"The pre‑Internet corporate industry was a system specifically engineered to waste the band's money." – Steve Albini.
For years, the record label industry dominated music, racing to find the next big artist. They powered the rise of icons – from Elvis's beginnings at RCA to Madonna's reinventions under Warner Music Group. Money, glory, and major recognition were promised to artists through deals and contracts presented as the only logical path for a young star. And while a signed contract promised artists a path to musical stardom, it frequently left them as nothing more than pawns in the music game, without royalties or even ownership of their lyrical creation. In short, the music industry wasn't the artist's game; it was the record labels'.
In recent years, the tables have begun to turn in favour of artists, with the future belonging to those who could build a brand from their bedroom. In 2018, Montero "Lil Nas X" Hill purchased a beat for US$30, recorded "Old Town Road" in one day, and posted it online. The song went viral on TikTok and set a record for 19 consecutive weeks at number 1 on the Billboard Hot 100. Chance the Rapper's mixtape "Coloring Book" became the first streaming exclusive album to reach the Billboard 200, and he did it without any label, relying on SoundCloud and word‑of‑mouth. Frank Ocean quietly negotiated his way out of a seven‑album contract, used his funds to buy back his masters and released the critically acclaimed Blonde independently. Taylor Swift, after her first six studio albums were sold without her consent, began re‑recording them to regain control of her catalogue. These artists have become symbols of a new era of musical independence, utilizing digital virality and fan engagement to bypass traditional industry gatekeepers.
However, behind this evolving image lies a more complicated truth. While major labels may no longer control the spotlight as they once did, their influence hasn't disappeared – just evolved. Many so-called "independent" labels operate under the financial and strategic umbrella of the Big Three, the 3 record label conglomerates that dominate the global music industry. Platforms like Spotify and TikTok are often seen as tools that empower artists to bypass traditional gatekeepers and connect directly with audiences. This shift has given artists greater control over how they release music, build fanbases, and shape their careers – a movement exemplified by figures like Taylor Swift, who has publicly challenged legacy contracts in order to regain ownership of her work.
While artists today may enjoy more freedom than ever before, they still operate under the rule of greater pieces in the game, shaped by algorithms, marketing infrastructure, and platform dynamics that subtly influence who gets seen and heard. It seems that although artists no longer need label approval to share music, they now face a new kind of gatekeeper: algorithms that prioritize virality over vision.
The Fall of the A&R Model
The A&R model, known as Artists and Repertoire, is a key component of record labels, responsible for discovering new talent and shaping artists' careers. Contracts consisting of tours, merchandise, endorsements and celebrity status were marketed as 360 deals, an idea that became popularized over the early 2000s as major labels faced declining record sales.
For instance, in 2001, a young artist may have walked into a Jive Records boardroom, signing a contract that would bring them to fame. Songwriters assigned, radio campaigns booked, tour merch folded into a contract that let the label monetize every fan. Record labels didn't just control the music – they owned the narrative. Through 360 deals, they profited from every concert ticket, radio feature, and every piece of branded merchandise, turning artists into merely commercial products like CDs. Many famous artists and groups, including NSYNC, Britney Spears, and the Backstreet Boys have followed this path, making it seem like Jive Records was the holy grail in music. However, just two decades later, stories like those of Lil Nas X can be told over and over, charting artists as the true creators and marketers of their music. What once was a legacy held by only record labels is slowly being torn down, and the A&R 360 model, which once gave labels control of the artist's music and public appearance, is slowly crashing.
To understand how this transformation is playing out within the industry today, Lauren Manley, Marketing Manager from the Big Machine Label Group Canada helped explain how A&R teams are fundamentally restructuring themselves to meet this landscape. While traditional scouting methods, like live performances, remain crucial, platforms like TikTok and Spotify have significantly reshaped the discovery process. As the marketing manager put it, "You can push out content all you want, but if it's not reaching people who actually care – it's just noise. We use data to guide every dollar."
The question remains, however, on why the success of A&R and its initial mission, to bring music to the masses, may have been its own undoing. According to Hollywood execs, "In the old days we were betting on the gut instinct of an A&R guy who at least knew his music, now we're chasing stats rather than tunes". The quote symbolizes the changing nature of A&R over the past years, as streaming platforms like Spotify, YouTube, and iTunes are creating a bridge for artists to share their music to the world. As a result of such competition and audience market shaping, labels become artificially incentivized to push artists that could uplift an already popular genre. As highlighted in Goldman Sachs' "Music In The Air 2023" publication, "Spotify's editorial and algorithmic playlists serve as a primary driver of track virality," and many labels are now "reactive rather than proactive" when it comes to artist signings. The deeper consequence here is the concept of homogeneity. Algorithms are prioritizing replayability while sacrificing creativity for familiarity. As a result, the concept of "genre sameness" has slowly been bred into the music industry with risk-averse labels leaning into "what already works" and pressuring emerging artists to follow the favours of algorithms. As one executive put it bluntly, "We used to bet on the gut instinct of an A&R guy… now we're just chasing stats instead of songs." The status of the A&R model, which once held a cornerstone in label dominance and growth, is now a downstream player in a machine that values virality over vision.
Despite the rise of digital platforms, traditional A&R hasn't vanished. In our interview with Lauren Manley, she noted that while data and virality guide much of today's scouting, live performance and vocal authenticity still matter, especially in genres like country music. "We still meet talent where they are," she said. "There are artists who may not have gone viral on TikTok, but when you hear them live, the talent is undeniable." Country music continues to rely on radio, CD sales, and conventional fanbases, meaning artists can still break through via live shows or industry connections.
Even then, fan engagement remains the deciding factor. Labels may discover talent through live shows, but streaming numbers and social media often validate that potential. Lauren emphasized that at the end of the day, fans drive careers. Talent is essential, but connecting with audiences, on stage or online, is what sustains an artist today. This hybrid model shows a transitional era where traditional scouting coexists with data-driven strategy, and careers can be launched both through intimate performances and viral clips.
While the fall of the A&R model demonstrates the positive changes and liberation of artists, it also reflects an empire that has fragmented and left new artists with opportunities to take control of the new model. Companies like DistroKid, Amuse, and Stem are market entrants with artist-first royalty tracking and real-time payments, shaping the pieces left by the previous leaders. As Goldman Sachs highlighted, "new content volume has diluted market shares and exposed flaws in the pro-rate streaming model", which was designed to treat streams under the same light, regardless of fan engagement or cultural relevance. The legacy that follows is modelled behind a new wave of fan-driven curation and, more importantly, a sight of exploitation of traditional bottlenecks built by label companies.
Fan Driven Curation and the "Double-Edged Sword"
When a disruptor enters the market, it is usually a sign that the incumbent has missed the audience. The rise of "bedroom artists" and TikTok-driven success can be mentioned from the failure of A&R models, which navigated towards streams over pure talent and content. More importantly, it shows how artists have risen to take control of their musical talents and curate new fan bases through platforms without any restrictions. This tension between artist and label is exemplified perfectly by Taylor Swift, who famously re-recorded her first six albums to regain ownership after her masters were sold without her consent. Her case shows the lingering control labels still exert over legacy contracts and the lengths even the most successful artists must go to reclaim autonomy for their intellectual property. That being said, for many rising artists, the power struggle looks different and is playing out on platforms like TikTok and Spotify, where fans, not labels, are curating the next generation of hits.
TikTok, in particular, has emerged as the most powerful A&R machine in the past 5 years. TikTok's "For You" page, driven by user behaviour such as watch time, rewatches, and shares, has turned ordinary users into tastemakers. Songs that become soundtracks to viral dances or trends can catapult unknown artists into stardom within days – often without any label involvement.
Artists like Doja Cat, Lil Nas X, and Ice Spice are the perfect example of this new wave, leveraging short content and meme culture to gain mainstream traction before major labels even step in. What's at proof here is that a unique phenomenon is occurring within the music space as a result of such platforms, being titled as bottom-up driven virality. Historically, labels acted as cultural architects – deciding which artists were promoted, which singles were pushed to radio, and which videos were placed in MTV rotation, a concept of top-down virality. However, as fan-driven behaviour has replaced algorithms and small groups of executives, songs are breaking charts as fans post, dance, and remix them, being chosen by fanbases to grow in popularity and streams.
However, this system isn't without limits. Spotify and TikTok algorithms, while empowering, still reward early momentum and visibility – something that can be manufactured through label-funded campaigns or influencer promotion. As such, while the myth of the "independent viral artist" is real, the reality is often that those who break through already had some form of strategic push behind them. This reinforces that fan-driven curation is powerful, but still subject to platform biases and backend industry influence.
As discussed with Lauren Manley, she shared, "Everything we do is informed by the fanbase. If an artist performs well on TikTok, we lean in there first before anything else." Rather than setting a direction, marketing teams now build strategies around existing fan engagement, using tools like TikTok lookalike audiences and Facebook groups. Fans aren't just the audience anymore; they are the algorithm.
Spotify is a Gatekeeper
The truth has changed. Music distribution and artist success are not democratized as many once believed and claimed through the rise of TikTok. The new system has cultivated a winner-take-all approach, where freedom is abundant and success is scarce.
While artists no longer need label approval to release music, they now face a new kind of gatekeeper: algorithmic recommendation systems. Platforms like Spotify may offer indie artists a free and open avenue to publish their work, but getting heard remains an uphill battle. In 2023, over 120,000 tracks were uploaded through Spotify's platform every day, nearly representing a song per second. However, artists aren't paid for uploads.
According to Shot Tower, "Just 1.4% of artists account for over 90% of Spotify streams, and only 5% of 'independent' artists earn more than $50,000 annually from music". This is similarly bred by a feedback loop: the more attention a song gets, the more likely it is to be added to algorithmic playlists like Discover Weekly or Radio, which then fuels even more exposure. But without an initial push, whether from social media virality, influencer support, or label-backed marketing, most songs simply fall through the cracks. As the charts below highlight, streams on Spotify are highly disproportionate to tracks and music uploads, revealing the truth behind Spotify's so-called "meritocracy of momentum". While fan-driven platforms and artists with the promise of success are pushed above the ranks, metrics like early engagement, peer behaviour, and precedent analysis require a momentum that artists mostly fail to capture. As competition grows more fierce, the income distribution curve has also grown steeper and left artists either invisible or indispensable.
As Lauren Manley noted, "We're not trying to wear all the hats. We partner with influencer groups and media experts to build artists' careers, so they can focus on the art. Labels are adapting by leaning into what fans value."
What remains clear is that the center of power is slowly tilting: not toward obscurity, but toward choice – where the artist, not the label, holds the mic.
