"Close to zero" cost of creating content

[LowB_FTW]

I don't have a particular axe to grind with this, but stating that the cost of content creation is zero (or close to that) is a preposterous statement, even someone with a cursory knowledge of what it takes to create content (which, for the record, is not a term I particularly like to use, but from a streaming services PoV, I find it very appropriate) knows the cost is not "close to zero".

Music fans and artists hit back as Spotify CEO claims “the cost of creating content” is “close to zero”

 

Mark

[neepheid]

Tone deaf nonsense being spouted by a leech who produces nothing and takes almost everything.

[Doctor J]

Some of the new stuff I've heard recently... yeah, I mean... in a way, I can see his point 🤷🏻‍♂️

[TheLowDown]

Actually, it's a significant cost to create content. For example

 

 

[nilebodgers]

6 minutes ago, TheLowDown said:

Actually, it's a significant cost to create content. For example

 

 

That is a really good video by Mary Spender. I’d never really thought about the cost of doing what she does until I watched that when it came out.

[JoeEvans]

I recently recorded an album with my jazz trio and I did it as cheaply as humanly possibly - recorded and produced by me, two days of recording only, borrowed mics on the drums. But it still cost me £500 to hire a suitable space with a good piano for two days, and I used about £1k of recording equipment that I own, playing a double bass that cost about £3k. So your man from Spotify can do one.

[Mickeyboro]

[super al]

I hate the word 'content' 

 

We used to create music, now it's just content...ones and zeroes to a funky beat!

 

If content be the food of love then stream on and on and on...until we break even

 

If we're lucky 😆

[Bolo]

2 hours ago, JoeEvans said:

I recently recorded an album with my jazz trio and I did it as cheaply as humanly possibly - recorded and produced by me, two days of recording only, borrowed mics on the drums. But it still cost me £500 to hire a suitable space with a good piano for two days, and I used about £1k of recording equipment that I own, playing a double bass that cost about £3k. So your man from Spotify can do one.

And then there's the hours of learning how to operate all of that.

[ped]

Bloke obviously hasn’t seen our pedalboard thread

[triplebass]

i think this is where he reveals his plans:

”This has sparked my curiosity about the concept of long shelf life versus short shelf life”

“This makes me wonder: what are the most unintuitive, yet enduring ideas that aren’t frequently discussed today but might have a long shelf life? Also, what are we creating now that will still be valued and discussed hundreds or thousands of years from today?”

 

[Baloney Balderdash]

I suppose he is right though, if the purpose is just to make any content for the sake of content, but inset the word "quality" in front of "content", and the statement becomes absolutely absurd.

 

Nothing new about shit costing next to nothing to produce though, unless of course it is expensive shit.

 

 

Edited June 8 by Baloney Balderdash

[Doctor J]

I wonder, given his company's increasing penchant for injecting AI generated "content" into playlists, if that is what he is referring to, rather than five lads in a recording studio laying it down on tape, maaaan, or the youtuber types with their army of editors and the like, and this is just hysterical offence being taken by those who despise how his company has contributed to making music almost worthless (myself included)? I read his original comment as making much more sense when applied to the likes of Tiktok or AI stuff than a Tool album.

[itu]

According to Wikipedia:

Ek has studied in Sweden, where education is practically free (funded via taxation). He has raised $2.5 billion via venture funding, i.e. he is creating his nonsense content with other people's money. And his own input seems to be under zero.

[A.G.E.N.T.E.]

This nonsense and lack of respect for others work is one of the multiple reasons I have chosen another streaming platform instead of Spotify. 

[TimR]

Spotify's cost of creating content is certainly zero. 

[TimR]

The cost to me of creating content is zero plus my spare time. I already own the tools to create the content. Laptop/phone/free software.

 

Recording is not the reason I have purchased the above or the instruments I own. 

 

I guess it boils down to why you are making recordings. Is that you're sole aim, or are you a live musician first. 

 

I've just spent an hour playing in a recording studio for a songwriter. I still have no idea what he intends to do with what he has recorded. I don't think he has either. I haven't spent any money doing it and I had the evening free. He is unlikely to make any money from the recording and even if he does, good luck to him. 

[gjones]

His comments are an insult to musicians and songwriters who have put years of effort into creating their art but he is correct in saying that much contemporary 'music' is just content, with very little thought or creativity involved in it's production. Because the need for obscenely, expensive, recording studios is a thing of the past, it does allow anyone to create 'junk music' in their bedroom and upload it to Spotify. There's probably more music being recorded than ever before, which means there's some great stuff out there (if you can find it) but also a lot of rubbish. 

 

I've experimented with AI music programs on the internet and I'm amazed at the quality of music it can produce with very little human input. I suspect that, within 10 years, much of the 'content' on Spotify will be AI created, probably by Spotify itself, and the average listener will love it. Which means Daniel Ek won't have to pay any more royalties to those pesky record companies or songwriters.

[Skybone]

Thanks to platforms like Spotify, it's almost made music a commodity, everyone seems to take it for granted, and very few people appear to be unwilling to put their hands in their pockets to support the bands and artists, buying band merch direct.

 

It's great for large, known bands who get thousands of hits, but smaller bands and artists, getting hits is dependent on your promotion.

[Doctor J]

1 hour ago, gjones said:

I suspect that, within 10 years, much of the 'content' on Spotify will be AI created, probably by Spotify itself, and the average listener will love it. Which means Daniel Ek won't have to pay any more royalties to those pesky record companies or songwriters.

Sorry to break it to you, but that is already happening today.

[Jackroadkill]

1 hour ago, gjones said:

I suspect that, within 10 years, much of the 'content' on Spotify will be AI created

 

Nah, in ten years the lights will have gone out, and Spotify with them!

[Supernaut]

If artists had a backbone, they would leave Spotify en mass but they don't. 

[asingardenof]

19 hours ago, nilebodgers said:

That is a really good video by Mary Spender. I’d never really thought about the cost of doing what she does until I watched that when it came out.

She's really good about spelling out exactly what she has to go through to do what she does, and while sometimes it looks really glamorous and she gets loads of nice guitars, she's clearly very canny.

[Wolverinebass]

Ek is a carpetbagging tosser of the highest order. In 2013, Q magazine did an article about streaming and it showed that although (allegedly) Spotify was (possibly) not making a profit, it was however making $73 million a month from the adverts. A month.

 

Now, here we have this guy who is making more from leeching off musicians in a year than Paul McCartney has made in his whole life (by being arguably the most successful songwriter in history) saying things like "if musicians want to be paid more, they should put out more music," "the cost of content is almost zero." Almost comically tone deaf.

 

Now for the fun. This utter melt then brings in the 1000 streams threshold to basically hold on to our cash and get the interest on it, or just not pay you at all. Oh wait, there's more!! He's actively lobbying governments to reduce the payout rate for musicians, yet has 300 million quid to sponsor Barcalona's stadium in a bid to bail them out of their ludicrously over leveraged position that saw Messi have to leave the other year.

 

Wait! There's even more! He's sacking almost 20% of the Spotify staff as a cost saving measure.

 

He can dress it up any way he wants, but the simple facts are there. They're making more than a billion dollars a year and we're the ones who are being taken for chumps by this soulless, snivelling, jumped up, tone deaf tosser. 

 

The main problem is that I have no idea how we get rid of him and his ilk. All the artist advantages that people like Peter Grant (who managed Led Zeppelin) fought for in the 50s and 60s are gone after being eroded by massive companies like Live Nation. We're not being paid even remotely fairly and add that to venues taking merch cuts and soon the wheels are properly going to come off the whole industry. 

Edited June 10 by Wolverinebass

[Dad3353]

2 hours ago, Wolverinebass said:

Ek is a carpetbagging tosser of the highest order...

 

Soooooo, you're not on Spotify, then. Oh, wait...