Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Simple: All composers hold the line with all customers and say “Take it or leave it”. Pay $100 or….have silence as your background music cue.
There is nothing simple about getting *ALL* composers to do anything.
Daniel
I’m confused. You said you own an EXCLUSIVE library. Well if someone signs a track with an exclusive library, they shouldn’t be able to place that track anywhere else on their own (RF or other) or they would be violating their contract.I would think the discussion would be more about composers placing tracks in both traditional NON-EXCLUSIVE libraries and RF libraries. (?)
One thing I noticed in discussions on this site is sometimes traditional libraries (E or NE) and RF libraries get lumped together in discussions. The word “library” applies to both but they are very different animals and business models.
If you don’t want to sign exclusive deals with no money up-front don’t… That applies to with or without reversion depending on how your feel about it. If you don’t think a type of deal is right for you, don’t take it.
I just have issues with the “we can change the world” revolutionary thing whereby composers will tell libraries how to run their business ‘or else’.
BTW, if you really think you have the right idea for a new music library business model that can be financially successful, quit your day job, take a second mortgage on your house, and start your own music library. See what you would do when the next morsel of food for your family depends on licensing tracks from your library.
The above may sound a bit dramatic but you really do have to put yourself in the shoes of the other guy running a business and trying to make a living. He/she hasn’t necessarily set up contract terms for the hell of it. They have to please THEIR clients or they will be out of business.
I knew a guy who tried this approach with respect to dating. He dated five women at once, telling each of them that the first one to sleep with him (assuming it was good sex) could have him.
He never heard the shot.
😉
I dunno… My family tells me I suck. So maybe I’m lucky! 🙂 🙂
When I read the OP I was too dumbfounded to even reply.
Yea, that was my first reaction. Definitely a Michael L. Category 2 storm here. I apologize, Richard, if my replies came off nasty. My intention is to be emphatic and not mean but it’s hard not to have a very strong reaction to your OP.
Richard, I hope you’ll read the replies here from other experienced music library composers and re-think your approach as opposed to “dig in” as to why your idea is a good one. But it’s YOUR career.
Again, the biggest problems with this idea are:
How can a library be the first one to get you a placement if they don’t pitch your tracks at all? And they won’t pitch without a contract. Period, end of story. Some will be willing to negotiate points on the contract such as adding reversion with terms. But no contract, no pitch.
You are WAY overestimating the importance of YOUR music from the POV of the library. The current climate of supply and demand is not in your favor. There is enough excellent music out there that libraries don’t need to acquiesce to some new business model of yours.
Also, don’t forget that there are REASONS why it can take years for a library to get a placement with your track and they don’t NECESSARILY mean the library is just letting your track sit on the shelf collecting dust. It’s unbelievably competitive out there and a sup feeling that your track and particular scene are the right match doesn’t happen easily.
My concern about your using this approach is in COULD be worse than non-successful. A library that you may want to deal with in the future may remember your initial contact and have written you off as someone “difficult” and not worth dealing with.
Best of luck.
This plan shows very little understanding of the realities as to how things work. Not meant to be offensive, but it’s down right silly.
No decent exclusive (or non-exclusive for that matter) library is going to bother pitching your tracks to anyone without a contract in place. If its an exclusive library, that contract saying they have exclusive control is an absolute prerequisite to pitching the tracks. How would they be sure that if they did pitch it and a client was interested, it would really be available and not signed to any other deals? This is an essential part of their business.
Saying to a library “the first one that gets a placement can have it” will be a major turn off (obnoxious and unprofessional) and pretty much guarantee no interest.
And the “composers can change the world” thing if we just all did this or that is old and tiresome. There is overabundance of eager composers and music out there that far exceeds demand. If you don’t like the way the business works, the next guy will.
I hope you haven’t sent that offer to too many libraries yet. It’s definitely not a plus for your professional reputation.
Michael L:
The problem is that I have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t understand where all the anger and pseudo-revolutionary talk is coming from. It is possible to do very well in this business, by being good at what you do, being prolific and having some business sense. What’s all the drama about?
I think wherever BIGG may ROME, drama follows. 😉
Michael L said:
The fastest way to move to the back of the line in this business is to have a chip-on-your-shoulder attitude, and to be difficult.
So true. 🙂
BIG ROME said:
My concern is this library may not be telling the truth on the actual fee and pocketing more. cause there is no paper trail given to me.
I don’t think you can function in this biz (or many others) if you go through life assuming the people you are dealing with may be lying to you. If you really are that suspicious of the business practices of a library, don’t work with them and move on. At some point, you just have to trust.
As far as auditing libraries per what’s allowed in the contract, I’d reserve that only for **EXTREME** situations. Once you play that card, you’ve completely damaged your working relationship. Basically, when you do it, you are calling the other party a liar.
BIG ROME said:
I recently had an argument with a site…
‘Nuff said about why.
THE MOTTO IS SIMPLE: YOU CANNOT A&R MUSIC FOR LICENSING.
Nobody knows what a client needs. It is an out dated model.Hey BIG ROME
I have to disagree with you on that one. Yes, the car co. approach is not for everyone. BUT, I’ve seen them do a great job acting as A&R for music licensing requests. For example, a library (or sup) wants something very specific such as an energetic piece a la [some band]. Direct submissions to the library require a lot of weeding out… Many tracks are way off target, not of good sound quality, etc. The upfront screening is very effective for the library. I’m sure you recognize how much stuff sent in by the general public is not at all suitable for prime time. I WILL grant you that sometimes “over-screening” can cause tracks not to make it that maybe should.For some reason, you say that they screen film/TV submissions the same way they screen for Billboard hits. I have not found that to be the case most of the time. They have a stable of screeners who are focused on film/TV. In some cases now, actual music sups, agents, or library owners do screening. Again, to be fair, I’ve had occasional returns whereby I thought the screener was being too selective for the FILM/TV use, such as nit-picking on some lyric lines. But these have not been the norm.
As others have mentioned, the service, along with forward/return, their feedback, and info from the forum & peers have given many their start in a world in which they would have never known how to get started in. Although one could always find lists of libraries on the internet (maybe not as comprehensive as here), so many folks needed a service like this to learn how to make music that libraries would even want in the first place.
It’s not perfect and it’s not for everybody. I find that using them as well as direct submissions to libraries to be effective… Not either/or… 2 of a number of components in an overall marketing plan.
Don’t need to sell me on this site, I have a 200 year subscription
200 years?? Wow, Chuck!!
LOL! 😀 😉