"Why don't some artists put their albums on streaming?"
I'm referring more so to independent artists. Kind of annoying to find out someone released an album but only place you can listen is Bandcamp.
I figure they get more money if people buy the album vs stream it but it would still be nice to be able to stream the album through whatever service you typically use.
Does it cost an artist money to put it on streaming, besides the possible calculation of more people buying the album if thats the only option. Meaning are there fees associated with adding albums to streaming services?
If it is only due to hoping more people would buy the album it would be nice if there was an option on streaming platforms to buy an album in order to unlock streaming. I know Bandcamp let's you do that but does anyone use Bandcamp as their streaming service? Can you make playlists with it?
1. "RE: Why don't some artists put their albums on streaming?" In response to Reply # 0
from a personal perspective as someone who (occasionally) makes music, I'm turned off of services like Spotify on principle because of the paltry amount they pay the artists.
maybe the ideal scenario would be to have an EP or smaller project on a big streamer as a kind of teaser to aid in discoverability, but holding bigger projects exclusively for Bandcamp and the like.
as far as I know, Bandcamp's streaming features are pretty bare-bones and there aren't any playlist options. but I wouldn't be surprised if they offered expanded functionality in the future. it seems their focus is more on the physical side, tho (their brick-and-mortar store in the Bay Area, the crowd-funded vinyl pressing service, etc.).
5. "RE: Are there fees to place your music on streaming services?" In response to Reply # 4
>if you want it...buy it and support the artist and put it in >the music app of your choice > >folks pay $7 for a cup of coffee they gonna pee out in 45 mins >but won't buy a $10 album they will listen to for a lifetime
The problem is people want to listen to a LOT of music from different artists.
Coming from buying music in the 80's and 90's, that cost a lot of money - and a lot of times it was for just 1 or 2 songs off a $15 or higher CD.
As much as I romaniticize that era, that really was asking too much for anyone not a middle-class adult or wealthy family child.
Streaming;/youtube is the only way for poor or young people to get MOSTLY ALL of the music exploration they want/need (unless they love regular radio for music listening).
7. "they dont have to but it surely makes things easier for fans" In response to Reply # 4
i paid $70 for one be los new album. granted, it included basically his whole discog. i have it on a flash drive, i have it in storage on my phone. id rather stream it along with the rest of 2020 releases and be able to share a playlist with songs from it.
i am looking to understand why they wouldnt want that. not saying there are not valid reasons. i just want to know what the reasons are.
i have no issue supporting artists, i will buy physical or even digital copies of albums i can stream.
8. "RE: they dont have to but it surely makes things easier for fans" In response to Reply # 7
>i am looking to understand why they wouldnt want that. not >saying there are not valid reasons. i just want to know what >the reasons are.
It's a totally valid question.
I'm just guessing here, but I think for some it's a question of balancing potential scenarios. If you're a relatively niche artist but with a substantial following, you might theoretically get more album purchases by not offering on streaming.
Let's say I have a core audience that is pretty devoted to me but I don't expect to have any major hits or breakthrough to other audiences any time soon.
I *could* put my album on streaming, but that might actually discourage my core audience from buying the record officially. So maybe I'm playing a probability game: my audience likes me enough to buy the record if it's not available elsewhere - and direct purchases mean greater profit - whereas if I stream, I might eat into those purchases.
The actual income from streaming is pretty minimal, even for a lot of big names. For many/most artists, direct purchases are much more profitable.
11. "RE: that makes sense" In response to Reply # 9
I think it's really hard to say. I don't know how well the above theory actually works in practice.
I think of ECM records, which until very recently had entirely kept their catalog off streaming. That meant no Keith Jarret (for one), as well as any number of their notable recent artists. I assume that a big part of that was to try and preserve their niche market as full purchases: if someone wants a Keith Jarrett record, they have to buy it. Considering both their contemporary lineup and their back catalog, that's a big asset.
Not long ago, their catalog went on streaming. (I think it's the whole catalog, but not sure.) If my assumption above has any truth to it, does that mean it didn't pan out the way they expected? That sales dropped (due to the general decline of album purchases) and their devoted fan base wasn't enough to keep purchases as the only/primary income stream?
12. "They're trying to make as much money as possible." In response to Reply # 0
Spotify and its direct competitors pay nearly nothing for streams. There is very, very little money coming in from that for most artists. And if it's on streaming, why buy it?
Certainly there's benefit to being easily listened-to, in terms of promoting other revenue streams (live performance, mostly, but also potentially licensing or merch or whatever). And you don't get paid NOTHING for Spotify streams. It's just that one $5 or $10 Bandcamp sale is thousands and thousands and thousands of Spotify streams.
So they're trying to maximize their income.
- Bullseye with Jesse Thorn A public radio show about things that are awesome. http://www.maximumfun.org "This is the kind of show people listen to in a more perfect world." - McSweeney's
15. "follow up question: how do you handle new music in playlists?" In response to Reply # 0
if you only listen to full albums and dont mess with playlists then this doesnt apply.
for those that do make playlists and listen primarily through playlists. how do you mix songs that are on streaming with those that are not? is there an app that will let you make a playlist with songs on streaming and songs that arent on streaming that you can share with others?
i know with google play music i could make playlists with local files, files i uploaded and songs that were on streaming. i couldnt share them though. at least not the songs that werent on streaming.
with youtube music its kind of worse. i cant seem to make a playlist that includes local or uploaded files with songs on streaming. might be because im using a brand account but im using the brand account so i can share playlist. i have found some unofficial uploads of albums on youtube but those could go down whenever and they wouldnt support the artist right?
so if an album or song isnt on streaming i rarely go back to it if i even find out about it.
before i got on streaming i was downloading most music. i would sometimes buy digital albums. if i couldnt find a good download for an album i just skipped it.
im thinking maybe i can try to start using streaming mostly to discover new music and buy all the music i really like so i just go back to local playlists but thats kind of cumbersome.
i might just need to use a better streaming app.
just listened to the drawn up project by j-live on bandcamp and its one of his better projects. glad he at least has paint a picture on streaming but would love to add different name on playlists too.