- This topic has 32 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Hi everyone!
I’m getting ready to start my new life as a library music composer. I still haven’t applied to any RF libraries because I wnat to have at least 20 tracks ready.
Can someone explain to me in a schematic way what are the differences between PRODUCTION music libraries and RF music libraries? Pro and cons? Should I foucs on one of them since I’m starting from scratch?
Thank you!
They don’t really differentiate them that way here – more the divide is between royalty free libraries, which provide music for all around general purposes – web, radio, sis’s wedding, corporate videos such as presentation, and some provide the streaming background music you here in retail stores, spas, etc. The other players are non exclusive libraries , who aim primarily for the film and tv market. They let you sell your same music to someone else or perhaps release your own album for sale, and exclusive libraries. Once you sell it to them it is theirs and theirs alone, say bye bye to your track and hope for the best. Other libraries (thi s end I’m not familiar with at all) work with trailer music, which I think deals with just film music, for , er trailers? There are variations in there but for the most part that is it.
Hi Wall E!
That’s a gray area. In ever really thought of there being a huge distinction.
However…
1) Traditional Production Music libraries are:
a. Sometimes “work for hire” (less often today)
b. Highly curated
c. Will ask you to compose to briefs
d. Are generally hard to get into
e. generally have more access to high-end licensesPROs:
1. There used to be more potential to make more money, especially backend
2. Perceived as “better,” which is only partially true.Cons:
1. They’re exclusive and sometimes your music just sits.
2. You give up the copyright.2) Royalty Free Libraries
a. Are not work for hire, with some notable and rumored exceptions
1. PB is rumored to pay upfront, as is SW on occasion
2. Performance free and subscription based RF libs pay upfront
and that’s it — nothing afterward.
b. Curation and quality are all over the map. Some libs, like ML, are tough to get into and once in not all tracks are accepted.
c. You don’t write to briefs, but some libs, like AS, list what they need.
e. generally easy to get into (which is a con)
f. Many RF libs sell a larger percentage lot of youtube and corporate licenses than high-end licensesPROs:
1. Royalty Free is often a misnomer a large percentage of RF libraries require their customers to file cue sheets, when appropriate.
2. You own your music and publishing (in most cases)
3. You get paid monthly (in most cases)CONS:
1. Some libs are uncurated and your tracks are swimming in a sea of sh*t.
2. License fees are low (in most cases)General thoughts:
Production Music libraries used to be focused on creating music that specifically functioned in Film, TV, Advertising. Of course, that now includes Games and Trailers. The production values are often higher. However, that is changing because competition is driving more and more highly-trained and skilled composers into the RF market. That, combined with increasingly amazing sample libraries, is raising the quality level of some RF music to a point where it’s competitive with high-end libs.
On the down-side, some RF libs are still a dumping ground for poorly written and poorly produced music.
Note: This doesn’t address “non-exclusive” libraries that do blanket deals with broadcasters. That’s a different model.
It’s not an either-or choice. Try both. Either way, unfortunately, we’re all snowflakes in a blizzard.
Just a side note:
Many of your traditional production music libraries are owned by large companies, like Sony and Warner.
Many of your RF libs are small companies owned and in some cases run by one or two people.
That’s not a value judgment. There’s a concept in contract law that arises in “key person” clauses. Generally, it has to do with what happens when a key person involved in the contract or deal can no perform. That is potentially a concern in smaller RF libraries if no provisions for succession are made.
We’ve seen that come into play here once or twice. There is a significant risk with small RF libraries — that a) the library would cease to exist overnight, or b) it won’t be able to operate at the same level.
Thanks for those explanations, Michael. My gut so far has told me to avoid the RF libraries. That’s not to say anything against them, but just a personal choice for me.
My gut so far has told me to avoid the RF libraries. That’s not to say anything against them, but just a personal choice for me.
On the contrary, there are a number of good RF libraries, from which you can generate a good revenue stream. I’ve been doing this for more years than I care to admit. I’ve written for seven or eight traditional production music libraries, as well as RF libraries.
At this time, my personal focus is on the RF market.
On the contrary, there are a number of good RF libraries, from which you can generate a good revenue stream. I’ve been doing this for more years than I care to admit. I’ve written for seven or eight traditional production music libraries, as well as RF libraries.
At this time, my personal focus is on the RF market.
Really, Michael? Maybe I’m misunderstanding the concept, then.
As far as I know, one of the main advantages of Production Music libraries, compared to RF, is the income coming from your Performance Right Organization, am I right?
Yes. But… “Royalty Free” in the context of most RF libraries means that the client pays a single sync fee and can reuse the track. It does not mean that they aren’t required to file cue sheets, if the music is used in a broadcat production. (some RF libs differ)
Really, Michael? Maybe I’m misunderstanding the concept, then.
Which concept — “Royalty Free?” If you read the Terms of Use for AS, P5 and Productiontrax, you will see that they require customers to file cue sheets.
Others, like AJ, require that your tracks not be PRO registered.
A number of writers here can confirm that they have, in fact, received backend PRO paynents from RF sales.
One Caveat: At this time, library music and composing are only additional revenue streams for me. So, my needs and expectations may be different.
I think any discussion about this has to be viewed as a business that is constantly changing, technology and the internet specifically have changed the way that music is heard and ultimately licensed. Netflix for example have exploded is growth, more companies are using the internet for promotion than TV.
My personal view is to keep a presence in all of the business models, they serve different ares of the market and they will all supply that market to a greater or lesser extent as time moves forward.
Lets not forget the iPad was only released in 2010 !!!!! Things change very quickly.
I think any discussion about this has to be viewed as a business that is constantly changing, technology and the internet specifically have changed the way that music is heard and ultimately licensed.
Denis is spot on! My royalties for Hulu and Netflix are a minute fraction of what my broadcast royalties are for the smae music in the same shows.
I fear that relying on, and focusing on, backend money may be a bit like wanting to become a blacksmith. That’s a bit drastic and it won’t change overnight. But, I think the writing is on the wall.
With respect to tradtional Production Music libraries vs RF libraries, I just heard am almost 20-year old track of mine in a local car Chevy dealer’s commercial.
The track was done in a somewhat “work for hire” arrangement. I do not get a share of any sync fees, and it is highly unlikely that I will see any backend for this use. If, on the other hand, that track was in a Royalty Free library, I would have received payment for the license.
Like Denis said, above, you need a “presence in all of the business models,” especially if you are doing this for a living.
I fear that relying on, and focusing on, backend money may be a bit like wanting to become a blacksmith. That’s a bit drastic and it won’t change overnight. But, I think the writing is on the wall.
Maybe, none of has a crystal ball.
As I have said before my back end royalties far outweigh my RF income but as MichaelL and Denis have said you have to play in all the arenas.
Okay, I’ll repeat again, “Business is war, war is hell, adapt or die!”. 🙂
As I have said before my back end royalties far outweigh my RF income but as MichaelL and Denis have said you have to play in all the arenas
I don’t doubt that’s the case. As I said, RF is another revenue stream for me. I would not rely on it as a sole source of music income.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.