Spotify vs. Apple Music Royalties: Which Platform Pays More for Ambient Music?
Spotify and Apple Music are the two dominant music streaming platforms globally, and understanding how their royalty structures differ is essential for maximizing your income as an independent artist. While both platforms pay per-stream royalties, their payment models, per-stream rates, and audience demographics differ significantly. For ambient and meditation music creators, these differences have practical implications: the platform where your listeners are concentrated matters more than average per-stream rates, and listener behavior (session length, repeat plays, playlist integration) varies between platforms. This comparison breaks down the royalty economics of each platform to help you understand where your money comes from and how to optimize your earning strategy across both services.
Spotify
Spotify is the world's largest music streaming platform with over 600 million users (including over 220 million premium subscribers). It uses a pro-rata royalty model where the total royalty pool is divided proportionally among all streams on the platform.
Pros
- +Largest user base — more potential listeners and discovery opportunities
- +Powerful algorithmic playlists (Discover Weekly, Release Radar) drive organic discovery
- +Extensive editorial playlist ecosystem including wellness and focus categories
- +Spotify for Artists provides detailed audience analytics and tools
- +Canvas (looping video), Storyline, and other engagement features
- +Strong integration with wellness and productivity apps
- +Podcasting platform drives users who also listen to ambient/meditation music
Cons
- −Lower per-stream rate ($0.003-$0.005) due to large free-tier user base
- −Pro-rata model means your earnings are diluted by total platform activity
- −Free-tier listeners generate significantly lower per-stream payments
- −Recent policy requires minimum 1,000 annual streams to monetize a track
- −Algorithmic recommendations can be unpredictable for niche genres
- −High competition for editorial playlist placement
Best for: Artists who prioritize discovery and audience growth. Spotify's algorithmic playlists are particularly effective for ambient music — tracks that perform well in focus/sleep/meditation playlists can generate massive stream counts that offset the lower per-stream rate.
Apple Music
Apple Music has over 100 million subscribers with no free ad-supported tier (only a limited free trial). It pays a per-stream rate that is generally higher than Spotify due to the absence of free-tier users diluting the royalty pool.
Pros
- +Higher per-stream rate ($0.007-$0.01) — roughly 2x Spotify's rate
- +All users are paying subscribers, resulting in more consistent per-stream payments
- +Lossless audio and Spatial Audio support appeals to quality-conscious listeners
- +Apple ecosystem integration (HomePod, Apple Watch, Siri) drives ambient music plays
- +Less dilution of royalty pool compared to Spotify's pro-rata model
- +Apple Fitness+ integration creates opportunities for wellness music
- +Growing editorial playlist ecosystem with dedicated ambient/focus categories
Cons
- −Significantly smaller user base than Spotify (approximately 1/3 the size)
- −Less sophisticated algorithmic discovery compared to Spotify
- −Fewer editorial playlists and playlist curators
- −Apple Music for Artists analytics are less detailed than Spotify's tools
- −Harder to pitch for editorial playlist placement as an independent
- −Limited free-tier means fewer casual listeners discovering your music
Best for: Artists whose existing audience is concentrated in the Apple ecosystem. Particularly beneficial for ambient producers whose listeners use HomePod, Apple Watch, or Siri to play background music, as Apple Music is the default service for these devices.
Feature comparison
| Feature | Spotify | Apple Music |
|---|---|---|
| Average Per-Stream Rate | $0.003-$0.005 | $0.007-$0.01 |
| Total User Base | 600M+ (220M+ premium) | 100M+ (all premium) |
| Free Tier | Yes — ad-supported with lower payouts | No — all subscribers pay |
| Algorithmic Discovery | Industry-leading (Discover Weekly, etc.) | Improving but less mature |
| Editorial Playlists | Extensive — including wellness/focus categories | Growing — fewer ambient-specific playlists |
| Audio Quality | Up to 320kbps OGG (no lossless) | Lossless + Spatial Audio (Dolby Atmos) |
| Artist Tools | Spotify for Artists — robust analytics | Apple Music for Artists — improving |
| Wellness Integration | Focus/Sleep playlists, app integrations | Apple Fitness+, Siri, HomePod |
Verdict
The answer isn't either/or — ambient and meditation music creators should be on both platforms. However, for many creators in this space, Spotify often generates more total revenue despite the lower per-stream rate because its massive user base and powerful algorithmic playlists drive significantly more streams. A track placed on a major Spotify focus or meditation playlist can generate millions of streams. That said, Apple Music's higher per-stream rate means that dollar-for-dollar, each Apple Music listener is more valuable. The strategic play is to optimize for both: use Spotify for discovery and audience growth, while cultivating Apple Music listeners for higher per-stream value. Spatial Audio on Apple Music also presents a unique opportunity for ambient music creators to differentiate their work.
FAQ
Related content
Comparisons
Want to monetize your catalog?
SPACE buys music catalogs in ambient, lo-fi, and meditation genres.
Apply Now