Royalty free libraries.....good idea?

[Matt_2010]

Are royalty-free libraries a good idea for submitting music too? Obviously, im assuming theres no royalties involved for any usage (duh....), but ive been told these are becoming more popular now due to higher volumes of sales? anyone here have any good experiences with any royalty-free production music libraries?

Also, is it possible to have the same track with a royalty-free non-exclusive library and also a non-exclusive library that will generate royalites? (if that makes sense....)

Many Thanks!!

[Midiscore]

Ive been selling my tracks on royalty free sites for a year and a month now. The maximum ive ever made from Royalty free music in one month was $3700 US but usually it averages out to about $1500 (from all sites combined ofcouse) per month ,

i have about 400+ tracks in a variety of styles ranging from film - to kids and ethnic...

if ure gonna get on the Royalty free wagon i can give u a few recommendations ... basically shit that i had to go through and figure out through trial and error ..

0) u need at least 20-30 good tracks to be considered for most good sites

1)
First of , DO NOT sell your music exclusively , unless its a lot of money youre beng offered upfront .. they buy it out cuz they know in the longrun thell make alot more then they invested in to it (obviously)

2) NEVER deal with RF sites that fingerprint or trace your music.
here is a lil story . A good friend of mine , a composer that also sells the same tracks all over the place was banned from a pretty profitable site 2 weeks ago , because a client bought a track from that site , put it under his youtube video and his youtube account was blocked for a few days because of copyright infringement ..
this is what happened .. my friend uploaded his 100 tracks to a whole bunch of royaltyfree sites (non exclusively) .. and one company called audiomicro (without his consent) fingerprinted his tracks through a company called "go digital" in order to make extra royalties from plays on youtube .. but since my friend is selling the same tracks all over the place it created problems , cuz people that bought the same track from any other place other than audiomicro were told that they are using the music illegally and that its copyrighted by audiomicro. Basically he was kicked out and threatened to get sued from a couple of good sites . thank god he figured out that by pitching the tracks up or down a semitone bypasses the godigital system , im any case YOUR FIRST Question to RF companies should be to you use Godigtal or similar services to track music .. if yes , avoid them

3) Quality sells . any track of great production quality will sell.. crap doesn't sell .. band in a box compositions will collect dust server dust and will never sell.

4) Longer tracks sell better : when i started uploading a year ago i had a whole bunch of pretty well produced tracks that were around 1 min long and rearly over 1:30 sec... after no sales for awhile i started comparing my tracks to others . production level was the same or sometimes better , .. then i realized that if a buyer has 2 similar tracks that work for his "film" from different composers... he'll buy the longer one , just because ppl like MORE .. .. i had to reopen all my tracks (cubase projects) and extend them which was a pain in the ass .. but tracks started selling after that .

5) positive / Negative music .. Based on my 400 tracks i can safely say that positive / optimistic music sells A LOT more than mystery / tension / drama .. it may be just me ... actually i think that there are more people are trying to attract people / costumers by using positive / optimistic music then to scare them away .

6) BE in one style per track and consistent .. if you wanna show all your harmonic / acoustic genius in one track , ull never sell it ..
i find that people are looking for one mood or feeling per track .. so dont jump from happy to sad , to mysterious back in to happy all in one track .. chances are no one will have a custom video or presentation to fit YOUr track .. and even if they like how it starts they wont buy it cuz u switched gears . Id say keep to one mood , one tempo , one key and if u started in 4/4 stick to it your intricate time switches will probably confuse the editor cutting the track to his video

7) you dont need 500 tracks to make money , you need 30-50 tracks that sell .. last month i made 350 $ from the sale of one track (it sold like 30 times on different sites) .. so some tracks sell and some don't .. most sites have statistics somewhere ..there u can see the most popular or most sold tracks .. don't invent the wheel , listen to the best and copy..

8) RF music isn't about expressing your musical abilities . it is pure commercial selling out . if u can live with it .. ull be making extra money each month .. if you get attached to each 2 minute track as if its a masterpiece .. ure screwed .. make it sound great just dont get emotionally attached. imagine someone using it to showcase a new Toilet design ..

Chances are that most of your tracks will end up under piece of shit crapilly produced home/indie films/videos or websites any ways .. (atleast around 300 videos with my music in them on youtube now are mostly shit. if u can swallow that, and just be happy that u sold the same track for the 100th time for 34.99 .. then RF music is for you.

If you think that each track is a piece of art.. don't even bother wasting your time with royalty free libraries. If you get offended easily or would be upset if your music ends up in a cheap porno .. dont bother with RF music.

I sold my soul a long time ago and am in it for the money , and extra 1500+/month for something that i did a year ago is a very warm and comforting thought for me.

9) ANYTHING SELLS , u can even imagine the weird shit that ive sold ..
stuff like a 3 minute tracks of aggressively strumming a distorted guitar .. (i cant play guitar) some one bought it ...a couple of times.
u just never know what stuff will be useful for .

10) DESCRIBE YOUR MUSIC using as many keywords as you can ..
cuz pople dont usually search for such things as " fortunate meeting in europe" " thell search for something like " romance " So make sure u have that freaking word in the description or keywords. I think people looking for a particular track can only think about about their own production , so if their video or website is about fishing , they wont stray too far from that while searching . so if your track has the word "fishing" in the description .. you win and YOUR track it the first musical association to their video .. prior to that their mind may have been completely empty of music . So without going overboard , come up with any possible scenario where your music would or could be used.

11)

there are a lot of Royalty Free sites online , here are some that sell well for me personally


musicloops.com
neosounds.com
soundtaxi.net
coolstockmusic.com
themusicase.com
revostock.com

most of the $ i earn with royalty free comes from these sites ..

below is my paypal screen shot from this month ,.. a few more payments should come in by the end of the month ..

hope u find this useful .. best !

[temetrepo]

Wow, some great advice

[Matt_2010]

Thnx for the great reply, some v.good advice in there

thats not the first time ive heard something negative about AudioMicro either....

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by Midiscore

2) NEVER deal with RF sites that fingerprint or trace your music.
here is a lil story ...and one company called audiomicro (without his consent) fingerprinted his tracks through a company called "go digital" in order to make extra royalties from plays on youtube .. in any case YOUR FIRST Question to RF companies should be to you use Godigtal or similar services to track music .. if yes , avoid them

This is why I've always stayed away from royalty free. It's not that the tracks are royalty free, it's that the company WILL NOT pay you the royalties!!! To me that's false representation and is basically stealing.

If they watermarked the tracks so THEY could make "extra" royalties from youtube plays.... that means that they are already making royalties and want to make EXTRA! Well then they really aren't a royalty free library now are they? And in doing so they are scamming the composers.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

This is why I've always stayed away from royalty free. It's not that the tracks are royalty free, it's that the company WILL NOT pay you the royalties!!! To me that's false representation and is basically stealing.

If they watermarked the tracks so THEY could make "extra" royalties from youtube plays.... that means that they are already making royalties and want to make EXTRA! Well then they really aren't a royalty free library now are they? And in doing so they are scamming the composers.

I think you're missing the point. It's royalty free to the buyers of the music - not to the composers.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

but it's always royalty free to the buyers as far as I know. It's the broadcasters that have to pay the royalties, not the buyers/producers of the spot the music is used in.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

taken from the "partners in rhyme"/"Musicloops" website.

we do not require you to submit cue sheets or report to any of the performing rights organizations, no matter how big the project.

So if that is the case, then the composers are not making any royalties.

Yet, if some of these RF libraries are secretly watermarking the tracks so THEY can collect royalties without the composer knowing (and how would the composer know, the song has never been added to his/her account with his PRO!?!) then that is kind of shady don't you think? And how would you find out about it if the company were doing it behind your back? You'd have to wait for a situation similar to what Midiscore describes in order to be alerted that it is happening. Even if the company says they aren't, what's to stop them from doing it anyway? There is Soooo much money involved with royalties, it would be hard for the companies to NOT do something like this.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

taken from the "partners in rhyme"/"Musicloops" website.



So if that is the case, then the composers are not making any royalties.

Semantics. They are making an up front licensing "royalty" (if you will) from the intial sale/license. Evidently no back end though. Although the library does not "require" a user to register a cue sheet, any broadcaster WILL. It will be on the list of deliverables with any producer of any repute. So, that's really a mute point IMO.

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

Yet, if some of these RF libraries are secretly watermarking the tracks so THEY can collect royalties without the composer knowing (and how would the composer know, the song has never been added to his/her account with his PRO!?!) then that is kind of shady don't you think? And how would you find out about it if the company were doing it behind your back? You'd have to wait for a situation similar to what Midiscore describes in order to be alerted that it is happening. Even if the company says they aren't, what's to stop them from doing it anyway? There is Soooo much money involved with royalties, it would be hard for the companies to NOT do something like this.

I'd agree with you 100% about this. Very Shady. But that's a BIG if that you're proposing, and it's a fools game. You'd best know your business associates I think, although working with "legit" libraries is no guarantee. I've had legit libraries that you know well that have put themselves down as partial or full composer on a cue sheet before. I've had PBS and CBS do the same. Only to cry "we didn't know" when confronted. That's a BS defense by anyones viewpoint. They are not fooling anyone.

There's NOTHING stopping ANYONE from stealing / relicensing / abusing your rights as a composer. Not with fly-by-night companies, not with legit long standing companies, not with broadcasters, not with the PRO's. You're on your own as a composer. Take advantage of all opportunities - that's my suggestion. If you hide in fear that someone might steal your money, then you'll never make any. You're going to get ripped off. But look at it this way, the more you're getting ripped off, the more you're making.

[Midiscore]

Ill b brief cuz im on a mobile phone . Brodcasters do require cuesheets but u forgot what i said in my post . 99 % of the music will never b broadcasted on radio and tv . Trust my experience ... Please ive sold a lot of tracks in a year... Im in canada any by canadian law EVERY single composition trat you write is automatically registered with socan (pro) u dont have to register physicaly . But it is a very gray area BECAUSE , for example i released 2 sample libraries (construction kits) through bigfish .. The sample cds contain full tracks and elements that make them up. How is that different from royalty free ? The only diffetence is that one is called SAMPLE LIBRARY and the other royalty free music ... In both cases i as the creator/composer am not promissed royalties and make money only from direct sales.

[beatsuite.com]

Some great advice there from Midiscore, particularly the part about sticking to one 'theme' or 'mood'. We have a composer on our books that churns out bucketloads of well-produced content and sends it in for review, but it can go from Bhangra to Nu Metal in the space of 8 bars and it's just totally unsellable.

The composers that do best for us have high production values, stick to one 'theme' or 'emotion' with each track and don't try to be too avant garde. If you're pitching direct to BMW for their next 3-Series advert campaign, great, think outside the box; but for library music, you're best off sticking to what people know.

He's right too to say that most of the stuff we license doesn't end up on international broadcasts, in general they're used in corporate videos or for promotional websites etc. Big jobs do come along but they're not something you should rely on as a composer. A steady stream of sales for small to medium projects is what I'd say you should be aiming for. If you have a decent body of well-produced, fresh sounding work then you definitely have the potential to make some extra cash.

Drop us an email Matt if you want to have a chat and maybe submit some work for review.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

So my question is then, do RF libraries submit your composer info and publisher info when selling a track for the purpose of broadcast?

It just seems like, from my poking around anyway, that the composer is never really mentioned anywhere. Is that incorrect?

Also on most RF sites I see the tracks going for $100~$300 a pop. How does that include a performance royalty buyout when a composer would probably make $2000 or $3000 from performance royalties on the track? Do the prices change when a person is purchasing the track for use in public broadcast? Or is it the same flat fee whether you are using the track for a home movie or an internationally syndicated TV show?

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

How does that include a performance royalty buyout when a composer would probably make $2000 or $3000 from performance royalties on the track?

Hey Etch, I don't really have any tracks in these RF libraries, (save one, but I got a large advance for that one), so I don't really have a horse in this RF race, BUT.....

Where are these $2000-3000 performance royalties? I've been doing this a looooooonnnnnnnggggg time, and have never seen a one-time performance royalty that even came close to your numbers. Knock off a zero and you're still on the North side of every-day reality.

From what Midiscore has shared, based on the number of tracks he has in these libraries, I'd say the payout is roughly comparable to what you'd get from a PRO in a traditional library setup. Maybe better.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by drBill

Hey Etch, I don't really have any tracks in these RF libraries, (save one, but I got a large advance for that one), so I don't really have a horse in this RF race, BUT.....

Where are these $2000-3000 performance royalties? I've been doing this a looooooonnnnnnnggggg time, and have never seen a one-time performance royalty that even came close to your numbers. Knock off a zero and you're still on the North side of every-day reality.

From what Midiscore has shared, based on the number of tracks he has in these libraries, I'd say the payout is roughly comparable to what you'd get from a PRO in a traditional library setup. Maybe better.

Really? My experiences have been different than yours then. To each there own.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

Really? My experiences have been different than yours then. To each there own.

The pleeeeeeeeaaaaaaassssseeeeee share. I long for your experience. thumbsup

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

Really? My experiences have been different than yours then. To each there own.

Originally Posted by drBill

The pleeeeeeeeaaaaaaassssseeeeee share. I long for your experience. thumbsup

Man, I was hoping for an answer Deerek (Etch). Honestly. My reply was not a dis on your experience, merely a jaw dropping "wtf" based on my personal experience. If I was pulling in those kinds of numbers for my compositions (which compared to normal library fare range from above average to phenomenal IMO) I'd be living in Monte Carlo or retired in Rio or something.

I'm in over 10 libraries. Only 1 is a RF library - and they actually paid me a nice advance. I'd love to hear more about your experiences that counter mine - because, the library biz is not looking good too me right now. With 2600+ titles in my BMI catalog (granted, many are duplicates with "alternate" names), BMI is just NOT making it for me.

Care to share? Any thoughts would be much appreciated. Thx.

bp

[beatsuite.com]

Most of the music sold through royalty-free libraries such as ourselves is not intended for broadcast, these tracks are for corporate videos or websites or independent films etc. I imagine each library is slightly different, but we offer a variety of types of license to cater for different customers.

The list price on the website is for a 'Standard License', this has been designed to offer a cost-effective solution for the majority of our customers and has some limitations (ie duplication up to 500 copies). Broadcast is not covered by the standard license, you would pay more for that. Interestingly though, in that case the composer & publisher would be able to claim royalties if they are PRO-affiliated. In our case they would also get 50% of the original license fee as well. So strictly speaking, royalty-free isn't royalty-free if it's being used in a broadcast context and the composer is PRO-registered. The royalties aren't paid by the production company however, they come from the coffers of the relevant PRO, which is topped up from their license fees. The broadcaster submits a list of all music played over a certain period and the relevant people get their cheques in the post. That's how it should work anyway, but in reality most of it goes to Bono...

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by drBill

With 2600+ titles in my BMI catalog (granted, many are duplicates with "alternate" names), BMI is just NOT making it for me.

Switch to ASCAP. Seriously. With 2600 titles you should be making decent money. It also depends on the libraries your music is with. Some libraries are better at certain types of placements and so on. But you should call ascap and talk to them about how much your payments would be based on the types of uses you get. I think that's just about the best advice I can give you. BMI has its pluses, but TV/commercial broadcast is NOT one of them.

There might be a lot of uses that BMI just doesn't pay you on and so they don't even show up in your statements! I know I've been getting paid on a couple songs for years that I cowrote with a BMI writer. He hasn't seen anything from those same songs.

Another friend of mine is about to switch. He just got a national ad campaign. When he called BMI to see how much he was going to get paid, they asked how the music was used, and based on that they estimated he would probably make nothing, to a few hundred dollars. When he called ascap, and told them how his music was getting used, they said he'd probably get around $10,000 to $20,000. YMMV. You should know how your PRO pays for the typical types of uses you get.

I just saw one of my tracks used in a Laker's ad a few weeks ago for the NBA finals on one of the networks (NBC or ABC I forget which one it was). Not sure if it was national ad for the Lakers/NBA or just local a ad for the Lakers games here at Staples Center...but because of the publicity of the finals, even if it was local I'll probably get some amount of money from ASCAP. If they aired it nationally, watch out!

And please, others reading on, dont' feel like I'm bashing BMI or anything. They are great and for some people they pay more than ASCAP would. But it's up to the individual to really research both and find out which would be better for that one person. My co-writer friend that is BMI doesn't want to change because he makes way more money from BMI than he would from ASCAP on the songs he writes with his band when they are played on College and Nationally Affiliated radio stations. So for him, personally, BMI is the right choice. Every person that writes music should really sit down and look at the rates for the types of use they get with their music and decide which PRO would be better for them.

[Etch-A-Sketch]

Originally Posted by beatsuite.com

Most of the music sold through royalty-free libraries such as ourselves is not intended for broadcast, these tracks are for corporate videos or websites or independent films etc. I imagine each library is slightly different, but we offer a variety of types of license to cater for different customers.

The list price on the website is for a 'Standard License', this has been designed to offer a cost-effective solution for the majority of our customers and has some limitations (ie duplication up to 500 copies). Broadcast is not covered by the standard license, you would pay more for that. Interestingly though, in that case the composer & publisher would be able to claim royalties if they are PRO-affiliated. In our case they would also get 50% of the original license fee as well. So strictly speaking, royalty-free isn't royalty-free if it's being used in a broadcast context and the composer is PRO-registered. The royalties aren't paid by the production company however, they come from the coffers of the relevant PRO, which is topped up from their license fees. The broadcaster submits a list of all music played over a certain period and the relevant people get their cheques in the post. That's how it should work anyway, but in reality most of it goes to Bono...

Luke, thanks for the great post! It answered a lot of my questions and I'm really happy to see that, at least beatsuite (not sure about other RF libraries), will list composers for broadcast use and has a different rate card for those uses.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch

Switch to ASCAP. Seriously. With 2600 titles you should be making decent money. It also depends on the libraries your music is with. Some libraries are better at certain types of placements and so on. But you should call ascap and talk to them about how much your payments would be based on the types of uses you get. I think that's just about the best advice I can give you. BMI has its pluses, but TV/commercial broadcast is NOT one of them.

There might be a lot of uses that BMI just doesn't pay you on and so they don't even show up in your statements! I know I've been getting paid on a couple songs for years that I cowrote with a BMI writer. He hasn't seen anything from those same songs.

Another friend of mine is about to switch. He just got a national ad campaign. When he called BMI to see how much he was going to get paid, they asked how the music was used, and based on that they estimated he would probably make nothing, to a few hundred dollars. When he called ascap, and told them how his music was getting used, they said he'd probably get around $10,000 to $20,000. YMMV. You should know how your PRO pays for the typical types of uses you get.

I just saw one of my tracks used in a Laker's ad a few weeks ago for the NBA finals on one of the networks (NBC or ABC I forget which one it was). Not sure if it was national ad for the Lakers/NBA or just local a ad for the Lakers games here at Staples Center...but because of the publicity of the finals, even if it was local I'll probably get some amount of money from ASCAP. If they aired it nationally, watch out!

And please, others reading on, dont' feel like I'm bashing BMI or anything. They are great and for some people they pay more than ASCAP would. But it's up to the individual to really research both and find out which would be better for that one person. My co-writer friend that is BMI doesn't want to change because he makes way more money from BMI than he would from ASCAP on the songs he writes with his band when they are played on College and Nationally Affiliated radio stations. So for him, personally, BMI is the right choice. Every person that writes music should really sit down and look at the rates for the types of use they get with their music and decide which PRO would be better for them.

Hey Derek, much thanks. Good things to think over, and after I come out of a few very busy days, I'm going to re-read and digest it. Again, much appreciated. thumbsup

bp

[djbabyboi]

great thread. any good quality music libraries that are not royalty free?

[Etch-A-Sketch]

tons.

I usually send people to the PMA as a starting point. The PMA is kind of like the RIAA for the library industry. There is a list of the libraries that belong to the PMA. From there you will probably find out about other companies not on the list, but it is a good starting point anyway.

Production Music Association

[Mylar]

Very informative thread—thanks guys.

So, are you saying that you're listing the exact same track, with the same title and artist name, with multiple libraries? Do you have some sort of contract that stipulates pricing so that the libraries aren't undercutting one another?

And do you sign on for a length of time, or is it permanent? -in other words, can you withdraw a track from a library?

[ButchP]

Bill,

Check out SESAC.I am definitely getting out of my BMI contract ASAP.I wish I knew this BEFORE I started with EX.

Then check out that company I told you about that does watermarking (and finger printing)

DigSound is a community for music professionals

Let me know if you are into it.They had a beta program going on.I'll hook you up with the owner if it's over.


BP

[ButchP]

Originally Posted by Mylar

Very informative thread—thanks guys.

So, are you saying that you're listing the exact same track, with the same title and artist name, with multiple libraries? ...................

IMO the shite is gonna hit the FAN when all the PRO's get their fingerprinting chops together.Those re-titled tracks from non exclusive libs(and the composers!) could be in major litigation!Looks like the big exclusives could come out on top and sink the mavericks.

BP

[topperf]

Great info and great replies thumbsup

I'm a European guy with 35+ tracks that I'd have no issues with putting up on these RF sites, but I'm not completely sure on how to 'go about' it.
You basically just contact these different places, send them your songs and hope you get accepted?

And I'm not sure I understand how you can put the same track up different places?

Thnx!