• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Music
streaming or downloading
micky1
29-08-2015
Ive just downloaded a track from google play. It the first time ive done this . Will the artist get anymore if i liston to it via the streaming method or will it make no difference as they already have the benifit of the download.

Just want to do the best thing to help the artists as they are new and trying to make a name for themselves.

Thanks
Thom001
29-08-2015
Originally Posted by micky1:
“Ive just downloaded a track from google play. It the first time ive done this . Will the artist get anymore if i liston to it via the streaming method or will it make no difference as they already have the benifit of the download.

Just want to do the best thing to help the artists as they are new and trying to make a name for themselves.

Thanks”

Artists end up getting paid very very little in terms of royalities via streaming. This is what the newly re-established streaming service, Tidal is trying to change, by acknowledging the importance of artists getting paid fairly for their work.

I would probably best stick to downloading for the time being.
Soapfan678
30-08-2015
I wouldn't worry about the artist. They have millions. As long as it is legal, you have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your music.
Hitstastic
30-08-2015
Originally Posted by micky1:
“Ive just downloaded a track from google play. It the first time ive done this . Will the artist get anymore if i liston to it via the streaming method or will it make no difference as they already have the benifit of the download.

Just want to do the best thing to help the artists as they are new and trying to make a name for themselves.

Thanks”

Out of interest, what is the name of the artist? You never know, there might be others on DS who decide to check out their music and buy their single too.

Word of mouth does wonders. Look at James Blunt.
Hollie_Louise
30-08-2015
Originally Posted by Soapfan678:
“I wouldn't worry about the artist. They have millions. As long as it is legal, you have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your music.”

I'm pretty sure the new artist the OP talks about doesn't have millions.
walterwhite
31-08-2015
Originally Posted by Soapfan678:
“I wouldn't worry about the artist. They have millions. As long as it is legal, you have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your music.”

Really? All music artists are worth millions?
mimicole
31-08-2015
Originally Posted by Soapfan678:
“I wouldn't worry about the artist. They have millions. As long as it is legal, you have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your music.”

Your big label artists, maybe...
Glawster2002
02-09-2015
Originally Posted by Soapfan678:
“I wouldn't worry about the artist. They have millions. As long as it is legal, you have nothing to worry about. Enjoy your music.”

Very, very, few artists make much money these days, those who have "millions" are the tiny minority of those making music and even then most of them make their real money outside of music.
mgvsmith
02-09-2015
Originally Posted by Glawster2002:
“Very, very, few artists make much money these days, those who have "millions" are the tiny minority of those making music and even then most of them make their real money outside of music.”

Yes, essentially true. There are a number of modern pop stars who have made >$200m in a relatively short time like Bieber, Gaga, Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Katie Perry,....but the vast majority of artists are nowhere near as wealthy.

It's the nature of pop music (and Capitalism, in general) to only allow a small number of artists to have a great share of the wealth. I suspect this has always been the case. There are of course many other ways of making money in pop music, through management, promotion, production, engineering and writing music for others.
walterwhite
02-09-2015
All of this of course is the reason Taylor Swift took that huge stand against Apple music. It wouldn't have affected her much, but for every Taylor Swift there are a thousand struggling musicians.
MTUK1
02-09-2015
Originally Posted by walterwhite:
“All of this of course is the reason Taylor Swift took that huge stand against Apple music. It wouldn't have affected her much, but for every Taylor Swift there are a thousand struggling musicians.”

That was a publicity stunt between her and Apple. It came exactly a week before Apple music launched. No way is that a coincidence.
walterwhite
03-09-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“That was a publicity stunt between her and Apple. It came exactly a week before Apple music launched. No way is that a coincidence.”

Any evidence of that? Shall I hold my breath?
MTUK1
03-09-2015
Originally Posted by walterwhite:
“Any evidence of that? Shall I hold my breath?”

You don't need to be a brain surgeon to work it out. Taylor has been moaning for months about the amount Spotify has paid her so she didn't put her latest album on it. Apple Music pays less per stream that Spotify yet she puts it on there?

I suspect Apple gave her a nice bit of money for her to do her faux rant. It ended up making both parties look good in the end.

Also, it was just a week before launch. Even if you don't agree with the above, you have to admit the timing was more than a coincidence.
walterwhite
04-09-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“You don't need to be a brain surgeon to work it out. Taylor has been moaning for months about the amount Spotify has paid her so she didn't put her latest album on it. Apple Music pays less per stream that Spotify yet she puts it on there?

I suspect Apple gave her a nice bit of money for her to do her faux rant. It ended up making both parties look good in the end.

Also, it was just a week before launch. Even if you don't agree with the above, you have to admit the timing was more than a coincidence.”

You seem to have a problem with the meaning of the word 'evidence'.
MTUK1
04-09-2015
Originally Posted by walterwhite:
“You seem to have a problem with the meaning of the word 'evidence'.”

You seem to be rather gullible believing famous peoples "press releases".
walterwhite
04-09-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“You seem to be rather gullible believing famous peoples "press releases".”

No, you're the gullible one believing something is true without any evidence whatsoever.
MTUK1
04-09-2015
Originally Posted by walterwhite:
“No, you're the gullible one believing something is true without any evidence whatsoever.”

Give me a reason why she'd put her album on Apple Music but not Spotify?
walterwhite
04-09-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“Give me a reason why she'd put her album on Apple Music but not Spotify?”

I don't know. Believe it or not I'm not Taylor Swift.
MTUK1
05-09-2015
Originally Posted by walterwhite:
“I don't know. Believe it or not I'm not Taylor Swift.”

You don't believe the timing was suspicious? And you don't think it's odd that she hasn't put her album on Spotify but on Apple music when it pays less per stream than Spotify?
walterwhite
05-09-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“You don't believe the timing was suspicious? And you don't think it's odd that she hasn't put her album on Spotify but on Apple music when it pays less per stream than Spotify?”

Unusual maybe. Evidence of some huge conspiracy? Not a chance.
Inkblot
05-09-2015
Originally Posted by MTUK1:
“You don't believe the timing was suspicious? And you don't think it's odd that she hasn't put her album on Spotify but on Apple music when it pays less per stream than Spotify?”

Since her complaint was not about the royalty rate but about non-payment of royalties during the three-month trial period, no. It's common sense that artists stand to get more plays during the trial period because many people will sign up for free trials with all the streaming services and then cancel. So getting artists paid during the three-month trial was an important victory.
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map