[JoelS]

I saw this thread cited in the newsletter, and it moved me to comment…

Music1234,
>> 2% success, yet they keep signing up for his “school”.

The scare quotes around ‘school’ there strike me as rather unfair. The guy in question has always offered a wealth of free educational/tutorial videos covering a wide variety of subjects on the business and production side of sync licensing. His paid platform has an enormous amount of similar material that goes into greater depth. It’s oriented towards beginners or intermediate composers, but he isn’t selling an unrealistic view of the business. He has consistently advocated hard work, persistence, and understanding the nature of what works to get placements, and explicitly does not promise success. In my view, he offers a real education and it’s up to the student to put that knowledge to use. He provides a valid educational resource, and I don’t see why it deserves harsh criticism.

I do not have any studies or data to back this opinion, but I think a very large number of people with an interest in a production music career receive no guidance outside of YouTube and forums they happen to find. Nobody is there to lay out what is ‘bottom feeding’ and what isn’t, and there are significant barriers to them even learning about the high-end library world, much less how to get into it. Going along with the fishing analogy, for someone to even arrive at the fishing hole, they have to navigate a dense, byzantine forest without any clear paths or signs marking the way. So, when a new composer hears a bird in the trees saying ‘the fish are over that way,’ of course they’re going to have a look… and if the fish are minnows instead of albacore tuna as big as you are, well, they’re still fish. Catch enough and you eat.

I generally agree that the business models sustaining the royalty free music industry are failing the composers, and that the continual decline in licensing fees makes it tough to advocate participation in that arena. Sync licensing seems more viable if your skills and disposition work for that medium. I make a small chunk of income from sync royalties. I saw the crowds at those fishing holes, left, and hacked through enough underbrush to find my own little pond in the video game industry.

I like working with indie game devs, and in general I’m sure the prices I charge would be disagreeable to you. However, I found a model that works for me and has enabled me to make composing my profession for the last decade plus. More recently, it’s also enabled me to help other artists make a living, and help charities as well. That said, I don’t specifically advocate my approach to others because what worked for me as I moved out of the RF market and into games would be a lot harder to pull off now than it was in 2013.

I see these markets as changing constantly, and nearly anyone looking to stay active producing music for a living has to be agile and have several bodies of water where they cast their lines. There’s always going to be a cream of the crop who can focus on one niche and perform exceptionally, but… you probably won’t know if that’s you until it’s plainly obvious that such is the case.

Finally, Music1234, I do agree with your comments that the PROs should deliver on streaming uses and cable placements (ESPN etc), and composers should always strive to retain ownership of their catalog. But, I won’t condemn composers who find any way to make a living in music, even if it’s through exclusive/subscription libraries. If they are like me, they had no help or guidance in making a career, and if they managed to pull it off, more power to them.

[Author]

Posts