TAXI.com

Just saw this crappy little nugget of disappointment in a newsletter. Looks like us ASCAP members are going to have to storm the castle!!!!!! Grab yer pitchforks and get ready to "harumpf!"

ASCAP ROYALTIES - ASCAP artists, who create vocal songs, will notice a substantial reduction in performance royalties in your June/July 2012 royalty statements. ASCAP has recently changed the way they weight their background vocals; they now will be paid at the same rate as background instrumentals, resulting in reduced payments for all background vocal uses. We are unhappy about their decision as well as it affects our publishing royalties just as it does yours, but there is nothing we can do but double up on our efforts to get your more placements. If you are an ASCAP member, we urge you to contact your ASCAP representative regarding any questions or concerns you might have.

Bad news...unless you're an instrumental composer. Then things just got more equitable.

ShadowaterMusic wrote:Bad news...unless you're an instrumental composer. Then things just got more equitable.

True - but going the wrong way

kc

Well that's a crappy little piece of news for us vocalists. Very crappy indeed.

Guess everyone will be paying bigger licensing fees to me from now on... Heh heh.

Ack.. I saw this too. Lets fix it... how do we fix it??? I have my pitchfork ready to go.

It does just mention BV's, is that just ooh and ahh's, it doesn't affect a full on lead vocal? Still sucks, and I still have my pitchfork ready!

Yeah, maybe evens the playing field, but Like Kayle said, it's not a good direction for any of us. What if they eventually lower the rate for BG instrumentals.
Mark I think it means a song with vocals playing in the background during a scene. Wish it was the other way.......

BOO!!!!!!!!!!!

Guess everyone will be paying bigger licensing fees to me from now on... Heh heh.

Yeah, I'll hold my breathe Raags

I wish they would have "met in the middle" with this instead of just cutting the vocal rate. As an instrumental composer I would have preferred a bit of a bump and a less drastic cut to the song rate.

Honestly, it really doesn't make a difference for many musicians.

Most artists with ASCAP were not earning enough to live off of to begin with. Is it fair that the vocal rate was cut? Nope. Is there anything that can be done about it? Nope.

I came to the conclusion a while ago that the investment in music for me is something to do as a hobby and not a career. I think that other musicians need to face the fact that unless some law is passed, music is not a sustainable career. It takes too much work to make too little money.

Musicians like myself will continue to make music because it is fun to create stuff. The royalties and licensing fees earned will really be a bonus. It makes sense to keep costs down and use any money earned from my music to buy new hardware, software, and instruments. The days of taking out a loan to buy musical equipment are done.

If you are in it for the money, you are in it for the wrong reason.

DesireInspires wrote:I think that other musicians need to face the fact that unless some law is passed, music is not a sustainable career.

Thanks, but most of us don't really NEED to be saved from disaster. For those of us that do make a sustainable career though music, your "fact" that we can't do this seems a little... well, non-factual. It's like showing up at NASA this week and saying "Face the facts... you guys will never make it into outer space". Uh... I think they already did.

Are you inspired, yet?