just the same thing that always has existed.   This problem has existed from the beginning.  A few smaller companies really were “all about the music”- like Atlantic Records.  Many others, especially corporations involvement not at all.  Money was all that mattered.

    Some quotes below from the book “Dirty Little Secrets of the Record Business- Why so much music you hear sucks“.

    Ahmet Ertegun, son of a Turkish ambassador, formed Atlantic Records in 1947 with his friend Herb Abramson, funded by a loan from their dentist. “When I first started Atlantic Records,” he said, “I intended to make good blues and jazz music, as well as some pop music. We did it for one main reason. We wanted to make the kind of records we wanted to buy.” 

    Artie Ripp had ripped up the market with his own Kama Sutra label and his big act, the Loving Spoonful. Ripp had worked his way up after dropping out of high school: I started walking around Broadway and I’d see these kids who were making records and not getting paid. They could have a number one record on the charts and end up owing the record company a half a million dollars. . . . I thought, “This business has some system.” . . . Every party was charged to the artist. “I’ve got a hundred hookers. Charge them to the artist.” 

    In 1955, EMI purchased Capitol Records….

    a 12-year-old company that had been founded in the midst of World War II. Getting the raw materials for the manufacture of records had verged on impossible then, due to wartime restrictions on purchasing the lacquer used to hold the grooves on the 78 rpm record, and the copper used to cut the masters from which the glass-and-lacquer records were made. These obstacles didn’t stop songwriter Johnny Mercer, lyricist–turned–movie mogul Buddy DeSylva, and some associates from forming the company, which they started with two major hits, Mercer’s own “Strip Polka” and Ella Mae Morse’s version of “Cow Cow Boogie.” In the record business, the most successful businesspeople are often the most contrarian.

    Yet a dozen years after starting, Capitol submitted to foreign domination. Not that EMI was the first multinational record company—not by a long shot. In 1902, as the craze for sound recording spread beyond America, the Victor Talking Machine Company made the first international alliance, joining forces with British Gramophone Company. Victor had already pulled a contrarian move, switching from the wax cylinder sold by Edison and Columbia, and selling the new (at the time) glass-and-lacquer disc and the hardware to play it. British Gramophone became disc based, and Victor started to use British Gramophone’s logo, a little terrier with its ear cocked toward the horn, listening to “His Master’s Voice.”

    What EMI knew from experience dawned on the rest of the business world by observation: the record business, as it stood in the early 1960s, lacked schooling. The people running the business possessed a lot of native smarts, but very few had formal business training—guys like Artie Ripp, who hadn’t even finished high school, were running record companies and making a fortune. By 1967, record company revenues topped the billion-dollar mark, spiking that year on the crest of EMI’s wave of Beatlemania and the subsequent invasion of the musical redcoats that segued into the Summer of Love youth culture beginning to reach its full economic flower.

    Now, by the tail end of the 1960s, the thinking in the corporate suites went something like this: if these uneducated guys, often working just this side of the law, could rake in all this big money, imagine what we, with our MBAs and JDs, could do if we brought some standard business practices to the party. It was pretty easy to see their point of view when you looked at some of the people in charge of many of the big hits of the mid-1960s:

    (Referring to the early corporation involvement ) The music business of the time (and much of it even now) would not do well in answering the key question of the Rotary: “Is it fair for all concerned?” Instead it operated on more of an everyone-for-themselves level. In many ways, it resembled (and perhaps continues to resemble) high-stakes gambling more than any particular business model. And like high-stakes gambling, the people who were the best at it knew how to stack the deck so that nobody noticed, had mastered the deadpan poker face in negotiations, and never, ever let anyone see them sweat. Stacking the deck predominantly affected the way that artists were remunerated. Particularly in the early days of rock, as Ripp pointed out, musicians could sell millions of records and not make a penny from it, in fact owing the record company money. This went on until the lawyers began to take an interest in that end of the record business, representing artists to make sure that they got a relatively fair shake (and the lawyer got their percentage).

     

  • #9562

    vinay
    Participant

    That’s just it though. Who decides how much compensation is “proper”?

    the lawyers and biz execs, which is the original problem. The free market should be able to decide. That is the ideal. Free market economy would fix things for established artists. But there are walls in the way, and it is also an investment biz too, for new bands.

    Yeah, that’s the thing. The classic model was more of a socialist model than a free market model. Record companies made a lot of money off popular acts so that they could take chances with new, promising or maybe not so promising acts. I’m a simple guy in this respect, I honestly don’t have a clue what a record should cost to sustain such a complex economic model. That’s what these biz execs are for. I read a lot of complaint on this forum that in the past twenty years, there’ve been no new good bands. Well, that’s a matter of which rock you’ve been hiding under obviously. But it is always nice to have more new good stuff. In that respect I’d rather give my money to the record company to go out, take chances, discover and invest in new stuff rather than spend it on a bunch of computer geeks in their office writing computer code.

  • #9568

    rorygfan
    Participant

    I read a lot of complaint on this forum that in the past twenty years, there been no new good bands.

    That was probably me complaining of course, ha.

    Whenever you can, I’d certainly love for you insert some Youtube links or make a list to post here of decent good new Hard Rock bands that you are aware of!   (however, no pop, No Dave Matthews boring rock, or whimsical-psychedelic rock, rap or anything remotely sounding rap-rock, nor doom-scream, or growl death metal)

    I try to give everything new to me to see at least a 30 second listen.  I think you are fortunate to live in Europe where there are still real tours, and real rock concerts, but of course we all have different tastes.  I’ve mentioned before acts like “The Pretty Reckless” as something new and cool to me, hard rock.  Someone mentioned Halestorm, which I listened too also but not as interesting and edgy as I like.

  • #13718

    rorygfan
    Participant

    Bob leftsetz comments today on streaming.

    Maybe YouTube is not king.

    As of this moment, Mike Posner’s “I Took A Pill In Ibiza” has 200,912,604 streams on Spotify. But nowhere near this count on YouTube.

    The Vevo/YouTube clip has 37,303,201 views.

    The next most watched YouTube clip of the SeeB remix, which is the track we’re talking about here, has 1,697,208 views.

    The one after that, 1,399,712 views.

    Then there are seventeen clips with views between 100,000 and a million, almost all of them covers. Proving, once again, that fan-created clips are your friend, you get paid on them too, don’t take them down.

    But the cumulative number on YouTube is nowhere close to the 200 million streams on Spotify.

    Now let’s go to Justin Bieber’s “Love Yourself. It’s got 470,378,996 streams on Spotify.

    On YouTube, the Vevo clip has 473,103,375 views.

    Lukas Graham has 252,848,507 streams of “7 Years” on Spotify, but only 56,907,403 views of the official music video on YouTube and 42,217,563 of the lyric video, together nowhere close to 252 million.

    So…

    Maybe there’s an explanation, maybe there’s something I’m not seeing.

    And there’s the issue of YouTube adoption in the rest of the world, it’s not as big for music overseas, and I’m giving you international numbers here, it’s a worldwide business.

    Then there are the issues of genre and audience. Adele’s “Hello” YouTube views far outpace the Spotify streams. The clip has 1,389,801,721 views, there are only 464,430,885 streams of the songs on Spotify. Then again, the entire album isn’t on Spotify. And who knows how many playlists it was on. (However, YouTube is free to all, there’s no sign-up necessary, it’s a larger pool of people.)

    But it certainly appears if you’re a pop act, appealing to youngsters, you’re doing a disservice to your career by not being on Spotify. Where not only your hard core fans can find you, but others experience you via playlists. Furthermore, could it be that Spotify subscribers utilize the service like a CD player/turntable, listening to the tracks over and over, more than those do on YouTube?

    The Apple Music numbers are not public.

    Never mind Tidal or Rhapsody.

    Then again, Spotify has the most subscribers.

    If you keep your music off the service you’re leaving your fans unsatisfied.

    Then again, you might be into cash more than exposure.

    Gwen Stefani’s new album debuted at number one with 84,000 units sold, supposedly 90% of them pure sales. So, you’ve got some serious billing there.

    But the official video of “Make Me Love You” has only got 6,413,194 views on YouTube in a month. The audio only video has got another 2,937,596 views. Still, these numbers are paltry compared to those of the acts above, even if they’ve had a longer chart history.

    Maybe “Make Me Like You” is a stiff, maybe being on Spotify wouldn’t help, but by searching for dollars has Stefani hurt her career? After all, the recorded music is a loss leader for the tour, the merch, the sponsorships. And let’s not forget, the revenue for Spotify streams is going up, up, up. Needless to say, Posner, Bieber and Graham will be getting big checks.

    If you’re interested in mass audience, if you’re interested in discovery, you’ve got to be on all the services day and date, especially Spotify.


    Visit the archive: lefsetz.com/wordpress/

    http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz

    If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
    http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1

  • #13726

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    Does Spotify have “Repeat 1”?
    Youtube does not have this. It would be to google’s benefit if they added the feature. I notice people manually hitting the ‘replay’ button, that’s not very friendly.

    It could explain some of the discrepancy in views..

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

  • #13744

    joaopazguitar
    Participant

    I use Spotify a lot – but I also buy a lot of music. Particularly vinyl these days.. CDs also to play in the car and even some mp3 on occasion.

    But the fact is that most musicians complain about how much they’re payed by Spotify. I don’t think I ever read someone saying “ok, I’m being paid (at least) mildly decently”… and while the major acts may see some actual money from Spotify I really feel this may be totally unfair to the newcomer artist.

    Here’s Radiohead’s frontman (whose points of view I respect) on Spotify

    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/15/thom-yorke-spotify-twitter

     

  • #15021

    rorygfan
    Participant
  • #20841

    superblonde
    Keymaster

    Chance the Rapper opens up about his Coloring Book deal with Apple Music

    Chicago MC says he was paid $500,000 for exclusive 2-week streaming window

    BY EDDIE FUON MARCH 17, 2017, 1:10PM

    Chance the Rapper opens up about his Coloring Book deal with Apple Music

    “I never felt the need to correct folks on my relationship with Apple but now that more people have tried to discredit my independence…” Chance stated. “Apple gave me half a mil and a commercial to post Coloring Book exclusively on Apple Music for two weeks. That was the extent of my deal. After two weeks, it was on SoundCloud for free. I needed money and they’re good people over there.”

    Chance also chipped in with some advice for other independent artists, telling them to “just keep at it” and take advantage of “opportunities to work with good people, pick up cash, and keep your integrity.”

    “I think artist can gain a lot from the streaming wars as long as they remain in control of their own product.”

    Even without the explanation, it’s hard for any argument that the Chicago rapper has sold out considering he just donated twice as much as he made from the Apple Music deal to Chicago Public Schools.

    I'm an intermediate student of Metal Method. I play seitannic heavy metal. All Kale Seitan! The glutens will be eaten with relish!
    And on the Seventh Day, Mustaine said: ∇ ⨯ E = - ∂B / ∂t ; and there was Thrash; and it had a ♭3; and it was good.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.