Band 8 model answer
A model answer written to illustrate a Band 8 response to this question, with the rubric breakdown and what carries it. Written by us as a teaching example, not a verified exam script.
“Streaming services have changed how musicians earn money. Has this been good or bad for the music industry?”8
Overall
8
Task response
8
Coherence & cohesion
8
Lexical resource
8
Grammar
Streaming services have fundamentally restructured how recorded music reaches listeners and how artists are compensated. On the whole, this transformation has been bad for most musicians, even as it has benefited consumers and a small number of globally successful acts.
The central problem is the per-stream royalty model. Platforms typically pay rights holders a fraction of a cent per stream, meaning that an artist must accumulate tens of millions of plays before earning income comparable to even modest album sales under the previous download or physical-copy model. For the vast majority of musicians who operate below superstar level, working professionals, independent artists, genre specialists, streaming has dramatically reduced earnings from recorded music. Many have compensated by increasing touring, but live performance is physically demanding, expensive to mount, and inaccessible for artists in markets with limited concert infrastructure.
There is also a structural concentration effect. Streaming platforms amplify the advantages of already-famous artists through recommendation algorithms, playlist placements, and editorial features. Catalogue-heavy major labels, which negotiated equity stakes and favourable royalty rates at the inception of streaming, capture a disproportionate share of revenues. Independent artists, released without such leverage, receive the least advantageous terms.
Defenders of streaming point out that global distribution at effectively zero marginal cost has allowed artists in smaller markets to reach international audiences that physical distribution could never have served. This is a genuine benefit, particularly for artists from regions previously excluded from the global music economy.
Nonetheless, access to a global audience means little if the financial returns from that reach are negligible. Structural reform, including higher per-stream rates and greater transparency in how royalties are calculated and distributed, is needed before streaming can be said to serve the music industry as a whole.
- •Per-stream royalty economics explained concisely and with quantitative framing
- •Structural concentration argument (algorithm amplification, major-label equity stakes) is an insightful, non-obvious point
- •Global distribution concession is genuine and not dismissed
- •The touring compensation point, while valid, is somewhat tangential and could be replaced by a deeper engagement with royalty reform options
Write your own. Get a real band read.
Reading a model answer only takes you so far. Write your own response to this question and we’ll grade it against the four official rubrics, the same way we scored this one.
Attempt this question