Someone somewhere is benefitting from streaming. But whom? It’s certainly not the artists whose music is on such services. They’re being paid a pittance for the use of their work. And it’s not even really the listeners – who only have access to that music so long as it’s available on their streaming service of choice.

No, streaming ultimately benefits the people behind the streaming companies – yes, I’m looking at you, Daniel Ek, – and the major labels, who make around £1million per hour from it. Now, Beatport has always been a bit more about the money than other dance music stores – not something I mind too much, because they’ve always been more open about it than others.

But even I have to ask questions about why exactly they’re now promoting a Beatport streaming service – and who’s going to benefit from it. A monthly subscription to the platform will cost $9.99 – the reason why that’s always the price is explored here, by the way – and lets you stream as much as you like from their store. Perfect for DJs with super fast internet and a strong wifi connection.

However, how many nightclubs are going to have super fast internet and strong wifi connections? Given that dancefloors are designed with the primary purpose in mind, it doesn’t somehow make sense to install a wifi point in there for the best signal – yet if this kind of streaming is to become normal in the DJ booth, that’s what’ll have to happen in a lot of clubs.

I honestly don’t know who Beatport are aiming this at. Perhaps there are far more bedroom DJs out there than I give credit for, and it might work nicely for some of the younger ones – those who don’t know anything other than streaming.

But for everyone else? I’m yet to be as convinced as Beatport apparently are…

By The Editor

Editor-in-chief at Amateur’s House.