Daniel Ek’s aspect hustle as a lightning-rod appears to be going very effectively.
Final yr he shook the music trade with three large adjustments to Spotify’s royalty funds, successfully demonetizing tracks with lower than 1000 streams per yr…
… and the web went nuts.
Then he in contrast aspiring musicians to beginner footballers.
And the web went nuts.
Then Spotify argued it might probably pay much less mechanical royalties to music publishers and songwriters as a result of it’s now bundling audiobooks with music.
And the web went nuts.
The price of creating content material: “near zero?”
After which…
… Ek went and did essentially the most controversial factor but…
… tweeting one thing that (to me) gave the impression of…
… the reality?
In the present day, with the price of creating content material being near zero, individuals can share an unimaginable quantity of content material. This has sparked my curiosity in regards to the idea of lengthy shelf life versus quick shelf life. Whereas a lot of what we see and listen to rapidly turns into out of date, there are…
— Daniel Ek (@eldsjal) Might 29, 2024
In the present day, with the price of creating content material being near zero, individuals can share an unimaginable quantity of content material. This has sparked my curiosity in regards to the idea of lengthy shelf life versus quick shelf life. Whereas a lot of what we see and listen to rapidly turns into out of date, there are timeless concepts and even items of music that may stay related for many years and even centuries.
For instance, we’re witnessing a resurgence of Stoicism, with a lot of Marcus Aurelius’s insights nonetheless resonating 1000’s of years later. This makes me marvel: what are essentially the most unintuitive, but enduring concepts that aren’t often mentioned immediately however may need a protracted shelf life? Additionally, what are we creating now that can nonetheless be valued and mentioned tons of or 1000’s of years from immediately?
-Daniel Ek, Might 29, 2024
The swift backlash from artists
In response to Ek’s declare that the price of creating content material is “near zero,” the web…
… (yep) you guessed it:
Went nuts!
Artists like deadmau5 threatened to take away music from Spotify.
Numerous different artists — each majors and indies — have registered their ire towards Ek’s claims.
Nevertheless, I used to be a bit baffled that this explicit tweet offended so many musicians.
What’s so controversial?
As a result of initially, Ek wasn’t speaking solely about music on this tweet. He was speaking about human artistic output within the mixture.
Songs, books, jpegs, TikTok movies.
All of which truly ARE simpler to create and distribute immediately than yesterday.
To say nothing of the convenience of creation now versus 50 years in the past.
What it USED TO COST to launch music
Whereas most artistic expression that’s price sharing DID take tons follow and ability to develop, and whereas musicians particularly CAN spend some huge cash making music in the event that they select — studio time, session participant charges, the price of gear — it’s additionally true that nice music will be made WITHOUT all of those self same prices.
Due to less-expensive and even free know-how, the barrier to entry (from a cost-perspective) actually has neared zero. Particularly in relative phrases.
Do not forget that a long time in the past, the method of making and releasing profitable music normally required (so as):
- A&R curiosity
- A file deal
- A studio finances of tons of of 1000’s and even tens of millions of {dollars}
- Large bodily distribution
- Nice advertising and marketing and radio promotion
- Sufficient gross sales to justify that shops maintain the album in inventory
- And extra
I’m afraid to whole up that price ticket.
In the present day artists can create a monitor on their telephone and garner billions of streams on Spotify.
Which may be placing it too merely, after all, as a result of consideration doesn’t simply magically occur.
Artists who’ve gained traction might have labored to construct an Instagram or TikTok following, or spent years streaming on Twitch or YouTube, or toured relentlessly, or assembled an important staff.
However the level is: Most of the earlier financial obstacles to creating music are gone.
It’s most likely extra correct to say:
The REQUISITE prices for making content material have neared zero
To not say you SHOULDN’T spend cash to make your music.
Even a self-reliant producer who makes digital music of their bed room with the identical gear they’ve used for years might someday ask, hmmm, what wouldn’t it value to get an actual bagpipe participant in right here, or to get my favourite singer so as to add some vocals?
Personally, I dream of recording with an orchestra someday. And the going price for 80 professional instrumentalists is way from “zero!”
However the truth stays that the music of mine that has essentially the most streams on Spotify is a people monitor I carried out and recorded completely myself. So I don’t HAVE to go that spendy orchestral route as a way to attain an viewers, is the purpose. And neither does anybody else immediately.
The identical is true for video. Non-fiction. Poems. Design. Comedy.
The one required value is the time it takes you to develop your craft. Plus an iPhone.
That’s why there may be extra artwork being made and launched immediately than ever earlier than.
Should you’re a rock band, would you like actual drums in a professional studio to no matter you may cook dinner up in your pc? Most likely so. However you may distribute your music to Spotify whether or not these drums are programmed or mic’d.
Should you’re a comic, wouldn’t it be good to have main funding in your work? To focus on your wit in an hour-long Netflix particular? Completely.
However that doesn’t change the truth that 1000’s of comedians can simply hop on Instagram and inform a joke. Whether or not it’s on Netflix or Instagram, fun is fun.
Oh no! Are we actually speaking about Provide & Demand once more?
All this implies there may be way more artistic output being shared throughout codecs and platforms. And it’s international.
THIS is the truth Daniel Ek was wrestling with in his tweet. Questioning what the sheer quantity of that output means for the methods by which anyone explicit piece of content material will rise to the extent of cultural consciousness. And the way lengthy a bit of content material can stay there.
As musicians, we don’t wish to see our personal artwork as a part of an financial system. Music is connective, ineffable, vital. It’s priceless, that’s true.
But music is now delivered (and let’s face it, usually consumed) as if it’s an inexhaustible commodity. In a means, it’s that too.
Which suspends us in a contradiction, and conjures up debate after debate. Is music priceless or price much less? Is the price of creation “close to zero” or “hey, it took me my entire life to write down this music?”
Many issues will be true directly.
The provision of music is staggering. The provision of content material is staggering. What does that do to demand?
Looks like an apparent query to ask in 2024. And an advanced one. So I didn’t suppose it was out-of-bounds for Daniel Ek to ask it.
Tread flippantly, sir!
After all Daniel Ek is the chief of one of many world’s most vital music corporations. An organization that has facilitated, accelerated, and profited from the commodification of music.
So maybe he may’ve chosen his phrases higher.
Particularly after so many different controversial statements and coverage shifts over the previous yr. And some buddies of mine have urged there’s no different option to learn his current tweet besides within the gentle of all these earlier controversies.
However I do consider, on this case, his phrases had been taken out of context. And if musicians need to advocate for his or her pursuits, and convey stress towards highly effective gamers within the trade, I feel it’s vital to stage outrage selectively, when issues are literally outrageous.
Do you make “content material?”
Talking of concern, I’ve targeted a lot right here on the COST claims in Ek’s tweet, I haven’t even talked about the OTHER supposed outrage. That he used the phrase “content material!”
“I make music, not content material,” exclaimed 1000’s of artists.
Do you make content material? You do! You make musical content material, in any other case generally known as music. Your artwork is content material. It simply means it has stuff in it.
Lyrical content material, rhythmic content material, harmonic and melodic content material, emotional content material,…
Plus, since Daniel Ek wasn’t particularly speaking about music within the tweet — bear in mind he referenced the traditional writings of Marcus Aurelius — content material is far simpler to kind than “a variety of artistic expression throughout a number of codecs and platforms.”
As soon as upon a time a e book needed to be printed, certain, packaged, and shipped. A symphony would possibly stay on vinyl or as dozens of pages of notation. A movie got here in a canister and bought projected on an enormous display. A picture could be canvas and oil.
However a lot of the expressive work we devour immediately is delivered in a uniform means: 0s and 1s.
They’re digital information. Going by digital pipes.
In that context particularly, “content material” appears okay to me.
It’s a catchall phrase.
I don’t suppose he meant it to decrease your music.
What do you suppose?
These are simply my very own ideas right here, and hey, I may very well be unsuitable.
Do you will have robust emotions about Daniel Ek’s newest tweet, or any of the massive Spotify information over the previous yr?
I’d love to listen to it. Go away your take within the feedback of this video.
