Complete absence of ECM recordings unacceptable

[akira]

I am a paying subscriber and am on the whole very pleased with the offering in most genres (clasical, country, folk, pop) and the quality is pretty good too. But as the header saysI am very unhappy with thecomplete absence of the ECM label. That just will not do. Please do something about this!

[John_Farrow]

You express that very well.

It's a great shame for music-lovers that ECM artists are not on Spotify. More people might discover them by chance.

But at the end of the day, it's their label and their choice.

[agn53]

I just would like to point out that the full ECM catalog of records is available on Google Music.
As it is also a streaming service from a big enterprise I can only think that ECM is coming very soon also to Spotify or there is some kind of reason to prevent this to hapen. 

[Marty15a]

Yes, I'm sure there's "some kind of reason", but I doubt it's mysterious. For example, the fact that Google Play apparently pays out 9x what Spotify does might have something to do with Eicher's reasoning... http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2014/02/21/favoritepays

---

@agn53 wrote:

As it is also a streaming service from a big enterprise I can only think that ECM is coming very soon also to Spotify or there is some kind of reason to prevent this to hapen. 

---

[tygersofwrath]

It sounds to me like ECM are seriously dragging their heels and are in real danger of going out of business if they don't move with the times. Spotify is here to stay and the sooner they realise that the better.

ECM have been around now for over 45 years they aren't going anywhere, don't forget this is the label that released a 10 LP box set of a relatively unknown pianist back in 1976. Thing is that spotify is mostly geared up for playing random tracks, and that isn't the ECM experience. You need to listen to a full album from start to finish. Jump into a random Rypdal track and it might well be something from the middle of "Melodic Warrior". What's the point of listening to one track from Life in Leipzig? This stuff needs your attention for 45-70 minutes.

I have well over 200 ECM albums. Regardless as to whether it is Tunisian oud, Norwegian folk, a fusion of modern electronic with 14th century early music. or piano and vibraphone I don't regret buying any one of them.

[Marty15a]

---

@tygersofwrath wrote:

Thing is that spotify is mostly geared up for playing random tracks, and that isn't the ECM experience.

---

All streaming services put this use case first, not just Spotify. Most people, not just the services they stream their music on, actually only care about hits, not albums. Moreover, Eicher seems to have no problem putting his tracks on other streaming services, so "I won't put my recordings up there because most people don't play the whole album" is unlikely to be his reasoning.

While I sympathize with Eicher's position in any negotiations with Spotify, ultimately he is going to have to face the reality that younger listeners are just not going to put up with shelling out $18 for every CD he releases. While he might be doing OK now (probably thanks to the older demographic that discovered him 30 years ago), it is foolhardy to assume that this will last forever. Something's gotta give.

[tygersofwrath]

Well Eicher's well into his 70s now so perhaps he doesn't care. Though when I saw him last year he was looking pretty fit.

Dunno, I connected with the label some 35 years ago and I can't get on with track jumping (in any genre). Fads change, and even vinyl is coming back into fashion. I see people with 1000s of 'played' artists on some sites. That seems to be little more than just sampling, how do you get a line on an artist having just listened to one or two tracks? One might just be playing some genre station in the background.

As for $18 for a CD, that ain't a great amount of money. What is 4 or 5 Lattes at starbucks? And a whole bunch are half that price on the Amazon Market place. If I think back the price of a CD was about $15 30 years ago.

[DannyFL]

I personally don't like buying an entire album for me to only like one or two songs in it... It may just be me, but I usually don't like any one album in it's entirety. So for me to pay $18 for two songs is a bit expensive. Now if you just absolutely LOVE an album, I would say that $10 on Amazon is fairly reasonable.

[Marty15a]

---

@tygersofwrath wrote:

As for $18 for a CD, that ain't a great amount of money. What is 4 or 5 Lattes at starbucks? And a whole bunch are half that price on the Amazon Market place. If I think back the price of a CD was about $15 30 years ago.

---

For $120 - thats the price of 7 CDs at full price - I can get an entire year of Spotify Premium or Google Play or Rdio Unlimited or whatever. There are in the ballpark of 3 or 4 million albums on these services, and I can listen to them on my phone anywhere I want. When Spotify launched, my average music spending went from $500-1000 per year to nearly zero. It just stopped making sense to take flyers on CDs for that kind of money when there were literaly thousands of things to discover that I hadn't bought in the past due to budget constraints.

Maybe that basic math somehow doesn't pose an existential threat to the business of guys like Eicher, because pointy-headed types will still think it's worth it to keep on supporting them with their loyal $18 CD purchases to get stuff they can't get on streaming services. 

But I doubt it.

That might be bad for the future production of quality art music. That might not be fair. We can shake our fists at kids -and trust me when I say that at least 98% of people under 35 have this attitude - who think it's ludicrous to keep sinking that kind of money into recorded music purchases. But that's not going to make them go away.

[tygersofwrath]

We can shake our fists at kids -and trust me when I say that at least 98% of people under 35 have this attitude - who think it's ludicrous to keep sinking that kind of money into recorded music purchases. But that's not going to make them go away.

And those same kids, listing on phones with $10 earbuds, complain that the current music is crap manufactured **bleep**e. Meanwhile many of them are 'discovering' the groups of the 60s, 70s, and 80s bands, and lets face it there is more stuff there than any one person can ever consume. I recall that back in the 1930s when the land was plundered with little regard for future d the result was the devastation of the land with 75% of the topsoil blown away.

Personally there are some 2000 ECM recordings I've not listened to, and 1000s of recording from the 70s too. Perhaps music has run its course and there is no more to be recorded, certainly if I listen to modern pop its pretty dire. Hardly anything gives brings you up short or gives you goosebumps. Its sad in a way.

Earlier I played "Tribute to Jack Johnston" how would that work as streaming?

[Marty15a]

---

@tygersofwrath wrote:

And those same kids, listing on phones with $10 earbuds, complain that the current music is crap manufactured **bleep**e. Meanwhile many of them are 'discovering' the groups of the 60s, 70s, and 80s bands, and lets face it there is more stuff there than any one person can ever consume.

---

Hmmm, which is more likely?

a) that kids are, en masse, intentionally torturing themselves by listening to music they hate with sound quality they consider terrible - but they keep on doing it

b) that this, in fact, is how kids enjoy listening to music and they are mostly perfectly content with inexpensive, lo-fi equipment and product put out by major labels.

Yes, most of that product is not stuff I prefer to listen to. What I prefer to listen to is wholly irrelevant to the question of whether a label like ECM can hope to attract new listeners in the streaming age and stay viable, or whether it is doomed as soon as its core customer base - people who are OK with shelling out cash for CDs in the year 2015 - starts entering nursing homes.

How would Jack Johnson "work" as streaming? Uhh, the same way any other record "works" as streaming. Step 1: Find album in Spotify. Step 2: Double-click "Right Off." Step 3: Enjoy "Right Off" and "Yesternow"  for 40 minutes. Perhaps you are confusing Spotify with Pandora?

[tygersofwrath]

ECM probably isn't going to attract the kids listening to the 3 minute pop song, it is a differrent audience altogether. Even at the level of the 3 minute pop song, how many of those that made it in the last few years will be the classics for the next generation? Why are so many kids returning to listen to groups like Creedence Clearwater Revival, Neil Young, Derek and the Dominoes, the Fall, Blur? Its like if people growing up in the 80s were all going back to listen to Perry Como. Alternatively they are listening to Japanese boy and girl bands. Highly manufactured stuff but with added cultural difference. The number of 70s and 80s tribute bands that are doinbg the circuits is astounding. Some incredibly talented musicians but there is no market of their own stuff. I'll be seeing some one next week who hasn't put out an album in almost 10 years, he says what's the point everyone wants to hear the old stuff and no one is buying new works anymore.

Streaming makes money for people that have a large back catalog so the labels can pickup money by the accumulated scraping of pennies of 100000s of tracks played a few times each. An individual artist isn't going to see much income at all, streaming doesn't work for them.

ECM may well be a niche market, but everything is going that way, you're going to end up with something like cable TV: 1000s of low budget offerings where YTs "Charlie bit my finger" gets to compete in teh 90 seconds slot.

ECM has always been about creating concepts, and events. Siwan, Officium, Koln Concert, Life in Leipzig, Astounding Eyes of Rita, Crystal Silence and 100s of others. This only works at the level of track streaming in a very diminished form. Perhaps there will eventually become a day where what ECM does is irrelevant. As I said yesterday I have another 2000 ECM CDs to get through which almost certainly see me out if I listen to nothing else. But its kind of sad.

[agn53]

I'm not a kid looking for 3 minute streams. I like to hear albuns, I love ECM. Have some stuff by ECM that I bought a few years back, vinyl mostly. I can hear ECM in Google Music and in TIdal. I can't do that in Spotify. So the conclusion and the choice is simple for me. Although there are many things that are better in Spotify than on the other services. You really can't have it all...

[ieaarva]

I am 54 and listening on $1200 earbuds.
Thx anyway.
IVer

[Marty15a]

@tygersofwrath wrote:

ECM probably isn't going to attract the kids listening to the 3 minute pop song, it is a differrent audience altogether. Even at the level of the 3 minute pop song, how many of those that made it in the last few years will be the classics for the next generation? Why are so many kids returning to listen to groups like Creedence Clearwater Revival, Neil Young, Derek and the Dominoes, the Fall, Blur? Its like if people growing up in the 80s were all going back to listen to Perry Como. Alternatively they are listening to Japanese boy and girl bands. Highly manufactured stuff but with added cultural difference. The number of 70s and 80s tribute bands that are doinbg the circuits is astounding. Some incredibly talented musicians but there is no market of their own stuff. 

---

This is crazy talk. I have no clue whatsoever why you think young people are flocking to CCR, Neil Young et al. Yes, there is a (very) small percentage of younger people who are classic rock fans who like these artists. Yes, they will occasionally check out Neil Young when he is playing at a festival with 10-20 other bands. No, they are not, generally, scarfing up every old Clapton LP they can find. Do you seriously think the tribute band circuit is driven by young people?!? The audience for these groups are almost always those who were young when the original versions were recorded.

The assertion about young people going crazy for J-pop is if anything even more bizarre. I'm sure there is a tiny subculture of Westerners who like J-pop. Emphasis on tiny. I honestly can't tell if you're just pulling our collective leg, or if you saw something like the "J-pop America Fun Time Now" sketch on SNL and read wayyyyyyyyy too much into it.

[DannyFL]

I think you are right @Marty15a!

[timw26]

Still no ECM how can we get spotify to do something

[Marty15a]

I suppose you could try emailing Spotify support and expressing your displeasure. 

But I doubt it will help much. Ultimately, it comes down to Spotify not really caring about losing the likes of Eicher as a partner. ECM puts out great music, but Spotify's bean counters don't care how great their partners' music is. They care about how many plays their partners' tracks get. ECM's audience is small when compared to more famous "jazz" artists and infinitesimally tiny when compared to whatever is playing on top-40 radio. Eicher has decided that Spotify pays so little that it's not worth it to him to put his catalog there, but he is so small and insignificant to Spotify's business that he has no leverage over Spotify to get them to modify their usual deal terms (they likely refuse to be flexible with their standard payouts for everyone except the most popular artists).

So we, the listeners, are stuck unless Eicher has a change of heart, Spotify amps up its payouts to everyone while taking the hit to its profits, or Spotify manages somehow to charge its subscribers and advertisers more so it can increase payouts without having to take a hit..

[steviemess]

You know what!!??? The answer is to change to Google Play!! There is a large selection of ECM records on there including new releases. Just listened to Gary Peacock's new album and subsequently brought the CD. I recall that someone in this forum did mention this some time ago. From what I can see Google offers virtually the same amount of artists as Spotify but has the added and best bonus of having ECM on there!!! Guess we will never know if it was ECM that didn't want Spotify or vice versa!!! Happy listening!!

[tygersofwrath]

Google play pays a fraction of the royalties that spotify pay. The reason the catalog might be on Google Play is the protection racket that Google pulled on independent labels and artist:

If you don't allow your stuff on Google Play we will pull your official channels from YouTube won't allow you to get any ad revenue, but allow others to post your stuff on YT

http://zoekeating.tumblr.com/post/108898194009/what-should-i-do-about-youtube

[Marty15a]

False, unless you are somehow pulling some definitional shenanigans between "royalties" and "payouts." Google Play Music is reputed to pay approximately 8.8x what Spotify pays per stream:

http://thetrichordist.com/2014/03/11/streaming-price-index-now-with-youtube-pay-rates-sxsw-sxsw/  

Zoe Keating's blog post has nothing to do with streaming rates on Google Play Music, where ECM is available. It's about payouts on YouTube, which are known to be lower. Those lower payouts may or may not be for good reasons (for instance, maybe Google knows people's listening patterns are different on YouTube videos), but again, YouTube is totally irrelevant to a discussion of why Manfred Eicher isn't on Spotify. It appears that you posted without understanding the differences between Google's web properties.