Question on Do's and Don'ts episode

[AlanHall]

Not experienced, but an avid Taxi TV watcher; take my comments with a grain of salt.

Write a bunch of cues/instros/songs and pitch them immediately to any and all libraries that you have contact with. The exclusive libraries will very much prefer the opportunity to actually have exclusive control over the publication/distribution. Any piece that's been on spotify (for example) has been released (published) by you, and so no longer can be exclusive to anyone else, at least not easily.

Non-ex libraries are fine with your work being previously distributed, the way I understand. I would simply avoid pitching to exclusive libraries the 'fish' that are already released. No need to "drawer" any new works, simply don't self-publish until you've tried the more lucrative options.

[cosmicdolphin]

I have almost all of my music published under my name or an artist name, and I have it all up on Youtube, Spotify, Amazon Music etc. I can always take it down from there for an exclusive deal with a library, but why would they expect that? It's not signed with anyone else, simply distributed through streaming platforms for the time being. Honestly, why would I keep all the works in a drawer "just in case" that some day some library might want to sign something exclusively?

There are some Libraries that like to sign songs from folks that have a bit of an indie artist profile as it can add extra kudos and authenticity to the catalogue, although it would seem you need to be plastered in tattoos and look a bit 'edgy' to fit in. It's probably not for everyone.

You do need to be sure that if the music you self released is the same material you want to pitch to these exclusive opportunities , that you have not either inadvertently nor by design opted in to allow any of the above to take the publishing split. Because if you have then the Library can't get paid, so they can't sign it.

It will usually be in one of the tick boxes when you sign up to places like CDBaby - Tunecore etc to distribute your music on places like Spotify ...something like .." Do you want us to monetize your music "...many people tick that box thus handing over the publishing to CDBaby etc. So now it's not eligible for an Exclusive Library agreement.

Mark

[cosmicdolphin]

I am currently pondering with the D201007CH "WIDE RANGE of ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTAL CUES" listing. The production cost for orchestral music can be much higher than for other stuff.

Do you mean monetary costs ? To buy the higher end virtual instruments. Or costs in time ?

[cosmicdolphin]

Purely costs in time.

Had you looked into Divisimate ?

[andygabrys]

For that reason I needed the clarification how "exclusive" the "exclusive" actually is.

It used to be that some libraries signed material exclusively but offered a reversion clause after 3 or 5 years. Other libraries sometimes would let you collect streaming / mechanical income (like iTunes Store downloads for a track that was placed in a feature spot in Grey's Anatomy etc.) and they weren't fussed.

These days, everything has tightened up. There are lots of avenues to place music - but there is also a lot of music in the supply chain. Probably like a bell curve - there is a lot of mediocre stuff, and there is a smaller amount of excellent stuff. So unless its really truly excellent, timeless, evergreen amazing music - its unlikely to be signed by even a non-exclusive library. Most of those libraries are also transitioning into having an exclusive side, or totally switching over. Most of those libraries also work on briefs for shows - so unless you are pitching something they need this week, they might not be so interested. Even if its sold digital downloads etc.

Today exclusive usually means "world wide, in perpetuity, all media", with a corresponding transfer of copyright to the library in return for 50% of all upfront fees the library actually receives and 100% of writers royalties. In return most exclusive libraries are connected with world wide networks of sub publishers which increase the earning power of your music. Instead of just the USA, you might have your music available in 40+ countries and there are a lot of european countries that pay very handsome income.

The libraries don't want stuff that has ever been registered with a PRO, as usually even if you "get those cues back" from a publisher on a reversion, there is still a titling issue. The original titles will remain in your PRO account to cover the case of they ever being used by clients of the original signing library. Your reversion can never be 100% airtight because some tracks may be stuck on a hard drive someplace used in far off lands. Its just a liability.

So you are writing to fill briefs (taxi or publishers directly) or you are putting together an album to pitch (direct to publisher).

Sure its a time commitment - and the earnings may be slim in some cases, but in other cases (trailers etc) they are much bigger.

Seems like the crux of it all is finding publishers who really pay decent money. Those are usually the bigger more well established libraries owned by major labels, and the subsidiaries of those in various countries.

Where are they? often at industry events in LA NYC etc like the TAXI Road Rally.

[andygabrys]

I have almost all of my music published under my name or an artist name, and I have it all up on Youtube, Spotify, Amazon Music etc. I can always take it down from there for an exclusive deal with a library

Like I was saying - once its digital its hard to every truly take it down from every platform, from every library client that might have the content on a hard drive sitting around for a rainy day project. Especially if its one track in the midst of 40,000 tracks that a library has offered a client.

You can ask, but its hard to ensure it happens. You are depending on a lot of people's time to get that one track removed.