Login / Register
 
Tunesat Reliability
New Reply
Subscribe
jazz4
Thread Starter
#1
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #1
Gear maniac
 
jazz4's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 220

Thread Starter
jazz4 is offline
Tunesat Reliability

Hey guys,

I've got this free trial for tunesat - the TV/Web monitoring service that seeks out the broadcast usage of your tunes.

I just thought I'd try the free trial and wouldn't pay for the service and now some things have comeback which I am unsure about:

A track of mine was used on a reality show called 'Hillbillies for Hire' (it's as bad as it sounds). They sent me a little audio clip of the show where my music appears. It was interesting - I found out early and got to hear the result of the usage, which is rare.

Now however, they've come back and said the same track has now been used on that new Dog the Bounty Hunter show AND a new animated series called 'Bounty Hunters' Starring Larry the Cable guy, however the audio clips they've sent for me to listen to are just the same audio snippets from 'Hillbillies for Hire'. This has me thinking they haven't monitored properly...

If they're stating this track is being used in multiple popular shows, I'd like to know for definite to save confusion and see if the usage is legit.

Does anyone have any experience with tunesat and if it's actually reliable? If they're coming back and claiming usage of my music in these shows when it's not the case, no wonder the PRO's don't want to use their service.

Hope that makes sense, it's kind of awkward to explain if you have no experience with tunesat.
#2
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #2
Lives for gear
 
Amber's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 1,429

Amber is offline
What library are you with that gets those tracks placed? And what type of music is it? Not your nostalgic John Williams type stuff?

I guess you could always spend you days away from the DAW watching awful TV.
jazz4
Thread Starter
#3
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #3
Gear maniac
 
jazz4's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 220

Thread Starter
jazz4 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amber View Post
What library are you with that gets those tracks placed? And what type of music is it? Not your nostalgic John Williams type stuff?

I guess you could always spend you days away from the DAW watching awful TV.
I think it's with Jingle Punks. I asked them to check and they said the cue sheets haven't been filed yet so they wont know...

The tracks were slide blues/rock stuff.

I've emailed tunesat...not sure if they'll get back to me.
#4
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Amber's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 1,429

Amber is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazz4 View Post
I think it's with Jingle Punks. I asked them to check and they said the cue sheets haven't been filed yet so they wont know...

The tracks were slide blues/rock stuff.

I've emailed tunesat...not sure if they'll get back to me.

Yeah Jingle Punks seem to love that slide guitar redneck sound.

Good luck with it! Maybe DrBill or Etch A Sketch might shed some light on this for you.
#5
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #5
Lives for gear
 
VitaEtMusica's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Location: Utah
Posts: 846

VitaEtMusica is offline
I use Tunesat everyday. It's pretty reliable, though it does miss uses every now and then. What you are describing makes me think your tune was being used in a promo for an unrelated show rather than the show itself. Are you using the feature that allows you to hear the clip starting X amount of seconds before and after?
jazz4
Thread Starter
#6
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #6
Gear maniac
 
jazz4's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 220

Thread Starter
jazz4 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaEtMusica View Post
I use Tunesat everyday. It's pretty reliable, though it does miss uses every now and then. What you are describing makes me think your tune was being used in a promo for an unrelated show rather than the show itself. Are you using the feature that allows you to hear the clip starting X amount of seconds before and after?
Yeah, I can play the audio clips but they aren't matching up.

The audio clips for the other bounty hunter shows are the exact same audio clips from 'Hillbillies for Hire'. -- I saw this show and heard my music in it, too.

It's like they've monitored one show (Hillbillies for Hire) as three seperate programmes.

It's the same track, too.

Does this make sense? It's pretty confusing.
#7
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #7
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: So Cal
Posts: 15,080

drBill is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amber View Post
Maybe DrBill or Etch A Sketch might shed some light on this for you.
I've got no personal "hands on" experience. I know libraries I work for use it. I haven't used them personally. Too busy trying to write the stuff....

The one thing I don't like about Tunesat's method is trying to find authorship through musical means ala shazam or the youtube method. Every time I upload a video with my OWN original music to youtube, it slaps me with a warning that I'm using someone else's copyrighted music. That is terrifying for anyone who relies on accurate reporting to earn a living. This is just a non-accurate way of defining the owner and fixing the problem. As bad as cue sheets are, Tunesat COULD be potentially worse.

With the use of so many loops, synth sounds, etc., and the seemingly MILLIONS of sound alike and derivative titles using a single synth note being released for "underscore" every year, there are for SURE going to be misfires. Why not put a unique digital serial number imbedded into each piece of music that runs the length of the play? Problem solved. It would give author, publisher, PRO, artist, etc. along with length of time played. ACCURATELY. It would even solve the "re-titling" problems.

No, I think the powers that be don't WANT accurate reporting. That's the only logical explanation from my point of view. Have a nice chat with your PRO representative about THAT....
#8
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #8
Gear interested
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1

audiowoods is offline
Hi jazz4,

I'm sure someone from our tech support team will be in contact with you tomorrow but I think I can answer your question.

From time to time the broadcast scheduling data we receive from Tribune (TMS: Source For Entertainment Data From Movie Showtimes To Online Video Data) is different from what was actually broadcast. This is usually because a broadcaster changes their schedule on the fly and needs to notify Tribune so they can update their database. We receive these updates from Tribune every 2-3 weeks after broadcast which we then in turn use to immediately update our database.

I hope this answers your question. Check back in a couple of weeks and the show info for that detection should be automatically corrected in your TuneSat account.

Best Regards,
Chris Woods
COO, TuneSat
Quote
1
jazz4
Thread Starter
#9
21st July 2013
Old 21st July 2013
  #9
Gear maniac
 
jazz4's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 220

Thread Starter
jazz4 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiowoods View Post
Hi jazz4,

I'm sure someone from our tech support team will be in contact with you tomorrow but I think I can answer your question.

From time to time the broadcast scheduling data we receive from Tribune (TMS: Source For Entertainment Data From Movie Showtimes To Online Video Data) is different from what was actually broadcast. This is usually because a broadcaster changes their schedule on the fly and needs to notify Tribune so they can update their database. We receive these updates from Tribune every 2-3 weeks after broadcast which we then in turn use to immediately update our database.

I hope this answers your question. Check back in a couple of weeks and the show info for that detection should be automatically corrected in your TuneSat account.

Best Regards,
Chris Woods
COO, TuneSat
Thanks so much for getting in touch, Chris. Does this happen a lot on Tunesat? I'm thinking of joining after my free trial ends.
#10
24th July 2013
Old 24th July 2013
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Etch-A-Sketch's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,496

Etch-A-Sketch is offline
The company I work for uses Tunesat, but I do not use it personally, nor is it part of my job to use it. But I do know the company has found it to be very beneficial, if that helps at all.

Technically though, I would think Jingle Punks would be the one signing up for it and policing the uses for you. That's what publishers are for, right? If Jingle Punks is the publisher, I'm not sure there is much you can do on your own in the way of getting paid for unreported uses from a PRO, since as far as I know all such claims have to come from/go through the publisher. But I could be wrong about that...
__________________
Derek Jones
Audio Engineer - Producer - Composer
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/derek-jones/8/986/9b9



"We were working on Raiders [of the Lost Ark]. He [Ben Burt] told me that the sound source for opening the lid of the ark in the last reel was within 20'. I couldn't figure it out. It turned out to be lifting the back off the toilet above the water chamber, and slowing it down." -Tomlinson Holman
#11
24th July 2013
Old 24th July 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Etch-A-Sketch's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,496

Etch-A-Sketch is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Why not put a unique digital serial number imbedded into each piece of music that runs the length of the play? Problem solved. It would give author, publisher, PRO, artist, etc. along with length of time played. ACCURATELY. It would even solve the "re-titling" problems.

No, I think the powers that be don't WANT accurate reporting. That's the only logical explanation from my point of view. Have a nice chat with your PRO representative about THAT....
SESAC does that. They require (or they did, not sure if they still do) all music composed by SESAC composers/publishers to be watermarked with a specific watermarking tool they use. But if it's any consolation, we have had some issues with the watermarking (it is a PITA to do), I had to do it personally so I am speaking from experience. I am very glad the industry is switching to a fingerprinting scheme instead of a watermarking scheme... because that means I don't have to go back and watermark 100's of CDs that have been out for decades already... Not to mention in doing that only people that get a copy of the audio after I watermark it would show up in the watermark detection, the audio that was sent out decades ago and is still in use would still go unreported. So for that sake too, the fingerprinting technology is the most robust idea.

But ultimately the problem we all face is this... if ASCAP and BMI did 100% accurate reporting, then they would be changing the pay scales dramatically for all the uses to compensate anyway... So regardless of whether it's 100% accurate or its a survey, most people would be making about the same money regardless, since there is only a finite pool of money the PROs pull from every year to pay everyone.

In other words, if the PROs switched to 100% accurate reporting, the payouts per second of use would drop dramatically. So instead of making $10 for the 5 reported uses of a cue in a production on your usage report, you'd make $10 for the 300 accurately reported uses of the cue in that production on your usage report. There is no way the PROs could keep the payout rates the same and stay in business for more than a year if they switched to 100% accurate reporting. They would have to change the payout rates accordingly.
#12
24th July 2013
Old 24th July 2013
  #12
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: So Cal
Posts: 15,080

drBill is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
SESAC does that. They require (or they did, not sure if they still do) all music composed by SESAC composers/publishers to be watermarked with a specific watermarking tool they use. But if it's any consolation, we have had some issues with the watermarking (it is a PITA to do), I had to do it personally so I am speaking from experience. I am very glad the industry is switching to a fingerprinting scheme instead of a watermarking scheme... because that means I don't have to go back and watermark 100's of CDs that have been out for decades already... Not to mention in doing that only people that get a copy of the audio after I watermark it would show up in the watermark detection, the audio that was sent out decades ago and is still in use would still go unreported. So for that sake too, the fingerprinting technology is the most robust idea.

But ultimately the problem we all face is this... if ASCAP and BMI did 100% accurate reporting, then they would be changing the pay scales dramatically for all the uses to compensate anyway... So regardless of whether it's 100% accurate or its a survey, most people would be making about the same money regardless, since there is only a finite pool of money the PROs pull from every year to pay everyone.

In other words, if the PROs switched to 100% accurate reporting, the payouts per second of use would drop dramatically. So instead of making $10 for the 5 reported uses of a cue in a production on your usage report, you'd make $10 for the 300 accurately reported uses of the cue in that production on your usage report. There is no way the PROs could keep the payout rates the same and stay in business for more than a year if they switched to 100% accurate reporting. They would have to change the payout rates accordingly.
Understood Derek, but if we move FORWARD with watermarking, things in 20 years will be much better and more accurate. If we compromise to make things easier for the short term, then we will be in the same place we are now in 20 years.

It's just my opinion of course, and open for discussion.

As for the payouts by PRO's, I think you would see some radical shifts of money distribution if they had exact reporting. But again, that's just my opinion, and if they change up their pay scales as you have accurately noted, they will probably shrink TV/Cable/Internet underscore useage down to next to nothing so they can keep song play up and profitable. BUT, and this is the kicker, with exact reporting, they would no doubt have a civil war on their hands as TV/Film composers ACCURATELY see the reality of their payouts and go ballistic.

All that said, I still think watermarking is a good thing. It would solve a LOT of problems. Well, except for you having to go back and watermark all your back catalog.... But to help out, I will tell RM that he needs to hire several attractive assistants to help you out with the watermarking fiasco.... LOL

bp
#13
24th July 2013
Old 24th July 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 
VitaEtMusica's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Location: Utah
Posts: 846

VitaEtMusica is offline
It would have to be something that a Harvest Media type would have to integrate into their system. I've heard talk, but it always comes down to back catalog, the myriad of software/search engines that are being used and the millions of cd's floating around. I'd say fingerprinting is still the best solution and something that should be improved... not time to start all over again.

You have to take into account that every time a massive production music company makes a decision like changing metadata, going with fingerprinting, integrating a new search engine, etc. it is a HUUUUUUUUGE undertaking that costs them 100's of thousands of dollars. Fingerprinting vs watermarking were weighed and considered, and watermarking was just not feasible. Not to mention, when tossed in with other music, fx and dialogue was not 100% accurate either.
#14
25th July 2013
Old 25th July 2013
  #14
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: So Cal
Posts: 15,080

drBill is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaEtMusica View Post
It would have to be something that a Harvest Media type would have to integrate into their system. I've heard talk, but it always comes down to back catalog, the myriad of software/search engines that are being used and the millions of cd's floating around. I'd say fingerprinting is still the best solution and something that should be improved... not time to start all over again.

You have to take into account that every time a massive production music company makes a decision like changing metadata, going with fingerprinting, integrating a new search engine, etc. it is a HUUUUUUUUGE undertaking that costs them 100's of thousands of dollars. Fingerprinting vs watermarking were weighed and considered, and watermarking was just not feasible. Not to mention, when tossed in with other music, fx and dialogue was not 100% accurate either.
I think you're missing the point. I always hear the same argument about "how hard it is" to implement into older catalogs. But the two are not mutually exclusive. We can do both. The powers that be could put both fingerprinting and watermarking into play immediately - at the same time, with no watermark back cataloging needed for plays going on currently in 2013, but all new music gets watermarked and in 20 years, we'll be rocking, with virtually all material in use being watermarked and all the fuzzy-ness and "special" math that plagues us now gone - history. Gradually, fingerprinting will fade into the horizon as an inaccurate and outmoded technology.

If all fingerprinting had to do was to identify top 40 songs with vocals, it would probably be pretty good. But for underscoring, no so much. In my experience "fingerprinting" is never going to be accurate, and the larger the body of recorded works become, and the more composers start relying on loops, synth pads, etc. for scoring, the less accurate fingerprinting becomes. Even if we head towards a 100% compliance with watermarks in the future, older material can still be fingerprinted if the owners don't want or can't update their catalogs. It's the best of both worlds, with a positive push towards an ACCURATE and fairer world with watermarking.

I can't think of a single reason a composer would prefer fingerprinting over watermarking. I can think of a dozen reasons that PRO's would though. For those in doubt, try uploading a video with an original piece of your own music to youtube, and watch it get tagged as copyright infringement. That would never happen with a watermark.
Quote
1
#15
25th July 2013
Old 25th July 2013
  #15
Lives for gear
 
VitaEtMusica's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Location: Utah
Posts: 846

VitaEtMusica is offline
I get what you're saying, but it's twice as expensive to implement and could potentially be redundant and confusing. This train has left the station, I'm afraid.
#16
26th July 2013
Old 26th July 2013
  #16
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: So Cal
Posts: 15,080

drBill is offline
It's a sorry state when the majority feel a second best and compromised solution is our only option.....
jazz4
Thread Starter
#17
26th July 2013
Old 26th July 2013
  #17
Gear maniac
 
jazz4's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 220

Thread Starter
jazz4 is offline
Now I'm getting matches on the reality show 'Househunters' but the audio clips can't be played.

Gotta say, it's not the best experience with Tunesat.

The original issue has also not been rectified. If I was paying for it, I'd be pretty bummed out.

Could be a really useful service to me, if it worked.
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.