Well it's a bit more complicated than there being a single daily rate. I think (if cynically) it does provide another reason why they used BBC / Sacconi et al, instead of bigger (ranked) names for their libs. Cos it costs them potentially a lot less! The BBC rate especially, which can be up to 10% cheaper, no travel etc expenses. The lib is twice as expensive as their studio orch, and inconveniently does not sound cohesive with their other (Air) libraries. But not because it worked out far cheaper! Err... because reasons.

Christian seems shy about his "voluntary" royalty info, tho. Given the lack of any hard info, I dunno whether it's fair to guess that Discovery prolly pay better royalties than Spitfire? But the idea that Discovery are trying to renegotiate paints a picture: that it's a lot. Or at least they feel it is.

The word "voluntary" suggests: we didn't have to pay royalties, but here's the barest minimum! Spitfire seem cynical in being eager to cut costs on the musician end while charging double for the content, I'm not sure it's any different in royalties. Like I said before about pointing fingers.

I'd think better of Christian (given his wealth and position) if he were trying to organise / unionise / collectivise people. This rant feels like a publicity stunt, and is just talk. Action (collectively) would be a practical step, one that he has the contacts to realise.

For his company, he could announce how much (more / less?) Spitfire royalties are, maybe index them to executive bonuses or w/e; reflect company success. That's certainly something that he could do, easily. Something that would make a difference to "music"; beyond Failbook likes and publicity.

Ima just assume, but it's all under sync which has mech royalties, kinda the whole point? I haven't written for (stock) libraries (edit) but the lib just gets some (20-30%?) of the publishing AFAIK. Thought this stuff was baked into US law? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Last edited: Dec 28, 2019

BBC = £899
Studio Pro = £899 (Sold separately: £1147) and no percussion

No idea where you are getting these figures? Costs double?
Don't reference the standard version, as this isn't comparable to BBC SO.

 

Last edited: Dec 27, 2019

Um, no. What I was stating was evidently factual. If you care to refute it, please go ahead. Ive worked as an artist, a hired gun and a commercial composer for my entire working career (in that order). As an "artist" I was frustrated and broke. As a hired gun I was frustrated and making a living and as commercial composer I'm successful and quite well off - if not especially satisfied artistically 100% of the time. That's music. That's work. Ive written scores of TV themes, many TV shows and docs and a number of films - some mildly successful. I co-wrote a top ten Australian album and toured the planet. This is not so much a call to authority as an argument to experience and reality.

That was phase one of what I laughingly referred to as "my career". Of course, that was just me being in a state of denial as the facade of indifference belied someone who actually craved approval - as we all do.

How is Christian (a) a "man-child" or (b) pretentious? What is wrong with him working as a composer AND a businessman?

Why do I sense jealousy?

 

The voices that lack experience are the loudest, unfortunately but predictably.

 

@famouslut So, you realise that Spitfire Audio (as in Spitfire the very British warplane) is a UK company.
And you realise that even a BBC Orch member can choose to charge MU rates? Do you know what MU is? Are you aware how royalties from a sale of a sound library would always be just a nice bonus compared to the rate of your session.
Did you know we get paid for the whole session (@hourly MU rate or pre-arranged rate for a full session of x hours) even if we provided the material in an hour or even half an hour?

It's not "all under sync" as you say, either.
And if it were, it's still not related to the fact that the SA royalties for players are based on individual sales of the library, not on their subsequent usage! Obvs? I saw it as a nice gesture. Uncommon in this day and age. So I decide Henson is a nice guy.

The funniest thing to me is somebody thinking that it's a TV production company that would pay royalties! hehe.

 

Last edited: Dec 28, 2019

I neither have the time nor the inclination to answer that....just one thing for you to ponder, have you ever considered that the frustration that you faced as an artist was because of your incompetency and not other people's indifference. May you find peace in your bubble.

 

Can anybody summarize the message of the video for me? I REALLY don't feel like watching a video claiming that composers shouldn't be paid. Kinda sounds like clickbait to me.

 

It is. I couldn't watch it all, felt like a mid-life crisis / hostage video. Cringe. Christian pretentiously describes music in a precious and condescending way, disses stock (library) composers as worthless, creates a clickbait heading and uploads. He also acts butthurt that someone dares to suggest he might get paid less royalties, and I think says something like "how DARE they use crappy free (!) library muzak.. I spent decades on those amazeballs tracks that will live in the trancendental subconcious for many eras across the known universe" (ima paraphrasing). I still don't know if it's accidentally or deliberately funneh in places. I did feel like calling ASPCA, tho. Those poor dogs!

I was told by a buddy that he and Paul worked on Discovery's Project Earth or w/e?

The two replies were about two entirely different things. Library (stock) music and recording for a kontakt library.

But the special sessions (3+) can be pared back drastically (cost per musician) for the BBC orch by as much as 10% (compared to ie LSO) as I understand it, right? And is a flat rate; across the board cheaper. And (if we're cynical) all the (many) incidentals they'd get charged would not apply if they recorded the orchestra where they did, instead of at (logical, cohesive place for it) Air? Seems funny for Christian to pretend that he's not interested in cutting costs, suddenly, now he's on the other side of it.

I think Christian exposes himself quite a lot, he is very sneering and condescending about stock music. I think he forgets that producers make this music, some of them using his libs, it's not just churned out by AI or smthn. Well, not yet.

The gruelling, pretentious guff about him doing it for makers of "spellbinding, artisan music for the ages that we're all involved with as travellers through time and space" and the like sounds familiar & like it was written by Paul Thompson, who can say that kind of rubbish with a mostly straight beard, and at least not sneer.

 

Last edited: Dec 28, 2019

Ok, I will.
Don't sell yourself short. If you are that desperate in need of a £1000, then do something else to get that. Don't undervalue your music/time.
Move with the times. Don't rely on 1 great income source, as it's likely to change at some stage.
Don't complain about future business models, if previously you helped implement these. See above
Music crafted by a composer watching a scene, building emotion for that scene, interpreting that scene... is better than a stock bed. It is 100%

So that's the less anti-Christian version if you prefer it.
I agree it's click bait (not my cup of tea personally), but that's how things work these days. See above about moving with the times

Peace

 

And on that note, there's just time for me to say a big thank-you to our team here; & a thank you to all our wonderful guests tonight; our lovely audience (so much better than last week's!) and most importantly to you, the viewers.
Thank you for joining us, and please do join us again, next time.
And remember, we love you madly. x

 

.

 

IOW - you can't.

 

I think it's very difficult to narrow down a moment or two in the entire vid where Christian is not being pretentious, to be entirely fair to him.

Spoiler

He says things like "nay onerous", (!) "people's love of music is a basic human need", (!) "good music will always be human music" (!) Also the whole re-enactment of Who Sniffed Mah Cheese is pseudy, pretentious drivel that had me feel physically queasy.

 

I'm sure you mean 'unfair'.
Other than the grammatical error, I do see your point though.

 

Well guys, apparently Discovery discussed this and it was a library that tried to double rates and were told no, so they spread these royalty rumors. Your pennies are safe @ Discovery for now

 

Regardless of who brings it to attention, it is not good for musicians worldwide if it propagates. Tearing anyone down whether they are rich or poor or what they do or have not done is not good for anyone.
Seems to happen a lot here. I wish them well.
On topic, it is not good for musician's employment worldwide if it is allowed to continue. The "she/he has a better job than me" is pathetic bullshit when it is actually doing a community service by letting people know and that it shouldn't be allowed, which it should not. The station of the person or status quo is not important. Removal of royalties is the issue. Would it be taken more seriously if it was done by a homeless person sitting with a cup begging for money?

If some people spent as much time as they do tearing people down on their own music, they would not have the time to tear others down, they would be working. Sometimes it is better to say nothing at all. Tearing down anyone does not open doors, it only shuts them. Try it with someone that might have otherwise liked your music and see what does not happen.
It's a community service. Protesting against the removal of royalties is the real problem not who makes the knowledge available.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jan 5, 2020

In my country, Finland, you pay freeriders like this Henson everytime you purchase a harddrive,mobile phone, whatever has storage. Sounds crazy? It is. You pay compansation to every one that calls himself musician because that hard drive might be used to store their songs xDD

 

I <3 Finland!

If what is allowed to continue? Capitalism? I guess. I think what I object to is multi-millionaire Christian wishing to protect (always "rumored") attempts to accept a cut to his royalties. All the while pretending it's "for the good of all that is holy music". It is the hypocrisy that is one of the two major issues I have with him. (The sanctimonious, pretentious drivel just makes this vid difficult - nay onerous - to listen to!) Also, he has a history of cutting back on expenses (paid by his company) to musicians, something glossed over by this rant. I asked him to get back to me with facts about this. He hasn't bothered. Presumably because the hard, black & white statistics make him look worse.

I agree. Christian would be better spent working on sync tracks, instead of dismissing stock / library composers' work as "worthless".

I think the estimate for royalties is in the $20-30m pa, so :o!

 

Last edited: Jan 5, 2020

It seems the only way humans truly understand something that should have stayed is when it is gone. History is full of that ignorance and error. Only people that have received royalties for their work only to no longer get them will probably feel the full weight of it.
The rest will have to experience it when they spend their time and money only to have someone use it and give them next to nothing.
Good luck with that.

 

Is there any hard (or even soft) evidence that anything mentioned by Christian is / was ever even threatened to happen to any royalties? I'm not sure if it could ever even happen, even if it was more than just some fantasy. But I guess it gets publicity.