Page 1 of 1

Confused about "Contemporary covers of Classics" listing

Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2015 8:18 pm
by CharlesLorenMusic
I need some business-savy people for this one!

You may have read the listing asking for contemporary covers of classics. Some examples they gave were Filter's "Happy Together" cover, Taken By Trees' "Sweet Child O' Mine" cover, Devlin and Ed Sheeran's "All Along the Watchtower" cover, etc. Basically they don't want a "sound-alike" cover, but a modern, interesting cover.

I was excited about this listing and jumped into my studio immediately. A couple days later I re-read the listing, and I noticed something I must've skimmed over... here is the part I need help understanding. The listing says "You’d be wise to avoid covers of songs that would be unaffordable or nearly impossible to license like; The Rolling Stones, U2, The Beatles, Neil Young, etc." Now, from my understanding, covering copyrighted material always goes back to the "mechanical rate", where the original artist gets around 10 cents per song per unit sold. It never registered in my mind that there's a whole different process for TV/film use until now. So I did some more research, and it looks like a "sync license" is involved here, where you need to contact the publishers of the material directly. Since this listing offers a 50/50 split, I'm assuming the company that ran the listing will take care of this part.

Now, wouldn't Jimi Hendrix and Guns N Roses fall under the category of "unaffordable or nearly impossible to license"?! Why would Taxi reference all these examples of big smash hits if they're not going to be able to license them? I guess I need help understanding the licensing process when it comes to covers in film/tv. But my other question is: should I completely abandon this Beach Boys cover I just started recording? Can you guys give me some examples of classic songs that are affordable and very possible to license?

Sorry for the incredibly long description.
- Charles Loren

Re: Confused about "Contemporary covers of Classics" listing

Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:08 am
by joematzzie
Yessss! So glad I found your post. I was wondering the same thing. Maybe we could have the screeners/listing writers weigh in on a list of good covers / bad covers. This would be a great resource to have on the forums.

U151123CV says "avoid ... Neil Young" but they use All Along The Watchtower (w&m by Bob Dylan).

So let's start a list

BAD
Rolling Stones
U2
Beatles
Neil Young

GOOD???

How about Stevie Wonder?, The Who? Paul Simon? Joni Mitchell? John Denver? The Doors? Jimi Hendrix? Marvin Gaye? Sly? Bruce? Black Sabbath? Janis Joplin? Bad Company? John Mellencamp? Nirvana? Grateful Dead? James Taylor? Carole King? James Brown? CSN? CCR?

Re: Confused about "Contemporary covers of Classics" listing

Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 11:14 am
by Russell Landwehr
I agree that a comprehensive list of "easy-to-sync" classics would be nice. Going after something like this is certainly a shot in the dark when we lack insider information.

Russell

Re: Confused about "Contemporary covers of Classics" listing

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 11:54 am
by CharlesLorenMusic
joematzzie wrote: Nirvana?
Is Nirvana considered classic now?! Man how time flies. I might have to submit 2 covers now 8-)

Do you think it's "nearly impossible" to license covers when the original artist has passed away? Maybe it's harder to find out who holds the rights to the composition. I imagine the master recording still belongs to the record company who produced it, no?

Re: Confused about "Contemporary covers of Classics" listing

Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2015 12:13 pm
by mojobone
Both Nirvana and Green Day are now 'Classic Rock'. There are really only a few of these artists who are either famously litigious or very touchy about their art/legacy and are likely to charge more than the going rate for a license or deny usage for commercial/advertising/political purposes. Part of the reason the Beatles' catalog is so valuable is because they denied any commercial use at all for literally a couple of generations. A good way to gauge an act's willingness is if you've heard their music in commercials, already and if they have only a few hits, they might be more amenable than superstars that are hip deep in them. So you can probably add Pearl Jam, Eagles, Rage Against The Machine and Mellencamp to the list, but keep in mind most acts will draw a distinction between licensing covers of their music and licensing their own tracks. Also bear in mind how few artists own their publishing; if they've assigned it anywhere, it's generally fair game.

Re: Confused about "Contemporary covers of Classics" listing

Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:07 pm
by AaronTrew
Hi guys, I covered poison, halo, and somebody bring me some water.