Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I know ASCAP had sent a letter a couple weeks ago. If you head to where you normally go to sign in, they do have additional info written as to what is currently happening.
My curiosity here: if our payments are reduced this quarter (which sounds like they are) and the crisis eases a bit, is ASCAP going to make adjustments to the next quarter payout (once operating conditions are more safe)?
I’m going to agree with Kubed. After a short listen to both, I don’t hear anything that immediately strikes me. Most of the elements are just common to that style, imho. Just my opinion, though.
To add to what Michael said: if you value the time that you put into carefully crafting your music, then you owe it to yourself to carefully vet the publishers that you submit to. It’s pretty frustrating to spend a ton of time preparing and sending submissions just to have a library be a complete failure.
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.
Yikes!
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.