Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You do not have permission to view this content.You do not have permission to view this content.You do not have permission to view this content.You do not have permission to view this content.You need to install it with their download app. Then open the new virtual instrument called “LABS”. There you can choose the instrument / presets.
https://www.spitfireaudio.com/labs/getting-started/
Thanks for this @woodsdenis! Especially love the soft piano…!
Production Trax is a bust…. Can anyone claim that they are pulling in consistent revenue from the above mentioned?
I’m making (netting) around 100,- USD / month on productiontrax with a small portfolio of only 16 tracks. I sell my tracks for around USD 40,- there. Works for me.
Great find and important topic, Art!
Here’s some more info on Wemark:
https://www.wemark.com/whitepaper.pdf
Of course we first have to wait and see how successful Wemark as a company will actually be with their approach before we get our hopes up. But the blockchain technology in itself definitely has great potential and could, in a few years time, do what Wemark proposes:
Decentralize a centralized market and give power back into the hands of creators.
It may be important to add, that Wemark’s aim isn’t ‘total decentralization’. (They also openly say so in their Whitepaper). But how could ‘total decentralization’ work at all in the context of digital marketplaces? I think it’s actually important to have a ‘middleman’ (and that’s what Wemark will still be in a way, though they claim to ‘cut out the middleman’ and give that role to the blockchain). There has to be some central instance that manages and evolves the infrastructure of a marketplace. This can’t all be done by the community.
What’s happening here from my point of view is this: The blockchain technology (with smart contracts) is able to automate a lot of the processes within a digital marketplace, including payment and (with limitations) distribution of content. If companies (agencies, platforms) are now using this technology to lower their costs significantly and are therefore able (and willing) to pay out more to the creators – that’s great news! And if they’re willing to also adopt even more possibilities offered by this (fairly new) technology (like hassle-free sharing of revenue between co-creators) – that’s even better!
But don’t get too hyped up by the marketing blabla of completely decentralized networks where ALL power goes back to the creator. And be aware that this is just one side of the medal. The other side is also mentioned as a sidenote (!) in Wemark’s Whitepaper:
By cutting the middleman, we believe photo licensing prices will decrease by 50% or more, while paying photographers more per download than they receive today.
I think what’s clear is: Changes are coming, though it might take a few more years…
What I try to do now is to stay as flexible as possible, so that I’ll be able to adapt to new, arising market situations by…
1. not binding content (especially if it’s exclusive) in unflexible contracts. (I only stay in contracts that don’t last longer than a year. I want to be able to pull my music out of any contract as fast as possible at any time.) and
2. not signing any copyrights away, ever.
You do not have permission to view this content.You do not have permission to view this content.You do not have permission to view this content.You do not have permission to view this content.Hi guys,
I think adding a field for subscription models in the library database is great and an important info to have! And it’s also important to highlight this info – the red, bold warning should get everyone’s attention.
Yet the implementation is a bit confusing right now: The warning message now appears on EVERY library page, regardless of them using a subscription model or not.
@Art: Is there some way to only show this message if the status for the field is actually ‘YES’? Or maybe change the wording a bit?
Anyway, here’s another NE-library with a dirt cheap subscription plan that had approached me when they started last year. I declined the offer…
https://www.totalmediatracks.com/license-information/
And here’s a quote from their email, ‘describing’ their subscription model:
[The subscription service…] is designed to provide all of our artists with some regular monetary compensation, regardless of whether or not your tracks are chosen for license. In short, a percentage of each subscription will be held over and divided among ALL artists to ensure that everyone is compensated at some level for their work. Additionally, when your music is chosen to be downloaded and licensed from the subscription pool, you will receive a fee per ‘downloaded track’ (single-use, single project). Calculations are based on how many users we have, and how many tracks they download, each month. The more your tracks are downloaded, the more you get paid. Needless to say, the more subscribers we have the better it will be for all artists.
@Music1234: Thanks for bringing up this important topic!