# Composers Collective anyone?



## IvanP (Oct 10, 2008)

Hi, has anyone worked within this association?

http://www.thecomposercollective.com/tcc/index.asp 

What do you think of these copyright and payment conditions?

$25-$50 per minute of final placed music
Screen Credit
A percentage of Writer's Cue Sheet Credit
Right to use your creations on your demo reel

collaboration with The Composer Collective("TCC") is non-exclusive.
As often as is possible, TCC assigned Lead Composers on projects will be able to retain 100% copyrights and 100% publishing rights. In consideration of the administrative and creative duties TCC performs, 10% of any creative fees, or 5% of any package budget, is collected for projects TCC procures, as well as 10% publishing royalty Cue Sheet affordance("Publishing Share"), or 5% writer's if Publishing Share is unobtainable for any reason.
TCC reserves the following rights:
(i) the right to administer it's projects, lead composers and all crew and team members contracted through The Composer Collective,
(ii) the right to arbitrate any disputes between the client and the lead composer and his or her team., 
(iii) the right to re-assign a lead composer at our sole discretion, and,
(iv) the right to use your name and demo materials as we see best fit, in order to effectively procure work.

Any ideas on how this might work?

Thks!


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 10, 2008)

http://www.thecomposercollective.com/tcc/blog.html

This to me says, "You are on the b team. NOT the A team but if you want to write music for no guarantee whatsoever and we like your stuff we MIGHT propose it to the project manager who MIGHT send it to the client. If you are so blessed then we will pay you up to $50 whole dollars per minute."

That's what is commonly refered to as a "cattle call". 

This seems really bad. Am I missing something?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 10, 2008)

25-50 $ per minute? That's a joke. Reallly. It should be 10 times that.


----------



## IvanP (Oct 10, 2008)

Yes, it IS a joke...

What about the rights? this seems to me as a poor ghostwriting wannabe, right? Sort of Media Ventures in Sudan :shock:


----------



## poseur (Oct 10, 2008)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Oct 10 said:


> 25-50 $ per minute? That's a joke. Reallly. It should be 10 times that.


hmmm.
i def couldn't write for that kind of dosh,
esp. where i'd have:
a) no clue as to my cue-sheet percentage,
b) no clue as to my potential credit on the film and, critically
c) no input as to the general nature of the arc of a score,
which is, largely, what i consider my job to actually BE:
concept, sound, the design of content 
of the score & ITS CONNECTION TO THE STORY TOLD.

of course,
i imagine this MIGHT (maybe, possibly) offer some kind of 
experience of value to someone younger,
hungrier & less creatively focussed than me (& my friends), but.....

it's fancy-pants needle-drop.
"creative" music supervision.
a "music house", in so many words,
without the big-name, experienced composer(s) to back it up.

..... it does seem to me 
to smack largely of providing one more thrust
towards the growing industrialisation of film-music,
wherein this new layer of additional "producers"
--- ie, the "composers' collective" (¿"*collective[/b:46ò‘E   ‡ë)‘E   ‡ë*‘E   ‡ë+‘E   ‡ë,‘E   ‡ë-‘E   ‡ë.‘E   ‡ë/‘E   ‡ë0‘E   ‡ë1‘E   ‡ë2‘E   ‡ë3‘E   ‡ë4‘E   ‡ë5‘E   ‡ë6‘E   ‡ë7‘E   ‡ë8‘E   ‡ë9‘E   ‡ë:‘E   ‡ë;‘E   ‡ë<‘E   ‡ë=‘E   ‡ë>‘E   ‡ë?‘E   ‡ë@‘E   ‡ëA‘E   ‡ëB‘E   ‡ë*


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 10, 2008)

poseur @ Fri Oct 10 said:


> Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Oct 10 said:
> 
> 
> > 25-50 $ per minute? That's a joke. Reallly. It should be 10 times that.
> ...




you make a good point (visually)


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 10, 2008)

So- I've had a few discussions with Evan Evans , the founder and I think it's still worth considering. This is a paradigm shift that while may not appeal to many as it's not exactly traditional, it does still create some viable opportunities. I think Evan recognized his temporary ad/website doesn't paint the entire picture.

So- the $50 thing is relatively misleading but unintentionally so. I think he''s coming from more of-this as a startup company and this is the lowest of the low but more money is there but it comes from cue sheet % etc. Okay- we all started by giving up something.- but, as I reminded him- thats unusually low. 

His website is changing soon and will include some testimonials of some major players so, imo, it's at least worth considering and giving him the benefit of the doubt. 

I also recommend emailing him on any questions.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 10, 2008)

I wonder how much the client is charged on per minute of music?


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 10, 2008)

yep. I'd have to know what the budget is. That's one major point for me. I don't like the so called buffer zone implied here. In addition, the agreement says they can take you off the project at their discretion. 

Pretty,,,uh,,edgy stuff. We'll see.


----------



## rgames (Oct 11, 2008)

I've taken a look at a couple of the projects and one of them actually looks like a decent film with a decent budget. Probably good for credits and a demo reel. The pay is, of course, a joke. I don't know if I'm going to submit any cues, mainly because I have serious heartburn over not knowing how much the production is paying for the music.

But think of it this way: if you're a hobbyist or between gigs, at least it keeps you writing some cues that you can throw over to some libraries - there's no requirement for exclusivity even if the cue gets used. Plus, if it is used, you pick up a little tiny bit of cash up front for a library track.

I think the model could actually work but Evan and Matt are going to have to quadruple the per-minute rate if they really want decent cues. But maybe their clients don't need that... capitalism, ya know!

rgames


----------



## IvanP (Oct 11, 2008)

rgames @ Sat Oct 11 said:


> I think the model could actually work but Evan and Matt are going to have to quadruple the per-minute rate if they really want decent cues. But maybe their clients don't need that... capitalism, ya know!
> 
> rgames



That's the point...we shouldn't be composing music JUST for money, but, at that price, I don't want to lose it either and I might not be polishing enough my cues...in the long term, that lack of perfectionism could turn out worse...


----------



## poseur (Oct 11, 2008)

..... i just wanna say that:
i do applaud these guys' efforts to achieve something
in a field that's both
a) gone somewhat insane, & 
b) is seriously slumping, both business-wise.....
..... and, creatively;
but, either i don't understand their intentions,
or their intentions just disagree with me.

so:
this is clearly NOT AT ALL a "new paradigm" in the industry;
increasingly, Film Music Supervisors are "composing"
complete scores by mucho needle-dropping/licensing
and sub-contracting individual cues;
as well, commercial Music "Houses" have been doing his very thing
for years --- mostly in TV-adverts, but also for film & TV.

is this method of score-procurement capable of
generating some cue-by-cue work
for some folks?
probably so,
where the individual business is being marketed effectively.

but, imo:
this approach does not constitute what i feel
is at the heart of film-scoring.

additionally:
can this paradigm produce great results?
hmmm.
not usually, i think.

i def have the feeling that scoring individual, isolated cues
--- as a base methodology ---
does not help new film-composers much with 
the reality of their eventual scoring work,
except as minimal experience,
when held in relation to scoring an entire picture,
where a full-on 24/7 relationship with a director's vision
(and the producers' & studios' perspectives),
mx editors, mx supervisors and,
most critically,
the composer's relationship to script, story, character,
performance, cinematography & production 
do everything to create the film-composer's personal gestalt.

of course,
there are a few major film-composers who regularly
"sub-out" cues to their "teams", & often take on
the role of Score Producer
(in lieu of composing the entirety of the score):
which seems quite similar to what i've perceived of the "Composers' Collective" intended initiatives.

but these are, indeed, more established,
experienced (& successful, fwiw) film-scoring folks;
they tend to have personal histories of
(what are generally seen as) results,
enough to back up certain elements
of these kinds of methodologies:
creative, financial & logistical.

i don't know about this stuff, really;
i'm not really interested in "team-scoring" pictures,
myself,
though i may have accidentally done my share.....
i'm def not intrigued by any "team-scoring" where my own
musical vision for a story is not 
presumed to be key.....
..... and,
the fostering of even more "music-by-committee"
simultaneously scares & sickens the living sh•te outta me.

sorry if that's ranty;
i'm really only wondering aloud, here.

d


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 11, 2008)

MY "paradigm" comment came more from my conversation with EE. I was parroting his words. . Truth be told, after thinking on it for a minute, I couldn't figure out what was the "new" thing happening here. 

I cant imagine being happy doing this. His "A' team vs. "b" is weird. In this scenario, the "a' team flourishes and are potentially politically connected while the "b" team struggles and struggles blindly. And the phrase "we reserve the right to replace team members" makes it as appealing as being part of a team manufacturing shoes. 

It's just hard to buy ,as he says, there is "a lot of excitement" from the film community.

But the really strange thing is, I sort of expect this from producer types. But this from musicians? It's far more disheartening than inspiring. I doubt of directors would be a part of a "team" approach.


----------



## jeffc (Oct 11, 2008)

I've got to agree with the skeptics a bit on this one. It's an interesting idea, but I don't see it benefitting anyone other than the owners, if anyone at all. I don't think some people realize how important relationships are in this business. They are everything - more than music, talent, etc. To think that someone's going to come up with a website where you can sit at home and ftp your cues to help your credits/reel is really naive. There really is no easy way or shortcut. Prowling websites for gigs is I think, an enormous waste of time and putting off the inevitable realization that you've got to knock on some doors and physically meet people. Even having a credit doesn't mean nearly as much as a relationship - that's what will get you hired again. That's really the only way, at least at the type of jobs that you want to eventually be working on. There might be the occasional micro budget film or library placement, but few and far between, with the rest being waste of time submissions that are a few layers removed from actual decision makers working on real projects.

On a purely creative note, crafting a score (even these days where it's not the most fostering atmosphere to be creative) is much more than writing some cues that sound right for a scene.  It's coming up with a concept, design, palate, melodic idea, for the entire score. That's the hard part. Writing the cues is the mechanics once you have the concept, and that's the easier part. How can you impart a concept on a score, if you're just writing one cue in a bubble? How will this collection of cues from random people sound like a 'score' at the end? Seems impossible. I have yet to meet the film maker worth his or her salt that would be excited about an anonymous concept like this. So much of writing a score is sitting in a room with the director and producer, discussing your cues, refining, taking everyone's opinion and ideas and making it all be crafted into the final score. It's a process and without that, it becomes just a bunch of music that the filmmaker has no vested interest in. 

I guess, in a long winded way, I'm saying that there are no easy ways out or shortcuts. The sooner you realize that is the sooner that you can start to make some real progress in your career - the old fashioned way with knocking down doors and taking things one step at a time. It's hard, unpredictable, frustrating, even when you catch a break or two, but it all takes time and hard work - and getting out from behind a computer and into the scary place - called the real world......

Just my humble, jaded opinion.


Jeff


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 11, 2008)

Jeff: Right On! =o o-[][]-o o=<


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 11, 2008)

yep


----------



## Will Loconto (Oct 11, 2008)

jeffc @ Sat Oct 11 said:


> I have yet to meet the film maker worth his or her salt that would be excited about an anonymous concept like this. So much of writing a score is sitting in a room with the director and producer, discussing your cues, refining, taking everyone's opinion and ideas and making it all be crafted into the final score. It's a process and without that, it becomes just a bunch of music that the filmmaker has no vested interest in.



If I were looking for someone to score my film, show, or game, I'd much prefer a direct relationship with the composer rather than something that takes more of an assembly line approach.

It would make just as much sense to needledrop library music instead.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 12, 2008)

Every day people find any new ideas in order to earn money.

Why not exploit the composers?

So sadly, but it is the result from our system.....: Money, money, money... . :roll:


----------



## rgames (Oct 13, 2008)

Anybody listened to any of the cues posted to the latest project?

Some of them are quite good...!?!?!

rgames


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 14, 2008)

It's not clear what is music generated by The Composers Collective or what is music done by the principals- Music from pre TCC.

Example-Future Murder was done in 2000- Composer E Evans. 

I was told TCC is one year old.


----------



## poseur (Oct 15, 2008)

418 composers are referenced
in CC's "current stats" on their site,
(as if they were/are "collective" members).

of those 418 composers,
i could find 
--- in my admittedly non-exhaustive search ---
only 3 composers' names shown:
specifically,
that of the President & Vice-President
of The Composers' Collective,
& one other composer.

previous to this "new paradigm",
i was blissfully unaware that a "collective"
might foster the positions of Executive Officers.

i guess there was a typo?
maybe it's meant to be The Composers' Llective,
without the Co-.

d


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 15, 2008)

It get's more interesting- the latest offering is $20.00 per finished minute


----------



## Markus S (Oct 17, 2008)

"Current Stats:

Projects: 7
Composers: 418"

..hope those 7 projects are huge enough for the over 400 composers..


----------



## artsoundz (Oct 17, 2008)

I think I know why the budgets are so low-

The 30 minute composers credit roll eats up most of the music budget.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 28, 2008)

What offends me is their opening statement:

"Hiring one composer is old school, not to mention risky, and can limit the quality of your creative choices and music production."

They have every right to offer hat they offer but this is disrespectful to those of us who have spent a number of years developing a craft.


----------



## Brian Ralston (Oct 28, 2008)

I completely agree Jay. And what is even more disrespectful is the fact that the way it appears to be set up...it is composers doing this to other composers. I just don't see how this would really help anyone who is trying to build their own name and reputation as a composer in this industry. 

Really folks...to get bigger and better composer jobs, you need to be hired as THE ONE who is in charge on a film as the composer. "Music by <insert name>" Titled by itself...on a single title card in the film. End of story. 

And having a proven track record of being that department head is what will help you to climb the ladder as a composer. It is not just about providing music. It is about positioning yourself and your name as a department head in charge of one of the most expensive departments in Post (...if the budget calls for live music anyway). The way this is set up...you are not in charge of anything if you are writing tracks for their projects...they are. And hence...they are the ones really reaping the benefits off of your sweat and hard work. Not you. 

I would avoid at all costs. And scold anyone who thinks this is a good idea like a grandmother would scold a child. 

:roll:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 28, 2008)

"Only TeamScore™ takes film scoring to the ultimate level on a scale never seen before."

Sorry, but that's naff. 

AND IF YOU ACT NOW YOU'LL GET NOT JUST ONE GINZU COMPOSER, NOT JUST TWO, BUT YOU'LL GET 489 INCOMPETENT ASSHOLES!!!!!!

CALL RICHMOND 9......


----------



## Thonex (Oct 28, 2008)

I don't know 1 client of mine that would use such a service.


----------



## rgames (Dec 2, 2008)

And now they want $25/month...

My experience with the composer collective was one of utter confusion - they really need to get organized if they're going to keep any decent composers around. It's a total crapshoot: what they ask for and what they pick don't seem to jive. Guidance and comments are spread around the project site in different spots, so it's nearly impossible to follow what's going on.

The thing I don't get is that the one film I worked on looked fairly decent, good FX, decent acting, etc. So it clearly had money. Why would that type of film use the composer collective?

Good luck to them, it just isn't for me, especially for $25/month...

rgames


----------



## Herman Witkam (Dec 6, 2008)

I posted some older stock tracks (hell I'm not gonna compose anything for that rediculous rate) to get feedback on it and to get the tracks placed in the film, but I waited for months and there hasn't been any feedback.

I'm giving up. It doesn't work.


----------



## rgames (Dec 6, 2008)

I got feedback on both of the tracks I submitted, but I didn't find it very illuminating. There's contradictory commentary all over the project site, so it's nearly impossible to decide on a direction for your work. That's fine if you're working directly with the director and the concepts develop over time, but if you're going to use this "herd of composers" approach, the spotting notes must be well-thought out and relatively fixed.

So, basically, my experience was one of a total crapshoot.

Again, I think the concept could work - it's nothing more than a web-based ghostwriting collective - but they'll need to get a bit more organized. And drop the fee to composers, that's just ridiculous, especially given the extremely low pay.

rgames


----------



## IvanP (Jan 8, 2009)

Great news!

Now you have to pay in order to get paid a misery!!!

Wow, this really goes beyond my deepest pervertions :mrgreen: 

http://www.thecomposercollective.com/tcc/fmm19.asp check pricing o=<


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 8, 2009)

I already emailed a question to Sid Barnhoorn, who seems to be a "member", specifically asking him if CC provides you with the visuals to score to...

No word about that on the site... Maybe they just expect "lego" music?

No reply yet from Sid


----------



## rgames (Jan 8, 2009)

They do supply all of the visuals - you sign an NDA then download the video.

One thing that's not clear to me is whether the productions actually commit to TCC for their music. Maybe TCC is just one among many entities submitting tracks to the production. One commercial I did a cue for had no payout info, even after the submission deadline had passed...

rgames


----------



## madbulk (Jan 8, 2009)

IvanP @ Thu Jan 08 said:


> http://www.thecomposercollective.com/tcc/fmm19.asp check pricing o=<



Nevermind checking the pricing. I love the direct comparison to RCP best of all. They're practically the same company. And no waiting list. No gophering. No attitudes. Don't gotta move to LA.

I admire these guys to no end.


----------



## rgames (Jan 8, 2009)

The fee could be worth it - my credits list could definitely use some larger-budget additions with "name" actors (which they have).

However, as I mentioned, I find the whole process confusing. Of the directors I've worked with since getting into composing for film, only a couple of times have I felt like their feedback on cues was way off. Most of the feedback I've gotten at TCC, and a lot that I've read regarding other submissions, confuses me.

Maybe I just don't get it...

rgames


----------



## madbulk (Jan 8, 2009)

rgames @ Thu Jan 08 said:


> They do supply all of the visuals - you sign an NDA then download the video.
> 
> One thing that's not clear to me is whether the productions actually commit to TCC for their music. Maybe TCC is just one among many entities submitting tracks to the production. One commercial I did a cue for had no payout info, even after the submission deadline had passed...
> 
> rgames



To me it seemed like a given that they're just one of many, particularly for name gigs. Why on earth would anyone with anything to em commit to such a broadly cast net of composers. On the other hand, I've forgotten already that they're essentially RCP.

Are these guys picky at all? I haven't listened to anything from their roster.


----------



## midphase (Jan 8, 2009)

If this prevents more composers from moving to LA....then I say "awesome guys...keep it up!"


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 8, 2009)

midphase @ Thu Jan 08 said:


> If this prevents more composers from moving to LA....then I say "awesome guys...keep it up!"



ROTFL!


----------



## rgames (Jan 8, 2009)

madbulk @ Thu Jan 08 said:


> To me it seemed like a given that they're just one of many, particularly for name gigs. Why on earth would anyone with anything to em commit to such a broadly cast net of composers. On the other hand, I've forgotten already that they're essentially RCP.
> 
> Are these guys picky at all? I haven't listened to anything from their roster.



One film they posted already had a name in "Music By" in the credits. Odd... Of course, maybe the guy bailed out and TCC picked it up.

And yes, they are picky. But what they pick often seems odd to me (style/production quality/relation to spotting notes/etc). And what they pick may or may not have anything to do with what they ask for.

Again, maybe my sensibilities don't match up with what they're looking for but my experience dealing directly with directors has been much less confusing.

rgames


----------



## Brian Ralston (Mar 10, 2009)

midphase @ Thu Jan 08 said:


> If this prevents more composers from moving to LA....then I say "awesome guys...keep it up!"


 :mrgreen: 

And to add to that...since this will definitely keep other guys from building their own names as the lead, head composer on a film, that also keeps the playing field more open for others who are building their own name. 

So I agree with Kays...keep it up! No studio (or even an under $10 Million indie) is going to hire any composer to be in charge of music on their multi-million dollar film because someone has "a cue or two" in a film where they were not the head guy responsible. 

And secondly...it is ALL about building relationships with directors. NOT avoiding them. These are the guys who are going to hire you time and time again. Putting yourself in a position where you are answering to another composer really just puts you into an assistant category and not a head composer in my opinion. It is all about building multiple working relationships with directors and producers...NOT with other composers...WHO ARE YOUR JOB COMPETITION!


----------



## rgames (Mar 12, 2009)

Somehow I got charged $100 for a membership - apparently I agreed to pay it once my $5 trial membership expired...

So I started asking questions about the nature of their contracts with the films and got no information other than comments about how much the directors love our work. I don't understand how so many composers would be willing to work on a film for which they have no information regarding the nature of the contract (or if one even exists). I guess it's because the pay is so lucrative :roll:.

At least two of the films I've looked at are decent - name actors, Hollywood production quality, etc. Those films must have a decent music budget. So that leads me to the following conclusion: either TCC is pocketing a huge wad of cash or there's no actual agreement between the film and TCC.

At first I thought it might have some promise but as I've gotten more info I'm becoming increasingly skeptical. The whole thing sounds fishy...

rgames


----------



## madbulk (Mar 12, 2009)

I did the same thing, man. Paid the five bucks or whatever so I could look around and see what they were up to after this thread began, checked back 8 weeks later to see that, "oh yeah, I forgot to stop them from getting that second balloon payment!" 
Oh well.


----------



## RiffWraith (Mar 12, 2009)

rgames @ Fri Mar 13 said:


> At least two of the films I've looked at are decent - name actors, Hollywood production quality, etc. Those films must have a decent music budget. So that leads me to the following conclusion: either TCC is pocketing a huge wad of cash or there's no actual agreement between the film and TCC.



Did you check IMDB for these films? If they are there, did you check for the composer?


----------



## rgames (Mar 14, 2009)

Yes - some of the folks working on the cues are listed on IMDB as "additoinal music by". So that's something, I guess...

I just started looking through their new project management website - it's as confusing as the old one. It's nearly impossible to follow what's going on...

rgames


----------



## Herman Witkam (Mar 21, 2009)

rgames @ Sun Mar 15 said:


> Yes - some of the folks working on the cues are listed on IMDB as "additoinal music by". So that's something, I guess...
> 
> I just started looking through their new project management website - it's as confusing as the old one. It's nearly impossible to follow what's going on...
> 
> rgames



Maybe the confusion is part of the evil scheme to underpay composers and benefit from it by taking the major scoring credit :D


----------



## madbulk (Mar 21, 2009)

Herman Witkam @ Sat Mar 21 said:


> rgames @ Sun Mar 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes - some of the folks working on the cues are listed on IMDB as "additoinal music by". So that's something, I guess...
> ...



naaaah. ya think?


----------



## erockrazor (Mar 21, 2009)

I also did the 5 buck trial membership. And I was also charged for the year without consent. So I had to straighten that out to get my money back.

Honestly, I was a bit over my head when joining. I don't compare to many of the people submitting music. Not to say that you guys can relate to me on that, as many of you are great.

I submitted music for a few different entries. Maybe 4 or 5 different cues. I had no comments on any of my stuff, so I gave up after the first month. 

Even if my music were chosen, there was many times where I wouldn't have actually gotten name credit on the piece. Then after that, I would have gotten paid in pennies.

I unsubscribed. I'll stick to working with my directors. It just works better for me. :D 

As Rgames said, it might be good to get your name on some nicer credit lists. Also, it wont make you money that could sustain life in a cardboard box. You may be wasting your time. In conclusion, you can try the "trial" with the aforementioned notes, just know that you'll be charged for the year .. since they have your credit card number..

Good luck, Eric


----------



## lux (Jun 4, 2009)

any updated experiences with this?


----------



## rgames (Jun 4, 2009)

Yes - I've had a few tracks "approved by the director". But I see no indication that they actually went anywhere.

Also not a single dollar in payment...... I read somewhere on the site that it can take several months to get paid - what's up with that crap?

I think the concept *can* work, it's just not well-executed and I'm not certain of the intentions of the organizers.

rgames


----------



## madbulk (Jun 5, 2009)

I'm as certain as I can be that we know the intentions of the organizers. At the most benevolent, it's to sit atop a pyramid.


----------



## Stevie (Jun 5, 2009)

It's like all those companies that are only hunting for credolous composers to spend money in the first place.
I'm not amused...


----------



## kdm (Jun 6, 2009)

Imho, this is just like any pyramid system, be it a "collective" for artists, a royalty free library, or a pyramid marketing business - the success of the concept depends on the contributions of a lot of people, most of whom ultimately lose money, but contribute enough for the larger "collective" to profit. 

I've never been convinced that the time invested will benefit individual contributors, and I'm also of the mind that such concepts are actually hurting the value of the individual in creative arts, and in business in general.


----------



## Adelmo (Jun 6, 2009)

shame, I wonder what his dad the great Bill Evens would say, say they have 5 or 10 people submitting music, everyones set up and general sound is different, can't see how a director or production company would use that on a film, i know there was a medieval film they are doing where i remember seeing that if a composer music will be used on the opening theme it will get him front credit, however at the same time it was already stated on IMDB that the music is by Evans, i guess if you are desperate and you dying for credit or to write for film and sucker enough to fall for that, good luck, i find that all directors wants to work with one person because thats the best part of a collaboration between a composer and director


----------



## rgames (Jun 6, 2009)

Of course it's never going to be anybody's primary gig. And they'll probably never land any major productions. But that's not the point.

In my mind, The Composers Collective is kind of like a musical emeregency room for producers: you're hurting and need help fast or you don't have the cash to go to a doctor. It's not going to replace traditional composer/director relationships. Rather, it's going to provide an opportunity for composers to work on films that would have otherwise gone to library music. So, if it works that way, it's creating work for composers where there was none. It doesn't have to be an exploitation - it *can* be a win-win situation. 

Several of the films they've done have been replacements where the previous composer was not able to complete the project. Given the tight timelines, there's no way one or even five composers could have done it. So what are the director's options? Well, he can just license some library music, or go with something like the The Composer Collective. Under which option are composers betterò$   £W$   £X$   £Y$   £Z$   £[$   £\$   £]$   £^$   £_$   £`$   £a$   £b$   £c$   £d$   £e$   £f$   £g$   £h$   £i$   £j$   £k$   £l$   £m$   £n$   £o$   £p$   £q$   £r$   £s$   £t$   £u$   £v$   £w$   £x$   £y$   £z$   £{$   £|$   £}$   £~$   £$   £€$   £$   £‚$   £ƒ$   £„$   £…$   £†$   £‡$   £ˆ$   £‰$   £Š$   £‹$   £Œ$   £$   £Ž$   £$   £$   £‘$   £’$   £“$   £”$   £•$   £–$   £—$   £˜$   £™$   £š$   £›$   £œ$   £$   £ž$   £Ÿ$   £ $   £¡$   £¢$   ££$   £¤$   £¥$   £¦$   £§$   £¨$   £©$   £ª$   £«%   £¬%   £­%   £®%   £¯%   £°%   £±%   £²%   £³%   £´%   £µ%   £¶%   £·%   £¸%   £¹%   £º%   £»%   £¼%   £½%   £¾%   £¿%   £À%   £Á%   £Â%   £Ã%   £Ä%   £Å%   £Æ              ò%   £È%   £É%   £Ê%   £Ë%   £Ì%   £Í%   £Î%   £Ï%   £Ð%   £Ñ%   £Ò%   £Ó%   £Ô%   £Õ%   £Ö%   £×%   £Ø%   £Ù&   £Ú&   £Û&   £Ü&   £Ý&   £Þ&   £ß&   £à&   £á&   £â&   £ã&   £ä&   £å&   £æ&   £ç&   £è&   £é&   £ê&   £ë&   £ì&   £í&   £î&   £ï&   £ð&   £ñ&   £ò&   £ó&   £ô&   £õ'   £ö'   £÷'   £ø'   £ù'   £ú'   £û'   £ü'   £ý'   £þ'   £ÿ'   £ '   £'   £'   £'   £'   £(   £(   £(   £(   £	(   £
(   £(   £(   £ (   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £(   £ (   £!(   £"(   £#)   £$)   £%)   £&)   £')   £()   £))   £*)   £+)   £,)   £-)   £.)   £/)   £0)   £1)   £2)   £3)   £4)   £5)   £6)   £7              ò)   £9*   £:*   £;*   £<*   £=*   £>*   £?*   £@*   £A*   £B*   £C*   £D*   £E*   £F*   £G*   £H*   £I*   £J*   £K+   £L+   £M+   £N+   £O+   £P+   £Q+   £R+   £S+   £T+   £U+   £V+   £W+   £X+   £Y+   £Z


----------



## kid-surf (Jun 6, 2009)

> I can't imagine that any large-budget films would ever use the service except as a last resort.



Not even for that. Then again, what is "large-budget" in your eyes?

Here's the prob; Your time is always best spent building YOUR brand, YOUR name, YOUR reputation...DIRECTLY...with those looking to hire a composer - as opposed to an "additional music by", guy.

Composer's Collective will never offer fees large enough for it to be worth your while if your goal is at all to be a "film composer". No way around that issue.

Looking at the gig triangle - a gig has got to incorporate one of the three to be worth your while:

1) Money.

2) Artistic Value.

3) Good name to work with.

Obviously, if you can check off all three you have found Elysium.


----------



## rgames (Jun 6, 2009)

Yeah, I get it Kid  TCC sucks right now. I agree. The question is will it always suck. You're posts seem to indicate that you think I'm a fanboy - I'm not. At least not with the way it's functioning right now.

Maybe this will help explain my thoughts: in the long term, I think TCC could function as a temp agency for composers. Of course nobody would ever choose it over a legit gig. But if you're between gigs, they have gigs where they need help and all of the relationships are established. So you punch in and out as you want. Because it's low commitment, you can continue to drum up other work while you're working with TCC.

So, yes, TCC sucks right now. But I still think it *could* be a good thing.

rgames


----------



## rgames (Jun 6, 2009)

kid-surf @ Sat Jun 06 said:


> Looking at the gig triangle - a gig has got to incorporate one of the three to be worth your while:
> 
> 1) Money.
> 
> ...



OK - two of the films that have come through TCC have had major Hollywood name actors. So, by your criterion that one of the three makes it worthwhile, then TCC is worthwhile. 

rgames


----------



## lux (Jun 7, 2009)

rgames @ Sat Jun 06 said:


> Yeah, I get it Kid  TCC sucks right now. I agree. The question is will it always suck.



I perfectly see your point and hopes.

Problem is that as a mere mathematical consideration, having a very large base of composers you should be able commercially to acquire works for a considerable amount of money. That means great contacts, a good number of commercial guys and agenst working for your count and such. If that doesnt happen i have the legit suspect that the real clients of TCC will be the composer themselves, the easiest to acquire and they also pay in advance.

What i mean is that providing a couple of features with a few dozen thousand budget in a year having, lets say, hundreds composers working is not likely to product anything serious for any of those composers, even the most talented (wherever talent should count anything)

I think giving an economic weight to what theyre able to provide as works for the collective is the only way to judge how serious this thing is.


----------



## kid-surf (Jun 7, 2009)

Rgames, I recognize your POV, though I agree with Lux...the math just doesn't add up from my POV.

BTW - I know you were joking about the name thing, but to be perfectly frank: There are, like, maybe, 10 actors in Hollywood who "matter". By that I mean, can greenlight a film on name alone. The new-ish trend is to package films (script/pitches) alongside producers and agents before you go to a studio. The only way you're sure to get a sale is to have one of those 10 names attached, and/or one of the 10 or so directors who "matter". It may be less than 10 names who matter, I don't have time to count...or think. :D

So, just be aware that an "actor we may recognize" is a far different thing (to Hollywood) than a "name" who can greenlight ANY film. With actors we may think of as "recognizable names", when presented to a studio, the studio would likely respond "and...? Come back when you have something we can bank on" Meaning, go get a director attached and we'll talk. The goal is (after you've already got a name producer onboard) to attach a director and an actor that matters. That's normally how films get made today - the studio likes everything to be packaged before they ever see it.

*BTW - each actor's "name" is worth a specific amount of budget. Example: You're looking to do a 60 Mil film. Brad Pitt attaches. You'll get that 60 Mil. You attach Michael Madsen, you'll get a whole lot less. Less than you might think. Obviously a studio isn't going to bite. You may already know that...?

So...when I say "good name to work with" I meant, YOU are working hand-in-hand with this name (producer or director) as opposed to an actor in a film a composer has no interaction with. Particularly, because that actor may not (truly) matter to anyone in Hollywood whom you'll need to impress in some way to rise through the ranks.

Probably goes without saying, but: It'd be much more beneficial to your career to be THE composer on an indie film with unknowns which catches buzz in some regard, rather than acquiring an "additional music by" credit in a film with actors who aren't bankable...nor, like Jeff explained, an "additional music by" credit in a film with actors who ARE bankable. Either way it's got to be your gig.


Point being: You'll never be able to check off #3 byway of using Composer's Collective. Far too many obstacles.

So...It seems one's "time spent" is always best spent on their own career.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 7, 2009)

Good lord, lately I agree with everything Kid Surf writes.

OK, who are you Kid Surf and what have you done with Jayson


----------



## drasticmeasures (Jun 7, 2009)

rgames @ Sat Jun 06 said:


> Yeah, I get it Kid  The question is will it always suck.



Yes. It will.

It's not a commercially viable option. EDIT: It's sketchy at best, and a pyramid scheme at worst.
They're trying to be a budget Remote Control without the funds, names, resources, and most importantly, volume.
Based off the level of these projects, I'm guesstimating they're making around $200 a minute (and this is assuming only 50 minutes of score) - or roughly 10k for a score (BTW, that's going to be the HIGH end of their stuff). 
A lot of the stuff I'm seeing in their credits have budgets of 500k, sometimes less. That generally means like 5-7k for music.
In certain situations, especially the "indie" ones, they are keeping publishing, which they will not tell you. Because of this, and other contractual complications with film distribution, you're music will have to be exclusive - you WILL NOT be able to use it for something else. 

In addition to this, no studio or (knowledgeable) director will tolerate this format as it's presented to you. So they would have to - to some degree - lie to "clients" (I hate that word). EE or someone else there will be the "face" of the company (which means he will get the "music by"). Also, the prods can limit or refuse a credit, etc. For this reason, YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT GET SCREEN CREDIT. EE might have it in his contract to get a credit that "is of equal size and placement as the editor, director", but that will not be extended to any of the "help" he would receive (that's you).
 
As far as your career, no one on these little films will have any idea you exist. The TCC business model REQUIRES this to survive.

If you're looking for something to do "in between" gigs, then start your own music supervision house (sort of what EE has done here). Start a record label and release an album via itunes or something. Expand your business model to other avenues. 
Contact big name composer's for ghost writing gigs. Shit, do "spec" submissions for commercials.
You're EVEN better off just sending music to Pumpaudio.com!

These are just off the top of my head, and will EASILY benefit you infinitely more, both financially and socially/PR.

Of course, I'm not even touching on what Jeff, Jay and Jayson (whoa, that's weird...) already have - that this completely undoes what "film scoring" is. Artistically, it doesn't even make sense.


----------



## José Herring (Jun 7, 2009)

Nathan Furst @ Sun Jun 07 said:


> rgames @ Sat Jun 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, I get it Kid  The question is will it always suck.
> ...



Right on Bro!!!


----------



## Stevie (Aug 9, 2009)

I had a look on the website and I just spotted 1270 composer are subscribed to the free services. Whatever this means... 
We should NEVER pay to play, period. 
BTW, I just seen a picture of Evan, he doesn't inspire confidence...


----------

