The music industry is dying slowly, and many may not know it. Music has always held immense value, not just as entertainment but as a form of cultural identity and a timepiece that helps us remember the good times throughout life’s journey. It’s an industry where individuals have poured their souls into entertaining others, using their creative genius to write, produce, and perform, all in hopes of turning their love of music into a sustainable career. With today’s technological advancements, people now have more opportunities than ever to share their dreams and contribute to the music industry. But is this increased accessibility also causing the value of music to decline, ushering in the era of the starving artist more clearly than ever before?
Technology and music have been at odds for decades. If you’re old enough to remember MP3.com, LimeWire, Napster, and the upload revolution of the late ’90s and early 2000s, then you witnessed the first wave of people freely sharing and uploading music. Naturally, the industry took notice. What began as piracy soon evolved into boardroom conversations, leading to the creation of streaming platforms. These platforms offered the dream: unlimited music at your fingertips on a portable device, now commonly the smartphone. While consumers celebrated this convenience, artists began to suffer. As we enter a new technological era, the real-time decline in the appreciation of music becomes more apparent. But how exactly has streaming hurt artists? Let’s examine what has happened to music industry profits in the streaming age.
The music industry has created immense wealth over generations. The executives running it are rich beyond imagination, and even some artists have profited immensely. Many people still chase the dream of becoming wealthy through music, but today’s social media has skewed public perception, making it seem more accessible than it actually is. Behind the curtain, the industry is suffering financially, especially when it comes to fair payouts for artists. The first major issue lies in the value of a song or album.
As of 2025, artist payouts are alarmingly low. Streams are worth fractions of a penny, based on a complex and often vague royalty payout system. Here’s a general overview of estimated per-stream payouts from major platforms (as of early 2025):
- Tidal: $0.012 to $0.019 per stream (among the highest)
- Apple Music: $0.007 to $0.01 per stream
- Deezer: $0.0064 to $0.01143 per stream
- Amazon Music: $0.004 to $0.0088 per stream
- Spotify: $0.003 to $0.005 per stream
- YouTube Music: $0.00069 to $0.00449 per stream
- Pandora: $0.0013 to $0.00235 per stream
The issue is clear: how can an artist earn a livable wage through streaming alone? Several factors influence payout amounts:
- Platform Revenue Model: Paid subscriptions yield higher payouts than free, ad-supported tiers.
- Artist Agreement: Record deals and distribution contracts impact how much artists actually keep. Independent artists may earn more per stream but lack marketing power.
- Listener Location: Streams from wealthier countries (e.g., U.S., U.K.) generally pay more.
- Subscription Type: Premium users contribute more than free listeners.
- Payout Model: Most services use a market-share model; some are exploring a user-centric model.
- Promotional Trade-offs: Artists may sacrifice higher royalties for greater visibility.
- Minimum Thresholds: Platforms like Spotify now require a minimum number of annual streams for a track to qualify for royalties.
Despite these rules, the owners of streaming platforms rake in over $20 billion collectively, while both mainstream and independent artists take home mere pennies. Some well-known artists have renegotiated their contracts to include streaming royalties. Others, like Ryan Leslie, have pulled their music off platforms altogether due to low pay. Snoop Dogg and Redman have publicly criticized the system as well.
In New Jersey, the annual livable wage for a single adult in 2025 is $54,503. To earn that solely from Spotify, for instance, an independent artist would need approximately 13.6 million streams per year, or over 37,000 streams per day. If artists like Nas and Jay-Z struggle under these terms, what chance does an emerging artist have?
Streaming has also led to oversaturation in the market. Anyone can upload music, regardless of quality, making it harder for exceptional work to stand out. Albums are no longer eagerly anticipated and cherished; instead, music is consumed on the go, with attention spans shortened by endless content. The art of sitting down to enjoy an album has largely vanished. Today, music is treated less like a respected art form and more like a disposable commodity—quick to consume and easy to forget.
Can the industry bounce back? That depends on the artists and their commitment to their craft. Many claim to be artists, but only a few take the steps to become professionals. Some simply enjoy local fame or chase a quick bag, often without the drive to take their art to the next level. Without value placed on the art itself, the starving artist will continue to be the industry standard.
An industry insider once said, “New artists aren’t valuable unless they die—death helps them recoup their budget. Older music has more value because of nostalgia.” If that’s true, today’s emerging artists may have little value in this AI-driven future. Wu-Tang Clan once sold an album for $1 million. Mach-Hommy sold copies of The G.A.T. for $5,000 each. The question is: What will you do to make your music valuable? Are you willing to put in the work, defy the odds, and build a career in an industry that seems to be fading?
