Forbes: Cut To Streaming Royalties Could Impact Broadway Cast Recordings- Page 2

[veronicamae]

Posted: 11/8/23 at 10:03pm

zainmax said: "Jay Lerner-Z said: "Right. Most working musicians need to tour relentlessly. From coast to coast, continent to continent. Deal with the hassles of venues, travel etc. Then put effort and money into producing merch to awkwardly hawk. Stand in the lobby after shows with a sharpie in their hand, desperate to make a sale. Posters, t-shirts, mugs... vinyls. Which is another reason vinyl has had a resurgence. People actually pay for them, if only as an act of charity to support the acts they like. Artists need to leave their families for weeks and months at a time, only to just about get by. They need to pay their band, their crew, insurance. If they are very lucky, they MIGHT just about have enough to record another album. All to start the same cycle over again.

This is what Spotify does."

Looking at musicals, though, what's the logic of a cast album? Some of them like FUNNY GIRL are independently, separately financed so the investors actually think that they'll see any money from them or is it more of a preservation motivation? I'm serious."

Some shows hurry to record their cast album so they can use their music in their advertising to sell tickets - why? Because they can't afford the rights to a previous recording, the previous recording is not able to be licensed at all, the current production's talent agreements prohibit them from using another cast's recording -- or the most obvious, it's a brand-new musical with no previous recording whatsoever. Not having music that can be used in advertising is a huge challenge for musicals and a big motivator for new ones to hurry to make their cast recordings.

An example like the Lea Michele Funny Girl falls more in the "because it will sell" category. I don't recall what music they used in their ads up to the point of having the Lea recording; was it always instrumentals? (Another workaround).

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 12:54am

TheatreFan4 said: "Nobody is buying music on the Apple Music Store, they're buying a license that can be revoked at any time. Anyone foolish enough to purchase from it deserves to be parted with that money. Don't invest real money in digital media that doesn't exist."

Some day I swear they're going to yank back all my Kindle books. It's already sus how often I have to update and individually download every book again (and it gets confused with my past library checkouts that I can't remove). Obviously it's more convenient to have something portable most of the time, but if I want to own something or meaningfully support I pay for physical media or merch or tickets to live performances.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 1:58am

Jay Lerner-Z said: "I think cast albums would get more than a measly three dollars, as HogansHero suggested. On average, 20 songs per album, assuming the listener gets through the whole thing would be sixty dollars per thousand listeners. Which is still nothing."

I'll gladly substitute $60 for $3 because it does not alter the point I was making at all. I would point out that this assumes that every song on the album is played right up to the threshold, which seems quite unlikely. From what I have been told, most listens are repeats.

 

[raddersons]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 7:23am

In the past 10 years, cast recordings have been made as marketing materials to push ticket sales and licensing. Without a cast recording the show gets lost to time and no one will know it exists. The change to Spotify’s model won’t change that, as I don’t think producers really plan on making a ton of money from streams.

[darquegk]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 9:09am

This. A cast album, and in many cases a Broadway/Off-Broadway run, typically exists as an advertisement for licensing. When Legally Blonde un-flopped on the road, the rules changed forever.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 10:12am

Does Spotify contribute to the ridiculous ticket prices of today?

Why would anyone buy a CD in the lobby when they can get it for free on Spotify? How much revenue is lost?

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 2:46pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "Does Spotify contribute to the ridiculous ticket prices of today?

Why would anyone buy a CD in the lobby when they can get it for free on Spotify? How much revenue is lost?"

Well, for starters most people wouldn’t by a cast recording in the lobby on CD since CDs are starting to go the way of the dodo. The fact is that streaming is taking over and is a very popular way for people get access to music. Why sit at home listen to a single album when you can be out and have the ability to listen to any song/album you want on demand? 

And, popularity dictates how much a ticket to a given concert costs. One may think that the price of a ticket to say, Swift’s Eras tour was beyond a bit much. But, there were clearly many many people who still bought them up regardless. 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 3:42pm

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

CDs have gone the way of the dodo, sure, but why is that? How come DVDs and Blu-ray are still around?

Spotify has a monopoly of the market, and give away other people's products for free. Can't we do better than this?

[JSquared2]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 3:46pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

CDs have gone the way of the dodo, sure, but why is that? How come DVDs and Blu-ray are still around?

They're not around -- at least not for anyone under 60.

 

 

 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 4:03pm

Ageism, great. I am not remotely close to being 60, and I have plenty. Maybe if you satisfied with the offerings of Netflix, or are unable to read subtitles, JSquared, streaming is fine for you. For others, sometimes purchase of physical products is the only way to see what they want to see.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 5:39pm

Islander_fan said: "JWell, for starters most people wouldn’t by a cast recording in the lobby on CD since CDs are starting to go the way of the dodo."

Crazy pricing is also an issue. When I saw Kimberly Akimbo last month, they were selling the CD for $35 vs. $15 at Amazon.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 6:08pm

Which of those is the crazy price? Arguably both. Amazon are also guilty of market manipulation.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 6:52pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

CDs have gone the way of the dodo, sure, but why is that? How come DVDs and Blu-ray are still around?

Spotify has a monopoly of the market, and give away other people's products for free. Can't we do better than this?"

People have been looking for a way to not have to buy albums for literally 25 years. Napster, then iTunes offering only buying the songs you want, then streaming services. It's incredibly clear that all of these outlets were in response to a desire. And Spotify doesn't have a monopoly on anything, you just said yourself they're giving away product for free! There are alternatives. Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, among many other niche avenues. Calling something a "Monopoly" when what you really mean is that a lot of people use it, doesn't make it a Monopoly. There's plenty of competition. Spotify isn't out here pushing legislation to crush the CD market. That's just called the passage of time! Trust and believe, I love physical media and prefer it but you have GOT to acknowledge that we are in the minority. People don't want, nor do they have space, for all that ****. I myself don't enjoy packing up all the DVDs & Blurays every time I move and I don't even have THAT many. 

[inception]

Posted: 11/9/23 at 9:10pm

I just saw aome tiktok this morning from some maybe 19 year old in LA showing off a stack of cd's he bought used at Amoeba. He was all like, this is amazing! They have all these classic songs and you can listen even when you don't have data or wifi!

What goes around comes around.