Comments on: Music Library POV

By: Art

Art — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:08:23 +0000

Not moot at all as many libraries do sell music online and split the proceeds with the writer. The libraries have the option to answer the question or not. Case in point: Mark has volunteered to answer for his company.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:09:20 +0000

I would answer it.

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:01:31 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by MusicLibraryRpt: [New/Updated Post] Music Library POV http://toast.tw/1003fw...

By: Doc

Doc — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 06:58:22 +0000

Then the question should be moot since there are many gratis sync/master deals that are PRO dependent. Either way, it’s not a question that I would expect a library to answer.

By: Art

Art — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 05:45:54 +0000

I need to clarify. I’m not talking about PRO income but the average income a writer might make from sites that are selling online. Sites such as Yooka Music, Audiosparx, Audiomicro, etc. Hope that’s clearer.

By: Art

Art — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:55:01 +0000

Were only talking averages not individual writer’s income. Of course it would be up to the libraries but it doesn’t hurt to ask.

By: Doc

Doc — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:20:08 +0000

Too many variables and none of anyone’s business unless the writer’s wish to reveal their income. The libraries don’t have time for this. Why would they offer this information up when it’s not related to their bottom line directly. They have music pouring in and don’t really have a reason to prove this to potential writers, unless of course it’s someone like Snoop Dogg. I’m sure someone explained the potential income of a writer before he decided to work with Extreme, or APM.

By: Dean

Dean — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:12:25 +0000

You’re right, the average income would be great to know!

How about also making it very clear what type of business they’re in, perhaps categorizing them (now that you have so many!). It seems to me that most libraries fall into these categories:

1) royalty free
2) license fee oriented
3) PRO royalty oriented

4) a combination thereof

By: Art

Art — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:10:03 +0000

Some great ideas. I like the Alexa idea and I’ll look into that.

I still like the idea of some kind of average income, maybe based on average number tracks per genre. I realize there are a lot of variables but I think it would be helpful. There is a lot of work that goes into uploading music, tagging, categorizing, describing, etc. It would be nice to know how much “gold” is at the end of that particular rainbow:)

Of course it all depends on how much each library would want to participate and what they might consider proprietary.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:07:07 +0000

Great idea Art. I would be happy to participate.

Maybe a high/low type income statement like ‘our composers make between $xx.xx and $xxxx.xx on average every month’.

Alexa info is a great suggestion.