Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Bonjour, and bon chance! 🙂
Ok, I’ll jump in with a few thoughts. The market is so crowded with composers, it is very difficult to get a response from a PMA library when making a blind submission. I recently was shopping a completed multi-song project, with alts and timing edits, focusing my shopping on PMA library members. 80% of libraries submitted to never responded. But who could blame them, given the amount of blind submissions they are probably receiving. If a point of contact at the PMA could assist in getting submissions heard, then that would be a useful resource.
Thoughts on the business – well, what really bothers me is backend payouts by the PRO’s. I’ll get an ASCAP statement 45 pages long, with a payout of $1,000. It’s discouraging. You would think one could make a living off of the number of placements it takes to fill up 45 pages, but no. Perhaps the PMA could advocate on this topic.
I haven’t found one edit to be better than another for placements. Typically, a library track is 1:30- 2:30 in total length and the composer provides timing edits:
15 Seconds
30 Seconds
60 Seconds
Loop
StingAlso, create alternate mixes where it makes sense. Drum and bass only is a popular alternate.
So mastering per the style of music really doesn’t matter that much?
Yes, it does. After achieving the basic attenuation, I use my ears to be sure it is making sense in context of the style. Back when I used to master for CD release, I set my loudnees by getting all the songs on the CD even sounding, and as close to a commercial release in the same style as possible. I don’t usually do this for library tracks, but something to consider if you’re looking for a level setting
FWIW- I master my production music tracks to achieve between -3 and -4dB attenuation from the limiter/maximizer, then use my ears to make the final determination.
Does that mean that I will not be able to use my music for some/all exclusive libraries?
You probably could still sign exclusive. The registration could likely be changed to reflect a new publisher. Perhaps a BMI member can chime in here to let you know what it takes, is it easy and etc.
If it was a live news broadcast it might fall under an “ephemeral use” and not pay. See:
http://pmamusic.com/ephemeral-use-and-production-music-just-the-facts/
You can get opportunities without a paid membership at http://www.filmmusic.net also at broadjam.com I believe. Both will make you pay per submission. I’ve had some luck with both, but that was years ago before the market got so crowded. I believe Art has had luck with the FMN.
That is an interesting concept that brings up a whole bunch of questions! I wonder for one is it only material signed exclusively up for auction? If it is non-exclusive tracks, who is going to all the possible places a composer has deals with to change the payout information? Are they including RF payments? And, it’s possible to miss a few sites right? If the composer has been sending out tracks for many years or not keeping good records.
The completed auctions show a number and say “closed”. They don’t necessarily say the posted number is what it sold for. It could be an ask that never received any bids. I wonder if a bidder is allowed to listen to the catalog before bidding? I mean what if the music is no good or dated sounding? I don’t know, lot’s of questions but an interesting concept.
Registering at BMI isn’t a form of copyright protection. A track is registered in order to define the payment splits for writers and publishers so BMI knows who to pay when distributing royalties. An exclusive library (publisher) will want to handle the registration because they will most likely be taking 100% of the publishing backend. Plus, if you register before getting an exclusive deal and don’t list a publisher, I believe BMI considers the track to be “self-published”. Maybe the splits can be changed later, if you need to, I don’t know, I’m ASCAP. But it would just be an added hassle. So no sense registering tracks destined for exclusive contracts.
If you’re shopping to exclusive libraries, you won’t want to register with BMI before submitting. Non-exclusive shouldn’t matter as the library will register a re-title with a new name or your title plus an identifying code.
Hi TerlinguaMusic, my background is similar also. Music degree, lots of live playing, having a studio and doing client work. You said “I do hear a lot of music like mine online and on TV, so there’s obviously a market for it.” You probably already thought of it, but pause on the credits of the TV shows using music like yours to see who has placed the tracks. Or contact the poster of the online content and ask where they got their music from. At the least that can give you a less random starting point.
Good luck!
Hi all, I just went through this exercise. I created an eight song compilation of tracks in the same style all with alternate mixes and timing edits (Michael L – you heard a few of these). Then I made a spreadsheet listing PMA libraries organized by “Primary”, “Associate” and “Represented by APM”. It came out to about 100 libraries. I submitted to 17 of them and received four responses, but ultimately, no offers. The one I wanted to place with went as far as the Senior Producer presenting my project to the sales team, whose response was that they had just released a similar project, and needed that one to “breathe” for a bit.
I was just about to go the non-exclusive route with the tracks when I got an offer to place them with a library I submitted to after seeing them mentioned here. When I researched the library, I saw one of MLR’s respected composer’s was represented by them. They also have a reasonable reversion clause for these exclusive tracks, and as a bonus will also take some of my non-exclusive stuff.
This whole shopping process took five months. Expect not to hear back from about 80% of your submissions. Composing a complete project like this takes time and I felt like I had more at stake with this than when doing a simple one off piece in a few hours. I wanted to make the right decision. When going this route, I would advise taking a deal with a respectable up-front payment. In lieu of that, make sure to get a reversion clause. If you can’t get either, ask yourself if you’re really willing to part with you hard work for no up-front money and no chance to ever get back the rights.
Hope this helps,
MichaelRight, we can’t do a 100% perfect job. So my take is we have do the best that we can and be satisfied with that. In your case, that might mean not using samples that you’re questioning, like I didn’t use the sax loop. But we all need to use content and can’t question every single thing. If a situation ever did come up, I’d hope the library would recognize if a composer took all possible measures to act honestly, and then themselves act understandingly. I mean in this day of blatant music thieves stealing full tracks and passing them off as their own, why dump an honest composer because of something they had no control over?
It is tricky. A typical license agreement gives you the right to use the sounds for commercial purposes within musical compositions, then the next paragraph says the sounds are licensed “as is” without warranties of any kind! I bought a saxophone sample product just recently and heard the melody of a famous jazz standard in some of the loops.
It would be a shame for a library to drop a composer who did everything correctly. The composer shopped and paid for content, and received a license to use the sounds commercially. What more can we do?
I guess it comes down to trust. It sounds like you don’t trust that the content is actually legal, so you need to either verify with the company providing the license that yes it is a 100% legal sample or don’t use it. I don’t trust the sax product now, and maybe any other product put out by the company.
Eventually, we have to create and need content to do so. How does that saying go – “Trust but verify” or something like that.