Is the Era of Free Streaming Music Coming to an End?

[Mandolin Cafe]

Just read this... how shall we put it... mind numbing article entitled Is the Era of Free Streaming Music Coming to an End?

"With streaming services asserting their market dominance, the music industry must now try to convince an entire generation raised on free to start paying up—without scaring them off."

We challenge those of you with an interest in how music is distributed and paid for (or not) to read it in its entirety. We found the writing exceptionally tedious but got through it nevertheless. It's an interesting bit of writing to say the least.

Summary seems to be that concerns about music being a free commodity is now coming under greater scrutiny because the companies distributing the bulk aren't getting enough revenue. The sub-headline seems to suggest somehow that it's us, the listeners, that are the big hurdle to face, as if it's our fault. It's a model that can't be maintained say the companies that engage in it, but their concern seems to be generated more because they aren't profiting enough, has nothing to do with paying artists. Find this amusing at best. Nowhere in the article does it really address fair pay to artists unless the names Taylor Swift, Beyonce and a few others are mentioned.

One thing is for certain: the exploitation of artists will continue on just as it has from the day it started. The ones exploiting keep shifting but the game never changes.

[Charlieshafer]

In a word, no. History has shown that as one format dies off, like a Napster, another one rises to take it's place. The ones complaining are the faulted models, like Pandora, who if they have to pay any royalties at all, are in trouble.

The musicians won't suffer any more than they already have, which is to say quite a lot. The big stars will do fine (i.e., pop music) and all the niche musicians (pretty much anyone else save for the big classical soloists) will make their money off touring and direct cd sales to fans at the gigs, mainly as souvenirs.

It'll take some very tech-savvy independent musicians to stream their own tunes for a buck or so to get what they are worth, without payments to distribution outlets, like iTunes, but they'll never stop the rampant genie-out-of-the-bottle which is free file sharing, either through commercial sites or underground ones.

[Roger Moss]

I never stream music, free or otherwise. I (ahem) obtained all my digital music during the downloading heyday about ten years ago. I still buy CDs. Music companies have always been bloodsuckers from the beginning. Only the names have changed.

[Mark Wilson]

I remember buying music. Folks looked forward to a new release and stood in line to buy it. Of course there was a cost.

By now music has been considered by most to be free content for at least a generation. Small amount of listeners might pay for it when there is no place left to obtain it for free. Legally or otherwise. Many will join in creating another free way around it. Eventually technology could win a battle for the industry - but it seems to me that the paradigm of hoards of listeners willingly and expectantly opting to pay for each new release of recorded music is over.

Should be interesting to watch

[Beanzy]

I feel like such a dinosaur; But I buy CDs or high quality downloads from places like bandcamp and Amazon.
I use YouTube to see what'sout there, then I buy the CD or DVD.
Is it really weird not to want it for free?. It probably looks nuts to someone who grew up in this millennium.

[Tom Wright]

I listen to streaming radio, usually NPR stations like KMUW in Wichita, for world music, eclectic rock, jazz and blues. Folk Alley is free-standing, not affiliated, and I use that for the radio equivalent for folk music. What I like about some version of radio is that the DJ uses his or her won preferences, not mine. That is how I discover new (or old) music. I contribute to them (modestly), but it isn't subscription, more like radio of old.

Then I buy the CD.

[Fred Keller]

I know more and more local folks doing what I did: putting their music up for sale on their own site, physical product and digital. I used to do CD Baby and digital distribution until I figured out I'd need to sell millions of mp3s to make hundreds of dollars. So when I had my new website created I asked them to add a store. I control the price, I get every penny. Yes, I suffer from not being available everywhere. But I'm ok with that. Call it "artisanal music creation"

You can check out my digital album here if you like

[Bil Kerrigan]

I am happy to pay for streaming services already. I don't need the clutter of more CDs (a format I never warmed up to--I was a big vinyl buyer back in the day.) I like the convenience of streaming, but hate the poor compensation artists are currently getting. I would pay significantly more to stream on a service that compensated artists better. I don't steal music. I am an author, and my book is now available on dozens of pirate sites for free, and that gets under my craw. Musicians, artists, and writers deserve compensation for their creative labors.

[Randi Gormley]

Speaking as someone whose profession has been at the mercy of the same thing -- I'm a journalist, god help me, and people say why pay for content they've for the past generation gotten for free -- that companies are looking for ways to make once-paid-for-but-now-free profitable again -- whether for themselves or the artists. but considering that television used to be free and now people happily pay -- or unhappily, but still -- there is a way to do it. Someone will figure it out, and someone else will figure out how to get around it. It often comes down to what it's worth to you. I'll pay to go to a museum, pay to see a concert, pay to own something I want, from a fancy coffee to a fancy hat, if that's my threshold. there's a cost to everything. Depends on where you see that line, though.

[Michael Neverisky]

Google Play, particularly with a family subscription, is nearly free and has an enormous, varied catalog.

[pops1]

I have a radio show and four times a year we have to have everything we play documented, it's entirety for copyright. During this time we cannot play self released music, so no copyright fees have to be paid to a musician who self releases ,even tho they have air play. I usually put the artist name as the company and play a few because it's only fair.

[LadysSolo]

I too still buy CDs. They don't take up much space. And I used to buy LPs. I have never figured out free streaming, and really don't want to.

[MediumMando5722]

The article certainly is mind-numbing. My take away is the same people who have always played catch up continue to do so, while innovators lead the way.

I will not argue that custom radio stations and playlists are inevitably the future. That said, I hate both. I like albums, whether they're on vinyl, CD, or download makes little difference since they all end up being played from my iPhone. I do utilize Amazon Prime's music selection, and buy much of what I listen to more than a few times.

Whether or not the free ad-supported streaming goes away or not... I hope it does. My wife uses Pandora at work, but if it weren't available she'd have me load her phone with music and listen to that. Musicians should be paid for their work, so music should not be free.

[Ivan Kelsall]

I do listen to streamed Bluegrass music,that's how i come across bands i've never heard or even heard of before & it's led me to buy oodles of CD's ie. Jett's Creek - ''The Wait is Over''. I'd never heard of them 2 months back. Add to that one literally dozens of CD's by other bands such as ''Kenny & Amanda Smith''/ 'Emory Lester' & many more,who again, i wouldn't have heard of if it hadn't been for streaming radio. It seems that my UK Cafe colleague Beanzy does the same thing. If i can find music on YouTube that isn't on CD,i usually store a link to the track instead of downloading it, as it takes up virtually no disc space at all on my PC. Unfortunately,many tracks are often deleted for one reason or another so they're gone for good.
For me - ''streaming'' music is simply like listening to a Radio - i have no way of downloading it for free (can that be done ?) ,& i doubt if i'd ever want to,
Ivan

[Petrus]

I rarely if ever stream music. I don't understand what they mean by "free" -- don't you pay for the subscription? Regardless, I do pay for the bandwidth. I have an AT&T plan with smartphone and tethering, 10 Gig / month for a ridiculous $140 (part of that is payment on the $600 phone.) As a result, I watch my bandwidth like I watch my electric or water meter. If I watch YT videos, I'll always choose the 144 or 240p option (since I'm usually interested in the sound, not the image) and never more than a few minutes a day. Occasionally I may record an audio track off YT using the 1/8" headphone connector to my TASCAM, but not a lot because it's cumbersome.

I buy quite a bit of music off Amazon via MP3 and have really amassed a nice collection as a result. Other options are CDs at the public library -- I know people who bring their laptops to the library and just rip CDs right there. Not sure if this is legal, though.

A lot of material is unavailable on MP3, so sometimes other options have to be sought. Occasionally I'll purchase CDs from Amazon or eBay if the material is not otherwise available. I purchased a CD of German free jazz recently and a rare Nick Drake compilation ("Time Has Told Me"), but won't spend more than $20-25 for a rare CD. I could get into vinyl but am resisting the temptation.

I sometimes buy old cassettes from thrift shops for a buck a piece, but often am disappointed to find that time has taken its toll on these 30 year old tapes, such that all I get is a lot of hiss and bleed-through on playback (remember bleed-through? When the other side of the tape can be heard while you're playing side A? Ah, the bad old days!)

[Petrus]

More seriously, the problem with streaming or subscription services is that you don't actually own the music. I'm not sure how many people record their streams, or the legality of this, but I do not like the present day trend of streaming video and music. People don't realize this means you're renting, not owning, the material. I've read stories (and could link to a few horror stories) of people who've had their music libraries messed around with by The Powers That Be, finding songs (or movies or books) deleted without their consent, and so forth.

Then there's those wonderful Apple music players that some genius in Cupertino decided don't need slots for SD cards because they want you to download everything via WiFi or broadband. I'm seriously going to download tens or hundreds of gigs of data, and subject it to the company's whims to delete at will? And what if I'm in an area with no WiFi or broadband connection? No thanks.

And yes, creators (writers, musicians, filmmakers) need to be paid fairly for their work, and receive decent residuals.

End rant!

[MediumMando5722]

A few things:

Ripping CDs you don't own is illegal. Check out the FBI warning listed on all of them.

Apple devices don't have card slots, but you can load them via a usb cable and your computer. This has always been the standard way of putting music on an MP3 player or phone.

Recording most streaming music is also probably illegal. Having said that, there are many websites that will convert a YouTube video to an MP3 file.

[Charlieshafer]

There is one historical fact to remember when trying to get all harsh on the free streaming services.Not saying this was right, but it's what happened:

Old days: radio listening was free. While royalties were paid to the stars, (like now, but at a much higher rate, of course) the new bands or niche players had to hope for local or specialized stations (like college stations now) to listen or resort to payola to get their music on the radio. So unfairly or not, musicians had to pay at some point in their careers to get heard. They also had to pay managers and agents, who if they chose poorly, would also delight in ripping off the artists.

The growing independent artist movement (Check out Jayme Stone on Facebook with his "How To Book Yourself Without An Agent" classes) makes it so motivated artists can put together their own tours. Through skillful use of interpersonal sales skills and a developing book of contacts that they control, they can develop the leads that used to be the job of the management team. This way, an artist can keep an easy 25% that they used to give up (booking agents at about 15%, managers at about 10%).

So, like any new development that changes the way things are done, you can be ahead of the curve and use it to your advantage, or behind it. The benefits of the internet far outweigh the disadvantages of losing a few bucks to streaming. Contacts are easier to make, and whatever it is you do,can be made to the entire world where 30 years ago, it never would have made it out of your county. I get emails from bands looking for gigs as far away as Spain, Estonia, etc. They're good and should be heard, and now they just might be.

My favorite business model is Sears; who along with Montgomery Ward owned the country's retail environment through catalogue sales. They went to brick and mortar stores as time went on, and when the internet came, it's like they completely forgot what a catalogue was. Amazon is nothing more than Sears was, without having to print a catalogue.

[Bertram Henze]

My source for free music has not dried up yet: I open my instrument case and there it is. The underlying business model ist very compact and robust.

[Fred Keller]

So, like any new development that changes the way things are done, you can be ahead of the curve and use it to your advantage, or behind it. The benefits of the internet far outweigh the disadvantages of losing a few bucks to streaming. Contacts are easier to make, and whatever it is you do,can be made to the entire world where 30 years ago, it never would have made it out of your county. I get emails from bands looking for gigs as far away as Spain, Estonia, etc. They're good and should be heard, and now they just might be.

Charlie, there are some aspects of this I agree with and some I don't. And there are a few things that need to be clarified or we'll wind up comparing apples and oranges.

1. I do agree that the internet has become a necessity for making contacts. I don't agree that it's qualitatively different anymore than, say, making good old fashioned phone calls. I'm a small-time working musician, regional, with aspirations towards making a living, paying some bills, etc. What I see is that electronic contacts are eminently ignorable in a way that a phone call was not. And now we have come to the place where calling is seen is as bad manners by a large cross section of people. Overall, my experience feels like a wash: I can send out MORE contacts, make MORE introductions, etc. But that doesn't mean anyone listens. I'm old enough to have started out my first years in professional music using the phone method to book gigs and in some ways I wish I could go back. At least I felt like I could make a human connection.

2. Streaming services are great for the end user, the listener. They are not so good for artists and this requires further elaboration. To wit...

3. I believe that one needs to delineate between small/regional/working acts and national/touring/contracted acts...at the very least when it comes to who benefits from streaming services and internet dissemination. I know from personal experience that all the various streaming services do pay artists. But they pay in THOUSANDTHS of a DOLLAR. The national/touring/BIGTIME acts will benefit here because (like the old ads asking "how can we sell this at such low prices?") "volume." When you expect to sell millions, you can afford to price each at $.002 a pop.

It's getting harder and harder to find work as a small-time, working musician who only wants to make a poverty level wage for the year. Maybe I'm just not that good; don't think I haven't wondered that often and--in some cases--constantly . But over the course of 22+ years I think it's gotten more difficult to find work in music, more difficult to get paid a living wage for that work, and I do see strong connections between that state and the internet.

The best work I've been finding, I've been finding despite the internet. Maybe it's the hipster craze of artisanal everything but good old word of mouth, phone calls, friends of friends networks all seem to be working better.

Ok, I don't mean to hijack this thread and make it about gigs/etc. But streaming services and the internet have a very strong impact on how the general public perceives the value of recorded and live music, the value of musicians as a valid art form, and the value of human musicians as a part of one's daily life. I assume that we on the Cafe strongly value these things but the way that streaming works on the internet says something very different.

[hank]

Good Rant Petrus! As I have watched the methods of recording music shift through my life the focus was to make the recording available for ownership by the purchaser on a one time basis. Now for the first time as far as I can tell the focus is on selling a monthly service and unfortunately with it a trend away from availability to own individual music libraries legally. As I think of my volumes of old vinyl, cassette tapes, 8 track tapes, VHS, Beta, CD, and now Blue Ray it's easy to see the lure of unowned streamed music in a monthly service. The trend now for music services is away from personal downloads or recording of music with limited availability of these services as time goes on. Even so called free streaming now cost you each month to pay to be part of the Web so it's just a matter of once they have you over a barrel with no personal libraries, how much are you willing to pay and how many hands will you tolerate in your wallet monthly to listen to songs you once could own. The lure of convenience and variety thru music service companies may one day make legal ownership of copy written music a thing of the past.

[brunello97]

Just read this... how shall we put it... mind numbing article entitled Is the Era of Free Streaming Music Coming to an End?
......We found the writing exceptionally tedious but got through it nevertheless. It's an interesting bit of writing to say the least.

Not sure why the hating on the article. I found it pretty informative and an easy read. (I've got no opinion on the accuracy of anything reported.)

Very interesting stuff. Thanks for posting the link.

Mick

[Bertram Henze]

...But streaming services and the internet have a very strong impact on how the general public perceives the value of recorded and live music, the value of musicians as a valid art form, and the value of human musicians as a part of one's daily life.

I think that the widespread public perception of music has not changed that much over the centuries. There is/has always been...
- A minority understanding and valuing music, prepared to make the effort to support it
- A majority hearing a more or less pleasant noise they take for granted (after all, it's called "playing", not "working", right?)

P.S. Thinking back, I remember that my parents (both professional classical musicians) refused to call the second category "music" at all.

[Folkmusician.com]

I don't think the situation is quite as dire as it appears. A lot of people I associate with have moved to subscription models for music. We were using Pandora and Amazon Prime, but recently started paying for an Apple Music family plan, which is $14.99 per month. I see Apple as leading the way here and the latest versions do offer enough benefit to entice people to pay up. I believe the streaming model will work itself out. Now artists making money from it is another story. The pay for artists will continue to erode. It is the saturation. There is such a low cost of entry now. From the recording gear to the distribution. Anyone can do it. This applies to almost every art form. Like it or not (and I don't like it), The majority of the value is gone.

I stopped buying CD's many years ago and it wasn't because I downloaded everything. I just lost interest in finding new music and had everything I was willing to pay for. A lot of this is for the fact that I rarely like a whole CD, so I am paying and dealing with the hassle for 2 songs that I really like.

[colorado_al]

No. Streaming is here to stay. Legal or otherwise.
I still buy music but I try to buy directly from the artist. Either DL or CD from their webpage or in person. They get more $ that way.