-
I said it before streaming music services are evil and ripping off songwriters and musicians. Spotify the worst of them well they just sank lower and now said they feel no need to pay mechanical royalties. For those new to music business a recording when played is suppose to get two types of royalties, first songwriters which is what most people are aware of, but still ignore. They second and much smaller mechanical royalties which is what the musicians on that recording get paid. This is how studio musicians make their living, first they get paid for the session, then they get a tiny payment every time the record is played on radio, TV, in commercial businesses, and similar use.
So as a musician supporting and encouraging use of streaming services you are basically shooting yourself in the foot.
Surprise! Spotify Says They Don't Owe Anything for 'Mechanicals'
-
09-02-2017 01:35 PM
-
As a songwriter myself who never made a dime from a tune that got almost 900 hits on youtube, I agree. I'm guilty as the next guy of using youtube to cop songs, bookmark recordings, etc. I really would rather not, and FWIW still purchase CDs, which feels more ethical. (I've never used the other services like Spotify).
I'd be willing to pay a small monthly fee that would go towards paying mechanicals to composers represented on youtube---and would encourage others to do the same...
-
Spotify may be evil, but just to be clear "mechanicals" are what the record company paid you for an album sale. Performance royalties are paid by "artist" associations like ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. Performance royalties are paid for TV, radio, and from live venue performances, not mechanicals. Spotify is arguing they should pay performance royalties, not royalties as if they were pressing and selling physical records.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Thanks for clearing that up.
Originally Posted by rlrhett
Shows you how little $ I've made on royalties not to even know that...
-
This is not accurate, in the US, studio musicians do not get any royalties, they get paid once for the session only. If this were true then guys like the wrecking crew would be as wealthy as the stars they played for. It would not be unheard of for them to have played on half the records in the top ten some weeks. Originally Posted by docbop
Last edited by cosmic gumbo; 09-03-2017 at 02:24 AM.
-
Cats I grew up with were getting paid it is very small compared to songwriters royalties and it was quickly diminishing rate over a few years, but they got checks. Could be different now, but that is what I knew to be true. Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
-
Maybe it was jingles, radio, TV or film work.
-
The genie has escaped from the bottle and isn't going back in.
The days of artists living on their royalties from airplay is over.
Albums are not being sold much.
Kids don't play pickup baseball in the neighborhood anymore.
The railroad industry is no longer the king of transportation.
Shoe repair is not a great business.
Model T's are not being made.
Woolworths is gone.
The British Empire is no more.
Elvis is dead.Last edited by Drumbler; 09-03-2017 at 07:57 AM.
-
Spotify - Wikipedia
"In March 2014, American funk band Vulfpeck exposed a loophole in Spotify's royalty calculation model. The band created an album titled Sleepify, which consisted solely of silence. The band asked users to stream the album on a loop while they slept to increase the amount of money earned. The album was pulled by Spotify in April 2014, citing unspecified service violation. Vulfpeck had accumulated enough streams to result in around $20,000 in royalties before the album was pulled."
-
I definitely don't disagree, but - although I've been thinking about the implications of streaming services for a few years now - I need to think about it more. Originally Posted by docbop
As Drumbler put it, 'The genie has escaped from the bottle...' - but that doesn't absolve me of responsibility for not just my actions, but the consequences of my actions. (To paraphrase Mrs Gump, "Evil is as evil does.")
I small gas - not from GAS, but from gaslighting.
To me, Spotify's candy-shop array seems like a deliberate ruse to infantilise 'consumers', perverting taste (among musicians, too) by seemingly innocuous means - surreptitiously inducing such expectations of recorded sound quality that it becomes valued over performance. Convenient? Yes. Innocuous? I'm not so sure.
I should take greater advantage* of my own record collection. After all, 'a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.'
*EDIT and of such live gems as this unreleased recording - from Benson's Breezin' band's début gig:
Last edited by destinytot; 09-03-2017 at 09:01 AM.
-
I'm probably in a very small minority, but I spend more $ on CD's since I've had Spotify. I like the physical object, the artwork, the liners...listening to music is not a passive experience for me.
-
Hmmmm, evil it may be. I still buy CDs as well, but damn, having Tidal hi fi as a research tool, a listening source is the best thing to happen in the last decade. All those historic albums I trawled through my local library for but couldn't find.
Having access to recordings from decades gone by, that are incredibly difficult to source (in my part of the world), most definitely keeps the music alive for me.
-
And big coal ain't coming back either. Originally Posted by Drumbler
-
I listen to 99% of my music these days on iTunes. I gave away my 800 albums. I still have the CD's but never play them.
I ain't going back. I want a certain song or album...and I want it now...and I'm not going to settle for anything else.
Sorry, I'm too old to be idealistic.
-
Wow, that's great. Never heard that before. A bit more fusiony than most of George's stuff from the 70's, but GREAT playing. Originally Posted by destinytot
They were one of the best bands of the era. I consider Weekend in LA one of the best albums of that time, as well. George was put on earth to entertain and astound. There's no way you can listen to that album and not be amazed and reinvigorated.
-
I use to see someone at a show and if I liked it I'd buy the album.
Or, I'd hear solo's on Steely Dan albums and I would seek out albums of the soloist... Steve Khan, Larry Carlton, Lee Ritenour.
Or, in high school (graduated in '76) I had a friend that had a great stereo, a group of friends would go over to his place and listen to albums. Teenagers intently listening to music for hours on end, I don't think that happens anymore. This was another source of leads to album purchases.
It just seems those days are gone forever... "over a long time ago".
I'm am so inundated with great players from the internet (youtube mostly, this forum too) that I don't buy many cd's anymore. Greatness now seems kind of ordinary.
Streaming yes, but more so, I just blame the whole internet.
Fagen and Becker lyrics from 1974...
I would love to tour the Southland
In a travelling minstrel show
Yes I'd love to tour the Southland
In a traveling minstrel show
Yes I'm dying to be a star and make them laugh
Sound just like a record on the phonograph
Those days are gone forever
Over a long time ago, oh yeah
Last edited by fep; 09-05-2017 at 05:52 PM.
-
Many years ago back I talked to Jake Hanna, a first rate jazz drummer that was featured on a lot of Concord Jazz recordings, and he told me that while he should have been paid royalties for some of the recording he never got any checks except from Japan. That every so often he would see a letter coming from Japan, and yea, it was a check for his session playing because a recording he was on was played in Japan. Originally Posted by docbop
Hey, I know little about this subject but I do recall Jake laughing at the fact he received checks from Japan for stuff he had done years, if not decades before.
-
Teenagers still get together and vibe out on jazz records, I've seen it a lot here in Santa Barbara which isnt exactly a music hub.
-
Just finished attending the Detroit Jazz Festival, which again is probably the premier jazz festival in the U.S. these days.
Drove in from NY on Fri. so I missed the Herbie Hancock opening show on Friday night.
The jazz festival was offering full streaming for $10 for 4 days of music and about 35 acts. (4 separate sound stages and music starting every day in early afternoon and continuing through the evening). My guessstimate was about 10,000 actual attendees each day.
The Detroit festival is a free festival...If you do a nominal contribution, that gets you guaranteed seating which is only an issue in the main venue on the Campus Martius park space...if they managed 100,000 streaming subscriptions, that would be $1 million in additional revenue.
I saw some really fine musicians...e.g. Michael Dease on trombone did a great tribute to Detroit-based past trombonists (JJ Johnson, Curtis Fuller, and Frank Rosolino)...Adam Rogers and John Pattituci and Steve Cardenas did a good guitar-only show. Any of these shows would have been worth a $10 streaming fee. (Russell Malone and Stanley Clark got rained out.)
Hopefully, some of the streaming revenue got back to the musicians, and even if it just goes to help cover appearance fees, that has got to be helpful, as corporate sponsorship (which was generous) is not unlimited.
-
As far as I know, musicians can chose royalties vs. upfront payment. Usually they go for upfront, which means wave the rights on royalties. Often, producers and labels would hire only those willing too play the game. Wrecking crew played on 140 top 10 hits, all while being the first call CLIQUE for abut 15 years. How many recordings they made that flopped? They must have had other qualities and abilities than musicianship.
Reply With Quote
Looking for a "jazz box"
Today, 09:57 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos