- January 11, 2017 at 3:43 pm #26558
I mainly compose library music on my own, but there are some songs that will sound better bringing in musicians.
I’m curious how other people here handle the issue of sharing revenue … do you split 50/50 (or differently depending on their contribution) and pay them yourself if/when revenue comes in – or do you give them co-credit and just split all revenue automatically when libraries and PROs pay out?
Also, what type of contract do you have the musician sign?
For me, I know the track will be more marketable, so it’s worth it. I’m waffling between keeping it simple by splitting it 50/50 with co-credit, — or giving them equal percent at first (starting at 50%) then reducing the percentage after revenue reaches some predetermined amount (say $1000, perhaps).
Any thoughts?January 11, 2017 at 7:06 pm #26559
50/50 or upfront payment / buy out. I wouldn’t recommend trying to keep tabs on residual income and changing the split as time goes by.
Someone tried that with me once – he hired me to ghost write on his various TV shows and said I couldn’t be on the cue sheet but he’d have his book-keeper go through all the PRO statements and calculate my share. He gave up pretty quickly after finding out what a PITA it was. Bought me out for a fee.January 11, 2017 at 7:33 pm #26560
If you are bringing in musicians to record music you have written, you can treat it as a work for hire. You pay the musicians for the session, but they don’t participate in ownership or royalties.
I think you can find boilerplate WFH agreements online. Doesn’t hurt to speak with a music attorney of course. But the spirit of this kind of agreement is pretty straightforward.January 12, 2017 at 11:46 am #26563
I have done both. I did a few 50/50 deals with a couple of friends. To keep is simple, we submitted exclusively and plan to forget about them. The only issue would be a sync fees. Since they were submitted through my JP/MIBE accounts, I presume a check would come to me only, but I’m honestly not sure.
If I want a track to be non-ex, I just do a flat work for hire using a contract template a bought from a legal document website. I’ve only done that a couple of times with tracks that I feel had strong earning potential if done “right.”January 12, 2017 at 11:52 am #26564
Oh, I forgot to mention I have used the “barter” method a couple of times too. I have traded recording/producing services for session work on a hand shake. I won’t do that anymore. I haven’t had a problem (yet), but one track in particular has a few high profile placements and I’m always worried a session player will hear it and think I made a ton of money and ripped them off. A ton of money, ha.January 12, 2017 at 1:49 pm #26565
If I want a track to be non-ex, I just do a flat work for hire using a contract template a bought from a legal document website.
Even we lawyers are in a “race to the bottom” situation thanks to technology and cheap competition!January 13, 2017 at 9:33 am #26569
Buy em out up front. No sharing of royalties. Find the money somehow and pay them fairly up front. Yeah, it hurts to pay up front, but the downsides of sharing royalties are a pita all the way around. The extra accounting, and then the loss of royalties down the line more than make it a loosing situation to share royalties.January 13, 2017 at 10:09 am #26570
As with many things in this industry (and life) — it’s a gamble.
I have one song that I want a saxophone on, that would be the focus of the song, so I’d be more inclined to share that one 50/50. It’s a crucial part of selling the song.
I have another where I just need a jazzy ride cymbal behind guitar and bass, so the generous part of me says “keep it simple and just do 50/50” whereas the anxious/financial/practical side says 50/50 will possibly lose me a bunch of money in the future.
My songs up till now have not sold much, so this doesn’t seem like much of an issue, but like most people here, I’m optimistically thinking “THIS song will be THE ONE!”….January 13, 2017 at 6:01 pm #26581
From my perspective, sharing royalties is an all around fail for both sides and a bad idea IMO.
1. – you split royalties on a sax solo or drum part and you get a $3500 license. That was an expensive overdub, and it’s almost certainly going to KEEP paying the instrumentalist. Of course, he/she is elated but you are probably never going to split a royalty for a simple overdub again….
2. – The song never does anything. Yes, you are off the hook for paying the musician, but they will never want to work for you again. It’s a loose / loose for both of you. Although you didn’t put out any money, you are not going to get them to play for you next time.
3. – Accounting. From here on out for the rest of your career, you’re going to have to administrate all these little deals…. Ugh. That might be the worst part…
Anyone who tells me I’ll get credit, it will help my career, OR THAT THEY WILL SHARE PROFITS with me gets an automatic write off. Musicians are one of the most taken advantage of professionals out there. Take care of your musicians and they will make your music POP. and you’ll make money.January 17, 2017 at 3:44 pm #26599
If you need a guitar riffs or solos shoot me an email, I’ll do 50/50January 17, 2017 at 3:45 pm #26600
Daniel BarryJanuary 18, 2017 at 3:41 pm #26626
Hi Daniel, thanks for the offer… guitar’s my main instrument too, so I’m covered there … but will keep you in mind!