Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by yason 251 days ago
> Why would the former pay obscure artists more?

I don't want the obscure artists to get more ― or less, for that matter. I want the artists I listen to to get my money, obscure or not. That's a simple transaction and has worked forever. If I buy a CD from artist X, I know I won't be supporting artist Y with my money, just X. If I then want to listen to Y, I can support them as well. But in any case Z won't be getting any of my money because they make noises I don't consider music.
2 comments
Gigachad 251 days ago
Money is fungible. Where “your” money went means nothing, just what the final payout the artist got at the end of the month.

It doesn’t seem obvious that smaller artists have audiences who stream music less than listeners to Taylor swift. Because that’s the only way the current system might rip people off.

link
BrenBarn 251 days ago
> If I buy a CD from artist X, I know I won't be supporting artist Y with my money, just X.

That's not entirely true, since by buying X's CD you're also giving money to the label/publisher of that CD, who may be allocating that money to Y if Y is also one of their artists. However, overall I agree that the buy-a-CD model makes it more clear where your money is going.

link