- This topic has 8 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Art had suggested before that he has gone back and made some changes or tweaks to royalty free tracks. I know I have a lot of older ones that don’t, for example, have edits, tracks back in the days of Taxi before I even considered doing royalty free stuff or I was otherwise letting them do the pitching so wasn’t really focusing on edits then. I now have enough tracks to where I am noticing, for example, tracks that may have sold or otherwise been placed, or gotten a lot of plays but have no alt versions; tracks that have gotten several plays but sell less then expected whose mixes I would like to re-mix or re-record. And tracks that I thought were strong contenders that just sit there and may need revisions of keywords, etc. because they are otherwise good tracks, or “adjusting ” of genres….anyone have success in doing this kinds of stuff, any suggestions of what do to revitalize or otherwise draw attention to older tracks that have underperformed that you still believe in?
I am still going to focus primarily on writing new stuff, but can make good use of a couple hours a week of doing this and am leaning towards doing so. Thoughts?
I think it’s worth it if you have the time. I’ve already seen sales on tracks that didn’t have alt edits as well as improved titles and metadata. I felt I had to do that before I could move forward. A year and a half project but worth for me.
My newer stuff always sounds “sonically better” than my older tracks. I attribute it to improvements in my mixing, plugins, sample libraries, hardware, etc. My older tracks often benefit from a new mix. Free time is always the problem.
anyone have success in doing this kinds of stuff, any suggestions of what do to revitalize or otherwise draw attention to older tracks that have underperformed that you still believe in?
I always push forward and produce new stuff instead of revising old stuff – no matter how hard the emotional tug is. Bottom line : Skill level is always improving. Gear is always improving. Redoing things is moving sideways at best, and the pull is always there because a song is never finished – only abandoned. 🙂
To go back and re-do things instead of taking that time to write/produce new music is a backwards thinking gamble for me. That’s just my personal perspective.
I would say edits YES, new mix NO (unless there was an awful problem which the perspective of time has revealed), Keywords YES.
I have done the occasional revamp of a tune with success, but in general I think it’s healthy to move forward.
I have been going back and remixing some older songs as my skills and gear have improved over the years.
Would you replace the old mixes in libraries, or submit the new ones under a new name [ie; “Old Name (2019 Mix)]?
Would you replace the old mixes in libraries, or submit the new ones under a new name [ie; “Old Name (2019 Mix)]?
I keep track of all versions in my internal records. If it’s new and the old one hasn’t sold I delete the old and re-upload. If the old one has sold I keep those that have sold and may change the title (if it’s better) or add “New Version”, to the new version. I usually end up changing the title. If you add something like “2019 Mix” you are locking yourself into a date that might look stale in 2025! 🙂
Thanks Art!
To go back and re-do things instead of taking that time to write/produce new music is a backwards thinking gamble for me. That’s just my personal perspective.
I’m so RIDICULOUS with having to write new stuff; that I will write to “Stock-Pile” certain Genre’s.
THEN, when the time comes to submit those types of Cues. I STILL end up writing them all brand new..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.