Today’s Topic: Music Streaming & American Billboard. I stumbled upon an interesting article on the American Billboard’s website, on how the organization uses music streaming data in order to help them rank today’s music. As I’ve explained before, music streaming is here to stay. We are now living in an age where today’s young children never seen a phonograph before (that really makes me feel old 🤣 ). Despite the noted rise in vinyl sales, the vast majority of mom and pop record shops are still closing largely due to the rise in music streaming. Although I embrace streaming, as a classic blogger, I now believe we don’t have a way to truly measure a song’s greatness, worthiness, or popularity; because classic music has been migrated from an era where the business model was completely different.
I’ve Always Disagreed With Adding YouTube In Any Streaming Analysis
The one thing I’ve always had a hard time with, is organizations such as Billboard adding YouTube to their analysis. Now, some may say I’m just hatin’ on YouTube, but I’m actually not. I’m just coming from a point of view that, if someone actually buys a digital download, and or uses a paid streaming service, it has a greater value for the song in my opinion. WTF am I talking about? 🤣 Well, think about it for a minute. Services such as Spotify are more personal than just watching a YouTube video. And if it’s in your playlist, you’re more likely to hear it again, and again if you really love it. Let me put it this way; there’s a difference between a single IP address listening to a song multiple times from a playlist, than an IP address coming from YouTube, who may be listening to your song in a mixed video with other artists (this doesn’t necessarily make a song popular in my opinion); in addition there’s a difference between royalties, and YouTube monetizing. The only way this could make a difference, is if every artist sets up “Content ID,” and if they only include customers on “YouTube Red.” And, to my understanding their services isn’t growing they way they’ve anticipated.
What’s interesting in Billboard’s article, is that it talks about how they have now added some more tier streaming services. In other words, they’ve now added ad supported streaming, such as on Spotify. This I agree with, because although it’s a lower payout for artist, it’s still consistent royalties. Unlike YouTube, where their metric system is entirely f**ked. To help you get a sense of how YouTube/Google handle’s artist pay out, check out this article. I just don’t see how they can include YouTube in order to help determine song rank. I think YouTube should be separate personally.
Didn’t Mean To Get On A YouTube Rant
The article also talked about including trial based subscription service. I’m not sure if that should be included either. Because they must be basing this on the assumption the user will stay a member. And we all know that’s not true (unless they have data predicting an average as to how many keep their service I guess). So, this is interesting how both technical and complex music has gotten (in addition to the business itself). If you’d like to read Billboard’s, here’s where you’ll find it “Billboard Finalizes Changes to How Streams Are Weighted for Billboard Hot 100 & Billboard 200.”