SoundExchange Reveals What Pandora Pays Artists - hypebot

« Google Finally Adds Warner Music, Brings Scan & Match To Free Music Locker In U.S. & Europe | Main | The Social Media Bandwagon: Everybody "Likes" a Winner »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Mason

this is why all of these labels are trying to make themselves look so noble by fighting for "artist money"--they're pocketing half of it. and for all the fuss about performance royalties, using the oscar peterson example, everyone else on the record gets a total of $500, so probably $60 each.

Wally West

In reality what should matter most to an artist is their VISIBILTY. That's one of the many reasons why my band chose to sign up with ADEDistribution for our distribution needs because they offer a much lower start-up cost compared to when we were with TuneCore, CDBaby, Songcast, etc.

Plus, most of those sites care more about increasing their user database than actually giving a musicians the tools they need to promote.

I'll admit, this thing with pandora and soundexchange is scary to say the least and i'm glad i saty'd out of that whole debacle.

chucknkd

how many other business models do you know of make a 50% profit margin?? not many, and if they do they certainly don't whine and complain like a big baby.

it's not up to labels and artists to give these companies free content to profit from. Ridiculous to even think that way.

kdardis

A station playing any new song is taking a chance on losing listeners - and the artist has nothing to hedge that bet for them. I back Wally's view, that visibility is the objective. An act gains exposure as consumers upgrade its worth.

I've never seen anyone discuss why a station should pay an unknown artist the same performance rate as a Taylor Swift or Maroon5. Being unknown, independent, new, whatever you wish to call it also labels you untested; and the station takes a chance each time they play the song. Will listeners stay or will they go? Is the artist, in any way, paying for the capital expense and manhours the station owner laid out to build their audience?

On the other hand, consumers are seeking Taylor Swift songs. She is a draw, built by exposing her talent.

I believe an artist needs to be paid. But I also believe, having spent years paying dues in my own creative career, that an artist's value increases as they become more widely known.

Initially, a creative person isn't worth much. There are just too many of us. We're a low value commodity that needs to meld talent and persistence with a good deal of luck to succeed.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Musician & Music Industry Resources


SEARCH HYPEBOT