The Current State of Music: The Artist is at Risk of Extinction

The music industry, once a bastion of creative expression and artistic innovation, is now increasingly controlled by a handful of powerful stakeholders. Major labels, streaming platforms, and institutional investors, such as Vanguard, BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley, hold the reins of a corporate oligopoly that manipulates revenue streams and often leaves the true soul of art, the artists and fans, on the sidelines.

In this article, we examine how the industry's financial power brokers are influencing the future of music, explore the stark contrast between the top-tier major-label artists and their independent counterparts, and reveal why the artist is at risk of extinction under the current system.

The Oligopoly: How Power Is Concentrated

The Big Three Labels’ Stranglehold

The Big Three control around 70% of global recorded music revenue 2 15, leveraging their catalogs to dominate playlists, radio, and licensing deals. Their influence extends beyond music:

• Universal Music Group (UMG): Owns Taylor Swift’s masters, controls 33% of the market, and partners with TikTok for viral promotion.
• Sony Music: Holds legacy catalogs (Queen, Michael Jackson) and integrates with Sony’s tech empire (PlayStation, films).
• Warner Music: Acquired Parlophone (Coldplay, Pink Floyd) to expand its streaming-era dominance 2 6.

These labels prioritize catalog acquisitions over artist development, buying timeless hits (e.g., Bruce Springsteen’s $500M Sony deal) to secure perpetual revenue streams 15.

Even icons like Taylor Swift lost control of her masters (sold to Universal’s Scooter Braun in 2019), forcing her to re-record albums to reclaim ownership. Independent artists retain rights but lack the reach to monetize them meaningfully.

Institutional Investors: The Hidden Architects

The same financial giants own stakes across labels, platforms, and distributors, creating a closed profit circuit:

• Vanguard Group ($7.2 trillion assets): Top shareholder in Spotify, Sony, and Warner, prioritizing quarterly returns over artistic diversity.
• BlackRock ($10 trillion assets): Second-largest Spotify shareholder, with stakes in Sony and Warner.
• J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley: Collectively manage billions in music industry shares, pressuring companies to maximize profits via catalog acquisitions and algorithmic homogenization.

This interlocking ownership ensures decisions favor shareholder dividends, not artists or fans.

Who owns music?

Music ownership is determined by copyright law, which splits rights into two main categories:

• Master Rights: Owned by whoever finances the recording (typically a record label if the artist is signed).
• Publishing Rights: Owned by the songwriter(s) or their publisher.

For example, if an independent artist self-releases music, they own both masters and publishing. Signed artists often assign master rights to their label and publishing rights to a publishing company.

Who owns the catalogs?

Catalogs (collections of songs) can be owned by:

• Artists (if they retain rights, e.g., Taylor Swift re-recording her masters).
• Record Labels (e.g., Universal Music Group owns masters of artists like Drake).
• Publishers (e.g., Sony Music Publishing owns songwriting rights for Beyoncé).
• Investment Firms (e.g., Hipgnosis Songs Fund bought catalogs from Shakira, Neil Young).

Who receives most royalties and holds rights?

Royalties are split among:

• Record Labels: Take 50–85% of streaming/sales revenue (from master rights).
• Publishers/Songwriters: Earn mechanical royalties (from sales/streams) and performance royalties (via PROs like ASCAP).
• Artists: Typically earn 10–25% of label revenue (after recouping advances).

Top earners are usually labels and publishers, though superstar artists (e.g., Swift, Beyoncé) negotiate better terms.

How many musicians exist, and how many make a living?

• Global Musicians: Estimates suggest 10–20 million (including part-time creators).
• Full-time Professionals: Likely less than 10% earn a sustainable income. For example:
  • Only 1.7% of Spotify artists earn over $50k/year according to MIDiA Research, 2023.
  • In the U.S., almost 40,000 musicians are employed full-time according to Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2023.

Is the music industry a monopoly?

No, but it’s an oligopoly dominated by the "Big Three" labels:

• Universal Music Group (33%), Sony Music (20%), Warner Music (16%) (2023 market share).
• Combined, they control around 70% of global recorded music revenue (IFPI, 2023).

Independents (e.g., Beggars Group, XL Recordings) hold ~30% but lack equal bargaining power. Streaming platforms (Spotify, Apple) also wield significant influence.

Key Takeaway:

While artists create music, ownership and revenue are heavily skewed toward labels, publishers, and institutional investors. The industry’s concentration among three majors limits competition but doesn’t constitute a monopoly. Most musicians struggle to monetize their work fully, relying on side jobs or grassroots revenue (e.g., touring, merch).

The Reality of Music Industry Deals and Power Dynamics

1. Typical Contracts Artists Sign: Exploitative Terms and Rights Surrender

Most artists, especially emerging ones, are pressured into signing deals that heavily favor labels and intermediaries. Key contract types include:

• Traditional Record Deals: Artists receive an advance (a recoupable loan) but surrender 80–90% of royalties to the label after recoupment. Labels own masters indefinitely, controlling distribution, licensing, and revenue 1 9.
• 360 Deals: Labels take a cut of all revenue streams (touring, merch, endorsements) in exchange for upfront funding. For example, a 1.2 million advance might require 6 million in earnings to break even, a near-impossible feat for most artists 3 11.
• Production Company "Hell Contracts": Some predatory agreements lock artists into indefinite terms, claiming rights to masters, publishing, and even likeness without providing real label support 11.

Even in "fairer" deals like distribution agreements, artists retain masters but still lose 15–35% of revenue to distributors 1.

2. Control Over Success and Content: The Major Label Oligopoly

The "Big Three" (Universal, Sony, Warner) dominate around 70% of global recorded music revenue 10 14. Their influence shapes industry dynamics:

• Gatekeeping Access: Labels prioritize artists who fit commercial trends, often sidelining niche genres. Their marketing budgets, radio connections, and playlist leverage dictate what listeners hear 9 10.
• Algorithmic Bias: Streaming platforms like Spotify, which rely on major-label catalogs for playlists (e.g., RapCaviar), amplify label-backed artists, creating a feedback loop that marginalizes independents 10 14.
• Catalog Monopolization: Majors acquire legacy catalogs (e.g., Queen’s $1.27 billion sale to Sony) to control timeless revenue streams, further entrenching their power 15.

3. Why Billionaire Artists Are Rare: The Revenue Disparity

Despite the industry’s $29.6 billion global revenue (2024) 10, few artists achieve billionaire status solely from music:

• Streaming’s Broken Economy: Artists earn $0.003–$0.005 per stream, requiring billions of streams to recoup advances. For example, 1.2 billion streams are needed to repay a $1.2 million advance 3 11.
• Reliance on Non-Music Income: Top earners like Taylor Swift and Beyoncé derive 70–90% of income from touring, merch, and endorsements, revenue streams labels often claim in 360 deals 1 3.
• Label Profit Extraction: Labels retain 50–85% of streaming revenue and deduct expenses (marketing, production) before paying artists, leaving most perpetually unrecouped 1 9.

4. Market Share and Exploitation: A Historical Perspective

The consolidation of major labels has intensified exploitation:

• Market Dominance: Post-EMI acquisition, the Big Three control around 70% of U.S. sales (2023) 14. Indies and self-releasing artists struggle to compete despite digital democratization 10 14.
• Revenue Growth ≠ Artist Prosperity: While the industry’s global revenue soared to $35.1 billion in 2023 (IFPI, 2023), artists saw little benefit:

• Only 1.7% of Spotify artists earned over $50k/year (MIDiA Research, 2023), with most surviving on poverty wages.
• Labels funnel profits into acquiring legacy catalogs (e.g., Queen’s $1.27B Sony deal) rather than nurturing new talent.

The result? A broken ecosystem where labels profit from the past, algorithms homogenize the present, and artists face extinction.

5. Systemic Consequences: The Erosion of Art

Homogenized Playlists, Silenced Voices

Spotify’s algorithms prioritize label-backed tracks with repetitive hooks, sidelining experimental genres.

Artist Burnout

Most musicians work day jobs to survive. Over 10–20 million global artists exist, but fewer than 40,000 earn sustainable incomes (BLS, 2023).

Cultural Theft

AI tools scrape indie music for training data, while labels like Universal sue platforms (e.g., TikTok) to protect their catalogs, a luxury indies can’t afford.

6. The Path Forward: Resistance and Alternatives

Artists increasingly reject traditional models:

• Direct-to-Fan Platforms: Bandcamp and Patreon let artists retain 85–90% of revenue without label interference, while Blockchain Solutions such as BitSong or Sound XYZ and others, with web3 tools and DeFi integrated, without central entities deciding anything, might represent the future of music, for a fairer and “cleaner” industry.
• Catalog Ownership Battles: Taylor Swift’s re-recordings and Chance the Rapper’s Grammy wins prove independence is possible, but rare. 1.
• Legislative Pushback: Calls for royalty reforms (e.g., fairer streaming payouts) aim to rebalance power 10 14.

A System Stacked Against Artists

The music industry remains a corporate oligopoly, where labels and platforms profit disproportionately from artists’ labor. While streaming revived revenue, its benefits flow to shareholders, not creators. True success, financial or artistic, requires navigating a rigged system, where even "fair" deals demand surrendering control. Until structural reforms address royalty inequities and monopolistic practices, the billionaires will remain label executives, not musicians.

The Great Divide: Major-Label Titans vs. Indie Survivors

Top 10 Richest Major-Label Artists vs. Indie Artists (2025)

The "Top 10 Richest Indie Musicians" ranking is compiled using publicly available data, industry estimates, and reported revenue streams (e.g., streaming, touring, merchandise, brand partnerships). Please note the following:

1. Estimates, Not Exact Figures:

   • Net worth values are approximations based on aggregated data from sources like Forbes, Spotify’s Loud & Clear, and Chartmetric.
   • Independent artists often lack publicly disclosed financial records, so figures may not reflect precise earnings.

2. Exclusions & Limitations:

   • Artists with partial label ties (e.g., distribution deals) or undisclosed revenue streams (e.g., private investments) may be omitted.
   • Regional disparities in streaming payouts (e.g., non-English markets) are not fully accounted for.

3. Dynamic Industry:

   • Net worth values fluctuate with market trends, catalog sales, and touring cycles. Data reflects snapshots as of 2024–2025.

4. Not Financial Advice:

   • This list is for informational purposes only. It should not be interpreted as endorsement, investment advice, or a guarantee of success.

Sources Cited:

• Spotify’s Loud & Clear (2024)
• Forbes Celebrity 100 Net Worth List (2025)
• Chartmetric Artist Analytics (2025)
• MIDiA Research (Indie Sector Growth Reports)

Key Observations

• Major-label wealth: Built on catalog sales (Springsteen’s $500M Sony deal) and non-music ventures (Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty) 15.
• Indie struggles: Reliant on DIY touring (Mitski) and Bandcamp sales (Phoebe Bridgers), with earnings capped by limited scale 8.
• Streaming disparity: Indies retain 70% of royalties but lack the streams; majors earn 10–30% of royalties but dominate algorithms 7 12.

Music as a Commodity, Artists as Collateral

The music industry’s $35.1 billion revenue flows not to artists, but basically to Vanguard, BlackRock, and Wall Street. Until structural reforms dismantle the oligopoly’s grip, artists will remain endangered, exploited for their labor while financiers profit from their art. The choice is clear: divest from the majors, demand transparent royalties, and rebuild music as a culture, not a commodity.

The soul of music depends on it.