Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: NPR: Streaming has Reached a Tipping Point

  1. #1
    Member Jerjo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    small town in ND
    Posts
    6,432

    NPR: Streaming has Reached a Tipping Point

    All week NPR Music has been running stories on streaming and all its implications. A pretty interesting series regardless of genre (though there's an interesting article solely devoted to streaming classical and the amount of meta-data lost). I posted the "how well can you hear audio quality" in the Audiophile thread but all the articles are an interesting read for music geeks. NPR does stream an incredible amount of music so it's good they're taking a long look at this.

    http://www.npr.org/sections/therecor...-tipping-point
    I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down.'- Bob Newhart

  2. #2
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    32S 116E
    Posts
    0
    From its founding in 1958 to the last half of the '00s, the Hot 100 measured, broadly, just two things: radio airplay and retail sales of the most popular songs in the country.
    This is news to me. I thought it was supposed to be just retail sales.

    The article is an interesting read. I find it amusing that I don't know most of the songs mentioned, and I don't know half the artists.

    A problem seems to be that the people behind the music charts have no clear idea just what information the charts are supposed to give. Is it how many people like a song, how many like it enough to pay for a download, or what?

    It would make a certain amount of sense for the charts to be simply based on how much money has been paid by people for the song, via whatever medium. That's not as shallow as it sounds - number of dollars spent is as good an indicator as any of how much value people place on a product. I think everyone here would agree that it would have no correlation with quality - but there's nothing new about that.
    Last edited by bob_32_116; 06-07-2015 at 10:45 AM.

  3. #3
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    308
    The charts really dont mean anything anymore. I learned that when "Shoes" by Kelly Sullivan came out. Riding the success of a YouTube video that went viral, it was released on iTunes and sold more than 300,000 downloads yet failed to chart on Billboard or anybody else

  4. #4
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by klothos View Post
    The charts really dont mean anything anymore. I learned that when "Shoes" by Kelly Sullivan came out. Riding the success of a YouTube video that went viral, it was released on iTunes and sold more than 300,000 downloads yet failed to chart on Billboard or anybody else
    As I understand the numbers, 300,000 downloads is about ten times the volume of sales it takes to get into the top ten these days.

    And it represents about $1 income for the artist

  5. #5
    Member Steve F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Fluffy Cloud
    Posts
    5,635
    An artist does not get $1.00 in income on a song that sells for $.99....

    Not even close. You think iTunes works for free?
    Steve F.

    www.waysidemusic.com
    www.cuneiformrecords.com

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    “Remember, if it doesn't say "Cuneiform," it's not prog!” - THE Jed Levin

    Any time any one speaks to me about any musical project, the one absolute given is "it will not make big money". [tip of the hat to HK]

    "Death to false 'support the scene' prog!"

    please add 'imo' wherever you like, to avoid offending those easily offended.

  6. #6
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve F. View Post
    An artist does not get $1.00 in income on a song that sells for $.99....
    A dollar TOTAL for 300,000 downloads, Steve.

  7. #7
    Oh No! Bass Solo! klothos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    308
    I should have been more specific - it was the album that had over 300,000 downloads and was ignited by the viral video for the title track. Also, I get a whopping $.42 from iTunes when I post songs through the big distrubution package through Reverb Nation. Ive made a huge 10 bucks so far! Im a Tenaire!

  8. #8
    I am reminded of the event not too long ago in Canada concerning an airing of a new Taylor Swift song that was supposedly "leaked" (of course, it wasn't ) and the station told people to tune in at a certain time to hear it. What they heard instead was an 8-second barp of static which promptly shot #1 as the most listened to song of the weekend or some such nonsense. That tells you a lot about how they gather their data and apply it. Clearly, it wasn't about the song, it was about promotion. It's an inflated husk and not much else for substance. In the end, it's just BS.
    "One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us." ---Kurt Vonnegut

  9. #9
    Studmuffin Scott Bails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, PA
    Posts
    6,583
    Quote Originally Posted by Speare-shaker View Post
    I am reminded of the event not too long ago in Canada concerning an airing of a new Taylor Swift song that was supposedly "leaked" (of course, it wasn't ) and the station told people to tune in at a certain time to hear it. What they heard instead was an 8-second barp of static
    Still better than an actual Taylor Swift song.
    Music isn't about chops, or even about talent - it's about sound and the way that sound communicates to people. Mike Keneally

  10. #10
    I don't think itsa tipping point until they actually make money

    http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles...ant-make-money

    and at some point the artists (those that actually drive traffic) are going to hold out for royalties that are approximately 10X greater than what they get now (which is didly-squat). As far as anyone can tell Now that ensures that the streaming services will never be profitable and that some other model will succeed it. Probably relatively quickly.

    Just Sayin
    KGH
    www.artbykgh.com

    Wherein one can peruse all manner of Digital Artwork & Photography. . .

  11. #11
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by KGHofSF View Post
    As far as anyone can tell Now that ensures that the streaming services will never be profitable and that some other model will succeed it. Probably relatively quickly.
    Well the opportunity is certainly there but it'll be a tough sell. A whole generation has grown up with the paradigm that music (and movies and video games) are free.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Bails View Post
    Still better than an actual Taylor Swift song.
    I agree and quite sincerely.
    "One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us." ---Kurt Vonnegut

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •