# So I upload several tracks to music libraries.. whats next?



## kfirpr (Feb 2, 2015)

So I got accepted to several music libraries and started uploading music to them.. What can I do to expose clients to my cues? upload as many tracks that I can? add good description and tagging? about music quality I know my level is good, couple of the people that approved me said so..
I'm asking seriously what's need to be done so that people can find my stuff?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Feb 2, 2015)

I thought it was the music library company that was supposed to find clients.


----------



## kfirpr (Feb 2, 2015)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> I thought it was the music library company that was supposed to find clients.



LOL :D 
I guess so


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Feb 2, 2015)

Your tracks are solid, BTW.


----------



## kfirpr (Feb 2, 2015)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> Your tracks are solid, BTW.



Thx, I got me a better monitors and I'm in the process of mix & mas all my music again.


----------



## PeterKorcek (Feb 2, 2015)

agree, nice solid tracks


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 2, 2015)

yep. the libraries should be moving your music. they are the publishers and that's what they do. 
with that said, those libraries have a lot of composers with good music, so basically you are just another pieace of candy in a convenient store. 
just another product/vendor for the client to choose from. 
so you can practice the same things those products do... like call up the library, create relashiionships and ask to see if there is something that your music can be on. any clients looking for the type of music you do. etc.


----------



## doctornine (Feb 2, 2015)

kfirpr @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> So I got accepted to several music libraries and started uploading music to them..



So I guess we're talking royalty free then ?


----------



## Valérie_D (Feb 2, 2015)

Not to sidetrack the thread but anybody tried Pond5 or MusicLoops which seems to accept music only if you have 50 tracks to submit?

Thanks!


----------



## kfirpr (Feb 2, 2015)

doctornine @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> kfirpr @ Mon Feb 02 said:
> 
> 
> > So I got accepted to several music libraries and started uploading music to them..
> ...



Yes at this point, I just want to license my music to many clients as possible.
is this a mistake?


----------



## Kralc (Feb 2, 2015)

Valérie_D @ Tue Feb 03 said:


> Not to sidetrack the thread but anybody tried Pond5 or MusicLoops which seems to accept music only if you have 50 tracks to submit?


Pond5 shouldn't but, yeah that's in the MusicLoops faq:



> 2. You must have at least 50 high quality tracks in your catalog with the intention of creating and uploading more music on a regular basis. This means 50 separate tracks not including loops and edits.


http://www.musicloops.com/faq.php#10


----------



## MichaelL (Feb 2, 2015)

kfirpr @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> doctornine @ Mon Feb 02 said:
> 
> 
> > kfirpr @ Mon Feb 02 said:
> ...




You tracks are strong. But Royalty Free is not the best market for your music. Your music is very cinematic, perhaps game oriented. Many RF customers tend to be more corporate producers. They need music to fit under narration.


----------



## MichaelL (Feb 2, 2015)

Kralc @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> Valérie_D @ Tue Feb 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Not to sidetrack the thread but anybody tried Pond5 or MusicLoops which seems to accept music only if you have 50 tracks to submit?
> ...



No such requirement at Pond5, as far as I know.

I can't speak for Mark. But my understanding is that MusicLoops wants to know that you're not an "occasional composer," that you are capable of producing a volume of work, who will regularly upload new material. 

The basic reason behind minimums is that it's very hard to get noticed with just a few tracks...and then nobody's happy.


----------



## MichaelL (Feb 2, 2015)

kfirpr @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Feb 02 said:
> 
> 
> > I thought it was the music library company that was supposed to find clients.
> ...




Royalty Free Libraries are more of musical supermarket in which you offer your goods for sale. Other than social media, they generally do not promote or pitch tracks directly to potential clients.

Clients find your music by entering search criteria. So, yes, tagging and meta-data are extremely important.

It's very important to understand the potential uses for your music, which must above all be functional. If you don't know what your music could, or should, be used for, it's quite possible no one else will either.


----------



## MichaelL (Feb 2, 2015)

I think that a library like this would be a better fit for you than RF,

http://www.gothic-storm.com


----------



## kfirpr (Feb 2, 2015)

Thank you Michael I will check this library, actually the library I started to upload tracks let register tracks with PRO and all kind of stuff so it's not royalty free right?


----------



## Ed (Feb 2, 2015)

kfirpr @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> Thank you Michael I will check this library, actually the library I started to upload tracks let register tracks with PRO and all kind of stuff so it's not royalty free right?



As far as I am aware this isn't what royalty free means. "Royalty free" means the client only needs to pay a one off fee and can use it in anything as long as they want. This is compared with the client paying a fee every time they want to use it in a new project or where its only valid for a certain length of time. They still need to fill in cue sheets for performing rights societies to collect from the TV companies.


----------



## Blackster (Feb 2, 2015)

Not exactly.

Royalty-free means that the client does not have to pay royalties to the local PRO for using the track. HOW he uses the track defines the one-time fee he has to pay to the library (e.g. the right to use it in a TV commercial is VERY different from the right to use it on YT .... and so is the fee!)

If a library is registered to a PRO as publisher they can register music from royalty-free composers but that's always written in the agreement .... guys, read the terms and the agreements carefully.

If your work is registered the royalties will be split between the writer and the publisher.


----------



## madbulk (Feb 2, 2015)

Royalties come in various forms. It used to be that every copy that was made of your track would pay you a mechanical royalty. It goes back to piano rolls. If your track were going to be in, say, a movie, and the movie went to DVD, those DVD's could be subject to a royalty.

As Ed said, typically when royalty free libraries sell a license for your track to a project, the producer of that project won't have to worry about paying repeatedly for the use of that track. It's one price and out the door. That's the appeal. If he makes a movie and it goes to DVD, there are no royalties associated with this. The end user of the track never has to worry about paying for the track again.

This is separate from performance royalties. If that same movie winds up on television, you should absolutely expect to receive a performance royalty from your PRO if you've registered that track. The end user doesn't pay this royalty. The broadcaster does.

There are exceptions -- true, 100% royalty free libraries that won't let you post tracks that are registered with a PRO. But they're not, for now, the norm. And the term "royalty free" is most often not used that way.

And as Blackster said, if in agreeing to a library's terms, you've signed away the publishing rights to your library, royalty free or not, you've given them half of that performance royalty.

So in other words, while your assumption was a reasonable one, the term royalty free is not so clear and a library can definitely be a royalty free library and still allow and even encourage registering your tracks with a PRO.

And this post is plenty long, so I'll leave it there for now.


----------



## kfirpr (Feb 3, 2015)

Thanks guys that was in enlightening..
2 more questions:
1. It seems that I can use same track for different libraries, is there any advantages\disadvantages ?
2. what are you saying about naming tracks like "epic percussion" vs "Name" ?


----------



## MichaelL (Feb 3, 2015)

Blackster @ Mon Feb 02 said:


> Not exactly.
> 
> Royalty-free means that the client does not have to pay royalties to the local PRO for using the track. HOW he uses the track defines the one-time fee he has to pay to the library (e.g. the right to use it in a TV commercial is VERY different from the right to use it on YT .... and so is the fee!)
> 
> ...




The client does not pay royalties, at least in the US. The broadcasting entity, i.e. the networks do.

My RF tracks are registered with my PRO as writer, AND with my publishing company as publisher. Most of the RF libraries hosting my tracks require that the client file cue sheets, when appropriate.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 6, 2015)

I just noticed this thread.

Blackster is right. With for example music loops you won't get any PRS/MCPS royalties afaik.


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 6, 2015)

kfirpr @ Tue Feb 03 said:


> Thanks guys that was in enlightening..
> 2 more questions:
> 1. It seems that I can use same track for different libraries, is there any advantages\disadvantages ?
> 2. what are you saying about naming tracks like "epic percussion" vs "Name" ?



giving the same tracks to different libraries gives you more chances to get them placed. 
the bad thing is that sometimes there are buyouts where a publisher buys up a track for a specific client, so if your track is being used in other libraries and or shows then you cannot do it or face a lawsuit. 


name the tracks something cool. don't name them best action cue ever. but use clever names that evoke the type of track. bloodthirst cyborg already sounds like hybrid action suspense.


----------



## kfirpr (Feb 23, 2015)

Iv'e sold couple of tracks with audiojungle, still looking for library that will suit me the best.
I think like some of you said I should compose music that can fit a narrative


----------

