Will subscription music overtake iTunes in 4 years time?

[EbookReader]

Vinyl is selling more than CD now in some cases, BTW. How do you explain that?

Vinyl is about 1.6% of the physical music market.
Cassette is ?
CD is probably 97% or more

I know of no case where Vinyl version is selling more than the CD version.


http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051711vinyl

That would still put vinyl at a small 1.6 percent of broader physical sales (numbers below are in millions.)

 

[shinji]

I get tired of listening to the same music over and over. For the price of buying a new album every month, I can subscribe to one of the streaming services and I get to hear much more than one new album. I do think it will eventually overtake iTunes digital downloads, and I'm looking forward to Apple's rumored service.

I don't really have the need or desire to own all the music I listen to. Favorite songs, sure. But how many times am I going to listen to every new thing I hear?

At the moment, I'm using MOG, which I recommend.

 

[AFDoc]

Who cares?

All music will downloaded and played internally through chips implanted so we can be tracked. It's going to be awesome!

 

[decafjava]

I get tired of listening to the same music over and over. For the price of buying a new album every month, I can subscribe to one of the streaming services and I get to hear much more than one new album. I do think it will eventually overtake iTunes digital downloads, and I'm looking forward to Apple's rumored service.

I don't really have the need or desire to own all the music I listen to. Favorite songs, sure. But how many times am I going to listen to every new thing I hear?

At the moment, I'm using MOG, which I recommend.

With smartplaylists and depending on the size of your library that is not a problem. Even my library would take 14 days to listen through, non-stop.

Since this was ignored in the other thread I'll repost this link here:

Why subscription streaming is bad for artists-

http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/8993-the-cloud/

Galaxie 500's "Tugboat", for example, was played 7,800 times on Pandora that quarter, for which its three songwriters were paid a collective total of 21 cents, or seven cents each. Spotify pays better: For the 5,960 times "Tugboat" was played there, Galaxie 500's songwriters went collectively into triple digits: $1.05 (35 cents each).

 

[BrokeTechLover]

I thought about trying a music subscription service ,, but changed my mind and decided to go with iTunes Match/google music. Something about paying close to $200 a year JUST TO LISTEN to music is insane to me. I just use pandora as my source of new music and go download it.

Also I'm notorious for subscribing to Something and forgetting about it,& so spotify and others is nothing but a waste of money for me. It's almost like... Idk paying for YouTube.

If it is the future,I'll be stuck in the past,cause it's a horrid waste of cash

 

[darkside flow]

And grooveshark's iOS app even requires a jailbreak.

Grooveshark offers an HTML5 web app free of charge. It's still pretty basic and doesn't feature intelligent radio but you can search for and play everything available on the full site and jailbreak app.

 

[utahusker]

Vinyl is about 1.6% of the physical music market.
Cassette is ?
CD is probably 97% or more

I know of no case where Vinyl version is selling more than the CD version.


http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051711vinyl
It looks like there's only 1.6% that cares about audio quality. I feel special now.



Image

It looks like there's only 1.6% of us that gives a **** about audio quality. I feel special

 

[EbookReader]

With smartplaylists and depending on the size of your library that is not a problem. Even my library would take 14 days to listen through, non-stop.

Since this was ignored in the other thread I'll repost this link here:

Why subscription streaming is bad for artists-

http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/8993-the-cloud/

Galaxie 500's "Tugboat", for example, was played 7,800 times on Pandora that quarter, for which its three songwriters were paid a collective total of 21 cents, or seven cents each. Spotify pays better: For the 5,960 times "Tugboat" was played there, Galaxie 500's songwriters went collectively into triple digits: $1.05 (35 cents each).

Pandora is online radio and it pays much better than traditional radio.

http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/indu...tters-streaming-services-pay-1008045232.story
Streaming Services Pay Far Better Than Terrestrial Radio



But we are talking about subscription music and Spotify pays 70% of its revenue to the labels/artists/publisher/songwriter.

So an user who pay $120 to Spotify. The breakdown is as followed:

30% or $36 to Spotify
70% or $84 to labels/artists/publisher/songwriter

The average American pay $23 a year for recorded music ($7.1 billion revenue / 310 millions). The average Spotify paid subscriber pay $110 a year. A paying Spotify subscriber pays almost 5 times for music as the average America. If you follow the music business like I do, you would know that music executives really really want the subscription model to succeed.

 

[EbookReader]

Here's the payout rate from subscription music.
Keep in mind that only Spotify has free streaming (5 million paying subscribers + 15 million free users). Having free users is losing Spotify a lot of money BUT it help Spotify grow. In comparison, Rhapsody is profitable while Spotify lost something like $50 million in 2011.

Without free users, Spotify will pay about the same rate as Rhapsody.




http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2012/120604youtube

per source: "Payable to Artist/Label via digital distributor for sales from July to December, 2011."
(Rhapsody purchased Napster last year, though the Napster name continues in various European territories.)

Zune
15,159 plays
Payout = $437.58
$0.028 per song
Ratio = 25:1 iTunes Song Download

Napster
30,238 plays
Payout = $479.07
$0.016 per song
Ratio = 43:1 iTunes song download.

Rhapsody
50,822 plays
Payout = $668.57
$0.013 per song
Ratio = 53:1 iTunes song download.

Spotify
798,783 plays.
Payout = $4,277.39
$0.005 per song.
Ratio = 140:1 iTunes Song Download

 

[Bass X]

First off, I am a HUGE music fanatic. Going back 10-13 or so years, I used to buy 3-5 albums a week.

A few years later I discovered iTunes and began purchasing music digitally, something I previously had no interest in. iTunes then became my #1 means of buying and listening to music.

Up until about 8 months ago or so I discovered Spotify and began using the free version. I loved how I had access to almost ALL of my favorite music on my computer and could listen to whatever I wanted. After trying the 30-day trial of their Premium services and being able to have the same power on my iPhone, I was absolutely sold. I pay $9.99/month for unlimited streaming (in superb quality) of whatever I want, when I want. I feel as though I no longer have the need to store tracks on my iPhone, let alone purchase tracks from iTunes. For me, paying $9.99 a month is far less than what I was previously purchasing for music on a monthly basis.

In my opinion, as more and more people discover and use music subscription services, they may indeed overtake iTunes. I'm sure Apple almost certainly has something up their sleeve and are aware of this scenario.

 

[shinji]

With smartplaylists and depending on the size of your library that is not a problem. Even my library would take 14 days to listen through, non-stop.

Since this was ignored in the other thread I'll repost this link here:

Why subscription streaming is bad for artists-

http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/8993-the-cloud/

But your existing library is music you've heard already. Beyond my favorites, I'm usually looking for something different. And I don't know about you, but I also have albums where I liked a couple songs and not the rest of the album, so that inflates my library.

As for the royalty payments, that's something the artists, labels, and services need to resolve. In many cases, that's determined by what the record label negotiated with the artist, and the streaming service only pays the label.

 

[tymaster50]

I would never subscribe for music. They can kiss my rear-end lol. I'd rather have my music on demand even if I don't have internet.

 

[naisdes]

I've always wished that Apple would do a subscription iTunes service. I buy songs from iTunes and nowhere else because of their range of songs available but if I could play a flat monthly fee for unlimited access to songs, even if it's restricted to say something like 2 mobile devices (an iPhone and iPad), and 2 computers (say a desktop and laptop Mac), then that would perfect for me.

I would wonder what would be an acceptable fee to pay each month though...

 

[tymaster50]

I wonder if it's just me but I'm not the first one to get into new music. I stick to the songs I like first then if I can't really skip the song at the moment I'll listen to it. sometimes I will like it a lot. It usually has to be on the radio first for me to get a feel for it, otherwise I'll just skip it.

 

[EbookReader]

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2012/12/spotify-may-be-heading-for-1-billion-in-revenue-in-2013.html
Spotify May Be Heading For $1 Billion In Revenue In 2013

 

[sim667]

I sincerely hope note. Music tastes are already watered down to xfactor releases etc..... I hate to think what the companies would force feed people who subscribe to their services

 

[rorschach]

I was against subscription-based music plans for a while (well, not so much against it as I thought it would never go anywhere).

However, having used Spotify for the last year I must say I've changed my mind. I use it all the time; it just makes things so much easier -- especially since I can download tracks for offline playing. An Apple/iTunes subscription plan would be even better, imo, because I'd get the benefits of Spotify but also have the option to buy songs I want to keep right within the same store.

I don't know if it will overtake iTunes; that depends on where iTunes goes over the next few years. iTunes Match certainly brings the benefits of having music in the "cloud" to iTunes (being able to access your whole music collection on any device without having to sync thousands of songs to every one); they just need to go a step further and introduce an "all you can eat" plan.

 

[STiNG Operation]

In my opinion the apps like "free music download" will have caught on and people will realize they don't have to pay for their music...

 

[EbookReader]

In my opinion the apps like "free music download" will have caught on and people will realize they don't have to pay for their music...

95% of music downloaded are illegal.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7832396.stm

So to most people, "free music download" has been happening ever since Napster. The only way to beat piracy is by convenient and price. (for example, if you use 10 minutes a day looking for illegal music, that's 5 hours a month wasted....Is 5 hours of your time worth $10 a month?)

That's why many people who used to pirate music now just use Spotify. Convenient and price.

 

[shinji]

One thing many people don't know about Spotify is that it uses P2P to stream on the desktop. Only ~8.8% of music is actually streamed from Spotify's servers. If you leave Spotify open, you're uploading to other users. It cannot be turned off, and paying for it doesn't change anything.

http://pansentient.com/2011/04/spotify-technology-some-stats-and-how-spotify-works/

Worth thinking about if you're on capped bandwidth or you're concerned about lag while gaming. Rdio, MOG, etc. are not P2P and you stream directly from their servers.

 

[EbookReader]

One thing many people don't know about Spotify is that it uses P2P to stream on the desktop. Only ~8.8% of music is actually streamed from Spotify's servers. If you leave Spotify open, you're uploading to other users. It cannot be turned off, and paying for it doesn't change anything.

http://pansentient.com/2011/04/spotify-technology-some-stats-and-how-spotify-works/

Worth thinking about if you're on capped bandwidth or you're concerned about lag while gaming. Rdio, MOG, etc. are not P2P and you stream directly from their servers.

Good to know.

Effective way to reduce bandwidth cost.

 

[paulsalter]

I am confused, this seems like worse for the consumer on bandwidth

I am on capped bandwidth, so with spotify, aswell as streaming my music I am also uploading it for others (others are streaming music from me)

instead of me just streaming music as i can from other places

was thinking of paying for spotify, but if this is how it works then I might delete it instead

 

[Razeus]

Subscription services have been around for a very, very, very long time now. The problem is that, like what Michael CM1 said, these people can jump off board at anytime - I did too. 10 million people AREN'T paying for Spotify, but still are using it by the way, which only makes the artist payout even more of a problem because just ad revenue isn't enough, which is what is happening to Pandora. Spotify is going to get bigger, but not in the way it wants to, free users are going to continue to add up, versus paid.

Most of us should be buying music. We're old enough to appreciate it, we have the money, and we're all owners of devices that can play it. And honestly, you should be thinking about why exactly you're paying $9.99 to listen to a playlist every month, when you could have owned that music for about that same price that you paid for Spotify in the first month. There are other means of sampling music, like YouTube, SoundCloud, and even just using the free version of Spotify.

That $9.99 let's me download the albums/songs to my iPhone, as much as my iPhone will hold. It let's me listen to the music commercial free. It let's me listen to full albums so I can see which ones I really do like - that way I can buy it later.

This is coming from an album only/own it kind of guy. My thoughts on it have changed. I don't buy $.99 songs, I buy full albums IF they are good enough. These "hit singles artists" these days (ie Rihanna, Beyonce) are better left to the likes of Spotify playlists.

 

[Jessica Lares]

That $9.99 let's me download the albums/songs to my iPhone, as much as my iPhone will hold. It let's me listen to the music commercial free. It let's me listen to full albums so I can see which ones I really do like - that way I can buy it later.

This is coming from an album only/own it kind of guy. My thoughts on it have changed. I don't buy $.99 songs, I buy full albums IF they are good enough. These "hit singles artists" these days (ie Rihanna, Beyonce) are better left to the likes of Spotify playlists.

I'm a album kind of person too, and what I've found out is that every time I used Spotify, I wish I would have spent the $9.99 to buy that one album every month. LOL.

 

[Razeus]

I'm a album kind of person too, and what I've found out is that every time I used Spotify, I wish I would have spent the $9.99 to buy that one album every month. LOL.

...You can listen to Spotify for free, THEN buy the album for $9.99.