NFTs
Are Music NFTs Dead? | Bankless
This week, Cooper Turleycreator of onchain record label Coop Records, has sparked a wave of debate in the NFT scene by arguing that the original paradigm of music NFTs has failed.
by X
Of course, there are a few things to consider here:
- Coop wasn’t saying that music NFTs had failed forever. Just that an early vision of them had failed.
- He said that collecting music should be free and accessible, that is, more relaxed, like enjoying a song on Spotify or YouTube.
- He warned against so-called “roadmap-itis,” that is, artists having to invent various perks to bolster their releases and expensive bullets.
- Ultimately, he suggested that the old paradigm of music NFTs has given way to open edition releases, which are friendlier to both artists and fans.
Regarding the first point, I think NFTs like basic MP3 files (many of which can be temporary via IPFS) are not attractive as a distribution avenue if they are not 1) involved in a larger, interesting project, or two) are not used in broader ways.
An example of the first is The albuma project led by PleasrDAO where fans can mint an encrypted but unlockable version of Wu-Tang Clan’s legendary Once Upon a Time in Shaolin album for $1. The album is collectible in its own right, but the distribution experiment is also compelling and worth supporting.
As for the latter, consider Sound capsuleswhich allows you to create simple audio players that can contain playlists of Zora music NFTs via ERC-6551. The underlying NFTs may be simple in a technical sense, but the platform on top of them allows you to compose and play with them for new purposes.
On Coop’s second point, I think making music NFTs as free and accessible as possible is smart in many cases, as this dynamic matches what most people expect when it comes to music UX.
But there are exceptions. Think about MyFi Studiosthat creates fully onchain musical instruments, or “musical toys,” like No dataa series of instruments with their loopers, pitchers, slicers and sequencers entirely on Ethereum. These are innovative digital artifacts, but they are also fun, interactive and scarce. It is fair to charge more than free for these literal collectibles, for example.
As for roadmap-itis and expensive music NFT mints, I agree that they’re not right for most people, though I’d hazard a guess that this approach could still work for really big artists like Taylor Swift or Travis Scott. They’d have the clout to make it work. On the other hand, these superstars are also the least likely to need or care about the composable and programmable indie possibilities around music NFTs, at least as things stand.
This brings us to Coop’s last point, “Music NFTs have moved on to open editions.” I can relate. Or at least I know what he means.
I’m personally a fan of Zora’s open-edition “free mints” model, where the artist doesn’t charge any primary price, but collectors pay a fee of 0.000777 ETH, part of which is redistributed back to the artists, meaning they can earn more from Zora Protocol Rewards through music releases than through streaming platforms.
At Coop Records, Coop also began subsidizing open-edition music releases by paying collectors token rewards, e.g., $OP, through the Boost platform. The +$100,000 in rewards paid out so far has helped offset collectors’ overall minting costs to ~$1 each. Not bad! It’s a cool approach for others to consider here in the future, I think.
Zooming out, I find the conversation around music NFTs this week encouraging. I’m reminded of how many passionate people care, and how many cool experiments are unfolding around this scene right now. Ultimately, I think the best path forward for music NFTs is to continue leaning into experimentation, new ways, different approaches. In that sense, I know we’re in good hands between us all.
The truth is, we’re just beginning to dream about what music NFTs can be. I’m optimistic.