Roger Fingas
During the first half of 2015 Americans streamed some 135 billion audio tracks and music videos over the Internet, despite the absence of any major new services such as Apple Music, according to newly-published data from market research firm Nielsen.
That number was almost double the amount from the first half of 2014, Nielsen said. The streaming tally includes not just dedicated music services such as Spotify, Rdio, and Pandora, but also YouTube, which hosts music videos and has been highlighting them through offerings like its Music Key service, still in beta.
At the same time, 2015 digital downloads dipped 10.4 percent to 531.6 million, and overall album sales fell 4 percent to 116 million.
Apple Music, which launched on Tuesday, may be critical to keeping Apple relevant in the music sphere. The iTunes Store is still the world's most successful music download outlet, but its fortunes have begun to decline as more and more people opt for streaming, which provides access to nearly inexhaustible content.
It remains to be seen how Apple will fare against its chief rival in the streaming space, Spotify. Whereas Spotify offers a free, ad-supported tier in addition to a $10-per-month Premium subscription, Apple has opted to gate all on-demand content behind a $10 monthly fee, leaving only Beats 1 and Apple Music Radio open to everyone. Users do however get three free months of full access.
Spotify is also available on more platforms, whereas Apple Music is currently limited to iOS devices and the Mac and Windows versions of iTunes. It should arrive on Android devices and the Apple TV sometime this fall.
Andrew Orr
Sponsored Content
Wesley Hilliard
Malcolm Owen
Christine McKee
William Gallagher
14 Comments
How is it that Youtube and the other services that ride on its back can stream and cache music unfettered?
[quote name="paxman" url="/t/187054/music-streams-surged-to-135-billion-songs-ahead-of-apple-music-debut#post_2743912"]How is it that Youtube and the other services that ride on its back can stream and cache music unfettered?[/quote] What do you mean by "unfettered"? Is it all that different from Vivo or even some other on-demand music streamers?
[quote name="Gatorguy" url="/t/187054/music-streams-surged-to-135-billion-songs-ahead-of-apple-music-debut#post_2743935"] What do you mean by "unfettered"? Is it all that different from Vivo or even some other on-demand music streamers?[/quote] I don't listen to music on Youtube but my kids do. They also use an app called itube or some such that caches the music and lets them create playlists etc for offline playing. Everything appears to be available. The question is wether YouTube have licensing deals with all the rights holders? I assumed they didn't but I could be wrong, of course.
[quote name="paxman" url="/t/187054/music-streams-surged-to-135-billion-songs-ahead-of-apple-music-debut#post_2743938"] I don't listen to music on Youtube but my kids do. They also use an app called itube or some such that caches the music and lets them create playlists etc for offline playing. Everything appears to be available. The question is wether YouTube have licensing deals with all the rights holders? I assumed they didn't but I could be wrong, of course.[/quote] Yes YouTube pays for play. If you do a simple websearch for "YouTube royalties" you'll find several sources for it. Almost as soon as Google bought them several years ago they put a system in place called ContentID to identify copyrighted music and see that the IP owner was paid each time the content was accessed if the artist/label wanted to allow it's use. If they don't want to Google removes/blocks the content and may even penalize the person uploading it. Vivo now use the same Google software. With that said songwriters get but a pittance from YouTube and other streamers with the labels reaping the vast majority of the revenue.
[quote name="Gatorguy" url="/t/187054/music-streams-surged-to-135-billion-songs-ahead-of-apple-music-debut#post_2743939"] Yes YouTube pays for play. If you do a simple websearch for "YouTube royalties" you'll find several sources for it. Almost as soon as Google bought them several years ago they put a system in place called ContentID to identify copyrighted music and see that the IP owner was paid each time the content was accessed if the artist/label wanted to allow it's use. If they don't want to Google removes/blocks the content and may even penalize the person uploading it. Vivo now use the same Google software. With that said songwriters get but a pittance from YouTube and other streamers with the labels reaping the vast majority of the revenue.[/quote] OK, thanks, I just assumed (Google, and all). I am trying to point my kids towards Apple Music (family plan), but they are resistant to change. The way they listen to music is VERY different than older (20 and up), folks do. I despair.