I just don’t think the industry and labels will let it happen. They own most of artists musics, this was same dream that was sold with streaming 1.0. Then majors worked it out to take control again.
NEVER PUT YOURSELF DOWN, ALWAYS KEEP YOUR HEAD-UP. AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT RECORD LABLES ONLY CAN OWN WHOEVER, AND WHATEVER IS SIGNED TO THE RECORD LABLES. MEANING THEY WILL NEVER OWN YOU OR YOUR CONTENT UNLESS YOU GIVE IT TO THEM..
@@justjasmin4251By all means, something should be tried but it’s not negative to acknowledge the way things usually go in the corporate world these days.
This is no longer the case.. look at Taylor Swift and Dua Lipa.. they own their catalogs and their masters.. they can take them anywhere. These 2 young ladies are showing the rest of the artists how to do it!
As a recording company, I think artists have two options, pay for recording and retain all royalties, or sign over some royalties to record. I prefer just being a recording service where the artist owns 100% of their music. I also don't have the advertising ties to justify owning royalty percentage anyhow. Musicians need to retain the royalties or they won't make the money.
The real problem is artists sign god awful deals. Spotify gives 70 to 80 % of their revenue (not profit, revenue) to labels and publishers. The labels and publishers then give the artists like 15 to 20 % of what they got. Music streaming can't really do anything about that. Even if Spotify cut an artist a sweet deal... artists don't own their music. They'd pay this money and still not get access to the music. Yung Joc said it best. In no other industry do you get a loan, you payback the loan 5 times over but they can say *nah that was our service fee, you gotta pay use outta your 15%*, AND the person who made the loan keeps all IP even if the loan is paid off. No other industry is making deals this lopsided. No bank could get away offering a crap tier loan like that. Nobody would take it. Only in the music industry does stuff like this fly.
Not everyone is signed, and I heard they give some of your money to the bigger artists, as well as the fact that they have moved the goal post, and or have been taking music down because of supposed fake streams. Curtiss KingTV (a rapper, and beat producer) talks about this on his YT channel
If the future of streaming is connecting a massive amount of fans directly to a massive amount of artists this will likely happen through a big platform. Why wouldn't we expect the dominant platforms to just take a similar cut as spotify for their connective services?
It would be interesting if a big social media platform just does the MySpace model of having artists streaming music on their profile. One stop shop of artists posting pics and videos as well as music and other things.
Bruh .. it's like your vids are crafted perfectly for our timeline! Fock Spotify! Music and production artists deserve to be valued accurately and a great step is booting out the middlemen who are there for nefarious reasons. Great content!
@@MusicMoneyMakeover I understand the perspective. Spotify already caters to label artists and playlisting. Where it's going, Spotify will unlikely be a reliable tool for majority of artists (if it's not already dubbed as such)
Thats not how streaming came about. It's a bit more complicated than "bad music" it started with Napster and limewire, the major labels passed on the opportunity to create platforms, hence big tech got involved and the rest is history
This shit is guaranteed to FAIL. At no point has the consumer EVER lost the ability to pay for music. If they cared about supporting the artist, they'd have been paying for MP3 downloads on Amazon. You established that streaming took over because fans didn't want to pay for music and then literally a few seconds later praised a CEO for saying fans want to pay the artist directly. WRONG!!!! Artists need to get this through their head: FANS DO NOT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT YOUR MONEY ISSUES. If you can't afford to make new music, they will say "aww that sucks" and move on to any one of the other billion artists out there. The reality is this: You CAN make money off of streaming. I thought that statement was bullshit too, but then I crunched the numbers and compared them to a signed artist dropping a physical single in the 1980s and 90s. It turns out that a successful single from an indie artist in 2023 actually earns the artist MORE money than an equally successful single from a signed artist back then. I'll try to summarize as best I can... The average artist back then recieved 4% from a physical sale, before retail markup. Let's ignore the fact that the artist had to pay back all the loans for studio-time, video shoots, photo shoots, marketing, etc. because, except for physical duplication, the indie artist today will have to pay that out of pocket (through being wealthy or taking out a personal loan) in order to make a huge hit, so they basically balance out. So... The cassette single sells at $1. The artist gets $0.04 of that. They sell 1-million copies, which comes out to $40k. Spotify in 2023 pays what works out to $4 for 1k streams ($0.004). A million streams generates $4k. That seems like artists used to make 10× more, right? WRONG. Each copy the signed 1990s artist sold was played by the fan at least 2 or 3 times daily for the first couple weeks and then played hundreds of times over the course of the year. There are 365.25 days in a year, so let's average it out to 100 plays in the first year. Experience and observation tell me each tape was played a LOT more than that, but 100 plays will help average out between replay value of huge hits and songs that fell off a little early. That's a 1-time payment of $0.04, which comes to $40k for 1M copies sold. If each tape sold is equal to 100 streams, $4k becomes $400k. I'm leaving out the fact that an artist had to be liked more back then to sell the single because people had to drive to a store and actually pay for it, as opposed to telling Siri/Alexa to play it or hit a button and get it for free. I'm also leaving out the fact that physical copies would be given a resold to others who could then hear it and not pay anything. The RIAA, whom awards gold and platinum status, actually values the comparison between physical and streams to be "1 sale = 1,500 streams". So I'm being very conservative in my comparison. I chose 2023 Spotify rates because, with Spotify not paying out to artists unless they get enough streams to actually have any chance of getting a payout from DistroKid (Spotify is NOT stealing payouts from artists who don't invest in professional studio-time and marketing. They're stopping DistroKid from stealing the money that they've been paying to artists... It's a long separate matter), Spotify will be paying MORE to artists people actually listen to in 2024.
It’s not over for streaming it’s over for MUSICIANS. what’s coming is AI-generated music by NON-MUSICIANS. Just like photos made everyone a photographer facebook, google, openai, etc already have the platforms to allow your grandma and every teenager to compose their own lyrics and music in any style they want. Their favorite songs will not be other artists but THEIR OWN creations.
@@Bob-kz6vs Millions of humans feel there is absolutely nothing more stale, mediocre, derivative, uninspiring or repetitive than humans only submitting songs on streaming platforms. I think AI-assisting humans might finally open doors to ORIGINAL compositions where the goal (ironically) is not to sound like everyone else. I don’t think humans are capable of that.
@@RedCloudServices AI literally can only imitate. Great art comes from sublime moments of inspiration in states of altered consciousness. Sleep, trans, meditation, hallucination, daydreaming, melting into your couch on heroin etc. Machines are incapable of achieving those states. AI with human guidance is a different story.
how about, people just head over to bandcamp and buy what they want to listen to. Pay people that create. And no. Not everyone needs nor wants to become a video producer. duh.
I don't believe more revenue will go the artist. I mean, I'd love to think it would, but the way corporate companies are operating nowadays all I see ( and I think we'll see in the future ) is more greed. Spotify is completely embedded in this industry ( with its all music free for users and paying artist peanuts business model ) and I don't see them going anywhere for a long time. They're still completely in control and ( as we've seen from recent spotify moves ) it's just going to get worse. Music as a digital commodity has been cheapened, people just don't want to pay for it. And unless, of course, there's a big shift back towards physical product, I don't see it changing. I really want to be wrong about this though, but as someone who's been in this industry for 3 decades I'm just not optimistic here.
Ryan Leslie has always been ahead of the game. He been using super phone and had already taken his music off streaming platforms because he was preparing for life after streaming.
There was a renaissance of good independent music on streaming from like 2003-2007 on pure volume and myspace, at least for metalcore. But there were no portable streaming devices back then so it still probably led to a lot of physical media sales with the streaming being used as promo.
I agree with @markdkberry. We all need to protest the algorithms by not participating in companies that use algorithms to present content. We need a list of THOSE companies. If if there isn't one, we need to start one.
Its not that its 'more work than I signed up for', its that I didn't sign up for work - I signed up to do what I love, not agonize so I can do what I love 5-10% of the time. Thats exploitation. Art had a lot more integrity when there was more to go around so people could delegate properly and keep their creative integrity & improve their craft & make honest work. Musicians are so fragmented they miss the point entirely now, and its easier and easier for half-assed talents with business accumen to clog the space with generic soundalike pablum.
I made it to 3:28 of your video. I beg to differ. Fans don’t want to spend anything! Riddle me this Batman, how do you expect people to pay for what they already consider they get for next to nothing? The past: you used to pay for the music and then you owned your copy of it. The present: you own nothing and stream it for next to nothing, for the illusion of ownership. The future??? You’re gonna have to pay for it again, to have ownership or the illusion of ownership!!! I’ve been rattling this very question around my brain since the inception of itunes. The children are the future and are the future consumers. They’ve been brought up on a steady dose of music is free. Do you honestly expect this next generation to start buying music again from artists? They can’t even afford a place to live on their own these days. Next in line after that is do what you have to to keep up with the Jones, and music is not going to be one of them. Next to take the fall is the motion picture industry.
@@TheAgentSumoThat should mean the talent should improve because the people still making music would be doing so simply because they have a passion for music...but most likely it'll be AI generated shlock, heavily promoted industry plants, and total amateurs with no financial incentive to improve
Fans don't want to spend anything? Really?Tell that to the Swifties and the Beehive and people who want to support other acts in general. What about all the other acts who consistently make 6 figures and 7 figures a year who aren't known?
Listening to this makes me wonder a few things. Do you think the CD format will dissapear completely? Will fans lose the ability to purchase and own music at some point and be limited to subscription only? I for one still like to purchase a physical CD because then I am not subject to losing access to a song, or album because the lable has pulled the rights and ability to listen to it on a streaming service. Even now there are artists that have albums that are not availalbe to stream, and if you're trying to discover new artists you end up limited in what you hear because you're not even aware that it exists.
CD format will never disappear. Having to rely on a label to publish your own music is defeating the purpose while the artist starves the label eats. I know many cats in the underground that are pushing physical CDs on there own website and at there shows . Why go the label route when you can do it all yourself? And usually the real fans support the artists so they can still make a living. Albeit they may not be super rich like a mainstream artist pretends to be but then again the music is usually more of an art form so people will buy it. People clowning Lloyd banks for selling his mixtape for $100 but I bet u he got 1000 people to buy it and it's basic mathematics here that's 100g for an independent artist making music in his own studio. Everyone gets so caught up in the glamour . Just support the real artist and let the major labels die out
But then it's not a "hit" so people won't listen to an underground artist that is probably making 100k+ a year lol people just be mad ignorant about this hit shit when music is an art not a way to get rich . All them artist that pretend to be rich are all on 360 deals and I doubt they'll ever recouped. Support your local artist buy there albums buy there merch
Utterly wonderful to see a post about this very subject that I have never yet considered in my angst about artists losing moneys due to them. Of course technology & trends never stand still these days. Its GREAT to even contemplate that these would evolve forward beyond the terrible model thats been around for 2 decades or more. Really appreciate you putting this out there and I hope it will act as an inspiration (along with all your cited reference people) to start a movement in consciousness towards artist paybacks. Thank you!
Dude you have the dopest advice and insights into the transformative aspects of the music industry…the music industry has been controlling the musicians since day one…it’s time that musicians took control of their Business not just their music.
Yeah man I been doing this for ages now, even have my site/join mailing list set as (Join The Revolution) while having a bunch of epic digital offers that are like single downloads but packed with much more. Still can't seem to get anyone to buy anything but I have confidence with time and proactive badass fans/supporters that this will grow. Even if I could get 50 fans that purchase every single for $4 everytime I have a new release I could cover some of the costs of the song and not go backwards so much, this is deffinatey the future, problem is we need reall forward thinking engaged and proactive people as fans.
Well made video, BUT, streaming is about ease of use for the CONSUMER not the artist. There will always be a "gatekeeper" based on convenience for the consumer to get everything all in one place. 🤷♂️
Every artist will manage their own music stream and music will be heard everywhere on social media where everyone will decide for themselves whether they want to pay for it or not. That is something we are moving towards🎹
@@Subzearo Well, that depends if its important to you to have new music that is produced to a high standard by professionals.... if not then I guess you are right
But what incentive to they have to keep their word and who is going to enforce this? This sounds to good to be true. They don't care about the artist at all.
There will be a huge vacuum once Bandcamp gets destroyed by mismanagement (coming in the next 2 years, almost guaranteed). Somebody with pockets who actually cares about artists, needs to create the replacement. These platforms should never be controlled by publicly traded corporations, as the push for year-over-year financial gain for shareholders destroys the ability of the platform to function in the interest of artists. Art is not a product for rich people to use to build their wealth. At least, it shouldn’t be.
These ‘gurus’ NEVER speak about the most important factor: Make extraordinary music. Michael Jackson. The Eagles. Prince. Sade. Bruce Springsteen. Stop falling for the okeedoke, people..and pay for these courses. They are selling to everyone …knowing most people will never make it because they are not good enough. It starts with real..true..talent. Not a scheme like he is talking about. Make great songs and everything else will take care of itself.
Been about this model and been setting up to help creators get off the plantation. Premium quality content has always been at the forefront. The lazy drag and drop way has never worked.
You get it! People fighting over royalties are missing the point entirely. There’s a revolution coming, in terms of where the value of music comes from. And it’s not royalty based.
@MusicMoneyMakeover I'm not gonna lie I thought you was referring to this 2.0 Wave as in the web 2.0 and meta verse world. I still feel so many people are oblivious to that side of the internet
Not everyone uploads music to RUclips lol! 1) you can’t close the app without stopping the video unless you pay for RUclips premium 2) monetization is different 3) I pay for Spotify because my music generates more than enough revenue to pay for the subscription and more.
I’m about to be “one of those guys” that you knew was coming but hey… While I understand you are completely right about what a “musician” needs to do to be successful, I just plain hate it. Basically, to be a successful musician one must be a business executive, marketing consultant, clout-seeker, viral chasing, sell-out. Now, I know I’m misrepresenting what was said a bit. But the fact that artists have to market a brand, rather than just making art, perpetuates this gross system. Not your fault, or maybe any one person’s fault, it’s just hard to hear messages like you can’t just be an amazing artist poet musician and be recognized, without TikTok tomfoolery. Just a sad state of affairs really… The meek get meeker and the gross get grosser…
You can be just a artist, musician, poet etc but if you want to earn a living and have a comfortable lifestyle then a modern creative artist must be all encompassing in their business approach. Unless, you are in the small majority where a business team earns the money for you and you still keep enough to live comfortably. If music is a side hustle and/or hobby then enjoy the freedom to do whatever you like.
@@JohnPapaGros I do understand the reality of the situation and know you are speaking the truth. For me, music is just a passion I do no matter what. I just feel like a phony when forced to market myself in order to get any recognition. So I’ll always keep doing it, I may just never play the big league game with it.
@@SelfPropelledDestiny Someone told me a long time ago, do what you love and do it the best you can and good things will happen. You just never predict what those good things will be.
As long as the major labels aren't able to creep in and take ownership, like they've done with Spotify and other streaming platforms and only prioritzing their own artists on playlists signed to their label.
We have over 29M TikTok video impressions and aren’t eligible for royalties. Over 25k organic users used my artist song “Psycho” and we still get more $ from Spotify than TikTok…..
That’s because TikTok doesn’t pay for impressions and views it pays for how many videos were created using your song. This is only for the publishing side.
Curiously, when I use a special offer of about $10 for 3 months of Spotify, after 3 months their algorithm’s music DISCOVERY function collapses completely for me and I am left with nothing new if I were to continue paying-so I don’t. This has happened repeatedly for about 4 years. It makes zero sense for me to be a subscriber when my motivation to pay rests 2/3rds upon fresh music, fresh artists. There’s no value-for-money in streaming service that just gives me access to music I already know.
It’s noteworthy that one writer suggests that video games have been under-utilized as a means of finding audiences. Since hearing pop rock and electronic music from around the world in FIFA years ago, barely any pop music worth hearing has been discovered in gaming.
Your success and the information provided are commendable. However, I'm curious about why, if investors are seeking direct fan investment, there are only options for creating a creator or an influencer and not a specific sign-up option for fans. Congratulations again on your achievements.
Tech companies are collecting all of our data - our data is the "new gold". The tec industry bought the music industry. So it's NOT a technical problem for the music industry to pay the artists: THEY DON'T WANT to pay the artists. These big companies are above the law. Only superrich artists can afford to sue tec companies. We simply need a law that all composers, artists have to be mentioned on every stream internally, so they get their money automatically. IMHO
If 2.0 figures out how to pay a fare share to the artist without affecting the membership of a customer it will be a win-win. For instance if in a month of paying 10$ for a subscription a customer plays only songs of 3 artists the big bulk of that 10$ should go to the artists and the rest to the streaming service. But greedy is bad and eventually kills business. Can’t wait to see a new innovation taking over this industry.
So basically what you mean is for musicicans to start taking those concepts more serious, make more premium exclusive content, be better at entertaiment for when those platforms start implementing those changes? But right now there is nothing really done yet, new platforms will be made and the existing ones will try to jump on this wave to retain their artists. Did i miss something?
Depends on genere and goals and age range of current fanbase. For anyone under 35 and pop hip-hopp etc yes but not Country, Christian, Bluegrass, or sync.
Russ, the weeknd, Drake The Ruler, Blokka Solo, future, 21 savage. They have all either signed distribution deals or stayed independent and are making SIX figures a year of steams, when you sign a record deal, that’s when they screw you. You can get rich off streams, it jus takes time to build a fan base and to be recognized by record labels. So you can have the opportunity negotiate your deal, that is best for you
a lot of the mentioned ideas are not user friendly at all. So i think the idea of settled streaming platforms is still on point, the oppurtunities for artists and users big, but the companys not artist friendly. thats the main problem.
It's corrupt and only the corporate-sponsored artists are promoted. It's worse on broadcast radio, but at least that remains a free service. Streaming manipulates its algorithms and ratings systems to make sure the payola artists are at the top. The benefit of radio/MTV was that you were introduced to new artists even though you were not given a choice of what they played. Streaming can become a cocoon if you're not actively searching for new music. Certain genres are completely left out so you must do some outside research to find what you like, or what you might like.
This is what drives me nuts as a prolific Spotify playlist creator, I find some random obscure song and click radio to find other stuff like it and it still feeds me billboard top 100s as recommendations at the top.
That’s dope I drop my music tracks all over the Internet for everyone to use even other DJs. I don’t care for labels or Zionist rule that is dead. We need to be in control of our lives. That’s also why I release all New Tracks on SoundCloud first then later on everything else. Great Video! #likwailao #lfamstreamersmusic
I don't envy new artists and the choices they are given today. Most of them will never release physical copies of their music. The music I listen to is mainly from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Streaming music isn't something I do. I only purchase it 1 time. I already physically own every piece of music that I want and most likely will ever want. The only thing that keeps me buying any music today is the release of reissues in a higher quality than I already have. I will buy a download of a reissue in an uncompressed format from places like HDTracks but, I will still always prefer a physical copy if the artist releases it. I enjoy the music I love to much to listen to it in a quality tailored to Cell Phones.
Funny enough, I see this going circular. Artists doing all the new work after already doing the work to create and perform, the record labels will return to offering to do what you don’t want to for a cost. Lesson learned by the labels sure, but eventually they’ll get greedy and round and round we go. Thoughts?
You should always send your audience to your own platform and keep them in YOUR universe. If you put a product on Amazon and someone purchases your item Amazon will never share with you their email, name and info. But Amazon gets to remarket and communicate with your Customer! Thousands of views on RUclips … RUclips has their email and contact you just have your view counter go up. Trash techniques. In 2017 RUclips was more wide open … less competition now you’re competing with celebs and people that have actual audiences in podcasting, and entertainment. Everything you do … do it for 1-2 minutes and then send them back to your platform for the full version.
Ren has done all this already it's old news. We need a completely new model where artists can just choose to focus on what they want and have full control over the monetisation cut out the middle men.
They take the money especially via membership while paying you nothing, then they take the content and sell it underwound overseas especially. bezos did this with audible and amazon books ebooks. never put your ebooks no where if it is copyright material.
I own a 100k Music video distribution platform and I get all the information before it hits the public because I’m signed a publishing deal and there is no talk about creating a fan sign up
Premium content can look like a bunch of stuff. Behind the scenes studio sessions, talks about how the song came about, podcast type talks/interviews with artists you are collaborating with, vlog of behind the scenes tour stuff, random games so that the audience gets to know you.
So basically the Capitalists are promising that artists will make more money as they've done a million times before. None of their ideas are new and none of this crap is going to make Artists any money. This entire video was a complete waste of my time.
What do you see from a producer prospective where it us going to be in rhe nex 5 years as producer getting paid for there songs because i feel like streaming your songs on a platform sight is not giving producers the full market value of there creativity as it owrtains to oroducing a song
We can't be everything to everyone. There's a saying: Jack if all trades, master of none. Music will suffer by requiring creators to also be marketers and business managers in order to find financial success.
That’s also going to be bad, if I were to connect only to the artists I LOVE, I’d pay for Beatles, Guns n Roses and Taylor Swift 😂 like most ppl, I would still be favoring big ones. So this doesn’t seem like the best way to favour small artists.
Honestly suggesting, and telling a whole generation of aspiring musicians that they need to become influencer entertainers to succeed at what they love seems very hollow - and even more like giving in to "the man". Money directly to the artists is a great idea, but let's not have our musicians jump through hoops and dance for us to 'earn our attention'.
Aren't musicians/entertainers already doing this with things like patreon? you have a your loyal fans and you offer some sort of benefit to subscribing to them for a fee. I don't see this as 2.0 streaming, its already happening. RUclips already has that 'sign up' feature for a monthly fee, I suppose spotify and apple music could integrate something similar
#pmefs is the way! See the glitz and the glam of the digital will confuse you to the point you'll forget what was actually working in the 1st place, cds 💿 ❤ but Walmart made a $1B selling media in 2022! While you got streams but no money,lol
I’d love to be hopeful about all of this but it sounds like more of the same promises tbh. Tech bros taking massive cuts on the backs of artists while “predicting” the next “way”. Just being real.
I just don’t think the industry and labels will let it happen. They own most of artists musics, this was same dream that was sold with streaming 1.0. Then majors worked it out to take control again.
NEVER PUT YOURSELF DOWN, ALWAYS KEEP YOUR HEAD-UP. AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT RECORD LABLES ONLY CAN OWN WHOEVER, AND WHATEVER IS SIGNED TO THE RECORD LABLES. MEANING THEY WILL NEVER OWN YOU OR YOUR CONTENT UNLESS YOU GIVE IT TO THEM..
think more positively. anything is possible.
@@justjasmin4251By all means, something should be tried but it’s not negative to acknowledge the way things usually go in the corporate world these days.
This is no longer the case.. look at Taylor Swift and Dua Lipa.. they own their catalogs and their masters.. they can take them anywhere. These 2 young ladies are showing the rest of the artists how to do it!
Raine Group are useless
As a recording company, I think artists have two options, pay for recording and retain all royalties, or sign over some royalties to record. I prefer just being a recording service where the artist owns 100% of their music. I also don't have the advertising ties to justify owning royalty percentage anyhow.
Musicians need to retain the royalties or they won't make the money.
The real problem is artists sign god awful deals. Spotify gives 70 to 80 % of their revenue (not profit, revenue) to labels and publishers. The labels and publishers then give the artists like 15 to 20 % of what they got. Music streaming can't really do anything about that. Even if Spotify cut an artist a sweet deal... artists don't own their music. They'd pay this money and still not get access to the music.
Yung Joc said it best. In no other industry do you get a loan, you payback the loan 5 times over but they can say *nah that was our service fee, you gotta pay use outta your 15%*, AND the person who made the loan keeps all IP even if the loan is paid off. No other industry is making deals this lopsided. No bank could get away offering a crap tier loan like that. Nobody would take it. Only in the music industry does stuff like this fly.
Not everyone is signed, and I heard they give some of your money to the bigger artists, as well as the fact that they have moved the goal post, and or have been taking music down because of supposed fake streams. Curtiss KingTV (a rapper, and beat producer) talks about this on his YT channel
If the future of streaming is connecting a massive amount of fans directly to a massive amount of artists this will likely happen through a big platform. Why wouldn't we expect the dominant platforms to just take a similar cut as spotify for their connective services?
They will. There will always be a "gatekeeper" since it's about convenience for the consumer.
That's why LAWS are written.....
It would be interesting if a big social media platform just does the MySpace model of having artists streaming music on their profile. One stop shop of artists posting pics and videos as well as music and other things.
Bruh .. it's like your vids are crafted perfectly for our timeline! Fock Spotify! Music and production artists deserve to be valued accurately and a great step is booting out the middlemen who are there for nefarious reasons. Great content!
Yeah but you're still going to need Spotify for those who aren't your fans.
@@MusicMoneyMakeover I understand the perspective. Spotify already caters to label artists and playlisting. Where it's going, Spotify will unlikely be a reliable tool for majority of artists (if it's not already dubbed as such)
@@MusicMoneyMakeoverglad you said this cuz I was just about to take my music off of their, but could you explain
@iammoamp This is exactly what I was going to say. 🙌🏻
@@MusicMoneyMakeover True, true. I agree... Hopefully, it won't be too costly of a loss-leader. Great content, by the way! 🤘🏻😎
Thats not how streaming came about. It's a bit more complicated than "bad music" it started with Napster and limewire, the major labels passed on the opportunity to create platforms, hence big tech got involved and the rest is history
This shit is guaranteed to FAIL.
At no point has the consumer EVER lost the ability to pay for music. If they cared about supporting the artist, they'd have been paying for MP3 downloads on Amazon. You established that streaming took over because fans didn't want to pay for music and then literally a few seconds later praised a CEO for saying fans want to pay the artist directly.
WRONG!!!!
Artists need to get this through their head:
FANS DO NOT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT YOUR MONEY ISSUES. If you can't afford to make new music, they will say "aww that sucks" and move on to any one of the other billion artists out there.
The reality is this:
You CAN make money off of streaming. I thought that statement was bullshit too, but then I crunched the numbers and compared them to a signed artist dropping a physical single in the 1980s and 90s. It turns out that a successful single from an indie artist in 2023 actually earns the artist MORE money than an equally successful single from a signed artist back then. I'll try to summarize as best I can...
The average artist back then recieved 4% from a physical sale, before retail markup. Let's ignore the fact that the artist had to pay back all the loans for studio-time, video shoots, photo shoots, marketing, etc. because, except for physical duplication, the indie artist today will have to pay that out of pocket (through being wealthy or taking out a personal loan) in order to make a huge hit, so they basically balance out.
So... The cassette single sells at $1. The artist gets $0.04 of that. They sell 1-million copies, which comes out to $40k.
Spotify in 2023 pays what works out to $4 for 1k streams ($0.004). A million streams generates $4k.
That seems like artists used to make 10× more, right? WRONG.
Each copy the signed 1990s artist sold was played by the fan at least 2 or 3 times daily for the first couple weeks and then played hundreds of times over the course of the year. There are 365.25 days in a year, so let's average it out to 100 plays in the first year. Experience and observation tell me each tape was played a LOT more than that, but 100 plays will help average out between replay value of huge hits and songs that fell off a little early.
That's a 1-time payment of $0.04, which comes to $40k for 1M copies sold. If each tape sold is equal to 100 streams, $4k becomes $400k.
I'm leaving out the fact that an artist had to be liked more back then to sell the single because people had to drive to a store and actually pay for it, as opposed to telling Siri/Alexa to play it or hit a button and get it for free. I'm also leaving out the fact that physical copies would be given a resold to others who could then hear it and not pay anything.
The RIAA, whom awards gold and platinum status, actually values the comparison between physical and streams to be "1 sale = 1,500 streams". So I'm being very conservative in my comparison.
I chose 2023 Spotify rates because, with Spotify not paying out to artists unless they get enough streams to actually have any chance of getting a payout from DistroKid (Spotify is NOT stealing payouts from artists who don't invest in professional studio-time and marketing. They're stopping DistroKid from stealing the money that they've been paying to artists... It's a long separate matter), Spotify will be paying MORE to artists people actually listen to in 2024.
Yeah this Spotify payout situation is crazy
It's not as bad as it sounds and it's not nearly as bad as getting monetized on youtube.
@@MusicMoneyMakeover yeah I mean 1k streams isn't a bad thing but ppls narrative on it got me thinking crazy haha
Tell that to Gary Newman
It’s not over for streaming it’s over for MUSICIANS. what’s coming is AI-generated music by NON-MUSICIANS. Just like photos made everyone a photographer facebook, google, openai, etc already have the platforms to allow your grandma and every teenager to compose their own lyrics and music in any style they want. Their favorite songs will not be other artists but THEIR OWN creations.
Both things can exist. Professional photographers are still around after AI pictures and its effects got popular :)
@@romunizTrue. Literally still see taxi cabs among Lyft/Uber drivers
If you want a stale imitation of music than AI is for you
@@Bob-kz6vs Millions of humans feel there is absolutely nothing more stale, mediocre, derivative, uninspiring or repetitive than humans only submitting songs on streaming platforms. I think AI-assisting humans might finally open doors to ORIGINAL compositions where the goal (ironically) is not to sound like everyone else. I don’t think humans are capable of that.
@@RedCloudServices AI literally can only imitate. Great art comes from sublime moments of inspiration in states of altered consciousness. Sleep, trans, meditation, hallucination, daydreaming, melting into your couch on heroin etc. Machines are incapable of achieving those states. AI with human guidance is a different story.
how about, people just head over to bandcamp and buy what they want to listen to. Pay people that create. And no. Not everyone needs nor wants to become a video producer. duh.
I don't believe more revenue will go the artist. I mean, I'd love to think it would, but the way corporate companies are operating nowadays all I see ( and I think we'll see in the future ) is more greed. Spotify is completely embedded in this industry ( with its all music free for users and paying artist peanuts business model ) and I don't see them going anywhere for a long time. They're still completely in control and ( as we've seen from recent spotify moves ) it's just going to get worse. Music as a digital commodity has been cheapened, people just don't want to pay for it. And unless, of course, there's a big shift back towards physical product, I don't see it changing.
I really want to be wrong about this though, but as someone who's been in this industry for 3 decades I'm just not optimistic here.
I don't stream. Spotify creeped me out from the beginning. I buy music. I like owning a library.
If any of this is true then songwriters (not artists) will find it even harder to get heard.
Yep. However its all in how you build your digital presence as well.
Nah I don’t believe not one bit I ain’t subscribing to it songwriters gonna be straight
Ryan Leslie has always been ahead of the game. He been using super phone and had already taken his music off streaming platforms because he was preparing for life after streaming.
There was a renaissance of good independent music on streaming from like 2003-2007 on pure volume and myspace, at least for metalcore. But there were no portable streaming devices back then so it still probably led to a lot of physical media sales with the streaming being used as promo.
I agree with @markdkberry. We all need to protest the algorithms by not participating in companies that use algorithms to present content. We need a list of THOSE companies. If if there isn't one, we need to start one.
Its not that its 'more work than I signed up for', its that I didn't sign up for work - I signed up to do what I love, not agonize so I can do what I love 5-10% of the time. Thats exploitation. Art had a lot more integrity when there was more to go around so people could delegate properly and keep their creative integrity & improve their craft & make honest work. Musicians are so fragmented they miss the point entirely now, and its easier and easier for half-assed talents with business accumen to clog the space with generic soundalike pablum.
Very informative and relevant to the dissatisfaction of many artists with current Streaming 1.0 services! Thanks so much!!!
I made it to 3:28 of your video. I beg to differ. Fans don’t want to spend anything!
Riddle me this Batman, how do you expect people to pay for what they already consider they get for next to nothing?
The past: you used to pay for the music and then you owned your copy of it.
The present: you own nothing and stream it for next to nothing, for the illusion of ownership.
The future??? You’re gonna have to pay for it again, to have ownership or the illusion of ownership!!!
I’ve been rattling this very question around my brain since the inception of itunes.
The children are the future and are the future consumers.
They’ve been brought up on a steady dose of music is free.
Do you honestly expect this next generation to start buying music again from artists?
They can’t even afford a place to live on their own these days. Next in line after that is do what you have to to keep up with the Jones, and music is not going to be one of them.
Next to take the fall is the motion picture industry.
Yep. You’re right. Kids have been turning away from music for years anyhow. Only the heavily promoted, branded acts do well.
I couldn't agree more- recorded music has no consumer-based value anymore- it is consumed for free- you cannot put the genie back in the bottle!
@@TheAgentSumoThat should mean the talent should improve because the people still making music would be doing so simply because they have a passion for music...but most likely it'll be AI generated shlock, heavily promoted industry plants, and total amateurs with no financial incentive to improve
Fans don't want to spend anything? Really?Tell that to the Swifties and the Beehive and people who want to support other acts in general. What about all the other acts who consistently make 6 figures and 7 figures a year who aren't known?
I agree, nobody is going to pay $15 per month for a single artist when they can pay that for thousands of artists.
Listening to this makes me wonder a few things. Do you think the CD format will dissapear completely? Will fans lose the ability to purchase and own music at some point and be limited to subscription only? I for one still like to purchase a physical CD because then I am not subject to losing access to a song, or album because the lable has pulled the rights and ability to listen to it on a streaming service. Even now there are artists that have albums that are not availalbe to stream, and if you're trying to discover new artists you end up limited in what you hear because you're not even aware that it exists.
If you have a website, you can put downloads in your "store."
CD format will never disappear. Having to rely on a label to publish your own music is defeating the purpose while the artist starves the label eats. I know many cats in the underground that are pushing physical CDs on there own website and at there shows . Why go the label route when you can do it all yourself? And usually the real fans support the artists so they can still make a living. Albeit they may not be super rich like a mainstream artist pretends to be but then again the music is usually more of an art form so people will buy it. People clowning Lloyd banks for selling his mixtape for $100 but I bet u he got 1000 people to buy it and it's basic mathematics here that's 100g for an independent artist making music in his own studio. Everyone gets so caught up in the glamour . Just support the real artist and let the major labels die out
But then it's not a "hit" so people won't listen to an underground artist that is probably making 100k+ a year lol people just be mad ignorant about this hit shit when music is an art not a way to get rich . All them artist that pretend to be rich are all on 360 deals and I doubt they'll ever recouped. Support your local artist buy there albums buy there merch
With all the current technology we will revert to the past making digital cassette recording mix tapes Of our favorite songs.
This can have gatekeeping factors without a doubt
Keep preaching it! Gotta keep the faith in such a seemly bleak world but hard work will Always pay off.
Utterly wonderful to see a post about this very subject that I have never yet considered in my angst about artists losing moneys due to them. Of course technology & trends never stand still these days. Its GREAT to even contemplate that these would evolve forward beyond the terrible model thats been around for 2 decades or more. Really appreciate you putting this out there and I hope it will act as an inspiration (along with all your cited reference people) to start a movement in consciousness towards artist paybacks. Thank you!
Dude you have the dopest advice and insights into the transformative aspects of the music industry…the music industry has been controlling the musicians since day one…it’s time that musicians took control of their Business not just their music.
Yeah man I been doing this for ages now, even have my site/join mailing list set as (Join The Revolution) while having a bunch of epic digital offers that are like single downloads but packed with much more. Still can't seem to get anyone to buy anything but I have confidence with time and proactive badass fans/supporters that this will grow. Even if I could get 50 fans that purchase every single for $4 everytime I have a new release I could cover some of the costs of the song and not go backwards so much, this is deffinatey the future, problem is we need reall forward thinking engaged and proactive people as fans.
From what I can see one of your big problems is that you lack branding. However your music doesn't sound bad at all.
Well made video, BUT, streaming is about ease of use for the CONSUMER not the artist. There will always be a "gatekeeper" based on convenience for the consumer to get everything all in one place. 🤷♂️
Every artist will manage their own music stream and music will be heard everywhere on social media where everyone will decide for themselves whether they want to pay for it or not. That is something we are moving towards🎹
The end of copyright is the end of professional music production. I make a living making music.
@@GingerDrumsNot our problem
@@Subzearo Well, that depends if its important to you to have new music that is produced to a high standard by professionals.... if not then I guess you are right
But what incentive to they have to keep their word and who is going to enforce this? This sounds to good to be true. They don't care about the artist at all.
Actually it's not too good to be true and there have been several attempts. I may make a video on who's leading the charge.
The “Investor’s Speculations” basically all described Bandcamp!?! 😂
So basically Streaming 1.0 isn’t dead and the things you need to do in the future are the things artists already need to do to make money
3:05 I believe it to MIke...! Golden video bro! :D
There will be a huge vacuum once Bandcamp gets destroyed by mismanagement (coming in the next 2 years, almost guaranteed). Somebody with pockets who actually cares about artists, needs to create the replacement. These platforms should never be controlled by publicly traded corporations, as the push for year-over-year financial gain for shareholders destroys the ability of the platform to function in the interest of artists. Art is not a product for rich people to use to build their wealth. At least, it shouldn’t be.
People aren’t going to subscribe to a bunch of different artists “premium” content.
These ‘gurus’ NEVER speak about the most important factor: Make extraordinary music. Michael Jackson. The Eagles. Prince. Sade. Bruce Springsteen. Stop falling for the okeedoke, people..and pay for these courses. They are selling to everyone …knowing most people will never make it because they are not good enough. It starts with real..true..talent. Not a scheme like he is talking about. Make great songs and everything else will take care of itself.
Talent is one thing but relying on that alone is the reason why 99% of artists fail.
Been about this model and been setting up to help creators get off the plantation. Premium quality content has always been at the forefront. The lazy drag and drop way has never worked.
Yup!
Ryan Leslie is the catalyst for this direction.
I can agree, yes!
You get it! People fighting over royalties are missing the point entirely. There’s a revolution coming, in terms of where the value of music comes from. And it’s not royalty based.
it's based on what?
@@energytrail315right still waiting on the answer
@@energytrail315vibes n feels
I thought music IS the content! What's content for a musician if not music?
You'll always want extras from your favorite musicians.... Studio bloopers, interviews, ETC.... Remember Pantera Home Videos???
The question is…
What companies are on the leading edge of 2.0… ?
RUclips music, and TikTok music
@MusicMoneyMakeover I'm not gonna lie I thought you was referring to this 2.0 Wave as in the web 2.0 and meta verse world. I still feel so many people are oblivious to that side of the internet
Practically every song by every artist ever is on youtube for free. Why would anybody pay for streaming anywhere online?
Not everyone uploads music to RUclips lol! 1) you can’t close the app without stopping the video unless you pay for RUclips premium 2) monetization is different 3) I pay for Spotify because my music generates more than enough revenue to pay for the subscription and more.
I’m about to be “one of those guys” that you knew was coming but hey…
While I understand you are completely right about what a “musician” needs to do to be successful, I just plain hate it. Basically, to be a successful musician one must be a business executive, marketing consultant, clout-seeker, viral chasing, sell-out. Now, I know I’m misrepresenting what was said a bit. But the fact that artists have to market a brand, rather than just making art, perpetuates this gross system. Not your fault, or maybe any one person’s fault, it’s just hard to hear messages like you can’t just be an amazing artist poet musician and be recognized, without TikTok tomfoolery. Just a sad state of affairs really… The meek get meeker and the gross get grosser…
You can be just a artist, musician, poet etc but if you want to earn a living and have a comfortable lifestyle then a modern creative artist must be all encompassing in their business approach. Unless, you are in the small majority where a business team earns the money for you and you still keep enough to live comfortably.
If music is a side hustle and/or hobby then enjoy the freedom to do whatever you like.
@@JohnPapaGros I do understand the reality of the situation and know you are speaking the truth. For me, music is just a passion I do no matter what. I just feel like a phony when forced to market myself in order to get any recognition. So I’ll always keep doing it, I may just never play the big league game with it.
@@SelfPropelledDestiny Someone told me a long time ago, do what you love and do it the best you can and good things will happen. You just never predict what those good things will be.
As long as the major labels aren't able to creep in and take ownership, like they've done with Spotify and other streaming platforms and only prioritzing their own artists on playlists signed to their label.
I see the Record Lable class that's being offered does not mention the 5th US based PRO: AllTrack Performing Rights
NO streaming for me.....I'm not interested in 'renting music' via a subscription
We have over 29M TikTok video impressions and aren’t eligible for royalties. Over 25k organic users used my artist song “Psycho” and we still get more $ from Spotify than TikTok…..
That’s because TikTok doesn’t pay for impressions and views it pays for how many videos were created using your song. This is only for the publishing side.
Curiously, when I use a special offer of about $10 for 3 months of Spotify, after 3 months their algorithm’s music DISCOVERY function collapses completely for me and I am left with nothing new if I were to continue paying-so I don’t. This has happened repeatedly for about 4 years. It makes zero sense for me to be a subscriber when my motivation to pay rests 2/3rds upon fresh music, fresh artists. There’s no value-for-money in streaming service that just gives me access to music I already know.
It’s noteworthy that one writer suggests that video games have been under-utilized as a means of finding audiences. Since hearing pop rock and electronic music from around the world in FIFA years ago, barely any pop music worth hearing has been discovered in gaming.
You have a great page bro. I appreciate you for always helping people out.
Thank you. I appreciate that.
Your success and the information provided are commendable. However, I'm curious about why, if investors are seeking direct fan investment, there are only options for creating a creator or an influencer and not a specific sign-up option for fans. Congratulations again on your achievements.
Tech companies are collecting all of our data - our data is the "new gold". The tec industry bought the music industry. So it's NOT a technical problem for the music industry to pay the artists: THEY DON'T WANT to pay the artists. These big companies are above the law. Only superrich artists can afford to sue tec companies. We simply need a law that all composers, artists have to be mentioned on every stream internally, so they get their money automatically. IMHO
Rick Beato, Why Musicians Are Broke and How to Fix It: ruclips.net/video/-TM9foEQJ-Q/видео.html
If 2.0 figures out how to pay a fare share to the artist without affecting the membership of a customer it will be a win-win. For instance if in a month of paying 10$ for a subscription a customer plays only songs of 3 artists the big bulk of that 10$ should go to the artists and the rest to the streaming service. But greedy is bad and eventually kills business. Can’t wait to see a new innovation taking over this industry.
So basically what you mean is for musicicans to start taking those concepts more serious, make more premium exclusive content, be better at entertaiment for when those platforms start implementing those changes? But right now there is nothing really done yet, new platforms will be made and the existing ones will try to jump on this wave to retain their artists. Did i miss something?
You're gonna need a foundation. What's that? Whatever your method is of supporting making quality, well-thought out music.
lol the up and down arrows with money clip art. Click bait video got me
Very interested. Where can I get this presentation?
bro, such damn high quality info here, thx so much hey
Depends on genere and goals and age range of current fanbase. For anyone under 35 and pop hip-hopp etc yes but not Country, Christian, Bluegrass, or sync.
appreciate this.
Correct me if I am wrong, they are trying to make it more accesible for artists to actually control and monetise their own creations?
Okay, I'm going to work with this brother
Let's do it man!
Russ, the weeknd, Drake The Ruler, Blokka Solo, future, 21 savage. They have all either signed distribution deals or stayed independent and are making SIX figures a year of steams, when you sign a record deal, that’s when they screw you. You can get rich off streams, it jus takes time to build a fan base and to be recognized by record labels. So you can have the opportunity negotiate your deal, that is best for you
a lot of the mentioned ideas are not user friendly at all. So i think the idea of settled streaming platforms is still on point, the oppurtunities for artists and users big, but the companys not artist friendly. thats the main problem.
It's corrupt and only the corporate-sponsored artists are promoted. It's worse on broadcast radio, but at least that remains a free service. Streaming manipulates its algorithms and ratings systems to make sure the payola artists are at the top. The benefit of radio/MTV was that you were introduced to new artists even though you were not given a choice of what they played. Streaming can become a cocoon if you're not actively searching for new music. Certain genres are completely left out so you must do some outside research to find what you like, or what you might like.
This is what drives me nuts as a prolific Spotify playlist creator, I find some random obscure song and click radio to find other stuff like it and it still feeds me billboard top 100s as recommendations at the top.
That’s dope I drop my music tracks all over the Internet for everyone to use even other DJs. I don’t care for labels or Zionist rule that is dead. We need to be in control of our lives. That’s also why I release all New Tracks on SoundCloud first then later on everything else. Great Video! #likwailao #lfamstreamersmusic
Spotify really so annoying 😢😢😢
I don't envy new artists and the choices they are given today. Most of them will never release physical copies of their music. The music I listen to is mainly from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Streaming music isn't something I do. I only purchase it 1 time. I already physically own every piece of music that I want and most likely will ever want. The only thing that keeps me buying any music today is the release of reissues in a higher quality than I already have. I will buy a download of a reissue in an uncompressed format from places like HDTracks but, I will still always prefer a physical copy if the artist releases it. I enjoy the music I love to much to listen to it in a quality tailored to Cell Phones.
What you should be doing is buying cd's and vinyl records.
Funny enough, I see this going circular. Artists doing all the new work after already doing the work to create and perform, the record labels will return to offering to do what you don’t want to for a cost. Lesson learned by the labels sure, but eventually they’ll get greedy and round and round we go. Thoughts?
You should always send your audience to your own platform and keep them in YOUR universe. If you put a product on Amazon and someone purchases your item Amazon will never share with you their email, name and info. But Amazon gets to remarket and communicate with your Customer! Thousands of views on RUclips … RUclips has their email and contact you just have your view counter go up. Trash techniques. In 2017 RUclips was more wide open … less competition now you’re competing with celebs and people that have actual audiences in podcasting, and entertainment. Everything you do … do it for 1-2 minutes and then send them back to your platform for the full version.
Fanbase is already connecting fans to your content in this way
Everybody telling me I got good music ..what do you recommend to get the spins up?? Idk what buttons to push
Ren has done all this already it's old news. We need a completely new model where artists can just choose to focus on what they want and have full control over the monetisation cut out the middle men.
as i creator i can't wait should start now
Are you using the DJI Pocket 3 to film this?
Thank you brother.
You are welcome
That's the problem with companies when they get too big. Definitely, their loss!!!
They take the money especially via membership while paying you nothing, then they take the content and sell it underwound overseas especially. bezos did this with audible and amazon books ebooks. never put your ebooks no where if it is copyright material.
How can I contact you ?
I own a 100k Music video distribution platform and I get all the information before it hits the public because I’m signed a publishing deal and there is no talk about creating a fan sign up
Man, I needed this video!
Glad i could help
Hey, whatever happened to Pono?
WHAT IS PREMIUM CONTENT i mean i know premium is likethebest the highest but give me a term where i can grab it because you might mean something else
Patreon. Stuff you pay a fee for, except it will be on the popular platforms.
Premium content can look like a bunch of stuff. Behind the scenes studio sessions, talks about how the song came about, podcast type talks/interviews with artists you are collaborating with, vlog of behind the scenes tour stuff, random games so that the audience gets to know you.
Remind me of David Ruffin, bruh.....
“Walk Away From Love” - what a track?
Channel Memberships is where you can pay your content creator if they have the sub count for it
So basically the Capitalists are promising that artists will make more money as they've done a million times before. None of their ideas are new and none of this crap is going to make Artists any money. This entire video was a complete waste of my time.
So subscription-based is Streaming 2.0?
What do you see from a producer prospective where it us going to be in rhe nex 5 years as producer getting paid for there songs because i feel like streaming your songs on a platform sight is not giving producers the full market value of there creativity as it owrtains to oroducing a song
you right music money makeover mannnn
We can't be everything to everyone. There's a saying: Jack if all trades, master of none. Music will suffer by requiring creators to also be marketers and business managers in order to find financial success.
“Artists who entertain [the lowest common denominator].” When music is verbose and visual, it’s just meaningless noise.
how will streaming 2.0 affect DJs getting music ?
That’s also going to be bad, if I were to connect only to the artists I LOVE, I’d pay for Beatles, Guns n Roses and Taylor Swift 😂 like most ppl, I would still be favoring big ones. So this doesn’t seem like the best way to favour small artists.
That’s because you don’t favor small artist. Think about it.
Honestly suggesting, and telling a whole generation of aspiring musicians that they need to become influencer entertainers to succeed at what they love seems very hollow - and even more like giving in to "the man".
Money directly to the artists is a great idea, but let's not have our musicians jump through hoops and dance for us to 'earn our attention'.
Aren't musicians/entertainers already doing this with things like patreon? you have a your loyal fans and you offer some sort of benefit to subscribing to them for a fee. I don't see this as 2.0 streaming, its already happening. RUclips already has that 'sign up' feature for a monthly fee, I suppose spotify and apple music could integrate something similar
Wait for it…. Tik Tok Music it’s on the way and it will be a congregation of all of it.
#pmefs is the way! See the glitz and the glam of the digital will confuse you to the point you'll forget what was actually working in the 1st place, cds 💿 ❤ but Walmart made a $1B selling media in 2022! While you got streams but no money,lol
For the future of MetaVerse
Stream 2.0 is zero money for artists because songs will be created by AI on the servers.
I’m in 💪🏾✊🏾
I’d love to be hopeful about all of this but it sounds like more of the same promises tbh. Tech bros taking massive cuts on the backs of artists while “predicting” the next “way”. Just being real.
So the original idea for music and internet after the fall of major label's control.
cool sales pitch, would be cooler if you were honest