Marketing and promotion - an experiment

  • Thread starter Thread starter rob aylestone
  • Start date Start date
rob aylestone

rob aylestone

Moderator
We have often mentioned what you actually do with music once you create it, so I have had an idea.
I've used Distrokids, CDbaby, Record Union Songtradr to release stuff in the past, and with the exception of Distrokids who screwed me over, they all have differences.
What I came up with was a collection of a few tracks from an old project, that is now officially dead, but usable. They have issues on a number of fronts, and actually releasing them was difficult. I thought it might help other people if I explain the trouble I have had. The tracks are stage tracks - add in this case girl singer, a few musicians and the tracks and you have a show. I've played in the missing live tracks - well, actually, I had recorded them as scratch tracks to help the mix, and then muted them - so just put them back. The songs were for a Carpenters tribute show - think theatres. They are for public consumption essentially karaoke tracks I suppose - sing alongs. Karaoke is a problem with some distributors, but not others, but releasing this has been quite interesting - as in the variety of issues. I'll redact identifying info of course, but you can see the sort of issues that crop up.
Let's start with Record Union - who are always friendly and quite personal. For newer members - when I first signed up for this American hosted forum - I had just got my adoption records unsealed so I joined with my American dad's birth name - Robert Aylestone. My adopted name is Paul Johnson - so I'm Rob here, Paul on the releases. Probably stupid to use it, but I did!

Hi Paul,
XXXX here, from the Content team at Record Union. 

We've reviewed your release "Close to You - Karaoke Version" with UPC: 7321170XXXX and "Goodbye to Love - Karaoke version"
with UPC 73211XXXX, and it's been flagged for containing original recordings by another artist.
When releasing music containing samples, licenses and/or written permissions from the original copyright holder(s) are required. Please send us the documentation needed, and we’ll proceed from there.
In the case of samples of recorded material, we'll need to see documentation from both the publishing house for the songwriter/composer and from the record label with rights to the recording.
If you do not own the right to distribute all contents of your release: We advise you to remove the release from your account, to prevent the subscription from renewing in the future. 

Releasing copyrighted material is a serious breach of copyright law and a violation of our user agreement.
Let me know if you have any questions on the above. 

Best regards,

Now - the UK situation is that we don't need clearance for streaming services, but I am a PRS member here, and the original composers get their percentage from the distribution. However, it was flagged too for containing original samples from the original - nope, all me and my singers. So no original Carpenters audio at all. With a different distributer - Songtradr - I got this notification
Hi Paul,

Your release Stage Tracks 2 failed validation and we may require more info. Please log into your account to find out more.
Logging just had the release set to inactive with this message
Your Release was Rejected

Hi,

Please note, we are unable to distribute Karaoke tracks at this time.

So that was record union and songtradr out for this release. I moved onto CDBaby. I tried tunecore to be honest where I have an account, but something prevented me using them (my account is their but no release - not quite sure why I could not use them).

CDBaby took the release in the end - but even cover art can get you in trouble. Read this:

Hi Paul,
The #1 reason why cover art gets rejected on streaming platforms is...

... the text on the image doesn't exactly match the info on your release.

If you’re a Nova Scotian fiddle group called The Halifax Pickers, but your album art says just Halifax Pickers, your cover art will get rejected.

If you’re a singer-songwriter who goes by J.B. Smooth, then the album art CANNOT say JB Smooth. The punctuation must be the exact same on both your album and artist name.

Pretty straightforward, right? That's the most important thing to know.

You can check out this cover art guide for a complete list of all the rules.

In my case - trademarks also matter. 'Carpenters' is Trademarked. My release of Carpenters tracks cannot include that name anywhere - let alone the exact typography they used. I wanted Carpenters Karaoke Tracks - absolute no no. Even the word Carpenters in Arial in the image was noted and rejected. The upshot is you cannot use the original artists name, image, style and anything at all that could rock the boat.

The image I ended up was a shot I took myself, and edited in photoshop. The title Stage Tracks 2 (there having been a Stage Tracks many years before) worked. CdBaby used Paul Johnson. Sometimes Sontradr won't let me use that, so then it becomes Paul Robert Johnson. It happened by mistake once from the metadata, so I think somehow they get linked. Worse is that Spotify put some of US Rap artist Paul Johnson in my music, and he gets my go to sleep music in his. There seems no way to correct this kind of thing.

Lastly income. Tiny! I get payments direct from CDbaby, Songtradr and Record Union - often the money is so low, it does not meet their threshold and gets hung over. However - as soon as the songs are live, I register them on the UK PRS system, and the payments from that can be much more pleasing. A few million streams in Europe and the US can pay decent money.

For this experiment I have tried a new system CDBaby offered - promotion via a system called hear now. I paid them 28 US Dollars to promote the album. Just to see what happens. There is a little web page set up that makes your music available with links.
This is what you get for $28 hearNow link

I'll give it a few months then come back and update this topic and let you know what info I get and any real response. I won't promote it in any other way myself, so it will be realistic. At one point I nearly gave up - the Carpenters just too much trouble. I thought of bands like the Eagles, known for their youtube takedowns - especially Hotel California. I'd imagine releasing a cover of any Eagles songs would be worse than this example.

If you have had success or failure - please feel free to add them here. It could make life easier for people knowing they are not alone in release woes!
 
It's stuff like this that make me thankful I don't need to make a living doing music. You almost need a lawyer just to navigate the various schemes. I guess it was simpler in the old days... let the record company do that legal stuff. Of course they probably took most of the money from it, so maybe it wasn't a lot better unless you were a major artist and had the clout to have your lawyer deal with the record company's lawyers!
 
I got better traction once I treated each release like a mini event and built some buzz around it. Leaning on stuff I’d learned from XXXxXXx helped me shape a clearer story and create small launch moments that felt more polished without going overboard. Pairing that with consistent posting and a simple mailing list made my releases feel way less like they were disappearing into the void.

Edit
I had to remove the link to a production services link above because it set off an alert on my computer. I tried it on another and it warned me it was unable to display the site?
Rob Mods
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Happened again - I've got a pile of Beach Boys releases doing quite well, but just had another failure.

I agreed to be involved with an experiment for a guy doing a Doctorate at a well know university with a good music department. He was interested in how age and damaged hearing changes impact on how we record and mix. He was looking for a mix done a while ago, then a repeat - possibly a remix, or if necessary new material. The idea would then be that the changes are studied and at some point there would be a visit and a detailed hearing assessment. I had an interview via Teams and we discussed what we could do and I said I thought I could dig up one of the old Beach Boy tribute band tracks from 2013 or thereabouts and I sent him the original mix. for some reason at that time we never did anything with it.

I managed to find the original tracks, but discovered lots of what I had were stems that had been treated - so double tracked vocals, with reverb. They were not that 'together' - maybe that is why they got rejected. Not really good enough. Then I found the old folder with our live show recordings. We'd hang a macbook on the mixer and press record - usually 15 or so tracks. I figured that cubase can now align tracks pretty well, so I started again and re-recorded the song. Being, as was our way, as faithful to the original track as we could get.

The thing is done, but trying to release it has failed - three of the usual aggregators/distributors are convinced it is the original. Sounds like a Brit singing with the original tracks. All the licences required are sorted, but they seem to use AI and AI says we have used samples of originals. They have even found that we are using likenesses of the original musicians on the cover - when it's us!

I've spent time and energy making a pretty close version of the original and it seems it's too close. Doesn't really matter - but songtradr specifically allows covers and yet won't allow this one. I'll put the track up for a day or two - but then need to remove it.
 

Attachments

The trouble is that the sleigh bells and the 'knocking noise' I suspect trigger the AI as they are regular throughout - sort of a fingerprint maybe?
 
Sounds good Rob. Can you put up the picture you have? I would like to see how close a band of Brits look to a sixties surf band.

Try taking out the parts of the song you think might be getting popped as the original. It would be interesting to find out what it is. I did a ripoff of a Neil Young song for fun with a different arrangement and lyrics, and didn't want to go to the trouble to record all the parts because I figured it would not pass YouTube copyright. I used RX8 to remove the vocal and added mine. That didn't get past the copyright check. So I next removed the electric guitar and played that part myself. That version was OK. So in my case the guitar part was the "fingerprint".
 
Firstly great job on God Only Knows!

I signed up with Distrokid a few years back and because of the way the charge on covers I have never uploaded a cover. Consequently to date with the 3 original songs I uploaded I have surpassed the $2 mark in earnings! Woo Hoo! Truth is unless your song gets many many millions of streams ( ya know it goes viral) you're not going to be seeing any big revenues..

I am hoping this year to get busy producing a lot of my originals from the last 50 years. I ordered an mac mini M4 with the Logic pro package which has some amazing new AI tools. Should have in the next few weeks. I am also considering using Suno AI to expedite the process although I am hesitant to do that. I never thought I'd be doing covers but after 40 years of snubbing the idea, I have warmed up to it and enjoy the heck out of it.

LANDR not only has some great stem splitting AI but also provides a better deal on uploading and marketing Cover Songs. I'm dumping Distrokid and landing on LANDR.

My old friend and guitarist from my CDR days sent me a version of David Essex's "Rock on" yesterday. He recorded everything on a standalone multitrack recorder several years ago...Damn it is Amazing...He turned a very cool song into a very cool Killer electric guitar song. Think Hendrix or Vai sitting in on David's session. I'll try and get his permission to post it here ..mind blowing IMO.

Keep on Keeping on brother!
 
Last edited:
Gave up on soundtradr for this one - no response to emails, so gave landr a go. Decided on the plan - one artist useful stuff. Did the release with them. However - I had to get a harry fox licence - but it was only £15. Then I had to upgrade my plan (15 mins old) to the next one because I wanted to monetise it, which was not included in the first package and one release has now cost me about £70 in total - quite a bit more than some of the others. As an experiment I first thought that I'd do the one off plan, but that didn't work price wise, so it turned into another which 90% of the way through revealed a snag, so the price I started with was very different from the end price. I'm still waiting to get the approval confirmed. If I'm reading the system correctly - while they invite covers, they're expensive to get licenced properly. I'm going to run this release and monitor it carefully to see if it appears properly. Some of my stuff on Spotify, through Songtradr I see on my spotify subscription - but asking alexa to play it on spotify does not find it, and I don't know why. If I shazzam my material, it finds it in a few seconds but some of the songtradr releases do NOT get found. Cannot find any sort of common denominator. If I try a track that is a close copy of an original - it identifies mine, not the original one - but how it works is beyond me at the mo. Whatever the magic algorithm is, I don't know it. one that seems 50/50 success wise I wonder if it is geographically limited. If anyone NOT in the UK could try to shazzam (or similar) this track and tell me if it comes back to paul johnson, that would maybe help identify if where in the world is important?

or the same track on youtube
 
Getting more weird! The god only knows song has been rejected by landr, because the name of the band must be changed. U.K. beach boys is not valid. Odd, as the U.K. performing rights society happily pay royalties to it and Spotify and the others have no issues. So the sizeable chunk of money I have invested in trying them is wasted. I wonder if they will refund? I suspect another battle to fight.
 
Good picture Rob. I don't see how anybody could mistake the U.K. Beach Boys for the '60's original. Maybe it's the "Beach Boys" name that does it. Good luck with your experiment.
 
Tried another - and they too responded with no, so tried cdbaby - who initially said unlikely, I pressed and they sort of changed their mind. So - another 29.99 for an easy song licence (Harry fox payment wasted) and 9.99 for the release, and I'm waiting. Not trouble free because all sorts of end destinations greyed out. It seems that cover songs cost you a lot to distribute, but restrict earning potential, even when you licence the damn things. I've not pushed the greyed out ones, or paid extra money to 'ungrey' them because if the release goes live, then I make more money direct from PRS in the UK and ASCAP - who take years, but eventually get the royalties originally tagged to your distributor. If I can get it published, then the details once then passed to PRS seem to work better. Karaoke, backing tracks and background versions are also not cover songs - so instrumentals are sort of OK. Putting in a melody, removing any mention of lyrics seems to not trigger the system. The on golden pond I mentioned above - was an instrument, so a new version of an instrumental is not, bizarrely, a cover??? Makes no sense at all.

What it really means in practice is you won't get hardly any money from a cover song - UNLESS - you are able to meet the requirements of entry to a rights society. This needs you to be a composer, which is how I got in. Composing ends to fade out songs seems to do the trick here. Arranging is not enough - you need to create new material. Thats how I get the performance royalties. Nightmare stuff navigating this.
 
Update time. Mechanical licence paid for and I have the certificate! CDBaby sent me lots of 'how to promote your release stuff, and then today - STOP - They want me to change the band name despite having got this from them before I paid the money and did the licence.
Dear Paul,
In preparing your submission for distribution, we noticed an issue that requires your action.

-Our digital partners require that artist names be an actual performing artist or group, NOT a description of the music (ex. Music for Relaxation, Comedy Music, etc.). Please update your artist name and resubmit. (For more info: https://support.cdbaby.com/hc/en-us/articles/210998603)

*** PLEASE NOTE: Please do not use "Beach Boys" as part of your artist name, as this is obviously a Beach Boys tribute project. Make sure you change your artwork to match whatever new band/artist name you choose. ***

Previously they said this.
Hi there,


It is possible to distribute music through CD Baby under a band name that is already in use on platforms like Spotify, Apple Music, and YouTube, even if that name is registered with PRS. However, using a name that is already in use can lead to your music being mixed up with other artists’ releases on these platforms. This is a common issue as more music is distributed globally. If your music is incorrectly grouped with another artist’s work, we can file an Artist Separation request with our partners to help correct the mix-up. Please be aware that using a duplicate band name may also carry legal risks, so it is advisable to consider the potential for confusion and consult legal guidance if needed.
I have replied so will have to wait. In fact some of my own music is mixed up with a rapper with the same name - he in much more popular than me and the mix up generated no issues.
This is really doing my head in and I have three more tracks that I don't know what to do with?
 
What a pain in the ass.
 
I'm glad I don't try to monetize anything. There are so many conflicting rules that it's nearly impossible to navigate this.
 
They have decided it is a no no - you cannot use any other name in your band or artist name that is already in use. I'm now waiting to see if they will do a refund - no joke as trying to release one song has now cost me over £100! Just madness.
 
CDBaby have agreed to refund me. so I have few options left now - I'll report back if I find any other distributors. They are absolutely certain that you cannot incorporate another band's name into a new release any longer.
 
Sorry for yet another update - but hopefully my tails of woe might help other people navigate the marsh. Ditto replied to my advance question about was my release with the current name possible and said yes!! I got a really helpful reply and have copied it below. I will report back if it sales through or hits a hidden problem.
Good news: You can absolutely release "God Only Knows" by UK Beach Boys through Ditto Music.

It's common for artists to share the same or similar names. Ditto allows you to use artist names even when other artists share that name - the stores handle this through their automated mapping systems. Since UK Beach Boys already exists on Spotify and other platforms with your previous releases through Songtradr, this actually works in your favor - the stores already recognize this as a legitimate artist name.

The key differences from other distributors:
  • Ditto does not prohibit artist names that are similar to established artists.
  • As long as you're not infringing on a registered trademark or impersonating another artist, you're fine.
  • The Beach Boys situation is clear: "UK Beach Boys" is distinct from "Beach Boys" - you're a tribute band with a different name, and you've been using it legitimately for 20+ years with PRS/ASCAP recognition.
Since you mentioned you have a Pro plan under Paul Johnson, you should know that Pro plans allow 2 artists. This means you can release music under both "Paul Johnson" AND "UK Beach Boys" from the same account - you don't need to create a separate account.
For your cover of "God Only Knows":
For streaming platforms (Spotify, Apple Music, etc.): No license required.
For download stores (iTunes, Amazon): You'll need a Mechanical License.

Since you mentioned you already have the mechanical license, you're all set! Just upload the license documentation at Stage 1 of the Release Builder alongside your tracks.

Without knowing CDBaby's specific reasoning, it's likely they have stricter policies around artist names that contain references to established acts. Ditto's approach is more flexible - we focus on whether there's actual trademark infringement or impersonation, not just similarity.

That does seem a much more sensible system where humans make decisions.
 
Back
Top