Advice

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 445 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Glow Music Group #44623
    Advice
    Participant

    Hi Lila
    I’m not comfortable giving out email addresses publicly so…
    Go to their website’s Contact Us page, drop them an email asking how to submit music. GlowMusicGroup dot com. It’s probably best to briefly introduce yourself and provide a website link so they get a feel for what you do.

    HTH!
    πŸ˜€

    in reply to: Difference between a ‘sync agent’ and a library? #44581
    Advice
    Participant

    Sync agents only go after higher end placements that always have a sync fee. Their income is generally all or most from sync fees. It varies, but they often don’t take a publishing share. Some are exclusive, some not.

    in reply to: Glow Music Group #44580
    Advice
    Participant

    Hey Dan
    I’ve worked with Glow and had a nice placement by them around 1-2 years ago. They actively pitch and continue to get good placements. They are highly selective and reject a large percentage of what is submitted. I don’t know much about instrumental cues with them but my *guess* would be if it has excellent licensing potential, they’d be interested. Probably not the place for typical reality TV cues, more likely very syncable instrumentals.

    They only seek sync fee deals which they split with the writers and take no publishing.

    HTH

    in reply to: Glow Music Group #44358
    Advice
    Participant

    Glow Music Group is a sync agency, not a library. As far as I know they are NON-exclusive as I have some songs with them. I had one nice placement with a decent sync fee. They do not take any publishing, only a split of sync fee.

    EXTREMELY selective. If you got any accepted, you have some excellent sync-worthy material.

    HTH. Good luck!

    in reply to: Wrong Usage Code on Cue Sheet #44336
    Advice
    Participant

    I think it’s best to start with the library who made the placement.

    in reply to: Work for Hire agreement with added viral clause #44335
    Advice
    Participant

    Monkeyman

    I actually agree with the person who was hiring you. The whole idea of a WFH is one fee, they own everything, and you get no additional royalties or payments of any kind.

    Keep in mind that the WFH contract *might* have to be shown to others that the client is working with and any encumbrance on rights, ownership, future liabilities, etc. can be a show stopper for them. They could end up involved in a lawsuit, for example. I’ve seen music libraries refuse songs if the WFH agreement had any other obligations of any kind.

    So if you’re not comfortable with that price and nothing else, you can see if you can get a higher fee. But it should be a once and done thing. Take it or leave it.

    Best,
    Casey

    in reply to: Has anyone been approached by cold calls? #44262
    Advice
    Participant

    Most successful libraries have plenty of great music and do not need to cold call to get more. They usually have way more submissions than they can handle as well as a darn good catalog. It would be a rarity that a solid opportunity would come from a cold call like that.

    Delete and move on.

    Best

    in reply to: Storefront Software #43956
    Advice
    Participant

    Thanks! It was Source Audio I was looking for and found it using those links. πŸ™‚

    Advice
    Participant

    Often being a little fish in a huge pond isn’t the best option. The best ones for me have been smaller, more boutique, ones that have good relationships with a number of TV and film music sups.

    Of course even with the libraries that “actively” seeking placements, tracks can linger for months, years, or forever without a placement.

    Advice
    Participant

    I’m with Art here. They miss a lot but they can also pick up something that makes you money. While it’s true that the PROs don’t accept Tunesat detections for proof of broadcast, a detection can have you go back to the library and see why you never saw a cue sheet, got paid, etc. Tunesat picked on a significant network placement for me for which I never got an ASCAP cue sheet. I contacted the library who in turn contacted the client who made a cue sheet correction. It turned out that my track was a last minute substitution and they had forgotton to fix it on the cue sheet.

    It’s true that 50 tracks isn’t much but heck, that’s for free. It’s also true that the paid options are way too expensive for anyone who is not managing a very large catalog with a lot of revenue involved such as it might be for a library.

    in reply to: That Pitch #43596
    Advice
    Participant

    Full disclosure, I know nothing about this company.

    It seems to me that music supervisors, libraries, and video content creators already live in a mega saturated market full of places to get music. And there’s certianly no shortage of sites out there to “help people get their music into the right hands”. And music libraries don’t have exactly struggle to find music.

    This is not a rant against anyone who charges, the so called “pay to play”. I hate that term and I do still work with one company I respect (don’t ask which one please).

    But I believe the best placement strategy is work directly with good music libraries. They have the contacts and connections. If you can find out what they are most looking for and that suits your style, that gives the best chances. A music library can pitch your track to many clients over many years. A one-time brief for one placement is just that. And just because your track is on some website, doesn’t mean anyone will ever hear it.

    JMHO

    in reply to: What Genre of Library Music Sells The Best? #43595
    Advice
    Participant

    I have to agree with what’s been said in that it has to be something you enjoy doing or you won’t be good at and probably lose interest. So pick a style that you hear regularly on TV shows and know you could excel at and go for it.

    in reply to: Is my music website a liability? #43434
    Advice
    Participant

    I like Bandzoogle for musician/composer websites since they have tons of templates and make putting up links to songs very easy. It runs around $19.95 a month (If I recall) to include email with your domain as well. I don’t know if that’s within your budget.

    Unlike Art, I have no interest in actually selling music on my site. I just want it represent who I am and samples of my work. Interestingly, I never use it to send song links to libraries or sups. For that I use Disco. I find it quicker and easier to customize playlists for that purpose with Disco. Soundcloud works as well but has issues with piracy and running ads.

    Advice
    Participant

    .

    Advice
    Participant

    BMAT’s website is pretty annoying and a turn off. You can’t get any information without going through a sales lead generation thing. They really have to simplify things to “What do you do and how much do you charge?” I understand that for big publishers, a personalized quote may be needed. But in general, the site is a sales & marketing disaster (not said meanly, just honesty). I wonder how many visitors leave right away because they can’t figure out anything from the website. BMAT may have great services, I don’t know. But MHO is you have change your web presence to get anywhere. I could be wrong there, I know. PS I am not in the website development business, not selling anything.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 445 total)
X

Forgot Password?

Join Us