Jon Schaffer Issues Statement About Spotify

[PurpleCrayonWriter]

Hi Guys,

Here's the latest from the Iced Earth camp...



Jon Schaffer, founder and creative force behind American metal icons Iced Earth, today released this statement about the Internet music-listening service Spotify:

“A lot of fans have contacted us regarding Century Media’s decision to pull all of its bands from Spotify,” Schaffer said regarding the 9 August statement from the metal label. “I want our fans to know that we had nothing to do with that decision. We understand Century Media’s position. The music industry has been deeply and irrevocably affected by illegal downloading on the Internet. I understand that all too well. In fact, all professional musicians today understand that.

“But Spotify is one of the most important developments in music I’ve seen in quite awhile. It allows fans to search for music from bands all over the world – sometimes rare, impossible to find, or out-of-print music. They hear it, decide they like it, and seek it out to buy it from a variety of sources – legal sources like iTunes, Amazon, or Amazon Marketplace.

“That’s a good thing. Stealing music is not. But sampling it on Spotify – which is legal and highly regarded worldwide – is not stealing it.

“If it were up to me, I’d put Iced Earth’s music back on Spotify. But I also have to respect the wishes of Century Media, our record label. They’re only trying to protect the best interests of their bands. So, I ask fans of Iced Earth to be respectful as well. Maybe additional dialogue with Century Media will change their minds. In the meantime, let’s all just agree to disagree on this one and wait to see what the future holds.”

For Iced Earth, the future holds the release of Dystopia, the band’s 10th studio album, scheduled for release in Europe on October 17th, and in the U.S. on October 18th both via Century Media. Two bonus tracks are also being recording for inclusion on special editions of the album.

The release of Dystopia will be followed by the most extensive world tour Iced Earth has ever undertaken.

The European leg of the 2011-2012 World Dystopia Tour has been posted on the band’s official web site, and all official social-media sites. The tour begins October 30th in Bochum, Germany.

 

[gilpdawg]

He gets it.

 

[Justin G]

This will probably never happen again, but I think I agree with Jon Schaffer on this one.

 

[Cheiron]

If you pay $6 a month for Spotify, why would you buy a CD?

 

[DustyV]

If you pay $6 a month for Spotify, why would you buy a CD?

Well, there are many who wouldn't buy the cd regardless, so at least with Spotify they get something from thsoe people, even if it isn't much....

Then you have those others who(if it weren't for Spotify) would be much more tempted to download illegally. Again, at least they get something for it, which is better than nothing.

 

[Justin G]

Isn't there a limit to how many times you can listen to a song/album on Spotify? If so, I could see that prompting some album sales.

 

[ApolloFC]

Isn't there a limit to how many times you can listen to a song/album on Spotify? If so, I could see that prompting some album sales.

If i recall correctly i think theres a cap on the # of hours you can listen to during a month after the initial free period ends. You can still listen to it for free but the hours will be capped. As far as # of times listening to a particular song/album: dunno.

 

[AngraRULES]

So the band gets a cut every time someone listens to a song, right? Even if the same user listens to a song a hundred times.

Well, if you're a paid Spotify user, pick a band every night, mute your sound and let their entire discography run on repeat. Doesn't take that much effort, but a few hours of playback could mean a little bit more $ to the bands. Even if that means it equals to 50 cents...

 

[TheLongshot]

If you pay $6 a month for Spotify, why would you buy a CD?

Because not everyone can listen online?

 

[dcowboys311]

So the band gets a cut every time someone listens to a song, right? Even if the same user listens to a song a hundred times.

Well, if you're a paid Spotify user, pick a band every night, mute your sound and let their entire discography run on repeat. Doesn't take that much effort, but a few hours of playback could mean a little bit more $ to the bands. Even if that means it equals to 50 cents...

I've been doing this for my friend's black metal project LMAO. He didn't even know that he was on Spotify.

 

[AngraRULES]

I've been doing this for my friend's black metal project LMAO. He didn't even know that he was on Spotify.

It takes zero effort and I think in the long run, it could help a band get something out of it.

 

[skyrefuge]

It takes zero effort and I think in the long run, it could help a band get something out of it.

If you're a paying member, maybe. At the current average payout rate, it would take about 23 hours of listening for the rights-holder to get 50 cents, or 153 hours for the artist to get 50 cents if they get a 15% cut from their label.

In comparison, your electric company will get at least $2.50 if you keep your computer running for 153 hours more than you normally would. So if you just PayPal-ed the artist $2, they'd get $1.50 more than if you had listened to Spotify, and you'd $0.50 spend less.

In the long term, free listeners will get only 10-20 hours per month, so this scheme *really* wouldn't work for them.

Also, Spotify's per-listen payouts vary wildly, and no one can quite figure out the formula, so it's always possible that payouts from people who listen nonstop are drastically lowered.

If you pay $6 a month for Spotify, why would you buy a CD?

Because at $4.99 (where does this $6 figure keep coming from?) you wouldn't be able to listen in your car or on your portable device. However, if someone is paying $10/month for Spotify's offline/mobile tier, then yes, they wouldn't be buying CDs. Either Schaffer is unaware that there is that $10/month level that makes CD-buying unnecessary, or he figures it's a small enough fraction that it isn't a serious concern.

Neil

 

[AngraRULES]

If you're a paying member, maybe. At the current average payout rate, it would take about 23 hours of listening for the rights-holder to get 50 cents, or 153 hours for the artist to get 50 cents if they get a 15% cut from their label.

In comparison, your electric company will get at least $2.50 if you keep your computer running for 153 hours more than you normally would. So if you just PayPal-ed the artist $2, they'd get $1.50 more than if you had listened to Spotify, and you'd $0.50 spend less.

In the long term, free listeners will get only 10-20 hours per month, so this scheme *really* wouldn't work for them.

Also, Spotify's per-listen payouts vary wildly, and no one can quite figure out the formula, so it's always possible that payouts from people who listen nonstop are drastically lowered.

Neil

Well, thanks for clarifying that. I figured you'd chime in eventually with your usual statistics/numbers, and I was actually looking forward to it. Thank you so much. Maybe there's really no way around it then, .

 

[dcowboys311]

Well, thanks for clarifying that. I figured you'd chime in eventually with your usual statistics/numbers, and I was actually looking forward to it. Thank you so much. Maybe there's really no way around it then, .

Well, if you already keep your computer on at all hours, it's no additional cost. Also, the increase in plays might make the label take notice/increase the tracks's popularity & recommendations/etc.

 

[Soundscape]

well there is always grooveshark.

 

[Pellaz]

I'm still 'getting into' Spotify. I gather that you can search for and listen to songs for free, with the inserted audio ads if you're not a paying customer. Is there any built-in mechanism for purchasing mp3's of songs you like for, say, $1? I'd probably make use of such a feature.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

So the band gets a cut every time someone listens to a song, right? Even if the same user listens to a song a hundred times.

Well, if you're a paid Spotify user, pick a band every night, mute your sound and let their entire discography run on repeat. Doesn't take that much effort, but a few hours of playback could mean a little bit more $ to the bands. Even if that means it equals to 50 cents...

The problem with that, as my unofficial hetero bf Skyrefuge pointed out in an earlier thread, that would probably run your cable/internet bill or electricity bill through the roof.

As my beloved brother from another mother who doesn't know who I am but whatever, Seargeant D calls them, LEADING INDEPENDENT METAL LABEL CENTURY MEDIA RECORDS I think is ultimately wrong in this decision, but I understand why they are doing it. Of all the "major indies," they have the highest sales expectations and the most infrastructure/overhead costs to worry about. It's not 10 people in an office like NB USA or Earache USA etc. Therefore, they need to have super high sales expectations to justify the lights on. Until they can be sure that Spotify can keep those lights on, it will be hard for them to make the switch.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

well there is always grooveshark.

Actually, Grooveshark is even worse, since bands make NOTHING from it. Its legality is in question as well, since the tracks are pretty much uploaded by fans. Like Youtube, they will take down anything that gets a copyright claim against it, but it's still a lousy service compared to Spotify. Hell the organization issues alone are enough to get me to never use it (I hear nothing but bad things about songs being mistagged, etc).

 

[ApolloFC]

I'm still 'getting into' Spotify. I gather that you can search for and listen to songs for free, with the inserted audio ads if you're not a paying customer. Is there any built-in mechanism for purchasing mp3's of songs you like for, say, $1? I'd probably make use of such a feature.

Dunno about Spotify but Rhapsody has that, but again subscription only ($10)

 

[gilpdawg]

Actually, Grooveshark is even worse, since bands make NOTHING from it. Its legality is in question as well, since the tracks are pretty much uploaded by fans. Like Youtube, they will take down anything that gets a copyright claim against it, but it's still a lousy service compared to Spotify. Hell the organization issues alone are enough to get me to never use it (I hear nothing but bad things about songs being mistagged, etc).

I've never gotten the love that Grooveshark gets. Mis-labeled tracks, shitty quality, tracks missing from albums. It's annoying.