Forum Replies Created

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Using Splice samples – is it problematic? #38563

    cyberk91 Thanks for posting that link, I had not seen that. Brilliant, really illustrates what can happen 🙂

    in reply to: Using Splice samples – is it problematic? #38534

    I think the problem mainly arises when phrases are used in their entirety and are exposed in the track. In such a scenario the problem for libraries arises when the music is registered with the likes of AdRev / YT content ID as it will pick up on the exposed sample elements. Anyone else subsequently using that sample phrase may get content Id claims on their piece, even if the phrase is buried.

    I use splice, but try to avoid phrases. I tend to mainly use one-shots, transitions, and chopped vocals (which could be a risk, but no problem so far.). I am even dubious about recorded chord sequences as they tend to be easily recognisable. Although there is no copyright on chord sequences, there is a copyright on the recording. Sometimes I use splice to get inspiration. I will find a phrase and then recreate it with my own sounds by playing it into the keyboard to avoid the recording recognition problem.

    I would say, be aware of the terms and limitations but make them a very small part of your production relying mainly on your own compositions skills.

    As a library owner, we get offered so many lazy tracks where it is a drum loop, a couple of phrases and a vocal chop, often all from the same sample pack. These are the risky ones imho, they have no composition and are just an arrangement of naked samples 🙂


    Hi Art, thanks for the reply.
    Their prices were very low, turns out it would have been pennies per license. I initially declined, however, they then told me they were changing their prices to $20-$50 USD per license. They have sent me a contract that is in Chinese too.
    I am unsure about them as I can’t find much about them online. Perhaps they are new.
    We have to be careful who we trust with our music 😉
    Many thanks, Lee

    in reply to: My experiment with a subscription deal #36061

    I don’t understand why companies have to change a system that already works, and that users will already pay for. It’s really cruel what the corporate world has done to hard working musicians.

    In my opinion… Greed! It works well for the company that gets committed users but devalues music.

    I am a library owner and composer so can see the attraction of getting subscribed customers, however, to reduce the income that the composer receives to pennies seems like a really bad move to me. Surely we will end up with the quality of music suffering. If this happens there will be no point in spending days or weeks working on music. We will have to knock out 10+ tracks a week to get enough bulk in the subscription websites. Seems like a road to disaster to me.

    I can understand that a single composer may offer a subscription option/patron model for clients, meaning that they get a regular income and the client supports their work. However, when a large company uses music (that has cost them nothing to acquire) in order to facilitate a low cost all you can use option, this is great for them but crap for the composers.

    I can also understand (and offer) a limited subscription option where the client gets a discount for agreeing to monthly payments, but all you can use seems really bad to me.

    As a library owner, I am now losing business to these disruptive business models and being pressured to keep considering them or lose more clients. As a composer, I am horrified that music is becoming so devalued and at best, I can create 1-2 tracks a week currently. This means that it takes a long time to create a sizable library and it is only viable if payouts are sensible. Getting pennies for hundreds of hours of work is pointless.

    I think there will be the composers that do join these and composer that don’t. We will end up with a 2 tiered stock industry. If enough people stay out of them, we will end up with two sets of music. A smaller, let’s say more valued set and a larger set where composers are needing to churn them out in bulk and fast.

    As a library owner, I know more is not always best. Also, I know that media clients will hunt for the right track and are prepared to pay the going rate for a license. Often £££’s and not pennies.

    As a composer, it is time to draw a line in the sand and consider your value. As a library owner, it is time to decide what you value more… money or music.

    Some will say do both, but if my client can find your music for pennies, why should I try and get ££ for it. I am doing my client a disservice if your music is also available for peanuts.

    I know some will agree and some disagree, but this is just my take on it.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)