____shawnee 4,118 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Maybe Taylor Swift had a point when she took her muzik down I recently discovered this bomb song that you should listen to while you read this thread and type your reply! Anyway, I did research on the band and it turns out they put a silent album on Spotify last year to raise money for a free tour. After only two months and 5.5 million streams, they made almost $20,000 source: http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6175358/vulfpecks-half-joke-silent-album-made-some-serious-cash That's a lot of money, honey. That's nearly double my current yearly income, honey (I'm in school, don't judge). In only two months, honey. And this is not like a super popular band. Just imagine what an artist like Taylor Swift could make from this a year. Don't lie no mo. Fergie's abs in this video though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttercell 260 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I may be wrong since I am not that knowledgeable in this so correct me if I am. It always has been making comparably less money. It does make money but not as much as money as "forcing" people to buy their music? It is Taylor Swift we are talking about if you want to compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seditary 5,876 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Put it into perspective. If those 5.5 million streams were all downloads, they would have made 5.5 million, not 20k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
____shawnee 4,118 Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 Put it into perspective. If those 5.5 million streams were all downloads, they would have made 5.5 million, not 20k. Is that Chun Li? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sane 16,342 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I'd say 1/3 of a cent per stream qualifies as "not much". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
____shawnee 4,118 Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 I'd say 1/3 of a cent per stream qualifies as "not much". It's an appropriate amount for streaming. Especially since making music isn't exactly chemical engineering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seditary 5,876 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Is that Chun Li? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sane 16,342 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 It's an appropriate amount for streaming. Especially since making music isn't exactly chemical engineering. It may not be chemical engineering, but it's still a skilled profession that deserves your respect. The world would be a lot more dull without music makers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocumentaLy 6,033 Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Put it into perspective. If those 5.5 million streams were all downloads, they would have made 5.5 million, not 20k. This is what a lot of people fail to realize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...... 3,962 Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Put it into perspective. If those 5.5 million streams were all downloads, they would have made 5.5 million, not 20k. true-ish... but not really... it's not really that black and white... assume they were signed to a major label and choose to release in the Itunes store ...let's say hypothetically (very)t hey got half that number in purchased downloads (because as an unknown act 5.5 million streams happened because, it was free to stream otherwise, there's no way they'd get those numbers)... nobody in this band would be seeing $5.5 million or $2.75 million...not even close... and... there would be no free tour... because they'd need the touring money to compensate for all the money they didn't make off their sales.... Say they release independently instead.... without Spotify.. nobody would have streamed their music 5.5 million times.... thus their tour would have been wack (or non-existent)... nobody would know who they are...Spotify (and successful streaming sites like it) is like "free" (but not because... you know... they take their cut) promo... the best available today for up and coming artists.... I don't necessarily support these streaming sites....but there's a logic to them, that's more complicated than "if this were in the Itunes store" ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thot 1,829 Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Put it into perspective. If those 5.5 million streams were all downloads, they would have made 5.5 million, not 20k. No because that's not 5.5 million individuals. That could be only a few thousand people listening to the song over and over again. Same way you buy a song for $1 then listen to it 10k times within a year.... Also some people who buy songs only buy singles, not entire albums. So some artists may benefit from streams if listeners are streaming other songs from their albums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.