US collaborator required

[malcolmdunn]

I'm a UK based composer & producer looking for a US based songwriter with a view to reaching the US market. Although I get some TAXI forwards some of the critiques suggest that some of my submissions are not on target stylistically. In addition some of the references I am unfamiliar with. I'm aiming mostly at producing finished recordings for use directly in broadcast and films although pitching songs is also a possibility.I need someone with songwriting skills and an understanding of the stylistic requirements. You don't need any recording facilities or musical/technical production skills. I have enough of these for both of us. You would need to be serious about the job though and be able to work quickly to a deadline when required.You can check out my TAXI page here www.taximusic.com/hosting/home.php?userid=9751

[Casey H]

Quote:I'm a UK based composer & producer looking for a US based songwriter with a view to reaching the US market. Although I get some TAXI forwards some of the critiques suggest that some of my submissions are not on target stylistically. In addition some of the references I am unfamiliar with. I'm aiming mostly at producing finished recordings for use directly in broadcast and films although pitching songs is also a possibility.I need someone with songwriting skills and an understanding of the stylistic requirements. You don't need any recording facilities or musical/technical production skills. I have enough of these for both of us. You would need to be serious about the job though and be able to work quickly to a deadline when required.You can check out my TAXI page here www.taximusic.com/hosting/home.php?userid=9751 HiIn a way, getting familiar with the styles is the easy part... Producing music that sounds like the styles is the harder part. You can get familiar with styles by listening to clips on sites like iTunes or amazon.com. So, when a listing says "a la Group X", check out what Group X's songs sound like. At 99 cents a download, it you think you can emulate a group's song(s), why not just purchase the track(s)? Collaboration is still a great idea and I will go take a listen to your music. You will find some great people here as potential collaborators... I just wanted to see if the concern was understanding the required sound or actually making it. Regards, Casey

[Casey H]

Quote:Hello Casey,I think it is a valid point to make that it more difficult to emulate a style than be familiar with it. Intellectually I can analyze and recreate a style but it is likely to be just a Pastiche. My reasoning for looking for a US collaborator is that they are more likely to be able create something more authentic. I reckon the trick is to be sufficiently original within a style but not cross over the boundaries. Given the material to work with I can make it sound right.MALCOLM Hi MalcolmI hope I didn't come across like I didn't think collaborating was a good idea. It is! I was just trying to see where you were so as to make the best suggestions. I listened to one of your tracks and it sounded really good! I'll try to listen to more later. We get a lot of folks on here who don't understand why their songs are rejected by TAXI for not being on-target but they've never even sampled tracks from the "a la" artists. So, it's hard to know where someone is coming from at first...I'll stop by your site and I hope others do too! Regards,Casey

[Casey H]

Hi again Malcom...I sampled some songs on your site. Nice stuff! You have a knack for writing catchy pop songs. As you know (and I think you are saying), your songs are retro so you can't target a lot of listings that call for songs resembling modern artists. Two things: You definitely have the talent to, either alone or with a collaborator, crank out more modern material. One key is to target songs for a particular genre or style... but you know that. The second thing is "retro" is not a dirty word anymore with so many film/TV opportunities for songs that sound like past decades, etc. So, your retro work has a market. Are you a Dispatch member? You might want to join if not... Or, at the minimum, contact taxi to get on their e-mailing list so you can see the kind of film/TV requests they get. (You can get the emails without joining... a good teaser and motivator)Looking for collaborator here is a great move. Kudos to you for, instead of bitching as to why your songs aren't getting forwarded for certain listings, seeking a productive solution. Regards, Casey

[sgs4u]

Well I also went to have a listen, before my previous post Malcolm. Something about how you worded your posts caught my attention. I think Casey's input is awesome, and I think he has a better handle on styles/genres more that just about anyone here, and that certainly includes me. But, if you plan to do all the recording work, because you already have the gear and chops, how do you envision including a co-writer's efforts into the copyright of these new creations? And are you thinking about more than one song, with this arrangement, and will you use the same division of ownership/contributions template, for more than one song?50/50 could seem unfair, if you're doing ALL the production work. I'm really interested in how you see things developing. This co-writing is also worth investigating to me, from a philosophical perspective. How much value will you give, and how do you quantify someone's efforts, to basically, consult with you? I'm simply asking this from a learning how you plan to do things POV. curious steveQuote:I'm aiming mostly at producing finished recordings for use directly in broadcast and films although pitching songs is also a possibility.I need someone with songwriting skills and an understanding of the stylistic requirements. You don't need any recording facilities or musical/technical production skills. I have enough of these for both of us. You would need to be serious about the job though and be able to work quickly to a deadline when required.You can check out my TAXI page here www.taximusic.com/hosting/home.php?userid=9751

[malcolmdunn]

Quote:Well I also went to have a listen, before my previous post Malcolm. Something about how you worded your posts caught my attention. I think Casey's input is awesome, and I think he has a better handle on styles/genres more that just about anyone here, and that certainly includes me. But, if you plan to do all the recording work, because you already have the gear and chops, how do you envision including a co-writer's efforts into the copyright of these new creations? And are you thinking about more than one song, with this arrangement, and will you use the same division of ownership/contributions template, for more than one song?50/50 could seem unfair, if you're doing ALL the production work. I'm really interested in how you see things developing. This co-writing is also worth investigating to me, from a philosophical perspective. How much value will you give, and how do you quantify someone's efforts, to basically, consult with you? I'm simply asking this from a learning how you plan to do things POV. curious steveHello Steve,I have always gone 50/50 on songwriting royalties. Lennon and McCartney did this even when they didn't collaborate on a song at all. I don't know of any other way of doing it.A distinction has to be made however between intellectual and mechanical royalties. That is between the song itself and the recording of it. They are two separate entities. Say I recorded a song that we had written together but you had no part in the recording. In this case I would own 100% of the recording and 50% of the song.There is a possible problem with certain types of broadcast use though where a flat fee is paid to use the recording and the royalties are not separately defined. In this case I might go for something like 66/33 split. I would always come to an agreement in advance about this kind of thing.There might be also be the situation where I record a song (as producer) that I had no hand in writing. This would require a different split but the principle of keeping the mechanical and intellectual rights separate would remain.I hope this makes sense and has cleared up any doubts you might have.

[Casey H]

Quote:Quote:Well I also went to have a listen, before my previous post Malcolm. Something about how you worded your posts caught my attention. I think Casey's input is awesome, and I think he has a better handle on styles/genres more that just about anyone here, and that certainly includes me. But, if you plan to do all the recording work, because you already have the gear and chops, how do you envision including a co-writer's efforts into the copyright of these new creations? And are you thinking about more than one song, with this arrangement, and will you use the same division of ownership/contributions template, for more than one song?50/50 could seem unfair, if you're doing ALL the production work. I'm really interested in how you see things developing. This co-writing is also worth investigating to me, from a philosophical perspective. How much value will you give, and how do you quantify someone's efforts, to basically, consult with you? I'm simply asking this from a learning how you plan to do things POV. curious steveHello Steve,I have always gone 50/50 on songwriting royalties. Lennon and McCartney did this even when they didn't collaborate on a song at all. I don't know of any other way of doing it.A distinction has to be made however between intellectual and mechanical royalties. That is between the song itself and the recording of it. They are two separate entities. Say I recorded a song that we had written together but you had no part in the recording. In this case I would own 100% of the recording and 50% of the song.There is a possible problem with certain types of broadcast use though where a flat fee is paid to use the recording and the royalties are not separately defined. In this case I might go for something like 66/33 split. I would always come to an agreement in advance about this kind of thing.There might be also be the situation where I record a song (as producer) that I had no hand in writing. This would require a different split but the principle of keeping the mechanical and intellectual rights separate would remain.I hope this makes sense and has cleared up any doubts you might have. Most people find it best to split everything 50/50. It you start differentiating the recording from the songwriting, it's too messy and it could be unfair to either party. Remember, a nice chuck of revenue could be licensing fees for film/TV which are technical for the recording. So should your songwriting partner be left out of that? And if an artist cuts a song, mechanical royalties are paid only to the songwriter (9.1 cents a CD in the US). If the recording helped land the cut, I don't think the person who did the recording should lose out either... not to mention performance royalties (songwriter only) which again would be better shared.I think you find it hard to get a co-writer on board unless it's all a 50/50 split. You never know how a song or recording will make money in the future. Regards, Casey

[malcolmdunn]

Quote:[quote author=malcolmdunn board=collaboration thread=1200429453 post=1200515043]Most people find it best to split everything 50/50. It you start differentiating the recording from the songwriting, it's too messy and it could be unfair to either party. Remember, a nice chuck of revenue could be licensing fees for film/TV which are technical for the recording. So should your songwriting partner be left out of that? And if an artist cuts a song, mechanical royalties are paid only to the songwriter (9.1 cents a CD in the US). If the recording helped land the cut, I don't think the person who did the recording should lose out either... not to mention performance royalties (songwriter only) which again would be better shared.I think you find it hard to get a co-writer on board unless it's all a 50/50 split. You never know how a song or recording will make money in the future. Regards, CaseyI agree that 50/50 is the way to go with songwriting royalties but in professional agreements mechanical rights are always treated separately. If a record company pays for the recording of a song they then own the mechanical rights and give the writer only a very small cut. If a master quality recording has been made entirely by one party then it is unreasonable to expect a 50/50 split on this. The producer in this case is acting more like a record company and payment should reflect this. In fact my quoted 66/33 split is very generous and most deals of this nature are considerably less advantageous to the writer.I'm talking specifically about money earned directly from the recording here. Any royalties earned from the use of the song elsewhere would remain at 50/50

[Casey H]

Quote:Quote:[quote author=malcolmdunn board=collaboration thread=1200429453 post=1200515043]Most people find it best to split everything 50/50. It you start differentiating the recording from the songwriting, it's too messy and it could be unfair to either party. Remember, a nice chuck of revenue could be licensing fees for film/TV which are technical for the recording. So should your songwriting partner be left out of that? And if an artist cuts a song, mechanical royalties are paid only to the songwriter (9.1 cents a CD in the US). If the recording helped land the cut, I don't think the person who did the recording should lose out either... not to mention performance royalties (songwriter only) which again would be better shared.I think you find it hard to get a co-writer on board unless it's all a 50/50 split. You never know how a song or recording will make money in the future. Regards, CaseyI agree that 50/50 is the way to go with songwriting royalties but in professional agreements mechanical rights are always treated separately. If a record company pays for the recording of a song they then own the mechanical rights and give the writer only a very small cut. If a master quality recording has been made entirely by one party then it is unreasonable to expect a 50/50 split on this. The producer in this case is acting more like a record company and payment should reflect this. In fact my quoted 66/33 split is very generous and most deals of this nature are considerably less advantageous to the writer.I'm talking specifically about money earned directly from the recording here. Any royalties earned from the use of the song elsewhere would remain at 50/50 Hi MalcolmBecause we are from different countries, we may not be using the same terminology to mean the same things. You used the word "mechanical" to refer to film/TV license fees (master/sync fees). The word "mechanical" here usually refers to the statutory rate paid songwriters when their song is put on (usually) a CD. It's currently 9.1 cents per song per CD in the US. That is paid only to the songwriter(s).What you are suggesting is generally fair if this is what you mean:66/33 or 60/40 in favor of the co-writer who did the recording for upfront licensing fees of the recording for film/TV, video games, advertising, etc.50/50 on performance royalties through PROs.50/50 on mechanical royalties, should the song be cut by an artist and manufactured on media such as CD.50/50 on any other royalties not covered above (there usually aren't any other but just in case).The reason many people do 50/50 across the board is sometimes its hard to differentiate individual contributions. For example, let's say we write a song together and you are doing the recording. As you are doing the recording, I listen to tracks and make suggestions such as, "Why don't we try a different bass line here?", "I think we really need to bring in instrument X to beef it up", etc. That's why it gets so fuzzy. Cheers, Casey

[Casey H]

The most important thing is to agree on these things UP FRONT when starting a project and put them in writing in the form of a collaboration agreement. If the parties involved are comfortable with any split they agree on, that's all that matters.It may seem cold at first to have to sign an agreement with someone who is basically (or completely) a friend, but reality is these things, more often than you would think, end up in disputes. If you've read these boards for a long time, you would have seen quite a few horror stories. Practice safe collaboration... Casey