You are here

Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Advice on everything from getting your music heard to setting up a label and royalties.

Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby 1tc » Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:55 am

Hello

Just wondering if some minor strategy can be elaborated when you put your indie music on streaming sites through an agregator. I'm not the first one to mull this, and though not much can be found on this subject.
The common sense has it that you should allow the uploading of yout track(s) on as many streaming platforms as possible since they do not share their subscribers for the most part (John Doe is with Spotify, not with napster and vice-versa). But... spotify+applemusic+pandora= 80% of the actual streams per year. If you compute this with the payback from those firms, this figure grows even more.Their financial weight is around 85%. Add Youtube that no one will ever think of ridding, and you're at 88-90%. So...
What about uploading to these 3 or 4 sites only, making it compulsory for any other subscriber (tidal, amazon etc...) to add a view to your YT video if they wish to listen to the song again (provided that they discover it there). That would only be 10-15% more, but the difference of earnings with YT will be negligible, and is it not better to grow your YT counter by 15%?
Besides, by doing so, you may slighly displace the cursor from streaming to downloading (itunes) since those 10-15% may prefer to have your track as a file? (back to the old question: does barring streaming increase downloads)
Is this reasoning completely deluded ? Any other proven strategy to improve what can be improved in the indie world...
Thank you
1tc
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:02 am

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby CS70 » Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:12 am

Guess the best is to try and see what happens. For a number of reasons (a bit long to write here) I think it's best to have your music available on as many platforms as possible when your fan base is lower than a certain critical mass, but then all of these online interactions are fairly new and changing, so nobody has pre-packaged answer I guess.
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3242
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby blinddrew » Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:33 am

I'm with CS70 on this, as a non-major artist the biggest challenge is obscurity. Getting onto as many platforms as possible gives you more chance to get found organically, as well as being more likely to get 'featured' on a smaller provider.

I think the idea that not being on streaming sites leads to more downloads is flawed for most artists. Unless you're heavily in demand, not being on the platform of your (potential) customer's choice just means they'll find something else. Unless they're a dedicated fan someone isn't going to go trawling through providers to find where you're hosted - and if they're a dedicated fan then they're probably buying direct from your website. :)

That's my tuppence-worth, but I should point out that my music career is spectacularly non-existent so treat this with the disdain it deserves. ;)
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5952
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby James Perrett » Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:54 pm

1tc wrote:Hello
But... spotify+applemusic+pandora= 80% of the actual streams per year.

Not sure where you get this from...

I've been doing a bit of work analysing streaming stats for an indie label and a much larger percentage seems to come from other services - many of which I had never heard of before as they're based in Russia or the far east.

Or is it that the subscribers to the services that you mention are more likely to listen to mainstream artists rather than go looking for new and more obscure artists?
User avatar
James Perrett
Moderator
Posts: 7774
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:00 am
Location: The wilds of Hampshire
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration. JRP Music Facebook Page

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby 1tc » Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:01 pm

Thank you guys for your answers. Didn't expect this many this quick.

@james Perret See the table on this page https://thetrichordist.com/2018/01/15/2 ... l-revenue/

Or is there any underlying deceit in there ?

Anyway, if I decide to let the aggregator upload my music on a few streaming sites only, can I change my mind later on and put it up on others? Or vice-versa, take it down from some platforms ?
1tc
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:02 am

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby blinddrew » Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:26 pm

I want to like David Lowery's stuff (and I admire his principles) but I do feel that he'd be better off trying to accept the world as it is rather than trying to dial it back 20 years. There is much that could be better about the current music industry but trying to tie things back to CD sale equivalents, download-to-streaming comparisons, and 'fair' rates is really just failing to understand the current market.
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5952
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby johnny h » Fri Nov 23, 2018 10:07 am

It’s hard to make money from streaming even if you have a strong career and real fans. Anything that comes in for me is just bonus money. Gigs are where the money is, streaming just drives the gigs.

Bandcamp is probably the best place to be “discovered” as an unknown artist.
johnny h
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3653
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:00 am

Re: Any such thing as a streaming strategy ?...

Postby manhattan » Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:54 pm

1tc wrote:Hello

Just wondering if some minor strategy can be elaborated when you put your indie music on streaming sites through an agregator. I'm not the first one to mull this, and though not much can be found on this subject.
The common sense has it that you should allow the uploading of yout track(s) on as many streaming platforms as possible since they do not share their subscribers for the most part (John Doe is with Spotify, not with napster and vice-versa). But... spotify+applemusic+pandora= 80% of the actual streams per year. If you compute this with the payback from those firms, this figure grows even more.Their financial weight is around 85%. Add Youtube that no one will ever think of ridding, and you're at 88-90%. So...
What about uploading to these 3 or 4 sites only, making it compulsory for any other subscriber (tidal, amazon etc...) to add a view to your YT video if they wish to listen to the song again (provided that they discover it there). That would only be 10-15% more, but the difference of earnings with YT will be negligible, and is it not better to grow your YT counter by 15%?
Besides, by doing so, you may slighly displace the cursor from streaming to downloading (itunes) since those 10-15% may prefer to have your track as a file? (back to the old question: does barring streaming increase downloads)
Is this reasoning completely deluded ? Any other proven strategy to improve what can be improved in the indie world...
Thank you

Yes, there are streaming strategies. Streaming has become the #1 revenue of recorded music sales Globally and downloads have dropped significantly. This will lead to more and more streaming strategies as times goes on.

I think that people are only moving away from downloading and overall trends will drive them more than individual decisions. Music is a wash of content and a cacophony of competition vying for ears, so on the listener's side, they often don't care they want their access and/or convenience, especially the younger crowds.

I have gone back and forth on the strategies of what to do. Sometimes I don't put stuff on certain streaming sites and downloading sites. Sometimes ill avoid Amazon or Tidal, Amazon because they undercut and Tidal because they take 8 months to pay and don't pay everything, meaning they miss streams from premium accounts. Tidal to their credit does pay a good per stream amount. This is another thing to consider. With so much content out there, how likely are you to really be found on some obscure platform or store? How many fans are finding you by random searches online, in stores and on platforms?

If the answers are hardly any, then it's reasonable to start thinking about funneling your fans to specific sites and stores to obtain your music. Spotify and Apple are musts, Google so long as you can avoid YouTube is great but it seems they've bundled the two together. YouTube is okay but you need to have a certain account, you need to have content ID and you need to have someone or yourself scan and scan and claim. You also need a certain amount of views before you're paid. They are also on the low end of pay per stream.

The thing you really need to consider is this, if you are worried about piracy, YouTube is by far the easiest place to steal songs. It's also one of if not the biggest streaming platforms for music. Perhaps it's best to delay the release to youtube to see if you can cash in on higher paying streams elsewhere first.

Generally, once you release and publish something you won't be able to just add it do more stores, you would have to take it down, and then put it back up, which can be a real PITA!
manhattan
Poster
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:38 am


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users