The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Pt. 3
The Good: Bandcamp 🔗
URL: https://www.bandcamp.com
IN THIS THIRD AND FINAL INSTALLMENT of “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,” I will examine the youngest website of the series: Bandcamp.com. Bandcamp launched in 2008 under the supervision of founders Ethan Diamond, Shawn Grunberger, Joe Holt, and Neal Tucker.1 One of the chief motiviations in establishing the site was to fill a niche left vacant by large-scale digital music vendors/services such as Apple, Amazon, Google, and Spotify: a niche where vendor and artist can engage in fair business practices. To that end, Bandcamp allows its artists to enjoy “80-85%” of revenues from sale of digital and physical goods (the site takes 15%, and payment processor fees consume the remainder, where applicable).2 Although four years would pass before Bandcamp considered itself a profitable enterprise, the site caught fire among countless musical acts—both signed and unsigned—and hundreds of independent record labels. As of 2022, Bandcamp routinely reports total monthly revenues in excess of $18.75 million, of which artists and labels receive approximately $15 million (ibid.).
In another business move that has brought the site massive acclaim, Bandcamp has recently parlayed its profitability into significant charity donations to both artists and social causes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused serious revenue loss for artists accustomed to selling their wares at live performances, Bandcamp piloted what has become a new tradition known as “Bandcamp Fridays.” On these special occasions, the site pledges to waive its share of sales revenues to help increase artists’ earnings.3 Customer response to these events has been so overwhelming that Bandcamp has begun using “Bandcamp Fridays” to raise funds for social causes, including efforts to combat “the ongoing state-sanctioned violence against black people in the US and around the world.” 4 Thus, in the wake of brutal and avoidable slayings of African Americans at the hands of U.S. police departments, Bandcamp donated millions of dollars to the NAACP in 2020 (ibid.).
In addition to Bandcamp’s “Fair Trade Music Policy,” another chief selling point of the site is its try-before-you-buy practice whereby site visitors may listen to songs in their entirety (although at a significantly reduced bit rate of 128 kbps). Other major digital music vendors often place strict limitations on the preview length of audio products, so many customers have praised this Bandcamp innovation. Customers may audition tracks in Bandacamp’s compact but responsive audio interface:
As one can see from the render above, the Bandcamp audio interface renders well in, e.g., Google Chrome on the Apple iPhone 8 Plus. However, do not take my word for it: let’s look at some measures from WebSpeed Insights and lambdatest.com,
WebSpeed Insights Analysis:
Test Conditions:
OS: Android 12
Cellular Network: Boost Mobile 5G
WebSpeed Insights awards Bandcamp some very high marks; however, the dip in performance in mobile browsers is worth examining closer. According to the detailed results, Bandcamp’s First Contentful Paint on mobile browsers took 3.1 s. The reason for this delay is likely due to some render-blocking CSS (potential reduction of 250 ms) and unused JavaScript (potential reduction of 125 KB). These impediments may also directly contribute to the First Contentful Paint (3G) of 6,232 ms. Ultimately, this minor reduction in performance may be worth the gains received by this highly inclusive and well-constructed website.
lambdatest.com Results (a sample)
Google Chrome
-768x1024.png "www.bandcamp.com on the Apple iPad 6th Generation")
Mozilla Firefox
-firefox-768x1024.png "www.bandcamp.com on the Apple iPad 6th Generation")
lambdatest.com test results demonstrated no major rendering problems or dramatic differences across mobile device browsers.
The Bottom Line:
Not only does Bandcamp.com implement an admirable business model, but it also demonstrates measurable facility in modern website design. I intentionally reviewed this site last so that “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly” could end on a high note. The marked differences between Bandcamp.com, Encyclopædia Metallum, and Prog Archives leave me to speculate about which factor/s may have prompted the youngest website to place a premium on accessibility and best practices (and, in turn, performance). Did Bandcamp launch at a time when mobile device use was on the rise? Were its founders simply hip individuals from California with their finger on the pulse of the World Wide Web and the needs of its users? I am inclined to believe that predicating financial success on user experience—a pairing which the two older sites were never forced to make—may have been the primary impetus behind Bandcamp’s web design philosophy. Whatever the reason, I think it fair to say that Bandcamp is doing something right, not only in its superior website architecture but also in its progressive business practices. For these reasons, I would highly recommend this site to anyone who loves music and values fair dealing.