If you have general questions or comments about the music library business please leave them here.
1,729 thoughts on “General Questions”
Comments are closed.
Music creators rating the music libraries.
If you have general questions or comments about the music library business please leave them here.
Comments are closed.
Many networks pay between $200 – $800 per use to put a “cue” (not song) on a promo. This is to offset any possible lack of PRO reporting. Not saying any monies were paid to JP whatsoever, just wanted to add some information…
Tunesat detected that same promo and another track of mine on fuse. The second track was used twice. Funny thing, those same two tracks are the ones I know have been placed in actual shows.
It seems like only those two songs are getting any traction, showing up on shows like Moonshiners, American Stuffers and Flipping Out.
I guess this brings up another question. With a service like tunesat, the power of information is slowly coming to the composer. How do I know which detections should be pursued with my PRO if they never show up on a cue sheet and which ones are part of the blanket gratis deal and to let slide?
Just because they are blanket deals it doesn’t mean you will not get paid PRO monies. It’s the promos you might not get paid on. I listen to them on Tunesat and you can usually hear if they are promos for other shows. Also, many times, the very short detections on Tunesat are promos. Then again it depends on the network on whether you will get paid. BMI will tell you which ones they are collecting on. Don’t know about the other PROs.
let me get this right ? ….. no payment at all ? [ assuming it’s the JP blanket license ]. If JP gets paid royalties for the blanket license that involves Greg’s track that was actually used , promo or not , shouldn’t Greg get something at least ? especially if JP gets royalty payment for that ? Or maybe I don’t understand what’s happening here ? I havn’t dealt with a blanket license before.
I am not sure JP getting paid for this blanket either.
This is something composers should take in account with JP.
JP says that because they use it for a promo, that is more likely they gonna use other tracks of your for in show placement (that pays) because they noticed you and love your tracks. I think it is a reasonable price to pay.
I’ve been encountering that ” carrot on a stick ” for 40 years , some things will never change, LOL ! And that carrot has been used longer than I ‘ve been alive and longer. I hope you snag that carrot mUSIC , and if you do, good for you ! But like I said, I never been involved with a blanket license before so maybe that particular carrot does get a few bites taken out of it. Yes Art , games games games , isn’t it 🙂
I think blanket is good for instrumental music, if you have a lot of tracks, like libraries do, its a good deal. But if you are a composer with only 20 tracks, I can understand…
Anyway, Art is right, you need to play the game, they have the power (production companies) so you do what they like to do, especially now, where there’s so much music out there.
Unfortunately a lot of games are played to get on some of these shows. Sometimes the libraries get caught between what the production companies demand. That could mean giving some freebies for some shows to get paid placement on others.
A couple of years ago I gave up half writers because the production company wanted all the publishing income. I ended up splitting the writers with the library but only for that show. Fortunately that show runs constantly and generates some decent money.
This kind of stuff goes on all the time in the record business and has been for years!
Yep, this is a JP placement. I suspected this type may never generate any $ for me, based on comments I have read here and on the JP help forum.
I’m confused. He had a track played on the Fuse Network and he shouldn’t expect money? I think he’ll get a little at least.
Its depends where the music came from, if it came from Jingle Punks , Jingle Punks got a blanket (royalties only) agreement with Fuse that allow Fuse to use any track they like to.
I had a tunesat detection that came up during a Fuse show called the top 100 sexiest videos (episode 6). Listening to the clip, it sound like a Fuse promo/interview thing. Something about Michel Buckley on special assignment for digitour.
Sounds like a promo useage and not actually in the show. I am registered with ascap and was reading a bit on their page about how commercial and promo placements work, but am not totally clear.
I am not sure if I need to register my work as a commercial (which it isn’t right now). I am also not sure if this type of use doesn’t always get detected/payed via the PRO. I think they only monitor for commercial and promo use during specific periods.
If anyone has experience with this, I would appreckate any advice.
Are you with Jingle Punks? Sounds like the placement came from them.
I had a lot like those, promo placements. Don’t expect any money out of it.
You do not have to register anything like this.
And yes, ASCAP do survey’s at specific times, I don’t know if Fuse are part of their survey’s, but again, don’t expect any money.
I had a bunch of placements on Fuse with no PRO money. They were promos and BMI does not collect on promos on all channels. They are adding more all the time though.
” adapting to how the game is at this time and moving forward ” ….. I think what has to be done is that artists have start playing the game more by saying ” no ” as what this thread seems to be saying right now , which is good to see. Yes, IF there is enough ” NOs ” the artists can change the playing field a bit. I was recently offered an exclusive deal from a reputable library for some of my tunes , the typical deal, no upfront , blah blah blah ! I said NO and gave the reasons why which coincides with what some are saying on here. I told them if they can find me a crystal ball that actually worked I may consider it. They took that statement well and decided to use the same tracks and others on a non exclusive deal. I know it’s wishful thinking having artists take a stand but I feel good about doing my part by saying ” no ” because it’s a crappy deal for the artist. “Adapting to the game and moving forward” is just a way of having everything fall right into their lap without a worry on their part , they know this and take advantage of it and that type of philosophy is one of the reasons why we’re in this particular situation. I was seriously thinking about going exclusive with some of my material but I’ve decided not to because it’s simply a crappy deal [ the type of exclusive deals we’re talking about ]. Just my opinion about this and how I’m dealing with it.
This is good to see.
I’ve turned down a few exclusive deals with no up front fee as well and I think that this need to be done by others too. Unless you are scoring to picture and know 100% your music will be on, than OK.
Guys that are new to this will take any deal offered to them, and I understand it, but if you are experienced composer, you cannot agree to this.
I will love to see a response from an exclusive library owner here, but I think its far from happening.
I get upfront money from a couple of exclusive libraries but was recently branching out and I can’t believe the number of exclusive libraries that don’t pay up front money.
What are they thinking? You write a phenomenal epic trailer piece just to stick it in ONE library with no upfront money and no guarantee its going to be used.
With upfront money you know the exclusive library is going to license that track because they want to get that money back.
Why are there so many exclusive libraries that think we are all suckers?? Is it because most of us are suckers? We need to stop giving tracks to exclusive libraries without an upfront production fee.
People say audiojungle and istockphoto are ruining the market, but come on have you heard the production quality on these sites? Music directors know this and stay clear of low tier sites…I say whats devaluing our market is giving your music to exclusive libraries without upfront money.
Lets say you have 50 cues in an exclusive library. You think the library is good because they have had about 100 strong placements.
Yet they have 3000 cues in their arsenal. That gives you a 1.6 percent chance of getting a placement. Which means if they’ve been in business for 10 years, and you’ve been with them 10 years, you will only get ONE good placement in 10 years! The numbers vary from library to library as you know, but my point is….
Why are you putting your cues in exclusive libraries if your getting no upfront production fee? Clearly a lot of you are doing this as I see these exclusive libraries have a plentiful selection.
J3h43f4,
I’m relatively new in the business, 50-ish cues in a handful of non-exclusives. Thank you for this post. I hope to give some exclusives a try in the next year or two and this is good food for thought if I every get accepted into one.
Cheers!
Thanks for that comment. I couldn’t agree more and why I usually stay away from any exclusive contracts that do not pay upfront monies unless it’s short (2 years) and with a reversion clause. Even at that I’m very leery.
My understanding, is that some of these exclusives are offering a sync fee split, in lieu of upfront money.
True, but not enough of an inducement for me.
Proverbial carrot at the end of a stick. Mostly stick and not much carrot. IMO
Exactly, because they might not ever license it.
Something we should understand is that even if you do get upfront money from an exclusive library, there is still no guarantee that it will get placed. The libraries know this all too well, which is why more of them are turning to 2 year reversion clause instead of paying anything upfront.
I’ve also seen a number of non-exclusive libraries moving towards the exclusive model simply because more of their clients just don’t want to deal with non-exclusive (retitling ) libraries. Many of these libraries are at least offering you the choice to either go exclusive or non-exclusive.
Non-exclusives are not going away IMHO. Of course all these Non-exclusives are offering exclusive. Why wouldn’t they, in doing so they are building up their database while starving the competition. And they use the excuse that “one of our clients has a problem with non-exclusive”, and “everything’s moving to exclusive.”
Some of the exclusive libraries that I am signed to offer sync fees, but I have not made any money that way yet. Many libraries now offer blanket licenses to customers willing to spend a few thousand dollars. This increases the chances of a placement since the customer has access to a larger pool of tracks. But this also means no upfront money for composers.
I have given up hope for making a sync fee these days. I have also given up hope for making an upfront fee from an exclusive library. Many customers do not buy single licenses as much anymore. This means that many music libraries do not have the money to acquire songs for a fee or even give out a sync fee to composers.
I know that composers feel that working with exclusive companies that only offer PRO royalties is bad. But I personally do not know of any other way to make money from licensing music. I plan on adding 50 cues to exclusive libraries by the end of the year. Not one pays an upfront fee, but they do offer 50% splits for sync fees. I do not have the power to change things. I am just adapting to how the game is at this time and moving forward.
I agree with you 100%!!!
I’ve just offered a ridiculous deal: 50$ per track and only 50% writers share. What people are thinking? And this is for a library that supply music to a major network show.
I think that if a library want to be exclusive and offer music to the high end clients, even if no sync fee is involved, they need to pay up-front money. If they work good they will get their investment back in the form of royalties.
They need to earn the right to be exclusive and that’s to pay an up front fee. So see what happen, exclusive library that do not pay an up-front fee to the composer, have their cake and eat it too because:
1) They get the major clients NBC CBS ABC (bigger royalties)
2) Music that no one have
3) Do not pay for the music
Non-exclusive library:
1) Low end clients-cable networks (less royalties)
2) Music that other companies have
3) Do not pay for the music
See, who you think is making more money?
We need to be smart.
Peace…
“Non-exclusive library:
1) Low end clients-cable networks (less royalties)”
Uh, not necessarily true.
I have non-exclusive music running on major networks and higher paying cable networks!
Yes me too, but now it seems that major networks are avoiding non-exclusive libraries.
I love the non-exclusive model, I think its the most fair model after the exclusive up-front fee model.
Jingle Punks for example are one of those non-exclusive libraries that gets major network placements all the time.
$50 a track and 50% writers share? I don’t understand, are you writing it all, or are they writing some?
I am the only one writing.
Sometimes companies will want some of the writer share in order to make more money.
I’ll have to eat my words on this as I had said I would never do a split writer unless it was a big name artist.
I realize I did do that a couple of years ago to get on a show. Fortunately it worked out well as the cues get used constantly and the split is only good for that show. What a legal morass that could become, though the contract is very specific.
Hello I’m with PRO libraries so I can’t sell on Audiojungle or istockphoto? These libraries get huge traffic. What if I do?
Hi Alex
If you mean by sell, to give up your entire copyright and interest in them, I would never ever do that.
If a library owner is interested then surely you can do a deal. Always retain at least 50 % of publishing pot unless its for Adele,Beyonce or Katy Perry. TBH deals like this always sound dodgy unless you are talking about a LOT of money.