Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yeah you still get paid royalties as if they used the full mix.
“your advice is to go on with Identifyy as music libraries and broadcasters will not have any issue with strikes as they pre clear all the music they use?”
Sorry what I meant was that libraries should be using Content ID as another income stream… if you’re writing for libraries that will own the music (exclusive deals), then definitely DON’T register them Identifyy or any other Content ID company. The library should be the one to do that.
Also for non-exclusive deals, you have to watch out as some libraries won’t take music registered with a CID company. If you’re writing non-exclusively for ‘royalty free’ music / stock music companies, they often insist on you NOT signing your tracks up with CID. That said, there are non-ex RF libraries that are happy to let their composers do it, and have a simple system for white listing customers’ videos when necessary.
I just thought it was odd that that guy “Adam” – a library owner, would have such an outdated perspective on CID. It’s only an issue for clients that want to monetize or make their videos mostly ad-free. The big broadcasters and media companies are immune from this issue as they have separate deals with Google for their channels. Maybe he said that a long time ago? Content ID was a scary thing when it first came out but in recent years pretty much every mainstream library has embraced it as a significant extra income generator.
“ Would you rather have a few dollars from an ad revenue system or a placement from Viacom / Bauer / Netflix / Marvel?”
The big content creators and broadcasters are pre-cleared, so don’t worry about that. And every big publisher I’ve worked with, that has placed my tracks with those big companies, also has their tracks in CID, with a company like this one.
Personally I sometimes make more from content ID in a year than I do from sync fees, and I get about 4 – 6 trailer placements a year.
Not an income stream you want to turn down unless you’re focused on royalty free licensing / micro-licensing.33% of writer’s performance royalties and 16% of sync fees isn’t exactly what I’d call a fair deal, which is what your composers will get if you and your business partner take 2/3rds of what’s left over after the publisher takes their cut.
You’re talking about performance royalties right? Those are still really low for YT. On the other hand, if you’d received the Content ID income for that video, you’d have made something like $25,000 – $50,000 depending on where the views were from.
Came in late Friday night. You might want to call them
Check with your library – CNN tends to be direct licensing ie zero royalties.
What’s a hefty tv royalty. Anyone here had one.
To some that might mean $100 a track per quarter. I aim for at least $500 but I’m also spending 5 – 10 days working on each track.
You write for trailers though right? Or am I mistaken?
Yeah that’s me, but I still do a lot of library music designed for TV, and make the majority of my income from that stuff used in unscripted shows, sports etc.
400 tracks is nothing at this point IMO
I’m not so sure about that. I’ve made more from my last 100 tracks than I have from the previous 2000.
Quality over quantity has proven to be a winner for me.
All of those variables are always 100% out of your control.
Great points! But, I’d argue there’s something in your control that increases the odds of those opportunities dropping out of the sky and into your lap: QUALITY. Moving from a spam-mode mindset to attempting to make each track the best thing you’ve ever done goes a long way to increasing the odds of theme use, major syncs etc.
about two years
Thanks for the push to take a look – usually I have a rough idea but last year was a bit wacky, and my numbers were really different from what I usually get. Here’s my breakdown:
57% performance royalties
25% mechanicals
12% sync
6% upfrontI have some music on that show, and for comparison, this is what I got from it airing on cable (MTV)
$24 for one minute of music.
As far as I could figure out, the show gets about 400,000 viewers per episode on its first airing.
Maybe Hulu’s rate isn’t so bad after all.
I think that what we’re going to see with the future of royalties (streaming replacing cable) is that hit shows will no longer prop up the royalties we get from less popular ones. At the moment we pretty much get the same amount of royalties per show – just depending on how many re-airs an episode get. ASCAP gives a bump in the rate for very popular shows, but it’s not a huge difference. With streaming, the difference will be HUGE.
I’ve been told by PRO employees that a hit show on a streaming service will likely make a composer more than they’d get on network (but for a short time, then the income quickly fades as the world is done bingeing the series). But an obscure non-hit will get a fraction of that.
Maybe that’s a fairer situation? Certainly going to be a lot more brutal.I don’t think you need to commit to a YouTube or IG channel that uploads new content every couple of days. But there’s a lot of good that come out of interacting with people in the business, commenting on their posts, congratulating them etc. Let people know you’re alive.
LinkedIn is a more professional crowd and it seems like just about every library owner / supervisor is on there.