View Full Version : Spotify Offer
twickers
02-01-2015, 22:10
For anyone who hasn't tried Spotify Premium and would like too, there is currently an offer on at just 99p for 3 months subscription.
raygreen
02-01-2015, 23:27
For anyone who hasn't tried Spotify Premium and would like too, there is currently an offer on at just 99p for 3 months subscription.
I guess there will be a sign up with a direct debit payment that will have to be cancelled before the 3 month period ends.
I use the free version at the moment and I am very tempted. I have come across a lot of new music in the past 6 months that I would never have heard otherwise. Opens up a lot of exposure for new bands out there. My only worry would be if I ever stopped paying Spotify would I then lose my whole collection I have built up whilst paying for the premium version?
PaulStewart
03-01-2015, 11:22
Spotify and Pandora rip off songwriters, publishers and performers have a look at THIS (http://www.thewrap.com/sony/atv-ceo-slams-cheap-songwriting-royalties-paid-by-pandora-spotify-totally-unacceptable/) $60.00 per million plays is outrageous, if the songwriters can't eat where is the new music going to come from?
Audio Advent
03-01-2015, 22:22
Discover the music then buy the vinyl.. It's more likely that the ARTIST will remove their music from spotify etc and therefore your "collection" will be deleted.
People listen to far more music and new bands these days it seems whilst back in the heyday of music sales people didn't have such easy access but would buy much of the music they did listen to.
It's still easy to keep up those personal music sale volumes whilst vastly increasing exposure to new music at the same time via streaming. It's just choice. In other words it's only a rip-off if people aren't buying the music off the back of the streaming exposure - it's the public's fault. Or donate money somehow to the artists you appreciate - they'll see probably 3 times as much money if you send them a fiver than if you buy their £15 vinyl .
We're at a transition point and the old music industry is slowing down that transition because it will likely take away their dominance and control. Soon I think we'll see different streaming models or digital delivery methods (like Thom Yorke's recent dable with BitTorrent Bundles) which allow artists to be paid directly and cut-out the money grabbing labels and managment who, lets face it, have been ripping off the artists for decades.
Audio Advent
03-01-2015, 22:33
I know Thom Yorke rejected Spotify for the same reasons about low royalties so it's hard to say how well his last album would have sold had it been available there too... but I just saw this article from yesterday!
http://www.digitaltrends.com/music/thom-yorke-bittorent/
Estimates he made close to $20 million off that album, which didn't get the greatest of reviews, but it was $6 for the album and he keeps 90% of the takings. Now, if those figues don't shake up the industry and make artists realise what a pittence they get from their labels in comparison.. then you'd have to blame the artists themselves for accepting the slavery. Publicity and PR I guess is the hardest bit, but social media is free.
twickers
04-01-2015, 11:36
The Guardian - Spotify vs Musicians;
"Streaming suits catalogue but cannot work as a way of supporting new artists. Spotify and the like either have to address that fact and change the model for new releases or else all new music producers should be bold and vote with their feet. Spotify say they have generated $500 million for "license holders." The way that Spotify works is that the money is divided up by percentage of total streams. Big labels have massive back catalogues, so their forty-year-old record by a dead artist earns them the same slice of the pie as a brand new-track by a new artist.
The big labels did secret deals with Spotify and the like in return for favorable royalty rates. The massive amount of catalogue being streamed guarantees that they get the massive slice of the pie (that $500 million), and the smaller producers and labels get pittance for their comparatively few streams. This is what's wrong. Catalogue and new music cannot be lumped in together. The model massively favors the larger companies with big catalogues."
"The net result is, working on a pure like-for-like basis, the per-play value of a download to an artist is $0.033 compared to $0.005 for streaming. Downloads are thus 5 ½ times more valuable to artists than streams. Of course this is still a disparity but it is much, much less than the 150 to 200 times value that has become common currency.
"The net result is, working on a pure like-for-like basis, the per-play value of a download to an artist is $0.033 compared to $0.005 for streaming. Downloads are thus 5 ½ times more valuable to artists than streams. Of course this is still a disparity but it is much, much less than the 150 to 200 times value that has become common currency.
It is also worth noting that the artist streaming pay out rate ($0.005) is actually 45% of the rights owner pay out rate ($0.0112). So artists are earning nearly the same out of streaming as the labels and publishers."
There are also a couple of quotes of some musicians who consider a different approach. Full article here;
SPOTIFY VS MUSICIANS (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/29/spotify-vs-musicians-streaming-royalties)
destroysall
04-01-2015, 11:45
Discover the music then buy the vinyl..This is what I live by (applies to CDs too). I usually use Spotify to browse over an album, then go out and buy it on CD (or on Vinyl if I love it a lot and it is available on the format). Spotify is a much better alternative to those who downloaded music illegally which in turn paid the artist no money at all.
Chris.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.