I know. You subscribed to Spotify years ago, you've grown accustomed to the interface, and you have friends and family who use the same service, making it easy to share songs and playlists. I know…
But the bottom line is this: Spotify, Amazon, Apple, and other streaming services are paying artists far less than other platforms. And if you're a true music fan, especially emerging artists, you should want to support the people who make the music.
The topic of streaming platform fees is complex, and I won't pretend to delve into it in detail in this article. However, after consulting dozens of sites and streaming calculators, one thing is clear: YouTube, Spotify, and Amazon are among the services that pay the least per stream. Apple does slightly better. Tidal pays about three times what Spotify offers. Qobuz even more.
I'm not necessarily promoting one service over another, but I encourage everyone to do their research, compare fees, and experiment with different platforms to then choose the one that best balances artist support with ease of use.
Personally, I abandoned Spotify last month and switched to Tidal, after a trial period with Tidal and Qobuz.(Qobuz is excellent, but its catalog isn't extensive enough for my tastes, though it might be perfect for other users.) The switch to Tidal was painless: I transferred all my playlists without any problems, the interface is very similar, the audio quality is superior, and the artist fees are significantly fairer. I haven't had any regrets.
Streaming fees don't impact established artists who earned money under the old recording model much, but for emerging musicians trying to build a career, every penny counts. Artists who have released an EP or a couple of albums and are playing clubs in small towns need to be able to earn enough to continue creating music. No one is automatically entitled to success, of course, but it would be nice if moderately established musicians could at least afford to record a second album without having to abandon their art for a full-time job in a company.
Let's take an example. You're an emerging artist, you've released an EP and an album, and you've managed to reach 100 million streams in five years. Not a bad achievement! You can probably fill 500-capacity clubs in big cities. But touring is difficult to make a living: you have to rent a van, pay a manager, a sound engineer, a merchandising manager, sleep in cheap motels or at fans' homes, cover insurance, and pay for merchandise upfront. It's not easy (if you want to understand how hard it is, search YouTube for artist testimonials). Making money from a tour is difficult, making good money is even rarer.
But you have 100 million streams! That should guarantee you a decent income, right?
Well… On Spotify, those 100 million streams could have earned you around $400,000 (about €384,000 at current exchange rates). That's a lot, but consider that it's a profit spread over five years, minus studio costs, the percentage for the record label, the manager, the band, and other expenses. No one is getting rich off this scenario. And that's fine. But I wish these artists could at least pay their bills, take a few months to write new material, rent a decent apartment, and maybe save something for the future.
I think it's important for music fans to support artists in concrete ways. The best way has always been and always will be to buy their merch and go to their concerts. But we can also contribute by choosing streaming platforms that pay artists more fairly. If we all did that, we could start a new artistic renaissance.
Improve the performance of your music!
If you're an artist and want to understand how to distribute your music most effectively and start monetizing your catalog, contact me. I've been working in the music industry for over 20 years and am an expert in editorial management and digital distribution. I can help you find the best solutions to enhance your music and ensure you're compensated more fairly for your work. Schedule a meeting with me and let's start building your musical future!
