- This topic has 59 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Advice, I think that you are reading my answer incorrectly.
Let me be clear, the [removed] company and similar companies ARE NOT libraries. They are independent A&R services, which act as a pre-screening services for the libraries that post opportunities on their sites.
Libraries that I am familiar with, who post opportunities on the A&R services’ sites, e.g. the [removed] company, DO NOT take a cut of the fees paid to independent A&R companies. In fact, in some cases the libraries also pay the independent A&R company to post the opportunity.
i still don’t get the appeal of this strategy. surely as a new composer the approach should be 1. try out getting into a few RF libraries or non-exclusive libraries. if you’re getting rejected by non-exclusive libraries then keep working on your craft. if you get accepted by every single non-exclusive library you apply too then it might be time to take a chance at some exclusives. next visit some exclusive libraries websites that specialize in what you do and submit your best 3 tracks to those libraries and see how you get on. Bingo, you’re in. and best of all, all, this method is all free of charge.
i really don’t understand where the [removed] company and similar needs to fit into this strategy.
Danny
A big part of the “fit” is for people who are just learning how to make music that is suitable for Film/TV. That company provides feedback on submissions and a lot of educational services to help members get to the point where their music is library-worthy. Tons of folks out there are nowhere near where many people here are. Composers who already have lots of library contacts and are already putting music in catalogs, getting placements/sales, etc. may find less value though I’ve seen even experienced folks gain plenty. This is not a promotion for the company on my part, just clarification. There is a lot of misinformation out there.I’ll chime in here. I tried with that [removed] company three different times over the couple of decades they have been in existence and I saw no value, subjective reviews and a bunch of money out the door. YMMV though. 😉
I think he referred to them as screening services. I would question the ethics of a library who took a cut of the fees charged. For most of these , let’s call them screening services, who get criticized there would be a number of guys who would argue that they helped them get their foot in the door. That said, they are often tougher critics then the libraries often are. But if , say, I submit to libraries and in general, the libraries accept , one in four of my tracks, but I go to a service with several “opportunities” and only one in ten get forwarded, I would question how well that is working for you if the only reason you are there is to get your foot in the door with libraries who may or may not let you in otherwise. Also , one could argue that their success stores are sometimes overblown , but it would also be incorrect to say these don’t work for anyone.
I’ll chime in here. I tried with that [removed] company three different times over the couple of decades they have been in existence and I saw no value, subjective reviews and a bunch of money out the door. YMMV though. 😉
Many years ago, when the [removed] was first starting to do their conferences. A friend, who was a member invited me to an event in Pasadena. I saw a LOT of people that I knew, asked them how they were affiliated; and it turned out that they were paid to be there, and pretty much all of them didn’t really think much about the company (this was including people that were on the board of this organization)
Long story short, I got drunk off my ASS; saw the founder of the company, and had a “real Heart to Heart”. Found out that he wasn’t a bad guy; just kinda “mis-represented himself, and what his organization has done”..
I hope that it has improved, but the more I looked into it the more dissatisfied people I found..
Positive or negative, I have a hard time with just plain disinformation. I know first hand that people attending or even teaching at the conference are not paid to be there. I have personal relationships with many dozens of people who were and will be attendees, teachers, mentors, panelists, etc. and they do not get paid.
Second, the company has no “board”.
It’s fine if this company is not for you but get concerned when things that are outright false are posted.
If this is directed towards me. I stand behind what I said. I was not personally a member, because I have been in “The working side of the music industry for a number of years” and this was something I personally did not need. I have no reason to bash anyone, but my truth is my truth..
Well, Beatslinger, I guess everyone I know who has attended, mentored, taught classes, and/or was on a panel is owned money. Not gonna argue about it. All I can say is I have tons of first hand experience here.
I’m done.
How about this..
Google “Them” and put complaints in there to go along with it.
in fairness as an outside observer i do find that claim of people being paid to be at these conferences a bit hard to believe.
but lets look at this service from another angle. the libraries are sick to death of getting submissions from composers who have no idea what they are doing and dont have any craft yet. so a middle man company like the yellow company comes along and pitches a service to those libraries. “tell you what,” we will filter all the rubbish from the good stuff for you and only send on quality placeable tracks. perfect for the libraries. then the service which is not going to be charity has to create a business model and to stop composers just bombarding them with rubbish they charge a $5 fee per submission which forces the composers to be more selective to what they send. so in a way everyone wins. the composer is forced to only submit good material and gets feedback on those tracks. the middle man is only getting good to great material making it easier to filter this stuff and lastly the libraries are not getting bombarded with rubbish on a daily basis and instead are only getting placeable tracks forwarded.
i can see how this model works for some all i’m saying is i don’t see the need for going down that road in the first place if you can take a free route.
How about this idea – Just write great music and then before you send it in to a library/ publisher for evaluation, why not listen to some accepted and published tracks in the exact same genre on these sites to hear if your music can realistically compete with what is currently offered. Be tough on yourself. Ask: Is my music ready for prime time? If you have any doubts and it’s obvious other writers have you beat, why submit?
Cabs, hits, and x-rays are not the path to follow. I will stand by my opinion which is this: these kinds of companies are motivated by profit from submission fees (mostly from unqualified writers/ music producers). On the other hand, maybe these places are a decent dose of reality for those who try to get into the “prime time” arena of tv, film and advertising licensing. The one thing I will give credit and KUDOS to at the cab company is that the owner does seem to be forthright in saying “country ballads are not going to get you cue sheets.” They offer lots of free lectures and Tips on YT. Why? I can only think that they are doing so to recruit a new crop of hopefuls into their ecosystem of submission fees.
I will add one more thing. I have spoken with Michael over the years and he’s always been pleasant. They have been around for a long time so obviously something is working. I just found it was not right for me.
yes whats working is that you will always have desperate composers who are in a hurry to break into the industry instead of taking time to educate themselves and work on their craft.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.