They always find something ...

[cosmicdolphin]

I just sometimes think that if they want an organic sounding guitar, they ought to say so

I think it's pretty much a given in any guitar based genre that it needs to sound like a real guitar. There's also a difference between real and organic. Real guitars can sound heavily processed too. Doesn't have to be a real one either, some VSTs can sound great, and in the right hands you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between real and VSTi.

What they don't want is obviously fake and stiff sounding facsimiles of live instruments - guitar or otherwise. No library would want it , as it wouldn't get licesensed - if you check out the Sports Rock section of any major library I would bet most of it is real, and if it isn't you can't tell.

I think the screener has given you the correct feedback here.

Mark

[WSAO]

Hi mate,

This is a cool song, but a real guitar would definitely elevate it.
Take a listen to the forwarded blog—all the featured songs include real guitar. At least the screener’s feedback was consistent.

It’s also not too hard to find a guitarist to collaborate with.

Cheers!

[PDebik]

n/a

[Casey H]

That's not the point. Actually, it only means that nothing distinct will ever be able to enter the libraries if only the existing sound is accepted.

Honestly, your understanding of the industry and how Film/TV music works is severely lacking. The audience wants to hear what's familiar to them. Why do you think there are all those reference tracks with contemporary and/or classic songs?

to
The end user will see the "Sports" show spot on TV, and that end user will not at all care whether the guitar is organic.

Do you have the slightest idea how competitive it is out there? The music sup for a sports highlights show has literally thousands of tracks at his/her disposal. Why would they pick your track over the others that sounds more natural? They are not out to change the world. They are out to give their audience what, from their experience, is most pleasing.

You are in the wrong business if you are not interested in giving customers what they want. That goes for any business.

[cosmicdolphin]

And here we have the difference in opinion. You are all arguing from the perspective of the producer.

Sure. But they are opinions from folk who've been doing this a long time with some success. I've had multiple sports placemtents personally and know other writers who have too.

Instead, consider the perspective of the end user. The end user will see the "Sports" show spot on TV, and that end user will not at all care whether the guitar is organic.

The end user isn't the audience, the end users are the editors that put the show together. They get to choose from tens of thousands of tracks ...so why do you think they would choose something that sounded fake and stiff when they have better tracks?

Current sounding pop productions even prove, that end users expect alienated, electronic sounding instruments and voices.

That's a different genre, it's not rock. In rock they expect bass-drums-guitars. I've had one of my electronic tracks used in Germany for the football coverage on Ard Das Erst. it plays a few times a season.

If it sounds like the genre it's meant to then great. But if it sounds sub-par and fake then they can't use it.

Regarding the question on whether to go "exclusive" or not: I guarantee, without knowing the details, that almost none of you can make a living off their library placements.

Almost every great library is exclusive now. I have detailed my journey and earnings over the years. I haven't signed a non-ex track since around 2018. Sure it's only 25% of my real job earnings but it is growing. people need to make their own judgements about whether it's worth their time or not. To me it's not work, I enjoy it too much and would be producing for streams a likes otherwise.

topic152454.html

[telefunkin]

That's not the point. Actually, it only means that nothing distinct will ever be able to enter the libraries if only the existing sound is accepted.

But popular music sets the trends that TV music follows, not the other way around. Creating ground-breaking innovative music for libraries is not the job. Creating what they ask for and can use IS. Fake sounding guitars are distinct only in that they have not yet become popular. When they do, you might have a track that is in demand, but until then realistic guitars will be chosen over fake sounding ones.

The end user will see the "Sports" show spot on TV, and that end user will not at all care whether the guitar is organic. Current sounding pop productions even prove, that end users expect alienated, electronic sounding instruments and voices. There is hardly anything out there any longer that doesn't distort voices beyond recognition. But again: It seems to be a silent requirement to not to do it. I'll have to accept that or live with the consequences.

Basically, its the same answer as above.

Regarding the question on whether to go "exclusive" or not: I guarantee, without knowing the details, that almost none of you can make a living off their library placements. That is, because the production costs (time mainly) are way too high to produce and then hope that in a few years maybe a cue will be used somewhere. And even then, it will normally not earn a lot, but if you are lucky a three digit number. For that reason, it is economical nonsense to sign music exclusively, unless the publisher guarantees placements and earnings.

It is no better with non-exclusive deals. Besides, some might want to make a living, some might be happy supplementing their income or simply subsidising their pastime. Also, if you want to make a living out of some endeavor there are far easier ways. You can read cosmicdolphin's latest completely open annual update on these forums and see how well (or otherwise, depending on your perspective) he's doing. However, no two paths through sync are the same.

It is so convenient for publishers to want hit songs without taking any risks, and then to offer for sale the goods that others have worked hard and laboriously to produce, essentially earning a share of the producers' profits. But I assume we have a different opinion on that, too.

We write tunes or songs for publishers/libraries, but they are not hits (and if they were we'd be doing something else with them). Then a publisher creates a writer account for you with al your personal and PRO details, ingests your music and alt versions, checks them thoroughly, tags them, puts it on their database linked with the writer details, prepares contracts for every song/writer, assembles an album of similar tracks, creates artwork for it, releases it on their website and markets it to all their clients, makes it available to any sub publishers, tracks any use to ensure sync fees and mechanicals can be split with you (and any other writers), makes such payments ....and probably many other tasks that I've missed out. Of course they agree to do all of that work upfront before its known whether the track will make any money at all for the library, as well as the writer. I'd say that's quite a lot of work that demands robust systems, and if you could do all of that yourself and had sufficient clients and influence within the industry to make it worthwhile then you go ahead. Otherwise, you might as well let the library take all of that risk on your behalf for their share of your track's potential earnings.

So yes, we do have differing opinions. Its just music though. Write lots of it, make it the best it can be, and enjoy the process. Offer libraries what they ask for. Spread it around. Wait a while. Be happy with whatever returns come your way.

[VanderBoegh]

I guarantee, without knowing the details, that almost none of you can make a living off their library placements. That is, because the production costs (time mainly) are way too high to produce and then hope that in a few years maybe a cue will be used somewhere. And even then, it will normally not earn a lot, but if you are lucky a three digit number.

Dude, with that type of outlook, you'd probably crap your pants if I showed you my royalty checks, lol. But there's a bigger issue here....

I know rejection stings and hurts like a b*%ch. And it's even worse when you come to the forums looking for a sympathetic ear or two and instead find that nobody takes your side. Yeah, that sucks. But your entire post is just screaming "newbie", and is riddled with misconceptions, incorrect assumptions, flawed logic, etc, that reading it is like hearing the sound of nails scraping against a chalkboard.

I'd recommend getting a better understanding of the industry you're trying to enter, before you start making even more wrong assumptions of the way this business works or what the "bar" is for production music.

If you decide Taxi isn't for you, and that you could hustle up better deals on your own, then nobody is stopping you from saying "peace out" and doing your own thing. We all want everyone to succeed in this world. Truly, there's enough business to go around that there's plenty for everyone. But regardless whether you use Taxi or not, do try to listen to your music with objective ears and compare it to other similar tracks. Music libraries aren't going to sign music that doesn't hit a certain threshold of quality. And if you want to defend your use of MIDI guitar for a guitar-driven rock track, then it shows me that you're really not open to criticism or feedback yet. So that's probably the best place to start...... take a step back, listen objectively (to your music and the feedback from professionals), and then adjust accordingly.

Best of luck to you, whatever you decide.

~~Matt

[SubRivers]

Getting a negative review for fakeness of a MIDI simulation of an instrument when the real instrument is a feature given in the brief is actually one of the least valid reasons to be upset.

They are just saying that you didn't manage to fake a guitar convincingly.
The fact they can pick that out as a critique is testament to their ears not a ding (though it is pretty obvious in this case)

It is true that most people watching TV might not be able to tell if guitars are real or fake, in reality they would just think the guitars are lame.

[PDebik]

n/a

[CTWF]

They show a lot.

That sounds a little ominous, my fellow German.