Do we (independent artists) need a fairer new music streaming service?

[brendaningram]

What if we (independent artists) could direct publish our music to a streaming service that offered:

• 100% of profits paid to artists
• $0 for artists to upload music
• No investors - artists are the investors and investment
• No ads
• Cross platform app for listeners to enjoy our music

If you are an artist, does that sound like a business/service that respects you enough that you would upload your music?

I’ve put together a more comprehensive Q&A on the website: https://tunefreq.com

My hope is that this starts a conversation that leads us toward a better platform for artists. I don’t want to get rich, I want to be of service. If the community wants a fairer (for artists) music streaming service, and it works for listeners too, then I’ll build it.

What do you think?

Thanks
Brendan

[Bombadil]

Interesting. Can we choose our own bitrate, and can we hotlink to forums and such?

[brendaningram]

Interesting. Can we choose our own bitrate, and can we hotlink to forums and such?

Thanks

The preference would be that music is uploaded at 48/24, and the default setting in the app would be to play back at native 48/24, with options in the listener app to play back at reduced bit rates (e.g. 192 or 320 MP3) if the listener wanted to save data on their device.

The current design is that if music is uploaded at 48/24 FLAC (as 1 example), the server backend creates various versions off that (e.g. 44/16 FLAC, 320 MP3, 192 MP3) and those files are then able to be played directly in the app depending on the listeners settings.

Re the forum links. Artists have a dedicated page (e.g. tunefreq.com/artist/bombadil) and the idea at the moment is that external links can be put in there (e.g. to social sites, merch sites, etc) so I imagine linking out to forums would be fine. So I understand properly, is there a particular benefit you had in mind with forum links, as opposed to external links more generally?

[Bombadil]

Just thinking of a place to park some music for people to listen, at least at the beginning.
Soundcloud is never going to be my thing.

[Frantz]

I would also like streaming services to be friendly to indie artists but you won't have any listeners if the service consists of just indie artists. Listeners will only subscribe (pay for) to services that include big artists whose catalogs are controlled by Universal/Sony/Warner. Universal et al. are not going to put their catalogs on an indie friendly service when they can be on platform tilted in their favor. The whole thing is unfortunately a non-starter.

[brendaningram]

I would also like streaming services to be friendly to indie artists but...

Featuring big artists that are signed to the major labels is not a part of the plan.

This is a service uniquely for independent artists, of whom there are millions.

As an artist, I feel hesitant in publishing my music to Spotify et al, because they don't respect indie artists. If there was a more respectful platform for me to publish my music on, I would feel better about publishing it there. I know it's sentimental, but if an artist feels good about using a service, then many more artists will also feel the same. Over time that adds up to a substantial catalogue of music for listeners to enjoy.

As a listener, I don't like using Spotify or Apple Music because it's hard to find the music I like - music that's created by smaller indie artists. If there was an app that exclusively featured indie artists for me to listen to, I would use that instead.

Here in Australia there used to be a show on the radio station TripleJ called "Triple J Unearthed". They featured exclusively indie artists, and it was a gold mine for the ears. Unearthed still exists, but is a ghost of its former self because TripleJ moved toward mainstream artists.

[Frantz]

Your site says, "Unlimited tier: $10USD per month (listen to all music)." Compare this to Spotify which charges $10.99USD per month.

I am afraid no one is going to fork over $10 per month to listen to a bunch of unknown artists when Spotify is offering pretty much every artist (major and indie) under the sun for the same price.

I am also uncomfortable with Spotify's policies but I'm afraid you need more than kumbaya and good feelings to sustain a business.

[brendaningram]

Your site says, "Unlimited tier: $10USD per month (listen to all music)." Compare this to Spotify which charges $10.99USD per month.

I am afraid no one is going to fork over $10 per month to listen to a bunch of unknown artists when Spotify is offering pretty much every artist (major and indie) under the sun for the same price.

I am also uncomfortable with Spotify's policies but I'm afraid you need more than kumbaya and good feelings to sustain a business.

Yes $10 per month is the price once the platform is established, and I agree in the short term does not represent value to a listener.

At launch, and until the service has established trust and a valuable catalogue of music, that monthly price will be much reduced.

The current plan is to offer $4 per month launch pricing, grandfathered. So anyone that signs up in the launch period will have that price for life, regardless of any future increases.

[ghettosynth]

I don't even pay $10.99 for Spotify. Ok, yes I do, but, that includes the ad-supported Hulu. I think that Bandcamp is on its way out. What do they do right? What do they get wrong? Like Bombadil, I don't have anything on the big streaming services. I just don't care, that's not why I make music.

Mostly posting to keep an eye on this. I think that it's a tough problem to solve though.

[brendaningram]

I don't even pay $10.99 for Spotify. Ok, yes I do, but, that includes the ad-supported Hulu. I think that Bandcamp is on its way out. What do they do right? What do they get wrong? Like Bombadil, I don't have anything on the big streaming services. I just don't care, that's not why I make music.

Mostly posting to keep an eye on this. I think that it's a tough problem to solve though.

Yep, it is a tough problem! There's always a chance of it failing I guess, but I think it's a worthwhile endeavour to try and build something that is more fair for artists.

I think the concern people have with Bandcamp at the moment is that it seems to be changing ownership into venture capital / investor hands, which perhaps some people are worried will mean a worse experience for artists?

What are the reasons that you make music? Is the end result of publishing it somewhere important for you, or do you simply enjoy the journey of creating it?

[Frantz]

I think many of us would be very reluctant to subscribe to yet another service. I couldn't drop my Spotify subscription and replace it with your service because it would be missing major artists.

I think you should somehow try to replace Bandcamp as the premiere indie platform now that it is on shaky ground. No subscriptions, instead you can stream any album or song you like up to 3 times for free. After 3 streams, it asks you to buy the song or album and the proceeds go mostly to the artist. After buying it, you can download the music or just continue streaming it.

Good luck with this.

[brendaningram]

I think many of us would be very reluctant to subscribe to yet another service. I couldn't drop my Spotify subscription and replace it with your service because it would be missing major artists.

I think you should somehow try to replace Bandcamp as the premiere indie platform now that it is on shaky ground. No subscriptions, instead you can stream any album or song you like up to 3 times for free. After 3 streams, it asks you to buy the song or album and the proceeds go mostly to the artist. After buying it, you can download the music or just continue streaming it.

Good luck with this.

That's good feedback and a good suggestion (to replace Bandcamp), thanks.

I understand that many listeners won't be able or willing to replace Spotify or subscribe to an additional service because of their reliance on access to the major artists and because of cost of living challenges. I hope that over time because TuneFreq is a platform that respects the artist, that some of the major artists (for example those that have reclaimed ownership of their music from the labels) will choose to publish on TuneFreq, and that will lead to a general consensus that there is a better option, and thus artists will flock to it, large and small.

Ultimately the goal is to provide a more fair and personal service to artists, something that helps make the entire artistic industry more sustainable. Because without artists, there is no streaming industry, there is no listener enjoyment, and that's just not good for anybody!

[funky lime]

It seems like the artists who release all their tracks for free are bound to get more streams than those who limit their catalog to paid subscribers. In fact, as an artist on this platform, why would someone even bother to choose to paywall their songs? They'd be lowering their stream count and their exposure, under the promise of some kind of trickle-down effect (i.e. 'build value for our company and subsidize The Indie Community by paywalling your songs and pushing yet another new subscription service onto your fans, and we pinky promise it will be worth your while someday'). It's a hard ask, especially as it's not a direct replacement for Spotify or whatever, but rather, another monthly bill to add to the pile.

It feels like this model potentially encourages a cutthroat mentality; the more popular another artist gets, the less money my streams are worth. The more another artist games the system, the more I get left in the dust if I don't. So it's still just more of the same Spotify-esque crap, shouting over each other to hopefully get heard, and then occasionally getting a check for $0.37, except this check also comes with hugs and high fives.

It's a nice thought and all, but I'm already trying to wear the hats of composer/arranger/performer/producer/promoter, and now you want me to sell your subscription service to people for you, on top of that?

[Frantz]

In fact, as an artist on this platform, why would someone even bother to choose to paywall their songs?

I'm not the OP but I am going to guess you would only get paid for paywalled songs. You would probably want your singles out there for free for maximum exposure and a good number of album tracks paywalled.

[i need Help]

I want a service that'll somehow prevent and protect my works from being vacuumed up by some AI company to train their push-button music generating algorithms and turn the years of blood, sweat, and tears I’ve put into all this into a few datapoints to spit out a song on 20 seconds.

If this service offers that, take all my money.