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

Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

ifpi.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 192 posts

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#171

Post by mikepurvis »

CharlesW wrote: post #66
mikepurvis wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tessa Violet is example of an artist who has blown up on TikTok and I believe has parlay that into real world success in terms of shows, merch, etc. First 2 Eleven is a YouTube cover band who I believe are still fully independent and On the streaming side, musicians like Danielle Allard are killing it, though sometimes in a scenario like this it's unclear if it's even the goal of the person to "go mainstream" vs just…

> Tessa Violet is example of an artist who has blown up on TikTok and I believe has parlay that into real world success in terms of shows, merch, etc. I've not heard of the others, but Tessa is on a label, T∆G Music, which has a global distribution deal with a subsidiary of Sony. She launched her career on the Make Music label as well.

I stand corrected!

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#172

Post by 0xf8 »

circlefavshape wrote: post #160
tsimionescu wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both can be true. The question wasn't if every artist can make it - it's not like small artists get rich off record labels. The question was whether any artist can become a massive success without a record label. 10 years ago this didn't even make sense to ask. Today, I can almost believe it.

10 years ago Macklemore did exactly that. I'm not aware of anyone repeating the feat since

Russ

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#173

Post by ProAm »

fullshark wrote: post #32
ProAm wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like every artist throughout history has?

By getting paid for it?

Most artist throughout history do not get paid much if anything. I think that is why it's art. Try as they will they still wont get paid.

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#174

Post by mtalantikite »

bryans wrote: post #134
mtalantikite wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, did they book their own tour? What sort of rooms are they playing? And who is dealing with their music publishing? All of my close musician friends generally have teams that deal with those sorts of things, but not necessarily from their label (although the more famous ones playing large rooms/stadiums definitely go through their labels).

They handle everything themselves. The recent tour was 200-300 cap rooms, with a couple of large clubs in the mix. Booking can definitely be a grind, but at the end of the day, the booking agencies are saving you about 5 hours of work in exchange for ~15% of gross, which they hope translates to at least $150 to make their own 2 hours of work worth it. But if you're grossing $1,000 from each gig, that's $30/hr that co…

Yeah for sure, the percentage take on these sorts of things adds up. But I do think there is a point where it starts making more sense to have a team as an artist gets larger.

Indie bands have always done this grind on their own -- I remember all the shows at Glasslands and the lofts and bars around Brooklyn 15 or so years ago, which were in that 150-300 cap range. Or my friends' college bands back in the early 2000s. Labels definitely weren't involved with any of that, it was just a bunch of musicians in a rented van driving to cities crashing on couches. Once you start playing 1000+ cap rooms (or stadiums, in the case of a few friends), the administrative part takes more time than the music part, and I don't really know any artists that care to deal with that. You need lawyers, tour managers, PR people, etc.

It definitely doesn't take a major label like it used to, but an indie label that can support you in that work is often necessary.

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#175

Post by whiddershins »

bryans wrote: post #154
whiddershins wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen several real life examples who have.

Then I would question what material they were learning, or how much effort they actually expended. I've watched even the worst songwriters and performers find success by grinding away at the right stones, so "I know a guy who tried Facebook ads and it didn't work" doesn't mean anything.

On a more productive note, how would you suggest an artist best educate themselves about critically impactful marketing and related topics?

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#176

Post by scarecrowbob »

Jensson wrote: post #130
scarecrowbob wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't really match up with the b-list regional folks I've gigged with. As far as I can tell, the big goal for the folks who were 25 in 1978 was to get an album on with large distribution and make basically mailbox money for the rest of a career. I've known people who have done that basically on a couple songs. Like, pretty middle of the road folks I've met were able to make a living off their mailbox. That wil…

Sounds like they won the lottery by getting perpetual visibility on poorly made albums thanks to how poorly optimized discovery and publishing was back then. Wont ever happen again with how much better those processes are today. Also doesn't sound like that old system actually was good for the music industry, it made a few lucky people a lot of money even if they didn't produce good music, which encourages people to…

I get the point. As a practicing musician, I quite disagree.

These folks aren't terrible, but they aren't, like Queen or Michael Jackson.

There are a couple of directions that my disagreements run, but of them would be something like this:

there's no middle ground where people can make a modest living playing music anymore. There were several ways to do that, prior to the mid 90s.

That was good for the industry in that instead of only allowing amatures or world-class acts to be performing, you had a ton of folks kind of not being great.

But the only way you get to be really, really good at this is by doing it all the time.

So now, instead of having a bunch of folks who were kind of making it, you mostly have either destitute folks or hobbyists.

So I don't agree that having a bunch of middling musicians didn't produce good music: where do we think all those really talented, experienced folks come from? People aren't born knowing how to arrange a tune or work an audience.

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#177

Post by phphphphp »

bryans wrote: post #140
phphphphp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s lots of independent artists that are successful, you’re about 5 years late on the “…independent musicians will kill labels…” prediction which hasn’t been borne out. Musicians are actively choosing to sign to labels, even when they don’t have to… make of that what you will.

You're trying to twist this into a scenario of absolutes, as if there's an on/off switch at which point independent artists make 100% of the money and labels don't exist anymore. That's clearly not what I said, and it's rather inflammatory of you to suggest that it is.

You said "record labels are rapidly becoming irrelevant" and "the jig is up and labels are going to be panicking". That's about as absolute as you can be. I contend that labels and independents will continue to co-exist, as they have done for many years, despite people proclaiming otherwise (to varying extremes).

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#178

Post by bryans »

whiddershins wrote: post #168
bryans wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I would question what material they were learning, or how much effort they actually expended. I've watched even the worst songwriters and performers find success by grinding away at the right stones, so "I know a guy who tried Facebook ads and it didn't work" doesn't mean anything.

I don’t know who you are or what your perspective is but I am a music industry professional in New York. I also don’t know how you are defining success. I also don’t know all your marketing knowledge. Maybe you know a whole set of things I am completely unaware of. What I do know is success as an artist seems to be a weird blend of savvy, talent, luck … and who knows what else. I have a bad reaction when people make…

It's somewhat disturbing that you would claim I'm "victim blaming" by asking for details on what these "unsuccessful marketing musicians" actually studied. "Victim" is a wholly inappropriate word to describe being unsuccessful at something.

You initially added nothing to the conversation, except for a very brief and vague claim about how you may know some people who contradict my own experiences. So, I'm not sure what kind of response you were hoping for, but a little snark never hurt anyone, and you're overreacting to it.

If you have an actual example of a musician who studied marketing and business but was unsuccessful, I'd love to hear about it, because I've simply never seen it happen.

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#179

Post by bryans »

hef19898 wrote: post #153
bryans wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I have tons of evidence for this, and for why all of your claims have no foundation. Allow me to provide one example of the hundreds that I personally know of or worked with (which is a tiny fraction of the numbers finding success independently). In late 2020, a band called Sub-Radio had a couple thousand followers on each social media platform and around ~15k monthly listeners on Spotify, and this was after man…

Curious question, if streaming services reach the point where they enable indy artists to actually become super stars (using TikTok for marketing), doesn't that move the role, and power, from label to those streaming services and social media (for marketing)?

No, because the label never had that power to begin with. They were always at the whim of social media and other factors. The trick is to not dedicate yourself to one platform, because they should all be treated as separate venues with different types of audiences (because they are). Social media sites are tools, not goals.

Re: Global music market grew by 18.5% in 2021, driven by paid subscription streaming

#180

Post by bryans »

siquick wrote: post #155
bryans wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I have tons of evidence for this, and for why all of your claims have no foundation. Allow me to provide one example of the hundreds that I personally know of or worked with (which is a tiny fraction of the numbers finding success independently). In late 2020, a band called Sub-Radio had a couple thousand followers on each social media platform and around ~15k monthly listeners on Spotify, and this was after man…

150k streams p/month is absolutely nothing compared to the artists that the major labels are interested in. Record labels that the likes of “Sub-Radio” are suited to have always be and will continue to act as taste makers and curators, and not large money making organisations (and for the better). Even the large indies like Sub Pop, Stones Throw, and K7 operate in completely different seperate financial and reach rea…

> 150k streams p/month is absolutely nothing compared to the artists that the major labels are interested in.

I said 150k unique listeners, not streams. Also, you're entirely wrong about this. The 100k-250k range is a very distinct tier of band, and those bands are ubiquitously on record labels. So, your insistence that labels aren't even interested in them is the exact opposite of reality.

> Record labels that the likes of “Sub-Radio” are suited to have always be and will continue to act as taste makers and curators, and not large money making organisations (and for the better). Even the large indies like Sub Pop, Stones Throw, and K7 operate in completely different seperate financial and reach realms than Universal, Warner and the like.

They operate at different scales because of the overall size of the rosters and the major label's ability to literally throw away cash at every turn just to maintain superiority. That doesn't mean major labels don't manage projects that are operating at smaller scales, because they absolutely do. They're called "subsidiaries" and they fit directly in the category that you're pretending doesn't exist.

> Major labels aren’t going anywhere.

Nobody said they were, so your entire argument was made with a false premise. The point was that they aren't necessary anymore.

Post reply on HN