TBH I don’t like most synth youtubers who put their face/personality in their videos, and I don’t like most celebrities either, I’m sure they can handle it.
I don’t envy them and I don’t hate on them, I just don’t watch their videos.
It’s interesting how through all this progress, the inevitable result is that small artists are constantly subjected to innovative and new ways of being screwed out of making a living.
Would you like to be successful as a musician? Be born into a trust fund and have a sibling attorney. Otherwise, piss off.
The reason a lot of people don’t listen to whoevers electronic music despite it having complex modulation, mind bending tempo changes, etc., is likely because a lot of it lacks any sort of personality. So if AI music comes along and captures the public’s imagination what does that tell us?
To get slightly closer to the intended discussion… I’m not really agreeing that Spotify will fail or die out. At least not in single digit years. Then again I’ve no business degree and can’t read a PnL.
I DO think that all these platforms are inevitably temporary and there is a sort of problem down the road with keeping a catalog of your art (or files, personal data, etc) within someone else’s model. I really support Bandcamp but I can smell the day coming where epic games begins turning it into another platform not focused on users or artists.
This for me is the biggest downside to non physical media, and even physical media can be lost due to reliance on specific technology, printed matter being one exception.
Your comment makes me wonder if the future or music streaming services will be similar to video streaming now…
Like, Sony/Universal/Warner each with their own streaming platform with exclusive content: music from Sony only on Sony’s platform, etc.
It makes sense from a financial point of view, but maybe it’ll increase piracy again.
Then there will be “alternative” streaming services in the spirit of BandCamp where you’ll be able to find independent artists managing their own financial success.
Yeah that’s an apt take. So the traditional megalithic record companies might replicate what say peacock or Disney have done. Big name artists only available on their respective channels - forcing any folks who want to listen to those artists to have multiple services. Can’t wait
hahahaha I don’t mean it’s a good idea either, but usually “financially” good ideas for such companies have bad consequences for the consumers, making them spending more.
On the other hand, it’d make the music industry (at that level of course) more competitive since companies would end up offering better deals to artists for their exclusiveness.
It reminds me a bit when The Beatles catalog was only available through iTunes.
Damn, flesh out the plot a bit and you’ve got a script for a fucking dystopian movie right there. Scarily enough, this doesn’t even seem too far fetched at all.
That’s what they want, but so far it’s a relatively level playing field for artists. Well, getting your music on all catalogues that is. Getting paid, we all know how that is.
There should be a variation of Godwin’s law for music forums which states as discussion regarding YouTube grows longer the probability of Rick Beato being mentioned approaches 1.
Hmm, a lot of people seem to misunderstand me here. By a failed musician I meant a failed professional musician. He’s certainly not a failed artist, which is different. Most of us haven’t failed as professionals because we never even tried to go pro.