Spotify, streams, and small artists: A look beyond your Discover Weekly mixes

Graphic: Kat Combs / Article cover: Freepik.com

Streaming services have been on the rise since the early 2000s with the introduction of trailblazers like Rhapsody and Pandora. Today, millions of people around the world flock to big-name providers like Spotify and Apple Music, as they boast some of the most expansive collections of tracks on the internet for a flat monthly fee. It seems almost too good to be true – for the consumer, that is.

The reality for a majority of independent artists in today’s streaming market is minimal revenue and recognition, and the main problem with streaming is this: while it does increase overall accessibility to smaller artists’ music, the way it’s set up now is a rich-get-richer scheme in which a small percentage of top artists receive most of the streaming revenue while independent artists see little to no return on the hours of hard work put in to produce content.

Since I don’t have much firsthand experience dealing with the headaches of the industry, I talked with a few friends and artists I’ve met over the years to get a better idea of the artist perspective. This ended up ranging from local bands with a smaller following to nationally touring acts with six–figure monthly listener counts.

Contrary to popular belief, artists don’t upload their music directly to most streaming or download services – instead, tracks first have to go through a distribution service. Sporting catchy names like Record Union and TuneCore, each service offers up a different set of quirks, from stream analytics reports to marketing tools like Instagram Story stickers. While most newcomers choose a user-friendly, simplistic host like CD Baby or DistroKid, many seasoned artists have settled comfortably on a more niche service that meets their specific needs. One of the major differences between services is fee structure, and each artist has their own preference. For example, Inning, the dream pop-y bedroom project of Charlottesville-based Evan Frolov, has been steadily putting out a single every couple of months since the release of debut EP D.C. Party Machine. With a full-length release a much more distant goal, Inning benefits from the use of DistroKid. Rather than paying the relatively high single costs charged by per-release distributors, Frolov’s yearly flat fee scores him unlimited track uploads. This is much more economical and efficient for an artist who puts out several small releases – other distributors charge as much as $10 per single.

Streaming has further complicated the finances of small artists in that rather than releasing music on their own terms, they are forced to play catch-up in an industry not conducive to their success. Streaming services have only really come to the forefront of the music world in the past decade – gone are the days where an artist’s first release would be a homemade CD sold at shows and to friends and family, now replaced with digital distribution to the masses. Ian Ruhala, the Detroit native behind the project Hala, points this out, telling me he “only just recently acquired physical, real copies of [his] music, for merchandise at shows/ when on tour,” and pointing out that, to the independent artist, “streaming really is everything.” And for Ruhala, this especially holds true – boasting almost 400,000 monthly listeners and millions of streams on his top tracks on Spotify.

Since a majority of small artists operate without the assistance of a label, they have to do all of their distribution and marketing themselves. Spotify in particular lends a hand with this, in the form of curated playlists. Inning and Hall Johnson are two bands that have benefitted from this, with their respective songs “Glow !” and “City Lights” earning sports on official Spotify playlists that skyrocketed their listener counts virtually overnight. Trevor Stovall, who wears the many hats of guitarist, keyboard player, and manager for DFW rockers Hall Johnson attributes the band’s early success to this, noting that “Spotify is really good about adding smaller artists to their big playlists, which is how [they] got the boost to some songs like ‘City Lights,’” a track boasting over 320,000 streams since its 2017 release.

Stovall also comments on the multitude of marketing tools Spotify offers, from a “concerts” tab to artist biographies and playlists, comparing it to a “simplified EPK (Electronic Press Kit).” This is a significant characteristic pretty much unique to Spotify that gives bands that can’t afford a website the opportunity to centralize their links and information. Bandcamp, a combination music streaming and download site, offers these same features, but Caroline Weinroth, frontwoman of sixties-reminiscent rock band Cinema Hearts, makes the point that it “isn’t popular outside of the indie music crowd.” This is painfully true – while Bandcamp is one of the few services that truly emphasizes direct artist support, it only reaches a very specific audience. While the several millions they pay to artists monthly may seem like a lot, when you consider the hundreds of thousands of artists using the platform in addition to the amount of popular artists selling their music there, it still amounts to a very small payout to the majority of independent artists.

Aside from audience, another reason Spotify trumps smaller competitors like Bandcamp is the social aspect. In the past few years, millennial and Gen Z demand has spurred the socialization of many mundane aspects of life, from dining to even making payments. While things like Instagramming and Yelp reviewing every meal or trying to find a funny caption for your Venmo transfer might seem like futuristic fads, the sharing of music is no new concept. Before Spotify, there were mix CDs, and before that, mixtapes. Spotify simply digitizes a tradition that dates back decades.

With the strongest social integration of any music service on the market, Spotify is very attractive to smaller bands looking to grow their following. Aside from official playlists, one of the biggest exposure opportunities on Spotify comes from grassroots support. Spotify’s 180,000,000+ users all have the ability to make and share their own playlists both publicly and among their network of friends. Word-of- mouth is generally one of the most widely used and effective forms of promotion in any industry, and the music business is no exception. Most of the best bands and songs I’ve ever listened to have been at the suggestion of friends, and I’m sure most others can say the same.

Another significant benefit of Spotify is the analytics you have access to as an artist, which includes stats on the gender, age, and location of your listeners, among other things. This is especially helpful in planning marketing campaigns and tours, as seen in LA indie-funk band Vulfpeck’s infamous Sleepify record. The 2014 project, which the band introduced in a short video, was to fund an entire tour by getting fans to stream an album of completely silent songs while they slept, hence the name. The album contained ten tracks all around a halfminute long, as Spotify counts one stream as thirty seconds of listening. Until Spotify removed the album for a violation of content terms, the band made over $20,000, which was used to fund a free tour through the cities that streamed it the most. This “clever stunt,” as it was called by Spotify, was a fantastic experiment on streaming royalty policy and listener analytics, and showed the influence of marketing in a service like Spotify.

However, for all of the great things Spotify offers, the small musician sees a ridiculously low financial return on streams. Although it ranges based on a number of factors, most artists make around half a cent per stream. This is just not conducive to sustainability and success for most small artists – Pat Davis, bassist for Richmond emo/alt band Downhaul, tells me that all four of their members work full-time jobs to fund their music. Davis says that it’s a double-edged sword, as “while it can make availability difficult, it makes it pretty easy to finance any musical endeavors.” Downhaul just released their first fulllength EP with the backing of a label and have since gained a feature on an official Spotify playlist, so they’re hopeful to see an increased return on investment in streaming revenue.

Overall, Spotify streaming, like most things, presents several very significant pros and cons. While it does provide many marketing and analytics tools for the artist, it also operates on a disproportionate royalty model in which bands with tens of thousands of streams have yet to break even on their production and release costs. Most small artists consider it a necessary evil, as although it pays less to the actual artist, the reach and accessibility it provides is an absolute necessity in today’s industry climate. So, next time you find an artist you like, maybe consider just shelling out the few bucks to buy their music directly from them.