Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Why do you NOT want to use your real identity? Curious… (Have you tried a phonebooth?) 😉
Seriously, I’m curious. Does it have to do with what comes up on Google searches?
🙂
Steve, was that 60K in the 2 years immediately following you uploading your tracks? How did it break down between license fees and PRO royalties? What were some typical license fees? What types of shows, films, etc used your tracks?
Regarding MS.com, I haven’t found it of value to ME. I’m always hesitant to criticize a library simply because my own tracks weren’t placed since there are so many factors. My gut tells me it (MS.com) just isn’t working as a business but to say I really know would be silly.
I always found their business model whereby they do not share in PRO royalties, only license fees, to be a strange one in today’s market. With license fees so small or non-existent in so many cases, it leaves me scratching my head. That is, unless they are able to focus on the really high end placements– feature films and their trailers trailers, network TV, etc.
I’ve had songs ‘locked’ for many years now because someone expressed interest. But that status never seems to get cleared and I would think if not placed by that end user within 2 years, it ain’t gonna happen.
I always keep in mind that those of us posting here on MLR might not be a good statistical sample of all their composers.
🙂
You do not have permission to view this content.Ignoring for a moment, the debate over whether or not one should have their tracks in multiple re-title libraries…
If there is technology whereby info can be embedded in a watermark or fingerprint, why can’t the composer and publisher ID info also be in there? Naive question…
—
It’s interesting that TuneSat has this technology which appears to work very well but the PRO’s are so far behind in adpoting fingerprinting or watermarking for all music monitoring.
QUOTE: You should sign up to Art’s website for the answer.
This is called doing your own research.
Everrbody want the easy answer.
—-I have to agree with this. One thing that frustrates experienced folks who paid their dues researching and learning, making contacts, etc. is one someone simply asks for information handed to them on a silver platter. No implied tone in my post here.
And, in this case, there is a whole website (here) full of information related to what you are asking.
🙂
I think that’s a very difficult question to give a blanket answer to since so much varies from music to music and composer to composer. What’s implied in the question is that it’s the quality of the library, not the music and having the right pieces at the right time that determine all this.
Of course, there ARE differences in libraries and which ones serve which markets– the upper tier with network placements & sync fees, the lower tier royalty free ones, etc. But within those realms, some make more money on RF than others make on higer end ones.
If you read around this site you’ll see great differences between different composer’s track records with different libraries. The variations are all over the board.
Obviously, it’s always best if you read that other composers HAVE had actual placements through libraries to at least know they are in the game.
🙂
Before submitting to the exclusive, carefully check your contract with the non-exclusive. If you can’t withdraw your track quickly– such as within 30-60 days, you definitely shouldn’t submit it to an exclusive. I wouldn’t actually sign the deal with the exclusive unless you have confirmed that your track was indeed removed from the non-exclusive. Otherwise you are in contract violation.
Keep in mind that many non-exclusive agreements have minimum terms of 2-3 years and some are even in perpetuity. Some libraries will still let you remove on request, even if those are the terms. You’d have to ask.
Just be careful. The last thing you want is to create a mess whereby a library thinks they have an exclusive and finds out another party is still pitching it. Even worse would be a conflict showing up at a music sup which would make EVERYONE look bad.
🙂
Yes, the above is correct. I happened to start an ASCAP publishing entity years ago when it cost little or nothing.
You DO need to have a publishing entity with ASCAP to collect the publisher’s share. However, this is a separate issue from whether you need to have an official “business” established with your state or bank to collect the publisher’s royalties paid to your publishing entity. My experience with ASCAP is I could simply direct deposit to my personal bank acccount.
🙂
I don’t even think, with ASCAP, it’s a matter of direct deposit or not. A publisher can designate how he/she wants the payments made out. Don’t know for sure about BMI.
I know that when I set up direct deposit with ASCAP, the on-line system made it very easy to input my bank account and routing numbers to get it rolling.
I would check with your PRO before asking the bank. Of course, laws might vary depending on what state you live in (talking US residents)… So YMMV…
🙂You really don’t need a biz license, special bank account, etc. You can direct ASCAP or BMI to direct deposit your publisher’s share into a bank account you specify. My publishing royalties (the few scraps that come in) are direct deposited by ASCAP to a checking account in my name.
😉
Roz: Good idea to give it 2 years.Another question I have is how does one tactfullycommunicate to a library, how is everything proceeding?I try at times to get a little info from them about thingsthey are doing to get my music out and hear very little feedback.I do it in a friendly way, but what are some ways for me to get themto talk to me more so I can provide them with more of what will sellin that company, etc.ThanksRoz
It’s always best to start your email with “Listen F*ckhead!”… HA… 😛 😉
It’s a tough call. You certainly don’t want to contact a library very often and become annoying to them. Many have a “If we have something to tell you, we will” policy. Others, more friendly to the inquiries. You could try after 1-2 years to politely ask if your tracks have been involved in any pitches and if they have any impressions. If they don’t respond, I’d probably let it go unless your email to them had more pressing questions.
The bottom line is as long as you do this very sparingly and are professional & polite, you’ll be fine.
🙂
It’s a good idea to make sure that a reversion clause has a bit more than just “secures a placement”. This is true for traditional publishing deals as well as music library ones. An income test is a good idea but what that $$ value is varies so much for each situation– composer, track, library, etc. Many tracks placed in film/TV never earn $2K in their lifetime, especially with up-front license fees having dropped so much. However, an experienced composer dealing with a higher end library may be able to negotiate $1-2K with that type of income not being unrealistic. In other situations, $250-$500 might be the sweet spot.
If you get offered an exclusive contract with reversion having no qualifiers, nothing wrong with politely asking if the clause could be strengthened. Some libraries will negotiate, some won’t. And then each individual has to decide what’s right for them.