Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
TV Composer Guy… While the jury still is out on this while exclusive vs. non-exclusive, I wanted to comment on the library you mentioned (“C….”) that is still very successful with major network and film placements while remaining non-exclusive.
It could very well be that because they established themselves SO well early on in this game and have such a great reputation with the sups they service, they were able to continue as non-exclusive, simply adding tags to track titles. Libraries with less well established relationships and reputation may not have the same luxury.
It also seems that the lower end blanket license market, such as for cable TV, is very affected here by this whole issue. I don’t think J…. and S…. are pushing exclusive just for the heck of it. Cable TV production companies see themselves paying blanket fees to multiple companies, only to find they are seeing a lot of the same tracks. So they feel they are wasting money.
All that being said, I also continue to get non-exc placements for those blanket cable deals and can’t say if that will dry up in the next few years or not.
I have to agree with you D_I… With numbers, you don’t know what’s really behind them. When I read accounts of people’s experiences I get a sense of both who the person is (most of the time) and what their experience was. Sometimes someone says negative things about a library but I can tell by the tone and attitude in their posts, that there is more to the story. Some people will always blame “the other guy” when they are not successful. Numerical ratings mask all that.
Someone can bitch how little money they made from a library but what do we know about their tracks? Is it cheap crap on an old Casio keyboard? Did they put in reasonable effort tagging their tracks (where applicable)? I remember someone posted all sorts of nasties about a particular RF library years back. One of the principals of the library chimed in and posted how that person had almost no track tags or description entered!
Personally, I like MLR better as a discussion forum vehicle and not a place for ratings. The tag line, “Music creators rating the music libraries” bothers me. I’d prefer “Music creators discussing…” or “Music creators sharing information…”
Just my 2 cents
😀Although it would be interesting to see earnings/track averages on libraries (I think it would be better for the RF model), it goes hand in hand with people making judgments about libraries in general. People’s experienced vary SO much according to the type of music they write, the (perceived by the end user community) quality of the tracks, etc.
We see it all the time. One person gets tons of placements with Library A and none with Library B, while someone else has the opposite experience.
There are reasons why I never liked ratings of any kind at all. Too many variables and faulty conclusions drawn.
It is public domain, at least according to my internet search which turned up: http://www.pdinfo.com/Public-Domain-Music-List.php
🙂
I think someone mentioned this before. The RF market serves different types of customers with different budgets. Projects needing music can vary all over the board from film school videos to full blown broadcast use. A student or film festival video may only be able to pay $50-$100 (or even less), while larger budget projects may be fine with $250-$500.
So I don’t think there is any easy way to set minimum prices in such a general sense. You have to know what market you are serving the most.
If, of course, you have a history of selling tracks you can look at what types of clients your music attracts most and what price ranges. That is, assuming there is a pattern.
Footnote: My experience with RF is limited so grain of salt here.
I read an article once that ASCAP does not accept Tunesat detections as a means to adjust royalty payments. Not sure what the latest is on that.
To all future library composers,wannabes, hobbyists and amateurs(especially those using loops) the library buisness is now closed. There are too many of you, making too much music (most of which lacks artistic merit). Please stop and go away, because you are causing the value of my labor (I use the term loosly) to go down.
In the words of Kramer… “I’m out!” 😀 🙂 😉
Did anyone else notice the new listings on film music job wire? A library in Nashville is after music for pilot on ABC & also the winter Olympics coverage on NBC. Both were wanting NON EXCLUSIVE tracks for major network placements…. Nothing more needs to be said, the sky isn’t falling, major networks still use non exclusive tracks, some libraries are trying their best to dupe composers into signing their lives away.
Keep in mind that any library can run a listing so they can collect tracks in the hopes of pitching for future events like these. These ads are blind so we don’t know anything about the library running the listing. They could be anything from a startup doing wishful thinking to a well connected library with a good shot at these types of placements. You can’t conclude ANYTHING from this listing.
I am *NOT* saying that tracks have to come from an exclusive library for use by NBC for these events. Just saying that the fact that a library wants to sign tracks non-exclusively to pitch here means very little.
I have to wonder. Did WE (myself very much included) contribute to this problem by putting the same tracks in multiple re-title libraries that service the same markets? I’m not talking about RF… Talking about libraries that send tracks to TV production companies.
When calling the publishers greedy, were we as composers greedy?
Cobra
I don’t think the library you mentioned requires 20 tracks to get started. Unless they’ve changed it since I started, the requirement of 20 is only to be featured as a hot new artist. AFAIK, you can start with any number. Of course, it usually takes a fair number of tracks to make any real money.My suggestion is to submit those 15 tracks to non-exclusive RF libraries and also non-exclusive libraries that focus on broadcast placements where there are backend (PRO) royalties. Many libraries discussed on this site place orchestral cues on TV. Of course, I don’t know your music but if libraries with decent track records accept your tracks, it’s a good indication they can be placed.
😀
They want $199 (the 50% 0ff sale price!) for their directory. I can’t imagine this information is worth anywhere near that much. There are directories out there MUCH cheaper such as one you can buy off filmmusic.net.
And many people think just having contact info for music sups will make them successful. It takes a lot of business savvy, time, patience, and the right goods. These sups get bombarded by composers contacting them every day. You have to really stand out from the crowd to get noticed. Doable, yes… But FAR from easy.
This is one reason many successful composers work through libraries. It allows them to focus on what they do best, making great music, while letting others do the schmoozing with the sups.
😀
Hi MP
Not my area of expertise but I think it’s difficult to answer a question such as “how much royalties you get from a [this or that]” because it varies so widely… Just how “big” the feature film is, what kind of distribution and play it gets, etc… But I’ll defer to someone who has acutally earned royalties in this area.
🙂
Unfortunately, in the US, there are no PRO royalties for your music being played in movie theaters. However, outside the US, in many countries you do get these royalties.
So, if the trailer piece is played mainly in theaters, you wouldn’t see US PRO dollars but down the road (1.5 years or so later) you might start seeing foreign PRO royalties if there was play in other countries.
For play in US TV ads, I’d contact your US PRO as suggested above.
That’s my understanding. 🙂
Ken
First, does PT take the publisher’s share of PRO for tracks sold on their site? If they do, in theory they should register the track with a re-title such as the original title with a tag. However, the majority of RF site placements are not used in broadcast whereby they would earn PRO dollars. If they share in publishing, either you or PT should register it with PT as the publisher. What title was used on the sale? That’s the way the registration should read. You could contact them and ask how they handle this.If PT does not take any publisher’s share then you want to register the track such that you collect both the writer’s and publisher’s share should there be any PRO revenue. Fortunately for you, with BMI, you can register yourself for both shares without having a publishing company. (ASCAP requires you have a publishing company). If you are unsure how to do this, contact BMI and they will help you.
Again, keep in mind that most RF placements do not earn PRO dollars.
Good luck!
@TimV…. Yea, I gotta figure out how to do that. It would be so much easier if they just let you order the songs on your profile page! But overall I like SC. I’m just not big on the marketing and promotion thing for film/TV library composers. Reaching out directly to libraries and sups and using these sites as a tool to present the music makes sense to me. The rest, not so sure. YMMV