801–810 of 861 posts
As a musician and someone who spent years in the "biz". Its never going to be like it was in the 70's. Those days are gone.
The way in which Spotify (and other streaming services) hurts the development of music isn’t what most people say. The problem with per-stream plays is that it is based on pop music logic: more streams equals more money. Fair! But many recording artists made a modest living by releasing music that you might not want to listen to over and over and over. This music is often labeled ‘art’ or ‘experimental’ or whatever,…
Patreon is also on the pop music logic: If you don't keep pumping out stuff people tend to stop donating.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So set up an organised way for me to do that, e.g. Patreon. Some artists already do.
This is crazy but we used to have this scheme where you actually just paid them for access to the recording. Weird, right? Then we Spotifyd and that was the end of that and people got a new hobby coming up with justifications for why it's good that we replaced a revenue source for musicians with ... maybe giving them money? Or maybe having them run a T-shirt business?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re just saying the same things older people have been saying about new music since time immemorial.
How about from other established rappers? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0OdmRtuQew Admittedly they are now "older" :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Korean pop music has been doing this for a while too. This group has pretty rapid releases, 5 singles a year, and 10 EPs and 3 albums since 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twice_discography
In addition, Kpop groups put a huge amount of effort into their physical albums. Sales of physical albums are extremely high in Korea (Japan I think too) compared to other countries (just my impression, but if anyone has sources I'd be interested). Albums are usually sold as boxes with a photo book inside and collectible cards, they are almost more like magazines. Some albums come in different editions with different…
I used to work in the music industry professionally, on the ground level doing booking and management. This trend has been happening slowly for nearly a decade but it’s finally here. Rap and Hip Hop figured out a long time before most other genres that rapid small releases was a far better way to keep hype and sales up. Before Spotify was a thing, the shift was happening with YouTube but it wasn’t as predominant. Now…
A friend once explained this to me a decade ago. I would buy albums, but he would torrent everything. In his eyes, music has shifted to the public domain now. He said the best way to support a band now would be to buy t-shirts and go to as many concerts as you can. I still buy all my albums, but finally see his point. I mean now, all artists have their entire collection of music on YouTube. If everyone almost always…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is crazy but we used to have this scheme where you actually just paid them for access to the recording. Weird, right? Then we Spotifyd and that was the end of that and people got a new hobby coming up with justifications for why it's good that we replaced a revenue source for musicians with ... maybe giving them money? Or maybe having them run a T-shirt business?
Maybe they can work for a living. Like go on tour and perform live. Selling tickets and such. If they are any good, people will want to go see them live. Look at the Grateful Dead, they allowed people to copy their music. There are massive sites dedicated to archiving all of their music recordings and you are free to download and listen to it. Yet they made a fortune on touring and performing. Not playing the song on…
Saying "maybe they can work for a living" is saying that people don't think that has value, in which case it's weird that anyone uses Spotify at all.
"Playing the song one time" is minimizing the work/time that goes into learning to play instruments, writing a song, coordinating the musicians for recording, and working on the production.
And it's a lot like saying software developers shouldn't be able to write a piece of code one time but get paid for people buying a copy or using a service running it on a server somewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true and yet the decreasing revenue, monetization, and relentless cost-cutting is real as well.
Concerns about making money are not going to destroy art. Almost all art through history has been made by people trying to make a living, not trying to express for its own sake. We don't have a thousand years of portraiture of the elite because artists were just absolutely convinced that was the ultimate expression of the medium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that’s also how you hear about how much writers hate writing and are only happy when handing in a manuscript for publication. (See: Vonnegut)
Can you provide a link or source for Vonnegut on the subject? I'm interested.