bobzilla77 said:

purpleforeverlove said:

He also mentioned that if i want my song played on the radio it should only be so many minutes. I forgot the amout of minutes that he told me a track should be. I remembered him telling me one of my track is a minute 2 long. This is one resson he think i should record it over.

Many artists have made 'radio-play' versions. This is nothing alarming, but maybe you can consider going back to your original producer and have HIM make the radio version. Seems like you really don't trust this other guy. Trust your instincts. I see it all over your words. Good luck

Guys... Just read purpleforeverlove profile page and you can see she's not playing with a full deck. Stop building her up with false hopes and dreams.

cb70 said:

bobzilla77 said:

Here's one example of a scenario in which you might work with a label and still retain ownership of your masters.

.

One of my bands recently made a deal with a label in Europe that's largely a no-cash transaction. We paid for recording & have a completed master of the stereo mix. The label is not giving us an advance, however they are paying for the pressing, handling the dstribution, and working on booking a tour. If they can get us enough $ in guarantees to go over there, they have the organization to do the booking, set us up with equipment and a vehicle, and handle the paperwork. Once the album is pressed we will get a certain number of copies of the vinyl and CD which we can sell on our website or at the shows. They have a promotional dept which will push us in Europe.

.

What does the label get? Rights to distribute the album throughout Europe and Asia for 7 years. After that, rights revert back to us automatically. We can make another deal with them, or another label, at that time.

.

What do we get? The pressing is paid for, distribution is taken care of, and we have PR people working for us. And the potential to do a European tour, with all expenses paid. I mean, we're ultimately paying for it, but we don't have to go out of pocket for plane tickets and hotels, and working with a reputable agency is a must when booking overseas.

.

We're already out of pocket for the recording expenses and not getting that back all at once. But with a few hundred copies headed our way, if we sell them all at full price, we end up with a few thousand dollars, more than enough to recoup. After a certain number of sales, we start getting traditional royalties instead of copies.

.

And we always own the masters. There was no pressure or even suggestions from the label at the time we were making it. They're not putting enough $$ into it to demand a lot of control, which is OK with us since we can work pretty econo and dont want to be controlled.

.

It feels like a step up from our last album, which was funded via Kickstarter. We had total control and total financial responsibility. While it paid for the pressing and allowed us to get it straight into the hands of people who wanted it, it was a lot of work, and didn't really sell enough to recoup all the upfront costs. With this situation, we're attached to a label that already has its own fan base and its own promotional machine, that can take on some of the upfront cost of pressing, mastering, listing fees and so forth. We can work in partnership toward the same goal of selling a lot of records.

would you say this no-cash relationship is a fairly common scenario these days?

thank you everyone for speaking here from your experience -- super-helpful ideas!

i hope that when a prince museum opens, it will include an exhibit that illustrates his music ownership ideals, to help educate visitors about the possibilities.

i feel like wb was a great help in helping make "for you" and "prince", and after that prince had found his everevolving self and could have had great success without them -- he had such great dedication and inspirationand charisma, but would the purple rain film have happened as early on without their help? maybe

PURplEMaPLeSyrup said:

bobzilla77 said:

Here's one example of a scenario in which you might work with a label and still retain ownership of your masters.

.

One of my bands recently made a deal with a label in Europe that's largely a no-cash transaction. We paid for recording & have a completed master of the stereo mix. The label is not giving us an advance, however they are paying for the pressing, handling the dstribution, and working on booking a tour. If they can get us enough $ in guarantees to go over there, they have the organization to do the booking, set us up with equipment and a vehicle, and handle the paperwork. Once the album is pressed we will get a certain number of copies of the vinyl and CD which we can sell on our website or at the shows. They have a promotional dept which will push us in Europe.

.

What does the label get? Rights to distribute the album throughout Europe and Asia for 7 years. After that, rights revert back to us automatically. We can make another deal with them, or another label, at that time.

.

What do we get? The pressing is paid for, distribution is taken care of, and we have PR people working for us. And the potential to do a European tour, with all expenses paid. I mean, we're ultimately paying for it, but we don't have to go out of pocket for plane tickets and hotels, and working with a reputable agency is a must when booking overseas.

.

We're already out of pocket for the recording expenses and not getting that back all at once. But with a few hundred copies headed our way, if we sell them all at full price, we end up with a few thousand dollars, more than enough to recoup. After a certain number of sales, we start getting traditional royalties instead of copies.

.

And we always own the masters. There was no pressure or even suggestions from the label at the time we were making it. They're not putting enough $$ into it to demand a lot of control, which is OK with us since we can work pretty econo and dont want to be controlled.

.

It feels like a step up from our last album, which was funded via Kickstarter. We had total control and total financial responsibility. While it paid for the pressing and allowed us to get it straight into the hands of people who wanted it, it was a lot of work, and didn't really sell enough to recoup all the upfront costs. With this situation, we're attached to a label that already has its own fan base and its own promotional machine, that can take on some of the upfront cost of pressing, mastering, listing fees and so forth. We can work in partnership toward the same goal of selling a lot of records.

would you say this no-cash relationship is a fairly common scenario these days?

thank you everyone for speaking here from your experience -- super-helpful ideas!

i hope that when a prince museum opens, it will include an exhibit that illustrates his music ownership ideals, to help educate visitors about the possibilities.

i feel like wb was a great help in helping make "for you" and "prince", and after that prince had found his everevolving self and could have had great success without them -- he had such great dedication and inspirationand charisma, but would the purple rain film have happened as early on without their help? maybe

I missed this question a while back.

.

I think that type of distribution deal is becoming more common these days. We got a few similar offers when we sent our new album around, and went with the company that looked like it could do the most for us.

.

I guess it helps that the people in this band have long histories playing this kind of music and some minimal amount of name recognition. And again I'm talking the world of underground rock labels, not sure what the landscape is like for other kinds of music.

IMO the beat producer does NOT have rights to royalties, unless said programmer can produce a contract spelling out the terms of such royalties signed by both of you. The payment that you made for the beats should preclude anybody else's claim to future royalties. Of course, untill or unless the sale of the music nets any substantial profit, the argument is moot anyway. Theoretical future royalties don't happen untill the songs make a bunch of money. For your future peace of mind, purchasing the beats was a sound investment. You now own some beats that I assume you like, and can do whatever you want with for the rest of your life.