←back to thread

300 points pseudolus | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.328s | source
Show context
parpfish ◴[] No.44408859[source]
How many financially self-sustaining musicians should there be? Streaming has caused the number to fall, but recorded music before that likely made it fall as well.

Should we stop thinking about music as a job and start thinking about it as a hobbyist art form? Nobody is out there lamenting that you can’t make a living off of landscape painting. It’s a fun form of self expression that people will do regardless of the economics, so maybe the problem was ever thinking you could make a profession out of it?

replies(22): >>44408928 #>>44408966 #>>44409045 #>>44409157 #>>44409254 #>>44409270 #>>44409551 #>>44409842 #>>44409919 #>>44410084 #>>44410086 #>>44410122 #>>44410201 #>>44410210 #>>44410229 #>>44410260 #>>44410292 #>>44410623 #>>44410719 #>>44411539 #>>44412762 #>>44421135 #
1. IG_Semmelweiss ◴[] No.44409842[source]
Streaming is only the next step of the ladder, the reality is that ever since recording was possible (then broadcasting, then the internet), music (and most of the arts for that matter) has increasing winner-take all effects, where a minuscule amount of artists reap huge gains, while the rest just scrape by.

Now, with AI, all signs seem to indicate that the industry will finally reset to what was the norm for hundreds of years : Artists would be supported on their craft by patrons and benefactors. Most didn't make it to be wealthy, but at least, they got to enjoy time in their craft.