Get Started for FREE
Sign up with Facebook Sign up with X
I don't have a Facebook or a X account
 Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
Universal Music Group made more money from streams of its recorded-music catalogue in 2016 than it did from physical sales. Via midem 
Scoop.it!
And now some genuinely great news in an otherwise unremarkable week.
Scoop.it!
Emily Ford's curator insight,
January 20, 2017 5:04 PM
This article connects well with industry because it discusses two different industries that are competing on the amount of paying customers each one is getting. My opinion of this topic is that it is interesting to read about different types of industries and how they compete with each other.
Emilie Amsellem's curator insight,
March 1, 2017 6:07 PM
Pour la 1ère fois, le nb d'abonnés payants en téléchargement de musique à dépasser celui de Netflix
Scoop.it!
The IFPI has released its latest ‘Investing in Music’ report, which quantifies the A&R and marketing investment made by major and independent labels. Via Midem Team
joseph martino's curator insight,
December 11, 2016 3:39 AM
Major labels still have the most capital to invest from revenues, with 27% of it going towards A&R and marketing. At the same time, it's a sober reminder that their major interests are in line with "famous artists," as evidenced by their plan to put out 100 two track "singles" with that level of artist representation. Maybe they'll start looking for non-label players before too long.
joseph martino's curator insight,
December 11, 2016 5:42 PM
Major labels still have the most capital to invest from revenues, with 27% of it going towards A&R and marketing. At the same time, it's a sober reminder that their major interests are in line with "famous artists," as evidenced by their plan to put out 100 two track "singles" with that level of artist representation. Maybe they'll start looking for non-label players before too long. 
Jeremy Jackson's curator insight,
October 17, 2021 8:57 PM
Labels are investing more in music which opens doors for a lot more artists to walk through. Music Ally is my source and I trust their insight. Music Ally is a major informational resource.
Scoop.it!
You’d be forgiven for having reached saturation point with thinkpieces about album exclusives on music-streaming services. Via Benjamin DEBUSSCHERE
Cory Gonzalez's curator insight,
September 15, 2016 11:00 AM
The final sentence of this article really made me think about the topic in full; if there is no solid copy and the music is only released through streaming then there really is no official release date. How many people will really get to listen to the artwork and how many people will have never known it was released in the first place? Well it all depends really, as technology begins to develop more and more as the years pass I do believe streaming and other media outlets will become the main source of music income to the masses. However one of the down sides to this procedure is the amount of sales that will be made due to streaming counting for a percentage and unless something is done to prevent it or some how incorporate the process into actual sales I do not see this system as very profitable. This way of sales is still new to us so it may take a while to straighten out all the kinks but just because the music is surfacing quicker now doesn't always mean its the best way. I feel it would matter more on who the artist is for some are able to be spread with a large amount of word of mouth and others to never be discovered with the rest using strategic marketing techniques to get their music heard by people all over the world.
Scoop.it!
Streaming gets you exposure. Vinyl makes you money. Any questions?
Scoop.it!
Is streaming killing off music piracy? Some forms of streaming are fuelling new methods of copyright infringement, according to US research firm MusicWatch. Via midem
Christopher Coleman's insight:
Ripping from streaming services should surprise no one. If it's playable it's obtainable.
Kyle Simpson's curator insight,
December 10, 2017 2:35 PM
Personally, I'm on the fence on this whole "streamripping" issue as far as their number predictions go. This article states that music piracy in the last couple of years has fallen by half! Why? Because we have access to more streaming services (Spotify, iTunes, etc...) than ever before. And the best part about these services is their price. Most people can afford an extra $9 per month to listen to absolutely any song they want. I believe that as more and more streaming services become available, as long as they keep their prices low, music piracy will continue to drop.
I used to pirate music all the time. I was young and broke, and most CD's cost $13-$20 per album. Nowadays. I pay for my Spotify subscription, and I've had no need to pirate music since. Others will eventually follow. 
Alyssa's curator insight,
August 25, 2019 7:10 PM
This was honestly the first time I've heard the term ' Streamripping'. They are saying younger consumers are more likely to engage in this variation of piracy. I also found it interesting that there are essentially tools to make this ' ripping' even easier for those interested. I know this source is reliable due to its reputation.
Nathan Bermudez's curator insight,
November 15, 2020 7:53 PM
Streamripping; never heard the term. Yet, such a perfect term for the school assignment task at hand. I, myself, am guilty of such acts and have stopped in respects to artist, producers, and all those involved in the music industry. While streaming isn't yet considered piracy, it has open a new door for a form of piracy.
Music ally is known for their briefings of main music market around the round. Therefore I believe this article to be a good source for information of the music industry news. I highly recommend it to professionals in the music industry.
Scoop.it!
Much like streaming music services today are reshaping our relationship with music, Edison's invention redefined the entire industry.
Scoop.it!
The stock market is faltering. The heavy flow of venture capital funding constricted sharply in the fourth quarter. Some high-flying technology companies, bloated with easy money, are starting to fall back to earth. The coming hangover might affect some digital music companies, but experts say not all valuations are suspect and that good ideas will continue to find financial backers.
Scoop.it!
his latest data problem came to light recently, when digital distribution and monitoring company Audiam alleged that Spotify was underpaying publishing royalties due from streams of Victory Records songs. Audiam compares the royalty statements of record labels and matches them against the mechanical royalty statements received by publishers. In the case of Victory, which owns both its master recording and publishing rights, Audiam claimed Spotify had not paid royalties on 53 million streams.
Austin Alderfer's curator insight,
January 12, 2016 5:02 PM
Basically Spotify is being sues for doing what they claim to be here to deter. They used the example they stream the song "X" from artist "Y". They then go on to say that there may be 3 artist "Y" for one song "X" and only get rights from 2 of the artist "Y" that worked on a song. I believe this is the artists fault. If you collaborate on a song, everyone should be aware of where that song would be played and what actions they need to take. Even if you do not believe that is right, Spotify even saves royalties in an account until that artist comes forward with rights and then Spotify will pay them everything they are owed. I do not agree with people pursuing legal actions against Spotify. I think they are one of the greatest things to happen to music in the last 30 years. A lot of other people agree as it states in the article and do not want to see Spotify fall because of greedy lawsuits. It is important everyone gets what they deserve and Spotify has said they will make sure that happens. So again I'm not sure why people are trying to cripple this company. 
Tyrone Dollison's curator insight,
October 13, 2017 12:10 AM
This article, written by Glenn Peoples, explains a recent Spotify lawsuit and the error that Spotify makes in streaming music without sufficient licenses. In plain terms, it expresses why Spotify was sued for $150 million - insufficient licensing. Spotify identified this issue itself by making plans to build a database of licensing and publishing system to fix the missing or incorrect data needed to pay proper rights. The article also makes the case that while Spotify claims to thwart piracy, it capitalizes on pirating music itself by streaming music to which it doesn't own lienses. 
Jeremy Everhart's curator insight,
December 12, 2021 6:18 PM
This is something very important. Royalties are a paycheck for artists. To have them not paid properly can be a huge let down.
Pros of the publishing being paid are that if you own your masters you are going to be fine. Cons are that most artists are not familiar with that process.
Scoop.it!
Facebook has announced a partnership with music service, Deezer, in a deal that will allow the social network giant to integrate music... Via midem
Scoop.it!
Do you care about audio quality? More than selection and convenience? See how you compare to most music users on the subject.
|
Scoop.it!
![If Music Is Digital Gold , Why Do We Always Treat It Like Digital Plastic? [BENJI ROGERS] | Soundtrack | Scoop.it](https://img.scoop.it/_aJZuvBO6mCPePKGfwh4lzl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9)
In the piece Benji Rogers bemoans the devaluation of music, and shares how the implementation of blockchain tech could make it so that ownership data was required for a song to even work, thereby restoring its value to the artist's benefit. _____________________________ Guest post by Benji Rogers of dotBlockcai Via midem
Scoop.it!
From
qz
Spotify, a modest Swedish company, started small in 2006, and has since grown into a global juggernaut inspiring dozens of similar on-demand music services from some of the biggest tech companies in the world. Now that subscription streaming has solidified into the mainstream, though, what's next? "It's about time for Spotify's successor to be born," says Bob Moczydlowsky. Via Benjamin DEBUSSCHERE
Jordan Parent's curator insight,
October 19, 2016 12:58 PM
This article talks about how subscribtion streaming platforms are finding sercurable foundation in the mainstream scene. This is news to the industry because now tech giants and record labels want to create succesors to platforms such as spotify. This is news to the industry and can open up new doors and expand how we listen to music. 
Jermarcus Brown's curator insight,
November 13, 2016 9:02 PM
The most important thing when in this industry is invest in yourself. you have many programs out here to help you but cannot promise a career. With the streaming finna make a big impact you could go independent and make good money. Just find your source and work with it.
Scoop.it!
From
medium
As Mark Mulligan put it recently “streaming has melded discovery and consumption into a single whole”. This is what is making it so… Via Benjamin DEBUSSCHERE
Teriq Massie's curator insight,
February 19, 2019 8:06 PM
“[Record labels] should view their role..as agents for their artist's creativity, rather than a company that sells music” “You’ll read a lot in the news about YouTube, Spotify, Apple, Soundcloud, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Nokia and other tech giants “negotiating with the music industry” over one thing or another. But that’s not actually what’s happening. Those guys ARE the music industry. They’re negotiating with record companies. Where “the music industry” is located has shifted again.” -Andrew Dubber 
Lauren Case's curator insight,
July 28, 2019 9:04 PM
This article discusses different statistics and how with the right culture, creativity and stats can work together and be very profitable. It uses two different examples from outside the music industry to show how. It was interesting to see how these topics related to the music industry in many ways. It also focuses on what record companies need to do to continue to build and grow.
This article was written by Samual Potts, head of radio promotions at Columbia Records UK, which was founded in 1887. Samuel has 10 years of experience. The article was published on Medium, which launched in 2012, and is a social journalism site.
Scoop.it!
"Google Play is offering new customers four months of free music, in a special promotion that trumps the free trial periods of digital competitors Apple, Spotify, Tidal and Deezer.
Christopher Coleman's insight:
Four months of ad-free music? Quite the deal.
Scoop.it!
ant to listen to 1989, I have to go to Apple Music. If I want to listen to The Life of Pablo, I have to subscribe to Tidal. And while this creates a healthy market of competition, it creates a huge hassle for me when I’m trying to make a unified playlist of my favorite songs.
Christopher Coleman's insight:
The author nails it. First, still not as convenient. Second, still not free. We may see piracy dip and dip lower, but for those two reasons, will probably never go away completely.
John Cinelli's curator insight,
November 14, 2019 1:19 PM
Armand Valdes from Mashable.com is the author of this article. I believe this article was accurate. I assume streaming services competing with each other will only make stream-ripping more popular. I think this because the writer brought up an exceptional point about needing subscriptions to listen to specific albums. He said, "If you want to listen to Owl City you can go to Spotify or YouTube and there it is [...] However if I wanted to listen to 1989 I have to go to Apple Music, and if I want to listen to The Life of Pablo I have to subscribe to Tidal." So this type of competition is hurting consumers and professionals in the industry. As a professional, I believe it affects you because you aren't getting the most streams possible by only having your album released on specific streaming platforms. As consumers, we're affected by this because it becomes more challenging to create a playlist of music we love. I think this is the exact reason why The Life of Pablo was pirated 500,000 times.
Scoop.it!
Company's board of directors say there are "material uncertainties facing the business."
Christopher Coleman's insight:
The times ... they are a changin' ... for the music business ... again.
Calvin Flowers's curator insight,
February 14, 2016 8:37 PM
The affects may cause professionals and consumers to pay more to stream and to listen to music
Scoop.it!
Why are older albums suddenly selling more than newer albums, for the first time in history? Digital Music News takes a look at the data.
Christopher Coleman's insight:
Could this also be a statement on the quality of music being released today versus yesteryear?
Michael Bonanno's curator insight,
February 14, 2016 1:00 AM
For the first time ever......we are noticing that new releases are not selling, they are being shared for free. That is what is really going on. It is not just the fact that older consumers buy older music, it is more of the fact that younger consumers share newer music. The need to buy an album is almost gone and will be in my opinion. If the industry is losing revenue due to technology, then change the way it is released. If a picture is worth a thousand words, why is a song worth $0.001128? (What an artist receives from streaming services on average according to a article from 'Information Is Beautiful' http://alturl.com/323n8) When the artist records a global hit song, it needs the marketing that a label provides in order to become a hit and to get plays from a streaming service. For instance, if a hit song was added to a streaming service for $1,000,000 revenue per play, (figuratively speaking) and only was played 1 time for life, that would be a nice day for the artist. That is not the case here. What if, the hit was added for $1 revenue per play and had 1,000,000 plays? Still not the case but, we are getting close. What if, we used both scenarios on 2 different songs the were "not" hits, then what? What it boils down too, is the fact that just because you made good music in the past, doesn't mean you will earn more money on every new hit. It just goes to show that a new hit has the potential to get the plays needed to make good money, as long as the streaming services don't decrease the pay scale.
Scoop.it!
This is the fifth post in my YouTube economy series. You can read the other posts here, here,here and here 2015 was the year that streaming came of age across global markets (it had already got there in the Nordics and South Korea of course). In the UK and the US stream volumes grew by 85% and 93%… Via Benjamin DEBUSSCHERE
Eric Fleshman's curator insight,
January 17, 2016 9:21 PM
I must say that this article is very insightful for a number of reasons. Record labels are finding that they're losing money to the new generation of streaming kids but do not try to find ways to capitalize. For instance youtube has become one of most major platforms for streaming music and videos. Many artist have became successful on youtube from building their fan bases. This article states that, "Record labels and artists can seize some control of their destiny, by taking a more sophisticated view of YouTube and exploring how to build strategies that work for YouTube in 2016..." Maybe new and upcoming artist can get on youtube, which more made money last year than any other streaming services, and use it for its advantages. They can build their fan bases by building a relationship with the younger generation by using the medium that they use the most often. I'll say, if you can't beat them, join them!
Scoop.it!
Aside from the excitement about Adele’s “25” at year-end, on-demand audio and video streaming continued to gain in popularity in 2015, posting growth rates of 83% and 102%, respectively. Vinyl also posted its 10th consecutive year of sales growth. Via midem
Scoop.it!
A sobering statistic: in 2015 so far I have listened to music on Spotify for 877 hours, but my favourite band’s payout from that was around $2.69. Via midem
Cy Queen's curator insight,
December 16, 2015 5:56 PM
As musicians, we're keenly aware of the low payouts from the streaming music services. |
This article was interesting. The article talks about the industry making more sales off of streaming music rather than physical sales.