Lyric Writer looking for Composer

[hummingbird]

Oct 30, 2009, 1:54am, cardell wrote:Thanks for your reply Vikki.I 100% agree that "...creating a musical bed is a significant contribution ..." but in terms of what is copyrightable (as a song) I had really written the entire song...in a sense. Stuartif you don't want to share the copyright, then you need to pay the contributor for their contribution. Otherwise I don't see how you can 'collaborate' on a song. Either you pay for their service with cash, or you pay for it with a share of songwriting. If you haven't paid them and don't have a signed work for hire... they could argue that their performance/arrangement is part of the master and part of the 'writing'. Just my opinion, of course... not legal advice, by any means.

[glender]

That is one smart hummingbird Thanks for chiming in Vikki. And please let me know when I start getting annoying.If I were Bernie Taupin and you were Elton John then I think 50/50 seems like a pretty fair split. That is to say if I was creating the lyric and melody and you were creating the music and performing the song. But at this level where we're talking about a rough demo that still needs a publisher and an artist 50/50 seems a little steep. I understand that the musician is bringing a lot to the table. Literally years of practice and dedication to get to a certain level of proficiency. So what I'm asking is what is a fair percentage if you were working for points? I personally didn't want to invest a lot of cash until I saw that my material was marketable, so I'm willing to give up percentage points instead. It's just that I'm having a hard time thinking past 10%-12%. I mean if the right song got into the right hands there's a potential for a six figure payday. 10%-12% seems pretty lucrative for a Musician/Producer cutting a clean demo. And I'm not talking about a one hit wonder deal. I'm talking about working together on multiple songs. The reality is we'd probably have twenty songs in play before we ever got anything signed. If one song made it I can guarantee at least five out of thirty will have great potential since they're all built around the same formula.Of course if these two people started collaborating equally on songs down the road or it was clear that the melody line or lyrics we're changing do to the musicians influence I could understand a different split. But just to get something on paper and start working on some songs that are pretty much etched in stone how does the 10%-12% range sound working strictly for points from a musicians perspective?Hmm...I guess I should have started my own thread but this one seemed right on topic for these questions. Sorry for the HijackI'm new

[Casey H]

Oct 29, 2009, 10:17pm, hummingbird wrote:If the writer of the melody & lyrics hired the producer to made the demo and paid them a reasonable amt, there would be nothing more to be paid and the musician/producer would not own any part of the song. In this case it is best to get a work for hire signed. If, however, a demo is then published on a CD or licensed to film/tv, you're getting into muddy waters unless you have a master release.If it was agreed that the writer would share part of the songwriting with the producer to compensate them for making the demo... then that agreement is between the two of you.Others will have additional advice.Just as Vikki said, if you hire a demo producer or service to create a demo, the fee paid for the service should allow you to keep 100% of the copyright. That's why a master release is so important. The demo maker signs that they did their work as a "work for a hire" and has no claim of ownership. A master release agreement is ESSENTIAL if you will pitch for film/TV.Obviously, you can make any arrangement in the world you want, just make sure it's all in writing. For example, you could have someone do a demo for you and in exchange share copyright ownership. Just make sure you dot all the i's and cross all the t's on paperwork. Even the best of friends who started with good intentions sometimes get into heated battles later and hold up any possible use of a song. It happens all the time. In the situation I just described you could probably put it all in a collaboration agreement, detailing who contributed what and the percentage splits. Make sure you address both the copyright the master recording ownership. They are different and both critical things to cover.I've co-written with VERY close friends who I met on these boards. We still sign a collaboration agreement.So be aware of two types of agreements:1) Co-writing/collaboration2) Master Release (aka Work for Hire)There is a sample collaborator's agreement at www.johnbraheny.com one can use as a starting point-- some editing & expanding will probably be required. I don't have a sample work-for-hire I can post. People shouldn't post legal agreements IMHO. That's playing attorney too much and I (personally) wouldn't want the responsibility.Good luck! Casey

[cardell]

OK, thanks Vikki & Casey for the explanations. I'm now beginning to better understanding the difference between:1. master recording ownership and2. copyright ownership.Stuart

[glender]

Thanks Casey it is starting to make more and more sense. I don't think I need to worry to much about the master since most of what I'm interested in is artist looking for original songs.I will do some research on the collaboration contract. I think it's best to get that out of the way early so that once the work starts everyone is on the same page with who gets what should a song start making money. God forbid the lawyers get it all

[Casey H]

Most of the time a co-write or ownership is best as 50/50. Nit-picking over alternate splits just gets ugly and the general way of doing things is IF you are sharing, share equally. It also makes it much easier for anyone you sign deals with-- they don't have to keep track of different splits.I don't consider 50/50 steep. Look at it from the perspective of would the song even exist if it weren't for the other party? Years back someone found me on the internet and sent me some lyrics. He was a pure lyricist looking for a music collaborator. I took ideas and some words from his lyrics (including the title!), wrote the music, and used a lot of my own words and ideas. He wrote none of the music and less than half of the lyrics. But I made it 50/50 all the way. Without him and his idea, there would have been no song. Even when the backing track without vocal (and hence no lyrics) gets signed, I make it 50/50. We are partners, period. (We split the cost of the pro demo, BTW)Interestingly, on another thread we talked about some of the challenges non-performing songwriters face. Demos are very expensive, in the $500-$1000 range. One excellent way to get more songs working for you is to collaborate with someone who has the performance and recording skills that you might lack. So instead of paying $500 or more to a demo service, you split the ownership of the song. This has happened a lot with folks who met right here on this forum.Don't forget the old addage... 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing.Best! Casey

[Casey H]

Oct 30, 2009, 5:01pm, glender wrote:Thanks Casey it is starting to make more and more sense. I don't think I need to worry to much about the master since most of what I'm interested in is artist looking for original songs.I will do some research on the collaboration contract. I think it's best to get that out of the way early so that once the work starts everyone is on the same page with who gets what should a song start making money. God forbid the lawyers get it all A lot of people start out thinking they only want to pitch for artists and not film/TV. Many of those people change their minds later, especially in view of just how hard getting an artist cut is. If possible, it is always best to get that master release as soon as the song is produced. I know that can be costly with Nashville demo services. But if cost is not the issue, I recommend getting the release so you are prepared for anything down the road. Even some publishers pitch both for artists and film/TV, so a master release is very helpful. It is a BAD idea to take the "I can get it later" approach with releases. Things change in people's lives, attitudes change, people become harder to find, etc. You do not want that deal you've been wanting for so many years to quickly go "poof" because you didn't do this up-front. (Again $$ permitting)... Casey

[hummingbird]

Oct 30, 2009, 6:09pm, hurowitz wrote:Most of the time a co-write or ownership is best as 50/50. Nit-picking over alternate splits just gets ugly and the general way of doing things is IF you are sharing, share equally. It also makes it much easier for anyone you sign deals with-- they don't have to keep track of different splits.I don't consider 50/50 steep. Look at it from the perspective of would the song even exist if it weren't for the other party? Years back someone found me on the internet and sent me some lyrics. He was a pure lyricist looking for a music collaborator. I took ideas and some words from his lyrics (including the title!), wrote the music, and used a lot of my own words and ideas. He wrote none of the music and less than half of the lyrics. But I made it 50/50 all the way. Without him and his idea, there would have been no song. Even when the backing track without vocal (and hence no lyrics) gets signed, I make it 50/50. We are partners, period. (We split the cost of the pro demo, BTW)Interestingly, on another thread we talked about some of the challenges non-performing songwriters face. Demos are very expensive, in the $500-$1000 range. One excellent way to get more songs working for you is to collaborate with someone who has the performance and recording skills that you might lack. So instead of paying $500 or more to a demo service, you split the ownership of the song. This has happened a lot with folks who met right here on this forum.Don't forget the old addage... 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing.Best! Caseygood post, especially would the song even exist if it weren't for the other party?

[glender]

Yeah the deeper I dig the more I see the 50/50 split as the standard. I guess for me the best possible scenario would be a musician singer with all the gear to do top shelf demos. That would get the songs to a certain level. But then your saying it's about $500.00-$1000.00 per song to get them mastered? I think that's the way i understand your post. I'm assuming a master needs to be done in a studio on some expensive equipment with a trained engineer. Is that correct?I was looking at some gear the other day and the sales man said you could do like 24 tracks or what ever and take that to a studio and dump it in their system for mastering. Is that typical or would you be re-recording all the tracks from scratch to get the master?I'm assuming that they were cutting the master from scratch in the movie "Once" Is that typically how you do it or can you dump your tracks from high quality home equipment and re-engineer that? I can see once you have a master you've opened up more doors for placement in film and tv. Thanks for posting Casey I appreciate your wealth of knowledge. It's a real time saver for someone taking another crack at this business twenty years after my first failed attempt.

[Casey H]

Hi GlenderThe $500-$1000 I referred to is the typical cost of a full demo from scratch by a professional demo service.If you or your co-writer do your own demo such as in a home studio, mastering is not required-- just a very good mix. There is a whole 'nother thread about this. Casey