Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[OTR-jkl]

Back in the Spring, I mastered a single for a local independent band and sent them a reference disc for approval. They gave me their approval via email and so I went ahead and burned the Master and emailed them an invoice stating that I would release the Master once I rcv'd full payment. I haven't heard from them since...

I've mailed them a couple of invoices and finally a statement with a late fee tacked on. Still no response. I can only assume that they decided that the ref was just as good as a Master and decided to use it instead thus avoiding paying their bill.

What's your standard procedure for sending out reference discs for un-attended sessions? Do you get full payment up front? a deposit? What...?

This is leading me to search for a way to incorporate some kind of Copy Protection into the ref discs to prevent this from happening again. Any ideas?

Thnx.

[Viitalahde]

Weird, I was about to ask then very same question.

[MASSIVE Mastering]

I ALWAYS, ALWAYS get a deposit of at least 50%.  I don't care if it's for a cousin.  Once you get burned a few times, don't invite the flame.

Other than that, I offer a "sample master" thing also - It's never more that two minutes or so of any given tune, so no problems there.  

When sending out reference listening discs, if you haven't received a deposit, scatter some tones through it so it can't (easily) be used.

[Ed Littman]

50% up front & the balance before receiving the reference.
No complaints in this policy yet.
Ed

[lowland]

Hi OTR,

I'm feeling your pain here. In the last couple of years I've changed my policy: previously I used to provide a 30 day invoice with the master (fool), but got burned once by a band and once by an indie label who took forever to pay, and there were emotional complications.

The new regime is that if it's a band or artist footing the bill they agree a fee in advance and pay the full amount up front - if it takes a little longer/is a bit more complex than projected I'm not going to worry too much, and I'm now pretty good at fair estimations of the probable job cost. With labels, if I've dealt with them before and they're OK it's 30 days with rigorous credit control, and if I don't know them it's either payment up front or on delivery of master depending on how cynical I feel about them.

Business-wise, life is much improved: if a band takes two weeks to come back with approval on the ref. for example, I've already got their money and eventual payment is no longer delayed by that period. The other thing I've found is that no-one has had any objection to payment in advance, possibly because most people budget for mastering anyway and it makes no difference to them whether they hand over the cash now or later. Mutual respect has been restored, and (so far) everyone wins.

[Steve Kitch]

Always 100% payment here unless I know and trust the client well. If necessary then I will post a 1min sample of their track on the server.

[bblackwood]

No masters released until I receive payment in full or a PO from a label.

[pg666]

perhaps put a 3 second sample at the beginning of the disc, "this is only a reference and not to be duplicated" or something like that? that, or hire some muscle..

[TotalSonic]

bblackwood wrote on Fri, 23 July 2004 12:18

No masters released until I receive payment in full or a PO from a label.

I can't emphasize Brad's point of getting a PO from a label enough.  At my work place a few years back we did work for Run (from RUN-DMC) with the understanding from Arista that they were taking care of it.  Problem was - we had never gotten an actual p.o. and their accounting dept refused to pay the invoice.  End result was that Run came down himself and paid with cash - so at least I got to check out his white Jag - but as you can imagine it was more hassle than we'd usually like it to be.

Same thing happened to a friend of mine who is the owner of a studio on the floor below that I have my project studio in - he did thousands of dollars of work for an artist for a major label with the a&r guy telling him "don't worry - I'll take care of all the paperwork - you don't need a po".  Needless to say - the a&r guy ended up fired - and my friend never got paid!

Lesson learned: without a faxed po from the label's accounting dept. - don't start the work!

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[OTR-jkl]

I understand and agree fully about not releasing Masters w/o full payment but my dilemma involves the ref (the Master is still sitting in my Outbox!!!). I need to figure out a way to deliver a good ref (one that the client can use to approve the work from) but still prevent them from using it in place of the Master.

I got this response on the Samp forum:

Quote:

Of course you have to write on the proof that it is protected by "Watermarking" and at no ways to be used as a production master

Anyone know what "Watermarking" is with regard to a ref disc...?

[bblackwood]

I'm not aware of any watermarking that can be done easily (or inexpensively) though there may be several...

Basically, you have to take your chances. If your clientele are predominantly the type to try to screw you, then you may have to work from flat rates and demand up front money. For whatever reason, I don't have a problem with this happening - in fact, I don't recall it ever happening. For this reason, I am wary of the possibility of making the client feel I don't trust them, like I expect them to screw me if given the opportunity.

Once again, you could alter the disc so it couldn't be used for manufacturing (burning the tracks TAO?), but I want the client to get a disc that will be a clone of the master so approval won't net surprises down the road.

[OTR-jkl]

Quote:

but I want the client to get a disc that will be a clone of the master so approval won't net surprises down the road.

Exactly...

[TotalSonic]

The thing is if it's digital information (i.e.in the vinyl world dub plates & copper ref discs can't be replicated off of)  unless we're talking about SACD then the ref IS capable of being a master - regardless of any attempts at "watermarking" - as these things are easily worked around if they have access to pro level gear.

So to me - if the client wants a ref - it's time for payment in full to be made prior to its release.   No ifs, ands or buts about it!

For unattended sessions I feel it's best to take it as a package rate with the clients satisfaction within reasonable demands to be the determination as to when the work is actually done.  i.e. if upon hearing the 1st ref the client wants say, one track brighter, another a little louder, and a pause timing change made - then I think its a good policy and in good faith to make these changes for them and provide the 2nd ref without additional charge.   If they want to swap out an entire track with a new mix - or have completely new instructions for a track that weren't provided before making the 1st ref - then to me that is an example of something that should be billed additionally.  

Anyway - this brings up the topic of how billing is handled for unattended package rates in terms of at what point has work ended for the inital package rate quoted if client wants lots of changes  - I'm curious as to how others approach this.  

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[lowland]

TotalSonic wrote on Fri, 23 July 2004 21:19

Anyway - this brings up the topic of how billing is handled for unattended package rates in terms of at what point has work ended for the inital package rate quoted if client wants lots of changes  - I'm curious as to how others approach this.   Best regards, Steve Berson

An interesting question. For me this is very much a 'feel' area which comes up rarely; experience usually gets me to the nub of what my customer's after quite quickly - after the first ref. we're not normally talking sonic tweaks (if we are it's generally overall brightness or loudness which can be straightforwardly adjusted) but more likely track gaps and running order, as initial opinions on these can change when mastered versions are heard in context.

My rule of thumb if I have one is that on an unattended package I generally build in one set of amendments, and will stretch to two if necessary and if they're nice to me. Otherwise a book rate charge is made, extra payment in full being expected either before work restarts or on release of the master, depending on how I read the situation - now I've cleaned up my business policy act and am more aware of potential  pitfalls this has worked fine, is instinctive and doesn't restrict me.

[Ronny]

Ed Littman wrote on Thu, 22 July 2004 15:34

50% up front & the balance before receiving the reference. No complaints in this policy yet. Ed

That's exactly what I do, half up front of the estimate I quote them, before I even start. I seldom send a ref. I send them one tune of their choice mp3'd. It's typically their most problematic song. That usually does it. I used to send ref cd's with clips but never the full songs. They'd often rather hear a quick mp3 than wait on a cd anyway, especially overseas clients. I've also faded a song out in the middle deleted a minute or two and faded it back in for the outro, to shrink it down for FTP of wav or aiff tunes. I've never had anyone complain when I explain that I have to protect myself. They can hear the improvement without having to give them a full playlist ref. If the ref's complete they can use it as the master. Without full payment it's a no-no.  

[OTR-jkl]

I guess I'm just gonna have to start requiring full payment before sending out the ref. I'll still make the ref a clone of the Master because I want them to listen down the entire project just as it will be replicated. Once I get approval, its a done deal - any changes after that will be on the clock...

I would like to think that I can trust all clients to keep their end of the deal. In a perfect world...

[bobkatz]

OTR-jkl wrote on Fri, 23 July 2004 14:44

I understand and agree fully about not releasing Masters w/o full payment but my dilemma involves the ref (the Master is still sitting in my Outbox!!!). I need to figure out a way to deliver a good ref (one that the client can use to approve the work from) but still prevent them from using it in place of the Master.

It's been a while since I had to do this, as I've tried to pre-qualify my clients, but I have been known to put an extra track at the end of the ref which is one of their original tracks unmastered. It can be a nice thing because they get to hear their original source and can compare it to the master. But it also makes an impediment to sending that ref directly off for mastering.

Other people have done nasty things like fading out the last cut before it is over so they can't use it. Or putting in a voiceover somewhere or whatever. Frankly, those things backfire and only make the client angry so I don't advise it. But my little trick of putting in the "before mastered" cut at the end of the ref is often appreciated. Sure, they can remove the track and then send it off to be mastered. But nothing is foolproof...   Prequalify your clients and get deposits, payments, or P.Os.

Watermarking?  Don't get me started.

BK

[rdolmat]

OTR-jkl wrote on Fri, 23 July 2004 11:44

I understand and agree fully about not releasing Masters w/o full payment but my dilemma involves the ref (the Master is still sitting in my Outbox!!!). I need to figure out a way to deliver a good ref (one that the client can use to approve the work from) but still prevent them from using it in place of the Master. I got this response on the Samp forum: Quote: Of course you have to write on the proof that it is protected by "Watermarking" and at no ways to be used as a production master Anyone know what "Watermarking" is with regard to a ref disc...?

How about just using Voxengo BEEP. It's a freeware plug that can add a tone of any length at any frequency. You can specify it to add a 1k beep (1sec long) every 20 sec etc...just strap it on the master buss and export the file.

cheers
rich

[mastermind]

For YEARS now I've either been paid for my work at the time I do it (ie - when I release a ref) or it's a PO from someone who has undergone a standard credit application. This is usually just label work or work from other like businesses.

I can't say I've ever had a problem with a client about getting paid before releasing any materials.

t

[lambda]

You could write your own firmware for a CD-R drive so it adds lots of correctable C1 errors within the Red Book standard, but outside of what any replication plant would accept.

[bblackwood]

I think giving the client a crippled ref is a really bad idea, personally. If you treat the client like you think they are crooks right out of the gate...

[lucey]

bblackwood wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 20:32

I think giving the client a crippled ref is a really bad idea, personally. If you treat the client like you think they are crooks right out of the gate...

Distrust ruins everything ...


Separation of Church and State

[jackthebear]

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 03 May 2005 11:32

I think giving the client a crippled ref is a really bad idea, personally. If you treat the client like you think they are crooks right out of the gate...

Certainly not the best way to start off the relationship but having said that why just not give them anything until the job has been paid for unless of course there has been prior arrangements made? Or at the the very least a deposit of say 50%.

It doesn't often happen here but I'm amazed how people can roll up to a session without any money or a cheque book. Try to go as a new customer anywhere and ask for $1500 of credit just on your word alone and see what happens.......

Cheers,

[Bob Olhsson]

The first sign of trouble is when somebody who has been around expects credit as a new client. Virtually nobody works that way with individuals. Chris Stone told me that he required the names of three established studios and always called them before extending credit to anybody.