Where Does Your Money Go?你花的钱去哪儿了？

马克·萨瑟兰 译/孟洁冰

The Real Cost of Music Streaming

音樂流媒体的真正成本

In the past decade， streaming has become synonymous with music fandom and consumption. But commercially it’s still an unequal playing field， to the detriment of our favourite rock bands…

For a music fan， streaming services are a dream. For around £9.99 a month， you gain access to pretty much every song and album ever released， from the latest releases to the absolute classics.

But， for an increasing number of artists， streaming has become more of a nightmare. Because， while you pay a tenner1 to listen to your favourite bands， only a fraction of that money filters through to those artists. And， with live music still on hiatus2 thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic， it’s left many musicians on the brink3.

“I’m watching so many bands around us getting part-time jobs at the moment，” says While She Sleeps guitarist Mat Welsh. ​“Many of them won’t go back into music as a full-time career， it’ll turn into something they do on the side. Streaming is an incredible thing. It’s like an infinite record store—pay £10 to get in and you can have whatever you want. It’s also a brilliant marketing platform for you to gain an audience… but that’s not translating into a sustainable income.”

Protests about streaming royalty rates are nothing new： artists have grumbled4 about them ever since Spotify launched in the UK in 2009， as the payments compared badly to those received during the physical era. Some artists have criticised Spotify in particular （the company is now valued at over $60 billion on the U.S. stock exchange， despite not yet turning a profit）， while others say that outdated record deals， often signed with labels before streaming became the dominant format， are to blame.

But， either way， with bands unable to make money on the road since the first lockdown a year ago， the complaints have been galvanised5 via online campaigns such as #BrokenRecord and #FixStreaming—and are now even being heard in the corridors of power6.

At the moment， everyone’s monthly tenner goes into a huge pot. After the streaming service， VAT， the record label， the music publisher and the songwriters take their cuts， research from trade body BPI （British Phonographic Industry） shows around £1.33 filters through to the artists. But that has to be split， according to market share， between every artist streamed that month—from your favourite underground grind band to the biggest names in music.

This system undoubtedly works well for those with large catalogues of songs that are streamed millions， or even billions of times： the major labels and huge pop/hip-hop acts that regularly drop new singles. But some say rock and metal bands， which still rely heavily on the album format and release music less often， are naturally disadvantaged.

Indeed， rock streaming is dominated by classic tracks by bands such as AC/DC， Linkin Park and Green Day， and its overall numbers are dwarfed by other genres， with many rock fans still preferring to buy a physical album.

Still， some artists are happy with the current system—Jon Bon Jovi recently said the value of his catalogue had doubled thanks to streaming. Meanwhile， Bring Me The Horizon—whose latest EP， Post Human： Survival Horror was initially only released on digital platforms—are one of the few contemporary acts to have streaming hits and be featured on mainstream playlists such as Spotify’s Hot Hits UK， usually a no-go zone for heavier bands.

“Streaming is a massively important tool for rock acts，” stresses Horizon’s co-manager， Craig Jennings of Raw Power Management， which also looks after acts including Bullet For My Valentine and Don Broco. ?“I always say to our bands， ​‘Look， the more monthly listeners you get on Spotify， the more people are going to look to buy a gig ticket， a piece of merch7 or a physical product where you get paid better for it.’ There have never been more places to hear bands’ music， but what we want is to get some sort of parity between all those people listening to the music， and getting paid properly for it.”

The importance of streaming means many bands are reluctant to rock the boat， but it’s particularly tough for acts with small but loyal fanbases. Take Palm Reader. The band had one of the most acclaimed albums of last year with Sleepless， which has racked up around 750，000 streams across the different platforms.

“That’s pretty good for a small band on an indie label，” says guitarist Andy Gillan. ​“But it adds up to no money at all. Streaming definitely benefits music that is instantly accessible， instantly recognisable and can be consumed in very large quantities for a short period of time and then it’s gone.”

Perhaps the most popular potential solution， at least amongst artists， is a move to ​‘user-centric’ payments. Under user-centric， your subscription money would be distributed amongst the artists you actually listen to each month. Whereas， at the moment， even if you only play black metal 24/7， Justin Bieber will still get a slice of your £9.99.

Streaming service SoundCloud recently announced it would move to such a system， although only for the 100，000-odd DIY artists with which it has a direct commercial relationship， where no labels are involved. And that seems to be a crucial caveat—another， more mainstream platform， Deezer （also one of the more rock-friendly services）， has been trying to bring in a user-centric trial for years， but has so far been unable to convince all of the labels to agree.

Whether they do that voluntarily， or have their hand forced by government， remains to be seen. But after a long， hard campaign， many are optimistic that the artists’ dream of a new streaming paradise—or， at least， a fairer payday—may yet become a reality.

过去十年，流媒体成了音乐粉丝圈和音乐消费的代名词。但是从商业角度来看，这个行业仍然缺少公平的竞争环境，损害了我们喜爱的摇滚乐队的利益……

对音乐迷来说，流媒体服务就像是美梦成真。每月只要花大约9.99英镑，就能欣赏有史以来发行的几乎所有歌曲和专辑，无论是最新版本还是传世经典。

不过，对越来越多的艺人来说，流媒体已变得更像是一场噩梦。因为，尽管粉丝花10英镑听自己喜欢的乐队的作品，可是只有很少一部分的钱会分给这些艺人。而且，由于新冠疫情的影响，现场音乐表演仍然暂时中断，这让许多音乐人陷入困境。

“我注意到周围很多乐队目前都在找兼职。”沉睡伊人乐队的吉他手马特·韦尔什说，“许多人不会再把音乐作为全职工作，而是当作副业。流媒体是不可思议的平台，像是一家不限量供应的唱片行——只要花10英镑进来，你就能听到想听的任何音乐。这也是个出色的营销平台，可以让你吸引听众……但是不能转化成可持续的收入。”

对流媒体版税率的抱怨不是什么新鲜事：2009年Spotify在英国上线以来，艺人就对此颇有怨言，因为相比实体唱片时代收到的费用，流媒体收入少得可怜。有些艺人尤其把矛头对准了Spotify（该公司目前在美国证券交易所的估值超过600亿美元，不过还未实现赢利），而其他艺人表示，不合时宜的唱片合约才是罪魁祸首，这些合约通常是在流媒体成为主要音乐形式前与唱片公司签署的。

但无论如何，由于从一年前首次因疫情实施封锁以来，乐队就无法举行巡回演出赚钱，这些抱怨通过 #BrokenRecord和 #FixStreaming等线上活动激起强烈反响，如今就连政府高层也有耳闻。

目前，每位用户每个月支付的10英镑汇入巨大的资金池。行业组织英国唱片业协会的研究表明，在扣除流媒体服务、增值税、唱片公司、音乐出版商和词曲作者提取的费用后，大约有1.33英镑分到艺人手中。不过这笔钱还要按照市场份额，分配给当月有播放量的每位艺人，包括你喜欢的地下辗核乐队和音乐界大牌明星。

毫无疑问，这个体系非常适合那些拥有大量歌单、播放量达到数百万甚至数十亿次的出品方：各大唱片公司和经常推出新单曲的大牌流行音乐或嘻哈音乐艺人。但有人表示，摇滚乐队和金属乐队依然严重依赖专辑形式，不经常發行音乐作品，自然处于劣势地位。

事实上，流媒体播放的摇滚乐以AC/DC、林肯公园和绿日等乐队的经典曲目为主，相比其他音乐类型，总体播放量要少得多，许多摇滚乐迷仍然更愿意购买实体专辑。

尽管如此，一些艺人对目前的体系还是感到满意：乔恩·邦·乔维最近说，多亏了流媒体，他的曲目价值翻了一番。与此同时，飞越地平线乐队（该乐队的最新迷你专辑《后人类：生存恐怖》最初只在数字平台上发行）是为数不多拥有流媒体流行单曲、登上Spotify的“英国热门金曲”等主流排行榜的当代乐队，而主流排行榜通常是重摇滚乐队的禁区。

“流媒体对摇滚乐队来说是非常重要的平台。”飞越地平线乐队的联合经纪人、原力管理公司（该公司还拥有致命情人和唐伯寇等乐队）的克雷格·詹宁斯着重指出，“我总是对我们的乐队说，‘听着，你们每个月在Spotify上吸引的听众越多，打算购买演出门票、周边商品或实体产品的人就越多，这样你们才能获得更高的报酬’。从来没有这么多平台可以听摇滚乐队的音乐，而我们想要的就是得到所有摇滚乐听众的公平对待，获得合理的报酬。”

流媒体的重要地位意味着许多乐队不愿意打破现状，但是对于只拥有少数忠实拥趸的乐队来说，处境尤为艰难。以Palm Reader乐队为例，这支乐队发行的《不眠》是去年口碑最好的专辑之一，该专辑在不同平台的播放量累计约有75万次。

“这对独立厂牌的小乐队来说相当不错，”吉他手安迪·吉兰说，“可是结果根本没有赚到钱。流媒体绝对有利于那些极易获取、极具辨识度的音乐，可以在短时间内大量消费，然后就消失不见了。”

也许最受欢迎（至少深受艺人欢迎）的潜在解决方案是转而采用“以用户为中心”的付款方式。按照以用户为中心的模式，粉丝每个月实际上听过哪些艺人的歌曲，订阅费就分配给这些艺人。然而目前的模式是，即使粉丝每周7天、每天24小时只听黑金属，贾斯汀·比伯仍然要从那些粉丝支付的9.99英镑中分一杯羹。

流媒体服务SoundCloud最近宣布将采用这种分配体系，不过仅针对与该平台有直接商业关系的10万多名独立艺人，不涉及任何唱片公司。这似乎是个重要提醒——另一个更主流的平台Deezer（也是对摇滚乐比较友好的流媒体服务）多年来一直尝试引入以用户为中心的模式，但到目前为止还无法说服所有的唱片公司同意。

这些流媒体平台究竟是自愿采取行动，还是迫于政府施加的压力，仍有待观察。但经过艰难持久的斗争，许多人乐观地认为，艺人梦想中的全新流媒体天堂（至少是更公平的薪酬体系）总有一天会成为现实。□

（译者为“《英语世界》杯”翻译大赛获奖者）