Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A lot of Kontakt libraries do NOT require the full version of Kontakt.
Cinematic strings 2 for example uses the Kontakt player, which is free. The full version of Kontakt is required for libraries that don’t use the NI encryption and authorization.
You are nearly better getting a Komplete package which includes the full Kontakt plus loads of other VIs than the Standalone version.
Komplete is 499 euro
Kontakt is 399 eurohttp://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/bundles/komplete-9/pricing/
First of all Emma thanks for your detailed post which is from your perspective in the UK and I respect that, the 30,000 cues is I think from Jingle Jared who believe me is not struggling.
I will repeat this forever, there is no right or wrong, there are different types of libraries for different markets. I do agree with Emma that the Internet/Garageband/Loops has made it easy and more importantly affordable for composers to enter the market. There is substandard music in all libraries if you you like to label it that way, the difference now is the the production values are high enough to be broadcast quality. I am uncomfortable with the term substandard TBH, I don’t think One Direction are substandard ( many I am sure would disagree) its a very personal definition.
I will relate again a personal experience, in my time running a studio we would regularly get copies of mixes from U2 as they were finishing them in the mix room in the 80s. Terrible drum sound, not a major 9nth chord in sight, same bass line etc etc etc we would sneer.Substandard music we would say, wont sell, Steely Dan are a real band blah blah. Musical arrogance is what that is called, I either like or dislike music these days. OH BTW the album was “The Joshua Tree” and went on to sell over 30 million copies and I think would be very highly regarded. Music appreciation is a personal thing not a judgement put on it by others.
Emma speaks from a UK perspective and she is correct about TV usage, there is a very strong and professional library base there, also their PRO rates are very good BUT whether I or anybody else likes it , library music is a global internet business with all the pro and cons that that entails. If I am making a living doing exclusive cues for the BBC I would hold a position very different from the average composer out there who is starting out.
It is possible to make a living in library music using ALL forms of libraries, I simply don’t make absolute judgements based on other peoples experience. I will certainly listen and take on board what they are saying.
MA stated he/she tried it for a year and it didn’t work, therefore it should be dismissed out of hand, its a slightly arrogant statement to make. Its based on the belief that your music is of such a hi standard that the RF libraries you tried simply didn’t know what they were doing. There are a few composers here who would counter that with a completely different experience, to demeanor them is not on. Language and nuance are very important on forums, and what is true for you is not the truth for everyone generally.
To finish, don’t take sides in this debate, try all types of outlets and find the niche or niches that work for you, funneling people down a predetermined path based on someone else shouting louder does not make a good career move, whatever position they may take.
After playing the RF game for 2013 to test it out
At best, RF should be considered a “chump change side show” not a realistic way to earn a liveable wage.
The problem I have with this MA is, first of all you have only tested the waters for a year or less, by your own admission, yet come very quickly to your conclusion that its a “chump change side show”.
Pretty one sided and misleading really. I am not claiming that RF or library music in general is an easy buck , but to make judgement based on “playing the RF game for 2013 to test it out” is silly.
Someone who claims to have the success you have in the exclusive world surely couldn’t have made that judgement after a year, could you ?
If I am misreading something here please correct me as I am directly quoting you above
It really helps to take the time to understand the nomenclature and distinctions between business models, how they function and who they service, however subtle.
You even need to understand the subcategories within business models…e.g. RF libraries that do promote actively to broadcast producers, those that don’t and those that charge reasonable license fee and those that don’t. You cannot lump all RF libraries into single pile anymore than you can put all composers into the same pile.How come you can say things clearly in one paragraph when it takes me five LOL. Anyway + 1000, this is really important.
That’s exactly what I talked about with a PMA board member at lunch last week and he agreed. Hopefully, by joining, I can start that conversation.
Thats great Art , keep us informed.
I like you, have been around the music business a few years, but only the library part of it for the past 4 years or so. I am also going to pursue the exclusive route now, diversify and don’t rely on any one income stream is my motto. Also for me, its important to be ready to adapt to what is a very fast moving industry and world.
1) a library that is marketing itself as ‘royalty free’ where there are no further sync fees for future use after the initial payment, yet
still insists on clients filling out cue sheets if the music airs on TV, film or radio.
This is the vast majority of websites competing for google searches containing the words ‘royalty free ___ music’.Is something we should all remember and the majority are non exclusive. There are many variations, so casting around “royalty free” as an insult does not help anyone to understand the business.
AS as an example, is a “royalty free” site which insists on PRO cue sheets and has different rates of sync fees depending on usage.
There are others who charge a once off fee for any usage and don’t insist on PRO cue sheets.
There are others who forbid any PRO affiliation for their composers.
and all variation of above !!!!!!
So lets talk about exclusives.Their roster of composers is well stocked by now and subsequently very, very, difficult to get into, if not impossible, unless you bring something extremely unique to the table. I am not saying don’t try, of course you should. You could literally spend years submitting and getting nowhere, correct me if I am wrong but the big writers for exclusives have been doing it for a very long time. This is why non-exclusives are attractive to new composers.
If the big exclusives represented by the PMA want to stop the race to the bottom, they need to reach out to get new composers on board IMHO. In the past there has been an elitist view of their own product and a marked disdain of any music that wasn’t controlled by them. Possibly motivated by fear and shrinking revenues ?
Before we get all partisan on this there is fantastic music on ALL sites exclusive/Non exclusive/royalty free(in all its incarnations) and also some terrible music on all of the above.
As MichaelL always reiterates their are many tiers and markets to this business. Music, ultimately is a commodity. Investigate and use all avenues of revenue is my opinion. There is no absolute wrong or right.
awwwwww cute, brings a tear to the most cynical eye.
Absolutely not !!!!
will munge the downbeat
A new adjective to me Art LOL, don’t forget that plugins on the Master bus are usually NOT delay compensated so maybe that could come into play there.
I am sure this came up here before or maybe Deja vu on my part, A little trick I learned was to leave one/half beat as your silence at the head (when bouncing in your DAW start @ bar 2 beat 4 if your track starts @ bar 3 etc). Usually less than .5 sec depending on tempo. This way if you have to do stereo edits its easy to line up exactly to the grid if necessary.
The rule when CDs were the norm was not to edit right up to the start as it would cause pops and clicks when burning.
Never had one, been a professional musician since I was 16.
Funny!!
So, just to clarify what is going on: these musicians sent their music to a library on a non-exclusive basis, then the musicians used those songs in their music videos, then the library gets YouTube to take those videos down?
There are a number of different things going on that are related, in one case it seems that a digital music distribution company TC opted into the Youtube scheme without allegedly telling their composers. There was a change in the TOS which gave them exclusivity to do so. As we have seen before here the sensible thing to do is to make it an opt in for composers and make it really obvious what it implies !!!!, other wise as we have seen, this mess occurs.
TC explain it here
Kenny…if you don’t plan on using Alchemy’s sample manipulation features and just want to use preset sounds, you could use the Free Alchemy Player.
+1 the player lets you do a lot of stuff apart from micro editing and sample import. TBH I could count on the fingers of one hand where I actually needed the full version as opposed to the player.
Omnisphere is a must have really , it still is the best all round synth out there for all genres. Get the free Alchemy player, you can always upgrade later if you feel it doesn’t give you enough control.
Should have no issues with that. Omnisphere can be a CPU brute as can Alchemy too.