My wife was listening to Spotify for at least a year.  I just ignored it.  When the software on the Beosound 5 was updated to enable Spotify, I subscribed like any Beophile would.  I really like it and am impressed at least for now.

Chris Townsend wrote:

Too true, how will these poor multimillionaires afford to fuel their limos. Austerity bites again :-/

I don't think *every* musician on Spotify is a multi-millionaire, Chris. Just because you're a musician, it doesn't mean you're automatically rich, let alone a multi-millionaire. There are a hell of a lot - the majority - of musicians who can't get a record deal and, if they do get a deal, it doesn't mean they get rich.

Who said "every"?

I only listen to very rich musicians. Happy new year.

mjmedlo wrote:

Unfortunately for the artist I think the key is concerts

 

Cd sales are de minimus on their earning arsenal nowadays. One cd is purchased and ripped and sent over the net to 5000 downloading kids.

 

Way of the world I suppose.

 

At least with spotify the artist get something.

The problem is concerts don't pay a wage, at least not until you're selling out arenas. It's pretty lucky for a band to just break even on a tour of local clubs etc once you factor in the cost of touring with a van & accommodation.

As someone who is in the industry and most certainly not 'at the top', I can see the direct effects of streaming services on the industry - it's turning it into a 'premiere-league' type of industry with huge amounts of wealth concentrated at the top of the charts (not actually earned through Spotify I should add) and everyone else is left floundering.

Now you only have to try and spend even a month or two in the industry to see that this is going to do nothing but stifle musicians on the way up and prevent them from ever focussing on their music. The record labels aren't investing in up-and-coming artists like they used to (ever hear the statistic about the top 10% paying for the other 90% on Universal Music? That's all changed now, the labels basically don't fund any 'loss-makers' which is most of the stuff which never got right to the top of the charts). This has lead to a massive collapse in the studio industry making it impossible for anyone who doesn't have a budget of thousands of pounds/day to work in a decent studio.

Of course the consumer likes it - it's very cheap/easy. But what are the major advantages of Spotify over something like iTunes (which does pay the artists)? Okay you have to download the music first on iTunes, but with modern broadband that takes what, a few seconds per tune? Why does Spotify have such a wide audience then? It's cheap, much cheaper than iTunes. Why is it cheaper? Because it doesn't pay the musicians.

It may seem better for the consumer in the short term but 10 years down the line when most of our musical culture has vanished, it'll seem such a shame to have back-tracked on ~70 years of a very successful industry for the sake of saving ~£7-8 an album.

The service is as sinister as it's success and the sooner it and it's rivals go disappear the better IMO.