TweetRecord producer's income has always been based on upfront advances and percentages of sales, which, on a successful record would generate income for many years. With the new model for music revenue, based on licensing and advertising revenue (i.e. money a producer rarely sees) how can a producer still make a living?
The following is an excerpt/sample chapter from the revolutionary new book on music business survival, 100 Answers to 50 Questions on the Music Business , by industry veteran, Moses Avalon.
Moses Avalon
As income from direct record sales becomes more tenuous, producers can no longer afford to trust that the standard compensation three-to-five points on physical sales can generate enough cash to pay for the cost of production, let alone their personal bills, or God forbid, a profit. With budgets shrinking and upfront fees diminishing, unless the producer happens to be one of the top 10 players who can still command a six- figure fee, they may become an endangered species. Add to this is the fact that auditing a record label’s physical sales was already hard enough, but auditing ad-based revenue and blanket licensing is nearly impossible. With this new financial reality, what will producers do to maintain enough of a margin to allow them to take risks on new acts?
FOLLOW THE LEADER
Just like record companies are focusing on inking 360 Deals with their acts, which take revenue from live shows and merchandise, and just as publishers now want to participate in the recording advances of their writers, the producer too needs to focus on sharing in more than just sales of recorded music of their artist/client; the producer royalty structure needs to include all income the recording generates, which includes airplay, film and TV sync licenses and publishing revenue.
There is quite a bit of opposition to this concept from songwriting public performance societies like ASCAP and BMI, who are trying to protect the interests of their members. But somewhere a new standard will have to emerge, or the profession will disintegrate and artists will be left to produce themselves.
This may sound tempting if you’re an artist who feels that labels homogenize music too much already, but not to labels who invest massive amounts in the artist’s development, especially when labels see already slumping sales dipping further against those acts that can afford a platinum-grade producer.
When evaluating which acts to invest in, labels now look at the entire team, which should include the producer, not just the demos, a lawyer and a fan page.
This is a new dynamic. In the past, the label, more often than not, saw themselves as the broker for the marriage of producer and talent. Now artists will have to hunt down and secure a top talent for themselves.
THE NEW DEVELOPMENT DEAL
The modern producer needs to be more integrated into the acts they develop from the ground up. In rap, R&B, and hip-hop, this is already common, but it is rare in rock, country, and other types of acoustic music to see producers taking on more than a creative or administrative role. Now, they will become the artist’s partner in more integrated–or invasive (depending on your viewpoint) ways; their deals with the artists will resemble 360 Deals.
An ironic twist to this is the subject of publishing. Asking for a percentage of the artist’s publishing was once thought to be the benchmark of a sleazy producer, but will now become the norm. Artists will be expected to give up a small piece of their songwriting pie or they might be perceived as unreasonable or underhanded.
In my new book 100 Answers to 50 Questions on the Music Business, we discuss the various forms that these new deals are taking, and how to cope with the changing landscape. Support this site and enhance your knowledge by picking up your copy today.
The following is an excerpt/sample chapter from the revolutionary new book on music business survival, 100 Answers to 50 Questions on the Music Business , by industry veteran, Moses Avalon.
Moses Avalon
As income from direct record sales becomes more tenuous, producers can no longer afford to trust that the standard compensation three-to-five points on physical sales can generate enough cash to pay for the cost of production, let alone their personal bills, or God forbid, a profit. With budgets shrinking and upfront fees diminishing, unless the producer happens to be one of the top 10 players who can still command a six- figure fee, they may become an endangered species. Add to this is the fact that auditing a record label’s physical sales was already hard enough, but auditing ad-based revenue and blanket licensing is nearly impossible. With this new financial reality, what will producers do to maintain enough of a margin to allow them to take risks on new acts?
FOLLOW THE LEADER
Just like record companies are focusing on inking 360 Deals with their acts, which take revenue from live shows and merchandise, and just as publishers now want to participate in the recording advances of their writers, the producer too needs to focus on sharing in more than just sales of recorded music of their artist/client; the producer royalty structure needs to include all income the recording generates, which includes airplay, film and TV sync licenses and publishing revenue.
There is quite a bit of opposition to this concept from songwriting public performance societies like ASCAP and BMI, who are trying to protect the interests of their members. But somewhere a new standard will have to emerge, or the profession will disintegrate and artists will be left to produce themselves.
This may sound tempting if you’re an artist who feels that labels homogenize music too much already, but not to labels who invest massive amounts in the artist’s development, especially when labels see already slumping sales dipping further against those acts that can afford a platinum-grade producer.
When evaluating which acts to invest in, labels now look at the entire team, which should include the producer, not just the demos, a lawyer and a fan page.
This is a new dynamic. In the past, the label, more often than not, saw themselves as the broker for the marriage of producer and talent. Now artists will have to hunt down and secure a top talent for themselves.
THE NEW DEVELOPMENT DEAL
The modern producer needs to be more integrated into the acts they develop from the ground up. In rap, R&B, and hip-hop, this is already common, but it is rare in rock, country, and other types of acoustic music to see producers taking on more than a creative or administrative role. Now, they will become the artist’s partner in more integrated–or invasive (depending on your viewpoint) ways; their deals with the artists will resemble 360 Deals.
An ironic twist to this is the subject of publishing. Asking for a percentage of the artist’s publishing was once thought to be the benchmark of a sleazy producer, but will now become the norm. Artists will be expected to give up a small piece of their songwriting pie or they might be perceived as unreasonable or underhanded.
In my new book 100 Answers to 50 Questions on the Music Business, we discuss the various forms that these new deals are taking, and how to cope with the changing landscape. Support this site and enhance your knowledge by picking up your copy today.
