Sourceaudio vs tunesat

Home Forums General Questions Sourceaudio vs tunesat

This topic contains 14 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  Art Munson 2 weeks, 5 days ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #30280 Reply

    Musicmatters
    Participant

    Hello, has anyone here tried the detection services offered by sourceaudio, they are substantially cheaper than tunesat which I have always thought was too expensive for composers. Thanks

    #30281 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    I could be wrong but I think Sourceaudio’s detection service is an add on to their hosting of your audio files (which is expensive).

    #30290 Reply

    dcrhere
    Participant

    SourceAudio’s trotting a new service out in a few months that’s significantly cheaper and may have a watermarking option. Stay tuned

    #30666 Reply

    Musicmatters
    Participant

    I did hear back from the people at sourceaudio and can confirm that the detection service is not an add on but a separate service and is very reasonably priced. You can confirm with your PRO if they will accept their data or not. Tunesat really need to bring their prices down…cheers

    #30667 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    Tunesat really need to bring their prices down…cheers

    Sourceaudio’s system is watermarking. This means your music files have to be watermarked before you send them for broadcast. Tunesat’s will detect existing files that are already being broadcast.

    So, if you already have music being broadcast, Sourceaudio will not detect it.

    From their website.

    21. When will I begin receiving detections on my watermarks?

    Watermarking inherently involves adding new information to your audio files. As such, newly watermarked music must be distributed to program producers, synched in their programming, and that programming aired before detections can occur.

    #30668 Reply

    Paul Gelsomine

    Sourceaudio’s system is watermarking. This means your music files have to be watermarked before you send them for broadcast. Tunesat’s will detect existing files that are already being broadcast.

    So, if you already have music being broadcast, Sourceaudio will not detect it.

    But the broadcast material wouldn’t be watermarked.

    So how does that affect detection?

    #30669 Reply

    Happy Ears
    Participant

    I think Art meant to say “Tunesat’s will NOT detect existing files that are already being broadcast”.

    #30670 Reply

    Paul Gelsomine

    Happy Ears

    Thanks for the clarification. Appreciated!

    #30671 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    I think Art meant to say “Tunesat’s will NOT detect existing files that are already being broadcast”.

    Please do not put words in my mouth Happy Ears. I stand by my statement: “Tunesat will detect existing files that are already being broadcast.”

    Sourceaudio will only will ONLY detect files if they have been watermarked.

    Tunesat files do not need to be watermarked. They are two different systems.

    I repeat, if you already have music being broadcast, Sourceaudio will not detect it if it hasn’t been watermarked by Sourceaudio. On the other hand, Tunesat will detect it without a watermark. Though, to be fair, Sourceaudio’s system is probably more accurate.

    #30678 Reply

    Happy Ears
    Participant

    Sorry Art and Paul, for some reason I read “Tunesat” as “Source Audio”. in that sentence. It was in the middle of the night……:)

    #30680 Reply

    LAwriter
    Participant

    Though, to be fair, Sourceaudio’s system is probably more accurate.

    Magnatudes more accurate. IMO, the way of the future. I was doing a bit of consulting with them when they started to move into the audio watermark arena, and they shared some of their test criteria. It’s a very robust system.

    #30683 Reply

    Paul Gelsomine

    Thanks for the clarification Art, quite clearer now on the Audio watermarking bit.

    One question though. Currently, do any of the US PROs accept either one of these companies detections as proof of performance?

    #30684 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    Currently, do any of the US PROs accept either one of these companies detections as proof of performance?

    BMI doesn’t pay on it but it is helpful in tracking down cue sheets or alerting a library to track down. The one area it has helped tremendously, for me, is with commercials. Once detected I can find it on Competitrack and BMI does pay from Competitrack. We currently have a commercial that is running on all channels that I would not have known about if it hadn’t been for Tunesat.

    #30769 Reply

    conorob25

    Awesome thread, guys and great tips there, Art. In regards to chasing payment/ cue sheet for commercial usage, would you normally wait and see with a few royalty statements before chasing it up with your PRO? If so how long?

    Cheers!

    #30771 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    In regards to chasing payment/ cue sheet for commercial usage, would you normally wait and see with a few royalty statements before chasing it up with your PRO? If so how long?

    I would wait three quarters, as that’s how long it usually takes. I have an Oxiclean commercial currently running that started back in June. Will hopefully see some of it in March 2019 statement. If not, will contact BMI.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
Reply To: Sourceaudio vs tunesat
Your information: