Hi,
Thanks for sharing this, unfortunately from personal experience I
don't have much faith left in monetizing music no matter how you slice
the pie or how much lipstick you put on the pig.. People are now just
plain used to getting music for free or in the case of Spotify (and
all other streaming services) for a very low subscription fee which
yes...rips off the artist.
I've released 2 albums in the last 2 years using 'CD Baby' which sets
up both physical CD and Digital Download sales pretty much anywhere
that's anywhere in Digital music retailing... iTunes, Google Play,
Spotify, Amazon... you get the idea. With both albums I have yet to
make back my initial $89.00 fee to CD Baby... Now you may say "well
obviously your music sucks!" or "you didn't try to promote it enough"
since I am just a guy posting this on a mailing list that is a
possibility but please indulge me with the benefit of the doubt, In
truth I know several close accomplished musician friends who are
telling me the exact same story and some of these people work
full-time on their music careers and have managed to have short lived
radio success. Even flogging CD's at gigs isn't anything like it used
to be, I've played festivals and large summer outdoor gigs to hundreds
of people who are really digging the music and hollering for encores
but am lucky to sell 5 CD's, at a couple of gigs I actually gave them
away to people who came up to the stage to say hi and how much they
enjoyed show and they just look at the CD with a "Where am I supposed
to put this!?" look on their face. I understand that Resonate doesn't
do physical CD's, I'm talking about the larger principle that you
can't GIVE people what they DON'T want whether it's CD's, streams or
downloads.
Most people who aren't diehard music collectors or hipsters see CD's
as junk, they see iTunes, Google, and Amazon selling songs for $0.99
as outrageously old-fashioned, pedantic and expensive and are willing
to pay subscription fees for Spotify, iTunes radio, Google Play Music,
simply because 99% of their computing time is spent on a mobile and
they want an established, affordable and mobile-friendly way to get
instant musical gratification. Resonate will possibly appeal to the
guilt-complexes of artists supporting artists because they know how
much of a rip-off Spotify is but really there is just not the time,
altruism and keen ambition to learn about something new out there in
the general population, with Trump, Climate change, ISIS and all the
rest the financial welfare of musicians is not even on their radar.
I appreciate your sentiments. I know of an artist who recently released an
album and got 350k paid downloads but only received E1600. That is a
ridiculously low sum of money considering that 350k album sales used to be
enough to fund a years salary. Now someone is making a profit out of that
but it ain't the artist.
The main difference with Resonate compared to other services is that
profits are distributed to the co-operative including the artists,
listeners and shareholders.
Granted it doesn't mean much if there is no profit but in it's defense the
system is live and money is being spent to listen to the music. It's too
early to tell if the concept will beat the odds and be a raging success
but even if it doesn't make hundreds of millions like the other major
players there is still the possibility that artists will make some income.
Some being better than none.
IIUC they are working on enabling instant micro payments. i.e if you have
earned a few bucks you will be able to get access to it without having to
wait for the ubiquitous $130 payment threshold. So if that helps a
struggling artist pay for a pack of cigarettes or a couple of cold beers
on a Friday at the local that is surely a "Good Thing"(tm)
The other part of the Resonate model that might appeal to open source
folks is the opportunity to influence the direction of the project by
getting directly involved in the development process.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Shirkey" <pshirkey(a)boosthardware.com>
To:"linux-audio-user" <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Cc:
Sent:Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:27:42 +0200
Subject:Re: [LAU] #stream2own
Thanks for introducing this. Very interesting.
I do like their idea, but I did not like the fact that they did not
mention
Bandcamp. Comparing to Spotify is fairly easy, but Bandcamp does
not have
a
subscription model. How do they compare to Bandcamp? I mean, I am
selling
something at Bandcamp and the good thing about it
is that the price
is not
fixed.
Either way, I am very much willing to try them.
IIUC they are planning to expand the pricing options after they have
solidified the core stream2own model.
In terms of comparing to Bandcamp I think the services are mutually
compatible. Bandcamp offers a viable sales model and is doing a lot
for
indie artists/producers. They are also actively monitoring hte
progress
and will most likely adopt the stream to own model if they see it
working
out with Resonate.
The stream2own model hasn't been fully proven yet so it's a bit hard
to
say how it will stack up against Bandcamp earnings. The main point is
that
the option is now available for artists and producers to join in the
fun
and find out for themselves.
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Patrick Shirkey <
pshirkey(a)boosthardware.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Bigups to @NovaDeviator
>
> Some of you might be interested in a new distribution system for
your
> music based on the #stream2own mechanism.
>
>
http://resonate.is
>
> #stream2own aims to give listeners and artists a fair deal. Each
paid
> stream cost exponentially more upto the 9th
stream and then the
track is
> owned by the listener and they can download
the track or stream
for
> free.
> A fully paid track costs E1.25.
>
> Artists who upload tracks get access to the beta program to start
> earning
> credits immediately.*
>
> Resonate is a co-op where all the shareholders get one vote
independent
> of
> the number of shares owned AND artists, fans are also eligible for
a
> share
> of the profits. It's a new paradigm for music distribution where
the
> goal
> is to fairly reimburse artists/producers for their hard work
instead of
> enabling a few board members to get 6 figure
salaries and private
> yachts/jets/etc...
>
> * Artists earn 70% of every paid stream of their tracks. have
voting
rights
and also get access to a portion of the total profits.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.com/
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd