Thought Provoking Article: "The coming implosion of the record business…"

[The Computer Audiophile]

I'm struggling to get through this article. I got to this one and couldn't go on. 

 

 

"The average income of a musician in the UK pre-COVID was about 20,000 pounds a year (about $27,500 USD). Now, according to PRS, that figure is about 8,000–10,000 pounds a year. Without government help, many musicians cannot survive without working outside of music."

 

I'm all for people making a living at doing whatever it is they want to do, but at some point people need to get another job if what they want to do doesn't pay the bills. Nobody is entitled to make a dime doing what they love. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, PeterG said:

 

 

The other thing that the article overlooks here is that musicians' plummeting incomes during covid are primarily driven by the dearth of live performance opportunities.  This is not a streaming issue

 

Absolutely. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

12 minutes ago, PeterG said:

 

Sam--here's a service you'd like!  Deezer splits each person's subscription fees into artists.  So an old guy who listens less often than his kids sends his artists more $/stream.

 

https://www.deezer.com/us/ucps

I don't think Deezer actually does this. The company wants to. Do you know if they've implemented this yet?

[The Computer Audiophile]

By the way, I love the payment model Deezer proposes. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Home entertainment has boomed during the pandemic. It logically follows that more music listening is being done. Shouldn't artist streaming revenue increase as well? Is that guy showing the artist income being down as a "look over here" move, when actually streaming should be paying more during the pandemic?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, DuckToller said:

how so with flat rates ? that would mean that the top earners would lose money ?

There are no such things as flat rates. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

The home entertainment boom should equate to more subscribers. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, DuckToller said:

a subscription service is not limited to 2h a day, in turn you can use it 24/7 the whole month. Your pice is fix for all you can eat. In Europe this is called flatrate.

Ah, I was looking at it as a flat rate per song paid to artists. Got ya Tom.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, PeterG said:

 

Ooo--good question.  I assumed they did when I posted, but upon further checking I see they do not.  From their community page pasted below, I see that they are waiting for the record labels to approve.  I suppose we all expect this to be a long wait, for reasons discussed above, especially for a service with only 16MM subscribers

 

• Jaime. 
• Community Manager
• 2245 replies
• 4 months ago
• ANSWER

Hi @fasdork Deezer has everything needed to launch a UCPS pilot roll out but we need all the labels to approve it in order to proceed. We continue to provide labels with all the information necessary for their analysis and are working hard to get consensus so that UCPS can be implemented as soon as possible.
Thanks 

 

 

I really wish they'd do this. It would at least make me feel better that my money only went to artists who's music I played. 

 

I wonder if the labels will use Deezer as a test platform for this. That 16MM subs may actually be beneficial in this case. There's no way Spotify will be the guinea pig. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

Bandcamp has a better model, but the talent?  A very small fraction is good, most most is meh.

I love the model but the general public has spoken. It wants streaming. It’s willing to pay for streaming. It isn’t willing to pay much for it and it isn’t willing to purchase any more. Kind of a bummer. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, hopkins said:

One thing that is not covered in the article, but that I find very important, is the loss of all the "non musical" information on streaming services: credits, dates, venues, recording equipment, liner notes, album art (not just the cover)... 

 

This information is rarely given on streaming services. This is a shame for us listeners as it greatly impoverishes the "Listening experience". 

 

It is also problematic for royalty payments that credits are missing or inexact. I read somewhere that it is estimated that 25% of payments are not made to the right artists.

 

There is a new standard being implemented for metadata management in the recording industry, but that will only cover new recordings, and obviously does not cover things such as liner notes. 

 

 

I love when Qobuz includes liner notes. 
 

I’ve never had a physical release show “dates, venues, recording equipment.” Are you suggesting streaming services don’t have this and some other thing does?

 

I don’t think liner notes do anything for royalty payments. Nobody is scanning though each album looking for people to pay. It’s all done behind the scenes. 
 

I’d love a new standard with tons of info. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Not many artists want the hassle of handling everything that come with running a business. If they can outsource much of it, and focus on being an artist, many of them opt for this route.