Mass Music Streaming Services Promise Exposure but Little in Royalties
Hundreds of millions of people access the world wide web on a daily basis. Of these millions, many are searching for new music to entertain themselves with. So far, so good, but how much of this browsing actually translates into meaningful exposure for the artist? Music managers, such as Coran Capshaw and others, have been laboring for some time to get better royalty rates for their artists. This is a battle that rages with especial force in the realm of mass music streaming sites, such as Pandora. It's one thing to get one million plays, but how much does this translate to in royalties?
Artist Management is Simultaneously Easier and Trickier Than Ever
Is It Possible to Find a Balance Between Accessibility and Commercial Value?
The question that keeps coming back to haunt artists, managers, and consumers alike is one of basic commercial integrity. Is it possible to find the magic median between making your music as widely available as possible and still getting paid a fair price for it? Can you make your music available to stream for a reasonable price, yet still be able to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle on the proceeds? Many artists have been forced to forgo releasing new music in any form because of the essential lack of financial return for doing so. As a result, recording has become a restricted medium for many musicians.
It certainly remains true, and will for many years to come, that the internet is the most relevant venue for artists and managers alike. However, it remains to be seen whether the change in emphasis that mass exposure brings with it will continue to affect the industry in a largely positive way. As things stand, there still remains a serious divide between exposure and financial feasibility that needs to be somehow bridged. This is a question that will continue to haunt the industry with no solution in sight.