What to charge for live recordings?

[slondo1]

Hey guys, I'm new here. I've got a question regarding charging for live recordings. I've recently assembled a rig at the venue I where I work and am ready to go live. Here's the rig:

Yamaha M7CL48
16 tracks direct out via TDIF
MOTU 2408mk1
PowerMac G4
24-bit 44.1khz in Reaper

Before you state so, yes, this is a legacy system. I had to build on the cheap, and I assembled this for somewhere around $400 (the M7 was already in place at the venue!). That being said, the quality is great, and more than adequate for a CD or digital release. I can slap the recordings on a USB drive, and take them home to mix them on my better setup if the clients wish. Otherwise I can just upload them to my personal website for easy distribution to the artist.

The question is what to charge? I live in Lexington, KY. The music scene is small here, but not non-existent. That being said, gigs around here don't usually pay much and musicians don't tend to have a lot of money to throw around (I'm one myself). I'm thinking ~$75 to $100 for the tracking, double it if they want me to mix it. Maybe even add a budget option of one song for $15. I do have the advantage of putting it on the venue's credit card system, making it more of an impulse buy. What do you guys think?

[joelpatterson]

Well... whatever someone is willing to give you for it... if you're in three figure territory, for a local-style band, for a CD of their set, you're doing well, believe me...

[Andy Hamm]

Scale is $250 a show for a walk in. I'd make it so patron's could buy it on their way out, and give the performer's a cut, if you wanted to get entrepreneurial.

[slondo1]

I've got plenty of reasons why I'm not considering selling CDs of the performance immediately after. For one, most of the time I'll be working FOH, monitors, lights, or any combo of the three. Often I'm the lone tech guy. After the performances, I have to clean up and disassemble the stage. About 90% of the time when I finally clock out, there's no patrons left in the bar, which means I'd have to trains someone else to use the equipment, pay them to sell them, etc etc. It's not viable at this time.

I'm hopefully looking to market it as a promotional tool for bands rather than something to sell to patrons. However, I'd definitely build in legal language to create a "Best of..." locals CD that I would sell at a later point.

[John Suitcase]

Since it's already in place, you can be low ball on the tracking side, I think $75 is pretty fair. I'd charge a good deal more for mixing, probably $40/hour, if you can get it. I know local bands are usually broke, but you might be able to works something with the bar, depending on what the bands get paid. If they're getting cash off the door, and play a killer set, you can probably get them to give up some cash.

I'd track everything, keep it 'til everyone gets paid and settle with the bands. Then, if they don't buy, delete the files. That puts some pressure on them to 'do it now', plus they'll be excited if they felt good about the gig. And if they've been drinking, hanging with friends, etc, they may be amiable to preserving the magic.

When I do a live thing, I usually charge a couple hundred for the tracking night, then I'll make a simple mix of the whole set as mp3 for them. They listen for a week or two and decide which songs to finish, then we spend however long it takes on the mix, at my normal hourly rate.

Works pretty well, but if I had a setup in place every night, I'm sure I could get lots of impulse buys, especially at a lower price.

The sound guy at a bar here in town used to charge $50-$75 to run a stereo CD of the band's set. Sounded ok, but not usable for releases, since it was just a mix of the FOH mix, with minimal attention paid to it!

[JEGG]

I think you need to rethink your business model, even if it's an informal one.

People have money for what they choose to spend it on. Some clients with lots of discretionary money have an even larger "personal problem" spending money than those less well off with "real money problems."

You may find that your services are more valued when you charge a rate that has some realistic component of value-and that's your time and skill.

You'll think twice when people start to make money (in promotion of performances, promotion of the venue, etc.) off an undervalued recording. And depending on income from purchases of files or a CD is asking to be taken advantage of.

Sorry, mine is probably a minority opinion. So far, anyway. And this assumes you know how to make a professional recording.

[Andy Hamm]

Yup, good point. So maybe another angle is to make radio spots using the recorded trax and charge the Venue.

Originally Posted by JEGG

I think you need to rethink your business model, even if it's an informal one.

People have money for what they choose to spend it on. Some clients with lots of discretionary money have an even larger "personal problem" spending money than those less well off with "real money problems."

You may find that your services are more valued when you charge a rate that has some realistic component of value-and that's your time and skill.

You'll think twice when people start to make money (in promotion of performances, promotion of the venue, etc.) off an undervalued recording. And depending on income from purchases of files or a CD is asking to be taken advantage of.

Sorry, mine is probably a minority opinion. So far, anyway. And this assumes you know how to make a professional recording.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by slondo1

I've got plenty of reasons why I'm not considering selling CDs of the performance immediately after. For one, most of the time I'll be working FOH, monitors, lights, or any combo of the three. Often I'm the lone tech guy. After the performances, I have to clean up and disassemble the stage. About 90% of the time when I finally clock out, there's no patrons left in the bar, which means I'd have to trains someone else to use the equipment, pay them to sell them, etc etc. It's not viable at this time.

I'm hopefully looking to market it as a promotional tool for bands rather than something to sell to patrons. However, I'd definitely build in legal language to create a "Best of..." locals CD that I would sell at a later point.

OK-From your first post, I was about to tell you why your financial model was seriously flawed, and that you were asking to be taken advantage of.

This information changes everything. You are really too overburdened with your other tasks (!!) to reliably deliver a professional recording, and thus charge professional rates.

At the same time, if you charge "non professional rates" (whatever that means: cheap, I guess), you are asking to be taken advantage of.

You will regret your undervalued recording being used for promotional use of the band, and relying on file and product fees is doomed to, again, being taken advantage of. Do not depend on file and product sales! You and your client don't really have control over what happens to the files when they are broadcast, ripped from a CD, etc. You should be paid for your time and work. People have money for what they want to spend it on. And, your "cheapie" recording is not going to represent you well at all.........

I'm not sure what to tell you. Perhaps not to do it. Or, if you want to make a professional recording, do that, and not all of your other duties on that day.

It will be very hard for you to be in the middle, I think. Either do the engineering or do the other stuff.

[JEGG]

Andy-I'm sorry I deleted my post, but I wanted to start again after I read the OP's second post. Yours got caught in the middle-I saw it only after I'd reposted and deleted the first.

Again, sorry for any confusion.

(I do so love Canada!)

[locosoundman]

Wow - $100 for a 16-track recording.

Is that what this business is coming to?

Time to go flip burgers I guess...

[John Suitcase]

Originally Posted by locosoundman

Wow - $100 for a 16-track recording.

Is that what this business is coming to?

Time to go flip burgers I guess...

Well, I don't think he's trying to compete with pro's who come out and do a nice live recording with good outboard preamps, splitters, quality mics on everything, etc. He's trying to do a value-added service to make a few bucks on the side, and help bands promote their live show.

Recording isn't a commodity, it's a boutique business. If one person can set the price for everyone, then it would be a commodity. But clearly there are people who get a lot of money to record something, and people who get very little.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by Andy Hamm

Yup, good point. So maybe another angle is to make radio spots using the recorded trax and charge the Venue.

The real value of the recording (IMO) will be to give to arts and entertainment writers to inspire them to write actual articles on the band (the money it takes to buy that free space is astronomical, and it's not for sale, anyway) and to play excerpts on the radio for interviews (again, extremely high value advertising not available for sale).

That, and applying for grants, is the huge value of this sort of recording (again, IMO).

That's why real rates need to be charged-because the recordings can leverage many, many, many thousands of dollars in publicity.

As a performer, a board member for presenting organizations, and a producer of recordings; I've been on all sides.

And the value of recordings is huge, providing there are informed people around for the leverage.

That is one reason why real rates must be charged. The recordings can be extraordinarily valuable.

The other reason is that engineers should be paid according to the real value of the work-time, skills, overhead.


It seems to me that John Suitcase's approach is basing fees on vague or non existent financial systems of poorly organized bands and venues that have no plans for development.

That is a road to a dead end.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by John Suitcase

Recording isn't a commodity, it's a boutique business.

Recording is a commodity for any clients with vision.

Originally Posted by John Suitcase

If one person can set the price for everyone, then it would be a commodity.

No, that's the opposite of reality. Some products have commodity value, the same sort of products or services that are differently branded or made do not have the same value. Some people demand more than others. Land Rovers and Mercedes cars have commodity value-justifiably or not-and, ironically, based on the asking price! Better made vehicles are available for less which do not have the same commodity value. (Not to say we should sell goodness by providing lesser products and services, but it is possible if one wants to do so.)

Originally Posted by John Suitcase

But clearly there are people who get a lot of money to record something, and people who get very little.

That is true. Much of it has to do with what is asked and delivered by the seller! Along with the vision of the client.

[locosoundman]

Originally Posted by John Suitcase

Well, I don't think he's trying to compete with pro's who come out and do a nice live recording with good outboard preamps, splitters, quality mics on everything, etc. He's trying to do a value-added service to make a few bucks on the side, and help bands promote their live show.

Recording isn't a commodity, it's a boutique business. If one person can set the price for everyone, then it would be a commodity. But clearly there are people who get a lot of money to record something, and people who get very little.

I dunno.

I remember when recordings used to be worth something. Because they were worth something, there was something special about them - especially live recordings. Musicians got ready for them - rehearsed a little extra, maybe gave a little more in the performance on those nights. Recordings were prized.

I know - this is the YouTube generation and everything gets recorded now somehow or another - but when you stop putting a good value on a premium service, other people stop valuing that service too. Then it's no longer a premium service.

$100 bucks would be fine for a stereo "board recording," but a 16-track recording?

Once you step up to multi-track land, I think you are competing with the pro's. When this type of recording is only commanding $100, that dude is the one setting the price for everyone else.

Cause there ain't noone else gonna be able to work in THAT club.

I must be getting too old for this.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by locosoundman

Wow - $100 for a 16-track recording.

Is that what this business is coming to?

Time to go flip burgers I guess...

No, it's time to find different clients.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by locosoundman

I dunno.

I remember when recordings used to be worth something. Because they were worth something, there was something special about them - especially live recordings. Musicians got ready for them - rehearsed a little extra, maybe gave a little more in the performance on those nights. Recordings were prized.

I know - this is the YouTube generation and everything gets recorded now somehow or another - but when you stop putting a good value on the service you offer, other people stop valuing that service too.

I couldn't agree more. And perhaps you've seen those curves of concert ticket prices vs units sold. There are similar curves for goods. More people will come to a non free concert than a free one. As prices escalate, so will purchases up to a certain point, then they will dip, rise, dip, etc. The idea as a presenter is to offer prices at different tiers for different demographics. BTW, I first encountered these curves in a high school mathematics course! Then many years later as a presenter. It's all about perceived value.

Originally Posted by locosoundman

$100 bucks would be fine for a stereo "board recording," but a 16-track recording?

I must be getting too old for this.

No, you are just looking at poor examples.

[locosoundman]

Well, I guess I am just glad that we're talking Kentucky and not my hometown.

Tho I'll bet someone here is doing the same thing.

[locosoundman]

I'll give you a case in point.

I have a live CD of a major label artist that sounds like ass. It really p*sses me off, because it's a great band, but the recording was obviously made from a multi taken from the direct outs of a live console.

But it's a commercial CD.

Now if the record label can sell a CD that was obviously done on the cheap, why would they bother to pay for the good stuff?

I mean, if the stuff that sounds like sh*t sells, but costs less to make, who cares if I can make a better sounding one that costs more?

What was that about recording not being a commodity?

I hope Burger King is still hiring...

[JEGG]

Loco, enough with the moaning!

Why spend the energy moaning about bad clients, bad product, and bad money? (Rhetorical question, surely you like it.)

You have convinced me that your outlook is correct and true. I was wrong.

So stop the complaining, act on your analysis, and go work at Burger King.



(BTW, there are many happy people at Burger King, and I admire them. Because their attitudes are usually better than mine. And it's hard work. Harder than the work I do. Customers like me, and so on...)

[John Suitcase]

I guess I'm not being terribly clear, and JEGG, I think you make very good points.

Here's where the local, small venue live recording business is going:

Every venue will have something like a Mackie Onyx or Presonus StudioLIve type rig. Every performance will be recorded, or at least, the rig will be there, set up and waiting. As a venue, if you can charge for that service and make a few bucks, great, because there will come a time when there will be no charge for that.

The only place to make money will be to be a boutique 'name' engineer, someone that does work of a higher quality, who can charge a premium to people who are planning to do more with the tracks than post the video on youtube.

I think the OP can charge $500 to track some local bands 45 minute set, but no one is going to take that deal. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not. But someone at another local venue will set up that rig and charge less, and get those dollars, and those gigs.

If the band just wants a cheap recording of the set, why not be the one to give it to them? Someone will fill that need, and if the OP can do it without adding to his workload in a significant way, he should.

I would like to say that people will pay top dollar for commodity-level recordings, but they clearly won't. The only way to get a premium price is to be someone people seek out to work with, to be a 'name.'

I'm having a hard time articulating this idea, but what I'm trying to say is that what the OP is selling isn't designed to compete with professionals, so much as to offer a service that didn't exist in the past. Cheap, multitrack recordings of a live gig, that the band can scrutinize, edit, remix, overdub, etc.

Maybe I'm not understanding his goal, but that's my impression, anyway...

[GZsound]

My suggestion would be to offer several different services at different rates. A simple multitrack recording that would not require any mixing or mastering could be charged out at something like $25 an hour.

For mixing and mastering, the charge would be greater, but in the real world, there are multitudes of studios that charge $20 - $25 an hour for complete multitrack recordings. I read ads on my local Craigslist from local studios that are practically giving away studio time.

I charged bands $100 for a two track CD recorded off the mixer and $300 for an actual mixed and mastered multitrack CD of their show.. Keeping in mind that it's a one hour CD of music.

But again, there are guys out there willing to come record your band for fifty bucks. They buy a stand alone recorder and consider themselves professionals.

[slondo1]

OP here. First let me say thank you to everyone for your opinions. If you're going to read this, grab a drink and get comfortable, as I'm about to write a book...

My thoughts follow most closely to John Suitcase - that I'm providing a service not previously offered. I think he understands very well what I'm hoping to accomplish. There's nobody else in town offering these services. There's few venues around here that would even have the capability. Seeing as I built the rig on a budget (though the quality is not "cheap"), I do think that a bit of lowballing on the tracking and enticing them to let me do the mixing is the best way to go. I feel like once they buy the files, they'll find out quickly that they're ill equipped to mix them and will come to me to mix them. If they are capable of mixing them, then more power to them. If they want to go to a traditional studio and have them mix it, then that's cool too. I do like the idea of providing a short sample mix to entice them as well.

I'm diametrically opposed in opinion from JEGG, and honestly I'm not following some of what you're saying. For example, you say I'm too overburdened to provide a decent recording... well, the entire point of the rig is that I don't have to mix on the fly at all. It will not add to my workload in the slightest. I can just hit record on the computer and pay minimal attention to it while I perform my other tasks, and then later take the tracks and mix them properly for release. Since it's all direct out, pre fader, pre eq, pre fx, I'll have complete freedom to mix everything later as needed. There'd be no dereliction of duty. And yes, I do know how to make a "professional recording"...

I don't believe I'd be competing directly with traditional studios. I think any band that opted to release live recordings as an album instead of studio recordings would be remiss. Live shows are a totally different animal than studio recordings, imo. Considering the status of music these days, I believe it it more important than ever to establish yourself as a good live act and what better way to do that than to have a live recording available for distribution? I believe in the near future (if they aren't already), live recordings will be essential to the promotion and marketing of a band. I feel I would be providing a marketing service more than something that would replace a band's regular album.

I don't care one bit if local bands distribute thousands of copies of stuff I've recorded and mixed for them. I really don't. As a musician myself, I'd rather see a live scene prosper and good bands maximize their potential, and I think these recordings would contribute to that. I suppose I could build legal language into the contract that if said recordings generate over X amount, I'd have rights to some of the money... but I think that's rather premature at this point.

As far as charging "real rates"... what even defines a real rate? Ten years ago doing a 16 track recording like this involved a lot of equipment, like a $2000 HDR, a snake with a split for you, or any number of things that cost big money and were intrusive to the live show at hand. I'll tell you exactly how much it cost me to get 16 digital 24-bit dedicated outputs on the M7. It cost exactly $120. We're living in the age of digital mixers and ebay, doing things right simply doesn't cost as much as it used to. Does this mean I ought to charge $500 just because recording 16 channels used to be more difficult? Or, as I believe I am, charge a rate that is affordable and will recoup the cost of my system in just a few months? When is it time to give up the ghost and admit that the live and recording world has changed?

It's a complicated subject overall, but I feel I can provide a niche business that isn't being fulfilled in a very affordable way. I believe I can come up with a pricing structure that is profitable to me and beneficial to the customers. I believe I can help bands while also profiting. That's the core of what I want to do.

[JEGG]

Well, this is an interesting thread.

John (Mr. Suitcase):
I think your points are good ones, and well thought out too. And I think we agree on the facts, too.

The differences, I think, are ones of approach. I've not been in precisely the same situations as the OP, but I have been in situations where I was offering services for what I thought "the market" would bear, and that I was wearing many hats while doing engineering work. CDs (and earlier, cassettes-that dates me) were a significant source of income.

I became dissatisfied with that, and just went after the clients, the repertoire, and the venues I wanted to work in. I worked less, became better paid, did better work, worked in nice buildings, and enjoyed being part of the creative team. And I still do. (The narrower path has a down side, though: sometimes I see engineers happily at work making money doing things I don't, and I wish I could be happy doing that!)

A blind spot is that I assume everyone would rather follow a similar path. That's not true, of course, we all like different things.

Slondo1, it seems many issues have become clarified, you know what you want, what you don't. That's a very good place to be. So have fun and good luck!

[slondo1]

Thanks JEGG. I think a big difference is that I don't have to freelance. I'll be at my venue doing tech junk and drawing my paycheck either way. I don't need to go record in other venues or rooms because I don't want to or need to (that being said, I own all the means of production and may look into being a recording engineer with a group touring with an M7). I don't feel I need to advertise beyond word of mouth, because 300+ bands come through here in a year, and each one will be offered this service in the booking process. Additionally, word of mouth between musicians here will spread fast.

Worst case scenario, it should take me about 5-7 clients to break even on my investment. That's not bad.

[John Suitcase]

Originally Posted by JEGG

Well, this is an interesting thread.

John (Mr. Suitcase):
I think your points are good ones, and well thought out too. And I think we agree on the facts, too.

The differences, I think, are ones of approach. I've not been in precisely the same situations as the OP, but I have been in situations where I was offering services for what I thought "the market" would bear, and that I was wearing many hats while doing engineering work.

I became dissatisfied with that, and just went after the clients, the repertoire, and the venues I wanted to work in. I worked less, became better paid, did better work, worked in nice buildings, and enjoyed being part of the creative team. And I still do. (It has its down side, though: sometimes I see engineers happily at work making money doing things I don't, and I wish I could be happy doing that!)

A blind spot is that I assume everyone would rather follow a similar path. That's not true, of course, we all like different things.

Slondo1, it seems many issues have become clarified, you know what you want, what you don't. That's a very good place to be. So have fun and good luck!

I actually fully agree with you about only doing quality projects, and do try to only work with artists I enjoy and get along with. But then, I'm not working as a FOH engineer, where I have to hear the bands, regardless of my personal preferences. If I could make sitting through night after night of bands, some of which I didn't care for, a little more lucrative, I would, too!

Not to say that's the OP's motivation, just that JEGG and I both have the luxury of working with bands of our choosing. Not everyone is in that boat!

[slondo1]

Not to say that's the OP's motivation, just that JEGG and I both have the luxury of working with bands of our choosing. Not everyone is in that boat!

That is definitely part of the motivation I do have a genuine interest in helping bands promote themselves, but also it'd be very nice to be earning a few extra bucks when a band breaks out "All Along the Watchtower" for the billionth time...

Also, since I spend half my life at the venue I forgot to add some details about my setup. For example, I don't have to worry about mics since the venue already provides them, and the venue is large enough that everything is miced anyway. I don't need any outboard preamps, A/D converters or anything, as the M7CL handles this and it's already in place. It's really just a dedicated digital split out from the back of the board, it's simple, compact, and maintains quality.

If you'd like to see where I work and where I'll be doing the recordings, check out the pics here: Photos | Buster's Billiards & Backroom . Thanks everyone!

-Ben

[John Suitcase]

Looks like a nice place!

Only thing I'd add is maybe a couple of room mics. I usually place a couple of small condensers just inside the mains, pointing out toward the room. Can be left up for a little room tone, or just pushed up to get audience reaction. These wouldn't be put through the mains, of course!

Good luck!

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Best of Luck!

You are probably on the low side of charging for a multitrack recording but only you will know what the clients are willing to pay.

I too question if you can do everything you are doing and still concentrate on the recording. If you are selling your services you need to provide top quality and if you are also doing lights and house sound you man not be able to pay attention to levels and take the time to trouble shoot problems.

Anyway let us know how things are going!

[Manfrensengensen]

I do mixing duties for 4 bands playing in bars, pub, etc and charge a flat rate $80-$100 depending on how far I have to travel. The band pays me, not the club,

I was thinking of offering tracking as well using a 1640i. In that case I would charge $200 for the show and drop the tracks on a thumb drive. 3 sets 1 hour each set.

Any mixing would be separate from that. I am mobile of course so it is more work. I have more invested with my own mixer, MBP, dozen mic's or so and carry a couple racks with additional gear to augment the bands system if need be. (helps me make them sound better with their minimal gear so they get a little more for their money, and it's my rep)

My idea was to offer this as a way for bands to have demo material and as stated most doing the club scene
Have little money. So if they want a few songs to post on networking sites or to market themselves I suggest they pick a few songs and go from there. Then pay me for time for what they want mixed. Or they can do it them selves.




Via Gearslutz iPhone app

[slondo1]

@Thomas, I definitely agree it'll have to be superb quality. That's why I designed the system so I didn't have to mix anything during the duration of the show. The extent of the difficulty will be pressing the "record" button and "stop" when the show is over, and many glance to make sure nothing's crashed. The 16 direct outs are all pre fader, pre eq, pre mute switch. All the signal ever hits on the Yamaha is the A/D and head amp. If the signal is low to the computer, I can adjust an attenuation knob on the direct outs, so i don't even have to mess with my mix. So long as I'm not messing with the HAs every two seconds, it's just like having a split from the snake. No matter what I do in the mix, to monitors, effects wise, or whatever, I can't mess up the signal to my computer.

It's an astoundingly simple, fool proof setup, yet still gives me 16 channels 24-bit 44.1khz... I love living in the future, lol :-D