Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@ Mark Petrie: Hi Mark, (this question is not intended to derail this thread, but I didn’t think it significant enough for its own thread….)
I did plenty of searching on MLR, and just couldn’t find the thread I was looking for which involved you giving sample library advice to someone starting with the epic orchestral trailer thing. You had boiled it down to several specific libraries, and presumably had budget reasons in mind for the advice you were giving. Can you or someone else (Art) please point me towards that thread?
And if you have arguments as to WHY those libraries are on the list vs. all that you own, I would love to hear them.
Much appreciated!
Vlad
words overused in this post: thread
Carry on, gents.
Regarding the original post, I have struggled with that question as well. (And I am referring to libraries that are TV oriented) I have joined some NEx libraries where I saw placements almost immediately….that surprised me. I joined one that took two years to show anything, then they kept rolling in. And here was the interesting one: a library flying the ’boutique’ flag, 5 years in, a ton of tracks, and I had thrown in the towel….then a placement showed up. With NEx I think it is a fair thing to feed new music to the library for 1-2 years, then it is on them. I write exclusively at this point, so all of my NE tracks are in libraries and waiting…..or dying.
@MichaelL, regarding your U2/Coldplay argument a few posts up….
If the ripoff were a song that had stylistic similarities yet an identity of its own (melody, chord structure, etc) I do feel that it is within the ballpark of okay, whereas the straight out theft of a track such as that is surely a violation. Kind of apples and oranges, IMO.
Evgeny,
That situation does suck. I am assuming this fellow purchased your track as RF, then did this? If so, I would approach him first and make sure he knows that this is a violation of copyright. He might not know that it wasn’t within his rights. Yes, these people exist. If your contact with him leads nowhere, contact the publisher(s).
And this is not legal advice, nor have I ever played a lawyer on TV.
@ Michael: great post.
So there is this battle I have been fighting, which involves creating work that I am proud of writing-wise and production-wise, vs. pumping out loads of mediocre music that I know is more likely to get placements. Recently, a library sent out links to frequently placed tracks. Not knocking the writers, but a good 75% of those tracks didn’t have much more than a back beat, very little melodic content, didnt groove, and production quality that was suspect to my ears. This inner struggle plagues me: high quality art to be proud of vs. large numbers of mediocre tracks. I seem to always choose the first. And no intention of hijacking this thread.
@ DI, good advice right there. Too easy to waste precious time on libraries that just don’t have any return.
Good informative observations from all above. I should add that a month ago I went through my spreadsheet and blocked off all the under performing libraries. There were a lot of them, sadly. I am now focusing on TV placements with Exclusives and Non-Exclusives. There was a time where I must have hit it just right and did very well with RF……that time has passed.
Most of my income over the last 5 years has been from RF sites (just writing specifically towards TV placements for the last year). My pricing is on the high side. I never sell at garbage sites. – That said, still marching along but not nearly what it was. I hit a peak around late 2011/early 2012. Always trying to figure out if the genre preferences have changed or what has happened. And I always write to current trends when RF is concerned.
I do mix a little as I go, but when the writing is complete I actually dedicated a few hours to the mix process (totally depending on the genre, of course). Then sleep on it, which reveals any issues. I aim for the best mix I can and try to be competitive with commercial releases. Actually surprised to hear that some guys spend so little time…..makes me wonder about my process.
Of course, when writing to a brief under time constraints, I mix on the fly.
@angopop, it would be my advice to try and make sure there is a reversion clause. I speak from experience and early on I screwed myself on Exclusives with no reversion clause…..and have regretted it. And if you can’t get the reversion clause, ‘just go for it’ might be good advice IF the library has a good track record with placements. Upfront $ can be a good motivator and would alter my feelings on everything I have stated thus far.
My two cents : I feel that the reverse cymbal that occurs throughout is killing the track. Always sounds the same. I would use it less AND change it throughout. OR, eliminate the reverse altogether and search for other musical elements that would achieve the same effect with more subtlety. Lastly, consider if you have heard an indie rock track with a reverse cymbal in it….I have, but carefully consider the choice to include it.
I know I focused on that one element….aside from the ‘ez drummer-ness’ of the drums, that cymbal jumped out at me.
All comments intended to help, not hurt. Hope that might help.
My first question for the library (or search in your contract):
If the cue is altered by the library, is your writer’s share to be split with the (house) composer that altered it?
Interesting post, D.I. – I think that approaching this entire library thing from Art’s angle is a pretty smart idea. Never put all of your eggs in one basket: write for RF, NE, Exclusives, Custom, etc. It is income from as many different revenue streams as possible while constantly improving writing + production chops. At least this has become my target, right or wrong.
I honestly feel that in the case of Session Horns, the demos convinced me NOT to consider it.