{"id":98616,"date":"2024-02-06T17:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-02-06T17:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/routenote.com\/blog\/?p=98616"},"modified":"2024-02-06T16:38:45","modified_gmt":"2024-02-06T16:38:45","slug":"indie-labels-dont-like-apple-encouraging-spatial-audio","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/routenote.com\/blog\/indie-labels-dont-like-apple-encouraging-spatial-audio\/","title":{"rendered":"Indie labels don’t like Apple encouraging spatial audio"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Image credit: Auguras Pipiras<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Apple have been making noise over paying artists more if they upload tracks mixed with spatial audio, but is it fair?<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

At the start of the year, leaked emails revealed that Apple intend to pay artists more when spatial audio mixes account for 50% of their streams<\/a>. They will reportedly pay as much as 10% more for spatial available tracks on Apple Music<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We’ve discussed why Apple might be doing this<\/a>, surmising firstly that Apple want to separate their service from competitors like Spotify. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, Apple likely want to enhance the experience of their expensive, new augmented reality headset Apple Vision Pro. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Why do Apple want to pay more for spatial audio?<\/a><\/blockquote>