Caesar

Spotify CEO: Artists need to release every year or two

Recommended Posts

TalkThatRihanna
2 minutes ago, Daddy said:

Not Ari... :bibliahh:

yes Ari, artists have been citing her for inspiration for her releasing so soon after Sweetener. Specifically Billie mentioned in an interview that that inspired her to start recording right after her album release

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Medonerpls

folklores impact :jonny5:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mariah's Glove

stfu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Six

apple music says hi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Antonini

This is why gags is such a flop now. She used to be a trailblazer but now can’t keep up. :( 

 

she said eff the music, need the bling and started doing make up and acting gigs 🧐

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cute

Anghami outsold :sistrens: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sergi91

Someone go tell @Sade her 10 year gap antics won’t work anymore :giraffe:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horizon Flame

Artists used to release albums every year for decades. That’s not new. Perhaps it would help to release EPs every year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mother Earth

Or maybe instead artists release their work whenever they want, and you could pay them more than fractions of pennies for their work.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NMiguelCosta
24 minutes ago, Mother Earth said:

Or maybe instead artists release their work whenever they want, and you could pay them more than fractions of pennies for their work.

 

 

Sure, if premium subscribers are willing to pay 2x or 3x more for their Spotify subscription and their free users get a premium subscription. Spotify is currently operating at a loss already and that's with paying artists pennies for their work... :skull:

 

 

OT: The way Kpop artists won by releasing new music several times a year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevyy

the blueprint already did it: 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2009, 2010... / 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mother Earth
2 minutes ago, NMiguelCosta said:

Sure, if premium subscribers are willing to pay 2x or 3x more for their Spotify subscription and their free users get a premium subscription. Spotify is currently operating at a loss already and that's with paying artists pennies for their work... :skull:

 

 

OT: The way Kpop artists won by releasing new music several times a year. 

Sounds like a Spotify problem.

 

Chart: Music-Streaming: Who Pays Best? | Statista

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NMiguelCosta
4 minutes ago, Mother Earth said:

Sounds like a Spotify problem.

 

Chart: Music-Streaming: Who Pays Best? | Statista

Only 46% of currently active Spotify users are on the premium tier, everyone else is on the ad-supported free tier. Other streaming services can pay better per stream because they only offer a paying service plus their users stream a lot less which means more revenue to be distributed to the artists. Spotify pays more or less the same to the artists whether streams come from paying users or ad-supported users. And you see Youtube on that list paying almost nothing because their only revenue comes from ads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305

Well good thing I stan quality. Lorde take your time sweetie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mother Earth
30 minutes ago, NMiguelCosta said:

Only 46% of currently active Spotify users are on the premium tier, everyone else is on the ad-supported free tier. Other streaming services can pay better per stream because they only offer a paying service plus their users stream a lot less which means more revenue to be distributed to the artists. Spotify pays more or less the same to the artists whether streams come from paying users or ad-supported users. And you see Youtube on that list paying almost nothing because their only revenue comes from ads. 

So you're agreeing with the Spotify CEO that musicians should force themselves to release music on a yearly basis to financially support themselves while Spotify provides their music to 54% of their listeners for free? Interesting take.

 

76b613b6825bc618ea08f0eb374e1eed.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NMiguelCosta
5 minutes ago, Mother Earth said:

So you're agreeing with the Spotify CEO that musicians should force themselves to release music on a yearly basis to financially support themselves while Spotify provides their music to 54% of their listeners for free? Interesting take.

 

76b613b6825bc618ea08f0eb374e1eed.gif

LMAO

I never said i support Spotify's current business model. I just explained why they can't pay more to artists when you commented they should increase their payout per stream. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dula Peep
9 hours ago, Tropez said:

That last part isnt true. Some of the greatest albums according to critics, and people are ones done after yearly releases, in the middle of touring, etc. For example, The Beatles released albums every year, often multiples releases in one year. Yet their work has been globally acclaimed and preserved as bodies of art. 
 

If an artist doesnt even write and produce all their music. It should not be an issue to release often. Look at artists from the 60s-80s and see just how much music they were putting out. That’s why old artists usually call newer artists lazy. 

I feel like the complexity of producing and mastering music today is so much more time consuming than it was back when the Beatles were churning out albums every year. I don't know the whole history of how they worked, but I assume they and many bands could write, record and play their instruments right there in the studio in a few takes. 

 

Yes,  "making music" is now easier in many ways because everything is done electronically. Indie artists and low budget artists have many of the tools to create... 

however, I feel like there is SO MUCH you can do now with music that its extremely complex and therefore takes more time  :michael: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jealous
2 hours ago, Mother Earth said:

Sounds like a Spotify problem.

 

Chart: Music-Streaming: Who Pays Best? | Statista

I thought AM would be second most-used streaming service app :rip: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mother Earth
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, NMiguelCosta said:

LMAO

I never said i support Spotify's current business model. I just explained why they can't pay more to artists when you commented they should increase their payout per stream. 

Oh.

 

76b613b6825bc618ea08f0eb374e1eed.gif

 

Do you support free streaming services? I think it's ****ty that the Spotify CEO is telling artists to release more music if they want to stay financially solvent

Edited by Mother Earth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mother Earth
16 minutes ago, Jealous said:

I thought AM would be second most-used streaming service app :rip: 

Pandora is probably really big only among old people. Everyone I know that uses Pandora is 40+. Also, Apple Music seems pretty low on the pie chart probably because Spotify has a free option that Apple Music lacks (as @NMiguelCosta reminded me).

 

If his stats are right, it's roughly only a 2.5:1 ratio for Spotify to Apple Music among paid subscriptions.

 

76b613b6825bc618ea08f0eb374e1eed.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gui Blackout

Yall completely missing the point here :rip:

 

He's just refusing to take blame that Spotify doesn't pay enough royalties and instead forcing musicians to work as a fast food chain in order to make enough money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BobBertran1992
6 hours ago, Horizon Flame said:

Artists used to release albums every year for decades. That’s not new. Perhaps it would help to release EPs every year. 

I think there's some differences:

 

1. Touring wasn't such a big part of the whole deal back then. Yeah, artists toured, but not on a global scale as nowadays  last year, so they had more spare time to hit the studio (even in between dates).

2. For upcoming artists, their first two albums were the most important, and they were released almost back to back, but while the first one was just a launching pad, it was the second one that served as a way to solidify the artist: look at Bob Dylan, for instance, and how no one knows his first album but everyone knows his second one.

3. Drugs....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Letemtalk

He wants to turn music into a production line.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tropez
3 hours ago, Dula Peep said:

I feel like the complexity of producing and mastering music today is so much more time consuming than it was back when the Beatles were churning out albums every year. I don't know the whole history of how they worked, but I assume they and many bands could write, record and play their instruments right there in the studio in a few takes. 

 

Yes,  "making music" is now easier in many ways because everything is done electronically. Indie artists and low budget artists have many of the tools to create... 

however, I feel like there is SO MUCH you can do now with music that its extremely complex and therefore takes more time  :michael: 

It is actually easier now. Music then was more complicated simply because they didnt have the tools and technology we have now at the touch of a finger. Look at all those artists springing up these days making music from computer software. Now being a professional musician is open to everyone. Back then you had to be on a label or you wouldn’t get anywhere because there was no internet, there was no advanced computer software. 
 

 

11 minutes ago, BobBertran1992 said:

I think there's some differences:

 

1. Touring wasn't such a big part of the whole deal back then. Yeah, artists toured, but not on a global scale as nowadays  last year, so they had more spare time to hit the studio (even in between dates).

2. For upcoming artists, their first two albums were the most important, and they were released almost back to back, but while the first one was just a launching pad, it was the second one that served as a way to solidify the artist: look at Bob Dylan, for instance, and how no one knows his first album but everyone knows his second one.

3. Drugs....

But thats in the past. With the virus going around, live music will be severely impacted for a while now. Stadiums and arenas will be rare even after things clear up. Artists cannot make a living from tours in 2020. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BobBertran1992
11 minutes ago, Tropez said:

It is actually easier now. Music then was more complicated simply because they didnt have the tools and technology we have now at the touch of a finger. Look at all those artists springing up these days making music from computer software. Now being a professional musician is open to everyone. Back then you had to be on a label or you wouldn’t get anywhere because there was no internet, there was no advanced computer software. 
 

 

But thats in the past. With the virus going around, live music will be severely impacted for a while now. Stadiums and arenas will be rare even after things clear up. Artists cannot make a living from tours in 2020. 

But the thing is, medium size artists used to be able to make a decent living out of pure sales only (even if their deal was rough). Now, with streaming as the main source of income while live music is out, no artist can actually make ends meet even if they release a yearly  LP or whatever. What Spotify's CEO is doing is trying to distract from the main problem: his business doesn't pay enough money to its musicians. But rather than look inward, to his model, he puts the blame on the artists who don't do enough, according to him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites