depends on what stipulations or agreements you make with the band in question. Otherwise you'd have to get the songs published through one of the outfits like ASCAP or BMI or whatever but you'd then only get royalties for radio play or public performance and even then your only talking a few pennies per. You'd be better off just selling the tunes outright to the band for $50 a pop and consider yourself lucky.
Kess, I see you're in Belfast so greybeardds advice isn't relevant to you.
I you write tunes in UK or Ireland and a band is to record them then you should register yourself with PRS and MCPS. It casts about £150 all in if I remember right though it may have gone up a bit. You can find them online.
When a CD gets made it has to have an MCPS license before it is pressed and the artist has to list the tunes and duration that are to be on the CD. You will then get paid a royalty every quarter. When a band plays live at a decent venue or festival they should fill out a PRS form which pays the writer for public performance of their tunes. Altogether it doesn't add up to a lot unless you have dozens of tunes published and recorded or played by well known artists.
Never sell your rights to a band or anyone else if you can help it.
I wouldn't take greybeardd's advice in the states either, for the record. As it stands, I believe the royalty rate for a recording of a tune under 5 minutes long is $.09, meaning that if said "popular band" burns only 1000 CDs (a relatively small number for a "popular" band), you'd be due $90 on the CDs alone... Without selling rights to anything.
And if the tune has not been commercially recorded previously, the statutory rate (Georgi's $.09, if that is current - I have no idea) doesn't apply and you are free to negotiate whatever rate you can agree on with the band and you have the right to refuse permission if they don't offer enough. If it has been recorded, you can still negotiate the rate, but now the band has the right to record it without your permission and pay you the statutory rate if your demands are too high for them.
In other words, if it's a really popular band that you think will sell lots of copies but they have lots of options of tunes to use, you can improve your chances of them choosing yours by offering them a lower rate than your competitors, planning to make up for it in volume. Or if it's a friend's band and you know they can't afford the statutory rate, you can allow them to use your tune for a lower rate or for free if you want. Or, if it hasn't been recorded yet and the popular band really, really wants your tune and nothing else will satisfy them, then you can hold out for whatever the market will bear.
I'd say dedicate them to the greater good - why look for money? How would you show that they are truly original?
Although the thread about the pub there yesterday seems to indicate that it doesn't matter if they are original or not, just as long as you claim them as yours!!
In fact, it's actually reminiscent of the old gold rush days - maybe everyone should get in there now and register their ownership of traditional tunes!!!
Though on reflection, the returns mightn't be great!!
My own personal viewpoint on royalties for trad is that it's totally out of place with the whole spirit of the thing. Trad to me is about not just the tunes but also the camaraderie and sharing, etc. Commercialsation would demean the whole process. It could also get a bit ludicrous in situations where if you include such a tune in your session set, the pub landlord has to send 19 cents off to some collection agency!
Funny, the greater good theory is interesting but it's unusual for it to be put forward by folk who have had tunes published. It's easy to suggest giving away someone else's work.
A recording is usually sold commercially. The Record Company make money, the shops make money, the distributor makes money, the recording artist makes money so why do you think the person who wrote the tune should be the only person not to make anything?
I suppose you think file-sharing is cool too? If a trad musician spends all their time playing, practicing, recording and writing the odd tune how do they make a living if they have to give their services for free all the time? They already give lots for free. Give me a break. Art should be free!!! Tell that to the poor b*stards who have to come up with the stuff.
royalties and rates and statutory whatevers are fine on paper but the music industry doesn't work like that. I have 4 friends who between them have written some 50 songs between them, folk, trad country... and put out 6 Cd's between them, and they sat down one evening and figured out that, between them, over the last 25 years they have received about $120 in royalties. The recording industry sets the rules and they rules are there to make the industry money not song writers. So I say stick it to the man and just enjoy the fact thqt your sone is out there being enjoyed. (or like i said just sell em out right to the band. ) lots of guys in Nashville made a living doing just that.
Greybeardd, the recording industry do not set the rules for mechanical rights. Where Kess is from they are set by MCPS and PRS. Record Companies negotiate royalties on sales and publishing. In order to earn $120 for 50 self penned songs on 6 albums in this country your friends would have to have sold about a total of a couple hundred CD's at the most, which is not very many in 25 years
50 songs among 4 songwriters isn't much. It basically means they are all beginners who shouldn't expect to be making money for their writing.
There's a famous story about the great Texas songwriter Townes van Zandt judging a songwriting contest. Someone glanced over his shoulder at his notes, which consisted of a single number assigned to each contestant. The numbers varied wildly, for example: 43, 897, 120000, 28, 63, 427, etc. When asked what his numbers meant, he said it was how many songs the person would have to write before writing a good one.
A friend of mine, who is a highly regarded songwriter, has written a song just about every week for about 35 years. He has 15 CDs of original songs, representing roughly the best 10% of his output. He doesn't make much from royalties, but it helps pay the bills. A well-known singer recorded one of his songs, which then got used in a TV show. That royalty paid the rent on his tiny apartment for a year.
If a creative artist automatically puts all of their works in the public domain, they are allowing the huge entertainment industry to use their works without compensation. What's unfortunate is that when the writer allows an organization to administer the rights to use the work, that organization doesn't distinguish between the types of potential users (i.e. big bad rich entertainment conglomerate vs. pub with a trad session).
"distinguish between the types of potential users (i.e. big bad rich entertainment conglomerate vs. pub with a trad session)" - that sums it all up. One would expect the big commercial concerns (Riverdance, Lord of the Dance, etc) who make millions out of trad to make an adequate contribution to those who create the music. However, a few lads in a pub playing for enjoyment, to keep the tradition alive and please the punters is a totally different thing and I would hate to think that such groups would be hounded for a few measly cents just because they've included a some newly composed tunes in their repertoire.
I'm afraid that is just an inaccurate example. The entertainment conglomerate does pay vastly more. For public performance a venue is charged for their amount of seats by PRS. In the UK while I had a pub our PRS bill was about £700 per year for 2 gigs a week, a couple of sessions and a juke box and telly. You tell them all the session tunes are trad. No tune writer I know has any objections to having there tunes played at sessions. Not to mention it is not the few lads playing to keep the tradition alive that pay the PRS, it's the pub owner. If the pub owner is not making more that that pittance back fron beer sales then you are in the wrong pub.
And more importantly, when a band records your tune, what Kess is asking about, MCPS pays the writer per CD pressed. If the guy you play with in the pub records a CD and presses only 500 copies he he pay very little MCPS, whereas if Riverdance press 500,000 copies with your tune on it you will get a very nice cheque.
Royalites for Tunes?
Royalites for Tunes?
I was just wondering if I wrote a few tunes that some sucessful bands recorded and put out on their cds would I get paid for them?
Cheers
K
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by Kess
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
depends on what stipulations or agreements you make with the band in question. Otherwise you'd have to get the songs published through one of the outfits like ASCAP or BMI or whatever but you'd then only get royalties for radio play or public performance and even then your only talking a few pennies per. You'd be better off just selling the tunes outright to the band for $50 a pop and consider yourself lucky.
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by greybeardd
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
Kess, I see you're in Belfast so greybeardds advice isn't relevant to you.
I you write tunes in UK or Ireland and a band is to record them then you should register yourself with PRS and MCPS. It casts about £150 all in if I remember right though it may have gone up a bit. You can find them online.
When a CD gets made it has to have an MCPS license before it is pressed and the artist has to list the tunes and duration that are to be on the CD. You will then get paid a royalty every quarter. When a band plays live at a decent venue or festival they should fill out a PRS form which pays the writer for public performance of their tunes. Altogether it doesn't add up to a lot unless you have dozens of tunes published and recorded or played by well known artists.
Never sell your rights to a band or anyone else if you can help it.
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by bogman
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
I wouldn't take greybeardd's advice in the states either, for the record. As it stands, I believe the royalty rate for a recording of a tune under 5 minutes long is $.09, meaning that if said "popular band" burns only 1000 CDs (a relatively small number for a "popular" band), you'd be due $90 on the CDs alone... Without selling rights to anything.
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by Georgi
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
And if the tune has not been commercially recorded previously, the statutory rate (Georgi's $.09, if that is current - I have no idea) doesn't apply and you are free to negotiate whatever rate you can agree on with the band and you have the right to refuse permission if they don't offer enough. If it has been recorded, you can still negotiate the rate, but now the band has the right to record it without your permission and pay you the statutory rate if your demands are too high for them.
In other words, if it's a really popular band that you think will sell lots of copies but they have lots of options of tunes to use, you can improve your chances of them choosing yours by offering them a lower rate than your competitors, planning to make up for it in volume. Or if it's a friend's band and you know they can't afford the statutory rate, you can allow them to use your tune for a lower rate or for free if you want. Or, if it hasn't been recorded yet and the popular band really, really wants your tune and nothing else will satisfy them, then you can hold out for whatever the market will bear.
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by GaryAMartin
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
I'd say dedicate them to the greater good - why look for money? How would you show that they are truly original?
Although the thread about the pub there yesterday seems to indicate that it doesn't matter if they are original or not, just as long as you claim them as yours!!
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by the wounded hussar
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
In fact, it's actually reminiscent of the old gold rush days - maybe everyone should get in there now and register their ownership of traditional tunes!!!
Though on reflection, the returns mightn't be great!!
# Posted on August 29th 2008 by the wounded hussar
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
My own personal viewpoint on royalties for trad is that it's totally out of place with the whole spirit of the thing. Trad to me is about not just the tunes but also the camaraderie and sharing, etc. Commercialsation would demean the whole process. It could also get a bit ludicrous in situations where if you include such a tune in your session set, the pub landlord has to send 19 cents off to some collection agency!
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by Bannerman
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
So, I'm glancing over the comments and instead of "statutory rate," I read something entirely different...
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by wyogal
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
It gets worse, wyogal--it's also known as a "mechanical"....
(royalty, that is).
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by John Galt
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
Funny, the greater good theory is interesting but it's unusual for it to be put forward by folk who have had tunes published. It's easy to suggest giving away someone else's work.
A recording is usually sold commercially. The Record Company make money, the shops make money, the distributor makes money, the recording artist makes money so why do you think the person who wrote the tune should be the only person not to make anything?
I suppose you think file-sharing is cool too? If a trad musician spends all their time playing, practicing, recording and writing the odd tune how do they make a living if they have to give their services for free all the time? They already give lots for free. Give me a break. Art should be free!!! Tell that to the poor b*stards who have to come up with the stuff.
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by bogman
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
royalties and rates and statutory whatevers are fine on paper but the music industry doesn't work like that. I have 4 friends who between them have written some 50 songs between them, folk, trad country... and put out 6 Cd's between them, and they sat down one evening and figured out that, between them, over the last 25 years they have received about $120 in royalties. The recording industry sets the rules and they rules are there to make the industry money not song writers. So I say stick it to the man and just enjoy the fact thqt your sone is out there being enjoyed. (or like i said just sell em out right to the band. ) lots of guys in Nashville made a living doing just that.
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by greybeardd
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
Greybeardd, the recording industry do not set the rules for mechanical rights. Where Kess is from they are set by MCPS and PRS. Record Companies negotiate royalties on sales and publishing. In order to earn $120 for 50 self penned songs on 6 albums in this country your friends would have to have sold about a total of a couple hundred CD's at the most, which is not very many in 25 years
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by bogman
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
Sorry, that was not meant to come across as bitchy.
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by bogman
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
50 songs among 4 songwriters isn't much. It basically means they are all beginners who shouldn't expect to be making money for their writing.
There's a famous story about the great Texas songwriter Townes van Zandt judging a songwriting contest. Someone glanced over his shoulder at his notes, which consisted of a single number assigned to each contestant. The numbers varied wildly, for example: 43, 897, 120000, 28, 63, 427, etc. When asked what his numbers meant, he said it was how many songs the person would have to write before writing a good one.
A friend of mine, who is a highly regarded songwriter, has written a song just about every week for about 35 years. He has 15 CDs of original songs, representing roughly the best 10% of his output. He doesn't make much from royalties, but it helps pay the bills. A well-known singer recorded one of his songs, which then got used in a TV show. That royalty paid the rent on his tiny apartment for a year.
If a creative artist automatically puts all of their works in the public domain, they are allowing the huge entertainment industry to use their works without compensation. What's unfortunate is that when the writer allows an organization to administer the rights to use the work, that organization doesn't distinguish between the types of potential users (i.e. big bad rich entertainment conglomerate vs. pub with a trad session).
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by GaryAMartin
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
"distinguish between the types of potential users (i.e. big bad rich entertainment conglomerate vs. pub with a trad session)" - that sums it all up. One would expect the big commercial concerns (Riverdance, Lord of the Dance, etc) who make millions out of trad to make an adequate contribution to those who create the music. However, a few lads in a pub playing for enjoyment, to keep the tradition alive and please the punters is a totally different thing and I would hate to think that such groups would be hounded for a few measly cents just because they've included a some newly composed tunes in their repertoire.
# Posted on August 30th 2008 by Bannerman
Re: Royalites for Tunes?
I'm afraid that is just an inaccurate example. The entertainment conglomerate does pay vastly more. For public performance a venue is charged for their amount of seats by PRS. In the UK while I had a pub our PRS bill was about £700 per year for 2 gigs a week, a couple of sessions and a juke box and telly. You tell them all the session tunes are trad. No tune writer I know has any objections to having there tunes played at sessions. Not to mention it is not the few lads playing to keep the tradition alive that pay the PRS, it's the pub owner. If the pub owner is not making more that that pittance back fron beer sales then you are in the wrong pub.
And more importantly, when a band records your tune, what Kess is asking about, MCPS pays the writer per CD pressed. If the guy you play with in the pub records a CD and presses only 500 copies he he pay very little MCPS, whereas if Riverdance press 500,000 copies with your tune on it you will get a very nice cheque.
# Posted on August 31st 2008 by bogman