# Which stock music library to choose?



## TheWillardofOZ (Jul 24, 2013)

I'm going to start shopping some of my music around to different stock music libraries and wanted to know if there are any that you all would recommend. 

Thanks!


----------



## Madrigal (Jul 24, 2013)

I don't think music libraries are very popular among the members of this forum, at least not the cheap royalty free ones. 

If you're serious about starting to write for libraries, you should subscribe to this site for a week and do some research: 

http://musiclibraryreport.com/

It's a great place to start!

-M


----------



## rgames (Jul 24, 2013)

Two comments - 

First, why limit yourself to one?

Second, yes, they're not ideal from a "musical satisfaction" standpoint for most composers. Songwriters and beat-makers, maybe, but if you think you're going to wow the stock music world with your originality, well, I think you'll be sorely disappointed. I think that's the attitude that most folks around here have with regard to stock music sites and that's why they're not highly regarded. But if you accept that fact (and write accordingly) then you probably can make some money.

If you figure out how, let me know. My stock music library is something like 300 tracks and I have them in a bunch of stock music sites but make basically nothing from any of them.

rgames


----------



## Greg (Jul 25, 2013)

Madrigal @ Wed Jul 24 said:


> I don't think music libraries are very popular among the members of this forum, at least not the cheap royalty free ones.
> 
> -M



I actually disagree! Only speaking for myself but.. I believe that cheaper stock libraries are an amazing tool for composers just starting out. Especially if your tracks aren't quite up to snuff for big time libraries.

Starting to see some income from your music can be one of the most inspiring things to keep carrying on! And it isn't all that difficult to make over $1000.00 a month with stock music.

Audiojungle is my fave, never had any problems, very good support, and decent sales!


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 25, 2013)

in my experience the best libraries are the most most famous like extreme music or the the really small ones connected with the shows productions which dont like retitling.
their thoughts is that smaller copmanies with less retitling will have more originality. 
as suppose to getting the same vanacore track everyone is doing. 
then again, depends on styles .


----------



## Madrigal (Jul 25, 2013)

> And it isn't all that difficult to make over $1000.00 a month with stock music.



If you can make 1000$ a month selling stock music that's great! I do have a hard time seeing how you can make that kind of money with Audiojungle that sells music for pennies and takes 65% of the non-exclusive cut. 

If you have some knowledge to share, I'm sure we'd all appreciate it!


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 25, 2013)

Madrigal @ Thu Jul 25 said:


> > And it isn't all that difficult to make over $1000.00 a month with stock music.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



there is plenty of libraries in LA that can get you the amount said. that dont keep any of your writers share and keep only publishing. 

but its like any business. you need relationships which can get you closer to having your tracks placed rather than the thousands of other tracks that can work as well.


----------



## doctornine (Jul 26, 2013)

If you mean : royalty free / non-exclusive in terms of "stock music library", honestly you are going to make peanuts from it. You're competing with people willing to sell their music for little or nothing.

Don't waste your time - work with Libraries that take music on an exclusive basis, it's the only real way to make money at this game.

:wink:


----------



## Madrigal (Jul 26, 2013)

Yes, the exclusive market is interesting, but you have to be sure to pair-up with the right publisher. Otherwise you'll end up having your tracks dying a slow death locked-up in a dusty virtual basement. 

Now finding the right library/publisher for your style of music, that's the real challenge. Getting your foot in the door and having your tracks used is often a matter of who you know.


----------



## jaredcowing (Jul 26, 2013)

rgames @ Wed Jul 24 said:


> Two comments -
> 
> First, why limit yourself to one?
> 
> Second, yes, they're not ideal from a "musical satisfaction" standpoint for most composers. Songwriters and beat-makers, maybe, but if you think you're going to wow the stock music world with your originality, well, I think you'll be sorely disappointed. I think that's the attitude that most folks around here have with regard to stock music sites and that's why they're not highly regarded. But if you accept that fact (and write accordingly) then you probably can make some money.



+1 on the first comment, I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket. You can still do exclusive contracts, just have some tracks exclusively with one library, and other tracks exclusive to another.

As far as originality goes, as long as you're writing for something targeted at a mainstream audience, you're going to be in the "yes" business no matter what. If having to constrain my creativity was my concern, I might not be writing for film or games at all. You just have to enjoy the process, even if it's for a very unremarkable track. But I do get your point- there's something about labeling your music as "stock music" that is a little disheartening. Makes me feel a little bit less like a composer and a little bit more like a farmer.


----------



## rgames (Jul 26, 2013)

Exclusive deals can be the best or the worst. If you get paid a good amount up front, they're the best. If you get paid nothing up front, they can be the worst unless you have a REALLY good relationship with the library.

Many years ago I submitted a group of tracks to an exclusive library that does not pay up front. To this day, I have not made a single penny from those tracks. Every bit of work I put in to them was completely wasted.

If you're not getting paid up front for exclusive tracks then I strongly suggest you require a VERY short reversion period, like 3 months. If the library can use them right away, then find out what the use is and go for it if it's going to generate good revenue. If not, they'll probably forget about those tracks after a few months, anyway, so having a short reversion period allows you to use them elsewhere at that point.

I think submitting tracks on an exclusive basis with no reversion is, for anyone just starting out, a VERY BAD idea.

rgames


----------



## doctornine (Jul 27, 2013)

Certainly in the UK, Exclusive Libraries require the rights in perpetuity.

I don't have a problem with that. 

It's a really simple formula : write music, place with library, repeat. Continuously.

I guess I'm one of the few around here that exclusively writes for library. Some tracks perform, some don't, some take an age to do anything then suddenly make a bank.

Bottom line is if you have tracks with a library that are doing nothing after 12 or 18 months, don't do anymore work for them, move on. Not all libraries are equal


----------



## Connor (Jul 27, 2013)

I've been using audiosparx, haven't written much for it but make a bit of pcoket change off it. Beer and pizza money basically. I'm going to write a lot more for it over the next year just to get better at this whole music thing, so we'll see how much those upcoming tracks will get me. I think that can be a very good way of building discipline for young composers before they have much credits in the film and vg worlds.


----------

