Taylor Swift pulls albums from Spotify

[realhifi]

This is a headline that may be a sign of things to come.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/taylor-swift-pulls-her-albums-143900565.html

[mrvco]

Now there is absolutely no chance that I'll ever hear a song by "Taylor Swift".

[Kelly]

Oh man, that must suck for somebody...

[Ned Kelly]

Agreed, but it's all relative. I'd love to see a complete ban on sultry female jazz singers at any show or in any audio review - punishable via public flogging - but apparently that's an extreme POV, as is my desire to have them replaced with melodic death metal bands like Insomnium. Just no accounting for the bizarre musical tastes of audiophiles

[maelob]

totally agree lol, Hey i was just listening to Foo Fighters followed by Enrique Iglesias, Shakira and LA guitar Quartet

[Ned Kelly]

totally agree lol, Hey i was just listening to Foo Fighters followed by Enrique Iglesias, Shakira and LA guitar Quartet

 

10 lashes, and I want you to consider that a warning

[Musicophile]

Guilty as charged for actually quite liking Diana Krall et all.

 

Back to topic: I don't particularly care about Mrs Swift's music, but I think she raises the important question of the appropriate remuneration for artists in today's streaming environment. Actually, somebody of her importance may actually still be making some money with Spotify et al, but a small Baroque ensemble or a local Jazz group certainly won't.

[Jud]

Guilty as charged for actually quite liking Diana Krall et all.

 

Back to topic: I don't particularly care about Mrs Swift's music, but I think she raises the important question of the appropriate remuneration for artists in today's streaming environment. Actually, somebody of her importance may actually still be making some money with Spotify et al, but a small Baroque ensemble or a local Jazz group certainly won't.

 

From an online Atlantic Magazine article: "We’ve known for a while that Spotify’s economics simply don’t work for musicians. In late 2011 and early 2012, cellist Zoe Keating made 97 percent of her income, almost $82,000, from folks buying her music as CDs or MP3s. She made less than $300 from Spotify during that same period."

[realhifi]

From an online Atlantic Magazine article: "We’ve known for a while that Spotify’s economics simply don’t work for musicians. In late 2011 and early 2012, cellist Zoe Keating made 97 percent of her income, almost $82,000, from folks buying her music as CDs or MP3s. She made less than $300 from Spotify during that same period."

 

To quote one of the most famous understatements, "Houston, we have a problem".

[Jimmypowder]

Boo hoo. ! I'm devastated. Lol .

[realhifi]

Boo hoo. ! I'm devastated. Lol .

 

The point is not WHO the artist is, it's that people are paying for a service and suddenly that service is not the same for them.

[firedog]

I don't blame her. The artists and songwriters get only micropayments from the streaming services. The royalties are small anyway, and little gets to the artist.

[mav52]

The point is not WHO the artist is, it's that people are paying for a service and suddenly that service is not the same for them.

 

It could be any artist. The artist and their label control the product, and the payment to the artist by Spotify just didn't satisfy the artist, material pulled. The people are paying for a service, not the right to listen to "A" artist in a large catalog.

[wwaldmanfan]

I don't blame her. The artists and songwriters get only micropayments from the streaming services. The royalties are small anyway, and little gets to the artist.

 

Like J.J. Cale sang, "Money Talks". Don't feel too sorry for her. Taylor Swift is 24 years old. She just bought a $25M apartment in NYC to add to her other homes.

I wonder how sucessful she would have been if she was ugly.

[firedog]

Like J.J. Cale sang, "Money Talks". Don't feel too sorry for her. Taylor Swift is 24 years old. She just bought a $25M apartment in NYC to add to her other homes.

I wonder how sucessful she would have been if she was ugly.

 

What does her apartment have to do with anything? Never said I felt sorry for her. Fortunately for her she controls her music and doesn't have to let people who barely pay her any money make money off of her. Good for her. I'm glad she's rich enough to blow them off.

 

Most of my favorite musicians make lots of money. I'm glad. One of the reasons I buy music instead of streaming or illegally downloading is so the artists I like get paid a decent royalty.

[realhifi]

It could be any artist. The artist and their label control the product, and the payment to the artist by Spotify just didn't satisfy the artist, material pulled. The people are paying for a service, not the right to listen to "A" artist in a large catalog.

 

Except the service they thought they were getting is no longer the same service.

[WINDIANRECORDS]

$.004 a play, that's how much my label makes with tracks on Spotify. That means if 100 people listen to a 12 song lp, the label gets $4.80. There is still a cut from the digital distribution house of 20% (this is the company that has negotiated contracts with the 100s of e-music providers so I just send them files and they go at it), so myself and the band split 50/50 and we each get under $2.

 

I am aware that larger labels have better deals, but those larger labels are doubtfully splitting the profit 50/50 between themselves and the artist, so I don't see it being much better for anyone else ...

 

I rely on getting physical sales first (since we are a vinyl label, that's sort of a requirement) so I only look to the streaming services as secondary income, but after a record of mine that came out in August got lots of play (comparatively), I was just shocked to see how irrelevant it was - 1 person buying the album from iTunes got us twice as much as 100 people listening.

 

Just a little experience on the other side of things, in which its sadly no better ...

[wwaldmanfan]

What does her apartment have to do with anything? Never said I felt sorry for her. Fortunately for her she controls her music and doesn't have to let people who barely pay her any money make money off of her. Good for her. I'm glad she's rich enough to blow them off.

 

Most of my favorite musicians make lots of money. I'm glad. One of the reasons I buy music instead of streaming or illegally downloading is so the artists I like get paid a decent royalty.

 

My point was not directed at you, only that she is already filthy rich, and this just makes her look greedy. Music is an art, a form of self-expression. I don't begrudge any artist a living, but when marketing becomes their prime motivation, to the point of depriving their fans of their work as a ploy to hoard even more wealth, artistic integrity comes into question.

[realhifi]

$.004 a play, that's how much my label makes with tracks on Spotify. That means if 100 people listen to a 12 song lp, the label gets $4.80. There is still a cut from the digital distribution house of 20% (this is the company that has negotiated contracts with the 100s of e-music providers so I just send them files and they go at it), so myself and the band split 50/50 and we each get under $2.

 

I am aware that larger labels have better deals, but those larger labels are doubtfully splitting the profit 50/50 between themselves and the artist, so I don't see it being much better for anyone else ...

 

I rely on getting physical sales first (since we are a vinyl label, that's sort of a requirement) so I only look to the streaming services as secondary income, but after a record of mine that came out in August got lots of play (comparatively), I was just shocked to see how irrelevant it was - 1 person buying the album from iTunes got us twice as much as 100 people listening.

 

Just a little experience on the other side of things, in which its sadly no better ...

 

Curious as to thoughts on difference between say Pandora (which has clear path to purchase when a song comes up) and Spotify which does not appear to have purchase option.

[realhifi]

My point was not directed at you, only that she is already filthy rich, and this just makes her look greedy. Music is an art, a form of self-expression. I don't begrudge any artist a living, but when marketing becomes their prime motivation, to the point of depriving their fans of their work as a ploy to hoard even more wealth, artistic integrity comes into question.

 

 

Possibly she is making a point for those that are struggling to make a living in the music business. Giving her the benefit of the doubt on this that she may be bringing something to the attention of many that things are not quite equitable in the music business as of today.

[WINDIANRECORDS]

Curious as to thoughts on difference between say Pandora (which has clear path to purchase when a song comes up) and Spotify which does not appear to have purchase option.

 

Wow, y'know, to be honest, I never played longer than a few days with either streaming service, so I haven't even viewed Pandora or Spotify as a user in a few years - the music I have in the system doesn't make it far with Pandora so I don't think I've got enough info - does it send you to iTunes when you go to purchase, or does Pandora have some other way of selling you the track?

 

(checking this out now)

[WINDIANRECORDS]

My point was not directed at you, only that she is already filthy rich, and this just makes her look greedy. Music is an art, a form of self-expression. I don't begrudge any artist a living, but when marketing becomes their prime motivation, to the point of depriving their fans of their work as a ploy to hoard even more wealth, artistic integrity comes into question.

 

Haters gonna hate, hate, hate ...

[realhifi]

Haters gonna hate, hate, hate ...

 

LOL! You made my day.

[christopher3393]

Some of Taylor Swift's opus is available for streaming on Tidal, at least as of today.

 

p.s. I am not presently, nor have I ever been, a Swifty.

[wwaldmanfan]

Possibly she is making a point for those that are struggling to make a living in the music business. Giving her the benefit of the doubt on this that she may be bringing something to the attention of many that things are not quite equitable in the music business as of today.

 

Good point, but when were things ever equitable in the music business? What I am seeing is is a paradigm shift away from music sold as physical media, like CD's, towards streaming as the primary form of distribution. All the audio manufacturers are jumping on the bandwagon. This looks like the start a backlash by the artists against that model. I suppose what may happen is that the streaming services will have to pay bigger royalties to the artists, which would be appropriate, like years ago, when record companies were forced to do the same thing.