Pump Audio

[timbreman]

Does anyone on here use Pump Audio?
I was leary at first to submit anything because of how picky they say they are and supposedly it takes up to 40 days to get an answer.

So I gave in and 1 day later I got the green light email.
Only thing is now I need to mail them a cd and just not sure if the green light was something that is really that difficult to get to begin with.

It just seemed like I got an answer back a little too quickly and just not sure how legit the site is. If anyone is actually using it I would really appreciate any advice and/or what their experience has been like.
Thanks,
Jon

[sctt_stone]

Curious to hear back myself as I just sighned up last week.

Originally Posted by timbreman

Does anyone on here use Pump Audio?
I was leary at first to submit anything because of how picky they say they are and supposedly it takes up to 40 days to get an answer.

So I gave in and 1 day later I got the green light email.
Only thing is now I need to mail them a cd and just not sure if the green light was something that is really that difficult to get to begin with.

It just seemed like I got an answer back a little too quickly and just not sure how legit the site is. If anyone is actually using it I would really appreciate any advice and/or what their experience has been like.
Thanks,
Jon

[timbreman]

Hi Scott,
What type of music did you submit?
Was it a quick response for a green light for you as well?
I had'nt really considered all the copyright stuff so I am now looking into BMI stuff right now. Apparently it is wise to do so.

[Jazzpunk]

There's a good thread going on in the Post section about some of these issues:

Give up Copyright and Sync fees for Library Music??

Lots of helpful folks in that part of the forum if you have specific questions.

[timbreman]

Thanks for the link Jazz. I was actually just checking it out now. Good info.

[taktheride]

Pump is legit. I've worked on shows that use their websearch and their harddrives they lend out that are stuffed with music for finding clips.

When I get some stuff together, they are one of the first places I'm going to be calling.

[Neruk]

I was just greenlit yesturday within 20 hours. So I am also wondering how easy it is to get greenlit..

[timbreman]

Originally Posted by Neruk

I was just greenlit yesturday within 20 hours. So I am also wondering how easy it is to get greenlit..

I was reading more into it the other day and found that just because we get green lit doesnt mean they will put our music up. In fact it could just be sitting there for years somewhere in a bin. My guess is this is their way of building up a music library that they can have access to anytime they need it.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

From what I understand Pump is non-exclusive. Check your contracts to verify that. If it is non-exclusive then you can still do whatever you want with the music, including putting it in other non-exclusive libraries. So it seems like a win-win if you get added to their library.

If they've changed their policies (or I've been misinformed) then you might want to think twice. Either way, find an entertainment attorney that has experience with music licensing to look over your contract.

From what I've heard, Pump does a very good job of placement in TV shows and gets pretty big licensing and royalty payments. I know they are one of the "bigger" companies for licensing unsigned artists... so definitely take them seriously.

[gsilbers]

well the 1st green light when they send u an email is to see thats its not garageband quality and that you are not using copyritten samples, like in hhiphop and such.

im in the same place u are. i got that greenlight but havent sent a cd. ive been busy, but they are good, they have ads in post production magz and they will try to sell your song
at the best price so they can earn money also. they give some for the licese and you get royalties if it get placed.
and as statd above; its non exclusive so you can use that music anywhere else.

[csl]

They provide music for Current TV apparently, which is pretty cool in my book. Also now part of the Getty empire, which can't hurt. Certainly seems like a slick operation...

They do have a huge library now though, so even if you're on their books, chances of getting music used are still very slim. But, by the look of things you've nothing to lose by submitting.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by csl

They do have a huge library now though...chances of getting music used are still very slim.

I disagree with that. Nowadays search tools like mSoft and Soundminer have really leveled the playing field. Everyone's music from every company is all consolidated onto one hard drive or server in most studios. When a Music Supervisor or editor goes looking for music they launch a search utility like Soundminer and all of the music from every company has been cataloged. When they type in "fast modern rock with heavy guitars" all the music that fit that criteria from every company shows up in a list. They go down the list auditioning each song and pull out ones they feel might work. Then they place them in and sit with the director to decide which one they will ultimately use.

If your song shows up in a search, it will at least get heard and considered by the clients. If someone isn't getting any uses it's either because nobody is looking for the music they write or other people produce the same style of music much better than they do.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by csl

They do have a huge library now though, so even if you're on their books, chances of getting music used are still very slim.

Well I agree.
Your chances are reduced by the sheer amount of choice.
It doesn't have to be about the quality or the search engine, it just becomes a lottery.
yes, it gives smaller players a chance, but television isn't using more library music than it was 5 years ago, so the opportunities are spread across more and more composers = less opportunities = lottery.
IMHO

[dan p]

There is another post here about pump audio.Someone got in at the beginning and did well.It becomes a numbers game once you get in hoping your stuff gets on one of there hard drives.Like Chris said,its like winning the lottery,but if you are good and your material is good your chances are better.
The best scenario for getting your material picked up for use is making the personal relationships with the decision makers,be it producer,director,music supervisor,marketer,corporation...etc.
Here is a good example;Moby's father was,is in advertising and got his music placed by dad back in the 90's.Bingo!
As for pump,it still may be worth doing,but dont expect any $ for a while once your music gets used.Good Luck!


Dan P

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by chrisso

but television isn't using more library music than it was 5 years ago...

Who told you that? The library industry has been growing between 20~30% every year for the last 5 years. Shows like "The Beast" use mostly library music in-show (which pays really well!) and the composer for the show scores very little. Go to an SCL meeting, you'll see all the TV/Film composers constantly bitching about how Production Libraries are starting to totally wipe them out. Would they be saying that if TV wasn't using anymore library than it was 5 years ago? TV is becoming usually more and more library and less custom. AND as turn-around times for TV shows, Ads, Promos and even films gets shorter and shorter, library music will get used even more.

[Rockfactory]

Hey guys there are better alternatives. Since Pump is now owned by Getty images, they really aren't that relevant to the indie scene,basically an over glorified song catalog. So you get placed in the catalog,alongside millions of other songs/artists,indie&major and you think you have a shot of getting placed in a film,Tv or commercial?

Seriously think about which songs they are going to be pitching to those opps.

And yes they'll greenlight pretty much anyone - it's a cash machine.

Just to prove it, we sent to different tracks - one solid that already has been placed in film and another with my 2 year old nephew screaming nonsense with some beats. Guess what? they green lighted both. think about it.

So Yeah, do your due diligence. get your PRO (Ascap,Bmi,Sesac) and copyrights in order first. And tell why in the world would you ever want to give away half of your potential money on a song placement to someone that did 5 minutes of work?

Check Out Musicians atlas / Music connection they list all the contact info for the top music supervisors in the biz, contact them direct.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by Rockfactory

Check Out Musicians atlas / Music connection they list all the contact info for the top music supervisors in the biz, contact them direct.

Really? And how has that been working out for you then? Have you been able to place a lot of your music by cold calling all the top supervisors yourself?

[Dave Davis]

Yeah, cold calling supervisors is crazy. People don't spot music based on who called them last... as another poster accurately described music searches are database driven, not personality driven. The market today is absolutely nothing like it was 20 years ago, and certainly bears no resemblance to radio and other payola/relationship fueled game for most application.

At my last job I was the engineer responsible for most music searches for tv and radio projects. We searched databases that we knew well, sent the music supervisor or director a selection of candidate tracks, which either contained the solution or came back for another round with comments. Unlike major motion pictures or even TV series, most ad work is very objective - no one gets placed in a national spot because someone knew someone. The stakes are higher than the music biz - pick the wrong song and you sell a few 100 million fewer big macs... uh oh. This is why really critical spots or big buys (super bowl ads) often get focus grouped.

I can think of few ways to waste more time than calling music directors to place your music. I confess I've gotten useful calls from composers and bands, but the usefulness is oblique and rewards delayed (e.g. I might place something 2-3 years after meeting someone). By and large, I pitched the best music for the spot, not my best buddies songs. Few professionals survive the other way around.

-d-

PS: Your impression of the effort required to find music, and appropriate compensation is kind of funny. We rarely billed less than an hour for music searches, many took a couple, end to end. We couldn't bill at all for the studio manager's time coordinating licenses and making sure the client reported properly - another unbillable half hour to an hour. For that time, access to our customers/clients, and completing the mountain of paperwork to make sure everyone is properly credited and paid, we indeed took 50% of the license fees, which represent far more than 50% of the total effort required to place a song. The truth is most tracks were cut for albums that recoup real costs directly. Licenses are gravy, not the entree, easy money when you can get. It would be difficult for most original artists to make a living writing/selling needledrop, even if they're great at it, because the needs are so varied and often quirky. It's all about numbers and quantity, not quality. Until such an artist built a library of a few thousand songs, they'd starve! Your opinion seems based on too small a sample to be representative... you have a very unusual perspective that doesn't apply to anyplace I've worked, either as a producer or a client.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by Dave Davis

Yeah, cold calling supervisors is crazy. People don't spot music based on who called them last... as another poster accurately described music searches are database driven, not personality driven. The market today is absolutely nothing like it was 20 years ago, and certainly bears no resemblance to radio and other payola/relationship fueled game for most application.

At my last job I was the engineer responsible for most music searches for tv and radio projects. We searched databases that we knew well, sent the music supervisor or director a selection of candidate tracks, which either contained the solution or came back for another round with comments. Unlike major motion pictures or even TV series, most ad work is very objective - no one gets placed in a national spot because someone knew someone. The stakes are higher than the music biz - pick the wrong song and you sell a few 100 million fewer big macs... uh oh. This is why really critical spots or big buys (super bowl ads) often get focus grouped.

I can think of few ways to waste more time than calling music directors to place your music. I confess I've gotten useful calls from composers and bands, but the usefulness is oblique and rewards delayed (e.g. I might place something 2-3 years after meeting someone). By and large, I pitched the best music for the spot, not my best buddies songs. Few professionals survive the other way around.

-d-

PS: Your impression of the effort required to find music, and appropriate compensation is kind of funny. We rarely billed less than an hour for music searches, many took a couple, end to end. We couldn't bill at all for the studio manager's time coordinating licenses and making sure the client reported properly - another unbillable half hour to an hour. For that time, access to our customers/clients, and completing the mountain of paperwork to make sure everyone is properly credited and paid, we indeed took 50% of the license fees, which represent far more than 50% of the total effort required to place a song. The truth is most tracks were cut for albums that recoup real costs directly. Licenses are gravy, not the entree, easy money when you can get. It would be difficult for most original artists to make a living writing/selling needledrop, even if they're great at it, because the needs are so varied and often quirky. It's all about numbers and quantity, not quality. Until such an artist built a library of a few thousand songs, they'd starve! Your opinion seems based on too small a sample to be representative... you have a very unusual perspective that doesn't apply to anyplace I've worked, either as a producer or a client.

Great post dave... exactly my point.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

Who told you that?

Personal experience.

The library industry has been growing between 20~30% every year for the last 5 years.

You're talking US right? My personal experience is in the UK.
I guess all I'm trying to say is that in my experience the library or production music role in television has been building steadily for at least ten years. In some respect due to the explosion of reality tv, but also the increased amount of free, low budget digital tv.
The best placed people to cash in on that are the composers, production houses and music publishers who've been in it for that amount of time in my opinion, not a new internet website.
But I could easily be wrong.

A couple of interesting articles on the subject of internet vs cd:
An Introduction To 'Production Music'
Broadcastnow.co.uk - Television, production, broadcast and radio industry news

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Dave Davis

most ad work is very objective - no one gets placed in a national spot because someone knew someone. The stakes are higher than the music biz - pick the wrong song and you sell a few 100 million fewer big macs... uh oh. This is why really critical spots or big buys (super bowl ads) often get focus grouped.

But as most composers can cover a lot of different bases a composer with a personal relationship with the agency or director will often get hired. It's comforting to use someone familiar, who has experience and a long advertising resume.
In my experience an ad agency will ask several composers to pitch for a particular ad, they are often fishing for an idea as they don't know what they want themselves.
It isn't at all unusual for the chosen composer to be a long time affiliate of the agency, or friend, or long term collaborator with the ad's director.
The final music may be completely different from the pitch or the submission demos handed in.
Of course if you are looking for songs recognizably made by bands it's a different story, but many ads still have specifically composed music.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by chrisso

But as most composers can cover a lot of different bases

It has been my personal experience, dealing with hundreds upon hundreds of composers over the last 8 years that most composers THINK they can cover a lot of different bases. That doesn't mean they actually can. And 10 times out of 10, they can't. And I've personally been involved as the engineer in a more than a few situations where the composer has talked his way into a gig, and then composed his way right out of it!

Yes personal relationships are very important. But in the end, bringing the correct product the first time is the most important. The quickest way to lose all hopes of future gigs as a composer is to say, "yeah I can write anything". cuz the first time you get called, it isn't going to be for some straight rock Pop sounding TV Ad. You're gonna be asked to do some crazy Gypsy Jazz or traditional Andean folk music or something (murphy's law, ya know?).

This is where library comes is and why it has been gaining ground very quickly. Whereas one composer cannot say he can do everything and mean it, a library can.

Also, when I say 20~30% growth, that is world-wide. Even if I was referring to US companies, most have sub publishers in other countries. Megatrax, for example, is sub published in 50 countries. Most of the uses I get from the songs I've written for them aren't in the US. It's Europe, Japan, Australia, etc..

[Dave Davis]

Originally Posted by chrisso

But as most composers can cover a lot of different bases a composer with a personal relationship with the agency or director will often get hired. It's comforting to use someone familiar, who has experience and a long advertising resume.

Completely different market. Companies who hire a composer to write a jingle have budgets and specific objectives. Even local jingles run in the thousands (from decent, experienced composers as you describe), while needledrop (library music) costs hundreds. Literally an order of magnitude difference in projects.

10 years ago, needledrop was always behind the times, and generally weak. Today the big libraries are all pretty decent, and the latest/greatest is always available if you know where to look. It's a bargain, and it's really biting into the market for composers.

But regardless of one's relationship to any composer(s), no one calls a composer for a piece of library music. Doesn't happen in the real world. They either do the search in-house, or they farm it out. Either way, it's between the hired ears and a database. No one reaches out to their favorite composers for a $300-500 piece. If you're looking for a greenday-alike, 9/10 times a library will already have the piece you're looking for, just a keyword away. Your composer buddy may be able to cover it, but it will ALWAYS cost more, and often won't be as good as the library piece (since the library buys the real deal, a conservatory trained jazz guy doesn't have to stretch him/herself, and the whole back-forth between directors and creatives is eliminated entirely).

And even when there's budget for composers, you hire based on the target, more than relationship. We had a composer in-house at my old job... he often composed stuff that he turned over to a "real" band in the genre. Rather than half-assing bluegrass sound, he hired kick-ass fiddlers, banjo and mando players. Rather than asking a jazz drummer to lock into a click, he'd pair a swing bass player and let the guitars and keys lock to them. He wasn't a hip hop guy, so he hired hip hop producers when that was called for - yeah, he got the call, and could do the work. But to enhance the very relationship you're mentioning, he essentially passed the job along and billed the production. Still, the only people who ever called him were Thousandaires - people who had budgets above $2000 with specific needs.

So you're comparing apples and oranges. These 2 markets only intersect when you pit bottom-feeding composers against the most exclusive library tracks. In other words, it's a decision that's rarely if ever encountered in the real world.

If you're trying to sell library music, the best strategy is to include your work in every non-exclusive library you can find, and extensively tag your compositions with keywords when possible. That makes you more visible to people who search autonomously (i.e. the entire library music market). Library music is NOT a human/social game (but composing still very much is).

-d-

[chrisso]

You are 99.9% right, but I think the scene is a little different in London.
I know very established composers who pitch for commercials with extremely low fees and budgets. If the commercial goes big they'll see thousands in return.
I don't work in commercials, but I've done a lot of work in television and on the film trailer scene. The gigs I had invariably involved mocking up quasi Philip Glass or Radiohead, Jay-Z or Arvo Part.
Budgets across the board are very low, so there isn't enough money in it to farm it out to bands that specialise in each specific genre.
Most of the composers I know in London are working steadily and in all areas (movies, ads, television) and in a wide variety of genres at the same time. It's at least as much who you know than what you are capable of. Of course if you screw up you wont be hired again.
I agree with your point that over recent years library has become so well made it is easier to surf the library from RnB to contemporary classical than to hire Johnny Composer.

[dcwave]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

It has been my personal experience, dealing with hundreds upon hundreds of composers over the last 8 years that most composers THINK they can cover a lot of different bases. That doesn't mean they actually can. And 10 times out of 10, they can't. And I've personally been involved as the engineer in a more than a few situations where the composer has talked his way into a gig, and then composed his way right out of it!

Yes personal relationships are very important. But in the end, bringing the correct product the first time is the most important. The quickest way to lose all hopes of future gigs as a composer is to say, "yeah I can write anything". cuz the first time you get called, it isn't going to be for some straight rock Pop sounding TV Ad. You're gonna be asked to do some crazy Gypsy Jazz or traditional Andean folk music or something (murphy's law, ya know?).

This is where library comes is and why it has been gaining ground very quickly. Whereas one composer cannot say he can do everything and mean it, a library can.

Also, when I say 20~30% growth, that is world-wide. Even if I was referring to US companies, most have sub publishers in other countries. Megatrax, for example, is sub published in 50 countries. Most of the uses I get from the songs I've written for them aren't in the US. It's Europe, Japan, Australia, etc..

I have to agree with everything here. I was one of those guys and almost burned a bridge, lost money on the deal, and had to split publishing with another songwriter/composer to keep the gig and deliver on time. I thought I could do most anything. Now I only submit music I am strong with and gotten placements with Pump. They do a good job of getting decent sync fees. Its the teeny tiny backend from ASCAPS rules for how they split things up that is questionable.

[Dave Davis]

Whats the difference on that, Dave? I only see if from the consumer perspective... we did composition in house when there was budget but used libraries for the rest, so I'm familiar with the purchase terms than artist deal.

Next question: is the difference great enough to cost you a sale by not being there? I wonder if this is something like the classic newbie "CD Baby or Amazon?" dilemma, where the obvious answer is be in both to get the sale.

And then the next question after that: what places are better for artists? I'd prefer to shop artist-friendly libraries all other things being equal.

Of the few-clicks, I don't mind Pump or YouLicense or even Rumblefish...

-d-

[emgbiotch]

there was another thread about this a while back.
i will say it again.
i highly recommend pump audio.
they have been very very good for me personally.
the contract is non-exclusive (you retain all ownership rights)

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by Dave Davis

Whats the difference on that, Dave? I only see if from the consumer perspective... we did composition in house when there was budget but used libraries for the rest, so I'm familiar with the purchase terms than artist deal.

Next question: is the difference great enough to cost you a sale by not being there? I wonder if this is something like the classic newbie "CD Baby or Amazon?" dilemma, where the obvious answer is be in both to get the sale.

And then the next question after that: what places are better for artists? I'd prefer to shop artist-friendly libraries all other things being equal.

Of the few-clicks, I don't mind Pump or YouLicense or even Rumblefish...

-d-

There really is no one company that treats it's composers better/worse than another. It's all relative. I've heard stories about a couple other libraries (who shall remain nameless) and the "deals" they give their composers and I was appalled. Totally shady and unethical. But, to some it might be worth it. So it's hard to tell...

What dave is referring to (at least I think this is what he's referring to) is the ASCAP payments from each broadcast. The ownership of the song is divided up between all parties involved. Even though it is one big "pie", usually ASCAP and BMI require you to divide it up so that 50% goes to all writers and 50% goes to all publishers. If you wrote the song yourself and have your own publishing company, you own 100% of the song split between you personally as the composer and your publishing company that you own.

If you co-write with someone else, you split the writers portion and the publishing portion with them. So each of you gets 50% writer's (25% of the total pie each) and 50% publisher's (25% of the total pie each), totally 50% each.

When you start dealing with companies like Pump audio, the do what is called "repurposing" your music. If it hasn't been published anywhere else, then you simply fill out the copyright forms and add them as a co-publisher "through written contract". This gives them 50% of the publishing (25% of the total), you maintain your 50% publishing (25% total) and ALL 100% of your writer's share (50% of the total). So you end up with 75% of the total pie, and pump gets 25%.

Since it's non-eclusive you can create the same deal with another non-exclusive company, but you have to retitle the songs and fill out a new copyright usually saying the forms are "derivative works" and put the new publisher's info in.

Now, ASCAP and BMI charge TV networks, Cable Stations, Radio Stations, etc a flat fee every year for the "right' to play music from the composers affiliated with them. The fee is based on the size of the stations audience and several other factors. This means there is a finite amount of money to distribute each year. In the past ASCAP and BMI haven't been able to track EVERY use for every composer. So they do a "survey" quarterly. If a cue sheet is submitted, then that counts as a use. But so many times cue sheets aren't submitted or they are filled out incorrectly, etc... This is where the survey comes in...

using statistical analysis they try to figure out how many uses you would have gotten in an quarter based off the cue sheets submitted with your music on it. Then they send out the survey CDs (usually about 50 CDs of random 70 minute selections of TV and Radio broadcsts). The publishers listen to all 50 CDs and pick out all their uses and submit claims. That is compared to what they were expecting to see... if you are showing MORE uses from the survey than they had logged, then they estimate that you probably had a higher percentage of uses. They have formulas to figure it out... but basically you get paid more if you can show you have a lot of unreported uses.

It's a slippery slope, since the per usage fee ASCAP and BMI pay to their composers are based on their averaging. As of right now, SESAC is the only PRO (Performing Rights Organization) that pays on EVERY single use, 100% of the time. They make all their composers watermark the material and have a company track every usage. But, because of this, the payment for each usage is much smaller. But you are guaranteed to get paid for every use. With ASCAP and BMI, you aren't guaranteed to get paid for every use, but as your stuff gets used more, your "estimated" uses goes up and you get a bigger chunk of the "finite" amount of money they collect every year.

I think this is what dave was referring to. You might see your track getting used, but if it never shows up on a cue sheet and never shows up in one of the surveys, you will never get paid for it.

And if you do get paid, that payment is split between all the people who own a piece of the song (as I listed earlier). So if one use pays $2. Then 25% of that goes to your co-publisher, like Pump, 25% goes to your publishing company, and 50% goes to you for your writers share.

and remember, this is separate from the up front licensing fees paid by the company who places the music. This is a back end payment that usually happens 1 or 2 years after the spot has been aired. The licensing fee, which is payed to the publishing company for the right to use the master recording, is usually split between the co-publisher (pump) and the primary owner/publisher (the composer).

If this feels like it's starting to get a little complicated, it's because it is. There is a whole field of legal practice specifically for this (copyright law). And these laws and regulations change as often as our tax code does... so I always say it is IMPERATIVE to have your own ENTERTAINMENT ATTORNEY who specifically specializes in copyright law. having an entertainment attorney who usually does recording contract negotiations or screenwriter script deals or modeling contracts is just as bad for you as getting a divorce lawyer to look over your copyright agreements!!! Spend the money, get the right person for the job and protect your interests. You'll be very happy you did.

[dcwave]

That's exactly what I am saying! HEHE. The sync fees upfront were nice, the back end from ASCAP (the 75%) was minuscule. The placements I got were on cable, underscore with no vocals, etc... and the payout was only a few dollars. But at least it aired a number of times so there were repeat checks

Someone I know that uses Pump told me that to make more than $30k per year required him to have about 70 songs submited per year with at least 10 placements per year. Its a numbers game. The more songs you can submit, the more chances you have of getting placed, the more placements you get, the more money you make. You want a full time income from library music - plan on working full time to write the songs, copyright them, and submit them. If you expect to make more that a couple of thousand dollars working a few hours here and there, think again.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by dcwave

That's exactly what I am saying! HEHE. The sync fees upfront were nice, the back end from ASCAP (the 75%) was minuscule. The placements I got were on cable, underscore with no vocals, etc... and the payout was only a few dollars. But at least it aired a number of times so there were repeat checks

Someone I know that uses Pump told me that to make more than $30k per year required him to have about 70 songs submited per year with at least 10 placements per year. Its a numbers game. The more songs you can submit, the more chances you have of getting placed, the more placements you get, the more money you make. You want a full time income from library music - plan on working full time to write the songs, copyright them, and submit them. If you expect to make more that a couple of thousand dollars working a few hours here and there, think again.

Very true. It is a numbers game. The more songs you have out there, the more chances you have of getting a placement. I know there are a couple composers who have about 30 or 40 CDs with us, and probably just about as many with a couple other library companies, and they've bragged to me that they make "well over" $100K a year just from their ASCAP royalties.

I also know a guy who writes big band jazz and 70's soul/funk, all with vocals (they are full songs) for a library that competes with pump. He's got mabye 5 CDs with the library and I've seen his BMI statements. He makes somewhere between $60K and $75K a year... but most of his stuff gets featured placement using the vocal and it might play for 5 minutes in a Network TV show (Cha-Ching$$$). He spends a lot of his own money making the CDs too, all the CDs are ALL LIVE players (real big band, real strings, etc) in nice studios. When you hear the songs you don't think they are library, you really think it's a CD. For him it's worth spending that money cuz he makes it back in a couple years with royalties.

So there are really people who can make a good living from it, I know a lot of them...but I will also say that they are a very small group of people. So to anyone interested in pursuing this, don't expect to be making crazy money and retire off one CD's worth of material. But it is a nice "secondary" income stream once you get a couple CDs of material working for you.