Is Spotify killing the Maltese music star? Or do the benefits of exposure outweigh the problems of very low royalties? Ramona Depares sounds out the local angle.
As Maltese users flocked to join over 24 million Spotify subscribers when the service became available in Malta three months ago, the development is sparking mixed reactions in the industry.
The popular music-streaming service has attracted a measure of criticism, with some claiming that the platform is nothing better than a cleverly-disguised way of encouraging piracy, and that smaller, local musicians are unlikely to reap any benefits.
Although a number of Maltese musicians have been available on Spotify for some years, it is only since the service was made available in Malta that Maltese users have been able to access their music for free. This has, in turn, given rise to worries that local CD sales will diminish even further.
The system is clearly not working, but there is no momentum or political will to fix it
With an interactive database of over 20 million songs and music that includes both mainstream and indie artists, Spotify claims to contribute to the music business by migrating users “away from piracy and less monetised platforms”.
Although albums and playlists are accessable for free at the basic level, Spotify charges a monthly subscription fee for a premium service that is advert-free, more flexible and that also allows high-quality downloads. The number of paid subscribers exceed the six million mark.
Participating artists are paid from the revenue generated by these subscriptions and by the advertising. Yet, only a paltry percentage of these funds are actually directed towards artists, despite the fact that the company claims it has succeeded in growing revenues for artists and labels in every country it operates.
The size of the Maltese market makes it unlikely that these percentages will make a difference to the bottom line of local artists, leading many to question whether offering their music for free is actually counterproductive.
“By agreeing to stream my music, I’m decreasing the chances of listeners actually buying my album. The revenue from Spotify would not make up for this, so it seems to me like artists who are rushing to be part of this are shooting themselves in the foot. They’re also making those of us who do not want to make money for Spotify look bad,” one musician, who declined to be named, said.
Stalko member Tim Ellis, whose music is available on the digital portal, acknowledges that services like Spotify present a double-edged sword to musicians.
“The arguments are very similar to platforms that offer music downloading and full-album streaming capacity. On the one hand, they help bands gain more exposure by taking their music to a wider audience,” he says.
The flipside, he adds, is that music sales have reduced drastically and it has become very complicated for bands to survive solely on music even if they are quite popular.
“Even relatively high-profile musicians have part-time jobs to survive. The royalties you get from Spotify streaming (and other internet sites) are practically non-existent. The system is clearly not working, but there is no momentum or political will to fix it,” Ellis explains.
Ellis acknowledges that finding solutions is extremely difficult, with artists resigned that the actual, physical music will never render any money.
“This approach can never be a good thing. Nowadays, artists’ only means of financial survival are live gigs, merchandise and having their music played in commercials and films. In most cases this is simply not enough.”
Moreover, Ellis adds that whether artists are financially succesful or not does not depend on how good they are, and that high quality does not necessarily equate to financial survival.
“At the moment artists are being shortchanged. The balance is a very delicate one, and has not yet been found.”
Singer Ira Losco’s music has also been available on Spotify – and on another 70 digital portals – for the past two years. When asked whether she believes that the revenue is distributed fairly, she replies that the main problem is the wide division of income, which makes the ultimate revenue for the artist minimal.
“However, I feel that the issue related to the PRS for Music, the organisation that collects royalties whenever an artist’s works are performed or broadcast in public, is much worse. Artists have been protesting against the system for years.”
PRS for Music (PRS) is often attacked by artists and licensees for lack of transparency. With royalties amounting to figures as low as €120 to top artists per year, it has also been criticised for failing to monitor proper distribution.
“Spotify has only been around for just over five years, so I like to think that it’s still a work in progress. Even so, I believe iTunes remains the main portal for music in the digital format, as it ensures both visibility and revenue to the artist.”
Losco does point out that the potential benefits related to being part of Spotify are not necessarily limited to revenue, but also to visibility.
“The potential for wider exposure is there. Also, unlike with some other sites, the streaming is done through a legal understanding, so I do welcome it as an alternative way to accessing music.”
Skimmed vocalist Alexandra Aquilina and guitarist Daniel Borg find the way websites like Spotify – and others like Last FM, Grooveshark, 8Tracks and YouTube – make business off other people’s intellectual property to be unjust.
“These business models should be subject to better control. On a local level they do not affect us so much, as they do not affect CD sales. People who are interested in local music still make the effort to attend gigs and buy CDs, but stricter laws still need to be implemented. ”
Aquilina and Borg put a portion of the blame squarely on the media, which sends out mixed messages to users.
“We are constantly told that piracy is wrong and that it can lead to fines and even prison sentences. However, the media still endorses sites that put artists in a position where they have to sign off their work to be used without receiving remuneration.”
The two musicians add that they appreciate that on a local level, given that exposure is limited, renumeration will be negligible when compared to the costs of say, recording a high-quality album.
“Any form of renumeration is a question of ethics.”
Winter Moods frontman Ivan Grech, however, believes musicians need to be where the people are.
“This is where people are looking for music nowadays, and Spotify reaches people across the globe. So yes, there is the element that people can discover our music there and go on to purchase our albums,” he says.
In Ellis’s words, a double-edged sword indeed. In the meantime, Maltese artists have no intention of stopping the music.