TheViking wrote on Fri, 19 August 2005 08:45 |
Any advice, input or has anyone had similar experiences with this? Thanks, Kevin |
TheViking wrote on Fri, 19 August 2005 07:45 |
Any advice, input or has anyone had similar experiences with this? |
Fig wrote on Fri, 19 August 2005 09:54 | ||
The best way to improve your clientele is to charge what you are worth, |
Jules wrote on Sun, 21 August 2005 15:07 |
I offer very selected bands record for publishing equity deals... Less & less takers... I blame it mostly on lawyers who would be embarrased to have agreed to such an arangement... |
Jules wrote |
I STRONGLY belive in folks with studio equipment acting as and BEING the NEW A&R departments of the future. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Mon, 22 August 2005 10:47 |
If you are writing with them, of course you should get publishing (as well as songwriters). But publishing for production? I dunno. Feels slimy to me. |
rankus wrote on Sun, 21 August 2005 10:58 |
I may use this as my quote of the month!!!.... very true, and nicely worded. |
Fibes wrote on Mon, 22 August 2005 08:11 |
I agree JJ but the reason folks do this is to protect themselves from spec deals gone bad. The kind where they re-track the entire thing almost excatly the same (you can relate)and refuse to pay for the original masters. I've been pissed on and have pissed on people in that same way. I think artists should own their songs but i also think production deals/spec deals that turn into something should be paid from whatever source. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Mon, 22 August 2005 20:58 |
I agree with Lord. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 01:14 |
Hey, if you can have that attitude and look yourself in the mirror, then go for it. Your reasoning wreaks of greed, to me. "Hey, if all these other cats are getting fucked, I want to be one of the fuckers, not one of the fuckees." Being a former publisher and knowing what it is worth, I see taking publishing for producing as larceny, unless I can guarantee that with me, they will see money that they would never have seen otherwise with any other producer. The karma train stops at every station. 'Karma', unlike 'bukakke', means motion. The concept of karma isn't that we are punished for our sins, but rather that we are punished by our sins. We set a series of events into motion, and then we eventually run into the consequences. If you want to swim with the sharks, you will likely get bitten. If you behave in a manner than is borderline unethical, you will attract more unethical people to you. If you behave in a way that is fair and not greedy, good people will seek you out. If you are working with some band that is sketchy and you afraid that you have to get over on them before they do the same to you, what the fuck are you doing working with somebody like that in the first place for? Will you become the biggest and richest producer by being ethical? Probably not. But do you think the biggest and richest producers are content with themselves? (Hint: You can tell if they are by how they treat other people, especially underlings.) I know lots of people who do sly stuff like that, and I don't want what any of those people have. Scruples, principles, fairness ... this is what defines a person and allows somebody to be OK with themselves. If you don't have that, the success is meaningless, because you won't be happy when you get it. And if you are some how happy without having those qualities? They have a term for that: sociopath. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 03:17 |
Eric, this is on the subject. What kind of deal do you want to make? It's entirely relevant, especially if you are looking for a 'way of life.' |
Fibes wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 03:27 |
Jules is right that the publishing is where the money is today but that doesn't mean everyone involved should partake in that slice in perpetuity. |
lord wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 12:32 |
The only part I can't understand is: bands are paying lawyers to badger studios into recording them for free? What kind of pouty, prep-school, barristers-in-training are starting bands in London these days? Do they save up for "legal time"? Or are they giving the lawyers 10% of their publishing as well? I know attorneys are a necessary cog in the industry, but this sounds silly. |
Jules wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 06:52 |
Also in the USA - you leave law school 'a lawyer' |
j.hall wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 13:34 | ||
totally not true. most law students in the US get jobs at law firms and all their work has to be signed off on by a bar certified member of the firm. the law students are not lawyers until they actually pass the bar exam, and technically, they can not practice law on their own until they have passed the bar. _____________________ JJ being more in line with this forum's theme???????? what is the world coming to?????????? |
lord wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 13:45 |
You could borrow that money from a bank, pay it back over two years, and still come out ahead--owning your own masters with no strings attached. Of course, musicians who are unable to sucessfully borrow even $7000 will continue to be shark food. |
Jules wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 10:16 |
If you can tell me how to point bands who are in their early 20's in the direction of people that will lend them $7,000 on a 2 year pay back deal for a recording, I would be very gratefull!. Who are these people? If the band get a major lable record deal .... |
Curve Dominant wrote on Mon, 22 August 2005 20:32 | ||
I'm not "looking for a 'way of life." This IS my life. It has nothing to do with "deals." The deals are there but that's not what's relevant. What's relevant is leaving a positive history. Being a part of something positive. "Spec" deals are all about doing what you believe in, to me anyway. The artists I'm working with are doing what THEY believe in, and I'm working with them because I believe in THEM and what they're doing. This is Philly, JJ. It's not like LA. It's a totally different culture here, and in London where Jules works as well. You cannot implant your LA mindset on what we're doing, it doesn't work. You cannot understand it from your LA mindset, until you get out of LA and get involved with a grass roots music scene. Really involved, where you put yourself completely out on a limb for artists who strike you at your soul. |
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 11:30 |
By the way, there's nothing wrong with being from LA-- |
Fibes wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 09:03 | ||
As long as you don't still live there. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! I've gone mad. I had my worst client last night. 15 years and last night was the top of the buttocks. |
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 08:30 |
Maybe JJ can find the next Missing Persons and you guys can have them fight to death in a cage match-- I'm hoping for a tie. |
Fibes wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 17:03 | ||
As long as you don't still live there. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! |
J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 16:05 |
Eric, before you lecture me about getting out of LA, you should know that I'm not from here. And back when you only knew how to record with your VHS machine, I was going further out on limbs than you have ever gone. |
Quote: |
And since you are an ASCAP member, you should know the value of publishing. It's the same there as it is in LA. Would you honestly give somebody a portion of your intellecual property? |
J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 09:53 | ||
Dude, Missing Persons kicks Bon Jovi's ass any day of the week. As Triumph the Insult Comic Dog says: "If you have never heard Bon Jovi, try to imagine Brude Springsteen coming out of my ass." BTW, do you want to know why nobody walks in LA? Because you can park everywhere ... unlike San Francisco! LOL. (I've lived there, too.) |
Quote: |
Yes I would, and I'll tell you exactly why: Because it is much more lucrative to own 50% of a song that becomes a hit, than to own 100% of a song that will never be heard by anyone. And that last bit, my dear humble friend, really sums up the crux of this whole issue. |
Curve Dominant wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 12:02 | ||
A VHS machine? You know, that's probably the ONLY thing I didn't learn how to record on. Gotta try that some time. |
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 18:27 |
Look at the Strokes, hate em or love em, they would have made a serious career mistake getting in bed with Jules. |
Jules wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 11:38 | ||
How? please explain that.. They would have been minus 20% publishing on 3 tunes. That's a share like they give non writing drummers of bands... Please explain the "career mistake"? Thanks Jules |
Curve Dominant wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 10:02 |
Because it is much more lucrative to own 50% of a song that becomes a hit, than to own 100% of a song that will never be heard by anyone. |
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 20:03 |
So they'd retain the masters working with you? |
rankus wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 13:55 | ||
Reminds of the old saying "It's better to have a slice of grapefruit than an entire grape"..... Regarding what it is worth to work on spec: If you only recoup on say, one in five projects, (and that would be optimistic) then it stands to reason that fronting the time is worth more than just recouping your regular rate for studio time... In fact in running a business it would be very reasonable to charge regular rate x 5... Plus interest... It's all very fine to argue the "artistic" philanthropic end, but we are in business to make money... (at the very least enough to make the bills and buy more gear) |
Jules wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 11:38 | ||
How? please explain that.. They would have been minus 20% publishing on 3 tunes. That's a share like they give non writing drummers of bands... Please explain the "career mistake"? Thanks Jules |
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 22:36 |
If someone is really interested in publishing revenue, they should WRITE SONGS. |
Jules wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 14:56 | ||
A noble thought and one I am sure that is rejected by a vast number of music publishers. |
Jules wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 11:38 |
Jules, Honest questions here-- not trying to engender any animosity. The Strokes are a 5 piece, even though JC writes all the tunes, I think it is a fair assumption that the other fellas get a piece of the publishing. So an even split would be 20% per man (as in your example)-- which I think is kind of the ultimate "bro deal" here in the states, i.e. rare circumstances. So in your example-- if you take 20% off the top-- and the band splits what's left 5 ways cause they love each other so much-- then JC is now getting 16%? The songwriter would get less than the producer? |
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 23:02 |
How about this-- Write a song OR start a music publishing business. I think one is a lot more interesting than the other, but it depends on your skill set/interest. |
TheViking wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 18:20 |
Has anyone any experience in this specific type of production or 'spec' deal? Thanks, Kevin |
J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 19:34 |
BTW, Eric, you never recorded TV shows on your VHS? I didn't mean music |
TheViking wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 15:20 |
Thanks to everyone who has posted in this thread. It's probably a lot more information and opinion than I was initially looking for. A lot of this discussion is dealing with publishing. I'm not so much concerned with publishing as I am with the actual record being bought. I am working with a small handful of clients on these 'production agreements'. The purpose is to do a record with the artist and then shop the record to various record labels in hopes that one will 'buy' the record from me. Has anyone any experience in this specific type of production or 'spec' deal? Thanks, Kevin |
brandondrury wrote on Wed, 24 August 2005 04:53 |
It seems to me to be a little more ethical to ask for a bigger slice when you have no idea if you will ever break even on the project. It seams that this is a much bigger risk to the dumb ass producing a record in his living room with no credibility than it is for Madonna. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Wed, 24 August 2005 05:30 |
BTW, to clarify things, Madonna takes a piece of publishing for recording your songs, not for producing you. She is bringing her guaranteed audience to the table. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Wed, 24 August 2005 03:26 |
Have something about the band using their 'best efforts' to use you as the producer, if they decide to re-record anything, or record additional songs once they are signed. If they re-record with a different producer, you state that there is a buy-out fee per song, and you get a point on each song on the record that you don't wind up producing yourself. |
Quote: |
In the arts, there is no such thing as a "guaranteed audience." That's why no artistic endeavor can ever get a bank loan on "projected sales." Your loan application will get rejected every time. Any artistic entity can only get approved for a loan against existing liquidity IE: cash on hand, and assets. Which makes your Madonna example null and void. Tilt, JJ, insert another quarter and try again. |
J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 22:26 | ||
Kevin, here's something I did recently: I came up with a concept for a group, I produced, engineered, mixed and co-arranged. The original agreement was for the band members (three of them) to do a four way split with me, if anything happened. But then, because of some of the turmoil at the jazz labels that we were going to approach, I wound up releasing the thing on my own label, and we restructured the deal. If I hadn't come up with the concept, etc. I might not have asked for an equal share under the original agreement. It was very much my baby. As far as doing an album on spec, the contract will refer to 'master recordings' generally. State how much you expect to be re-imbursed at the point that they get signed, and have your points attached to the masters. Have something about the band using their 'best efforts' to use you as the producer, if they decide to re-record anything, or record additional songs once they are signed. If they re-record with a different producer, you state that there is a buy-out fee per song, and you get a point on each song on the record that you don't wind up producing yourself. This is of course if they get signed based on the work they do with you. The devil is in the details, but that is the crux of the biscuit. |
Curve Dominant wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 19:03 |
And here's ANOTHER thing that pisses me off: The Strokes even got MENTIONED as an example here. Those clowns should have GOTTEN DOWN ON THEIR KNEES and BEGGED for Jules' guidance, not to mention ANY competent producer. They were signed as a product of a HUGE bidding war. The publicity spent on that band was IMMENSE. JC's daddy is John Casablancas, the head of the world's biggest modelling agency, and daddy made sure there were NO negative reviews of his baby boy's band, because his clients were their biggest advertisers. You couldn't go ANYWHERE without seeing the Strokes peering out at you from a magazine cover. That band had more money and more publicity spent on them than arguably any new band in the history of rock & roll. And what did all that get them? Two bombs, the second even worse than the first. Two big hairy bollocks, dropped so hard they went through the basement floor. (Which tells you the same thing several major label CEO's told me in NYC a couple of years ago: "We cannot make people buy music; they have to WANT to buy it.") Let's not derail this thread by using ultra-rich folks' vanity projects as examples, please. |
Curve Dominant wrote on Tue, 23 August 2005 22:03 |
And here's ANOTHER thing that pisses me off: The Strokes even got MENTIONED as an example here. Those clowns should have GOTTEN DOWN ON THEIR KNEES and BEGGED for Jules' guidance, not to mention ANY competent producer. They were signed as a product of a HUGE bidding war. The publicity spent on that band was IMMENSE. JC's daddy is John Casablancas, the head of the world's biggest modelling agency, and daddy made sure there were NO negative reviews of his baby boy's band, because his clients were their biggest advertisers. You couldn't go ANYWHERE without seeing the Strokes peering out at you from a magazine cover. That band had more money and more publicity spent on them than arguably any new band in the history of rock & roll. And what did all that get them? Two bombs, the second even worse than the first. Two big hairy bollocks, dropped so hard they went through the basement floor. (Which tells you the same thing several major label CEO's told me in NYC a couple of years ago: "We cannot make people buy music; they have to WANT to buy it.") |
J.J. Blair wrote on Wed, 24 August 2005 07:59 |
Madonna not withstanding, you're hijacking the thread again, Eric. Relax, dude. You're in good hands with ASCAP. |
Jules wrote on Wed, 24 August 2005 13:28 |
Dreary thing is that it seems the legal affairs departments at big labels seem to think it is part of their job to crush 'the little guy' like a bug. Best thing you can do IMHO is to have the band on your side... they are the ONLY ones that can send a message to the big guys to 'play nice' with you... The "new management company" that scooped up the rising talent (short sightedly) may want a big hitter 'he does everyone' type producer to record the band next so they probably don't give a rats ass about what you get out of any deal... Of course bands 'memories' can become, er... 'vague' about all the help you gave em in the early days when the glare from the afternoon sun on the 50 platinum records in the record co boardroom hits them in the eyes... When negotiations are on a knife edge, good relations with the band can make ALL the difference... Lawyers know this and often ask at crucial stages, "how's the relationship between you and the band".. They KNOW that a band tight with someone isn't going to dig their A&R mook if he blatantly shafts someone close to them.. naturally being a nasty business - chums DO get shafted / pushed asside... Plus if you get on well with the band, they can come back as clients after a year or so of the major label A&R circus - to record thier OWN records with you! |
rattleyour wrote on Thu, 25 August 2005 10:24 |
how many of you guys actually have or have had your own label? How do you make your self a LABEL, rather than just some dude getting 1000 CD's printed up. Off the top of my head, distribution, promotion, and publicity are all part of the LABEL equation. Obviously, owning the label has a correlative relationship to working on spec-- that's why I bring it up. |
Quote: |
Saying that she doesn't have a built in audience is like saying that U2 doesn't have a built in audience. |
brandondrury wrote on Sat, 27 August 2005 08:20 |
I know people who run out and buy everything that Nickelback singer/songwriter dude produces simply because he produced it. Brandon |
rankus wrote on Fri, 26 August 2005 02:14 |
So, As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have opted to become a new entity: "Managing Producer". I am producing and managing a band that I really believe in and feel much better about the relationship than I would if I had got them on my "label". As manager I am "on their side" rather than lording above them, I am one of the "gang" and that is a far better position to steer things from. 15% as manager .... (not off small gigs though, only "bigger picture" stuff that I will be involved in) In the "label" scenario I would be cut out of the picture once they signed to a larger label...(And take a one shot buy out) As manager I (hope to) stay on well into their career (when the real earning power kicks in) and make it a long term income stream. Also, they want me to stay on as producer "no matter what" so once they get picked up by a major and get forced to hire a "real" producer , I will be there to soak up the glory as "assistant producer" or some other vague title... This in itself would be worth the price of admission...(Networking, networking, networking) (This is where I will meet the label execs for next time around.) |
Jules wrote on Sat, 27 August 2005 13:58 |
Problem that some folks around a signed act might have with that is.. You being a 'beginner manager' Any how - that is my view of the "I'm not realy a manager" dream.. (BTW nothing personal, I am sure you are a nice person etc...) |
rankus wrote on Sat, 27 August 2005 22:55 |
You seem to mixing up "artists manager" with "profesional manager" ... two seperate entities ... I am the former., and will hire the latter before any major labels see any ink. |
DivideByZero wrote on Tue, 29 November 2005 07:44 |
I detest the Nashville writer's paradigm; bring song to publisher, publisher calls friends, friends change 3 words, everyone eats writer's carcass. |
DivideByZero wrote on Wed, 30 November 2005 09:33 |
Ok, It never happens to people you know. heh... and just try and deny country rap.. M |
Dave Martin wrote on Wed, 30 November 2005 04:39 | ||
And you don't know what the hell you're talking about. I don't see that happening - ever. Not with professional writers and professional publishers. |
Tomas Danko wrote on Fri, 02 December 2005 12:36 |
I've seen this thing happening several times over here, whenever someone writes a good song and a famous artist picks it up. The artist changes a word or three and presto, he/she will also get a piece of that action. There are some large names overseas doing this as well, then again it's all part of the game so you'll just have to deal with it. |
henchman wrote on Sat, 03 December 2005 21:37 | ||
Yet everyone bitches and moans when the guy sitting behind the console, offering his time space and equipment for free, asks for a small percentage of publishing to make up for the time he put in. Which usually is more time than anyone else involved. |