# Library and Royalty Free as full film score?



## JimmyPoppa (Mar 1, 2012)

Hi Guys,

Recently I've had conversations with two unrelated film maker acquaintances, both doing feature films. Both said they are using library and royalty free music for, virtually, the entire scores of their films.

One person is a well known stage performer doing his first feature film but the other is a long-time, highly experienced, full-time professional producer/director and visual effects genius with multiple credits.

They both said essentially the same thing. The material available in libraries is at such a high level and the variety is so huge that there just is no reason to hire a composer and deal with all that it brings.

I've known the pro guy for many years and, when we first met, he didn't work this way because either the quality level was low or the cost high for library music. Now things have completely changed and these guys can just hire someone to spend hours searching until they find what they want.

Since I'm not very involved in the film world (make that, not at all involved), this was news to me. Perhaps you guys already are aware of it. Any comments?

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## José Herring (Mar 1, 2012)

This has been happening for ages now.

They'll learn from experience how hard what they're trying to do really is. They'll basically end up with a temp score. Then they'll go running around looking for a composer who can emulate the temp.

I say keep in touch with them. Put seeds of doubt in their mind about the approach they're taking. By the end of it you may end up with two gigs.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 1, 2012)

George Romero used library music for Night of the Living Dead. That was how many decades ago...? The music barely seems to follow the story (and it actually has a sort of nightmarish quality in its being detached). An original score (and perhaps better sound) is the most obvious factor keeping this from being a true classic and instead a b-classic IMO.

Keep up with them. See what they come up with.


----------



## JimmyPoppa (Mar 1, 2012)

Gotcha,

So, I'm the one who is behind the times. Well, that's not entirely new :oops: 

Yeah, these are people I will see now and again, and one, the experienced guy, I see fairly often.

Film composing isn't my thing really but, I'm certainly willing if the opportunity comes up.

Thanks for the update.

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## jleckie (Mar 1, 2012)

http://www.smartsound.com/products/indielicense.html

sounds tasty eh?


----------



## midphase (Mar 1, 2012)

josejherring @ Thu Mar 01 said:


> They'll learn from experience how hard what they're trying to do really is. They'll basically end up with a temp score. Then they'll go running around looking for a composer who can emulate the temp.



Yup, I'm with Jose. It's a challenge for me to edit some of my own stems into additional cues for a film from time to time...and that's me working with essentially custom elements and a cohesive score. I can't imagine editing an entire film with library tracks, especially since by and far most library tracks tend to go towards the electronic and industrial/corporate side of life.


Here's what I don't understand:

"They both said essentially the same thing [...] there just is no reason to hire a composer and deal with all that it brings." 

What did they mean by that? What, they don't want to deal with a creative person whose sole purpose is to make their film better? I don't get what the issue is that they are so opposed to. Money? Time? Composers who smell bad? What?

My guess is that they are both amateurs and that their films are ultra low budget crapfests that will be lucky to get a direct-to-Netflix release. Seriously, any director who thinks the way these two do is doomed for massive failure and you have to wonder what other questionable choices are also being made in other aspects of the film (starting from the screenplay).


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Mar 2, 2012)

midphase @ 1/3/2012 said:


> My guess is that they are both amateurs and that their films are ultra low budget crapfests that will be lucky to get a direct-to-Netflix release. Seriously, any director who thinks the way these two do is doomed for massive failure and you have to wonder what other questionable choices are also being made in other aspects of the film (starting from the screenplay).



+1


----------



## JimmyPoppa (Mar 2, 2012)

midphase @ Thu Mar 01 said:


> josejherring @ Thu Mar 01 said:
> 
> 
> > They'll learn from experience how hard what they're trying to do really is. They'll basically end up with a temp score. Then they'll go running around looking for a composer who can emulate the temp.
> ...



One of the guys is definitely not an amateur. He has lots of credits and has been doing film for many years. The other is doing his first feature but has several network TV credits as a performer.

Regarding hiring composers, my perception is not so much that they were against that specifically as that they felt they were able to find what they wanted without having to pay for the composer. It's a money and time thing. It had nothing to do with 'dealing with creative people...' and all that. They seem to be saying they are honestly finding what they need in the variety of library music available. 

I haven't specifically followed the whole library thing but I have gathered from reading forums that there has been a huge explosion in that world in terms of the number of libraries, the range of styles, the number of composers, the quality of the music and the sheer scope of what is available now. It seems to me that everyone jumped onto that wagon and now it's so saturated that it's difficult for composers to get in on it.

The conversations I had were not in-depth. I saw each of these guys in the process of working together on something not related to the subject. The talk about music came up for the obvious reason that I am an arranger/orchestrator here in town.

Anyway, I was surprised and thought I'd check here. Seems it's nothing new to you guys and there are strong feelings about it.

So, to be provocative, let me ask you this: Why should a filmmaker hire a composer if s/he is finding satisfactory music in a library? 

We all understand the difference in something custom created for anything, in any industry but, in the real world, people buy 'clothes off the rack' all the time, and are perfectly happy with them. Of course, it's not as good as having a custom tailor but, most people can't afford that. 

In the arranging world, there are lot's of 'stock' arrangements that people can buy for 1/10th or less of the cost of a custom arrangement. For most situations that fits their needs quite satisfactorily. The get pretty good arrangements, do their act and off they go. Why spend hundreds on me when they can get, at least decent, for so much less and spend that money on other parts of their show?

Of course, you can all get mad and call these guys jerks and say their movies are no good. You can also argue how much better it would be with a 'real' composer doing it. I get all that.

I'm being much more 'real world' about it. I'm not a film composer. I've never done a media gig for TV/Games/Film, or any of that. I'm an arranger/orchestrator and have been doing it for a living for over 30 yrs. I've seen things change in a lot of ways and technology is one of the biggest.

As far as the media world is concerned, unless I'm not seeing clearly, 90+% of the movies, TV, documentaries, industrial films, etc. could easily be handled by library music. I'm not talking just about straight to DVD, I'm talking about what's on TV every day. The VAST majority of these are not great art. It's real, everyday stuff that gets on networks and the hundreds of other channels available all over the world.

Also, movies that don't become major, studio hits, are still being made every single day. There are hundreds, maybe even thousands of them and they can't all be 'crapfests.' 

I foresee the flaming reactions coming but, I'm just asking from their point of view. 

Bottom line: Why spend the money and time on a composer nowadays, when there is so much available for so cheap? Is what you're getting from that composer, as related to the level of the project you're doing, really worth it?

What do you guys think?

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Mar 2, 2012)

Your question has already been answered by posts above, I think.


----------



## David Story (Mar 2, 2012)

JimmyPoppa @ Fri Mar 02 said:


> Bottom line: Why spend the money and time on a composer nowadays, when there is so much available for so cheap?



If you want to do your best, you collaborate with the best. The audience does care and will pay for quality. 

If you're a bottom feeder, no reason. If your work is so generic that any stock actor, or composer, or footage works, save your money.

Stories are common, well told stories rare and valuable. Good composers tell the story better than a temp track. At 4% of the budget. That's a great deal.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 2, 2012)

David Story @ Fri Mar 02 said:


> JimmyPoppa @ Fri Mar 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Bottom line: Why spend the money and time on a composer nowadays, when there is so much available for so cheap?
> ...



Well stated, sir!


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 02 said:


> Well stated, sir!



+1


----------



## midphase (Mar 2, 2012)

JimmyPoppa @ Fri Mar 02 said:


> So, to be provocative, let me ask you this: Why should a filmmaker hire a composer if s/he is finding satisfactory music in a library?



That question is really best answered by actually doing what those two are going to attempt to do.

In an average score, there are 30 or more custom but yet cohesive cues that fit the timings just right and all come from the same sonic palette. Trying to find 30 or more cues from a library that fit the same criteria is next to impossible and requires an inordinate amount of time...trust me I've done it.

Want to hear a practical example of what I'm talking about?

Go and rent Allan Quatermain and the Temple of Skulls from Netflix. It's a terrible film that I wish I could have my name removed from. What happened is that my well meaning but overly optimistic friend and director Mark found himself lacking a composer for the film and running out of time. He asked if I could assist, but since I was working on another feature at the time the best that I could do is give him a hard drive full of my tracks to license with the understanding that it would be up to him to music-edit them into the film.

So what you have here is a situation where he's working with about 100 different tracks all coming from the same composer, with the same sonic palette and same general mix, in many cases he had stems, and in some cases he had variations on the same cues...much more flexibility than in a scenario where all the tracks are coming from a music library.

The result speaks for itself, the soundtrack is a mess. It's repetitive, doesn't hit the dramatic and emotional points where it should, at times it ends abruptly or segues in a forced manner from cue to cue, and even though all the music came from the same composer, it doesn't have much cohesion. 

Now, you could argue that he could have hired me (or a qualified music editor) to sort it all out and that would have yielded better results. True, but now you're also adding on top of the licensing fees, the cost of music editor for at least a week, and more than likely two weeks, and you're still dealing with the same limitations. 

Trust me, both of your friends will either end up regretting their decisions, or end up with a film that is considerably sub par.


----------



## MichaelL (Mar 2, 2012)

midphase @ Thu Mar 01 said:


> What did they mean by that? What, they don't want to deal with a creative person whose sole purpose is to make their film better? I don't get what the issue is that they are so opposed to. Money? Time? Composers who smell bad? What?




OK...I'll be the one to fan the flames. Prima donnas. You ever notice how much attitude there is around here some times?

I don't disagree with anything any one has said about the potential for sub-par quality using the approach that Jimmy's friends want to take. 

But...musicians are sometimes there own worst enemies.


----------



## jleckie (Mar 2, 2012)

:lol: I'm with Midphase on what he said. And I don't think he said anything that comes across as a prima donna TBH....


----------



## MichaelL (Mar 2, 2012)

jleckie @ Fri Mar 02 said:


> :lol: I'm with Midphase on what he said. And I don't think he said anything that comes across as a prima donna TBH....




I wasn't referring to Kays, or his statement, with which I agreed.

I was answering the question as to what the film producers meant buy not wanting to hire a composer and "all that brings."

Sometimes times what it brings is a prima donna. Just read through a few threads here about what is and isn't good music. You'll get the picture.


----------



## jleckie (Mar 2, 2012)

Ah-yes. When you quoted him then said you were not referring to him it didn't make any sense.

I see where your going now.


----------



## flashman (Mar 2, 2012)

There is another point here and that is that more and more directors like to start with music and then cut the film to it, not in a temp track way. I have worked this way and I can see where they are coming from.

Also there is quite a lot of very mediocre music scored and the sense of disappointment when you've been handed a score you don't like can't afford to junk must be profound. Hiring a composer remains the most scary part of the whole process for a lot of film makers and library offers an alternative which we ignore at our peril.

Our response must be to raise our game


----------



## MichaelL (Mar 3, 2012)

midphase @ Fri Mar 02 said:


> He asked if I could assist, but since I was working on another feature at the time the best that I could do is give him a hard drive full of my tracks to license with the understanding that it would be up to him to music-edit them into the film.
> 
> So what you have here is a situation where he's working with about 100 different tracks all coming from the same composer, with the same sonic palette and same general mix, in many cases he had stems, and in some cases he had variations on the same cues...much more flexibility than in a scenario where all the tracks are coming from a music library.
> 
> Isn't that pretty much how The Social Network was scored?


----------



## Daryl (Mar 3, 2012)

It's funny how often this subject seems to come up. However, there is no right and wrong, IMO.

I don't think that anyone wold argue against a composed score potentially having the ability to work better with the picture than one from various different sources. However, there are many lower budget TV movies where this doesn't seem to be the case.

1) Often the music doesn't seem to fit the picture very well at all, and at times is totally inappropriate to the visuals. This could be the fault of the composer not really understanding how to score to picture. It could be that the director or producer (or both) decided to move the music around until it was no longer in the best place, just because they thought it "worked better". It doesn't matter. The result is the same. The specially composed score works no better with picture than library tracks would have done.

2) Then you have the standard of composition and production. There are times I hear stuff that is not only really badly written, but badly programmed using dreadful samples and mixed so that nothing works. This is also not any better than using bad library tracks, and chances are that the library tracks (if from a reputable source) would sound much better.

So it really depends on circumstance. A composed score has the potential to work better, but there are no guarantees, and I can quite understand that some directors would rather go for the sure thing by using library music, rather than risk their meagre budget on a composer who may deliver a crappy score, but still expect to be paid. :wink: 

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 3, 2012)

Daryl @ Sat Mar 03 said:


> It's funny how often this subject seems to come up. However, there is no right and wrong, IMO.
> 
> I don't think that anyone wold argue against a composed score potentially having the ability to work better with the picture than one from various different sources. However, there are many lower budget TV movies where this doesn't seem to be the case.
> 
> ...



The problem with that argument for me, Daryl, is that it plays into the myth, and it IS a myth, that a direcotr or producer is the best judge of how music works with his picture. Of course, he has the right to make the calls because it is his picture but in no way does that mean that he has the best judgement. A lot of them are not great at any one aspect of making a film, just passable enough at all aspects so they get to make the film. 

Let's take this scenario:

It is 25 years ago and Elmer Bernstein writes a score for a film. He does 30 cues and the director likes 26 of them but says of four of them, "it doesn't work."

Elmer, pro that he was, would state why he disagreed and made the choices he made but then make the requested changes.

If however, a reasonably intelligent group of film watchers viwed both, I predict 85% of them would have preferred Elmer's. Why? Because then, and even more so now, very few directors or producers unbderstand the synthesis of film and music as well as Elmer did.

OTOH, if it is a composer who is no more than "a sample manipulator"' as I like to refer to them, well, then the balance shifts back to the likelihood of the director/producer being the better judge.

But at the end of the day of course, it does not matter who has the best judgement, it is who has the power.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 3, 2012)

Jay, I don't think I disagree with any of that. However, it doesn't alter the fact that some "composed" scores are rubbish.

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 3, 2012)

Daryl @ Sat Mar 03 said:


> Jay, I don't think I disagree with any of that. However, it doesn't alter the fact that some "composed" scores are rubbish.
> 
> D



True, just as some films are. And certainly the percentage of rubbish scores, in my opinion, is far higher now than 30 years ago.

But even so, if a director hires an experienced film/tv composer, his chances of getting an objectively more or less good result is higher with a composed score than any alternatives.

And now ten guys will come on and write that there is no objective, only subjective :roll:


----------



## Daryl (Mar 3, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 03 said:


> But even so, if a director hires an experienced film/tv composer, his chances of getting an objectively more or less good result is higher with a composed score than any alternatives.


Ah, but I don't think that the films we are thinking about would be able to afford to hire someone experienced.

D


----------



## midphase (Mar 3, 2012)

As some of you might know, I've been dabbling in directing and am shifting a lot of focus towards doing more of it (much more rewarding experience if you ask me).

I have learned a lot from my limited experience as director, and I can tell you a few things from that point of view of both myself and other good director friends whom speak candidly and honestly about their process:

- Regarding the "prima donna" issue, that is simply a fact of life in a business dominated by egos and highly emotive and insecure 'artists'. It is by no means exclusive to composers, quite the opposite actually. So a director who doesn't want to deal with egos is simply a director who doesn't want to direct. I have seen directors complain about actors, DP's, even make up artists having attitude problems and egos. Never once have I heard a director complain about ego issues with a composer....actually scratch that, I did hear it once, about a composer from around here actually...but I'm not telling!

- The decision to hire a composer for a director is stressful, but so is the one to hire a costume designer, DP, actors, location scout and on and on. The point is that they are all variables which will have a substantial impact on the film. To focus on the music as 'the most scary part of the hiring process' is insane. If anything, music is easily replaceable...try finding a solution to a poor casting choice, poor cinematography or poor location! Trust me, the hiring of a composer is one of the least stressful portions of a director's job.

- Scores are not always what the director envisioned. You know what else isn't? The entire film! A director begins with a clear mental vision of the finished film based on the screenplay. From that moment on, it's an immense struggle to get as close as possible to that vision, but it's ultimately a battle that can't be fully won no matter who is at the helm. Directors like Kubrick and Malick have made it a point of their careers to stick to their guns much longer than everybody else when it comes to making their films as close as possible to their inner vision. But they are rare exceptions, they have access to generous shooting schedules and resources (much to the stress of their producers) which are unique to their situation. For everybody else, it simply doesn't work that way. A director who rejects the variables that come with hiring a composer is a director who rejects the uniquely collaborative art that is filmmaking!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 3, 2012)

Hitchcock is the classic exception, of course - he knew exactly what he was getting.

But anyway:



> One of the guys is definitely not an amateur. He has lots of credits and has been doing film for many years.



Exhibit A: Woody Allen. Neurotic creep manages to make some good films, but he has total contempt for the entire medium of film music. Think how much better his films would be if he had real scores instead of that annoying, dated crap he tracks his films with.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 3, 2012)

Okay, I admit it: I also wish I could un-know that he took up with his stepdaughter while watching his films.

But my overwhelming desire to stomp the nearest clarinet to pieces is also a big distraction while I'm watching one of his films.

***

Re: egos and film music - Clint Eastwood.

Need one say more?


----------

