As we move toward the launch of Apple music, I am trying to understand what will happen during the free three month trail period to indi artists? According to a recent article, Apple sent a ‘take it or leave it’ ultimatum to indi labels recently, basically saying accept the terms – or have no access to Apple services such as radio and more importantly downloads. So maybe they have no choice but to accept? It is also interesting to consider what will happen to Spotify streams during this period: not only will artists get no income from Apple – but if users cross over from Spotify, even for the three month period – artists face the prospect of receiving no streaming income for three months.
Off the back of the few posts I have made this week – this one is the most disturbing. While I love the idea of giving the new Apple Music service a try out before paying – to hear that I am effectively taking away royalties from musicians really worries me. As the article below discusses – a leaked contract reveals Apple will not pay any royalties to artists for their free service period. I personally pay my £10 per month to Spotify to ‘pay something back’ (however small) into the system – as opposed to going down the route of illegal downloads etc. So my question is – how is this supposed to assist a music industry in transition. It can’t in the short term at least! Leaked Contract: Apple Music Pays No Royalties For Free Account Plays – News – Deep House Amsterdam.
Another post in The Guardian has revealed that Spotify has made a significant increase in its paid subscribers over the last 12 months – despite the fact that 20 million paid subscribers is a drop in the ocean compared to iTunes’ 800 million! However, it is not this that I am interested in – it is the following claim
According to Spotify, with 20 million subscribers, a “niche/indie artist” could expect to generate $1.2m a year in Spotify payouts, while a “heritage artist” would generate $2.6m. It also claimed that an artist in the company’s top 100 chart could get $3.3m, while a “global superstar” could generate $13.9m’.
These figures seem grossly exaggerated to me – I am sure the indi musician in particular will have something to say about it.
The new Apple streaming service is getting more interesting by the second. According to an article in the Guardian – they are now being investigated for anti competitive behaviour. Could we be experiencing a similar situation to the ‘payola’ situation from decades ago – where the power of large corporations are attempting to lever the content we hear – and in the case of Apple – how we hear it?
“We understand that the investigation concerns whether participants in the music industry are seeking to act collusively to restrain competition among music streaming services, in particular, by working together to suppress the availability to consumers of free, advertising-supported, on-demand music streaming or similar services, such as those offered by Spotify and YouTube,” said Universal’s head antitrust lawyer, Eric J. Stock, in the letter.
So, Apple have eventually entered the streaming market. It appears that they are now attempting to develop an ‘all in one’ platform that facilities users to access all of their content in one place. What I am interested in is how the streaming side of the business will resonate with the download side – will it simply be a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul? Also, will Apple be able to tempt the loyal Spotify users who have spent years developing playlists and providing the search engine to recommend music they like? Most importantly, what will this mean for the music business? See the following link for more information.
My interview on Radio Newcastle on my Sting book is available for the next week below. The interview links into Geordie Identity and the progressive ‘love/hate’ relationship with a region. It also covers how it is possible to negotiate your own identity through the lens of someone else. I certainly find I am able to do this when writing about Sting.
This podcast is on the relationship on the elements of music and form. It considers the ways in which elements such as musical texture, time signatures, and harmony can interact to create expectations in a listener. In popular music, these expectations need to be fulfilled, and if they are not – the music has the potential not to be ‘popular’. The lecture considers how in addition to harmonic tendencies, the ‘rule of four’ is engrained in european listeners – also creating expectations of verses, choruses, etc.
I am so pleased to hear that this funding has been given to the British Library to develop this sound Archive. Really interested to see what music is included. See below for details.
The British Library has received *earmarked funding for a £9,568,900 bid from the Heritage Lottery Fund (including a £215,900 development fund) to help to save the nation’s sounds, and open them up online for everyone to hear.
The funding will enable the British Library to digitise and make available 500,000 rare, unique and at-risk sound recordings from its own archive and other key collections around the country over 5 years (2017-2022).
This post concerns the elements of music, and the ways in which they are prioritised to indoctrinate interest in a piece of music. How can we use the elements that for most are so familiar, to begin to analyse popular music? This is an introductory session which covers some of the basics. What are the basic elements (which many were introduced to in primary school), and how can we use these to consider popular music analysis? Unlike the ways it is sometimes taught in schools (as a recommendation of the National Curriculum in the min 1980s), this session considers more formal analysis: what is actually going on in the music?
A more subjective perspective is how important the elements are to the song?? This of course depends on how one regards an element. For example – a song with a one chord progression could be deemed as resulting in the ‘harmony’ not being considered an important part of the song. However, an alternative perspective could be that the single chord is an essential factor in the formation of the style of the song. The session provides a couple of indicative examples, via the songs ‘Car Wash’ and ‘Victory Dance’ (by My Morning Jacket), where this sort of discussion takes place. How important are elements such as dynamics, harmony, texture, tempo, form and rhythm (groove), and how can this perspective differ from person to person?
Students are encouraged to give each element a score form 1 to 10, with 1 being ‘important’ and 10 being ‘not important’. The students provide some interesting perspectives, as they are encouraged to rationalise their answers – sometimes not agreeing with each other (or me), highlighting the importance of subjectivity to music analysis. The ways in which some elements are compromised in order to highlight others is also discussed in the 2nd song. Using this approach – the importance of the reliance of the elements of music to each other is considered.
Here is another very brief snippet asking students to consider the difference between WHAT music means and HOW it means. As Alan Moore points out in his book ‘Song Means’ – there is often a confusion here. For me, it is important for music listeners to consider the polysemic nature of music, embrace what it means to us then focus on how it does this.
Professor Paul Carr Music Consultancy 