Streaming Service Summary

[sarumbear]

Your argument is valid, unfortunately the system is stacked against independent artists the most since some of them have the ability to publish via a record label. Few months ago i remember seeing a price breakdown of what the major platforms payout per stream and it was diabolical at what the rate was.

The system was always stacked against indipendent artists.

You sign with a label, they give you an advance, you record your music, they market and distribute your output. Without marketing and distribution indipendants didn’t have the chance then, they don’t have now. Nothing has changed other than you are now interested on how small artists are paid.

That diabolical number is the same for all artists (give or take). If people know you (via marketing) your music is sold and your royalty check is large. That’s why only a few acts are rich, the rest have to do other jobs for a living.

 

[MRC01]

The system was always stacked against indipendent artists. ...

True. Yet as much as people talk about how bad the streaming payout to artists is these days, decades ago, it was likely even worse. The technology to make and distribute an album was prohibitively expensive: tape decks that needed to be calibrated, the tape itself, mixing consoles, cutting records, etc. VERY expensive stuff. Independent musicians had essentially no way to make an album cheaply. Technology has gotten better and cheaper. Good mics, mic preamps, digital audio and computers have cut the costs by orders of magnitude. And one can distribute on the internet.
That's not to say that artists these days have it easy, just some perspective.

 

[pseudoid]

Similar [paradigm?] shift like the autonomous EVs that are toppling the InternalCombustionEngine dominance. The advancements in 'one-button' hit making is leaving a wake behind it. Toppling down many studios/productions houses (and their brain-trust) like they were mere inconsequential and collateral damage. Sad yet the trajectory of the old business model needed toppling, along with...… well… those... HooliganB*st*rds at the helm.

 

[Rottmannash]

Why would anyone choose their streaming service based upon market share?

I base mine on SQ/ quality of masters.

 

[MaxBuck]

I base mine on SQ/ quality of masters.

Yes, and I think this is underappreciated. I suspect one big reason Spotify sounds so dull to me is that they're not getting the best quality masters.

 

[_thelaughingman]

Yes, and I think this is underappreciated. I suspect one big reason Spotify sounds so dull to me is that they're not getting the best quality masters.

You don't even need A/B testing to tell how bad Spotify sounds even on a pair of decent headphones.

 

[pseudoid]

It appears that we [I?] sure could use a chart (like below) as the “Summary” to this ‘Streaming Service Summary’ topic:

Service Name	Users (e+6)​	Subscribers (e+6)​	Market% @487M​	Cost ($/mo)​	Format Type​	Data Rate (Mbps)​	Other
NetEase		55​	13.00%​
Apple Music		60​	16.00%​
Audiomack	17​
Deezer	16​		2.00%​
Gaana	185​
Idagio							FairPay?No Roon
NetEase			4.00%​
Pandora	55​	6​	1.00%​
Qobuz		0​
SoundCloud	175​
Spotify	365​	165​	32.00%​				NFG
Tencent	615​	61​	13.00%​
Tidal
Yandex			2.00%​
YouTube(Google)	2,000​	30​	8.00%​
Others			9.00%​
Totals	3,428​	377​	100.00%​

I partially stuffed the available data from the replies (ty @acbarn, @sarumbear for data and @keebz28 who should volunteer for pricing data (he alluded to).

 

[_thelaughingman]

Hardly a single platform pay's 1 cent per stream, let alone fractions of a cent.

Slightly updated metrics on payout.

 

[sarumbear]

It appears that we [I?] sure could use a chart (like below) as the “Summary” to this ‘Streaming Service Summary’ topic:

Service Name	Users (e+6)​	Subscribers (e+6)​	Market% @487M​	Cost ($/mo)​	Format Type​	Data Rate (Mbps)​	Other
NetEase		55​	13.00%​
Apple Music		60​	16.00%​
Audiomack	17​
Deezer	16​		2.00%​
Gaana	185​
Idagio							FairPay?No Roon
NetEase			4.00%​
Pandora	55​	6​	1.00%​
Qobuz		0​
SoundCloud	175​
Spotify	365​	165​	32.00%​				NFG
Tencent	615​	61​	13.00%​
Tidal
Yandex			2.00%​
YouTube(Google)	2,000​	30​	8.00%​
Others			9.00%​
Totals	3,428​	377​	100.00%​

I partially stuffed the available data from the replies (ty @acbarn, @sarumbear for data and @keebz28 who should volunteer for pricing data (he alluded to).

The problem with listing every name one ever heard without any context is you forget a major supplier: Amazon, but list a game service, twice.

I posted this data earlier with source.

 

[Zensō]

Apple Music Insights: Royalties - Apple Music for Artists

Learn more about our philosophy and values regarding streaming royalties, publishing operations, and editorial playlists.

artists.apple.com

 

[pseudoid]

Great information, @keebz28 and I'd stuff that info to the sample "chart (like below)", but I prefer not be chastised again...

Slightly updated metrics on payout.

 

[Raindog123]

Why would anyone choose their streaming service based upon market share?

To make sure it is there tomorrow, and there is sufficient support for it - eg, integration - by HW manufacturers..?

 

[BN1]

I"m waiting for Spotify connect hi-res. I hope for easy streaming solution for R-pi 4B USB Connection directly to DAC.

Ditto, but they do need to toe the line on price, can't expect a $5-$10 premium on price now that Amazon and Apple have provided value leadership.

 

[BN1]

I have tried them all.

Settled on roon+qobuz for a while.

Ditching both and going with Spotify for now. Half the cost, extensive catalog, nice app that works the same at home or on the go, connect feature works great with phone/tablet as remote for desktop app or AVR (except no volume normalization with AVR), great discovery features, playlists for any mood/occasion.

Hifi will be a bonus if/when they ever launch it. Even without, I can't tell much if any difference from CD when level matched.

My main complaint is that you can't search favorite albums by genre. No big deal, though.

Agree, but we'll have to see where Spotify lands on price for HF (lossless CD in this case). No doubt that Spotify's goal was to charge a premium for HF but that ship has sailed now that Apple and Amazon offer equal/better quality for around $10 (or less) per month. I think that Spotify was aware that 320 kbps was a sweet spot for a lot of listeners but market expectations may have changed.

 

[JanesJr1]

After a few months of poking at streaming solutions for my 2 channel system, I have come to the following observations:

Spotify Connect
Pros: Great user interface – great for discovery – Spotify Connect is widely supported
Cons: Music is relatively low resolution – all the forum members will mock you for using this service – the promised high-resolution service will be available “sometime soon”
Tidal Connect
Pros: High resolution music – large catalog – MQA magic – polished user interface - Roon is a great add on that adds a richer visual experience
Cons: MQA is snake oil – pushed to reduce bandwidth burden – cost with Roon is high – pushes music genres outside my musical tastes
Amazon HD
Pros: Low cost – high resolution without MQA – strong catalog
Cons: No Amazon connect service – Bluesound Node offers some integration but has limited capability due to simple Amazon API – Amazon desktop app required for high resolution, but app always stops on second track of a session – support instructs me to use web app which cannot support high resolution
Local Music Library
Pros: No cost once purchased – lots of free solutions for solid user interface – Roon available if you want a rich user interface
Cons: High cost to build a library – discovery is expensive – laborious to rip CDs for the library – not readily portable

Are my observations consistent with your experience?




Save Share
Reply Quote

Sorry for slow reply, but just to note I have no problem with hi-res playback on Amazon with the desktop app, e.g. stopping on the second track.

(I found there are limitations on the ability of Amazon to switch among the ultra-high-res sampling rates without re-sampling, but ultimately joined other ASR commentators that sampling rates and bit rates on lossless recordings beyond the red-book standard don't really make much (if any) difference in practice.)

 

[Siwel]

I miss Qobuz, good till super good quality and a catalog that will be expanding hopefully.
But untill now I'm quite suprised with what they are offering.And since this month for a lower price.

I have Tidal and Qobuz subs and often as not find I prefer the sound streamed over Qobuz although Tidal still sounds good enough for me to enjoy on a full bandwidth system. I can stream and fully unfold MQA with my rig, have two dacs, one MQA licensed, one not and decided I can easily live without MQA. I think QoBuz's catalog seems to be filling out for my tastes. I don't like Tidal's headline music recommendations either and streaming it natively mean minimal metadata as well whereas Qobuz makes a much gamer attempt to provide that and high resolution material as well although I've nothing against 44.1 if it comes to that.

If I had to pick one dedicated streaming service today for my money it's Qobuz. I still keep Tidal mostly because I'm lazy.

 

[Jimbob54]

I have Tidal and Qobuz subs and often as not find I prefer the sound streamed over Qobuz although Tidal still sounds good enough for me to enjoy on a full bandwidth system. I can stream and fully unfold MQA with my rig, have two dacs, one MQA licensed, one not and decided I can easily live without MQA. I think QoBuz's catalog seems to be filling out for my tastes. I don't like Tidal's headline music recommendations either and streaming it natively mean minimal metadata as well whereas Qobuz makes a much gamer attempt to provide that and high resolution material as well although I've nothing against 44.1 if it comes to that.

If I had to pick one dedicated streaming service today for my money it's Qobuz. I still keep Tidal mostly because I'm lazy.

If they had good functionality in the Windows and mobile apps and a decent playlist track limit (currently 999) I would agree with you.

 

[MRC01]

I switched to Qobuz when Primephonic shut down. No regrets, it's been great. They are the only service that plays lossless (CD quality or higher) in a browser. That's important to me, as I run Linux on my computers. Also, USB Audio Player Pro can stream from Qobuz, which enables bit perfect to your DAC, and optionally applying parametric EQ via their tonebusters plugin, bypassing the audio resampling that the phone/tablet OS often does. Qobuz support has also been responsive to my various questions.

 

[pseudoid]

So, technically, can a subscriber copy/record the selection being played? Would that recording quality be any good?
I guess what I am trying to ask is how the content is protected from being illegally duped?
NOTE: I have zero interest in doing so but DRM [?] is not going to protect against nefarious netizens. IMHO

 

[MRC01]

Neither Qobuz nor Primephonic had DRM or copy protection when playing in the browser. In Linux, you can capture bit perfect data streaming through the audio system, so a tech savvy user could make a local disk copy of the raw music data as it played, and maybe find a way to convert it to WAV or FLAC format. More easily, pretty much anyone could play the app output into a digital recorder. But what's the point? Why go through all that effort when you can stream it bit-perfect whenever you want? At least there is no point for personal use. If somebody did that to redistribute the music, he'd be breaking the law subject to some hefty penalties.