Don't Devalue Your Music!
You can read a lot about new business models that come from the use of the Internet
. Many of the discussions reflect good ideas-thoughtful examinations of the implications of new ways of delivering products to consumers and ways of promoting music through the new media, such as ringtones. But some of it is, to be frank-crap!
One of the highly controversial ideas is that of giving your music away. The concept makes sense at a superficial level. By giving your music away, the consumer, the fan, decides they like what you do, and go to concerts, buy merchandise and otherwise (sometimes in vague ways that are left unclear in the hope that the future will provide new ones) support the musicians.
THE PROBLEM
So what is the problem? Simply put-the market becomes flooded with music, and the music becomes devalued. If you have a touring band, the logic of the business model, at least, might hold, but it makes no sense at all for songwriters whose income is based on selling recordings, airplay and use in television and movies. And are you in music because of a love or music or simply as a business? Bands hungry for attention will allow their music to be used in movies and television for little or nothing, completely undermining the efforts of nonperforming musicians and composers to earn a living at their craft.
I've been told that this is simply a sign of the times-that nonperforming musicians and composers better get with it. That is nothing but foolishness. Times have changed for certain-music supervisors, who are rightfully as cost conscious as the next business person, are getting seduced into using clones of hits and mediocre music (due to its low prices) rather than opting to have truly original music of the highest quality. That might be fine for some productions, but this lowers the bar and reflects the economics of our culture rather than it richness and diversity. This does not bode well for musicians or film and television.
Jennifer Yeko runs True Talent Management in Beverly Hills, and does artist management, music licensing, and music publicity. In a recent email, she mentioned people offering their music for free, saying: "we just want to be able to brag to our friends that some big movie producer is using our songs in their movies/shows." If you are a professional musician, that is the face of the future you are dealing with. With the exciting musical tools available, people who want to impress their friends are creating tracks that, in some cases, are "good enough."
Yeko makes four significant points, which I will quote (with her kind permission):
1) Studios and networks are slashing their music budgets. I'd say they are roughly 1/2 of what they used to be. In some cases, 1/3. They aren't doing this solely to be greedy but as their lose advertisers (or advertisers cut their budgets) the first thing to get cut in a TV show or film is the music budget.
Blame digital files for being "free" so now the studios and networks think they can get music if not for free, for very cheap, from indie artists like you!
2) Artists - artists and bands need to stand up for their rights. And value their music. Everyone will tell you "it's all about the exposure" - even music supervisors and people at the performing rights societies will say this. Yet, YOU, the artist, are the one that really gets hurt and mostly by your fellow musician and songwriting friends.
Because artists (like the one above who wrote that quote) don't value their music, the studios, networks and supervisors know they don't have to pay what they used to for songs.
3) Simple supply and demand. Before the Internet really exploded, studios and networks had no choice but to license songs from major record labels and major publishers.
Now they can go to any one of a million bands and artists on sites like myspace - many of whom are too naive to ask for payment for their songs so they practically give them away.
4) The growing use of music libraries that provide lots of music in a huge volume, for cheap, often at pre-negotiated rates of say $500 a track, if that.
Of these, I find point #2 the most significant. The reality is that we are not talking about exposure, but respect for the work and creative effort that good music takes. Giving away your tracks indicates that you don't value your music. And what do you really want to be known for: Wild tee shirts and other merchandise, or great music?
Note that this doesn't mean you should stick it to anyone wanting music. As Yeko advises: "Educate yourself. Know when you're being taken advantage of in terms of fees - and when you should be happy to get *any* money - i.e. a festival license for an indie film."
Yes, it is okay to share in the risk of a project if you are reaping some benefit. I have done music for free for filmmakers under two circumstances:
1)For a worthwhile charitable cause - I happily wrote and performed music for the video "A Will to Live, a Dream to Dive" produced by Ocean Opportunity which is a documentary of the amazing story of Mathew Johnston who became the world's first ventilator dependent diver. As a a scuba diver and a fan of heroes, this was a no brainer for me. I wanted the word out and I wanted to be associated with this great project. (Later the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation agreed and provided funding for distribution-but otherwise the video was a labor of love).
2)Working with someone you respect who is bootstrapping their production; working together, sharing the risk, might produce an interesting future. This one is not unlike cowriting with another unknown. It's a gamble, but also a learning experience and you have the opportunity to get noticed.
But a funded, for profit operation shouldn't be the beneficiary of your work without paying for it.
THE PRICE
So what should you charge? What does it mean to value your music fairly? The fascinating thing about licensing is the lack of standards. Unlike union gigs, there aren't pay scales. Even script writers have a standard fee schedule that sets a minimum. Yenko suggests that is why you need professional help in negotiating these things.
And that is true to a large extent. A professional has a better handle on what current budgets and going rates are. There are ways to find these things out of course, but how much effort you want to put into that depends a lot on how the rest of your career is structured. If you are a movie composer, or trying to be, some networking is in order. If you are interested in licensing music, but your focus is getting your band bigger and better gigs, then you are going to need help. The contacts and expertise can be of great value.
Once again, this brings you back to the position of that great jazz musician, Socrates, who said: "Know thyself." (What is less known is that he also suggested playing the natural minor whenever possible, and always hitting the flat third on the off beat.)
Music licensing is challenging, complex, rewarding, and frustrating. If you have had some good or bad experience with it, or simply want to give your story about how you made millions giving music away, let me hear about it!
by: Kavit Haria
Should You Buy Playstation 3 Games Or Not? How To Start A Hip Hop Record Label In Easy Steps Part 2 - Getting Set Up 3 Reasons Why People Start Their Country Music Blog The Hottest Country Music Songs On Charts Today 10 Of The Most Popular Country Singers Of All Time 5 Country Songs That Will Make Your Wedding Day Spectacular Jerkin Dancers Get Geeked Up And Go Hard How To Plan A Successful Cd Release Party How To Enlarge Your Fanbase Why Musicians Must Have A Personal Website How To Enhance Or Improve Your Image Music Genres Going For The Best Mp4 Player