Changing of the Guard? Are GFL paying too little?

[HotChipWillBreakYourLegs]

2 hours ago, gigpusher said:

Streaming fees needs to be fixed.

 

 

This.  There's money in streaming but not enough of it is going to the artists.

[TiZuff]

glasto makes me realise not enough people try and listen to new music and just listen to the same old sh*t they did when they were 15. 

 

every year... same ol sh*t. then in 5 years time people will post this years poster and be like "omg what a year this was, so much better than this years sh*t lineup"

 

rinse...repeat.... 

[dingbat2]

I think they should pay as near to market rate as they can for the non-televised stages. But they should carry on paying below market rates for the televised stages as the exposure they get from being on telly must be more than the difference in fee they would get. I would be interested to know how much an act playing a non-televised stage such as the Glade would get at Glasto v what they could get elsewhere

 

 

[CanWeRest]

New music is what it's all about. I don't want to end up being that person that listens to the same 5 greatest hits CDs on repeat. I'm happy for Glasto to get rid of all these greedy established musicians in favour of the young up and comers.

 

However, I don't want to see any more DJs. There are enough already. More bands please!

[HotChipWillBreakYourLegs]

25 minutes ago, TiZuff said:

glasto makes me realise not enough people try and listen to new music and just listen to the same old sh*t they did when they were 15. 

 

every year... same ol sh*t. then in 5 years time people will post this years poster and be like "omg what a year this was, so much better than this years sh*t lineup"

 

rinse...repeat.... 

 

It seems that that is just human nature.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/12/17003076/spotify-data-shows-songs-teens-adult-taste-music

 

 

[Tiesto13]

25 minutes ago, HotChipWillBreakYourLegs said:

 

This.  There's money in streaming but not enough of it is going to the artists.

 

Yeah, when I saw the articles about how Barclays were pulling out of sponsoring Download, my initial reaction was wtf are Barclays doing sponsoring Download in the first place. How has the arts and music funding model in this country become so broken that arts, literary and music festivals have become reliant on corporate sponsorship which can come with significant strings attached. I appreciate that its a worldwide phenomenon because the historic funding models have been ripped up and the models that replace them don't work. 

So yeah, not sure thats really an answer, more of a rant. But I think that consumers of art, media and music have to accept that they have had an incredible run of it over the past 10 years, and that maybe there needs to be a bit of reckoning. Consumers of live music on other hand, they've had a pretty rum deal, as they're now effectively subsidising streamers.

[Tiesto13]

11 minutes ago, CanWeRest said:

New music is what it's all about. I don't want to end up being that person that listens to the same 5 greatest hits CDs on repeat. I'm happy for Glasto to get rid of all these greedy established musicians in favour of the young up and comers.

 

However, I don't want to see any more DJs. There are enough already. More bands please!

 

By their nature, bands are a lot more expensive than DJs

[HotChipWillBreakYourLegs]

6 minutes ago, Tiesto13 said:

 

Yeah, when I saw the articles about how Barclays were pulling out of sponsoring Download, my initial reaction was wtf are Barclays doing sponsoring Download in the first place. How has the arts and music funding model in this country become so broken that arts, literary and music festivals have become reliant on corporate sponsorship which can come with significant strings attached. I appreciate that its a worldwide phenomenon because the historic funding models have been ripped up and the models that replace them don't work. 

So yeah, not sure thats really an answer, more of a rant. But I think that consumers of art, media and music have to accept that they have had an incredible run of it over the past 10 years, and that maybe there needs to be a bit of reckoning. Consumers of live music on other hand, they've had a pretty rum deal, as they're now effectively subsidising streamers.

 

I'm yet to be convinced that streaming is too cheap for the consumer.  But the distribution of the revenues is definitely out of whack.

 

For example look at the amount Spotify are paying for Joe Rogan to host his podcast on their platform.  We've all paid for that with our subs when we might have only been listening to Peruvian nose flute music for a year.

 

Now Spotify are proposing a minimum number of streams before they even pay an artist for a play.

 

Public Service Broadcasting did a good twitter post a while back on the amount they get paid by all the different streaming platforms.  I'll see if I can find it.

 

Spotify were at the lower end despite being the most popular.

[-TLR-]

34 minutes ago, TiZuff said:

glasto makes me realise not enough people try and listen to new music and just listen to the same old sh*t they did when they were 15. 

 

 

 

i listen to the same old sh*t i did when i was 15.

 

i couldn't give a sh*t about new music, i'm happily stuck in my rut and make no apologies for that.

 

so i guess i should not be allowed to go, or something?

[TiZuff]

23 minutes ago, -TLR- said:

 

i listen to the same old sh*t i did when i was 15.

 

i couldn't give a sh*t about new music, i'm happily stuck in my rut and make no apologies for that.

 

so i guess i should not be allowed to go, or something?

who said you cant go?  but if you are "stuck in a rut" i dont think the festival should have to be too... which is what it feels like with alot of people who complain about the lineup

 

the amount of people who will say its a sh*t lineup because they dont know any of the acts or just reply with "who" when they see the lineup.

if people dont keep up to date with new music then they cant really complain can they? but they do...every year...

 

ive got no issues with older acts on, newer acts on, whatever. dont care, ill listen to the lineup, find stuff i love.  its fun discovering new music on a lineup.

 

Edited June 20 by TiZuff

[Ben7amin_]

1 minute ago, TiZuff said:

who said you cant go?  but if you are "stuck in a rut" i dont think the festival should have to be too... which is what it feels like with alot of people who complain about the lineup

 

the amount of people who will say its a sh*t lineup because they dont know any of the acts or just reply with "who" when they see the lineup.

if people dont keep up to date with new music then they cant really complain can they? but they do...every year...

 

ive got no issues with older acts on, newer acts on, whatever. dont care, ill listen to the lineup, find stuff i love. mostly its fun discovering new music on a lineup.

 

100% agree no problem with people choosing to pause expanding there music taste and close there mind to new things that's there choice. 

 

But its absolutely outrageous that people choose to pause there music taste and then expect music festivals to still meet there tastes as the years go by. 

 

It's not a legacy period festival like rewind etc etc. So people should expect the vast chunk of the line up to be current. 

[bennyboi]

55 minutes ago, TiZuff said:

glasto makes me realise not enough people try and listen to new music and just listen to the same old sh*t they did when they were 15. 

 

every year... same ol sh*t. then in 5 years time people will post this years poster and be like "omg what a year this was, so much better than this years sh*t lineup"

 

rinse...repeat.... 

 

last few years, I’ve had to make a playlist for my mates that moan about not knowing anyone one the line up (they are still holding out for 2pac to play I think) 

 

and every year they get into someone new pre-fest. 
 

they are all dead keen for Bob Vylan this year now. 

[-TLR-]

5 minutes ago, TiZuff said:

but if you are "stuck in a rut" i dont think the festival should have to be too... 

 

fair play... can't really argue with that.

 

 

[tarw]

18 minutes ago, -TLR- said:

 

i listen to the same old sh*t i did when i was 15.

 

i couldn't give a sh*t about new music, i'm happily stuck in my rut and make no apologies for that.

 

so i guess i should not be allowed to go, or something?

I’m exactly the opposite. I will generally watch new music over a heritage act. 
 

I want to watch artists in their prime rather than see them churn out the same stuff that they have for the past decade or two. 
Given the choice between Dua Lipa and The Eagles playing Hotel California in a bored and indifferent way I know which I would choose 

[Alvoram]

5 hours ago, gigpusher said:

Glastonbury are clearly not paying enough for many acts and usually that would be absolutely fine and people would play for a. the exposure and b the tickets and pick up the money elsewhere but sadly for most artists live is the only place they make their money now and it's getting much harder as people cut back more and more. Really what needs to happen is a more sustainable model for artists to make a living. Recorded music must be one of the few costs that has either stayed static or gone down for most people over the years. Paying £10 a month for all the music you consume is ridiculously cheap considering people were paying £8-12 for one cd in the 90's.

 

Even though it would hit me big time I think streaming services should charge tiered amounts for services so those of us who listen to more music would pay more. I know a lot of people wouldn't like it but it would eventually stop the crazy live costs as well. Otherwise a few people are going to keep paying more and more to prop up the industry and more and more festivals will fold as it become unaffordable to put them on.

I've often wondered why the movie model hasn't been copied across to Spotify...

By that I mean Prime for example. You can pay to stream as much content as you like, or, if you like the movie, and want to own it, or just support the makers of it, you can buy it and keep it permanently, regardless of prime membership status. 

I'd do that with Spotify if the price was reasonable, I'd buy the albums I really like. 

Perhaps they'd need to integrate it with the download feature. Instead of continuing to push subscription prices up, remove the download for offline feature, unless you 'own' that album. Keep subscriptions for streaming only.  

Sure it'd hurt lots of us who like to download our playlists for use when not connected to the internet, but if the price was reasonable, £3 or £6 quid per (single disc) album, 50p -£1 for single songs, and 'most' of that money went directly back to the artist, then it's a sacrifice I'd gladly make to support my favourites. 

As it currently stands, I have records and CD's still in their wrappers, as I don't own either player, but wanted to support the artists. 🙈😂

(As a side note, we do the same with books. Our bookshelves are full of brand new books that look like they've never been read, but we all have Kindles, prefer to read on them. However, you just can't beat a real book, so if we like the book, or the series, we'll buy the physical books too. It's weird I know, but they're very cheap, and when the tech world comes crashing down, we'll still have our books!!!)

Edited June 20 by Alvoram

[1986]

19 minutes ago, TiZuff said:

who said you cant go?  but if you are "stuck in a rut" i dont think the festival should have to be too... which is what it feels like with alot of people who complain about the lineup

 

the amount of people who will say its a sh*t lineup because they dont know any of the acts or just reply with "who" when they see the lineup.

if people dont keep up to date with new music then they cant really complain can they? but they do...every year...

 

ive got no issues with older acts on, newer acts on, whatever. dont care, ill listen to the lineup, find stuff i love.  its fun discovering new music on a lineup.

 

Though I agree with you on the whole for every "who" that went towards SZA there were equal amounts of complaints at the same old sh*t like Coldplay and Seasick Steve taking up real estate.

[dumski]

11 hours ago, BigMarv said:

Seems this years lineup is missing so many Glastonbury staples from the last 20 years of attending:

 

- Dub Pistols

- Stanton Warriors

- Dave Seaman

- DJ Yoda

- Nick Warren

- Sasha/Digweed

Just Fatboy Slim to chop now  (and im saying that as a fan - I'd rather the wasn't there all the time!)

[dumski]

Does the BBC actually pay to cover it?  I'd be Very intrigued to know

[incident]

Just now, dumski said:

Does the BBC actually pay to cover it?  I'd be Very intrigued to know

 

Don't believe so.

 

It's more of a joint partnership situation where the BBC record and can broadcast the footage, but GFL retain control and ownership of certain aspects. If you look at the copyright message at the end of every broadcast, you'll see both BBC and GFL named as the owner.

[DeanoL]

17 minutes ago, Alvoram said:

I've often wondered why the movie model hasn't been copied across to Spotify...

By that I mean Prime for example. You can pay to stream as much content as you like, or, if you like the movie, and want to own it, or just support the makers of it, you can buy it and keep it permanently, regardless of prime membership status. 

I'd do that with Spotify if the price was reasonable, I'd buy the albums I really like. 

Perhaps they'd need to integrate it with the download feature. Instead of continuing to push subscription prices up, remove the download for offline feature, unless you 'own' that album. Keep subscriptions for streaming only.  

Sure it'd hurt lots of us who like to download our playlists for use when not connected to the internet, but if the price was reasonable, £3 or £6 quid per (single disc) album, 50p -£1 for single songs, and 'most' of that money went directly back to the artist, then it's a sacrifice I'd gladly make to support my favourites. 

Or just limit it to like three or five streams a month for a specific song unless you "buy" the album.

[-TLR-]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Or just limit it to like three or five streams a month for a specific song unless you "buy" the album.

 

didn't they already try this tho'?

 

i'm sure a few years back spotify made it so that on a free account you could only listen to something so many times? (i know its not like this now, but sure it was at one point???)

[CanWeRest]

1 hour ago, Tiesto13 said:

 

By their nature, bands are a lot more expensive than DJs

 

Yes, I know these are hard times, but my concern is now they know they can "get away with it" and it will never change back (like the increased attendance after COVID). 

 

Also, I'd definitely be happy with them to cut money on staging, like all the elaborate things in the SE corner and the seaside pier. It really doesn't do anything for me.

 

But people in general seem to like endless DJs and fancy facades.

[-TLR-]

2 minutes ago, CanWeRest said:

 

But people in general seem to like endless DJs and fancy facades.

 

i gotta be honest, i like the fancy facades.

 

my favourite ever stage at Glastonbury was The Blues stage, that thing was f**king genius.

 

 

[CanWeRest]

22 minutes ago, -TLR- said:

 

i gotta be honest, i like the fancy facades.

 

my favourite ever stage at Glastonbury was The Blues stage, that thing was f**king genius.

 

 

 

I understand that, but I just don't feel it myself.

 

I also think dance music and the elaborate surroundings go hand in hand. Dance music has very repetitive, predictable beats in the same way your surroundings are fixed and don't change. So together they give the impression of being somewhere otherworldly (especially with drugs too). But my mind refuses to leave reality. I look at something and think "wow, bet it took a fairly big construction team to get that bit of kit all the way up there...I wonder if the HSE would approve..."

 

Nah, I'm just a purest. I like bands that rock and singer songwriters being all poetic and stuff.

[clarkete]

4 hours ago, tarw said:

I thought that Boeing’s problems were due to the merger with McDonnal Douglas and introducing the QA and cost cutting they used. Didn’t have anything to do with diversity 

 

Indeed they were.  I assumed the other statement was in the wrong thread tbh as it was pretty random.  

 

5 hours ago, gigpusher said:

Streaming fees needs to be fixed.

 

I think most of us are aware that other steaming suppliers pay far higher rates per listen than the most popular one and as I recall you're one of those who uses a different service.  I'm aware that spoti have changed their payment model now and as I understand it there can be some figures which appear improved, but also below a certain number of listens it can be seriously detrimental?

https://www.viberate.com/blog/independent-artist/which-music-platform-pays-the-most-find-out-now/

https://dittomusic.com/en/blog/how-much-do-music-streaming-services-pay-musicians

https://routenote.com/blog/how-much-music-streaming-services-pay/