Live data from Hacker News

Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

docs.google.com

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#61
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The internet and technology in general have done some great things for music but making money is harder than ever." I don't think we can conclude that at all, especially in this case. In the pre-Internet era, the niche for modernist cello music would have been an incredibly small set. If she were supremely lucky, she'd make it to Carnegie Hall every few years, and maybe sell a couple hundred CDs at a given performan…

I'm curious about your use of the terms 'modernist' and 'experimental' (plus the site's own strap line 'Avant Cello'). I've listened to a couple of pieces and while, nice, they sound pretty conventional tonally, rhythmically and structurally. I was expecting something a bit more unconventional.

A lot of her work incorporates electronics. She uses her laptop to sample, loop, and layer her tracks while playing.

You may notice that some of her works sound like they feature multiple cellists. That's actually one cello, her own, being sampled and layered in real time.

Structurally, tonally, and rhythmically, the pieces tend to vary. But I would agree on some level with your observation; it's not like she's delving too deeply into Philip Glass territory or anything.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#62
post #39

Just wanted to say thanks for this link - I'm not interested in her numbers, but to stumble across this on HN, and head off and listen to her music, awesome. I really love the sound of the cello, and discovered another cellist, Philip Sheppard, in a similar way. And her album is only 8 bucks! in FLAC format!

Yup, same here. I've never heard of her before, but thanks to this link I went to her site, listened to the album and picked up a copy. Great programming music.

"Great programming music."

I completely agree. Been listening to it all day. I'm thankful that the OP added this link to HN. It made my day that much brighter.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#63
post #58

All up, it looks like she made about $85,000 from October of 2011 to March of 2012. That's antihistamine money, especially for someone not making pop music. This appears to be unambiguously good news for independent artists.

unambiguously good news for independent artists What algorithm do you use for your amazing extrapolation based on one data point?

"Good news" is an extrapolation requiring a trend line? Please.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#64
post #54
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heres one perspective on how artists might choose channels http://www.noisemademedoit.com/how-to-earn-money-with-music/...

interestingly, with spotify and last.fm, artists get a higher proportion of the total money (15.3% and 15.8%, respectively) than they do with amazon/itunes (14.5%). it's surprising to me that it's so low for the artist in these cases.

Patently false.

There are several things misrepresented by that well-meaning graph, and if it leads you to believe that musicians make more money from Spotify and Last.fm than form Amazon and iTunes, that really should be corrected for, because that is absolutely not the case in my experience, and Zoe Keating's numbers seem to echo what I've seen in the field.

The info graphic cites, among other things, 'industry sources.' Zoe Keating, on the other hand, is a completely transparent actual industry source. Don't be surprised that artists exposing their revenue information make less than you think, be surprised that in 2012 people still buy the garbage statistics handed out by unnamed 'industry sources'

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#65

This is nice, but I'd still like to see a complete nobody, without previous record deals start out on the internet and "make it". So far all the examples of internet distribution "working" have been from big (or relatively big) artists.

Anecdote coming your way:

My wife is a composer - currently attending UPenn getting her PhD in music composition. She does not typically perform her music herself. In 2009, her concert opera concerning the senate judiciary hearings on former attorney general Alberto Gonzales. We recorded a performance of "The Gonzales Cantata" and posted on Bandcamp, iTunes, and Amazon in anticipation of a series of live performances done at that year's Philadelphia Fringe Festival.

The recording earned a little over $1000 (half that from Bandcamp alone). The live performances earned several times that, enough that we could pay each of the over 30 performers involved at least three figures.

$1000 might not sound like much, but put it into perspective, it was her first recorded piece, and it's probably earned her more than what her professors have made with releases they've done. (Well, not necessarily her Penn professors) Had she released through a label? She was approached by one of the more well known 'classical' labels about doing a studio recording and 'label' release. The deal basically would have been that she'd have paid thousands of dollars, and gotten a box of CDs and miniscule residual income when all was said and done.. and this is how a lot of people in the classical world do things. The money may come from grants or patrons, but it's generally wasted.

$1000 for a single recording is not enough to live off, but $1000 for your first release, particularly a fairly obscure release, is incredibly encouraging. As a composer, she has other sources of income to chase down, whether it's commissions, or sheet music, performances, licensing, etc. I would not be surprised if after graduating, she is able to sustain a living composing music. If that doesn't work out, she can make plenty of money in private lessons.

We haven't done any 'big' recordings since then. Last year we recorded a piano-vocal piece, "Tesla's Pigeon", and commissioned a visual artist to do the cover art. We Kickstarted asking for $550 and raised $787, and while it's up on Bandcamp and iTunes, we haven't gone promotion crazy about it like we did for The Gonzales Cantata, so it's only made a couple hundred dollars, mostly through physical sales at concert performances - which themselves have brought in enough money that again, we were able to pay the performers well and have a nice amount leftover for ourselves.

I think it's a good start, and I think it's far better than she would have been able to do if she were born twenty years sooner than she had been.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#66
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

unambiguously good news for independent artists What algorithm do you use for your amazing extrapolation based on one data point?

"Good news" is an extrapolation requiring a trend line? Please.

Proclaiming 2 quarters' income figures from one single player as unambigiously good news for a huge diverse market is a bit hyperbolic, don't you think?

It's like saying a $1M exit for a random startup is unambigiously good news for all startups. What if the startup took an investment of $2M? What if the founders lost money and are now stuck in a low paying job? What looks good on the surface could very well be bad news if you know all the facts.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#67
post #47

All up, it looks like she made about $85,000 from October of 2011 to March of 2012. That's antihistamine money, especially for someone not making pop music. This appears to be unambiguously good news for independent artists.

The most interesting point is that most of this isn't from Spotify or any other streaming service. People use these services the same they would as if they owned the music. It is possible that total lifetime revenue from these services could be higher, but I doubt it.

In the future I think this is going to have to play out the way it has been for Netflix: As streaming services disrupt other revenue models, content producers will begin charging streaming providers more money.

Right now, though, it's still easy to think of Spotify in the way Keating suggests: As a form of advertising first and foremost.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#68
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think about that for a minute. How many people listen to a song, how often, and at what licensing rate? Clearchannel radio claims their network reaches 237 Million listeners a month [1]. If they managed to hit one play for every listener they reach at $132/32,000 that is $977,592 per month. Yes, its hard to get between 'starting' and 'living large.' And no, not everyone will go there, but the numbers here aren't "rea…

'reaching' 237 million people is a lot different than 237 million people actually listening to your song. Old media like radio have a long history of making these stats as inflated as possible to keep ad rates high. Things change drastically when you can accurately count exactly how many people are tuned in at any given moment.

Listeners, like web site visitors, can only be reasoned about statistically. This is even more true in this century than it was in the last century. If a service (say Spotify or Pandora or whatever) has a population P then the probability that they request a performance of a given piece might be f(P). Popularity might be measured by the number of unique people who request a performance g(P) and quality might be measured as the mode of the number of times a unique person requested a performance.

The remuneration rate, like the 'average selling price' for a commodity, is the median price of the performance across all requests.

My original point is that the 'size' of the music market, in terms of the number of times a song is played, is very very large. There are probably close to a billion 'plays' of songs on any given day in the US. I'm sure Pete Warden could come up with a way to figure out an exact number, I base that guess on half the population, 150M people, and 6 songs per person per day median, so 900M plays.

If the ASP, to artists, is $132/32000 (not saying it is, just its the only real number we've got in this discussion) that would make a daily sweep of like $3.7M. So if, as an artist you were the top song that day you might take home 1% of that or $37,000.

My overall point is that the music industry that is being birthed out of the ashes of the old one, looks a lot different. It's more 'on demand', it's more relational, and it's less understood. Consequently there are a lot of people trying to mold it to something they can control and get the money out of, and that reality distortion makes seeing the real forces driving it harder.

So when you reason about the music business and someone says "Gee the artist only sees one tenth of a cent each time spotify plays their song.", that sounds horrible! A song, for only 0.1 cent? Gee I'd have to listen to the same song all day just so they could buy a cup of coffee at Peet's. But if that song is reasonably popular and it's being played 10 million times a day, that means the artist is making $10,000 a DAY on just one song. That sounds awesome! The difference between these two is all that probability / market size reasoning that is sometimes glossed over.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#69
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean 32,000 listeners?

32,000 listens, 10 listens per person, 3,200 people.

Sorry, I think you math is broken here. 32,000 listens in a month at even a half cent per stream (More than ms. Keating is making) equals $160 a month. Try paying your rent with that!

Maybe you missed a decimal point? She would need 320,000 listens from 32,000 extremely dedicated fans each month, which is unlikely to happen. If we got this rate up to a full 2 cents (more than quadruple what it is now)your 32,000 plays would still gross her only $640. Not even half the cost of a 1 bedroom's rent in any metropolitan area that I'm aware of.

Re: Cellist Zoe Keating has posted her "Online Sales & Streaming" numbers

#70
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

interestingly, with spotify and last.fm, artists get a higher proportion of the total money (15.3% and 15.8%, respectively) than they do with amazon/itunes (14.5%). it's surprising to me that it's so low for the artist in these cases.

Patently false. There are several things misrepresented by that well-meaning graph, and if it leads you to believe that musicians make more money from Spotify and Last.fm than form Amazon and iTunes, that really should be corrected for, because that is absolutely not the case in my experience, and Zoe Keating's numbers seem to echo what I've seen in the field. The info graphic cites, among other things, 'industry sou…

i think you might have misunderstood what i wrote. i didn't say artists make more money from spotify/last.fm. i said they got a higher proportion of what was paid.

either way, it sounds like there are just anecdotes on both sides, so there's no actual information either way.

Post reply on HN