A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a column about how I suddenly realized it had been more than two years since I paid for a song or album, opting instead to listen exclusively via my Spotify account.
Apparently, I touched a nerve.
"I'm very disappointed in your approach to consuming music," reader Tim Threadgill chided me, if mildly, via email. "The musicians and artists you appreciate and enjoy simply are not compensated with the Spotify/Pandora/YouTube model."
He has a point, as did an email from Bob Boyer, the director of the Patten Performances Series at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Boyer said that despite the "exorbitant" prices the recording industry charges, he prefers paying them to "enabl[ing] a system that continues to screw the artists."
Plenty of people shared their point of view, referring to Spotify as "legalized piracy" because of a payment system that is estimated at a mere 0.6 to 0.84 cents per listen. Artists such as David Byrne, The Black Keys' Dan Auerbach and Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke all have criticized these woefully underwhelming royalties.
To clarify, my column wasn't intended as a promotion of practices that don't compensate artists but rather a "gee whiz, isn't that interesting?" observation about how my habits have changed. I've come to rely on Spotify to find new music. For me, at least, it's a legitimate tool I use to do my job.
However, many of my friends are musicians - as am I, if on a purely amateur level - and the last thing I want is for them not to receive their due. Just like writers, however, they're having to learn to adjust to an online ecosystem that has trained consumers to expect, if not feel entitled to, receiving content for free.
So what's the solution? I wish I had one. Artists can choose not to have their music on Spotify, and if enough go that route, it would cripple the system. But I can't support that since it would kill a service that a lot of people have probably used - as I do - to discover new artists. If Spotify did end, I'd be interested to see the impact that would have on attendance at live shows for indie artists.
Would it make a difference? Maybe, maybe not, but there are plenty of bands who are happy to give away music, either on their own or via streaming services, if it means getting people on their email lists and into clubs, where pay is all but guaranteed.
Yet again, I'm out of space, but this is a huge topic. Care to keep the discussion going? Email me.
Contact Casey Phillips at cphillips@timesfreepress.com or 423-757-6205. Follow him on Twitter at @PhillipsCTFP.