Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Tech News > Digital music sales drop: streaming services the culprit?

Digital music sales drop: streaming services the culprit?
Thread Tools
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2014, 09:59 PM
 
According to a new report by Nielsen SoundScan, digital music sales dropped for the first time since the iTunes Store went online in 2003. Sales fell by 5.7 percent to 1.26 billion songs, with industry executives putting the blame on streaming services like Pandora, Spotify and Rdio -- services the record companies themselves licensed their music to in an effort to reduce their dependency on iTunes. Whether revenue from streaming has offset the sales dip hasn't yet been revealed.

In addition to the drop in single-song sales, digital albums sales are also down very slightly. Album sales fell 0.1 percent to 117.6 million units. SoundScan hasn't yet released its figures for streaming revenue in 2013, making it unclear if the shift in listener habits from buying to subscription services has offset the drops.

Conventional CDs still held the most sway when it comes to album sales, taking 57.2 percent. Digital accounted for 40.6 percent of all albums sold, with vinyl accounting for two percent of sales. Cassettes and album DVDs made up the remaining 0.2 percent. Though it took several years, iTunes eventually became the biggest seller of digital music in the US (2008) and the world (2010), a position it continues to hold today. The company has always taken a dim view to subscription services, saying listeners wanted to "own their music."

However, as higher-speed cellular and Wi-Fi became ubiquitous in major cities, a new trend emerged of users relying primarily on their mobile devices, rather than home entertainment systems, for listening to music. These on-the-go listeners craved a larger variety of music than could fit in the limited storage capacity of the typical smartphone, and the ability to discover new artists and songs -- leading to the acceptance among mainstream consumers for free and subscription "radio-like" services. Curated stations aimed at specific demographics and broader streaming channels of music available on demand everywhere became worth paying up to $12 a month for, leaving buyers with less money for digital or physical song purchases.

Apple eventually joined the fray, creating a free (but advertising-supported) service called iTunes Radio that has proven popular. In the US and one or two other countries, Pandora's user-created "stations" are also well-known, and Spotify has built up a worldwide audience with limited free options and subscription plans. Like many before it, however, operations like Spotify are still a point of contention among artists, many of whom feel they are not being compensated fairly for the use of their work. Spotify has taken to being more transparent about its payouts in an effort to shift the blame back to record companies.

Apple uses revenue from advertising to pay for the music it uses, and additionally pays artists or record companies when customers use the iTunes Match "music locker" service, which costs $25 per year and offers the added benefit of making iTunes Radio ad-free. The pricing makes iTunes Radio the cheapest of the options for streaming ad-free music services.
( Last edited by NewsPoster; Jan 5, 2014 at 11:48 AM. )
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2014, 11:00 PM
 
maybe crappy generic music is the problem, where a whole bunch of producers decide to manufacture 'the next big hit'
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2014, 11:55 PM
 
You just described the entire music industry since its inception. Much of popular music has been "manufactured" since day 1. Nothing new at all.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2014, 04:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by nowwhatareyoulookingat View Post
maybe crappy generic music is the problem, where a whole bunch of producers decide to manufacture 'the next big hit'
Yep, which is why music sales have slumped since the 19th century, when Strauss and co manufactured cheap, generic hits, looking for a quick buck. Nobody bought sheet music, preferring to sing the classics. And it really went downhill with the industrial writing tanks of the 1930s, hitting rock bottom with the crooners of the 1950s.

Seriously man, if you think you have any idea what you're talking about, watch "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" and Google "the Wrecking Crew" for an idea of how that industry worked to churn out formulaic hits back in the days you probably think of as great music.
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2014, 11:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Yep, which is why music sales have slumped since the 19th century, when Strauss and co manufactured cheap, generic hits, looking for a quick buck. Nobody bought sheet music, preferring to sing the classics. And it really went downhill with the industrial writing tanks of the 1930s, hitting rock bottom with the crooners of the 1950s.

Seriously man, if you think you have any idea what you're talking about, watch "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" and Google "the Wrecking Crew" for an idea of how that industry worked to churn out formulaic hits back in the days you probably think of as great music.
Music is enjoyable whether or not the songs were created using algorithms or the old fashioned way. I generally dislike "pop" music and prefer to stick to more soulful songs but I don't give a crap how it's made so long as it strikes a chord with my heart and soul.
"Like a midget at a urinal, I was going to have to stay on my toes." Frank Drebin, Naked Gun 33 1/3: The Final Insult
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2014, 11:42 AM
 
The "Old-Fashioned Way" IS using formulae and recycling themes and marketing.

Motown was a hit factory in the 60s because they figured out a formula for the music and filled the marketing with completely artificially constructed identities and saleable faces.

Absolutely no hit record ever was designed by automated algorithms.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2014, 03:13 PM
 
In my case, I end up buying more songs because of the iTunes Radio and Pandora. They introduce me to new songs/music that I had never heard of.
     
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2014, 07:49 PM
 
Top 40 music has always been crappy, at least as long as I've been alive. I agree with coffeetime, iTunes Radio (Pandora, et al) help me find out about new artists I may wish to buy. I can't see myself wasting money on a subscription fee though (well I'm already using iTunes Match so that doesn't count), seems like at the end of the day I have nothing to show for it (I'm aware that the same could be said of cable TV, that's why I gave it up).

It appears that the record companies are guilty of screwing recording artists by paying them less for streaming (ie Spotify) plays than for regular airplay on radio. If that's true, then its yet another reason to push for the end of the record industry as we know it and towards a more creator-friendly compensation system. I have **no** problem paying for music I enjoy, I just want at least half of it to go to the artist(s).
_chas_
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2014, 07:58 PM
 
It's not the record companies who aren't paying the artists for steaming.

If you think that's the case, you really haven't been paying attention.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 5, 2014, 01:31 PM
 
Reissue Barney's greatest hits album. That should jump start the industry!
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 5, 2014, 04:27 PM
 
I remember back in 2004/2005 when the record companies were scared of the success of iTunes and wanted to find a way to break the "golden handcuffs" (Universal Music was famous for this), and they kept saying the future is in "subscription" and streaming. Of course that never panned out then, because mobile hadn't happened ..... and then they brought on Amazon to sell below cost in order to change the $0.99 model. Well, Amazon strong-armed them to lower their wholesale cost, which cut into their margins a bit. And now, they've been in a frenzy signing up every streaming service they can get, so that they can contain iTunes ... again.

The whole thing is bizarre, because they make MOST of their money on iTunes and other track sales like Amazon, since they don't have the overhead of CD's. And now that they've found out streaming doesn't pay, they're complaining that "oh ... we're losing track sales ... F$CK !!! ... who's idea was this streaming thing anyway?" ..... they're just a bunch of greedy clowns which are run just like the mafia, and despite their many years in the business, they simply don't understand new business models.
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:22 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2