# Music Libraries Conditions



## Aceituna (Apr 27, 2020)

I received a reply from a Music Library.

"General Terms & Conditions"
Exclusive contract
No Up Front Fees
Performance 50/50
Mechanical 50/50
Copyright would need to be Assigned to [the library] for perpetuity.
Any samples used within an original work would need to be authorised.
Please request our specs that we would require for the catalogue should we decide to publish your works. 

Is perpetuity a common condition?
Do I have to ask an authorization from NI, Quantum Leap,....?


----------



## muk (Apr 27, 2020)

Perpetuity is a standard term. You have to check the EULA of every sample library you are using. Most, if not all of them, should state which use is allowed and which isn't. When in doubt, contact the developer and ask.

Also, you might want to read this ten part series of articles in SOS:






All About Library Music: Part 1


Production music is rarely glamorous, but it can be very lucrative. In the first of a major new series, we explain how to get your foot in the door.




www.soundonsound.com


----------



## Aceituna (Apr 27, 2020)

I red (and still reading) the Dan Graham articles. The are so good....



muk said:


> Perpetuity is a standard term


Does that mean I waive future royalties ?


----------



## Daryl (Apr 27, 2020)

Aceituna said:


> Does that mean I waive future royalties ?



Why would you do that? The contract says that you will get the so-called writer's share (50%) in perpetuity. How do you read that as losing your Royatlies?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Apr 27, 2020)

For an exclusive deal, I would ask for money upfront.


----------



## SamC (Apr 27, 2020)

Is there no upfront fee too? I get an upfront fee per track with every exclusive deal I sign with the same terms. If I were you I’d try and get paid upfront also, or only work with libraries who operate under that model.

Royalties can be great, but with the precarious situation royalties will be in in the near future — try and get paid upfront.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

Aceituna said:


> "General Terms & Conditions"
> Exclusive contract
> No Up Front Fees
> Performance 50/50
> ...



Common deal.



Aceituna said:


> Is perpetuity a common condition?



Yes. Say you give your work exclusively to lib A, and three years later, you give that same work to another lib. Lib A is telling their clients that this work will not appear anywhere else, but you have just given you wok to other to another lib for use in an another show.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> For an exclusive deal, I would ask for money upfront.



A good thing to have, but if that is becoming increasingly uncommon.



SamC said:


> Royalties can be great, but with the precarious situation royalties will be in in the near future — try and get paid upfront.



Unless we are talking trailer music, or TV ads, the royalties (over time) typically FAR outperform, $-wise, any up front fee.


----------



## Aceituna (Apr 27, 2020)

Daryl said:


> Why would you do that? The contract says that you will get the so-called writer's share (50%) in perpetuity. How do you read that as losing your Royatlies?


I am so newbie....


----------



## Aceituna (Apr 27, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> For an exclusive deal, I would ask for money upfront.


Is it possible at the beginning?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Apr 27, 2020)

Aceituna said:


> Is it possible at the beginning?



Yes, and is typically an advance royalty. It gives you more of an incentive.


----------



## muk (Apr 27, 2020)

Aceituna said:


> Is it possible at the beginning?



Asking is always possible. I don't know whether the chances are good though.

Upfront fees are very nice. Unfortunately, in my experience they have become relatively rare in production music, as @RonOrchComp wrote. And certainly so if they split the mechanicals 50/50. Usually if you get an upfront fee, the library keeps 100% of the mechanicals.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

Aceituna said:


> Is it possible at the beginning?



Virtually impossible. If the lib hasn't offered any money up front, they aren't going say, "hey - sure! We'll give you $500 per track!" just because you ask. Not to someone new to this, with as yet have no name/rep.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Apr 27, 2020)

RonOrchComp said:


> Virtually impossible. If the lib hasn't offered any money up front, they aren't going say, "hey - sure! We'll give you $500 per track!" just because you ask. Not to someone new to this, with as yet have no name/rep.



why not? I have been successful with this. It’s usually an advance royalty.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> why not? I have been successful with this. It’s usually an advance royalty.



You mean an advance on your royalties that the lib would later recoup? I didnt think that's what what were talking about here.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Apr 27, 2020)

RonOrchComp said:


> You mean an advance on your royalties that the lib would later recoup? I didnt think that's what what were talking about here.



Correct. I haven’t heard of anyone receiving money upfront that isn’t a royalty advance, except for a buyout.


----------



## StevenMcDonald (Apr 27, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Correct. I haven’t heard of anyone receiving money upfront that isn’t a royalty advance, except for a buyout.



I've had a couple smaller reality TV (and one trailer) focused libraries give $50-$100 up front, not an advance. But that has definitely been the minority in my experience!


----------



## JohnG (Apr 27, 2020)

I like for any library to have skin in the game and would be very leery of any situation where that's not the case. In other words, an up-front fee or paying costs of recording (players and an engineer, including mixing costs).

Conceivably, the library might be more willing to pay for adding live players than a "fee" upfront from an inexperienced / unproven source.

Important: It is not unusual for the library to recoup its costs, only paying after they are recovered. Nevertheless, if they have paid $10k to record each track (including mixing, mastering etc.), that means that they have a financial incentive to make $$ with your tracks and, moreover, won't just casually accept tracks unless they have confidence that they're going to license.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I haven’t heard of anyone receiving money upfront that isn’t a royalty advance, except for a buyout.



Opposite here. Until now, I haven’t heard of anyone receiving money upfront that is a royalty advance, which the lib recoups later. Whenever I get an upfront fee for an exclusive track, it's not a buyout, and it's not an advacne on the royalties.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Apr 27, 2020)

RonOrchComp said:


> Opposite here. Until now, I haven’t heard of anyone receiving money upfront that is a royalty advance, which the lib recoups later. Whenever I get an upfront fee for an exclusive track, it's not a buyout, and it's not an advacne on the royalties.



You are in the right place then! I wonder how they are recouping that money?


----------



## rgames (Apr 27, 2020)

RonOrchComp said:


> Whenever I get an upfront fee for an exclusive track, it's not a buyout, and it's not an advacne on the royalties.


Same here except I'm not sure what you mean about the buyout part. In my experience, if they're paying for the track uip front then they get exclusive rights to it and whatever revenues they generate from license fees. I keep the writer's share of any performance royalties but that's generally a small percentage of the revenues (usually zero) from the tracks where I get paid up-front.

Doing exclusives for no up-front fee can be OK if you have a good relationship with the library and they have a strong history of making money on the kinds of tracks you're submitting.

But if not, say good-bye to your work. It's going to be locked up forever doing mostly nothing.

What libraries should do is have a conditional reversion: if the track doesn't get used in, say, 24 months then it goes to non-exclusive or it gets removed from the library. But there aren't enough people on board with that approach so being the one guy pushing for it tends not to be very effective. For some reason there are plenty of people willing to give away their work with basically zero chance of getting any return on it.

rgames


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> You are in the right place then! I wonder how they are recouping that money?



Sync fees, I think.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Apr 27, 2020)

rgames said:


> Same here except I'm not sure what you mean about the buyout part.



Meaning the lib does not buyout the writer's share of the performance royalties. Which I would never agree to. Which, I believe is illegal in the UK, and should be illegal here in the USA


----------



## SamC (Apr 28, 2020)

RonOrchComp said:


> A good thing to have, but if that is becoming increasingly uncommon.
> 
> 
> 
> Unless we are talking trailer music, or TV ads, the royalties (over time) typically FAR outperform, $-wise, any up front fee.



Of course, from my experience they do — however, streaming royalties on the other hand are a fraction of broadcast royalties — and we’re not too far off on demand video being the norm in which the majority of people consume “television” as we know it. My royalties for one show is earning me 4% in backend than it did on television...4%. I make a huge part of my living from royalties.

Since there is no unionisation or policy being changed in our favour on the horizon, composers need to yield as much as they can for their work. The performing rights societies are incredibly complacent about the precarious position broadcast royalties are slowly falling into.

The royalty deal should always be in place, but an upfront fee should always be on the cards too in my opinion. If you’re a working composer you shouldn’t really put a note to paper unless you’re getting paid, no matter what backend there is.


----------



## FabTramp (May 4, 2020)

Hey everyone, thank you so much for this thread, it's been really helpful!

I would need to ask some questions regarding the "Exclusive" deals that might be helpful for others too. I am new to the Production Music "World" and although I am understanding the main concepts, I have some confusion about the Exclusive Deals and the Copyrights of my music.

A few questions if I may:

1) This might be a very silly question, when you sign a contract with an Exclusive Library is the deal you have with a song or an album not a deal with you as a Composer right? What I mean is, you can work for as many Exclusive Libraries as you want as long as the music you provide to them is different in each library?

2) As I am understanding, when you sign a deal for a specific song with an Exclusive Library, you are giving them the rights to own that track for any future usages and licensing of that song (for perpetuity, in most cases in the UK apparently). My question is: Is that song still yours and under your name as a Composer? Obviously it is in the PRO (PRS in my case) as you're registered to get your Royalties but what if I want to have that song on my Website, Socials, Spotify.. To show my portfolio and what my music sounds like or even to advertise that that song is on sale on this library..Is this allowed? Am I still the official Composer and owner of that track? I also understand that I won't be able to remove the track from the library or use it for any other projects forever. I am just wondering about the fact that if I spend 15 years writing music for Exclusive Library and my portfolio will look like I have never made music in my life. Hope it makes sense. 

3) After I signed a track for an Exclusive Library, is that track going to be used for infinite projects or is there a possibility that the track can be bought exclusively for one and only one project (TV, trailer, etc)?

Those were all the questions regarding Exclusive Deals that have been worrying my mind for a few days now, thanks guys! 
I have only got another questions but this time is about Non-Exclusive deals if that's ok!

4) As I mentioned earlier I am a beginner to Music Libraries and I am going to begin my journey with small Non-Exclusive Libraries. My question is about the Title of the song I would choose. As I'm understanding, if I am submitting the same song to different N-Exc Libraries it would be worth it (for them mainly) to have a different title for it in different Libraries. Also, in some of these libraries, you don't have the possibility to have a professional title and underneath the description of mood, instruments etc etc like in bigger Libraries and most of the time I can see that people rely a lot on the words they use in the title in order to be found in the search engine. 
So sometimes I see songs titles like "Epic & Dramatic Trailer" or "Suspenseful Dramatic Cue with Strings and Woodwinds".. This is obviously not a professional title if I would like to have this song displayed on my Website, Social, Music Platforms etc etc..

My question is: Can a specific track have many different titles and also have only 1 Tunecode so that can be traced by the PRO? On the PRS Website there is a section when you add the title and it seems like you can add several titles but I am just trying to understand if that is for this purpose. 

Example about 1 song having more titles:

Library A: Song Title: "Epic Music"--> sold to Production Company --> they pay the PRO, PRO pays me

Library B: Song Title: "Epic Trailer" --> sold to another Prod COmpany --> pay PRO, PRO pays me

My Website: Song Title: "Yesterday" --> sold privately to a Prod Compant --> pay PRO, PRO pays

When the different Production Companies contact my PRO saying they've used this song for their projects, as the songs has got 3 titles, the same Tunecode will get triggered in these different situations? Sorry this might sound like a very obvious question.

Thank you so much!!!!!

Fabio


----------



## SamC (May 4, 2020)

FabTramp said:


> Hey everyone, thank you so much for this thread, it's been really helpful!
> 
> I would need to ask some questions regarding the "Exclusive" deals that might be helpful for others too. I am new to the Production Music "World" and although I am understanding the main concepts, I have some confusion about the Exclusive Deals and the Copyrights of my music.
> 
> ...



Hey Fabio,

1) Correct, the exclusivity is only in regards to the works you’ve signed over, not you individually.

2) Yes, of course you’re allowed to have it on your socials as long as you aren’t licensing them from there.

3) Infinite projects, which is why it can be such a lucrative business. I don’t know of a case where a client has tried to buy ownership of the track - a buyout yes, but not ownership. They would be better off hiring a composer outright to write something similar which happens all the time anyway, even when a license is too pricey.

4) I’ve had situations where
Libraries have re-titled my tracks and logged the new title and tune code with my PRO. When royalties come through, the usage will be assigned to the track’s respective title.


----------



## FabTramp (May 4, 2020)

SamC said:


> Hey Fabio,
> 
> 1) Correct, the exclusivity is only in regards to the works you’ve signed over, not you individually.
> 
> ...



Hey Sam,

Brilliant! Thanks mate for your help! Just one last thing! I'm pleased to know that if the library changes the title of my song they will eventually contact my PRO informing them about the new title and new tunecode when the music is licensed! What would you suggest I should do regarding the titles now when I am registering to the PRO before I upload anything to the library? 

Shall I register 1 file with the song with different titles (so 1 tunecode for all this titles, if this is the way it works?) Or shall I register 3 different files on the PRO with each titles for the same song?

Example:

1 song:

Title 1
Title 2 ---> Registered as one file and therefore one tunecode that i associated to all the titles 
Title 3

or

Title 1 --> Registered as one file, Tunecode 1234
Title 2 --> Registered as one file, Tunecode 5678
Title 3 --> Registered as one file, Tunecode 9999

Cheers!!!


----------



## SamC (May 4, 2020)

FabTramp said:


> Hey Sam,
> 
> Brilliant! Thanks mate for your help! Just one last thing! I'm pleased to know that if the library changes the title of my song they will eventually contact my PRO informing them about the new title and new tunecode when the music is licensed! What would you suggest I should do regarding the titles now when I am registering to the PRO before I upload anything to the library?
> 
> ...



No problem!

Personally, I’ve never had to assign tracks with my PRO myself. I only write for exclusives and all that is taken care of by the library.

I think even way back when I handed over a couple tracks for a non-exclusive they still assigned and they did in fact assign each “version” of the track as a separate track.

Main
Underscore
60
30
Etc..


----------



## FabTramp (May 4, 2020)

SamC said:


> No problem!
> 
> Personally, I’ve never had to assign tracks with my PRO myself. I only write for exclusives and all that is taken of by the library.
> 
> ...



Amazing! Thanks!!


----------



## FabTramp (May 6, 2020)

Hey Everyone,

Hope you're all well!! I'm touching base for a new question regarding Music Libraries and thought to continue on this thread that hopefully will be helpful for others too!

My question is about Music Publishers within the world of Music Libraries. As I mentioned earlier, I am new to Production Music Libraries and Music Business in general so although I am doing so much research I've created so much confusion in my head and seeking help from you more experts than me. Thank you! 

So, I've got some songs finished and ready to be submitted to a Non-Exclusive music library. I went on my PRO (PRS in my case) and tried to register my work, so that they can collect my royalties, but there are some points that I'm not sure what to fill in. I rang my PRO to ask about these points and they said that usually these are things that gets filled in by publishers. 
Now, do I really have to have a publisher? What I understood a publisher will do is to make sure that all my royalties will be paid and then take 50% of it. What do they actually do? As I'm putting my work out there through a Music Library I wouldn't really need a publisher to find me more work and opportunities as my music is already searchable from tv, etc on the market through the library right? So would a Publisher just make sure that if a Production Company buys a track of mine and uses it for a TV show, etc he/she will make sure that they fill in the Cue Sheet and pay my PRO? Could I just do this myself? I mean, contacting privately this production company and make sure a cue sheet is filled in?

I hope this is not sounding nonsense, I'm just not getting the point of a Publisher. I understand the sync fee 50/50 with libraries that allow me to put my work in the market, but 50% for the royalties to do something I might be able to myself? Can I actually? 

I've understood you could create your own Publishing Company and therefore get the 100%.

My question are: 

1) What is the job of a Publishing Company? If I create my own one, what are the things I need to do in order to make sure all my royalties are paid? 

2) Is it actually worth it to give 50% of royalties to a Publisher? 

3) If I do end up using a Music Publisher, is it best to have a relationship with a specific Publisher or to just use the Music Libraries as Publishers? 

Hope this is not to confusing!

Thank you very much!!


----------



## SamC (May 6, 2020)

FabTramp said:


> Hey Everyone,
> 
> Hope you're all well!! I'm touching base for a new question regarding Music Libraries and thought to continue on this thread that hopefully will be helpful for others too!
> 
> ...



The music library IS the publisher. That’s what they take their cut for. If they’re good, they have a sales team who push their catalogue, publishers have a direct line to clients (again, if they’re good).

For example, EMI publishes some my tracks. They brief out their projects, usually based on client requests or general industry needs. As a publisher, they pay me to write for them, they record live orchestra when needed at their expense, they have a sales team who pitch my music, gain clients and take their percentage out of sync and backend.

If, say, you write directly for a commercial you can totally self publish that as it isn’t synced from another source. Same goes if you’re writing music for tv show and the studio or music agency hasn’t assigned the publishing to themselves.


----------



## SamC (May 6, 2020)

Just some sober advice:

Bear in mind, I wouldn’t want to be a composer just attempting library music now. Not with how the landscape is changing - and it changes all the time.

I think a lot of people see Production Music as a quick money making scheme when it simply isn’t. There are a million other ways to make money way easier.

The real success in this business comes from truly understanding what library
music is, it’s value, how it’s written, the need to be a very versatile composer, finding libraries who know what you can do, how to place you, what kind of briefs to give you, making good relationships (the most important factor), finding a groove with certain publishers and being reliable, the need to digest TONS of music, to compose quickly, watching a lot of tv and listening out for the music is important, not spreading yourself too thin, constantly knocking on doors, reliability again, just to drill it in

These things separate making beer money from non exclusives and buying a house with a production music catalogue. It is not simple or easy.

Even now we have streaming closing in and decimating the backend of composers, whether it’s production music or work for hire. The fees aren’t growing either!

The plus side of being a production music composer is that you learn your chops. The opportunity to have your stuff played with big orchestras, learning and adapting your skills to other genres, your output can be ridiculous sometimes. Getting great credits for your reel. All that is a bonus.

I just want to stress that this is not an easy business and it’s only getting harder.

I think new composers need to hear that. Not that it’s impossible, it’s just a lot of work.

EDIT: I’d also like to add that a lot of this attitude towards writing production music has been cultivated by these new libraries like Artlist who spend an awful lot of time and money advertising to...composers. Not clients. They dress it up like it’s an attractive, quick, easy, glamorous thing to do in this “side hustle” culture we have, but if you’re serious about this, this isn’t a side hustle and it’s not particularly glamorous either.


----------



## FabTramp (May 6, 2020)

Hey Sam, 

Thanks again for your prompt response! And thanks for your heads up regarding this career. Through my research and study I understood it's not going to be an easy journey but, although the difficulties I will encounter on the road, I am very willing to give it a try! Though, thanks again for reminding me to be realistic! 

Going back to my questions:



SamC said:


> The music library IS the publisher. That’s what they take their cut for.



So, it's kind of compulsory to have a publisher with Music Libraries as they are Publishers themselves? Do you know the library Pond5? It seems like you can choose to register for them to be your publisher or not?

I'm going to start this road on Pond5 as a composer friend of mine has suggested me as he's been working with them for a while and finding it good. I'm sure this is just a massive catalogue library and probably not as good as some bigger ones especially exclusive ones where the connections with clients and composers is more serious. As I have got a few songs finished and some of them might suits what potential Music Library Clients might need, I just thought to upload them on some non-exclusive libraries, instead of sitting on my computer, whilst I slowly take the journey of studying the craft!

So, professional libraries are all Publishers themselves.. so I was thinking perhaps would you suggest me to just ask Pond5 to be my Publisher so that at least, even though they might not be good, they can create more contacts and clients with my music? 

Thanks so much!!!


----------



## SamC (May 6, 2020)

Everyone’s path is different and my path won’t be the same as yours, I started this 10-ish years ago so what’s worked for me might not work for you.

I wouldn’t even bother with Pond5, personally. Not sure how they really work, but they seem to be on the very low end of this business and don’t even know if they license to tv. Some people might be able to make an okay living if they’re based elsewhere in the world. 
Don’t Know if and how they handle actual publishing as far as PRO’s go.

Im sure there’s plenty of discussion about all those types of libraries on this site.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 6, 2020)

Pond 5 is now a waste of time IMHO. I have about 100 tracks on there, and the amount you end up with is literally peanuts, and it keeps getting worse. That’s my experience, anyways. Keep in mind that if you place good material on a saturated, non-exclusive site, and it gets licensed once, you cannot use it for an exclusive site. I would spend some time putting together an album of well crafted tracks and shop around to higher end library houses.


----------



## SamC (May 6, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Pond 5 is now a waste of time IMHO. I have about 100 tracks on there, and the amount you end up with is literally peanuts, and it keeps getting worse. That’s my experience, anyways. Keep in mind that if you place good material on a saturated, non-exclusive site, and it gets licensed once, you cannot use it for an exclusive site. I would spend some time putting together an album of well crafted tracks and shop around to higher end library houses.



Agreed. Before I approached libraries I spent a year listening and composing a portfolio and even they were bad looking back on it.

@FabTramp It’s also not good trying to demo tons of styles. No one can do “everything.” Pick 1-3 genres you do really well and get good at it.

Some guys I know just write blues. But they write the best blues production music in the game. Their tracks are on every reality show, every tv promo, whiskey commercial, you name it.

Keep an eye out for what’s popular, what the industry is missing and would benefit. I’m amazed at the amount of composers who want to write library music and don’t even browse library music.


----------



## FabTramp (May 6, 2020)

Thank you guys, you are really helping out here! You are making me doing one step back and making me understand that there is no rush in this industry and that it's actually better to start this journey with better knowledge and better libraries. I will take my time now to listen, study and understand this "World" before I jump in it!

I'm currently going though "All about Music Library" on SOS form Dan Graham which I'm finding very informative, but please if you have any links or materials that you would recommend me it would be brilliant! 

Thanks again, legends!!

oh, by the way, well done Sam for having some tracks published on EMI, I know that's a very good library right? Also 10 years of work in this field is very impressive, well done mate!!


----------



## SamC (May 6, 2020)

FabTramp said:


> Thank you guys, you are really helping out here! You are making me doing one step back and making me understand that there is no rush in this industry and that it's actually better to start this journey with better knowledge and better libraries. I will take my time now to listen, study and understand this "World" before I jump in it!
> 
> I'm currently going though "All about Music Library" on SOS form Dan Graham which I'm finding very informative, but please if you have any links or materials that you would recommend me it would be brilliant!
> 
> ...



It’s worth it to take the time to approach the higher-end clients with material you’re proud of. Not just some stuff you’ve got lying around you think could earn you some extra money. That is a non-starter in my opinion. That goes for all those Direct licensing sites like audiojungle, pond5, Artlist, which actually just makes what the higher end libraries do more valuable as their catalogues tend to be more focused, tailor made, have people working behind the scenes who really understand music licensing, work closely with clients and composers and don’t spend their time and money advertising to composers. I’m sure you can make money out of those other sites but it depends on where you want to go and if you want to do this as a career.

As the commenter said above if you think you have great tracks, it isn’t really worth sticking them in a non-exclusive site as once it’s licensed it’s useless to the higher end exclusives. I’ve had people steal my music and upload it to Audiojungle...I don’t like the ethics of those sites and their staff haven’t helped us at all. Any reputable publisher would be on top of the material in their library.

Dan has some good insights, I have written for his libraries too.


----------



## rgames (May 6, 2020)

SamC said:


> It’s worth it to take the time to approach the higher-end clients with material you’re proud of. Not just some stuff you’ve got lying around


That is not my experience. I have not been able to discern what is "good" and what is "not good" in either my work or anyone else's. I even made the mistake of soliciting the advice of "experts" to help me judge way back in the day. Guess what: they were all wrong. And they were all right. It's random.

One of my biggest placements was for a track that I didn't intend to release. It was a poorly-arranged, poorly-performed and poorly-recorded demo (by my standards). But it was simliar to a few others I did and the library asked if I had any others, so I said yeah but I didn't think it was very good. 

Well, maybe it wasn't. But it made some good money.

You can license just about anything that's at least slightly related to some kind of sound that's already being licensed. You just need enough networking, quantity and luck. Don't try to judge quality.



SamC said:


> 1) Correct, the exclusivity is only in regards to the works you’ve signed over, not you individually.


Not necessarily true, though probably true for someone just starting out. Depends on what the contract says. I once got a contract from a short film to write a few minutes of music. The contract had an exclusivity clause that said I couldn't work on any other projects until their film was done. Ummm... no. I think they just got a boilerplate contract for a major production from some lawyer who wasn't paying attention.

rgames


----------



## SamC (May 6, 2020)

rgames said:


> That is not my experience. I have not been able to discern what is "good" and what is "not good" in either my work or anyone else's. I even made the mistake of soliciting the advice of "experts" to help me judge way back in the day. Guess what: they were all wrong. And they were all right. It's random.
> 
> One of my biggest placements was for a track that I didn't intend to release. It was a poorly-arranged, poorly-performed and poorly-recorded demo (by my standards). But it was simliar to a few others I did and the library asked if I had any others, so I said yeah but I didn't think it was very good.
> 
> ...



In fairness, I also stated above that everyone’s path is different and mine is different to yours and OP’s. There are a plethora of ways people even experience success in this business. I don’t like to be too heavy handed with advice but I think it could be useful. It’s not gospel, that’s for sure.

We can all attest to the randomness and luck that surrounds this industry. But, although it’s true “anything can be synced,” there’s so many different types of syncs. It depends what you’re aiming for - corporate films? Trailer? Commercial? TV shows? They’re all very different requirements.

If you can create specific albums that are “on trend” you’re probably going to have _more_ syncs. If these tracks have top notch writing and production, that helps. If you’ve got a library track written for a network-owned library you can gear your tracks towards their programming and promos. If Universal have paid good money on a live orchestra for a full album, their sales teams are going to push it. If a library has “Dramedy Vol 8,” they probably have relationships with a few recurring shows who need that stuff.

After writing production music everyday for almost 10 years I’ve found that 80% of the time if I just ‘knock out’ something that sounds similar to some other popular style it doesn’t have as much longevity as the stuff I don’t “knock out.” After all, you’re really aiming at peaking the interest of editors and if they’re scrolling through 700 dramedy tracks, you want yours to pop. ‘Quality’ doesn’t necessarily mean well produced or well arranged, either, it can just be really “on brief.” Well produced and well arranged certainly doesn’t hurt though. It’s why some libraries have incredibly high standards. If an editor likes the sound of your tracks, he/she will search your name or reuse your tracks in multiple episodes.

I also stated above that relationships were the “most important factor.” I agree with that. Surprisingly, quantity doesn’t always help, though. You could have 1000 tracks with a bad publisher or 100 with a great one. A good publisher will tell you your “quality” isn’t good enough this time. Add a chunk of luck to that, sure, but after doing this a while, I do believe there are things to shoot for to try and turn it in your favour.

The exclusivity clause was just about library conditions. I personally haven’t seen a production music contract where “exclusivity” hasn’t meant in terms of track rights.


----------



## rgames (May 7, 2020)

SamC said:


> ‘Quality’ doesn’t necessarily mean well produced or well arranged, either, it can just be really “on brief.”


Yes, I agree that being on brief is a factor.

But even then it can be a crap shoot. Another story: I'm a clarinetist and I once got a call for arrangements of Satie Gymnopedies for clarinet and strings. So, yeah! I can do that. Totally on brief and really specific to my wheelhouse. How much of that could there possibly be? I must be one of very few people totally on-brief for that, right?

The commercial wound up with an ambient electronica track that had no link to Satie.

Go figure.

So you can be absolutely on-brief but it's often the case that the production has no idea what they're actually looking for. Or they think they do but totally change their minds. Again, there's the luck part.

Rather than trying to guess your way around those vagaries, or trying to make "quality" music, building a network of people who can sell your wares is the vastly better approach. If your goal is to make money, worry less about the music and more about networking, quantity and luck.

rgames


----------



## SamC (May 7, 2020)

rgames said:


> Yes, I agree that being on brief is a factor.
> 
> But even then it can be a crap shoot. Another story: I'm a clarinetist and I once got a call for arrangements of Satie Gymnopedies for clarinet and strings. So, yeah! I can do that. Totally on brief and really specific to my wheelhouse. How much of that could there possibly be? I must be one of very few people totally on-brief for that, right?
> 
> ...



I mean, I’m not talking about pitching for commercials or individual productions, I’ve been there, the crap-shootery in commercials especially is incomparable. The clients never know what they want and they 9/10 change their mind at the last minute anyway. The competition is incredibly exhausting to be up against. I’ve pulled 24 hour stints of changes upon changes only to be tossed aside at the last hour for something else!

“On brief” in terms of library music is really knowing what it is you’re writing; is it a Spaghetti Western album? If so, it’s best to be ‘on brief’ with its own concept; if it doesn’t have twangy guitars, whistling, mariachi trumpets and apache drums, is it really Spaghetti Western? Maybe it’s missing all the hallmarks that an client/editor is looking for to sync it to their commercial.

To reiterate *again, *good contacts are “the most important,” but I personally think striving for “quality” no matter how illusory it seems should be a given. You can still do that and network and keep writing. Already shared my thoughts on quantity, however production music is a looooong haul business. Some tracks don’t even get released to industry until a year after you’ve written them...

On the plus side, if clients like your library tracks, the producers of the shows can hire you off the back of that.

If you’re scoring a show and you’ve got a decent catalogue of library tracks, they’ll use your score AND your library tracks so the sound and “quality” is consistent. This has happened to me and others firsthand. It means more backend revenue of course.


----------



## Daryl (May 8, 2020)

rgames said:


> That is not my experience. I have not been able to discern what is "good" and what is "not good" in either my work or anyone else's. I even made the mistake of soliciting the advice of "experts" to help me judge way back in the day. Guess what: they were all wrong. And they were all right. It's random.


No, its not random. Over time, a clear pattern can be discerned. That's what makes some of us extremely successful, and others not so much. There are always outliers and tracks that don't make money, that one thinks ought to be successful, but other than that, it's a business. If it wasn't possible to predict at all, how would any small Publisher make any money? One doesn't have thousands of albums, so the scatter-gun approach can't work.

You can choose to believe me, or you can choose to believe that I'm talking nonsense. However, I do this for a living, invest ££ into albums, and the fact that I don't need to have a secondary job, should give you a clue that I can't be totally ignorant on these matters.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 8, 2020)

Daryl said:


> If it wasn't possible to predict at all, how would any small Publisher make any money?



But that’s the thing, they don’t always make money. Like any business, they either succeed or they don’t. Just because a publisher has top quality music doesn’t mean they are going to succeed. Same with a composer...if he/she has top quality tracks (which is definitely important), it doesn’t mean they are going to be a success. Maybe I’m completely wrong, but based on my personal experience over the years, the best work came as a result of “being in the right place at the right time”. This, combined with pounding the pavement, networking, and pure luck are the biggest contributing factors. But yes, having less quality tracks as opposed to a ton of mediocre tracks is going to be a better selling feature.


----------



## SamC (May 8, 2020)

.


Wolfie2112 said:


> But that’s the thing, they don’t always make money. Like any business, they either succeed or they don’t. Just because a publisher has top quality music doesn’t mean they are going to succeed.



Definitely. The publishers I know who are successful are always in meetings, they’re at film festivals, they’re flying across the world for a conference, pitching to studios and tv execs.

There’s no point networking if you aren’t prepared to work your ass off on your music, and there’s no point working your ass off on your music if you aren’t prepared to network. They go hand-in-hand.

For every library that succeeds there’s a whole bunch that close shop.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 8, 2020)

SamC said:


> .
> 
> 
> Definitely. The publishers I know who are successful are always in meetings, they’re at film festivals, they’re flying across the world for a conference, pitching to studios and tv execs.
> ...



Getty Images is closing it’s doors too, received the email this morning. Too bad, as they served me well for years, even back when they were Pump Audio.


----------



## SamC (May 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Getty Images is closing it’s doors too, received the email this morning. Too bad, as they served me well for years, even back when they were Pump Audio.



Not too surprising in recent news! Getty used to be kings.

Any library that starts taking huge percentage cuts and fees away from creators clearly shows how desperate they are to stay afloat. Weren’t Pump Audio splits quite bad?


----------



## Serge Pavkin (May 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Getty Images is closing it’s doors too, received the email this morning. Too bad, as they served me well for years, even back when they were Pump Audio.


I don’t even know what to do .. This has been my main income for ten years..


----------



## SamC (May 8, 2020)

Sergii Pavkin said:


> I don’t even know what to do .. This has been my main income for ten years..



So sorry to hear that.


----------



## rgames (May 8, 2020)

SamC said:


> Weren’t Pump Audio splits quite bad?


Not back when they were actually Pump Audio - it was 50/50 and composers kept the publishing. I consider that a decent split.

Pump Audio was one of the first libraries that made money for me. And I made pretty decent money for the effort required - four-figure license fees were not uncommon and they were even non-exclusive.

That started to go away with the sale to Getty. My music revenues with them have been going down ever since. I can't remember the last time I got a four-figure deal with Getty. I don't think I ever have.

rgames


----------



## SamC (May 8, 2020)

rgames said:


> Not back when they were actually Pump Audio - it was 50/50 and composers kept the publishing. I consider that a decent split.
> 
> Pump Audio was one of the first libraries that made money for me. And I made pretty decent money for the effort required - four-figure license fees were not uncommon and they were even non-exclusive.
> 
> ...



I’m curious how much Getty acquired Pump for. Those are great splits, a real shame they went south when it changed hands.


----------



## Daryl (May 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> But that’s the thing, they don’t always make money. Like any business, they either succeed or they don’t. Just because a publisher has top quality music doesn’t mean they are going to succeed. Same with a composer...if he/she has top quality tracks (which is definitely important), it doesn’t mean they are going to be a success. Maybe I’m completely wrong, but based on my personal experience over the years, the best work came as a result of “being in the right place at the right time”. This, combined with pounding the pavement, networking, and pure luck are the biggest contributing factors. But yes, having less quality tracks as opposed to a ton of mediocre tracks is going to be a better selling feature.


You are entitled to your opinion. Mine is based on begin both a successful library composer and also running a successful library company.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 8, 2020)

Daryl said:


> You are entitled to your opinion. Mine is based on begin both a successful library composer and also running a successful library company.



Would you agree that many of your early successes were due in part to luck?


----------



## Daryl (May 8, 2020)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Would you agree that many of your early successes were due in part to luck?


The only luck was being asked to write them. However, that was a long path from other things, through being an orchestrator and before that a conductor. I wasn't lucky in writing successful tracks. That was a result of years of hard work.


----------



## rgames (May 8, 2020)

Daryl said:


> You are entitled to your opinion.


Are you sure? I'm thinking we should probably check with you first. 

Here's my opinion: you need to look up "survivorship bias". Here's part of the definition from Wikipedia:

"It can lead to the false belief that the successes in a group have some special property, rather than just coincidence "

(But, of course, that's only my opinion if you'll grant it to me.)

rgames


----------



## SamC (May 8, 2020)

Daryl said:


> The only luck was being asked to write them. However, that was a long path from other things, through being an orchestrator and before that a conductor. I wasn't lucky in writing successful tracks. That was a result of years of hard work.



What’s that saying?

‘Luck is when preparation meets opportunity.’

People often say “that’s luck.” But they miss out all the misery, hard work and missed opportunities that came before it.


----------



## Daryl (May 8, 2020)

rgames said:


> Are you sure? I'm thinking we should probably check with you first.
> 
> Here's my opinion: you need to look up "survivorship bias". Here's part of the definition from Wikipedia:
> 
> ...


And continued successes, with virtually no failure, cannot be a coincidence. That's the bit you forget about.


----------



## Daryl (May 8, 2020)

SamC said:


> What’s that saying?
> 
> ‘Luck is when preparation meets opportunity.’
> 
> People often say “that’s luck.” But they miss out all the misery, hard work and missed opportunities that came before it.


Exactly. A lack of opportunity can often be down to luck. However, library music is one of the huge levellers. It is anonymous. The vast majority of clients don't care who you are, what you've done, how successful you might have been in the past. The complete opposite of film composers. There are two things that matter in library music:

1. Writing commercial material
2. Having good distribution.

The first is 100% within your power. The second is more difficult, but possible, with enough legwork.


----------



## Pincel (May 9, 2020)

This turned into a very interesting thread. 

Lately I've been trying to get into the Production Music game more seriously, after dabbling with it for a couple of years with no success, although part of that is certainly owed to the fact that the library I was involved with was just starting out and really didn't know what they were doing in the first place. But then again, neither did I, so there's that.

It's funny to see so many different opinions, everyone really has to figure out their own path, there's no guaranteed formula, one really has to sink a lot of energy and research into this. 

I'd like to ask the more experiencied folks like @Daryl, @SamC and @rgames, how well do you deal with the creative limitations inherent to creating 'licenseable' music? Do you even feel them at all?

It's something that's been bothering me as of late, because I always feel very 'stuck' when trying to create music that might be easy to edit to or whatever, because I'm used to being very experimental with form and structure in my own music, which I understand is a big 'no no' in this business. It might sound stupid, but I guess I'm struggling to simplify things without sounding repetitive, it's harder than it should be.


----------



## Thundercat (May 9, 2020)

SamC said:


> It’s worth it to take the time to approach the higher-end clients with material you’re proud of. Not just some stuff you’ve got lying around you think could earn you some extra money. That is a non-starter in my opinion. That goes for all those Direct licensing sites like audiojungle, pond5, Artlist, which actually just makes what the higher end libraries do more valuable as their catalogues tend to be more focused, tailor made, have people working behind the scenes who really understand music licensing, work closely with clients and composers and don’t spend their time and money advertising to composers. I’m sure you can make money out of those other sites but it depends on where you want to go and if you want to do this as a career.
> 
> As the commenter said above if you think you have great tracks, it isn’t really worth sticking them in a non-exclusive site as once it’s licensed it’s useless to the higher end exclusives. I’ve had people steal my music and upload it to Audiojungle...I don’t like the ethics of those sites and their staff haven’t helped us at all. Any reputable publisher would be on top of the material in their library.
> 
> Dan has some good insights, I have written for his libraries too.


I am following all your posts with great interest, and deep appreciation. Thanks for being so generous and spilling the beans - it's a generosity of spirit and I'm sure your music reflects that too.

I've been composing for a long time but have finally gotten serious. I am a composer. it's taken me a long time to own that, but I am. With your great information, as well as the many other helpful posts here, including the OPs, I'm sure I'll get there a lot faster.

Many thanks!

Mike


----------



## jcrosby (May 10, 2020)

Pincel said:


> ..... the creative limitations inherent to creating 'licenseable' music? .........
> 
> It's something that's been bothering me as of late, because I always feel very 'stuck' when trying to create music that might be easy to edit to or whatever, because I'm used to being very experimental with form and structure in my own music, which I understand is a big 'no no' in this business. It might sound stupid, but I guess I'm struggling to simplify things without sounding repetitive, it's harder than it should be.



Unless you had the fortune of finding a library that specialized in experimental music then this is the wrong approach. The higher up the food chain you go the more specific the briefs become, and the more detailed critiques get if/when changes are requested. That isn't to say you _can't_ experiment, the question is are you _experimenting_ in such a way that it's appropriate for a given brief or library?

Not creating music that's friendly toward the editor is also a recipe for failure. In many ways the editor *is *your focus since this is one of the key members of any given production team that the library serves. Ignoring the importance of the editor is like ignoring the importance of the story in a dialogue-driven scene. Are you making music to suit the project, or are you making music for yourself? (I'm asking this rhetorically...)

The short answer is if you really want to be successful in production music you have to check your ego at the door. And, expect to have it checked _for you_ until you're comfortable writing to a brief, and checked again every once in while.


----------



## SamC (May 10, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> I am following all your posts with great interest, and deep appreciation. Thanks for being so generous and spilling the beans - it's a generosity of spirit and I'm sure your music reflects that too.
> 
> I've been composing for a long time but have finally gotten serious. I am a composer. it's taken me a long time to own that, but I am. With your great information, as well as the many other helpful posts here, including the OPs, I'm sure I'll get there a lot faster.
> 
> ...



Thank you Mike, I hope it’s been of some help.

Best of luck with everything!

Hey, if it’s any consolation, whenever someone asks me what I do, the word “composer” still sounds weird to me when I say it.


----------



## muk (May 10, 2020)

It's normal to get stuck at first when you are new to writing production music. However, it sounds like you'd rather be doing something else altogether. If you perceive the necessities of creating production musica as 'creative limitations', why even attempt to write it? Why not try to find an outlet for the things you enjoy writing? I would advise to browse through the catalogs of some of the top tier libraries and listen to the tracks in the genre(s) that appeal to you. If they sound like something you'd enjoy to create, then go. If not, ask yourself why you wanted to write production music in the first place, and maybe reconsider.

There are quite some prejudices floating around production music I think. If you are with the right libraries, and managed to build some nice personal contacts and working relationships, it can be very rewarding. But if you think that it is inferior music, or if you feel straightjacketed and limited by rules, chances are that the music you create under these conditions will not be very suitable.

Like with any music and genre, there are certain conditions that must be met for production music. The music itself must be interesting and well crafted, and the production level must be high. Then there are some requirements as to the lenght, structure, hit points etc. If you can see them as inspiring creative challenges, then your in the right frame of mind. If they stifle your creativity and they are a nuisance to you, or if you think production music is of little artistic value, maybe then it simply isn't what you want to be doing at the moment?


----------



## SamC (May 10, 2020)

Pincel said:


> This turned into a very interesting thread.
> 
> Lately I've been trying to get into the Production Music game more seriously, after dabbling with it for a couple of years with no success, although part of that is certainly owed to the fact that the library I was involved with was just starting out and really didn't know what they were doing in the first place. But then again, neither did I, so there's that.
> 
> ...



Yes, the “dabble” approach isn’t quite conducive to what this business requires.

Don’t feel ashamed with feeling creatively stuck. Out of everything outlined above, the need to create something new from scratch everyday is by far the hardest and most daunting. Every time I finish a track and it goes down well with the client I feel like it was a fluke. Hundreds of tracks later and I still feel that!

Usually, when a library briefs out a project there’s a lot in there to help generate ideas; they will describe the moods, tones, desired instrumentation, big, small, structure. They will also supply a selection of tracks in that style they like - that helps getting you into that sound world.

Also, I would simply listen.* A LOT.*

Digest music like a cow eats grass. Chew on it everyday. Every type of music. From Moroccan Folk to the charts. Listen to the catalogues of all the big players; EMI, Universal, Extreme Music, Warner Chappell, etc.

For me, I always want to broaden my musical vocabulary, so if a brief comes along and they require Traditional African music in 3 days, I’ve got a playlist of world music that I love and I already have that sound in my head.

Maybe that won’t work for you — what music do you love and is your best style compositionally? Make it your strong suit. Get better at it. Libraries don’t want to hear you can do everything, they would rather hear you can do a couple things really well. Listen to that style on libraries.

Although there’s a place for production music tracks with experimentation, structurally, editors wants something easy to navigate.

Here’s some examples of my production music tracks. Even if they’re different individually, structurally, they’re not far apart. Don’t be afraid to repeat! Often times, when you hear your music on tv, the editors have taken a 20 second chunk and looped it for a minute or two. Especially with underscore. Editors like tracks that are always “going somewhere.”

Some of my stuff to give you an idea:

TV:
Positive Reality TV
Light Drama/Dramedy
Reality TV Comedy
Sentimental

Film/Trailer:
Family Adventure
Thriller
Mystery

Commercial:
Funky Shit
Funny Shit
Spy Style

I hope that helps!


----------



## Pincel (May 10, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> Unless you had the fortune of finding a library that specialized in experimental music then this is the wrong approach. The higher up the food chain you go the more specific the briefs become, and the more detailed critiques get if/when changes are requested. That isn't to say you _can't_ experiment, the question is are you _experimenting_ in such a way that it's appropriate for a given brief or library?
> 
> Not creating music that's friendly toward the editor is also a recipe for failure. In many ways the editor *is *your focus since this is one of the key members of any given production team that the library serves. Ignoring the importance of the editor is like ignoring the importance of the story in a dialogue-driven scene. Are you making music to suit the project, or are you making music for yourself? (I'm asking this rhetorically...)
> 
> The short answer is if you really want to be successful in production music you have to check your ego at the door. And, expect to have it checked _for you_ until you're comfortable writing to a brief, and checked again every once in while.




What you said makes sense, and I do agree with it, so maybe I came across the wrong way. Sorry if I came across as pretentious, wasn't my intention... 

I understand the importance of having the editors in mind when creating the tracks, I really do, it's just that I haven't found my way with it yet I guess, so that's why I still struggle with nice and workable structures for this purpose. But I'm trying to get better at it for sure, listening to a lot of music from sucessful libraries catalogs certainly helps, and the rest I believe will come with 'real world' experience.

Thanks for the honest answer, this is why I love this forum.


----------



## Pincel (May 10, 2020)

muk said:


> It's normal to get stuck at first when you are new to writing production music. However, it sounds like you'd rather be doing something else altogether. If you perceive the necessities of creating production musica as 'creative limitations', why even attempt to write it? Why not try to find an outlet for the things you enjoy writing? I would advise to browse through the catalogs of some of the top tier libraries and listen to the tracks in the genre(s) that appeal to you. If they sound like something you'd enjoy to create, then go. If not, ask yourself why you wanted to write production music in the first place, and maybe reconsider.
> 
> There are quite some prejudices floating around production music I think. If you are with the right libraries, and managed to build some nice personal contacts and working relationships, it can be very rewarding. But if you think that it is inferior music, or if you feel straightjacketed and limited by rules, chances are that the music you create under these conditions will not be very suitable.
> 
> Like with any music and genre, there are certain conditions that must be met for production music. The music itself must be interesting and well crafted, and the production level must be high. Then there are some requirements as to the lenght, structure, hit points etc. If you can see them as inspiring creative challenges, then your in the right frame of mind. If they stifle your creativity and they are a nuisance to you, or if you think production music is of little artistic value, maybe then it simply isn't what you want to be doing at the moment?



Like I said previously, I'm sorry if I came across as pretentious, or disrespectful in any way towards the composers and business of Production Music. That was not the intent, and it was likely down to a poor choice of words.

I don't consider the music inherently inferior. If anything, I'm considering myself 'inferior' (so to speak) for not being able to get it right at the moment. I had rejections last week, and I guess I was just kind of venting out in my post when I talked about 'creative limitations'. There are certainly rules and 'restrictions' that have to be met, depend on the kind of brief, and that can be a great challenge for sure, but can also be frustrating if you're not able to make it work.

It's just that I'm feeling that when you're used to doing your thing for a long time, it can be tough when someone's tells you that 'it's too busy', 'it's boring' or 'something doesn't work', but then offer no solutions. Maybe this is normal and I'm just naive, or maybe I'm working with the wrong people. But then again, I worked with a library previously that kinda just accepted everything I sent them, which is not a great model either, and nothing came out of it.

I love the idea of Production/Library Music, I just don't love the idea that maybe I just suck at it! 

I guess, in the end, there might be some ego involved at play... I want to get rid of it too, but it's hard to let go sometimes.

Thank you for taking the time to answer.


----------



## Pincel (May 10, 2020)

SamC said:


> Yes, the “dabble” approach isn’t quite conducive to what this business requires.
> 
> Don’t feel ashamed with feeling creatively stuck. Out of everything outlined above, the need to create something new from scratch everyday is by far the hardest and most daunting. Every time I finish a track and it goes down well with the client I feel like it was a fluke. Hundreds of tracks later and I still feel that!
> 
> ...




This in incredible, thank you so much for taking the time to write all of this!

That idea of genre playlists is something I've actually started doing recently, and it really is incredibly helpful, if not even essential. Great stuff.

I've been struggling to find my niche, that I can admit to, and I tend to try and do a lot of different styles, with very different rates of success. But it's been on my mind that I really need to focus on something more specific and get really good at it, as that definitely seems more doable than trying to be a jack of all trades right off the bat.

I've listened to some of your tracks, and honestly, it's easy to see why you do well in this business! Congrats man, great stuff!


And to the OP, I'm sorry if I kind of hijacked the thread for a while... But I think this info can be very beneficial to anyone starting out in this business, along with the replies to the original question.


All the best


----------



## PatrickS (May 10, 2020)

SamC said:


> I’m curious how much Getty acquired Pump for. Those are great splits, a real shame they went south when it changed hands.


Quite a nice chunk of change according to Techcrunch in October 2007 as follows:

Pump Audio relaunched today as Soundtrack, following its http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9732185-7.html ($42 million purchase) by Getty Images last June. Pump Audio’s catalog of music from 20,000 independent artists can be licensed for the Web, TV, or radio. Customers range from major TV shows like The Colbert Report to advertising agencies and podcasters.


----------



## muk (May 10, 2020)

Pincel said:


> Like I said previously, I'm sorry if I came across as pretentious, or disrespectful in any way towards the composers and business of Production Music. That was not the intent, and it was likely down to a poor choice of words.
> 
> I don't consider the music inherently inferior. If anything, I'm considering myself 'inferior' (so to speak) for not being able to get it right at the moment. I had rejections last week, and I guess I was just kind of venting out in my post when I talked about 'creative limitations'. There are certainly rules and 'restrictions' that have to be met, depend on the kind of brief, and that can be a great challenge for sure, but can also be frustrating if you're not able to make it work.
> 
> ...



Hey, you seem to have a great working ethos and seem to be genuinely humble. No problem at all there. 
Starting out is tough. One of the most important things to know: it's absolutely normal to have your tracks rejected. And it happens all the time, even to seasoned pros. Often that has nothing to do with the music itself. You can create fantastic tracks, only to have them rejected because a library already has a lot of music in this genre, or is not currently looking for it.

Don't let it discourage you. If you submit without an in or if you cold-call, most libraries won't even listen to your submissions because they are swamped in music. Do your research, filter out the libraries where your music really fits in, then approach them in a friendly and professional manner. If you keep at this, eventually your music will get accepted (granted that the music and production values are high). And then you can start building your relationships and your chops from there.

I remember a former user on this forum called Carles. He created fantastic mockups and wanted to get into production music. From his postings, it seemed to have been a rough and discouraging start. But he seemed to have gotten in with some publishers. Haven't heard from him in quite some time unfortunately. But I think this thread could be interesting for you:





__





Music Library Submissions-an industry secret?


None of the music library web sites I have visited seem to contain information for composers about how to actually submit music for consideration. I have read that the larger libraries are only looking for music in a style that fits an upcoming "themed album" for example, "Bright Ukelele Pop" or...




vi-control.net





In any case, don't let rejections discourage you and keep at it.


----------



## Pincel (May 10, 2020)

muk said:


> Hey, you seem to have a great working ethos and seem to be genuinely humble. No problem at all there.
> Starting out is tough. One of the most important things to know: it's absolutely normal to have your tracks rejected. And it happens all the time, even to seasoned pros. Often that has nothing to do with the music itself. You can create fantastic tracks, only to have them rejected because a library already has a lot of music in this genre, or is not currently looking for it.
> 
> Don't let it discourage you. If you submit without an in or if you cold-call, most libraries won't even listen to your submissions because they are swamped in music. Do your research, filter out the libraries where your music really fits in, then approach them in a friendly and professional manner. If you keep at this, eventually your music will get accepted (granted that the music and production values are high). And then you can start building your relationships and your chops from there.
> ...




Thanks for the great advice and encouragement! 
I'll look into that thread for sure.


----------



## SamC (May 10, 2020)

PatrickS said:


> Quite a nice chunk of change according to Techcrunch in October 2007 as follows:
> 
> Pump Audio relaunched today as Soundtrack, following its http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9732185-7.html ($42 million purchase) by Getty Images last June. Pump Audio’s catalog of music from 20,000 independent artists can be licensed for the Web, TV, or radio. Customers range from major TV shows like The Colbert Report to advertising agencies and podcasters.



42 million!

With a purchase like that you’d think Getty would know the ins and outs of music licensing. They probably thought it was just like stock photos. Acquire a bunch of music and wait for the money to roll in.

A good piece of advice I received was ‘diversify.’ Don’t put all your eggs in one basket. I hope all the composers who relied on Getty/Pump can bounce back.


----------



## Thundercat (May 10, 2020)

SamC said:


> Yes, the “dabble” approach isn’t quite conducive to what this business requires.
> 
> Don’t feel ashamed with feeling creatively stuck. Out of everything outlined above, the need to create something new from scratch everyday is by far the hardest and most daunting. Every time I finish a track and it goes down well with the client I feel like it was a fluke. Hundreds of tracks later and I still feel that!
> 
> ...


Sam - I'm sitting listening to your soundcloud demo reel, and I'm totally blown away. Your compositions, and production quality, are just astounding! You show me what it means to be a pro at this game. If I could ever write tracks that good, I'd be so pleased with myself. Thanks for sharing - what a gift!

Question - on your demo reel tracks, which sound so incredibly alive and well-mixed and clean - did you use sample libraries, or live musicians? Or a combination of both? I hear a wonderful shaker on one track, for example - live musician?

Thanks for any insights.

Best,

Mike


----------



## Thundercat (May 10, 2020)

This great thread has inspired me! So this is OT, but here's a link to another thread here where I uploaded my first piece, ever, to SoundCloud. Comments welcome there so as not to pollute this thread.

Thanks,

Mike

New Composition Thread Link...


----------



## jcrosby (May 10, 2020)

Pincel said:


> What you said makes sense, and I do agree with it, so maybe I came across the wrong way. Sorry if I came across as pretentious, wasn't my intention...
> 
> I understand the importance of having the editors in mind when creating the tracks, I really do, it's just that I haven't found my way with it yet I guess, so that's why I still struggle with nice and workable structures for this purpose. But I'm trying to get better at it for sure, listening to a lot of music from sucessful libraries catalogs certainly helps, and the rest I believe will come with 'real world' experience.
> 
> Thanks for the honest answer, this is why I love this forum.


You bet. Also hope my reply came across as intended, a _matter-of-fact_ reply based on lots of experience... A good library will be straight to the point when they request changes. I actually went through this all over again not too long ago when starting to work with a trailer library that had really strict standards. It's a little rough at first, once you get over the bruised ego it makes you a stronger writer, not to mention stronger and more tenacious as a person...

And for sure. There's no substitute for learning via trial by fire... That's basically what the experience was for me... While I'd done tons of _trailer-esque_ tracks over the years I hadn't done anything quite up to their standard. (Even though I was _sure_ I had  ) The critiques were tougher than expected but it was a great reminder that you have to check your ego at the door as the saying goes...


----------



## SamC (May 11, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> Sam - I'm sitting listening to your soundcloud demo reel, and I'm totally blown away. Your compositions, and production quality, are just astounding! You show me what it means to be a pro at this game. If I could ever write tracks that good, I'd be so pleased with myself. Thanks for sharing - what a gift!
> 
> Question - on your demo reel tracks, which sound so incredibly alive and well-mixed and clean - did you use sample libraries, or live musicians? Or a combination of both? I hear a wonderful shaker on one track, for example - live musician?
> 
> ...



Thanks Mike! That’s very kind of you.

The only track with all live players is “Magical Journey.” The rest are all samples with the odd track having a live instrument like guitar and piano thrown in.

Here’s the library’s live session!

I had another library track set to record with live orchestra recently but it’s been postponed due to this global mess. That mockup is “Start the Adventure” on my soundcloud.

I’ve had to get myself as good as I can possibly be when it comes to samples as unfortunately you don’t always have the budget and time to record everything live.

Personally, I am such a layman when it comes to producing/tech/gear. I’m really just chasing the sound in my head and trying to make them sound as “alive” as possible. Hence my attempt to appeal to editors! If your tracks feel alive then hopefully it can add an extra reason the editor and the audience responds - even if it’s subliminal.

Despite some above commenter decreeing that quality was either irrelevant or indiscernible, I believe that this is my version of “quality” I shoot for.


----------



## Thundercat (May 11, 2020)

SamC said:


> Thanks Mike! That’s very kind of you.
> 
> The only track with all live players is “Magical Journey.” The rest are all samples with the odd track having a live instrument like guitar and piano thrown in.
> 
> ...


Just. Amazing.

you have set the bar very high for what a composer can do with mostly samples. Congratulations on the upcoming recording session, and thanks for sharing the YouTube; I really enjoyed it!

mike


----------

