There are tons of articles about music streaming sites like Pandora, Spotify, etc in relation to recording artists making money or not. Here’s a screen capture of my quarterly royalty statement. 14,227 performances of music (almost every track 100% owned by me) generated $4.20. Notice one performance of “Ceremonies” or “Distant Lands” streaming radio show like Hearts of Space that brings in 26 cents for the full writer’s share compared to 2,088 performances of “Gypsy Rain” on Spotify that brought in a total of 60 cents.
Really sad: I’m a Grammy Nominated Artist. Want to See My Royalty Statements?
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 582 posts since 23 Dec, 2002
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permali ... statements
-
- KVRAF
- 3187 posts since 31 Dec, 2004 from People's Republic of Minnesota
I kind of thought that writing your own music was its own reward. If you want to make serious money you're probably better off going into petroleum engineering.
-Sam
-Sam
-
- KVRAF
- 4881 posts since 4 Aug, 2006 from Helsinki
Hmmm... As some commentators stated, this kind of stories are not very uplifting, but sadly true. Gone are the days when there were every year several millionaires generated only by one 45`s single hit.
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38044 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
+1...but let us not forget our passions are not the same...there is nothing wrong with your passion being that of making a living from your passion. (In this case making music). While some people do get their reward from simply writing music that allows them to express themselves it's not out of line for your passion to be more...it's not wrong to shoot for the stars, it's not wrong to have a dream and dream big. Just like it's not wrong to spend your life in your own studio writing music for your own pleasure.masterhiggins wrote:I kind of thought that writing your own music was its own reward. If you want to make serious money you're probably better off going into petroleum engineering.
-Sam
I'm sorry for the OP having such a rough go, I can offer you these words...this hangs on my wall (though I admit it's one the bathroom wall which one should read anything into
) and on my mother's wall (kitchen wall)..we both got them from the same place...my late sister's house after she passed away. These words were 100% true for her, unfortunately cancer won.Best wishes urlwolf and may all your hard work reap the rewards you desireAnything you vividly imagine,
anything you sincerely believe in,
ardently desire, enthusiastically act upon,
will inevitably come to pass-Gary Leffew
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRian
- 1222 posts since 2 Dec, 2008 from Finland
From the consumer/listener point of view ..
A thing is that streaming is becoming more and more common way of getting music and listening to it -- people aren't buying mp3s. Apple and Google are entering (or are they in it already?) to the streaming biz.
Some people on these forums (germans mostly?) have complained about having Internet-connections with bandwidth quotas; that is, after a while of downloading and streaming and whatnot, they either need to pay more for their connections or stick to slower connections.
It's not common here where I live, but I understand some places are taking that direction. What it means in the context of music (that people consume everywhere, any time of the day) is that people need to pay for access to the streaming service and after a while they need to pay their ISPs more to use those services conveniently.
As far as I can see, the only thing that can lead to is the streaming services offer their services for cheaper (so that people don't consider them expensive compared to their Internet bills) and that ISPs will charge more, without caring what the bandwidth is used for. Both of these will lead to the artist getting less compensation for putting their music out there.
Except for the Internet service providers, everyone loses.
Somewhere in the comments, someone asks the Grammy-nominee "Armen, what about sales from digital music files? Did they amount to much?"
And the answer is: "Selling digital music files pays much higher and amounts to much more. Compare selling 10 files to streaming 10,000 performances. Now that starts a whole new discussion about “why should someone buy music when they can hear it for free?”, right?"
To me it seems independent sales is the only way to get any sort of compensation, assuming that the listener/consumer is actually willing to own the music as digital copies and that the transaction is made easy for the buyer. (Regarding why buy music, I'd say for the same reasons as always; it's nice to 'have' the music you like for your own enjoyment any hour of the day without paying for it each time in some manner.)
I listen to reggae music, that's my thing. There's atleast one shop that has what I think is a very good business model, it's called http://www.reggaemusicstore.com/ It's a general music store, run by a long time UK reggae character called Jah Warrior. Now, over at the site it's possible to buy downloads too, and individual songs are at 0.99£ a piece. For the buyer, it's much cheaper than going with the regular media of vinyls, but still much more for the artist than selling the same music through various digital stores -- or offering them for streaming (I have no idea however what kind of share the company takes, but they do sell their own productions as well, so it's more for them, at least). They also sell 'dubplates' which are different mixes of songs that have been released elsewhere, and they sell for 4.99£ each (remembering one pound is more than a dollar or an euro). That's actually quite a good money for an individual song, isn't it? That depends obviously on that there are people who want different mixes of songs they know and that's a reggae peculiarity. In the end they might not sell much, but they still get better compensation for the little that they do sell.
Yea, that's what I think about this. TL;DR: selling individual files is the way to go, both for the artiste and the listener. Also, out of my large-ish hat, if one can add any sort of additional 'experience' for the buyer, I think they'll be more likely to sell more.
A thing is that streaming is becoming more and more common way of getting music and listening to it -- people aren't buying mp3s. Apple and Google are entering (or are they in it already?) to the streaming biz.
Some people on these forums (germans mostly?) have complained about having Internet-connections with bandwidth quotas; that is, after a while of downloading and streaming and whatnot, they either need to pay more for their connections or stick to slower connections.
It's not common here where I live, but I understand some places are taking that direction. What it means in the context of music (that people consume everywhere, any time of the day) is that people need to pay for access to the streaming service and after a while they need to pay their ISPs more to use those services conveniently.
As far as I can see, the only thing that can lead to is the streaming services offer their services for cheaper (so that people don't consider them expensive compared to their Internet bills) and that ISPs will charge more, without caring what the bandwidth is used for. Both of these will lead to the artist getting less compensation for putting their music out there.
Except for the Internet service providers, everyone loses.
Somewhere in the comments, someone asks the Grammy-nominee "Armen, what about sales from digital music files? Did they amount to much?"
And the answer is: "Selling digital music files pays much higher and amounts to much more. Compare selling 10 files to streaming 10,000 performances. Now that starts a whole new discussion about “why should someone buy music when they can hear it for free?”, right?"
To me it seems independent sales is the only way to get any sort of compensation, assuming that the listener/consumer is actually willing to own the music as digital copies and that the transaction is made easy for the buyer. (Regarding why buy music, I'd say for the same reasons as always; it's nice to 'have' the music you like for your own enjoyment any hour of the day without paying for it each time in some manner.)
I listen to reggae music, that's my thing. There's atleast one shop that has what I think is a very good business model, it's called http://www.reggaemusicstore.com/ It's a general music store, run by a long time UK reggae character called Jah Warrior. Now, over at the site it's possible to buy downloads too, and individual songs are at 0.99£ a piece. For the buyer, it's much cheaper than going with the regular media of vinyls, but still much more for the artist than selling the same music through various digital stores -- or offering them for streaming (I have no idea however what kind of share the company takes, but they do sell their own productions as well, so it's more for them, at least). They also sell 'dubplates' which are different mixes of songs that have been released elsewhere, and they sell for 4.99£ each (remembering one pound is more than a dollar or an euro). That's actually quite a good money for an individual song, isn't it? That depends obviously on that there are people who want different mixes of songs they know and that's a reggae peculiarity. In the end they might not sell much, but they still get better compensation for the little that they do sell.
Yea, that's what I think about this. TL;DR: selling individual files is the way to go, both for the artiste and the listener. Also, out of my large-ish hat, if one can add any sort of additional 'experience' for the buyer, I think they'll be more likely to sell more.
Last edited by ras.s on Sat May 10, 2014 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 3944 posts since 7 May, 2004 from behind his workbench
I know why i stopped making music for money. It makes me fu***** sad... 
-
- KVRAF
- 25852 posts since 20 Jan, 2008 from a star near where you are
Was there ever such days?Harry_HH wrote:Gone are the days when there were every year several millionaires generated only by one 45`s single hit.
I really don't like Spotify, it takes the fun out of collecting records. Seeing the low return for example the "grammy nominee" gets from Spotify, hopefully they'll pull their stuff.
This guy hasn't released much records though, no albums or singles, his Discogs profile only shows tracks on compilations:
http://www.discogs.com/artist/27854-Armen-Chakmakian
But I guess he could pull in some dough being a member of Shadowfax
-
- KVRAF
- 4881 posts since 4 Aug, 2006 from Helsinki
You know anything about popular music (near) history?Numanoid wrote:Was there ever such days?Harry_HH wrote:Gone are the days when there were every year several millionaires generated only by one 45`s single hit.
Even in jazz genre, e.g. Herbie Hancocks "Watermelon Man" (1962) made him a rich man, although a very young man in that time, he was wise enough to demand publishing rights under his own name.
-
- KVRAF
- 5691 posts since 24 May, 2004 from []1
I had a song on an album that was released in the U.S. and the only royalties I ever saw from it were generated by radio play in foreign countries.
Last edited by Musical Gym on Sat May 10, 2014 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 25852 posts since 20 Jan, 2008 from a star near where you are
Do you?Harry_HH wrote:You know anything about popular music (near) history?
Where do you get your numbers from, I would like to see those for myself in case.
-
thecontrolcentre thecontrolcentre https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=76240 - KVRAF
- 35171 posts since 27 Jul, 2005 from the wilds of wanny
Thats a great quote ...Hink wrote:BestAnything you vividly imagine,
anything you sincerely believe in,
ardently desire, enthusiastically act upon,
will inevitably come to pass-Gary Leffew
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38044 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
yes, I like it too...thecontrolcentre wrote:Thats a great quote ...Hink wrote:BestAnything you vividly imagine,
anything you sincerely believe in,
ardently desire, enthusiastically act upon,
will inevitably come to pass-Gary Leffew
btw just for the record I dont stream music often (I do stream tv and movies all the time), I buy MP3's though from Amazon or I'll buy the CD. I suppose I should stream more though, it would likely expose me to more music but I would rather skip songs I do not want to listen to
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRAF
- 2141 posts since 20 Sep, 2013 from Poland
I also know why I stopped making music for money, but it makes me happy. Happy that I made the right decision and stuck to it.sonicfire wrote:I know why i stopped making music for money. It makes me fu***** sad...
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38044 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
I know why I dont make music for money too...I would surely question anyone who would pay me to play for them
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
