The manipulation behind "music briefs" for exclusive libs.

Home Forums Commentary The manipulation behind "music briefs" for exclusive libs.

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 48 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #28164 Reply
    MichaelL
    Participant

    I could have done better with it on any one of the RF sites. And it’s amazing music. Some of my best. Placing music with a top tier company does not guarantee it’s usage

    That was inevitable when upfront money started to shrink. It didn’t take long for me to realize that I could easily equal the upfront money with RF sales and then the rest is profit.

    #28165 Reply
    Music1234
    Participant

    “I’ve got a couple hundred tracks in the BEST of the A list companies that are essentially sitting dead on a shelf somewhere. “

    I would call the company and ask for a reversion or conversion to non-exclusive in perpetuity. All they can do is say no but why would they? If they are not presenting and pitching the music and you have gone a few years with no royalty income activity on those albums, ask if you can take a shot at making income with them. What do you have to lose? All they can do is say no. People should never under estimate what can happen in any and all markets. in the last year, My father pulled some 1/4 inch tape masters and digitally transferred 30 or 40 tunes. I listened and pointed out my favorites and told him where to sell them, how to title them, and how to keyword them. These were recorded in the 1956 to 1964 era. A couple of those suckers are selling away and I know that one of these days we will nail down a 4 figure or 5 figure license on one of them. NO WAY would we ever give this stuff to an exclusive publisher.

    “Ownership=flexibility=longevity”= total control=empowerment=the only way forward

    #28166 Reply
    LAwriter
    Participant

    Unfortunately, I was paid top dollar on all these songs, and there’s no way I can get them back easily.

    #28167 Reply
    Music1234
    Participant

    at least you were paid!

    #28168 Reply
    Chuck Mott
    Guest

    While I don’t disagree with what you folks are saying , and let me say thank you to LAwriter and others who have a great depth and experience to share, the lack of transparency here is beginning to bother me. What I am hearing is that those of us who are relatively new to this this are doing the wrong thing by submitting to music briefs to exclusive libraries, and that there are many other nonexclusives, it seems to be implied that do such a fantastic job of placing music and paying upfront fees, at least collectively, that submitting to exclusives is a waste of time. Yet, excuse me for saying so, we have no idea really who these other composers are , how well they are doing (or not), what kind of music you write or how “top quality” it is, or the libraries they involve themselves in, that they may just as well be unicorns at this point.
    And if I said semipro , it was in the strictest definition of the term, doing something for financial gain but not full time, is has nothing to do , the way I use the term, with the quality of the music put out. Which I am betting on here would consist of quite a number of us. Some of whom are writing some pretty good music.

    #28169 Reply
    Paolo
    Guest

    @LAwriter and @Music1234

    great discussion about re-focusing on front-end money.

    when dealing with libraries and a library wants to do a buyout, what do you think is fair upfront money that composers should be asking?

    #28170 Reply
    LAwriter
    Participant

    when dealing with libraries and a library wants to do a buyout, what do you think is fair upfront money that composers should be asking?

    For an exclusive buyout in perpetuity, I think $1k – $1500 up front is “fair” – depending on style, musicians, etc.. Good luck getting that nowadays.

    the lack of transparency here is beginning to bother me

    Completely understand that Chuck. Unfortunately, that’s just the way it has to be for me at this point. I have a lot of relationships that I don’t want to burn. And burn they would if I speak the truth from my perspective. And just to be clear – it’s only from MY perspective. I do not claim to be a prophet.

    I don’t think submitting to Exclusives is a “waste of time”. I just think it’s dangerous long term with their business model based on “back end” – meanwhile, we are staring down the barrel’s of netflix’s gun. How do you think that’s going to turn out? Check out the thread I posted about that.

    I DO suggest diversity. Although my take on things today points me away from A level libraries, perpetuity, and up front buyouts, that could change in a few years. This biz is twisting and turning at every moment – so diversification in music, styles, libraries and types of ownership IS in order IMO.

    To give some perspective – I have thousands of sync’s, and between my front end and back end royalties, I make enough to own a home, have a modest studio and support a family in LA. That should at least give you a tiny bit of perspective. Sorry I can’t be more “up front”. Cheers, and best of luck in your search.

    #28171 Reply
    ChuckMott
    Participant

    I have no problem with your posts, and I think we all benefit from the experience, and thanks for sharing. I think the conversation took a turn though. If you had a blog, I’d be a subscriber. How far off do you see this return to front end payments, are did it never go away , for some of us at least?

    #28172 Reply
    Music1234
    Participant

    Chuck, please do not doubt the level of experience that you are getting from our opinions just because we are on here being critical of publishers under an alias. If I were to present my real, full name, do you think I could actually present my opinions and experiences on this forum as forthright as I am? As you can see, I and LA Writer are highly critical of the publishers and production companies who want free work from everyone.

    I am sorry but these companies DO have “up front” money for music cues just as they have money for actors, directors, producers, editors, assistants, gaffers, production managers, booking agents, etc…

    We are just sounding the alarm here on all fronts. If EVERYONE continues to write to briefs for free, that then becomes the norm. Have you ever bothered to ask some questions about these briefs? Such as what show is it for? What network will it air on? Why is there no budget to develop underscores for the show? (There is a budget, the library just does not want to spend any of the money they will charge because there are too many folks fishing/ hoping for back end in 12 months) Can I write cues for the show but still sell them under different titles on RF markets?

    Writers need to ask some questions and not be so gullible. Don’t be a “sure I’ll get you some cues” kind of person, every time you get a brief.

    I guarantee you that privately these publishers chuckle behind the scenes and say “ahh…no worries, we’ll put out a brief and have 40 cues on our desk in a week, composers are just a dime a dozen” …Not even a penny a dozen I’d say…

    The practice needs to end just as piracy needed to end. The music business did find a way to combat piracy with spotify, Pandora, and other streaming services. People are not buying records, but they are buying monthly subscriptions for $10 to eliminate ads. That means people are buying music again.It’s just happening in a different way.

    In our world of music for TV, Film, advertising, YT/ internet Videos, Games, explainers, tutorials, podcasts, blogs, etc…there is money for music. That I guarantee you. Composers somewhere along the line decided that they are not only free (for TV show cues), but free in perpetuity. It’s mind boggling how this happened.

    RESIST.

    Publishers: Change your ways, dig into the budget and do what’s right, pay writers OR, make the deal non-exclusive. Don’t suppress a writers income potential. Create a win/ win situation. As it stands now it’s an “only we win” deal. This is my opinion folks. You decide if you agree or not. I also have some facts to back it up. When I write a cue and release in both markets: direct licensing and NE publisher, I see revenue happening from both sides of the equation. I have video editors buying the tunes for $50, $70, $100, and up for their web videos, then I see 12 to 18 months down the road the same cue going on shows and cue sheets start hitting. Then I see the back end for these cues. Write for all ends. I cant wait 18 months to MAYBE be paid for my works. Nor should you, nor anyone. If publishers need exclusivity, pay up for it. This should become the biggest topic of discussion at the next PMA meeting.

    #28174 Reply
    Alan
    Participant

    Can I write cues for the show but still sell them under different titles on RF markets?

    Of course that would make it a non-exclusive deal. I have asked this before and the response was an immediate no. I also started a thread on it a while back and many of you thought it was a foolish newbie idea.

    I still think if one library has the intestinal fortitude to start a new licensing agreement it would be a win-win. Let us sell on RF sites under a pseudonym and sure, give us a “black” list of competing broadcast libraries we cannot write for.

    Who was the first non-exclusive library? Anyone know?

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 48 total)
Reply To: The manipulation behind "music briefs" for exclusive libs.
Your information: