What Apple pays musicians in 42 countries

What Apple pays musicians in 42 countries


norman lebrecht

May 25, 2016

Fragments of a peanut, that’s what.

A country-by-country survey of one musician’s earnings in Digital Music News is interesting both for the regional variations it shows and for the micro-sums that Apple ekes out to musicians for every stream and download.

How little? Less than one-hundredth of one US cent per i-play.

That’s 10,000 plays for one dollar.

See here.


apple music


  • L.F. says:

    Its really a scandal and kills music. Why does everybody agree to give the rights of recordings to this robbers?

    • Jason says:

      This isn’t all bad. Maybe it will lead to humanistic performance being the highest of artistic expression and less of an emphasis of edited and re-edited recordings to fund careers, in all genres. Everyone complains of the artistic burdens created by perfect recordings, so here we have a chance to knock those down a peg.

      • L.F. says:

        No career in classical music is or can be funded by recordings today.

        And if EVERY musician would refuse to cooperate with these robbers (Spotify, Googleplay, itunes etc) these could lead to a fair remuneration.

      • Anon says:

        Who wants repeated mistakes?
        Live is live. Meaning: now. Musicians and listeners in the very same moment experiencing music together.
        You simply never ever can record that.
        Comes the so called “live recording”, an oxymoron, if there ever was one.

        A recording of a performance in the past, including all the mistakes?
        Same exact mistakes repeated at will anytime?
        If you do a recording, you do it right.

        Live is live, recording is recording. Apples and Oranges.

        Anyway, your idea is irrelevant, the problems of the recording business of today are not between edited vs unedited.

        The problems are between music as art vs music as profit making a commodity.

        • L.F. says:

          I agree that a recording is not performing art and not comparable to a live concert. This does not change the argument.

          A recording is still a product of art like a sculpture or a picture. It can have intrinsic value, listen to the recordings of the Busch quatuor, of Arthur Schnabel or Heifetz. And artists have a right of fair remuneration. Its an unjust anomaly that these works of art can be streamed or downloaded for nothing. And to remedy this there is since twohundred years the instrument of strike. If all musicians would refuse the conditions of Apple, Google, Spotify and other Robbers Inc. one could arrive at a fair payment. But only if ALL participate.

          • Anon says:

            Oh you misunderstood. I never argued that a recording is not art. Of course it is. It’s just different and has different requirements to deliver the art to the recipient than a live performance.