Recent news revealed that Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek has been investing heavily in military tech companies, which adds another ethical layer to a platform already criticized for how little it pays musicians !
Spotify only pays artists about $3–5 per 1,000 streams, using a pro-rata model that directs most money toward major stars… By contrast, Qobuz (≈$18–20 per 1,000 streams) and Tidal (≈$12–13) pay far more fairly!
However Tidal is far from ethical. Most of its revenue is controlled by private investors and founders and small artists still earn very little…
More fair-minded platforms like Bandcamp, Resonate, Ampled, or SoundCloud’s fan-powered royalties prioritize musicians over investors.
With these more ethical alternatives available, why do we keep using Spotify?
Why would I? Pay $1.49 to listen to 1 song over and over or pay $12 to listen to basically the entirety of human creation any time I want? Not to mention custom playlists and whatnot.
My music collection spans some 1,700 tracks and several full albums. It’s not difficult to create local playlists, I don’t pay monthly, and I don’t have an excessive data plan because I need streaming. Look at the knock-on costs. It’s not $12/month.
I listen to probably at least a dozen new songs every day. If I bought them that would cost me $18/day. Or $540/mo. Not to mention the absolute fortune required to store them all locally.
I’m in the phase of my life where if I encounter a new track I like in the wild, I’ll buy it. But I’m not seeking out new stuff because (cracks open a PBR and grows a goatee) everything feels homogenized today.
Perhaps it’s just different use cases. Still, you’re dependent on a company to be able to continue listening to the music you like. That’s worrisome. If a company took away the collection I’ve been building since the '80s, livid wouldn’t begin to explain my reaction.