- July 3, 2012 at 12:58 pm #5937
I’m still new at this, so I have to ask: Do you have a Music Lawyer? If yes, how did you go about getting one? How about a manager? My husband seems to think I’m spinning my wheels going through music libraries, although I am optimistic (most days). I’ve just started a great book called “All you need to know about the Music Business” by Donald S. Passman – someone here recommended this book and I love it! I just wanted to check it against reality! Also, since I do best at writing from my heart, I primarily focus on one type of music and no plans to perform live. So, does this put me in a position of not needing managers and agencies? I appreciate your feedback!July 7, 2012 at 2:17 am #5954
Hi Cari, I’d say the fewer middlemen/middlewomen (?) the better! What service could an agent/manager provide to you? What is it that you think you need help with? Is it getting you in touch with libraries, is it going through all the legalese or filling out meta data? 😉July 9, 2012 at 7:40 am #5959
As you probably know, I am a lawyer and a composer (not in that order). Without getting into a complicated explanation about the differences between, lawyers, agents and managers, I would ask the same questions as Ulla. If you came to me, my first question would be, “what do you want to accomplish?” The answer to this question would let me know if you have realistic expectations about the business. A lot of the anger and frustration that composers vent here comes from not having realistic expectations in the first place.
>My husband seems to think I’m spinning my wheels going through music libraries, although I am optimistic (most days)<
“Going through music libraries”….to get where? Earning a living? Selling CD’s? Selling downloads (e.g. itunes, CDbaby)? Custom scoring..films, video games????
> Also, since I do best at writing from my heart, I primarily focus on one type of music and no plans to perform live.<
Writing one type of music, unfortunately is (possibly, not always) a problem in the library business, but not necessarily for the licensing business. To succeed as a library composer you really need to be able to create what Mark Lewis calls a “large volume of work.” My opinion, and that of some others here, is that you really need a catalog of 1000 or more cues in order to make a living wage composing library music. In my opinion, and based upon the success of others, e.g. Mark Petrie, John Mazzei, etc, you should write in a number of different styles.
To that, I would add that a library writer should write keeping in mind what is usable. Listen to the music in a variety of TV shows and ads, e.g. drama, reality, news, etc. Background music on CSI is different than Desparate Housewives, is different than Jersey Shore, is different than an ad for Pampers. Listen to the music in radio ads. Focus on what gets used, and think about why.
Licensing can be a different animal. A one-style writer can have success via a licensing if their style is popular or trendy, and meets the needs of end users…at the moment. Moby would be an example of a one-style writer, who achieved great success through licensing. Unfortunately, styles come and go so, you need to make hay while the sun shines. He did.
I’ve listened to your music. It’s very lovely. But…it is very esoteric. It would most likely be labeled “new age.” The “good” news, is that unlike crowded genres, such as hip-hop and dubstep, your competition is limited in comparison. The “bad” news is that the sync market for that style is also comparatively small, as it’s heyday was in the early to mid 1990’s. Hiring a lawyer, agent or manager will not change that reality.
Thus, depending on what your goals are, you are not necessarily “spinning your wheels.” You may be achieving what can be done with your style, at this point in time (things change). Think of how that style gets used. I recently heard an ad for an “all-natuaral” sunscreen product that has, what I’ll call, a “new age-like” underscore. But, it’s more “new age-like” than new age (which raises a whole different discussion regarding the differences between writing in a genre and writing in a “style” for media. There is a distinction).
I would give you a more specific opinion, but I cannot do that without knowing what your goals are. If you just want to write from the heart, and sell your music to people who will listen to it, you may want to consider going the CDbaby, itunes etc, digital artist route. However, you have to be prepared to promote yourself to achieve any success,in any arena. You may spend more than you make.
If you want to be a library composer my advice, for what it’s worth, would be:
1) Buy the best equipment and sounds that you can afford (if not using live players)
2) Write in more than one style (but know your limitations)
3) Write every day, whether you want to or not. (Inspiration is for amateurs)
4) Be prolific. Unless lightning strikes (e.g. Mind Heist), you need 1000 to 1500 cues to make what many people would consider a living. Everyone’s needs vary.
5) Have an attorney to review contracts for you. It’s easy to get burned!
6) Work hard to raise your game, and learn from everything you do (including mistakes).
Some general thoughts (not judgements).
Library music is the domain 0f professional composers, who write on a daily basis and produce a large volume of consistently usable work.
Licensing , as distinguished from library music, is more “artist” focused. As such, the opportunities may rise and fall with the artist’s popularity…potentially a strike while the iron is hot situation.
Donald Passman’s book, All You Need to Know About the Music Business, is good, but may be more geared to performing and recording artists.
Music Money and Success, by Jeff and Todd Brabec (both entertainment attorneys) is also very good.
I hope that gives you some food for thought.
All the best,
MichaelNovember 22, 2012 at 7:00 am #7641
@michaell, fanstastic advice, thank you for this.November 22, 2012 at 6:14 pm #7647
I have to chime in with Michael 100%
and now my two cents:
in reading what Michael wrote I had the following thought
why not experiment and add elements of dub step and / or hip hop to your new age style compositions?
you can get loads of ideas on you tube they have great how to vids on getting certain sounds look up their Pro- Tools channels and how to mixing and production videos they can be a great recourse not only for honing and developing you production chops but also for getting some interesting ideas and updated soundsNovember 24, 2012 at 3:24 am #7651
I have two comments to add to Michael’s great overview of your situation. Since I have personal interactions with your catalog I can verify that Michael is spot on with his assessment of your very specific style of composing. It really only appeals to a very limited audience.
My two bits…
1. You are simultaneously trying to hit both the CD Baby / Orchard Music / iTunes / Amazon $0.99 download market and the $49.95 licensing market with the exact same catalog. I would suggest you pick one and stick with it as doing both causes lots of problems.
2. Maybe try and market your music catalog as relaxation / meditation music and go directly after the yoga studios and massage therapists out there who need soothing background music in their studios.
Pick an audience / market and then start promoting yourself. Start a twitter account, a facebook page and a soundcloud account, let people know about your music. Give away samples of your music so people keep coming back. You have to build awareness then figure out how to monetize.
I won’t beat a dead horse by reiterating that you definitely don’t need a lawyer or an agent or a manager (oops, I just did). Please do not get suckered into wasting your money because some book told you that hiring expensive middlemen is the only way to be successful in the music business.
There are no magic bullets, it’s simply hard work and persistence.
-MarkNovember 27, 2012 at 10:48 am #7707
Another newbie here. I’d like to explore something Mark Lewis said above.
Mark, you said:
“You are simultaneously trying to hit both the CD Baby / Orchard Music / iTunes / Amazon $0.99 download market and the $49.95 licensing market with the exact same catalog. I would suggest you pick one and stick with it as doing both causes lots of problems.”
Can you elaborate a bit on this? I play in an indie rock band that has been haphazardly submitting music to libraries for a couple years now (we’ve made a few hundred bucks with AudioSparx but have had zero income from MusicDealers, YookaMusic, Mainstream Music, or AudioSocket). We also have all of our catalog available for digital sale at the usual sites (CD Baby, I-Tunes, Amazon, etc.).
Looking forward to your thoughts on this,
The Whole Bolivian Army
http://www.twba.comNovember 28, 2012 at 1:12 am #7710
Sure, here are two good reasons to keep your catalogs separate.
When you submit your music catalog to Orchard Music and CD Baby those companies will then take your music and enter it into the Youtube ContentID system to monetize your music when it is used on Youtube.
This is all fine if you are an indie band trying to promote your band and are making sales of your music directly to your fans.
The problem comes in when you legally license your music to someone to use in their video on Youtube. This customer has just paid you for the right to legally use your music in their video content. If your music is registered with CD Baby their video will be immediately hit with a copyright flag saying that they are using music that does not belong to them. Ads will be placed on top of their videos and their youtube account gets shut down to the opportunity to monetize the video creator’s content.
I can tell you from past experience over the last 4 years that customers absolutely hate it when this happens to their video content and their chance to earn revenue from their creations especially when they have just paid the composer $49.95 for this exact situation not to happen.
These issues cause many legal problems and business issues for the music libraries distributing your music.
The other issue is that once a customer finds your piece of music on a music licensing website they might also do a search for that track name to see if they can get a better deal on a different website. If they find your $49.95 track available for $0.99 on iTunes what is to stop them from just purchasing it on iTunes and using it in their commercial project?
Hope this helps.
-MarkNovember 28, 2012 at 5:36 am #7714
My understanding of the CDbaby youtube content ID arrangement is that it is “opt-in”.. After reading about the youtube program on the MLR, I chose to not opt-in, when CDBaby announced their program. I’ll double check.
I have two new age CD’s and a smooth jazz CD in digital distribution through CDBaby. But I also have some of that music in libraries. I wouldn’t want it in the youtube content ID system, for the reasons that you mention. If it is, I’ll have it removed.
With respect to searching for a better deal, that sounds like an instance where the composer should do alternate titles, which is perfectly legit, under US copyright law. (this is not to be confused with re-titling as it is practiced by some libraries).
MichaelNovember 28, 2012 at 9:57 pm #7719
Thanks for getting back with your thoughts, Mark, and thank you, Michael, for adding yours.
Michael is correct about CD Baby. We opted out as soon as we learned that AudioSparx, though non-exclusive, doesn’t like its artists to be affiliated with Rumblefish, which is the company that partners with CD Baby to handle their licensing, including the YouTube deals.
Regarding your second point, Mark, I could be naive here, but wouldn’t someone who’s willing to pay a licensing fee know better than to simply buy a track on Amazon and then try to use it on their video? Most people who go to the trouble to do things legally know the difference between merely buying music to listen to it and buying it to license it. Or maybe I’m wrong.
?November 28, 2012 at 11:59 pm #7720
“but wouldn’t someone who’s willing to pay a licensing fee know better than to simply buy a track on Amazon and then try to use it on their video?”
My answer would be no, not always. You’d be surprised at what people do and the complete ignorance of copyright laws that a substantial percentage of people have out there.
Also, simply un-checking an option that you checked when you signed up with CD Baby doesn’t mean that Rumblefish will immediately and diligently go out and remove your music from the Youtube ContentID system, quite the contrary.
Once it is in there it is difficult to get it removed. Uploading your music to Youtube is the easiest way to see if your music is still being flagged by the contentID system.
But in the end it is up to you what you do with your music, I’m just stating what we have found in our experience of licensing music for the last 14 years.
At musicloops.com we don’t accept any composers that have their music available for $0.99 elsewhere. To us it means that they are not serious about creating a valuable catalog of production music and there are plenty of great composers out there that do value the integrity of their catalog so there’s no real need to deal with a music catalog that has the potential of causing us problems.November 29, 2012 at 7:28 am #7721
At musicloops.com we don’t accept any composers that have their music available for $0.99 elsewhere. To us it means that they are not serious about creating a valuable catalog of production music
Mark…with complete respect to you, I disagree, to a point. It’s not all black and white.
All of the successful composers that I know, at various times, wear different hats to earn a living, including: composing, teaching, performing, scoring etc. When they compose, they compose for all sorts of purposes including: production music, film/video scores, games, commercial releases, industrial theater, etc etc, etc. To say that a composer is not serious about any one of those elements because they do the other is an over generalization.
One of my first professional gigs was composing for the NFL music library around 1978. Since then, I composed hundreds of production music cues for half a dozen exclusive libraries. I also composed 200 cues for a royalty free library 15 years before you started Music Loops. I left my law practice, and invested a lot of money, specifically for the purpose of producing a high quality and valuable production music catalog. I think that qualifies as serious.
But…I have music on CDBaby too. The music in question is from three CDs that were commercially released in the 90’s, when I was a smooth jazz/new age artist (one of the other hats). It was never intended to be production music. Because there is sometimes a place for those genres in the production music world, I put some of my commercially released music into libraries, not the other way around.
I apologize for talking about me way too much, but the point is to illustrate that you cannot assume someone is not a serious composer of production music simply because they put music on CDbaby or iTunes, etc. You could easily turn it around and argue that someone isn’t a serious artist if they license their music through libraries, which would also be an over generalization.
That said, I understand your position. A lot of “artists” who do not compose production music, specifically, try to license their “songs” in as many ways as possible through various libraries, and CDBaby etc. They take the shotgun approach, because every self-help guru tells them that’s what you have to do. There is, however, a distinction between being a professional production music composer and being a songwriter. It is a completely separate skill set, and not everybody gets that. (If I could set up an MLR just for production music composers I would.)
When writers assume that libraries, especially royalty free libraries, should be a dumping ground for anything and everything that they do, without understanding or regard for the specific library’s business model and needs, it is a headache for the library and a problem for the business in general.
I don’t agree with an all-or-nothing generalization that would prevent composers from diversifying their revenue streams. Conversely, I don’t think composers should blindly shotgun their entire catalog. That only leads to problems for both the library and composer.
A professional writer should/would only submit music to a library that meets its criteria. To do otherwise, shows that the writer didn’t do their homework regarding the library’s needs/expectations, and is either oblivious, or doesn’t care, which doesn’t speak well of the writer. Conversely, by eliminating writers because they diversify might, in the long run, deprive a library of representing a valuable catalog.
The balanced approach, as I advocated in previous threads, is for writers to divide their catalog. Put your music where it’s appropriate, and more doors will open. You’ll be regarded as a professional, and libraries, like Music Loops, might not find it necessary to adopt policies that will limit your opportunities.
_MichaelNovember 29, 2012 at 8:29 am #7722
Sorry, but in business things sometimes need to be black and white.
Out of our 130 composers I have had 4 composers enter their music catalog into CD Baby to “diversify”.
When they do this I am immediately hit with complaints from all of our customers who have licensed their music in the past that their youtube accounts are now showing copyright flags and they are no longer able to earn revenue from their video content that contains legally licensed music.
I have had to hire lawyers to contact CD Baby.
I have had many dealings with the legal dept at Orchard Music because of it.
I have had to give refunds to loyal customers who trusted us that they have the legal right to use the music they’ve licensed from us.
All because a composer wanted to “diversify” and earn a few more pennies from their catalog.
I don’t need that hassle or expense, I don’t need the loss of time, energy and most importantly a customer’s trust. I don’t have to deal with it so I don’t.
Believe me, there are plenty of great production music composers out there that have no intention of trying to sell their music for $0.99, there is no shortage of them and there is no reason to figure out how to work around a “diversified” catalog just so a composer can join the library. There are plenty of libraries out there that don’t care what composers do with their music and that is where diversified composers should go.
And Michael, my comments were meant in the most general sense possible, I was in no way directing them at you personally. I would have hoped that a few composers might have learned something from what I said, whether they take my advice or not is inconsequential.
This will be my last response to this thread as I think it has gotten way off subject.
Sorry about that Art.
-MarkNovember 29, 2012 at 9:17 am #7723
Im pretty sure that what I wrote is 99% in agreement with your views, with the exception that I think it’s possible for someone to be a production music composer AND to have a separate and distinct catalog of non-production music for sale elsewhere, with the emphasis being on separate and distinct. If the two catalogs do not overlap, there is nothing for you to work around.
_MichaelNovember 30, 2012 at 9:19 am #7735
I don’t use CD Baby, although I know my music is on iTunes from another source. They have since made changes and no longer go through IODA/youtube.
Here’s the scoop: as a professional musician for over 30 years, I have decided to compose and perform my own music. I politely presented my work to many music library’s (non-exclusive) and awaited their approval. I don’t have a hidden agenda nor do I wish to cause any waves whatsoever. When told my entire library was being removed from a highly recommended music library, I was very disappointed. My intent has been to find the right place for my music and certainly never to take advantage of anyone. I know, ignorance is no excuse.
If I really wanted to create waves, I would ask why do non-exclusives want my music exclusively but not willing to pay for it?
(BTW, my IODA paycheck was $12.26 for 128 songs sold in 12 months.)
Ruth Polcari @ Cari Live Studio.