Daniel Ek’s aspect hustle as a lightning-rod appears to be going very nicely.
Final 12 months he shook the music trade with three massive modifications to Spotify’s royalty funds, successfully demonetizing tracks with lower than 1000 streams per 12 months…
… and the web went nuts.
Then he in contrast aspiring musicians to beginner footballers.
And the web went nuts.
Then Spotify argued it will 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) appeared like…
… the reality?
In the present day, with the price of creating content material being near zero, folks can share an unbelievable quantity of content material. This has sparked my curiosity concerning the idea of lengthy shelf life versus quick shelf life. Whereas a lot of what we see and listen to shortly turns into out of date, there are…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, folks can share an unbelievable quantity of content material. This has sparked my curiosity concerning the idea of lengthy shelf life versus quick shelf life. Whereas a lot of what we see and listen to shortly turns into out of date, there are timeless concepts and even items of music that may stay related for many years and even centuries.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 lots of Marcus Aurelius’s insights nonetheless resonating hundreds of years later. This makes me marvel: what are essentially the most unintuitive, but enduring concepts that aren’t incessantly mentioned in the present day however may need an extended shelf life? Additionally, what are we creating now that can nonetheless be valued and mentioned lots of or hundreds of years from in the present day?
-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 in opposition to Ek’s claims.
Nonetheless, I used to be a bit baffled that this specific tweet offended so many musicians.
What’s so controversial?
As a result of to begin with, Ek wasn’t speaking completely about music on this tweet. He was speaking about human artistic output within the mixture.
Songs, books, jpegs, TikTok movies.
All of which really ARE simpler to create and distribute in the present day 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 observe and talent 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 expertise, the barrier to entry (from a cost-perspective) actually has neared zero. Particularly in relative phrases.
Do not forget that many years in the past, the method of making and releasing profitable music normally required (so as):
- A&R curiosity
- A document deal
- A studio finances of lots of of hundreds and even tens of millions of {dollars}
- Broad bodily distribution
- Nice advertising and radio promotion
- Sufficient gross sales to justify that shops preserve the album in inventory
- And extra
I’m afraid to complete up that price ticket.
In the present day artists can create a observe on their telephone and garner billions of streams on Spotify.
Which may be placing it too merely, in fact, 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 group.
However the level is: Most of the earlier financial boundaries 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 charge for 80 professional instrumentalists is much from “zero!”
However the reality stays that the tune of mine that has essentially the most streams on Spotify is a people observe I carried out and recorded solely myself. So I don’t HAVE to go that spendy orchestral route with the intention to attain an viewers, is the purpose. And neither does anybody else in the present day.
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 in the present day than ever earlier than.
In case you’re a rock band, would you favor actual drums in a professional studio to no matter you possibly can prepare dinner up in your pc? Most likely so. However you possibly can distribute your tune to Spotify whether or not these drums are programmed or mic’d.
In case 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 hundreds of comedians can simply hop on Instagram and inform a joke. Whether or not it’s on Netflix or Instagram, amusing is amusing.
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 fact Daniel Ek was wrestling with in his tweet. Questioning what the sheer quantity of that output means for the methods by which anyone specific piece of content material will rise to the extent of cultural consciousness. And the way lengthy a chunk of content material can stay there.
As musicians, we don’t prefer to see our personal artwork as a part of an financial system. Music is connective, ineffable, needed. It’s priceless, that’s true.
But music is now delivered (and let’s face it, typically 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 complete life to write down this tune?”
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 calmly, sir!
In fact 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 might’ve chosen his phrases higher.
Particularly after so many different controversial statements and coverage shifts over the previous 12 months. And some pals of mine have steered there’s no different strategy to learn his latest 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 wish to advocate for his or her pursuits, and convey stress in opposition to 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 hundreds of artists.
Do you make content material? You do! You make musical content material, in any other case often 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 sort 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, sure, 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 a large display screen. A picture is likely to be canvas and oil.
However a lot of the expressive work we devour in the present day is delivered in a uniform means: 0s and 1s.
They’re digital recordsdata. Going by way of 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 could possibly be improper.
Do you might have robust emotions about Daniel Ek’s newest tweet, or any of the massive Spotify information over the previous 12 months?
I’d love to listen to it. Depart your take within the feedback of this video.
