Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Ian
While I agree with you that commitment to quality is key, I don’t think you can define quality based on live vs. samples. That is, if by “samples” you mean anything virtual and not live. We certainly know very experienced composers who make a living (including major placements in film and network) and use zero or near zero live performers.
But yes… mediocre tracks result in pennies earned. Quality is the one thing you can control. Now more than ever, it’s critical to up your game. If you can’t do it alone, network with other composers for collaborative efforts. Get your tracks in libraries that are not in the blanket market. No one said it would be easy.
😀
It does appear that blanket licensing issues are a big part of this whole exclusive/non-exclusive thing. As mentioned earlier, TV shows do not want to sign multiple blanket license deals only to find the same tracks in the various catalogs.
Audiosparx is jumping in the blanket licensing game as well. Although they will offer both exc and non-exc tracks, it does appear that as time goes on, exclusives will have more and more of a better shot. If you are with AS, plesae DO NOT share here any artist communique emails they sent out. They clearly ask us not to do that.
I used to think all this exclusive stuff had to do with the higher end of the chain– vocal songs on major TV networks, etc. It still might but what we are seeing right now is on the so-called “lower” end. In fact, Crucial isn’t concerned about all this. It’s the blanket dependent libraries that are.
Personally, I have a very hard time giving exclusives on instrumental tracks that will be background on cable reality shows and pay very little. However, I’m a realist and if that becomes the only way to be in this game, I will have to adapt or get out.
As far as JP having 25,000 exclusive tracks now, most likely, those tracks are from the company principles and inner circle. I know that JP staff names are always on the cue sheets along with ours for placements. Since those tracks were not signed elsewhere, it would have been very easy for JP to simply call them exclusive now. I can’t see accusing them of anything dirty. If any of us had treated our non-exclusive tracks signed with them as exclusive (e.g. not signed them elsewhere), we’d immediately have the same option now. They didn’t set out to take advantage of anyone (IMHO). The industry changes and that’s the way it is.
😀
My comment with the now infamous “name calling” was not directed at you, Scott. If someome has a very specific situation to resolve, in can be very appropriate to contact a music sup or production company directly.
I was referring to more generic, unprofessional behavoir– calling music sups for minor, trivial things or hounding them with many phone calls, emails, etc. A number of libraries have sent out warning emails that their clients have been annoyed with all sorts of calls and inquiries. Libraries can even lose good clients this way.
Common sense… Professionalism… Always needed.
😀
I apologize. Art, feel free to delete that comment.
Name calling? I was referring to people who hound music supervisors directly about placements from libraries. Did it seem otherwise?
It that was inappropriate, I apologize. 🙂
“Someone needs to start a “boot camp” on how to navigate these waters in a businesslike and professional manner. Failure to do so is the musician’s Achilles heel”…
So true about non-professional behavior… Sadly, within any large group of people, there will be some a-holes who make it bad for everyone else.
LG
The word “sync” is used incorrectly here, just so you know. That refers to front-end (up front) license fees which PRO’s do not get involved in.
As far as back-end PRO royalties, the pay is about the same when averaged over a number of different placements. One may pay slightly more on one while the other pays better on another. For most folks who do what WE do – film/TV cues, there really isn’t a financial difference.
We all have the option of not signing non-exclusives with no up-front money, especially if there are long commitments. I know I wouldn’t unless I felt the library truly offered me something better than I could get doing what am currently doing with non-exclusive.
That being said, it’s easy to get huffy and think we, as composers, have all the power. Reality is supply and demand is not in our favor. There are many thousands of people churning out great tracks from home studios, willing to do anything just to get their music out there. If exclusive without upfront became the only way, I don’t think libraries would have a shortage of music. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
I’ve been told from a reliable source that Crucial has no intention of going exclusive, at least not for the forseeable future. They are very committed to the non-exclusive model.
What I’ve been hearing has been the problem has more to do with libraries like JP that rely heavily on blanket deals (Crucial does not do blankets). TV shows are signing multiple blanket deals only to find they are getting the same tracks from those different libraries (e.g. JP, SK, etc)… Budget-wise, this is very non-cost-effective. They feel like they are paying 2-3 times for the same thing. If the TV networks tell libraries like JP that they won’t do blanket deals anymore unless the tracks are exclusive, JP and others will simply have no choice. A large chunk of their business model depends on this.
As far as JP making this up as a scare tactic, that’s ridiculous. We may not like it and be disappointed, but accusing them of outright lying is very inappropriate. These possible changes in the industry are very real. I’ve heard it from at least 3-4 libaries and publishers the past 2 years. Many non-exc libraries we deal with have started exclusive catalogs for the same reason.
Deep breath, take it slow… See where the dust all settles. 😀
Mutilple clients licensing the same track from one source who has exclusive rights (e.g. true POA over copyright and master to issue licenses) is not the same as one client getting pitched the same track from multiple sources, raising doubt about true ownership and causing annoying redundancy.
As far as what to do now, I think everyone should take a deep breath and just wait and see… I wouldn’t (personally) do anything regarding existing tracks in any non-exclusive catalogs, even if in more than one. This hasn’t shaken out yet and we really don’t know where the dust will settle.
Although the result for the composer is the same as far as upfront sync fee, the term “gratis” deal is a misnomer. What there are more and more of are “blanket” deals between the library and the TV production company– one fee to the library for access to an entire catalog. These already are very common for JP, Scorekeepers, and others and these libraries do not share a portion of the blanket fees with composers. I may no judgement as to whether or not their business model would support sharing a piece of the blanket fees (e.g. they could do that and stay in business)…
It’s very possible that this trend will extend *further* into major networks (it has already). So, Blind, yes I expect you would see a library like JP placing exclusive tracks via blanket deals and there being no sync fee to the composer.
Actually, the whole blanket deal thing is one of the reasons for networks being concerned about exclusivity. They sign blanket deals with mulitiple libraries, only to find the same tracks in each catalog. They feel that they are therefore paying twice for the same thing. Budgets are too tight for that.
JP relies heavily on blanket deals. If the end users say they will only do blankets with exclusives, their business model has to change.
Usually, the exclusivity being discussed here only is with respect to film/TV pitches through 3rd parties such as libaries. Many of the exclusive contracts I’ve seen allow you to do non film/TV pitches with no conflict. Also, many do not prohibit you from pitching direct to music sups, just through other 3rd parties. Of course, check contracts carefully… YMMV. 🙂
On JP’s website it says… “Jingle Punks is launching its exclusive music library offering in addition to their standard library in order to provide clients the option of being able to search for music they can exclusively license and immediately obtain the rights to.”
So hopefully there still will be opporunities for our non-exclusive tracks with them, even if not major network.
I’ve been hearing that major networks won’t sign non-exclusive, re-titled tracks for a while now. That’s why we’ve seen a number of non-exclusive libraries including Scorekeepers, Indigi, and now JP start an exclusive catalog. Libraries have been telling me the past 1-2 years that they won’t pitch my non-exclusive tracks to ABC, NBC, etc.
What’s not clear to me is whether this truly is the beginning of the end for the non-exclusive model, or there will be a fractured market whereby cable channels will continue to accept non-exclusive tracks. If what I’ve been hearing is true, the split market is actually nothing new. (Crucial seems to have managed an exception so far with their “re-title by adding a tag only” approach)…
I do want to ask JP if they plan to still pitch the non-exclusive tracks to networks other than the major ones. Based on the placements I’ve had with them, they work with Bravo, E!, TLC, History, Discovery, etc, etc. I’m not sure while they made it sound like the majors were the majority of their clients. Yes, of course, the majors are the highest paying opps.
As far as composers having the power to influence industry decisions, sadly that’s not really the case. There are way too many hungry composers out there with great home studios and talent who will do whatever it takes to get their music out there. If you won’t sign an exclusive with no up-front fee, someone else will. This trend is nothing new either. Supply and demand is not in the composer’s favor.
If the re-title model is going dead, anyone with tracks in multiple non-exclusive libraries may have a problem. That was a risk going in. I knew that when I double-dipped (and triple and….) quite a few times.
We shall see.
PS If I had never put my tracks in multiple non-exclusive libraries, I would never have had the placements I’ve had to date. So no regrets…
Bigg Rome
I’ve signed library deals through Taxi as well as FMN and on my own. These are libraries that have made placements for me. Tons of people have had placements due to Taxi. There are big lists of placement successes on their forum. I know the people involved in those placements personally… It’s all very real and true.
Again, I’m not saying that Taxi is the only way or works for everyone. Go with what works best for you.
🙂