Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@Rosalind, This the Apple loops license agreement
B. Except as otherwise indicated, you may use the Apple and third party audio file content (including, but not limited to, the Apple Loops, built-in sound files, samples and impulse responses) (collectively the “Audio Content”), contained in or otherwise included with the Apple Software, on a royalty-free basis, to create your own original soundtracks for your film, video and audio projects. You may broadcast and/or distribute your own soundtracks that were created using the Audio Content, however, individual Apple loops, audio files, sound settings, samples and impulse responses may not be commercially or otherwise distributed on a standalone basis, nor may they be repackaged in whole or in part as audio samples, sound files, sound effects or music beds.
Which basically means you can use them is any way in your own compositions but you cannot redistribute them separately. (make your own loop library out of them) which is fair. Usher had a no1 record a few years ago with an Apple loop as the main riff in it, no problems at all.
@Rosalind
I will use Logic and Apple loops as an example, the same basically applies for any loop/sample library (sort of)
When purchasing Logic and the contained Apple loops your are given permission to use them in any way in your own compositions without a further royalty payment, you may modify them in this context (Within a composition!!!!). You may NOT modify them only and then attempt to resell them as your own. The same rule applies to most loop/sample libraries, there is usually a caveat that a loop/sample cannot be exposed in a composition or have a set number of other tracks with it or “within a musical context”
However each sample/loop library has its own Terms and it very important to read their licensing agreements as this may vary. Some for example do not allow their samples to be used in Library or Trailer music. Never buy samples/loops without reading their licensing agreements and conditions.
@TheOne
A UK/Ireland variant is of this is called Trad Arr. Similarly if you take a PD folk/traditional tune and make a unique arrangement of it you register with your PRO as Trad Arr (Traditional arrangement). You are entitled to the full writers share. Unique is an opinion of course, How many different ways are there of singing “Greensleeves” for example, that is of course you don’t copy an existing arrangement that was a significant departure from the original.
MichaelL do you have Trad Arr in the States ?
@RecHead, Youtube content id probably is the best/only way to get some kind of Royalty from Youtube BUT and this is a BIG BUT, you must treat the track that is submitted as exclusive to whatever library that operates this, otherwise it
1. Breaks Youtube’s own terms regarding this
and
2. Will start to generate take down notices for clients who have purchased a license from a different library.(if you have the track in more than one non exclusive lib.)
If the PRS could somehow track Youtube plays it would get rid of content id as an option for composers, but it doesn’t seem to want or be able to.
If you can hear it, you can steal it, simple as that. Quality might be dreadful and editing out the ‘lib voice watermarks’ mane obvious but anything is possible. If you are talking about hacking a library database and getting the original wav files, yes that would be possible too but unlikely.
http://www.loopmasters.com/format/show/39/MIDI_Files
Most of the major loop libs do Midi files too.
Tx Marina great info
Yep a giant, with an astonishing body of work.RIP.
On a related note, I understand mixing on headphones is generally considered verboten, but other than issues with panning, is there a reason not to do it?
No reason not to do it. I couldn’t personally.I know a lot of mix engineers that will reference mixs on headphones but never do a whole mix on them. Whatever works.
Sounds ok to me, It certainly isn’t bass light mind you sound cloud can do funny things.
If you feel there is a boom, hi pass channels. I actually do this on most channels to take out sub frequencies that maybe don’t interfere individually, but when there is a lot going on it adds up. I also cut 20-40 hz on the master buss, its inaudible unless your in an IMAX theatre with a THX rig.
+1 euca, one thing I have come to realize in this game is a big seller on one site is no barometer of sales on another. As a NE it means nothing to me, but if I had exclusive tracks on there I think it would be reasonable to be told what “retired” means.
Good manners, communication skills, whatever you want to call it are part of doing business.
Denis, do you use the focal cms? More and more I am leaning towards that line.
euca, No I dont, a few of my colleagues use them and for mid range monitors they are superb. I have HHB Circle 5 which I just know the sound of and are similar . I would replace them with Focal CMS 50’s in a flash.They are very accurate and don’t flatter.
Room treatment is important, but the Focals aren’t huge so they sound decent in most rooms (unless its really bad). If you work in a smallish untreated room with big monitors, you have to turn them up to get an accurate frequency response. This, in an untreated room will skew the balance.
The Focals sound good at low volumes with an even frequency dispersion and great stereo image. Perfect of the home studio. IMO. The mid sized Adams are very good also.
Personally I cant stand the mid sized Genelecs, the metal tweeters are really fatiguing and unnatural for me.
http://www.focalprofessional.com/en/72-cms
for mid priced the best I have heard. Loads of choice as you pay more
I just got my PRO statement, the best earner was a track about 3 years old, ambient type thing. Totally forgettable for me , so much so I had to dig it out to remind myself what it sounded like ! You never know.
Maybe I`m far out here, but as far as I know this is not true. If there is no publishing registered for a track, then the composer will get the whole 200% of the track I think. Both the writers share and 100% of the publishing.
Please correct me if I`m wrong here.Depends which PRO you are with. In Ireland and UK (IMRO/PRS) you do not need a publishing entity to collect your “publishers share”.
Also over here we view a song as 100%. A writer can never get less than 50%. There fore publishing splits are described as 50/50, 70/30 etc. If there is no publisher, the writer is assigned 100% ( to reiterate thats ALL of the income ) and it is distributed like that.
The American system is a little bit confusing with there is a writers 100% and a publishers 100%. Bizarrely a song now is 200% !!!
It assumes that a publisher is automatically assigned 50% of the pie , which certainly isnt the case these days. It gets very confusing when there is a 75/25 split ( as we see it) and it is described in the States as the writer getting their share plus 50% of the publishing share.