News

Cambridge Residents Slam Council Proposal to Delay Bike Lane Construction

News

‘Gender-Affirming Slay Fest’: Harvard College QSA Hosts Annual Queer Prom

News

‘Not Being Nerds’: Harvard Students Dance to Tinashe at Yardfest

News

Wrongful Death Trial Against CAMHS Employee Over 2015 Student Suicide To Begin Tuesday

News

Cornel West, Harvard Affiliates Call for University to Divest from ‘Israeli Apartheid’ at Rally

What the Hell Happened: Streaming Services

By Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
By Mila Gauvin II, Crimson Staff Writer

Subscriptions to music streaming services like Spotify, Apple Music, and Tidal are at an all-time high, while buying music—CDs, digital tracks, etc—has seen a steady decline in popularity. With the many different advantages and disadvantages to either streaming or buying—buying is more expensive, but streaming is more limited in music availability—it may be hard to decide which option is best. However, consumers are clearly showing a preference for streaming services, a trend that says a lot about the direction in which the music industry and music consumption is going.

The industry comes under fire when evidence emerges that it devalues both artists and their art. Spotify allegedly offers artists purposefully unfair deals that confuse and entrap. Furthermore, the lower-end music services offer tend to be more compressed and lower in quality, sullying an artist’s hard work. The biggest issue artists have, however, is whether or not their music should be offered for free. Taylor Swift’s music isn’t on Spotify because she refuses to make her music available anywhere for free. She was also initially at odds with Apple for offering a free three-month trial to new users, which would make it such that an artist would “not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs.” While these services mean well in trying to attract an audience that is more reluctant to pay for music, the risk that the music itself and the team of people who work tirelessly to create it will be devalued is an essential issue that must be dealt with delicately. If artists feel devalued, why would they continue to make music?

An interesting consequence of the increasing popularity of streaming services is that artists gain an advantage in that they can choose the platform on which they will profit from their music. Adele, for example, did not initially allow her album “25” to be streamed, and only recently allowed for it to be released on Spotify. People feared this decision would dangerously limit her audience, but on the contrary, “25” broke the single-week US album sales record, selling more than two million copies in a little over three days. Drake has an exclusive deal with Apple Music, and his latest album, “Views,” was the first to reach a billion streams on the service. Both Chance the Rapper and Frank Ocean released their most recent albums exclusively on Apple Music for a few weeks. Frank Ocean’s decision to release “Blonde” independently—without a music label—could spark a revolution in the music industry if more established artists forego music labels and just go straight to streaming services to negotiate music distribution. With artists gaining more power, the future of the music industry remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: The advent of streaming services have given both consumers and artists a plethora of options to access and release music, the ramifications of which we have yet to fully understand.

—Staff writer Mila Gauvin II can be reached at mila.gauvin@thecrimson.com.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags
ArtsCultureCulture Front Feature