Myths

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fletcher
  • Start date Start date
What kills me is if you spent even half the time actually learning the names of a few chords and the nature of a few of the very basic concepts of western music theory as you did defending your reasons for not learning that stuff, this argument would not even be happening.

It's like the worker who puts twice as much effort into "looking busy" than he would if he actually did the work.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
What kills me is if you spent even half the time actually learning the names of a few chords and the nature of a few of the very basic concepts of western music theory as you did defending your reasons for not learning that stuff, this argument would not even be happening.

It's like the worker who puts twice as much effort into "looking busy" than he would if he actually did the work.

G.

"Looking busy"??? lol. Did you hear the recording quality of the song I posted? Lets hear something you and your "theory" did that even comes close .. thought so. You can't teach me jack shit when it comes to producing music, pal. That's the reality of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NL5
myth #7586: you should never drink a lager with a pork and mango chutney dish
 
myth # 8575809: peanut butter is best served on my balls.
 
Sillyhat said:
For someone who spent much of their posts in this thread lashing out against what they thought they read instead of what was actually said, you certainly are a smug little son of a bitch, aren't you?


Um, you mean the ONE post of yours I misread (and by the way edited my post before you said anything). Yeah, I did this the whoooole thread all right!

A may be smug, may even be a sumbitch, but at 6' 235lbs aint little!

I've debated, but haven't resorted to insults, only put a couple of people in their place when they did.
 
myth #3215: there is any solid logical or experimental evidence for string theory.
 
EDAN said:
"Looking busy"??? lol. Did you hear the recording quality of the song I posted? Lets hear something you and your "theory" did that even comes close .. thought so. You can't teach me jack shit when it comes to producing music, pal. That's the reality of it.


Where is the link to the song? I can't find it.

Thanks!
 
Why is it that the people who talk the most about artistic freedom, rule breaking, and such almost always come up with the safest, cliched, most normal sounding stuff?

Why would anyone get apoplectic about rules that they didn't know existed but seem to follow anyway?
 
I'm home guys.....6 hour drive, and nothings been settled here 'cept for the fact Giraffe likes to put peanut butter on his nuts, and have the cat lick it off.... :D

Nice.....
 
I'm still waiting, Sergeant Edan, sir.

Describe to me how the mechanism for collecting mechanical royalties works. And while you're at it, describe to me how copyright law applies to your songs.

I have a decent general understanding of this stuff, though I admit I'm no entertainment lawyer. Maybe I have a detail wrong somewhere. If I do, I will be the first to admit it and cede that particular point to you.

But I'm still waiting for you to take me up on my acceptance of your offer to "school me". Hey, maybe you can truely teach us all something here and this thread can be pulled out of the sludge that it has sunken into.

In the meantime, nobody has been schooled on anything other than the impression that you're too lazy to learn a very rudimentary amount of information regarding basic, basic music theory and nomenclature. Which, BTW, you cannot possibly know whether it will help you or not if you don't even know it. It's like the child at the dinner table who says that he won't eat peas because they tastes bad, when he's never even tasted them.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
It's like the child at the dinner table who says that he won't eat peas because they tastes bad, when he's never even tasted them.

G.

I have to say, I'm impressed with all your analogies. :p
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Myth #331. This thread is still of any use to anybody.

G.

This is not a myth.

I am still enthralled with this thread. I kinda hope in never ends, although I know it's going to. :(
 
Sillyhat said:
Why is it that the people who talk the most about artistic freedom, rule breaking, and such almost always come up with the safest, cliched, most normal sounding stuff?

Why would anyone get apoplectic about rules that they didn't know existed but seem to follow anyway?


Are you talking about the song I produced that you said sounded great?

You are confusing rules with established working parameters. Just because most burgers are round doesn't mean it's a rule, ask Wendy's. The fact the round burgers are more or less the standard the world over simply says people like then that way, easy to eat, perfect size etc. You don't have to mess with something just to try and make it different for the sake of it. Popular songs work well within a framework, they work this way for many reasons, it's not a rule. I have the book "Behind The Glass" and although I can't recall what producer said what off the top of my head I do remember one saying NEVER hard pan instruments in a mix, it doesn't sound natural and is an amatureish mistake while a few chapters up some other producer said he hard pans things all the time, that it adds seperation and interest. There are no rules, you only limit yourself if you think there are. Oh, for those gear snobs who haven't read it do yourself a favor and do so, more than a couple big time producers use and recommend some cheap ass consumer gear, such as Behringer, Boss, Digitech and I think TC if memory serves me right, yes, I'm sure it was one of the TC consumer grade mastering processors.
 
EDAN said:
You are confusing rules with established working parameters.
What's the difference? If you don't do it a certain way, there will be concequences. Once again, it seems like you have a bigger problem with the word than the concept.
 
Sillyhat said:
What's the difference? If you don't do it a certain way, there will be concequences. Once again, it seems like you have a bigger problem with the word than the concept.
Yeah, but you have a silly hat!
 
Cyrokk said:
myth: this thread is useful past page one.
Hey, that's not a myth...I've posted some really killer shit in here after the first page. And Giraffe is lathering up his nuts with peanut butter....
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I'm still waiting, Sergeant Edan, sir.

Describe to me how the mechanism for collecting mechanical royalties works. And while you're at it, describe to me how copyright law applies to your songs.

I have a decent general understanding of this stuff, though I admit I'm no entertainment lawyer. Maybe I have a detail wrong somewhere. If I do, I will be the first to admit it and cede that particular point to you.

But I'm still waiting for you to take me up on my acceptance of your offer to "school me". Hey, maybe you can truely teach us all something here and this thread can be pulled out of the sludge that it has sunken into.

In the meantime, nobody has been schooled on anything other than the impression that you're too lazy to learn a very rudimentary amount of information regarding basic, basic music theory and nomenclature. Which, BTW, you cannot possibly know whether it will help you or not if you don't even know it. It's like the child at the dinner table who says that he won't eat peas because they tastes bad, when he's never even tasted them.

G.


I didn't know you were waiting, nevermind still waiting. I'd be happy to ...

First lets start with copyright. A song is copyrighted as soon as it's written. It's up to the writer/writers/publisher to register the song with the copyright office. To do this you simply send them a recording of the song along with a lyric sheet and $30 bucks. You can also register many songs as at once under a complete work for the same amount of money but if any song within that work gets released you will have to file that song seperate from the rest. Once you register a song/songs it will take a few months for the copyright office to send you a notice. The copyright office does not listen or even look at your songs, they simply get filed away and the only time they will come out is if there is a lawsuit. Now, if you are an outside songwriter who writes for other artists there is little reason to register your songs as it could get very expensive. In Nashville most songs don't get registered until they are about to be released on an album and sometimes even after they are released and this is done by the publisher as the publisher owns the song (the publisher could me the songwriter, but most likely it's in outside publisher who got the song cut). Songs are pitched for years and years in Nashville before they ever get registered with the copyright office. It's very rare a song is actually stolen and I believe over 90% of the cases are dismissed, don't hold me to that number, but it's what I recall reading. Now once the song is selling it's the record labels job to gather sales data and pay the Harry Fox Agency (there are other much smaller agencies) the mechanical royalty rate (set by the gov.) which is now either 9 or 9.5 cents an album sold. If you have more than one song on an album you get the rate for each song. The label pays HFA quartly and then HFA pays the songwriter. There are many loopholes which allow the label to IMO screw the songwriter, Promo CD's, international releases etc pay zero to less than the 9 or 9.5 cents and it takes a lot longer for the songwriter to collect. The publisher (usually) gets none of this money, only the songwriter. If you are a staff songwriters getting a draw from a publisher sometimes they try and get a piece of the mechanicals to recoup your advance, but this is rare and most all attorneys in the know would advise against the songwriter they represent accepting this.

Now, on to performance roylties, these anywhere your song gets played in public besides restuarants, on the radio, in an elevator, in your local club, on TV etc. (movies are different and are negotiated by the publisher). The songwriter first has to be affiliated with a performance rights organization such as ASCAP or BMI, songwriters join for free, publishers pay a fee to belong. ASCAP and BMI have different ways of calculating performance royalties. There are blanket fees club owners, store owners, etc have to pay to the PRO's (performance rights organizations) which have to do with the size of the club. These fees are usually in the hundreds and are paid yearly. So every club that has live conver music around the country (and other countries) pay these fees the the PROs who inturn splice it up and pay their songwriters. Now, the big money is in a hit song. This is very confusing and I can assure you only the attorneys at the PROs no exactly who gets what and why, but the basic way it works is this. Market size for the radio station determines a lot, bigger markets mean more people are listening and requesting any given song and gives the song more exposure overal. The time of day a song is played matters as well, drive time I believe pays the most and midnight until six am I believe pays the least. Depending on the market and time a song will earn anywhere from 10 cents to 25 cents or more a spin. An average pop hit song might get two or three million spins a year, a mega hit might get over five million. Devide those spins by an average of say 17 cents and you can see where the big money comes from. There are also other more indepth and involved factors which can double for a time the airplay royalties. The songwriter and publishers are the only people who make performance royalties. That is to say the singer doesn't make a cent unless they wrote the song. Of course in pop and rock music most bands write their own music and thus can make a lot of money. In country or MOR (i.e Celen Dion, etc) as well as some pop outside writers write about two thirds of hit songs and they and they alone get the royalties. I should explain that the publisher owns the song, the publisher is you unless you sign part or all of the song away. Although an outside writer can make any deal they want with a publisher the most typical is one where the publisher owns the song 100% and it is his responsiblity to pitch the song and try to secure a cut, it is also his job to collect all money owed from the PROs and pay the songwriter. Now, here's where it gets confusing. Although the publisher owns the song, the songwriter always, by law, gets at least half of the performace royalties. Now, lets say you are co-publisher where you own half the publishing and a "real" publisher owns the other half, You would than get your writers share of performance royalties plus half of the publishing, meaning you earn 75 percent and your co-publisher get 25 percent. In somewhat, but not all that, rare cases a songwriter will own all of his own publishing, in these cases the writer usually works with an administrater. who fuctions somewhat like a publisher minus the pitching of your songs, they do the paper work, collect money owed etc for a percentage, usually 10%-20%. I'm sure a forgot a few things, but I'm getting tired!

Ps. Excuse the typos and spelling, I need a nap.
 
Back
Top