Overall, music industry revenues in the U.S., adjusted for inflation, are at about 35% of their 1999 peak even including streaming, downloading, licensing, etc. The good news is that if the industry can get 50% of U.S. households to pay about $11 a month, total industry revenues would once again reach their former peak, although that's counting gross subscription revenue to a service like Apple Music, Pandora or Spotify as part of music industry revenues.
I believe music will never have its golden age of 80's and 90's again. It is the emergence of the Internet (web browsing in particular) as an entertaining media that fundamentally shifted consumer interests. Same happens now with television. 50% of household paying for streaming music is a wishful thinking.
I tried signing up as an independent artist and Apple Music did not allow me. I'm wondering how this will work. It's revolutionary and could bring a new era to music like the App Store did.
But I can guarantee you about 1M independent artists will sign up as soon as it's available to them. Will the big labels be willing to split the profits with all these young up and comers? $9.99 a month will not cut it.
I believe music will never have its golden age of 80's and 90's again. It is the emergence of the Internet (web browsing in particular) as an entertaining media that fundamentally shifted consumer interests. Same happens now with television. 50% of household paying for streaming music is a wishful thinking.
It's all these cheap sh**heads that think everything should be free destroying the industry. I've had arguments with them before. They say music should be free and they shouldn't have to pay for it. YouTube isn't helping much either. You can find everything on iTunes on YouTube uploaded by some teenager in his bedroom with nothing else to do. The music industry is doing nothing about this. People need to be fined and jailed for stealing IPs.
Giggle is loving the piracy. It only means less money for Apple and artists and more ads for them. Giggle should be fined to the highest extent for this crap.
Not really. Spotify will still continue to thrive. I know a lot of people who are not switching because they like Spotify so much and they can play it on everything including Sonos. So stop acting like everyone is just suddenly going to stop using Spotify and switch to Apple Music because they're not. And that includes myself who is going to Keep Google Play Music as is already does everything Apple Music does. More actually.
Right, Sonos users clearly represent the mass market.
Not.
And you're right, GPM sells your listening habits, so I suppose that's a 'feature'.
And finally, please explain how Apple Music is giving artists such a platform. If I'm an independent artist who has funded my own recordings, how do I get my recordings on Apple Music? I was under the impression that Apple Music was not an open platform - that it was contingent upon deals between Apple and the traditional music companies.
the pinebox boys (friends of mine) have their music on the iTunes store and they're not being represented by anyone but themselves. i have to assume they're making all the money outside of manufacturing costs, t-shirts, and apple's fees, but you couldn't get that with a label.
if your music is good, there are plenty of ways to get it played out there. not only that, it will find a way.
the pinebox boys play all over europe & the us. they do it for the love of it—not for fame or fortune. if you're seeking fame & fortune, you might need to adjust your expectations or perhaps put your focus on the joy you get from making your music.
I tried signing up as an independent artist and Apple Music did not allow me.
I'm wondering how this will work. It's revolutionary and could bring a new era to music like the App Store did.
But I can guarantee you about 1M independent artists will sign up as soon as it's available to them. Will the big labels be willing to split the profits with all these young up and comers? $9.99 a month will not cut it.
Few artists in this industry can make money. According to the RIAA, in 2011:
0.5% of albums sold more than 10,000 copies
5.5% of albums sold between 1000 and 10,000 copies
14% sold between 100 and 1000 copies
80% sold fewer than 100 copies.
So 94% of albums released sold less than 1000 copies.
And the above number represent only albums that sold at least one copy.
Out of 8 million digital tracks sold in that year, 7.5 million sold less than 100 copies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cali
It's all these cheap sh**heads that think everything should be free destroying the industry. I've had arguments with them before. They say music should be free and they shouldn't have to pay for it. YouTube isn't helping much either. You can find everything on iTunes on YouTube uploaded by some teenager in his bedroom with nothing else to do. The music industry is doing nothing about this. People need to be fined and jailed for stealing IPs.
Giggle is loving the piracy. It only means less money for Apple and artists and more ads for them. Giggle should be fined to the highest extent for this crap.
I always wondered how all those videos of records spinning on turntables or a track accompanied by fan pics existed as well. But I believe that YouTube does actually pay royalties of some sort on all those videos uploaded by jerks who don't understand that they have no right to do so. I posted a video of a TV performance that I had permission to upload from a musician who was in it (posted as Private just so I could access it from the musician's website) and within five minutes, I received an email saying that I violated someone's copyright. I also once posted a video of a family member dancing at a recital to a relatively rare Brazilian recording. The video was heavily edited so the music was chopped up. In spite of that, YouTube recognized that the video had copyrighted material and they stuck advertising on it, which means they had a deal with that label to keep it up and pay them a piece of the ad revenue. The label probably received as much as a tenth of a cent!
I was at an AES meeting last night on copyright (as I've posted elsewhere) and there was general agreement that piracy is in decline and is much less of an issue. It's been in decline ever since Apple launched iTunes. The problem is that the perception has remained that recorded music isn't worth very much. I remember all the people defending piracy and crying that 99 cents a track was too much who were in complete denial that back in 1965, when no one was complaining about the price of music, a single listed for 99 cents and generally sold for 66 cents ($4.96 in 2015 dollars) and albums listed for $3.79, $4.79 and $5.79, generally sold for $3.25, $3.85 and $4.49 and on special sale sold for $2.17, $2.77 and $3.37, which is the equivalent of $16.30, $20.80 and $25.31 in 2015 dollars at the very lowest prices then available. Music is an incredible bargain and has been for some time. All those back catalog CDs, frequently with 20 tracks that sell for as little as $3 to $5? It's inconceivable to me that consumers don't see that as miraculous. But few care about CDs anymore anyway.
What's actually killed the music industry is the change from an albums market back to a singles market. That's completely unsustainable. When singles were popular in the 1950s and 60s, artists would record three songs in a single session. Now they take months and for albums, there are frequently multiple producers, engineers and studios involved.
Another factor is that radio used to sell a lot of music, but with the emphasis on demographics for advertisers, radio programming and music listening has become highly fragmented and radio playlists have become so tight that it no longer sells music, not that young people listen to traditional radio anymore anyway. Everyone is listening to something different, which isn't bad in theory, but it means that we'll never again have a Sinatra, Beatles, Stones, Madonna, Michael Jackson, Springsteen, Eagles, etc. It's been many years since an album has been certified Diamond (10 million units or more) by the RIAA.
IMO, the dumbing down of America has also played a role and so we see very weak sales of Classical and Jazz genres. And the decline of the physical record store has also hurt recorded music sales as there's no longer a central place to hang out and become aware of new artists. I don't think socialization on the web makes up for that, no matter how many billions of posts there are.
I also think that the massive amount of releases actually hurts sales - there's simply way too much trash to wade through. I think many people would consider the 1970s as a golden era for pop music but if you look at the major's catalogs from back then, they were actually quite small. Columbia, Warner-Reprise and RCA each had only a few hundred active albums in their catalogs at that time.
To those complaining the artists are getting their share, that may be true, but just wait until someone, likely Apple, totally disintermediates the publishers and other middlemen, allowing anyone to bring their music to market in a viable manner. Like the ball fields of Cuba providing a never-ending supply of future big league baseball players (because there's passion for playing the game), the passion to make music that exists in a large segment of the human race will finally open the floodgates. With so much supply, those who are in the business primarily to make money or achieve fame for fame's sake will continue to be pushed aside by a growing population of those who make music because it's their passion and who will do so regardless of the money or fame associated. Key lesson: Dont get into a highly competitive commodity business unless you are okay with never gaining recognition or wealth.
Looks like Spotify are worried - and rightly so. Come end of the month my Spotify premium is getting cancelled and I'm taking up the family offer from Apple which is incredible value in comparison. Spotify's days are numbered I'm afraid.
I use Spotify and like it. I'll give Apple Music a try since it's free for 3 months but I didn't see anything that would really entice me to switch. You don't need a subscription for the Beats 1 radio station (at least not on Apple devices) and I'm already paying for iTunes Match.
I also have Spotify, but will probably switch to Apple Music because it's going to be much more integrated with the whole Apple ecosystem(apple watch, apple tv, etc). Anyway, the bigger threat to spotify is that new users are more likely to go with Apple Music as opposed to existing users moving. What's the reason to go with Spotify if Apple Music does essentially the same thing?
I was a beats user and went to spotify, only because the app was more reliable. If the app works well there's a good chance I'll switch back. The catalogs are almost identical, but I miss Beats' music discovery mechanism.
I was a beats user and went to spotify, only because the app was more reliable. If the app works well there's a good chance I'll switch back. The catalogs are almost identical, but I miss Beats' music discovery mechanism.
To those complaining the artists are getting their share, that may be true, but just wait until someone, likely Apple, totally disintermediates the publishers and other middlemen, allowing anyone to bring their music to market in a viable manner. Like the ball fields of Cuba providing a never-ending supply of future big league baseball players (because there's passion for playing the game), the passion to make music that exists in a large segment of the human race will finally open the floodgates. With so much supply, those who are in the business primarily to make money or achieve fame for fame's sake will continue to be pushed aside by a growing population of those who make music because it's their passion and who will do so regardless of the money or fame associated. Key lesson: Dont get into a highly competitive commodity business unless you are okay with never gaining recognition or wealth.
This was the point of the keynote 99.9999% of viewers missed. I leaped out at me.
Looks like Spotify are worried - and rightly so. Come end of the month my Spotify premium is getting cancelled and I'm taking up the family offer from Apple which is incredible value in comparison. Spotify's days are numbered I'm afraid.
If there are a lot of switchers from spotlfy It wll be massively damaging People have choices ? music Is compelling especially the family plan Imagine if apple gave access or discounts on AUDIOBOOKS Wow that would be compelling in a major way I'd jump now My wife uses lots of audiobooks
Comments
Overall, music industry revenues in the U.S., adjusted for inflation, are at about 35% of their 1999 peak even including streaming, downloading, licensing, etc. The good news is that if the industry can get 50% of U.S. households to pay about $11 a month, total industry revenues would once again reach their former peak, although that's counting gross subscription revenue to a service like Apple Music, Pandora or Spotify as part of music industry revenues.
I believe music will never have its golden age of 80's and 90's again. It is the emergence of the Internet (web browsing in particular) as an entertaining media that fundamentally shifted consumer interests. Same happens now with television. 50% of household paying for streaming music is a wishful thinking.
I'm wondering how this will work. It's revolutionary and could bring a new era to music like the App Store did.
But I can guarantee you about 1M independent artists will sign up as soon as it's available to them. Will the big labels be willing to split the profits with all these young up and comers? $9.99 a month will not cut it.
It's all these cheap sh**heads that think everything should be free destroying the industry. I've had arguments with them before. They say music should be free and they shouldn't have to pay for it. YouTube isn't helping much either. You can find everything on iTunes on YouTube uploaded by some teenager in his bedroom with nothing else to do. The music industry is doing nothing about this. People need to be fined and jailed for stealing IPs.
Giggle is loving the piracy. It only means less money for Apple and artists and more ads for them. Giggle should be fined to the highest extent for this crap.
Not really. Spotify will still continue to thrive. I know a lot of people who are not switching because they like Spotify so much and they can play it on everything including Sonos. So stop acting like everyone is just suddenly going to stop using Spotify and switch to Apple Music because they're not. And that includes myself who is going to Keep Google Play Music as is already does everything Apple Music does. More actually.
Right, Sonos users clearly represent the mass market.
Not.
And you're right, GPM sells your listening habits, so I suppose that's a 'feature'.
And finally, please explain how Apple Music is giving artists such a platform. If I'm an independent artist who has funded my own recordings, how do I get my recordings on Apple Music? I was under the impression that Apple Music was not an open platform - that it was contingent upon deals between Apple and the traditional music companies.
the pinebox boys (friends of mine) have their music on the iTunes store and they're not being represented by anyone but themselves. i have to assume they're making all the money outside of manufacturing costs, t-shirts, and apple's fees, but you couldn't get that with a label.if your music is good, there are plenty of ways to get it played out there. not only that, it will find a way.
the pinebox boys play all over europe & the us. they do it for the love of it—not for fame or fortune.
if you're seeking fame & fortune, you might need to adjust your expectations or perhaps put your focus on the joy you get from making your music.
I tried signing up as an independent artist and Apple Music did not allow me.
I'm wondering how this will work. It's revolutionary and could bring a new era to music like the App Store did.
But I can guarantee you about 1M independent artists will sign up as soon as it's available to them. Will the big labels be willing to split the profits with all these young up and comers? $9.99 a month will not cut it.
Few artists in this industry can make money. According to the RIAA, in 2011:
0.5% of albums sold more than 10,000 copies
5.5% of albums sold between 1000 and 10,000 copies
14% sold between 100 and 1000 copies
80% sold fewer than 100 copies.
So 94% of albums released sold less than 1000 copies.
And the above number represent only albums that sold at least one copy.
Out of 8 million digital tracks sold in that year, 7.5 million sold less than 100 copies.
It's all these cheap sh**heads that think everything should be free destroying the industry. I've had arguments with them before. They say music should be free and they shouldn't have to pay for it. YouTube isn't helping much either. You can find everything on iTunes on YouTube uploaded by some teenager in his bedroom with nothing else to do. The music industry is doing nothing about this. People need to be fined and jailed for stealing IPs.
Giggle is loving the piracy. It only means less money for Apple and artists and more ads for them. Giggle should be fined to the highest extent for this crap.
I always wondered how all those videos of records spinning on turntables or a track accompanied by fan pics existed as well. But I believe that YouTube does actually pay royalties of some sort on all those videos uploaded by jerks who don't understand that they have no right to do so. I posted a video of a TV performance that I had permission to upload from a musician who was in it (posted as Private just so I could access it from the musician's website) and within five minutes, I received an email saying that I violated someone's copyright. I also once posted a video of a family member dancing at a recital to a relatively rare Brazilian recording. The video was heavily edited so the music was chopped up. In spite of that, YouTube recognized that the video had copyrighted material and they stuck advertising on it, which means they had a deal with that label to keep it up and pay them a piece of the ad revenue. The label probably received as much as a tenth of a cent!
I was at an AES meeting last night on copyright (as I've posted elsewhere) and there was general agreement that piracy is in decline and is much less of an issue. It's been in decline ever since Apple launched iTunes. The problem is that the perception has remained that recorded music isn't worth very much. I remember all the people defending piracy and crying that 99 cents a track was too much who were in complete denial that back in 1965, when no one was complaining about the price of music, a single listed for 99 cents and generally sold for 66 cents ($4.96 in 2015 dollars) and albums listed for $3.79, $4.79 and $5.79, generally sold for $3.25, $3.85 and $4.49 and on special sale sold for $2.17, $2.77 and $3.37, which is the equivalent of $16.30, $20.80 and $25.31 in 2015 dollars at the very lowest prices then available. Music is an incredible bargain and has been for some time. All those back catalog CDs, frequently with 20 tracks that sell for as little as $3 to $5? It's inconceivable to me that consumers don't see that as miraculous. But few care about CDs anymore anyway.
What's actually killed the music industry is the change from an albums market back to a singles market. That's completely unsustainable. When singles were popular in the 1950s and 60s, artists would record three songs in a single session. Now they take months and for albums, there are frequently multiple producers, engineers and studios involved.
Another factor is that radio used to sell a lot of music, but with the emphasis on demographics for advertisers, radio programming and music listening has become highly fragmented and radio playlists have become so tight that it no longer sells music, not that young people listen to traditional radio anymore anyway. Everyone is listening to something different, which isn't bad in theory, but it means that we'll never again have a Sinatra, Beatles, Stones, Madonna, Michael Jackson, Springsteen, Eagles, etc. It's been many years since an album has been certified Diamond (10 million units or more) by the RIAA.
IMO, the dumbing down of America has also played a role and so we see very weak sales of Classical and Jazz genres. And the decline of the physical record store has also hurt recorded music sales as there's no longer a central place to hang out and become aware of new artists. I don't think socialization on the web makes up for that, no matter how many billions of posts there are.
I also think that the massive amount of releases actually hurts sales - there's simply way too much trash to wade through. I think many people would consider the 1970s as a golden era for pop music but if you look at the major's catalogs from back then, they were actually quite small. Columbia, Warner-Reprise and RCA each had only a few hundred active albums in their catalogs at that time.
Spotify pays the artists more money.
Spoitfy pays rights holders 70% of revenues and Apple Music only pays 58% of revenues.
Looks like Spotify are worried - and rightly so. Come end of the month my Spotify premium is getting cancelled and I'm taking up the family offer from Apple which is incredible value in comparison. Spotify's days are numbered I'm afraid.
I use Spotify and like it. I'll give Apple Music a try since it's free for 3 months but I didn't see anything that would really entice me to switch. You don't need a subscription for the Beats 1 radio station (at least not on Apple devices) and I'm already paying for iTunes Match.
I also have Spotify, but will probably switch to Apple Music because it's going to be much more integrated with the whole Apple ecosystem(apple watch, apple tv, etc). Anyway, the bigger threat to spotify is that new users are more likely to go with Apple Music as opposed to existing users moving. What's the reason to go with Spotify if Apple Music does essentially the same thing?
I was a beats user and went to spotify, only because the app was more reliable. If the app works well there's a good chance I'll switch back. The catalogs are almost identical, but I miss Beats' music discovery mechanism.
Spotify will be a junk stock in 12 months after its IPO.
Spotify on OS X is a system pig.
And yet the nearly 1 billion Apple customers will win with more artists interested in 58% of that pool over Spotify.
This was the point of the keynote 99.9999% of viewers missed. I leaped out at me.
Spotify has the same rate now.
It wll be massively damaging
People have choices ? music Is compelling especially the family plan
Imagine if apple gave access or discounts on
AUDIOBOOKS
Wow that would be compelling in a major way
I'd jump now
My wife uses lots of audiobooks
Quote:
Spotify has the same rate now.
Not in the UK they don't - ridiculous pricing for all 6 of us (they only offer up to 4 additional members anyway).
Get Spotify Family
Add up to four family members and get 50% off their Premium. Cancel anytime.
Your point is what exactly?
Doesn't Amazon just keep reinvesting in itself? Amazon Web Services weren't built out of nothing.
Amazon is also essentially a non-profit.