Digital Streaming
There are plenty of issues with the music industry in the modern era – the usual array of -isms and -phobias, lack of artists owning their own music, and seemingly manufactured charts and awards – but the one issue that I will be focusing on here is streaming. Digital streaming platforms (DSPs) have revolutionised music, allowing for greater availability and wider each among a global audience which is, of course, a fantastic thing as music should be enjoyed by as many people as possible, however it does also have its downsides. Countless artists have already come out in favour of change within the streaming industry, including figures such as Paul McCartney, Kate Bush, and Kano, in an open letter sent to Boris Johnson’s government [5], demanding artists and songwriters be paid more for their work. Despite streaming accounting for well over $1bil being put into the UK economy in 2020 alone[6], artists see a small fraction of the income generated.
Major DSPs
The largest DSPs in the industry are household names (Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, etc.) but recently these names have received flak for their pay-per-stream (PPS) rates. Some platforms have shied away from releasing their PPS rates whilst others have made it public knowledge, even detailing how they offer different ways of paying artists, for example Tidal have an initiative to allocate up to 10% of a HiFi Plus (highest tier) subscriber’s monthly payment to the artist they listened to most in a month.
The up to 10% allocation will be directed to each Hifi Plus subscriber’s most-listened-to artist for the month based on audio track streams. Following the end of every calendar month, we will look back at a subscriber’s most-listened-to artist, and allocate the direct payment to that artist.
TIDAL[7]
In the above chart, we can see that – based on average figures found by website Headphonesty -artists receive vastly different incomes from the various major platforms out there, ranging from over 900,000 streams to generate $1,000 with Deezer down to TIDAL’s 8,333. For many artists, particularly ones trying to break through, these figures just aren’t enough to support them. The emergence of TIDAL is a step in the right direction, managing to pay artists over ten times the amount of the next major competitor in the chart, but some feel like it still isn’t enough, wanting more direct relationships between fan and artist which could offer a clearer connection with a less aggressive middle man.
Artist Friendly DSPs
Bandcamp
Bandcamp has been operating since 2008, back in the days of torrent sites such as Limewire and Kazaa, and two years after Spotify was founded. Co-founder and CEO Ethan Diamond said this of the company’s inspiration in an interview with NPR:
…it just seemed very obvious to me that if you like some music from one of your favourite artists, you should be able to support them directly. And so we built the platform to do that.
Ethan Diamond, Bandcamp CEO[9]
The Oakland-based company offer direct payment services straight to the artists who upload music themselves, this removes the need for a distribution service who will take their time in uploading music to DSPs, as well as paying out to artists quarterly. Bandcamp make it well known that an average of 82% of money generated goes into artists’ pockets, much more compared to other services[10]. In a show of support for their artists, one Friday a month, they waive all fees and allow artists/labels to receive the full amount that listeners are paying.
Resonate
Berlin-based Resonate are all about changing the game to help artists earn revenue fairly. Since launching in 2015, the site has garnered a close community of artists and listeners alike. This community has been fostered via operating the company as a co-operative, meaning for €10 annually anybody can become a member and part owner of the company. Below is an explanation of how their payment model Stream2own functions, straight from the horse’s mouth.
Whilst offering a much more progressive model to support artists and ensure that listeners’ money goes in the direction of who they listen to, Resonate isn’t a mass appeal project. Due to its limited library of artists, the average consumer will be put off as the platform simply doesn’t have those big name popular artists.
In regards to profit share, Resonate are clear on how they operate. First, 30% is taken with 20% going towards a rainy day fund as is procedure for co-operatives and 10% paying interest for owners of shares in the company. Using those remaining profits we find the much more interesting split: 45% for musicians, 35% for listeners, and 20% for workers[12]. This shows a clear vision where a DSP is built around the people who produce content on the platform.
Ampled
Brought to life in 2019, Ampled is streaming’s new kid on the block, a co-operative which has similar tenets to Resonate but many differences when you dig deeper. Ampled doesn’t really operate as a DSP but I found it interesting enough to include. It is more of Patreon-style platform; supporters pay a minimum of $3 monthly to artists who offer content outside of usual album and single releases, this content can come in the form of essays, snippets, vlogs, et cetera. Artists on the platform are given a choice of how much they contribute in membership fees, as explained below.
For artists to become an “Artist-Owner” (member) of the co-operative, they must have 10 supporters on their page and sign an Owner agreement; this prevents just anybody from becoming a member – including listeners – but is still a reasonably low barrier for entry, allowing plenty of artists with small support to become a part of the co-op’s community. Artists are also paid monthly, in line with many other platforms[13b].
Thoughts
In my opinion, mainstream DSPs simply don’t do enough to support the very people who create the content that their platform is based upon. Without the artists creating content, the platforms wouldn’t even exist, I would say it’s only right that these creators are paid fairly for their labour, particularly smaller artists who don’t find themselves blessed by algorithms and placed on playlists. Of the big names, TIDAL is leading the charge, however most money is still in the hands of the higher-ups, and so there is progress yet to be made – likely the case for the foreseeable future now.
However in pockets of the Internet, we see flashes of light, communities springing up around this core idea of supporting artists directly, with fairness. These communities are hugely important in the spaces they provide and the opportunities they create for artists and listeners alike, and so they should be protected and supported where possible; personally, I feel myself much more inclined to use Bandcamp as a platform to discover music and get involved in a musical community. But that is just my example, one single case, as these communities grow I believe we will see a shift towards artists and away from the suits, in terms of where the profits end up. More and more artists are vocal about the downsides of major DSPs and it’s only a matter of time before they garner enough public support and enough momentum to force the hands of the people at the top.
Personal Release
In regards to my final project, I considered the decision to release it only on Bandcamp. I never planned for a full release on major DSPs as I don’t have the money to justify sending £30 in the direction of a distributor only to make a few pennies back, and while it may be a good exercise for potentially going down that route in the future, at this stage it isn’t justifiable. I also considered contacting some smaller DSPs to help promote my own track as I release it on their platforms, I never would expect a response but in the end this isn’t even the path I have opted to go down. I’m not enamoured with what I’ve created and I don’t feel as though it is the best work to be releasing onto DSPs, even smaller ones such as Resonate. It is also a fair bit of work that would take some time to manage successfully – frankly I’m not prepared to put in this time and effort into something with minimal return. I have a lot of other work to catch up on and complete therefore I have chosen to prioritise every other thing as they are either more important to the project or offer higher returns.
The reason I was looking to release the single onto Bandcamp was to dip my toe in the water, experiencing what it’s like to release music of my own creation into the aether, knowing people would hear it and were free to like, critique, or hate it in whatever fashion suits them.
What I have decided now is that I will not be releasing this as a single in any capacity. Like I mentioned before, I’m not particularly pleased with my work in regards to it being a recorded track. It is experiential. The way it is formatted and the way it is performed is key to its success, taking that away and releasing it without the performance aspect makes it a mediocre song at best. I believe that this is performance art and the only way to consume such art is through consuming the visuals as well as the audio. It would be a disservice to the piece if I was to release it without the best part, and without that visual component it isn’t a piece of work I am proud of creating and putting out into the world.