Forum Replies Created
ABC just covered it….
This thread is horrifying and sad. When I started licensing music it was a world where I was consistently getting $150-$300 per standard license (or $500-$800 for a perpetuity buyout). That was less than ten years ago.
I’m curious as to what QUALITY these top subscription writers are putting up. Are they the ‘3-6 tracks a day’ crew, or the ‘1 track a week’ folks?
Reading this thread makes me feel a whole lot better about my process. I always think it’s really important to put my personal stamp on each piece, no matter what it is for. I’m usually doing 8-12 hours, depending on the genre/length. Sometimes as much as 15-17 if needed. I find it really intimidating when people say they are cranking 3 tracks a day, as I don’t think that leaves room for putting your signature on a track.
@ Mark, oh the fury! That’s just not right. Ethically, morally, it’s so very wrong. What a shame.
This is such a terrible thread. So much work is done to craft professional tracks and pound the pavement to get them in the right hands for a placement. Then bam! No money. Maybe I’m short sighted, but there just can’t be another industry where a professional product is being used by a client and the party responsible for collecting the money is just flat out failing (in some cases, not all).
There it is. Case closed, as far as I’m concerned.
I think there are some people on these forums with more experience that might be able to weigh in on this subject. I know one in particular that has a well deserved terrifying IMDb page (that I think might possibly include these, but I’m not positive).
I am curious about this as well. ‘Music department’ does seem to imply that a person was hired by the production company that made the show. If that isn’t the case and it is just a placement through a library, is that allowable?
I would say edits YES, new mix NO (unless there was an awful problem which the perspective of time has revealed), Keywords YES.
I have done the occasional revamp of a tune with success, but in general I think it’s healthy to move forward.September 18, 2018 at 10:12 am in reply to: Chasing after the YOUTUBE Music Buyers – Is it worth our time? #30838
@LA writer, yes. On point and I agree to all of that.September 18, 2018 at 8:07 am in reply to: Chasing after the YOUTUBE Music Buyers – Is it worth our time? #30831
I am actually surprised to hear that there IS a market for music + YouTube videos at this point.
YouTube has its own free music library and I’ve seen a few popular youtubers using one particular composer that puts his tracks out there for free. Regardless of track quality, the video producer has their needs met without a purchase.
Why would they pay for music at all?
@Art, part of Aaron’s comment ^^^^ has no place here. This isn’t one of the garbage comment sections of a YouTube video. I will say that Abby handled it like a champ. Bravo.
You are right on removing music from companies that aren’t producing income. I am now making a list of my libraries that are on the chopping block. It is sad that so much time + energy goes into getting music to some libraries that literally flat out fail to produce income.
This was my logic as well. Thanks for chiming in.