UMAW Streaming Resources
Section 1:
The Problem with Spotify & Major Streaming Services
When streaming audio entered the US market in 2011, pioneered by Swedish company Spotify and then copied by Apple Music, Amazon Music and others, it avoided existing regulations previously passed by Congress for direct payment to recording musicians from existing digital networks. Currently, Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music and other “interactive” streaming platforms pay $0 directly to recording musicians, unlike prior forms of digital distribution such as satellite radio, internet broadcast, and even “non-interactive” streaming platforms like Pandora, all of which pay recording artists directly via non-profitSoundExchange.
As UMAW began publicizing in 2020 with ourJustice at Spotify campaign, streaming services pay royalties for recordings only to master rights holders – that is, record labels – and those royalties are outrageously low even as the platforms and major labels have made billions from this new system of distribution. Spotify controls the major share of the market and as a result has received the most scrutiny, but the same basic problems apply to all commercial streaming platforms.
Some facts about Spotify and streaming in general:
Spotify’s pay per stream to record labels currently averages $0.0035 [see Liz Pelly, Mood Machine, Chapter 13]
Even if an artist owns their masters, does not work with a record label or manager, is solo and owes no other musicians any share of their recording income, and therefore receives 100% of the per stream $0.0035 paid by Spotify for use of their recordings, it would take 714,286 monthly streams on Spotify to earn $15/hour living minimum wage. (In practice, musicians typically do not work entirely alone and generally share master rights with others, making even this calculation unrealistically high.)
Streaming currently represents 84% of all recorded music income in the US,according to the RIAA. There are hardly any income streams left for recordings outside of streaming.
In 2024, Spotify unilaterally decided to no longer account for any royalties to tracks that receive less than 1,000 streams per year.According to Luminate, this means that in 2025, 88% of all tracks on Spotify were demonetized and received no master rights payments.
These problems with streaming have created a crisis for working artists, who have been shut out from the benefits of this new technology even as they supply all its crucial content.
Rate per stream is declining while Spotify's revenue grows. Update current per-stream rate is $0.0035
ARPU continues to fall — streaming devalues music as a commodity. In 2024 it was $5.08
Algorithmic curation and Discovery Mode as modern payola — artists pay for visibility with lower royalties.
Spotify's legal battles against the CRB to reduce songwriter mechanical royalty rates.
The Living Wage calculation: at $15/hr, how many monthly Spotify streams does one band member need? 714,286
Section 2:
Digital Music Alternatives
Disclaimer: The platforms and projects listed here are some alternatives to Spotify and other major streaming services. UMAW does not endorse any digital music providers, and has not verified all of the business practices of the companies and projects listed here. If you’d like to add another alternative digital music resource, please email admin@weareumaw.org.
Digital Music Alternatives
Ampwall - E-commerce platform. Free to use, but asks for a $10/year contribution to cover operating costs.
Bandcamp - E-commerce platform for independent music. Artists and labels receive 80–85% of sales after payment processing fees. Does not pay for streams — revenue comes from direct purchases. 10–15% revenue share on digital items, 10% on physical goods. Daily payouts.
Mirlo - Artist storefront with a cooperative model. Artists choose how to price their music and how much of each sale goes to Mirlo. Default platform fee is 10%, but artists can adjust this down to 0%.
Campfire - 501(c)(3) nonprofit building a public-benefit streaming platform to reform artist compensation and support local music discovery. User-centric subscription model. 20% for operations with no profit incentive; the rest goes to rights holders. Only artist rights-holders or independent labels accepted — no major labels or publishers.SubvertCooperative digital download marketplace
Catalytic Sound - Music-based cooperative designed to create economic sustainability for its artists through patron support. 50% of listener spending goes directly to musicians.
Qobuz - Hi-res streaming platform. $11/month for users. Pays approximately $0.01873 per stream — significantly higher than Spotify. Commercial company.
SoundCloud - Audio distribution and sharing platform with user-centric payouts on Premier, Repost, and Repost Select tiers. VC-backed commercial platform. Fan-powered royalties model is an improvement but company structure remains conventional.-
Coda Music - Streaming platform claiming to pay 10x more than Spotify.
Local and Public Streaming Services
Below are publicly funded and library-backed platforms that provide free or low-cost access to curated local music collections. Most operate through MUSICat / Rabble. If you don’t see your city here, contact your local library and encourage them to create one!
Appleton, WI - FlipSide
Austin, TX - Electric Lady Bird
Baton Rouge, LA - Red Stick Rhythms
Chapel Hill, NC - Tracks Music Library
Davenport, IA - QC Beats
Eau Claire, WI - Sawdust City Sounds
Edmonton, AB - Capital City Records
Fort Worth, TX - Amplify817
Grand Rapids, MI - Vibes
Hartford, CT - The Beat
Huntsville, AL - Blast
Lawrence, KS - Kaw Valley Jukebox
Memphis, TN - Memphis Sound Connection
Minneapolis, MN - MNSpin
Nashville, TX - Boombox
Pittsburgh, PA - STACKS
Portland, OR - Multnomah County Library Music Project
New Orleans, LA - Crescent City Sounds
Salt Lake City, UT - Hear Utah Music
San Francisco, CA - Bay Beats
Seattle, WA - Playback
Shreveport, LA - Logjam
Spokane, WA - Lilac City Records
Traverse City, MI - Waves
Tucson, AZ - Desert Streams
Section 3:
Academic Articles, Further Readings & Bookshelf
Combined from the existing "Readings on the Streaming Economy" and "Bookshelf" sections into one unified resource.
Articles & Reports
Unwrapping Spotify: Profiting from Apartheid, Genocide, and Racist Deportations - BDS Movement
Socialized Streaming: A Case For Universal Music Access — Real Life Magazine
Islands in the Stream — The American Prospect, on Spotify/YouTube monopoly
Spotify Artist Payments Are Declining (2017) — Digital Music News
Musicians want streamers to pay a living wage. Can this bill make that happen? - Fast Company
Tlaib Introduces Living Wage for Musicians Act - Rashida Tlaib
Spotify faces fresh lawsuit over Discovery Mode tool - Resident Advisor
Spotify and Other Streaming Services Propose 'Lowest Royalty Rates in History' for Artists.” Music Business Worldwide, October 15, 2021.
NYC Council Passes Resolution Supporting Higher Pay for Artists on Streaming Services - Resident Advisor
“Is Spotify’s model wiping out music’s middle class?” The Ringer. Luckerson, Victor.
Academic essays:
Dimont, Joseph. "Royalty Inequity: Why Music Streaming Services Should Switch to a Per-Subscriber Model." UC Law Journal 69, no. 1 (2017): 247-272.
Hesmondhalgh, David. "Is Music Streaming Bad for Musicians? Problems of Evidence and Argument." New Media & Society 23, no. 12 (December 2021): 3593-3615.
Hesmondhalgh, David. "Streaming's Effects on Music Culture: Old Anxieties and New Simplifications." Cultural Sociology 16, no. 1 (2022): 3-24.
Hogan, Molly. "The Upstream Effects of the Streaming Revolution: A Look into the Law and Economics of a Spotify-Dominated Industry." Colorado Technology Law Journal 14, no. 1 (2015): 131-152.
Jacques, Sabine, and Mathew Flynn. "Protecting Human Creativity in AI-Generated Music with the Introduction of an AI-Royalty Fund." GRUR International 73, no. 12 (December 2024): 1137-1149.
Jansson, André. "Beyond the Platform: Music Streaming as a Site of Logistical and Symbolic Struggle." New Media & Society 25, no. 6 (August 2021): 1402-1419.
Kaye, D. Bondy Valdovinos. "Renting Royalties: How the Assetization of Music Copyrights Contributes to Inequality for Musicians." Media, Culture & Society (2025).
Lee, Sanghwa, and Robert Prey. "The Labor Process of Relational Labor: The Case of the K-Pop Fan Platform 'Bubble'." Popular Music and Society 48, no. 4 (2025): 416-436.
Osborne, Richard. "Songwriters vs. the Recording Industry: The Use and Abuse of Statistics in UK Streaming Debates." Popular Music 42, no. 3 (2023): 246-266.
Pastukhov, Dmitry. "What Music Streaming Services Pay Per-Stream (And Why It Actually Doesn't Matter)." Soundcharts (blog), June 26, 2019.
Peksan, Selcan. "To Be Heard or Not to Be Heard: Precarity in the Lives of Turkish Musicians in Paris and Istanbul." International Sociology (2025).
Pelly, Liz. "The Ghosts in the Machine." Harper's Magazine, January 2025.
Prey, Robert. "Locating Power in Platformization: Music Streaming Playlists and Curatorial Power." Social Media + Society 6, no. 2 (April 2020): 1-11.
Prey, Robert, and Seonok Lee. "A Global Approach to Studying Platforms and Cultural Production." International Journal of Cultural Studies 28, no. 1 (2025): 30-38.
Sakakeeny, Matt. "Playing for Work: Music as a Form of Labor in New Orleans." In The Oxford Handbook Topics in Music. Oxford University Press, 2014.
Thomes, Tim Paul. "An Economic Analysis of Online Streaming Music Services." Information Economics and Policy 25, no. 2 (2013): 81-91.
Thomson, Kristin. "Roles, Revenue, and Responsibilities: The Changing Nature of Being a Working Musician." Work and Occupations 40, no. 4 (November 2013): 514-525.
Thomson, Kristin, and Jean Cook. "Artist Revenue Streams: A Multi-Method Research Project Examining Changes in Musicians' Sources of Income." Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, October 2010.
Tofalvy, Tamas, and Júlia Koltai. "'Splendid Isolation': The Reproduction of Music Industry Inequalities in Spotify's Recommendation System." New Media & Society 25, no. 7 (July 2021): 1580-1604.
Books
Mood Machine - Liz Pelly
Streaming Music, Streaming Capital - Eric Drott
Spotify Teardown — Eriksson, Fleischer, Johansson, Snickars & Vonderau (MIT Press)
The People's Platform — Astra Taylor (Macmillan)
Section 4:
Call to Action
Primary: Join UMAW & Support the LWFMA
The primary call to action directs visitors to join UMAW and take action in support of the Living Wage for Musicians Act (LWFMA). This is the most impactful action a visitor can take.
Suggested CTA: "Join UMAW and fight for a living wage for musicians."
Secondary: Switch to Alternatives & Organize Locally
Encourage visitors to pursue alternative streaming platforms and get involved with mission-aligned music organizing efforts in their city.
Suggested CTA: "Switch your streaming. Support your local music community. Get organized."
Editorial Note: Consider linking to local UMAW chapters or a directory of mission-aligned music organizing groups. Could also link back up to Section 2 for specific platform recommendations.