undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmgrouchy16y ago0 comments

Honestly, it depends on how many albums the artist actually sells VS how large of a draw you are(there is a correlation between both).

Say for example an artist makes 1.35/album and sells 2 million(which is not too bad) and then does 100 shows (which certainly is not out of the realm of possibility)commands 40k fee + merch sales at the venue.

1.35/album * 2,000,000 = 2.7 million 100 shows * 40k = 4 Million + merch sales - costs

So it really depends, the more albums you sell the more money you make from albums. The less albums you sell but the more you tour, so for a middle tier artist who generally doesn't sell an obscene amount of albums but does a lot of gigs, they would certainly make more touring.

Someone like U2, probably makes more from album sales.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

Kuytu16y ago· 1 in thread

"1.35/album * 2,000,000 = 2.7 million" It should be noted that especially new artists often start getting royalties after the costs of making the record and music videos have been paid. I believe that is a big reason why many one-hit wonders might sell millions world wide and go broke soon after the success fades.

mgrouchyOP16y ago

yes, that's very true too. So after costs, it might be a break even proposition(or not as much as it might seem anyway) on an album.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse