Former Twitch employee here. The labels will take a pretty high cut of revenue - I've heard something in the range of 30-50% - leaving the DJ with 25% (on the high end) after splitting it 50/50 with Twitch. Deduct tax and payment processing fees, this effectively would leave the DJ with ~20% of their current earnings. So the DJ would get 99 cents out of a $4.99 (US) sub.
Additionally, Twitch isn't providing any features to help DJ creators make up for this loss in earnings, so this is effectively just a way for Twitch to avoid DMCA lawsuits while making it easier for DJs to stream.
Twitch is softening the earnings (and PR) blow by absorbing the costs for one year, after which DJ creators are going to be in for a rude awakening.
Not to diminish the value that a DJ brings for music, but I think if the labels took less than 70% then Twitch and the DJ is ripping them off.
At least, when you consider anything in excess of a 30% platform fee, the amount Apple, Google, Steam etc. consider to be reasonable, price gouging.
From the music creators perspective, a DJ is a platform showcasing their music, so it makes sense they'd pay the DJ some fee.
If it's less of a service platform, and more like a retail store, than taking a larger amount like the 50-70% might be reasonable, but it feels like a bit of a stretch, as retail stores have very high overhead costs in comparison.
I wonder what the real calculation was to get to that 30-50%, and if the DJ's really do consider it to be a lot.
Proceeds to diminish DJs’s value. A mix isn’t a playlist, nor a platform. Comparing a DJ’s mix to a retail store hawking individual songs makes it seem like you don’t have much appreciation for mixes.
Being brutally commercial about it though, DJs on Twitch produce content wholly dependent on other people's content – pre-recorded music. It's only reasonable that if the DJs are getting paid, the content creators they depend on should get paid alongside. Nobody is going to pay to watch a DJ tweak a CDJ over and over without the tunes that someone else made.
Not sure how it's different from DJs who don't play on Twitch but in real venues. The tracks they're playing are (most often) purchased from other producers already, which is money that goes to the creators of the tracks (+ other owners) already. Depending on the platform, creators get different shares of that price.
Proper, hard-working DJs submit track lists from gigs which then compensates artists through copyright and performing arts agencies, which is way more money than the $0.50 you get from a single track sale. This has been standard for decades and is no different from Twitch collecting revenue. You can also submit tracklists from online events these days. Although in my experience most DJs are lazy (or do not know of this scheme), and this stuff needs to be automated.
Pretending that the DJ's experience matters more than the music they play is cringeworthy for any DJ worth their salt. Nobody beside self-centered assholes think this way about themselves.
And this is not even getting to how a lot of DJs don't even pay for their music.. big names have a constant stream of free promos coming their way, and you can sign up on any number of promo lists from labels to get their latest releases delivered in your inbox. It used to be that they mailed out physical vinyl, for free!
I mean I think DJs should basically pay what any other artist does to cover a song. It's weird that the meme of DJs "playing other people's music" is still so pervasive when whole music festivals with 50-100k attendees are dedicated to them. Anyone whos listened to pop for the last 20 years probably has songs produced by DJs littered through their liked songs without even knowing it.
Odeza was nominated for a Grammy his stuff is so good. DJing has evolved into performances of live music production. Apache brings an orchestra with him, Illenium has a full band, Sullivan King writes and performs all his own licks and plays them during his performances, Griz's saxophone game was legendary.
I'm not sure what you mean, I just checked out Odesza, and their album only contains original music. They're not the sort of DJ that would livestream a mix of other peoples music, unless I'm mistaken?
You're confusing DJing with producing music. They're completely separate, yet intertwined skills. You can be an excellent DJ that sucks at making music, and you can make excellent electronic music but still suck at DJing.
Most DJs don't produce their own music, therefore they just play other people's music. Those that aim for international fame have to produce their own music, which then becomes a part (but not the entirety) of their DJ sets. Those that have been producing their own music for quite a while (like Odesza) do have enough that they don't need to play other people's tracks, but that gets pretty stale pretty quickly. If you've listened to Odesza once, it's gonna be pretty identical the next time, similar to a band performing a concert (but even more identical).
Then there's also labels, which are like the crown jewel of electronic music. It's not enough to just make music, you have to find a label that will publish it. The bigger the label, the bigger the exposure. Not just in terms of sales, but because DJs/producers associated with a label tend to boost each other's careers by playing each other's tracks (with the added benefit of not having to worry about copyright). The really really big labels also organise their own parties and festivals. To name some of the biggest ones: Ultra Music Festival (UMF) = Ultra Records, Electric Daisy Carnival (EDC) = Insomniac Records. So, if you consistently get your music released by Insomniac/Ultra, odds are they're gonna invite you play in front of hundreds of thousands of people, even if 95% of them have never heard of you. That's how you get like 5 headliners that are there to get the people to come and 30 or so supporting acts that are there to play before them, warming up the crowd before the main act.
There's this excellent crowdsourced website (https://www.1001tracklists.com/) where fans keep track of all of that. If there's a recording of a DJ set available anywhere online, odds are some fan has gone through the trouble of identifying most of the tracks. Click on a couple of sets on the homepage, check out the list of artists whose tracks they play, and you'll see all of this in action. In some cases, all original. In some cases, all released by one label. In most cases, mostly other people's music.
Are you complaining that DJs can earn money by playing other people’s music on a stream, or that they don’t earn enough playing other people’s music on a stream?
I would complain that the DJ is making too small of a piece of the pie in this situation, given that their performance matters significantly. People can hear music anywhere nowadays. All these players should get paid but the record company taking that big of a chunk is overstating the impact of the music in these streams.
DJing is bog easy and commoditised to the point where anyone can pick it up and sound believable by pushing a few buttons that literally do the mechanical work for you. This is coming from someone who's DJ'd for twenty years in all sorts of establishments. These Twitch DJs have donation buttons and merch that they get the majority of their income through anyway, if they even are monetised (many aren't). Personally I wouldn't mind if 100% of the revenue from my Twitch DJ streams went to the artists.
You're right, this stuff really doesn't help the indie people who would need the most support as nearly all of the long tail falls outside of the program.
You'd be surprised how many artists own 100% of their rights these days though- people have gotten way more aware of the business side of things in the past 20 years, and there are things like label deals where the rights roll back to the artist after x years.
DJing has a quite smooth learning curve, with easy entry point, and one can quickly become passable.
However to build an active following on Twitch is still quite hard work. Maybe not difficult, but certainly seems like it requires persistence and constantly being in entertainment mode. Many put in considerable effort in the "show" aspect of it - on top of the music. Both in terms of visuals and of crowd interaction. I believe that may of those that are successful in the "DJ" format on Twitch would also be successful another formats (like gaming). There are reasons why people choose Twitch DJ over a pre recorded mix on YouTube/Mixcloud/Spotify etc. All this to say that the streamer does bring something. I don't really know how that should be represented financially though...
fwiw the price of tier 1 twitch subs will go up to $5.99 in July according to a recent email sent to all subscribers, so I suppose the figure goes up to $1.18 or something
As someone who gift subs, this is bad news for my gifting budget which will stay the same. I also do not see any benefits for the streamer with this price raise.
> I also do not see any benefits for the streamer with this price raise.
I see this as a huge, industry-changing event.
Right now, there's no big DJs streaming on Twitch. There's also no big streamers that became big because they're DJing. DJs on Twitch do exist, but we're talking dozens to hundreds of listeners, a small but very consistent community. I can only name one DJ that can consistently reach a couple of thousand, but she's more of a variety streamer, not exclusively a DJ.
The really big story here is that DJing stops being this legal gray area on a major platform. If record label owners woke up one day with the intention to remove every DJ set from YouTube, or SoundCloud, or Twitch, there's nothing anyone could do about it.
Up until this point, Mixcloud was the only platform available where a random nobody can perform or publish a DJ set without having to worry about it being taken down. The problem with Mixcloud is that most listeners don't want a separate app just for DJ sets, they'd rather listen to them on an app they already use, like Soundcloud or YouTube. So naturally, DJs navigate towards constantly living in this shady gray area, accepting the risk that the community they've gathered could simply vanish one day, despite there existing a 100% legal method that every DJ is aware of.
Now, there's a mainstream platform that has, for the lack of a better word, "regulated" this whole thing. If Twitch does the bare minimum to promote this (as in sign a couple of relatively mainstream DJs to attract a new crowd), I can absolutely see this being very beneficial for the random "nobodies" already DJing on Twitch in front of dozens to hundreds of people.
Co-founder of Mixcloud here. We've been doing live streaming and licensed for years at this point (https://www.mixcloud.com/pro/live) Surprised it took twitch so long to make these deals happen, but it shows how complex these deals are to navigate, and congrats on them for doing so! Interested to see how this pans out and glad to see others in the field figuring out the licensing and not just ignoring it.
I wonder how long until Twitch also gets forced to some rather arbitrary rules set by the record companies, like how you can't do "best of Daft Punk" on Mixcloud (too many songs by one artist).
Jokes aside, kudos to you for coming up with what's been the only available legal option for the past decade or so! Judging by this, your platform will still have some advantages:
> No Vods, Clips, or Highlights
> DJs opted into the program will not be able to save VODs, Clips, or Highlights to Twitch. VODs, Clips and Highlights involve different rights than live streams. We are creating additional promotional and discovery opportunities to extend the reach and impact of DJ content.
It'll depend a lot on the deals being struck, I can only speculate on the structure. The weird rules stem from the US copyright laws, and are therefore are impossible for a company like ours to get changed. We benefit from lower rates because of this and can make a service which will survive long term, so its a tradeoff we believe is worth it. I would stipulate that by going outside of those rules, they will have to pay a larger chunk of revenue to the labels, and it'll increase the ad load and cut the revenue passed to DJ's. Ultimately we decided that wasn't the approach we wanted to take, and the trade off was a good one, we'll find out with time which way they went.
The structure smells very much like the YouTube deal major labels made when they’d had enough of PROs not negotiating high enough license rates for them.
Which, as an ex-PRO employee, makes me a bit sad to see.
“Performing Rights Organization” - so in the USA, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC. They offer what’s known as “collective licensing” for music rights - essentially an aggregation of a bunch of copyright owners, so that someone who wants to use music can negotiate with the PRO and get access to all its members rights rather than having to go and negotiate with thousands of individual music publishers, songwriters, etc.
Switched over to you for events that I run years ago after dealing with the nightmare of twitch and couldn't be happier. Y'all have a good product. Much prefer working with you to the likes of Twitch, anyway.
What is the maximum bit rate for mixcloud mixes? The audio quality of anything I upload sounds terribly degraded especially when I share it with someone who is not signed in
Depends on if you are on free or Pro account as the uploader, if you are on Pro we up the bitrate substantially. Beyond this, it also depends on the device the user is listening on, we'll switch over to Opus when possible, which makes a big difference. If you want to max out the quality I would recommend you get Pro and ensure you listen on Chrome (or mobile apps). We'll do up to 320k on aac and 192k on opus. On Live we do something similar and last time I checked we did substantially higher rates than twitch on audio, but lower bitrates on the video.
I'm curious if Twitch explored a partnership with you all at Mixcloud, given you had the deals and infra all built out. In hindsight that would've been a much more efficient process For Twitch, but as a former employee I also understand Twitch is averse to integrations with third-party companies that create dependencies on their ability to control their own destiny.
We've talked to twitch on and off over the years, but nothing specific to this. Music licensing data pipelines are a massively complex topic and very hard to get right. Its one of those areas you can only appreciate having done it. It looks trivial from the outside, my guess is they will be starting that work now, and in about 6-12 months time the complex reality of it will start to set in. Ironically the hardest part isn't even figuring out the track, its figuring out which major label owns the rights for it, in the territory it was streamed, on the day it was streamed. This is even more complex on the publishing side, where you can have multiple writers.
Hey Mat, I've been working on a music platform called dns.xyz. would love to know if we could partner to let people upload and sell dj sets, and rev share with you for being in the clear wrt rights. I'm @dnsceo
100% its way less than 1% of their streams, the CEO said as much recently. However that doesn't mean that the music labels are ok with copyright infringement being on the platform. I guess this is the real question, they clearly had to do a deal or shut it DJ's on the service. They chose to do the deals, so will they now lean into it as its an active area for investment, or was it a necessity to avoid a lawsuit etc. Time will tell, and its great to see them addressing this problem and the playing field being levelled for everyone else we was already paying for rights.
Interesting! Never heard of Mixcloud before. Thank you. Personally I like the model where the you pay an X amount per month for your licensing versus the “we take whatever we feel like after the fact” that seems to be Twitch model. I stream relatively small music producers and why should I pay for licensing something from a big artist?
I know this is a complicated subject but thats how it feels on my end.
> DJs opted into the program will not be able to save VODs, Clips, or Highlights to Twitch.
> Our program does not allow you to stream pre-release tracks
Those two conditions alone show you how much they have no clue what a DJ does and this new "program" is just a way for the majors to be even more greedy.
AFAIK (at least here in Spain), it's the venue that is responsible for paying this license fee, not the DJ themselves. Unless you organize your own events/play at your own venue, obviously.
Same thing in France (SACEM). The venue pays the fees, and it is dependent on the scale of the event, the entrance fees, etc... The DJ doesn't have to pay anything, he just plays the music the venue has paid for the right to play.
And it is essentially the same thing with Twitch here, as Twitch pays the necessary fees that allow the DJ to perform on their platform.
It may be different in some other countries indeed. I think in Germany, home of the infamous GEMA, DJs have to pay a fee in certain conditions, in addition to what the venue pays.
I'm not super clear on the situation, but I have a brother that DJs at a local venue. Their biggest complaint was that even though they had obtained their broadcast license they couldn't livestream their sets on Twitch. Not sure if this offering now resolves that issue, or how other platforms are handling those situations. Seems like it would make more sense for the platforms to require proof of the performers licensing rather than handling the licensing themselves.
Former pro DJ here. This is a big step in the right direction, but twitch probably won't be the beneficiary.
Music is sold and consumed in single-song increments, and that's silly. That's what the industry wants, not all consumers. It's like if you could only eat one kind of food ingredient at a time. There are absolutely amazing artists taking these ingredients and, like a chef, chopping and mixing them together in wildly creative ways. However, accessing this entertainment is very challenging because there is no legitimate online business model for it. This leaves DJ's with a big incentive to only perform their best material live where they can monetize it. Once there is an online business model where they can get paid decently for this material, music consumption will change dramatically in this catagory.
Imagine being able to tune into or stream different Vegas club mixes for your party at home, or at a bar, or at the gym? Imagine a netflix of all the best DJ sets of all time?
Twitch is doing some of the "icebreaking" here, but music streaming is a huge business, and Spotify/apple, and all the others will follow, and there will likely be one or more services that specialize in this.
I apologize that this is going to sound really ignorant, but how exactly is DJ mix different from something like a Spotify playlist?
I use those all the time for different activities, like a playlist for working out, another one for relaxing, different ones for different board games, etc.
But I've never been to a club where a DJ plays (just not really my thing, too loud and not my kind of music). What do they do? Why might someone want to stream one instead of using a playlist?
A large part of the “value” a DJ brings is track selection; for sure. Playlists can do part of that, say to create a certain mood. But DJs get to adjust these on the fly as they observe the crowd reaction. Additionally, DJs rarely play full songs. Transitions can be drawn out over 16,32,64 bars, taking 1-2minutes. During that time DJs use tools like EQs or stem splitters to ensure the two tracks playing don’t clash.
There’s lots more detail; just take my strongest recommendation to try DJing on hardware with a friend at some point; it’s a richer and more rewarding experience than the “Skrillex pressing play on his MacBook” meme suggests.
Edit: there’s lots more to say about DJing of course, maybe someone else will chime in. One aspect to keep in mind is that DJing is important primarily in dance music. If you don’t go dancing at clubs you may not be aware how different dance music is to traditional music meant for listening. A lot of the focus of dance music is generating tension (“build”) and releasing it in a pleasant manner (“drop”). Doing that at a pace that works for the energy level of the crowd at that moment, without unexpected shifts in energy levels, is not trivial. It requires taste and experience, and aims to create a more cohesive and unified experience for the dancers than a playlist could.
Although I've never really been the "clubbing" type, I do other types of dancing (swing, salsa, Scottish, country, etc.). They usually go off playlists, but I can see how having a live DJ who interactively adjusts the music to the crowd's energy level would be fun. I'd love to experience something like that!
In terms of streaming, it would also be really cool to get a live DJ for D&D and other board game nights, who can dynamically respond to what's happening in the game world and blend the tracks (and sound effects?) appropriately. Does anyone do stuff like that? I'd pay for that service!
Yeah, in ballroom one takes a break between songs iirc. (It’s been a decade or two.) The harder styles of dance and deeper kinds of house music seem designed to put you into a mild trance, thus the need to keep the rhythm consistent.
For D&D, have you seen https://tabletopy.com/ ? I think I saw it here on HN a while ago.
> For D&D, have you seen https://tabletopy.com/ ? I think I saw it here on HN a while ago.
Lol, that's pretty cool. Like a soundboard for D&D.
Having grown up with the
D&D video games like Baldur's Gates 1 & 2 and NWN, the ambient music and sounds is something I miss about the tabletop experience. The cities and the crowd noises, the dungeons with subtle chains and screams and caves with dripping water reverberating, the background music that stays out of the way and then amps up in the prelude to combat and gets all romantic for dialog, etc. Adds a level of immersion that's hard to get in tabletop unless the DM is heavy on production value. Still fun, just different!
I think DJs were meant to monetize "live" – that was the whole point.
I'm now imagining a Netflix of the best DJ sets of all time.
It doesn't make any money.
Musicians similarly have to "perform their best material live where they can monetize it". DJing really is part of a party, without the party, there's really next to nothing left, particularly now the technical aspect has been as good as automated thanks to CDJs.
> The Twitch DJ program lets you stream DJ sets using the vast majority of popular music.
Sounds great that seemingly it coves a lot of the mainstream music, but what's the procedure if I happen to stream something that isn't a part of that? And how can I check what songs from my library are cleared to play/stream without having to actually play them and "find out" after the fact? The pages about this program seem to miss something vital practical information.
> If you stream pre-release tracks, your channel may be subject to enforcement and penalties including termination of your stream and suspension of your channel.
What a shame... Half the fun is finding absolutely new tracks and playing those. But I guess overall this program is a step in the right direction.
> A searchable catalog constantly updated with new releases means you’ll have a full view of the millions of tracks that are covered to stream as a part of this offering
TL;DR build sets out of the “twitch licensed works” catalog
> I don’t play major pop records or much major label music. Does this program apply to me?
> We're always looking to grow the Twitch DJ catalog. If you're interested in chatting with us about this, please reach out to [email protected].
TL;DR Email them about the tracks you want added (and pray, probably).
Thanks, missed that about the searchable catalog. Here's to hoping there will be some Rekordbox integration in the future so one doesn't have to manually search through 100s of tracks and instead can just get a checkbox in the UI.
> TL;DR Email them about the tracks you want added (and pray, probably).
I think that part is about labels/rights holders wanting to add tracks to the catalog from their side, not for DJs to request tracks to be added. But maybe I read that wrong, worth a try at least.
It's clearly saying DJs should email if they want to request tracks be added, though whether the "chat with us about this" will go anywhere, who knows.
Yeah I read it as being on the creators side of things (because that’s what the whole page is for). But you could be right. Worth tying anyway like you say.
Many, many streamers have been getting away with streaming copyrighted music for a while now, by simply not recording VODs (or, recording them in such a way that the music is excluded).
My understanding is that this practice is still technically illegal (since live-broadcasting music without recording it is still something you need copyright permission for), but significantly more difficult for record companies to crack down on.
The second-last paragraph seems to cover this. In short, no - but it seems reasonable to believe this could be a solid stepping-stone on the path from here to there.
If you just want background music that won't set off any DMCA alarms use one of the generative AI music tools. Even the examples and 10-second tests are probably good enough (just loop them), LOL
By law they can't be copyrighted since they were generated by AI.
That’s primarily via the PROs - ASCAP, BMI, SESAC.
E.g. ASCAP says
“Fortunately, most popular live-streaming platforms, such as YouTube, Facebook, Instagram Live, Soundcloud and Twitch are licensed by ASCAP”
I’m assuming because DJ performances via twitch are considered non-interactive streaming they - like Pandora’s free tier - don’t need a mechanical licence, at least in the US.
How that then translates to other territories though I’m not entirely sure. In Europe I’m pretty sure they’d need to have a mechanical licence in place whether or not they are interactive.
My only concern is that actually the big guys get the big cut, and the DJ and the original artists (that are not wildly popular) the shortest end of the stick.
> DJs often leverage pre-recorded music from other artists as a critical part of their creative expression
It’s crazy to me that the misconception that DJs are playing original music is still around. Even DJs who also produce music play 90%+ records from other people.
Additionally, Twitch isn't providing any features to help DJ creators make up for this loss in earnings, so this is effectively just a way for Twitch to avoid DMCA lawsuits while making it easier for DJs to stream.
Twitch is softening the earnings (and PR) blow by absorbing the costs for one year, after which DJ creators are going to be in for a rude awakening.