This is the post duck lipped selfie?
I’m not even sure what that means.
Never mind, I see now. I’ve never once played one of his songs, but I am actually starting to like some of Taylor Swift’s music.
I am becoming more impressed with her as she has shown versatility with other musicians with totally different styles of music.
She clearly has a talent, but the product was not something I particularly liked. Her latest album, however, is excellent and demonstrates a maturity and expression that is in a different league to most of her other work. Even down to the album cover, which could easily have graced an Opeth album once upon a time 
Anyone have any idea how much Qobuz pay artists per stream?
The link posted earlier in the thread shows everyone else apart from Qobuz, so I was just curious
From 2018 …
| Digital Service Provider | $ Per Stream |
|---|---|
| Qobuz | $0.04390 |
| Peloton | $0.04036 |
| iHeartRadio | $0.01426 |
| Amazon Unlimited | $0.01175 |
| Napster/Rhapsody | $0.01110 |
| 24/7 Entertainment GmbH | $0.01050 |
| YouTube Red | $0.00948 |
| Tidal | $0.00927 |
| Deezer | $0.00567 |
| Google Play | $0.00543 |
| Apple | $0.00495 |
| KKBox | $0.00435 |
| Amazon Digital Services Inc. | $0.00395 |
| Spotify | $0.00331 |
| Loen | $0.00205 |
| Pandora | $0.00155 |
| Vevo | $0.00109 |
| Yandex LLC | $0.00051 |
| YouTube Content ID | $0.00028 |
| UMA | $0.00013 |
Qobuz not listed in the 2019 article: https://thetrichordist.com/category/music-streaming/.
Thanks @Martin_Webster.
Another good reason to continue with my Qobuz subscription providing the rates have remained at a similar level compared to the others…
1 Like
Indeed, mind the gap…
Most streaming services accumulate total time streamed and artist time streamed. The artist is paid a share of royalties proportional to the total time his work was streamed. The sums are done globally over all listeners. The per stream rates quoted at Ditto are calculated this way. 1 play divided by total plays times net revenues after salaries, data service, etc are paid.
A fairer model to the artist would be to calculate total artist time by each listener and apportion out the listener’s burdened subscription fee (fee minus other costs) to the artist, maybe through the regional rights management so the songwriters and session players receive payment. Using this model, Vijay Iyer is not competing with Madonna for royalties unless I also happen to play Madonna.
7 Likes
That implies that we should stream our favorite artists all the time to a muted system. I have unlimited streaming on Qobuz and apple music. I could rack up a lot of plays in the 8-16 hours each day the stereo isn’t playing.
1 Like
This could turn into some kind of charitable concern. Imagine a folding at home style service dedicated to ensuring “worthy” artists get a larger share of the pie. Constant streaming to virtual silent endpoints. Maybe this explains Justin Biber’s success?
Under the current “Big pool” system, that is correct. And don’t think that, just because you are not doing so, that’s not already being done on a massive scale.
Under the “user-centric” system, the total amount of money available to be distributed is (65% of†) your monthly subscription fee. It wouldn’t matter how many hours you play your system on mute; your subscription would be divided among the artists you actually stream.
† I think that’s the typical percentage of revenues. Substitute some other figure if you prefer.
2 Likes
Many thanks for sharing that. It did dawn on me that someone must have thought of this already. The idea of armies of “Biberbots” not listening to endless playlists makes me shudder, it’s worse than Skynet 
1 Like
Precisely. If I stream nothing but The Flower Kings, 100% of my subscription - after the streaming company’s cut - should go to The Flower Kings. Unfortunately, under the current model, most of my subscription goes to the most streamed artists, who I don’t listen to!
Deezer is currently the only major streaming service pushing for a User-Centric Payment model. It would be great if they succeed.
1 Like
How would this help the smaller independent artists who aren’t ‘popular’? I imagine that 80% of all streaming covers the top 10-20% of musicians at best.
Probably 20% if Pareto’s Principle holds, always a good estimation starting point.
I doubt it does since popular music is fickle.
1 Like