FYI: Tagging Music

[ochaim]

Most of you probably know this already, but thought I'd share for some of the new members:

http://socanmagazine.ca/en/sound-advice ... our-tunes/

[guitargurumike]

very important stuff Owen, thanks for posting

[hummingbird]

I just wanted to comment on this writers/publishers info mentioned. I'm surprised he asked for this, as the majority of songwriters/composers submitting directly to him are not going to have publishers, that comment is better directed to the libraries/publishers and not the general writer-member of SOCAN. For our purposes, in submitting to TAXI and submitting directly to music libraries or publishers, etc, I would leave that out, because if the track is accepted they will be the publisher. When submitting direct to supervisor, I'd put in the email address/tel number of the writer to contact for licencing agreement. When you get the agreement, you also get a schedule A on which you will list your accepted tracks, and that's where you list the co-writers and percentages.

JMHO

[andygabrys]

..... the majority of songwriters/composers submitting directly to him are not going to have publishers, .....

don't agree. this article is written by people (music supers) who need complete info. They don't care where they get the song as long as they can quickly sign paper and assign rights, and the people they work with are professional.

If you have no publisher, then you are a few steps away from having IP that you can submit directly to a supervisor / agency / film and you should likely be submitting to libraries or publishers who have relationships and can get your music placed.

If you are going it alone, having a publisher is vital to ensure a professional, business-like transaction. After all, this is the music business.

If you have a stop-gap solution as BMI does with excess writer clearance to credit the publisher share to the writer fine, but this is not a long term professional solution.

Yes it costs money to setup a publishing company. And you need to determine whether that is worth it to you deepening on the way you see yourself working. But as my BMI rep told me "if you are wondering whether you need one (i.e. you have impending direct to super / agency / film placements) then that is your answer right there. You need one. "

Just an opinion.

[sabalsounds]

Thanks so much to all of you for sharing your expertise!

Silly questions warning! But please clue me in: on my PC if I right click on a newly rendered mp3 and select Properties then Details I can enter all the information requested and click apply then ok to exit. If I reopen the mp3 on my pc I see all of that data has been retained.

Is this all I have to do? In other words, if that mp3 file is uploaded to itunes or fileshared via dropbox, etc the end user will be able to see everything I saved on the mp3? Or do I have to repeat those steps once the file is loaded into itunes and converted to mp4a?

ID3 and metadata are not the same? I.E. I've noticed, prior to exporting a track from Cubase I enter the ID3 data but that is not the same as the metadata fields under Properties>Details as described previously.

Steven

[andygabrys]

......... I can enter all the information requested and click apply then ok to exit. If I reopen the mp3 on my pc I see all of that data has been retained......

sure and that is fine until you take a file out of iTunes either by dragging to the desktop or find in in the library and send it to someone else.

Generally ID3 / meta-tags on Mp3's stick.
Mp4a - I think sticks as well. But sort of a non-issue as this isn't a standard format (really) for anyone sending tunes around for licensing.
WAV - never sticks.
AIF - sticks if the tracks are either resampled to AIF within iTunes or or dragged to desktop from the iTunes window. Otherwise does not stick reliably.

Is this all I have to do? In other words, if that mp3 file is uploaded to itunes or fileshared via dropbox, etc the end user will be able to see everything I saved on the mp3?

generally yes, the mp3 will retain all the meta-tags you have entered in iTunes.

Or do I have to repeat those steps once the file is loaded into itunes and converted to mp4a?

not absolute but if the track is already in mp3 format there is little point to resampling to mp4a format.

ID3 and metadata are not the same? I.E. I've noticed, prior to exporting a track from Cubase I enter the ID3 data but that is not the same as the metadata fields under Properties>Details as described previously.

I understand it to be sort of like nose tissue and kleenex. Meta data is a general term, where ID3 is a specific format (to my knowledge - google is your friend here) for mp3 files with specific fields to fill out.

Logic's mp3 export pane there are slightly different fields compared to iTunes. But its more or less equivalent.

[ottlukk]

The producer I work with includes metadata in the MP3 he sends me. I subsequently have a lyric video made by a third party, and upload it to YouTube. Let's say I produced my own song, and did not put metadata on the MP3, and uploaded it to YouTube. Can I go into YouTube and add the data? I note that the original link referenced I-tunes, not YouTube. Ott

[hummingbird]

If you have no publisher, then you are a few steps away from having IP that you can submit directly to a supervisor / agency / film and you should likely be submitting to libraries or publishers who have relationships and can get your music placed.

If you are going it alone, having a publisher is vital to ensure a professional, business-like transaction. After all, this is the music business.

I have to disagree with this. If I pitch to film and tv opportunities that are Exclusive, there is no way I am going to indicate a publisher on my submissions, that will certainly make me look like an amateur. For non-exclusive they are going be retitling my track and adding their own information. Either way putting in a publisher muddies the water.

Each track is an entity. Some have one publisher, some have several. In the absence of a publisher, assuming they do not wish to wait for an industry opportunity to come along, the writer may register their track with SOCAN at 100% so they get both shares.

[andygabrys]

If you have no publisher, then you are a few steps away from having IP that you can submit directly to a supervisor / agency / film and you should likely be submitting to libraries or publishers who have relationships and can get your music placed.

If you are going it alone, having a publisher is vital to ensure a professional, business-like transaction. After all, this is the music business.

I have to disagree with this. If I pitch to film and tv opportunities that are Exclusive, there is no way I am going to indicate a publisher on my submissions, that will certainly make me look like an amateur. For non-exclusive they are going be retitling my track and adding their own information. Either way putting in a publisher muddies the water.

Each track is an entity. Some have one publisher, some have several. In the absence of a publisher, assuming they do not wish to wait for an industry opportunity to come along, the writer may register their track with SOCAN at 100% so they get both shares.

so - you have conflated exclusive library / publishing deals with non-exclusive direct to super deals. Care to straighten this out?

[Paulie]

Taxi TV a couple of weeks ago had music lawyer Ben McLane on and the gist I got out of it is that you do NOT need to create a publishing company.

Check out 1:27:42 in this Taxi TV video.

What say those of you actually getting listed?