Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Leon Luis at alterboymusic.com just sent me an e-mail with this contact. I don’t know him, just passing on the info.
Juan Lopez: Legal / A&R
t: (+44)7912684513
e: info@altarboymusic.com
skype: juan.david.lopez5
a: 35 Kingsland Road, London E8 4AE, UK@Scott: I wasn’t offended at all. In fact I would have most likely done the same thing. I have contacted production companies and networks when I felt it was appropriate. I’m on your side. 🙂
@Scott “Too bad if some think that was unprofessional and resort to name calling. I don’t think it was unprofessional of me to do the research.”
For the record: I would probably have done the same as you.
Maybe it’s just me as I’ve always been the guy who sees the glass half full instead of half empty. All of the hand wringing about JP, the state of the library business, non-exclusive or non-exclusive, etc is just so much speculation and conjecture. Interesting conversation, for sure, but I think it’s better to be looking for the opportunities that lurk within instead of getting mired in what was or what should be. Those who can find those opportunities will be the winners going forward. It’s why there was an Apple, Google and even JP. They found a niche and filled it.
I’m filled with quotes today so here’s another from a few decades ago.
“Nothing changes but the changes!”
Ok. I think we’re moving on now, right?… For the record, I love you all for taking the time and effort to have these sorts of conversations here regardless of whatever little detours happen along the way. I learn a lot from these exchanges and I don’t know where else I could get this…
I think this whole exchange illustrates part of the complexity I was talking about earlier in this thread. The whole non-exclusive re-title model opened up this crowd sourcing aspect of music licensing several years ago and plenty of people have been lured in with the promise of “get your music on tv”. Now there’s a “wild west” atmosphere surrounding it and you have a landscape filled with a few seasoned professionals and a whole lot of people that are doing it on the side or dreaming of a career that likely won’t be possible. In the example of contacting a production company directly I certainly understand why someone would take that route in the current climate despite the fact that I have the experience to know it’s not a good move. On the other hand, I really can’t feel any sympathy for JP or other people who have signed with them when someone does this. We’ve all create this reality together (JP and all the other libraries and the all the contributors) and these types of reactions are just natural manifestations of a marketplace that has gone a little nutty.
I think MichaelL said something similar previously but I’m wondering if we’re not seeing the start of an era where the floodgates get closed a bit and professionalism starts to have a value again. I pretty much hope that’s the case but I bet there will be some discomfort along the way as many of us start to feel the squeeze.
I think Art’s comment is right on the money: “Music is business, business is war, war is hell, adapt or die”
>Name calling? I was referring to people who hound music supervisors directly about placements from libraries. Did it seem otherwise?<
No, it didn’t seem otherwise. You referred to people who contact music supervisors directly as “a-holes”. That’s what I was referring to when I used the term “name calling” and I think that’s unfair in this context.
“Whoa! Name calling is a little over the top, isn’t it?…”
I agree Kiwi. I think everyone should take a deep breath about all of this. Here’s a quote I came up with a few years ago that might put some things into perspective. It can apply to both music libraries and composers.
“Music is business, business is war, war is hell, adapt or die!”
Whoa! Name calling is a little over the top, isn’t it?… It’s debatable whether submitting music to JP is a “professional” pursuit. “Crowd sourcing” is what it is. JP (and others) take freely provided content and sign blanket agreements with it that they get paid for without sharing the proceeds with anyone and they also give the content away when it suits them. In this scenario the composer is hardly being treated as a professional. Even though contacting the production company is *not* the way to go about it I can hardly blame someone (who might not be very experienced) for wanting to find out why they aren’t being paid. I think that maligning that person, especially in light of the treatment they are receiving from JP, is a bit unfair and certainly unproductive.
Just sayin’…
Advice said:
“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.”
I think this is exactly what this is all about, not some big exclusive versus non-exclusive situation that extends throughout the industry. These libraries (JP, SK, etc) are saturated and they’re trying to capture as much of the market as they can and blanket licenses are a great way to do that when they don’t have to pay anything upfront for content but the end customers for these blanket licenses are certainly not going to be happy when they see a lot of redundancy between libraries. Hence, exclusivity. There’s such a great supply of music that I’m sure they have no doubt that they will continue being able to meet the demand and they are attractive to composers regardless because they produce results. It really seems to me to be about how these particular libraries are doing business rather than a mass exodus from the use of non-exclusive tracks.
In my own experience I’ve been fortunate enough to contribute directly to some cable shows through a music house on a work-for-hire basis. Right alongside these exclusive tracks I’ve directly licensed other cues of mine to the same shows that are in non-exclusive libraries. I remember the first time that I did this I felt confident that I had the track they were looking for but it was in a couple of non-exclusives so I was nervous about presenting it and so I “warned” the music supervisor. I was taken aback by his reaction which was to basically laugh and say “Why would they care, if they like the track they’ll license it?” And they did. And it was no big deal. Since then I’ve had quite a few interactions and gotten to see some things and what I’ve seen leads me to believe that it’s much more about getting the show done on time and on budget with the best production possible than adhering to any particular licensing approach. Different people at different production companies seem to have different ideas as how to best do this and I’m sure that budgets and deadlines vary greatly. In the end they probably just want to get the job done with minimal hassle and problems.
What I’m trying to say here is that I think the business is much more complex and nuanced than it ends up being portrayed on this forum sometimes and that within that complexity there’s room for all the different modes of doing business. I don’t think that JP and SK shifting their focus means that there’s necessarily a global shift in the industry. It just means that those particular entities have realized that they can capitalize on an opportunity and that they are leveraged to do so.
Remember that there are hundreds of production companies feeding shows to all the networks and that all of these companies have their own focuses and proclivities. Some are much more inclined toward branding their shows with exclusive music than others. Some spend thousands per episode on music and some spend hundreds. Some use libraries, some use music houses and supplement with library tracks. The only constant seems to be the ever shifting nature of it all as everyone clamors to stay afloat.
“Maybe Art is the new in house composer for them out in LA and he is sworn to secrecy.”
Ha, I wish! Then again, who knows what that means. One JP e-mail asked for “young and hungry composers” in L.A. I certainly don’t fit that (neither young nor particularly hungry).
“what are you thinking you will do Art?”
Still trying to decide. I answered their e-mail but haven’t seen a thing.
“Just wondering if the RF sites provide a good regular income”
Back end PRO income, for me, is way better than RF income.
Generally no but I have one cue, in particular, that gets purchased over and over again off of a RF site and is used constantly on NBC and CBS sports shows. I can only imagine that the same client re-purchases for each show.
Initially I found it being used via my Tunesat account. When it showed up on my PRO statement they had the composers listed correctly but the wrong publisher info. I contacted BMI and they straightened that out. I title my RF cues differently so I had a pretty good idea where it was purchased.
To those folks trying to post their company’s “solution” to those wanting set up their own library: Please see – https://musiclibraryreport.com/advertising-on-music-library-report/ and help support MLR!
“Before any of you spend another dime, check out Source Audio.”
I did and thought they were pricey. Nice site though.
“Art why are you blocking my posts. I’m not saying any thing crazy?”
Sorry bigg rome, I’m trying to figure out why you are being blocked. There’s no indication on the back end but I am working on it. Please bear with me.