Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

stevebenjamins.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 288 posts

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#271

Post by SergeAx »

dragonwriter wrote: post #268
SergeAx wrote: post #267

> Albums are big statements. Some of the most iconic releases in popular music have been albums. On the contrary, most of the greatest contemporary hits was singles. I can't remember really bold and moving statements in the form of albums, except maybe "The Wall". Classic composers never wrote albums,their large forms were symfonies and opera - whole pieces of separate parts. Albums was invented by vinyl/CD music ind…

> Classic composers never wrote albums,their large forms were symfonies and opera - whole pieces of separate parts. Albums, in the idealized form (there are, of course, lots that are collections of basically disconnected singles, too) are “whole pieces of separate parts”, like symphonies or operas (or, I suppose, soundtracks.) People who lament losing albums aren't talking about package-of-convenience collections of…

The Planets is a later piece (beginning of XX) and may be inspired by sheet music industry, which worked the same way and has same limitations - it was too expensive to manufacture and distribute "singles". I beleive the term "album" itself was inherited from there.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#272

Post by dcbadacd »

tbodt wrote: post #223
dcbadacd wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do have schizophrenic A/B testing though. Just recently they started playing the exact same ads but sometimes they have a few syllables messed up. I think I now have first-hand experience in being gaslit, it really makes you doubt your sanity if you heard the "same" ad but "wrong".

That could be advertisers doing schizophrenic A/B testing rather than Spotify.

They're "Spotify premium" ads though.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#273

Post by tomerv »

rorykoehler wrote: post #206
hammock wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great point. And speaking from insider knowledge, I can tell you that there are consultants you can pay anywhere from a little bit up to thousands per month who will get you tested/placed on different editorial playlists. The more you can get on, and the longer you can stay on them (there is no guarantee of staying on, they only keep you on if you gain traction), the more success you will have.

Tom Misch used those for sure. I was only talking about it with my wife the other day. Lost in Paris seems to play evry time I open Spotify. I wish you could blacklist songs on Spotify.

I'm pretty sure that Spotify has this button. It depends on the interface you're using, but it generally looks like a "no entrance" road sign. I used it a few times, and I didn't hear the song again.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#274

Post by mattmcknight »

rewgs wrote: post #265
mattmcknight wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a radio play gets $0.12 and goes out to 10,000 listeners. Amazon Music Unlimited pays $0.012 per stream, or $120 for 10,000 listeners. Spotify pays $0.00318 per stream, or $31.80 per 10,000 listeners. Maybe radio does haven't that many listeners? But by my math, if your radio play goes out more than 265 people, you are getting less per listen than on Spotify. The real loss is the $15 10 track CD, which someone wou…

Terrestrial radio isn’t paying based on the number of listeners. The radio station is paying for a license to broadcast the music (so that people listen to the ads in between, just like TV), a portion of which goes to the songwriter(s), and the publisher(s), and so on. Audience size has nothing to do with it. Embedded in what you’re saying is the expectation that radio plays/streams/etc are primarily for “exposure.”…

"Terrestrial radio isn’t paying based on the number of listeners." I know this. However, you are acting like a terrestrial broadcast to n listeners is equivalent to a Spotify non-broadcast to one listener. If n > 265 you are making more money with Spotify per person listening to the song. If 10,000 people are listening to it on a radio broadcast, you are getting $0.12. If 10,000 people listen on Spotify, you are getting $31.80. Even Spotify pays better than radio, in most scenarios. $0.12 per stream is not a viable model for music.

The better argument you make is that Spotify shouldn't be compared to radio, because it is "on demand". It is more like a CD purchase. There is some truth to this, and it should probably fall in the middle pricewise (and it does) it's just a matter of which direction it should move. It shouldn't cost as much as CD, because you have to keep paying every month for access and have no resale option. You don't own it, you're just renting for 4 minutes. I did a lot of CD trading- spent way too much time and money in used CD stores which paid the artists nothing, but meant you could a least capture some residual value from a CD you purchased.

Having streaming access has really changed my music listening patterns. I hardly ever listen to an album on repeat. There's so much more to listen to, but I listen to each thing less. Patterns of consumption may have changed for others as well.

I don't know how to best try to get more money. You still have some artists selling directly, not putting all material on Spotify, only putting it on the higher paying places, putting it on well after release, treating it as a sample shop.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#275

Post by aerospace_guy »

heed wrote: post #144
aerospace_guy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it’s an option in settings. I always thought it was just to make your listening activity private from your followers, but maybe it does more.

It used to only hide your activity but now apparently anything you play in a private session won’t influence recommendation features: https://support.spotify.com/us/using_spotify/features/how-to...

Thanks! I wish they’d say ‘will not’ rather than ‘may not’. Good to know they’ve thought about it though!

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#276

Post by deeblering4 »

chimpansteve wrote: post #197
deminature wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal, but Spotify's Discover Weekly feature has ridiculously good recommendations for me and I usually end up adding half of each week's playlist to my library. The recommended music is fantastic, obscure stuff I would never have known about otherwise. My experience with Spotify recommendations couldn't be more different to yours.

I'll absolutely agree with this. The Discover Weekly playlist seems to know my musical preferences better than I do myself, and i'm certainly not sticking to just a couple of specific genres that I listen to

I enjoyed Discover Weekly at first but over time got sick of only hearing suggestions from inside my own “bubble”. I’ve switched to human curated radio and the variety is so much better. haven’t looked back.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#277

Post by rewgs »

mattmcknight wrote: post #274
rewgs wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrestrial radio isn’t paying based on the number of listeners. The radio station is paying for a license to broadcast the music (so that people listen to the ads in between, just like TV), a portion of which goes to the songwriter(s), and the publisher(s), and so on. Audience size has nothing to do with it. Embedded in what you’re saying is the expectation that radio plays/streams/etc are primarily for “exposure.”…

"Terrestrial radio isn’t paying based on the number of listeners." I know this. However, you are acting like a terrestrial broadcast to n listeners is equivalent to a Spotify non-broadcast to one listener. If n > 265 you are making more money with Spotify per person listening to the song. If 10,000 people are listening to it on a radio broadcast, you are getting $0.12. If 10,000 people listen on Spotify, you are gett…

Try reading your first paragraph again. You’re contradicting yourself and are completely missing the point.

You say that you “know” that terrestrial broadcast isn’t based on the number of listeners, and then go and make the same argument that Spotify pays better than radio based on “radio plays with n listeners.”

> You are acting like a terrestrial broadcast to n listeners is equivalent to a Spotify non-broadcast to one listener.

Yes, I am, exactly! Please tell me you understand the difference between 10,000 people individually seeking out a song on Spotify vs a radio broadcasting a song one time to n people (and sure, n can equal 10,000).

I like how you say “$0.12 per stream is not a viable model for music” while somehow pushing that $0.00318 per stream is. You’re right, though —- $0.12 per stream isn’t a viable model for music without the album sales those streams used to lead to. Spotify, if it’s to replace both radio and CD sales, needs to pay at least comparably to both. I’d say $1 per stream with a small bonus on top if someone listens to an album from start to finish all the way through would be a decent model.

Your last paragraph betrays your ignorance of the subject. The situation in which an artist voluntarily choose to not put their music on Spotify is so rare I’m not sure it’s even statistically significant. A more common reason is due to the publisher refusing for some sort of money reason, but those situations are eroding all the time. Spotify is the de facto king.

And it’s not like “some artists sell directly.” Everyone does! They do so because they have to recoup the utterly disastrous rates paid by Spotify somehow. So yes, by all means pay for music directly. But it’s not a better product than Spotify, because both allow the listener the same experiencing of “owning the album” (due to the benefit of “on-demand access”), so direct music purchases are just a “nice to have,” nothing a musician can actually depend upon. In other words: who cares about the edge cases when the majority use case is so shit and is actively pushing edge cases even closer and closer to the edge. Direct music sales are not a remedy to Spotify’s abhorrent per-stream rate and overall effect on the music selling landscape. Only one thing is: negotiating better per-stream rates. Period.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#278

Post by rorykoehler »

tomerv wrote: post #273
rorykoehler wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tom Misch used those for sure. I was only talking about it with my wife the other day. Lost in Paris seems to play evry time I open Spotify. I wish you could blacklist songs on Spotify.

I'm pretty sure that Spotify has this button. It depends on the interface you're using, but it generally looks like a "no entrance" road sign. I used it a few times, and I didn't hear the song again.

I only have a heart button. MacOS

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#279

Post by fao_ »

sameerds wrote: post #269
fao_ wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which someone would have to listen to 471 times to reach Spotify pricing. You might have misphrased, but in the event you didn't: How does listening to a CD generate revenue?

I think the comparison goes somewhat like this: selling one CD puts X dollars in the creator's pocket. How many times need a track be played on Spotify to generate the same number of dollars? The answer is 471, I think.

Right, but the way it was phrased was that it was the CD that was being listened to. I was curious.

Re: Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

#280

Post by bjustin »

mattmcknight wrote: post #252
rewgs wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but an indie artist is nearly always the songwriter and publisher (no one else owns the publishing rights, hence “independent”). So it’s a fair comparison, and unfortunately, all else being equal, streaming woefully underperforms to radio to the point of tears.

So a radio play gets $0.12 and goes out to 10,000 listeners. Amazon Music Unlimited pays $0.012 per stream, or $120 for 10,000 listeners. Spotify pays $0.00318 per stream, or $31.80 per 10,000 listeners. Maybe radio does haven't that many listeners? But by my math, if your radio play goes out more than 265 people, you are getting less per listen than on Spotify. The real loss is the $15 10 track CD, which someone wou…

Amazon paying over 1 cent per stream is wild. $0.012 per stream is 666 streams at $8/month. (Now that I look at the numbers, I shouldn't have needed a calculator for that...)

No wonder some musicians complain loudly about Spotify's rate.

Post reply on HN