Ali͎na NorakariSomebody I know is in the top 10% of Spotify.
Guess how much the artist makes by being in the top 10% of Spotify.
Around $50 a month.
Streaming music sucks
kay 
@lastfuture another reason i will always buy my music and never use spotify
Oliver 👔I don't know the contractual conditions of the other providers - but as #Deezer pays out 70% of the revenue to the labels - how can that be worse than the old $1 CD deals? #ucps
https://www.deezer.com/ucps
https://www.deezer.com/ucps
Xair@lastfuture streaming music isn’t really the problem, massive technology monopolies that lock pricing against artists is the problem
I think independent sales and streaming services deliver pretty good amounts of money to artists, Bandcamp is pretty good and is direct sale to fans (so artists keep a majority of profits) afaik
mostly just companies like Spotify and others which fuck over the artists for money, not the actual act of streaming itself :p
Olivier D'Hondt 🛰️🌍🌱@lastfuture
This is why I buy stuff on bandcamp...
This is why I buy stuff on bandcamp...
ube boi 
@lastfuture this is why we need to normalise buying music again.
Also #bandcampfriday is coming this week
@purplepeopleeater I agree.
(*next week)
(*next week)
@lastfuture thanks for the correction
FrankyFire@purplepeopleeater @lastfuture not going to Happen. We will have to live with streaming. It's just to easy to use. I love Bandcamp, but it's kind of a hassle to download music for offline playing.
Also, I don't want to buy every song of a Playlist if I'm throwing a 90's party. Streaming is the way to go, but we have to figure a way how artists can benefit too.
@FrankyFire I agree somewhat, they will always live together, but it wouldn't hurt if poeple supported their favorite artists with buying music or merch.
I think streaming is just too cheap and people won't be happy if all the streaming services all of a sudden became more expensive
@purplepeopleeater true, I'm totally with you on that. Some changes have to happen. Maybe we'll find a Streaming Service one day that costs, let's say 15-20€ per month, but has a guaranteed and fair payout for artists. And artists will use it and abondon Spotify and Users will therefore move too. Because Spotify only works, if you can find every musicians music there.
patinlawrence@lastfuture
Yeah clearly we need to move back to physical media. I'm only half kidding. Imagine buying modern 8 tracks.
Yeah clearly we need to move back to physical media. I'm only half kidding. Imagine buying modern 8 tracks.
Laurent Q.@lastfuture This person you know should really talk to his/her label (or major, I guess). The problem lies there also (and maybe foremost).
@marshotel they're not signed to a label. They managed to get into the top 10% on their own accord.
@lastfuture Ok. Good for them. But top 10% is vague. There is so many artists on spotify. Do you know how many streams they make to earn 50 bucks a month ?
@marshotel I can ask him but that's beside the point. The post was meant to be a reminder to people that their subscription money is skewed heavily towards even the top of the top 10%. He's doing better than at least 42 million other artists on Spotify and he is still a long shot from making a living with it or even to break even.
@lastfuture A better question would then be : would he earn more if streaming didn't exist , with only physical sales (with the distribution issues it entails) ? Money was always skewed towards the top sellers, even when streaming didn't exist. I don't want to defend streaming revenue distribution (which seems unfair), but it seems to me that the music business has always been that unfair.
Maltimore@lastfuture
I fully agree with your general criticism, but I'd like to point out that the number 10% means nothing. There could be a gigantic amount of artists on spotify, most of whom never get any clicks. In that case the 50$ for 10th percentile might be adequate. I'm not saying it is, just that the 10% number doesn't show this.
I fully agree with your general criticism, but I'd like to point out that the number 10% means nothing. There could be a gigantic amount of artists on spotify, most of whom never get any clicks. In that case the 50$ for 10th percentile might be adequate. I'm not saying it is, just that the 10% number doesn't show this.
@maltimore The top 10% on Spotify are made up of roughly 43000 artists according to a letter to shareholders from July 29th 2020
Skinny Feels@lastfuture yeah, it's good for raising awareness of what you create, but you'll never make money from it. My focus is now on soundcloud for community and friends and bandcam to actually try and make money. Plus a few ideas up my sleeve for a few years down the line.
@lastfuture dropped a p
Eugen Rochko@lastfuture The most disappointing thing about the way Spotify works is that your monthly payment gets distributed to all artists on Spotify according to how popular they are globally, not the ones you actually listen to
Patrick Georgi@lastfuture Now compare that to what the top 10% _at_ Spotify make...
Ruben@lastfuture I canceled my Spotify subscription a couple of years back when I heard about stories like this. Also, it dawn on me that music was *to* avaliable, and it took away some of the joy of discovering and listening to music. Now I curate my own music library again, buying music from many different sources, like Bandcamp, discogs.com, directly from artists etc. I do occasionally pirate some music still, but only the big names (the 1%-ers of Spotify), not lesser know musicians.
All your base are belong to us@lastfuture Would you mind asking your friend which services are better for the artists? I don't have spotify, but do wonder how my service ranks. I would be willing to change if I knew which were better.
Zach "earboxer" DeCook@lastfuture How many fans do they have?
Under the sales model, they'd need 1 album every two years, and 120 fans willing to purchase that album for comparable income.
Erik Boritsch@lastfuture But is being acknowledged as an artist not the point of art? Spotify does that. As for monetary reward — you're talking job not art. There are surer ways to earn a living than music.
IMO, being a musician in top 10% of Spotify or an artist altogether is a luxury. Gives you lots of bragging rights similar to, say, a Benley. Both will cost you a premium though. Being e.g. an engineer is much less hip but pays the bills.But it's not as hip as being in top 10% of Spotify. Choose wisely.
@erik art is not single purpose, it's multi-faceted. Is being recognized for your code contributions the point of being a programmer? Ask one who works in-house at a large corporation, one that is scraping by with freelance web development and one that contributes a lot to open source projects and they will give you different answers
@lastfuture Well, some purposes are better served with art than the others. Social aspect is well-served: it's more fancy to be a musician than programmer. Monetary aspect is more of a lottery though: for every millionaire there are thousands of part-time waiters. For programmers less celebrities, more stable income.
There's always a trade-off. Spotify is just a medium to connect artist with the audience. The artist didn't get much money out of it, but a ton of bragging rights about top 10%.
spazzpp2@lastfuture
That's what I call a satisfied market. Keep the sheer number of artists in mind while comparing to CD-selling decades!
How much does the bandcamp Top10 make?