cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,060
According to the RIAA 2018 Year-End Music Industry Revenue Report, revenue from streaming music platforms grew 30% year-over-year (YoY) in 2018. Revenue from streaming music platforms was $7.4 billion and contributed to 75% of the total revenue from 2018. Nearly all U.S. music industry revenue growth in 2018 came from streaming music platforms! Subscriptions to music streaming services accounted for more than half of total revenues for the year as subscription revenue increased 32% to $5.4 billion. The industry averaged over one million new subscriptions added on a monthly basis. Over 50 million people subscribe to a paid music service as the amount of subscribers grew 42% in 2018. Revenue from digital radio stations grew 32% YoY to $1.2 billion and exceeded the $1 billion mark for the first time.

Permanent digital-download sales fell 25% YoY as the category experienced its sixth consecutive year of decline. Physical products declined 23% YoY with CD sales declining 34% to $698 million. This is the first time since 1986 that revenue from CD sales has been less than $1 billion. On a positive note, the revenue from vinyl sales was up 8%. This is the highest level for the category since 1988. Vinyl contributed to 33% of revenues from the physical category.

Revenues from on-demand streaming services supported by advertising (including YouTube, Vevo, and the free version of Spotify) grew 15% annually to $760 million, a slower rate than other streaming formats. These types of services streamed more than 400 billion songs to listeners in the Unites States, more than one-third of an estimated total of 1.2 trillion streams, yet contributed only 8% to total revenues for the year.
 
Unless the digital music is offered in some losless format which a vast majority aren't, then the cd option will be superior. At least nowdays we do have digital services that offer .wav and .flac but they are far and few.
 
Yeah, my wife use Amazon streaming almost exclusively, but that's only because she uses the Echo for almost everything.

Amazon doesn't let you upload our own music like Google, so you're stuck paying for the services.

I still use CDs whenever possible, but I can actually tell the difference between the two:D
 
Got a few Alexa's, signed up for the Amazon. Love it so far.

I can't fathom how you think CDs are "easier". Sound better maybe, but easier? How?!
 
I'm part of the declining digital download crowd. I just buy individual songs on itunes. There isn't a lot of new music that I like so I probably average buying 10 songs a year, with half of them being more than 10 years old... I trialed amazon streaming music and liked it fine, so I get why it's popular.
 
Apple Music is my car ritual. Too much convenience.

There is something fun about queuing up Metallica by yelling into your watch.
 
Got a few Alexa's, signed up for the Amazon. Love it so far.

I can't fathom how you think CDs are "easier". Sound better maybe, but easier? How?!


In the cases where you can't buy a digital copy of something on Amazon, there is no way to put it into your Amazon music library. And there is no way to put CDs already purchased (or Amazon digital purchases from a different account) into your amazon library. And that is what Alexa defaults to whenever you ask her to do something basic.

To me, that is not helpful. Google Music just uploads any CDs I rip to my free 20,000 song digital library, allowing me to add tracks from whatever source I desire (even Amazon mp3 downloads, if I desire).

That's it. You can play back on any device with Google Music. I even have the Wife's phone signed in to my account, so she gets the same music.

The wife works around the limitations of Amazon Alexa by just subscribing to the Amazon unlimited streaming, and she just subscribes to multiple music services (and setting up multiple channels) to work around those obvious library gaps. All so she can use voice control on music playback.
 
Last edited:
I still think every band should just sell their music in mp3, flac, and cd directly from their own band site. This way they get almost 100% of the profits compared to crap percentages from iTunes and others, plus user gets full quality and can subscribe to alerts of the band's future music. Everyone is happy except the streams.

Streaming on the other hand, well you know you're not getting full quality nor are you supporting the artists. You just want shallow convenience.
 
Last edited:
But....I thought the music industry was going broke??? That is what they kept insinuating! Meanwhile the rest of the world knew the industries chicken little narrative was garbage.
 
If you read their PDF there was a link to the really interesting information - the sales figures for the last 45 years, by category. The peak was 1998, with a revenue of $14.6 billion; of that, 95% of the revenue was from CDs and cassettes. In comparison, 2018 saw revenue of $9.8 billion, a drop of 32.8%, but CDs and other physical media only made up 11.4% of sales.

My question is, are they richer today than they were? They lost a third of their revenue, and that's not adjusted for inflation, either. But on the other hand, if they've cut out the manufacturing costs on 95% of 1998's sales, they could be way ahead.

In either case, screw 'em, I don't feel bad. The old, established music industry hasn't been using their money to promote new music. Instead, they've been using their clout to make themselves money. The digital age has been a huge boon for new artists looking for opportunities and exposure, and the digital age has been a huge blessing for people who like to explore music. The music industry from the 1990's isn't interested in either of those things.

P.S. Speaking of artists supported by the 'old' music industry, Justin Bieber just turned 25 today! Let's all wish him a Happy "Go Fuck Yourself" Birthday!
 
Last edited:
Got a few Alexa's, signed up for the Amazon. Love it so far.

I can't fathom how you think CDs are "easier". Sound better maybe, but easier? How?!

I have tried Pandora and Spotify, they both have far too many wide and glaring gaps of music that I listen to quite often. I buy digitally from bandcamp, CDs at concerts (yes, they are still sold to support the artists) and CDs off eBay. Ripping a CD with EAC takes very little time. 128 gig SD cards at $22.00 you can pack quite a bit of local music on your phone. Plus I like to actually curate what I listen to.
 
If you read their PDF there was a link to the really interesting information - the sales figures for the last 45 years, by category. The peak was 1998, with a revenue of $14.6 billion; of that, 95% of the revenue was from CDs and cassettes. In comparison, 2018 saw revenue of $9.8 billion, a drop of 32.8%, but CDs and other physical media only made up 11.4% of sales.

My question is, are they richer today than they were? They lost a third of their revenue, and that's not adjusted for inflation, either. But on the other hand, if they've cut out the manufacturing costs on 95% of 1998's sales, they could be way ahead.

In either case, screw 'em, I don't feel bad. The old, established music industry hasn't been using their money to promote new music. Instead, they've been using their clout to make themselves money. The digital age has been a huge boon for new artists looking for opportunities and exposure, and the digital age has been a huge blessing for people who like to explore music. The music industry from the 1990's isn't interested in either of those things.

P.S. Speaking of artists supported by the 'old' music industry, Justin Bieber just turned 25 today! Let's all wish him a Happy "Go Fuck Yourself" Birthday!

Wasn't that part of the transition era where people were buying CDs to replace their old record albums? Once the replacements were done, sale fell to more normal levels. At least until streaming started taking over.
 
Wasn't that part of the transition era where people were buying CDs to replace their old record albums? Once the replacements were done, sale fell to more normal levels. At least until streaming started taking over.

Not really. Based on my own experience, the transition from albums to CDs was finished by 1988. You still saw records floating around, but it was rare to find a new album in vinyl after 1986. CDs almost completely killed vinyl, I remember people selling off their expensive record players for peanuts because they were afraid that vinyl would become non-existent.
 
I tried out spotify premium for 3 months when it was 99cents[?] a month. It was nice finding different bands and songs I usually pass over. But after those 3 months, I unsubed, and uninstalled.
I've been growing my music collection since I was 12. I couldn't imagine trusting in an online service to supply my music as my main source. What do people do when their internet goes down? When the artist pulls their music from the platform?
 
I use the free version of iHeartRadio (love the 80's music station out of San Francisco - Martha Quinn is a DJ on it) or Amazon Music. I usually listen on the bus, so the quality on these are fine for that noisy ride.
 
Wasn't that part of the transition era where people were buying CDs to replace their old record albums? Once the replacements were done, sale fell to more normal levels. At least until streaming started taking over.
Winamp launched in 97', Napster in 99'. The CD jumped in it's coffin right there.
 
Back
Top