​

I found this subject interesting to discuss. Actually I think that article is arrogant and the main target is people's wallets while it's blaming composers. I can't agree with that guy and I'm sorry to read this on 8dio. And I'm glad to see some opposite comments. I've read almost all comments but still wanna read yours about that.

I'm one of the those who worked for free or just for credits. By the way, I still see myself as an amateur, so my music is not very well too. Last month, I did a 30 seconds song for a friend, as free of charge. Today I'm working for that friend again for another work and he already paid to me before I finish the work. So I think that's the right way I'm walking on. What do you think or how do you do?

 

Always charge for your work. The value is not in the dollar figures itself but in the motivation.

If you're starting out and dont feel confident in your abilities, charge $10 to work on a song. It wont make you rich (or the other guy broke), but once youre done you'll have something tangible to show for your work. This will motivate you to improve your skills so next month you can charge $15. Not only that but you'll start learning about business strategies, how to market yourself, and customer relations, all of which will come in handy for when you start charging $500.

Remember a "professional" ________ is defined as someone who gets paid to do ________.

 

If you're indeed talented composer, you don't need to listen to Troels.

Think about Ennio Morricone.
Would he even care? he would just write perfect pieces again and again and never would give attention to other whining composers.

The answer is simple:
Write the greatest piece on the earth. Then, everything will solve by itself.

Troels, the person who is telling you this, never gained attention for his composition and all of his movie scores have failed besides Tomb Raider game. He's score on Tomb Raider is horrendous and extremely plain. There's no way to help that.

A truly gifted traditional composer who actually plays, writes, record by himself would never have this kind of issue. People would call him up to play.
Beethoven was a virtuoso of his time. Sergei Rachmaninoff was the best composer and pianist of his time. He performed everything by himself. When he has arrived to the states, people called him "A man with golden heart and arms of steel".
Troels is a person who never tried to accomplish such musicianship by himself. His degree in "adaptive music system for videos" is very questionable.

If Rachmaninoff sees this kind of article, he would be very upset.

 

i'm sure as hell not gonna work for free, no chance in hell

my dj-skills are often requested by a few fashion designers who need good music during their fashion shows, tho they dont pay me in money they do design outfits for me that i get in return, as i normally dont have the money to buy these kinds of outfits it's a good deal for me and shows me how much they value my work, 300 euro custom latex clothing that i wear at dj-gigs, live gigs and parties. this cant be a bad thing.

 

So it's more about sharing! and that's good. That's why each person is special and have his own abilities so we can share it together. It's not about the money what wee do and what we are on this planet.
I'm glad i'm not the only one that does not only work for money in first place. The money just destroy the Humanity!

cheers

 

in this case yes offcourse, tho it has actual value and the clothing they make goes for around 3-400 euros, i would never be able to buy it and rather spend my money on more gear for the studio, tho my gf thinks i'm crazy for wanting more gear XD

 

I don't think his point is that far off, it's probably the blanket statement he gives to artists wanting free stuff... just backing it up with figures, which are pretty much true. And believe me, a LOT of people work for free and for credit, and those who have been doing this for a LONG time, not just some new kid with garageband and a cracked version of sylenth.... He is right. He may have his own interests stated in the body of the post, but nothing wrong with that, it was THEIR blog.... I don't see anything arrogant in it. He works, has people that work for him, has people and taxes he has to pay, and thus is explaining why this stuff isn't free. Not a big head scratcher.

The musicians "unions" suck donkey balls. they don't take care of us, and have certainly not caught up to the new millennia, let alone this decade. Sucks to be us.... so we need to learn to adapt or find a different line of work. I'm really not sure what you found arrogant in his own blog post outside of promoting his own companies painstakingly and admittedly good work.

 

I'm debating whether I should tackle this or not and it's a tough one because I feel it sucking me in and I do want to have this conversation but I haven't slept in a really long time and I have a shitload of work to do. Plus what would it really change anyway? Most people would leave with their own preconceived notions. Also I'm sure there are people here that are WAY more successful at this game than little old me and my occupation isn't as a producer or musician, it's as a developer and some other computer fields which I think still is pertinent considering we're talking about instruments that need to be coded so I could possibly attack it from that angle. Don't work for free. Gee I'm glad nobody told Urs Heckmann that when he took over development of the Tyrell N6 project when it went grossly overbudget and it looked like it would never see the light of day. Had he not stepped up that most excellent synth would not exist and I'm sure he got a fair bit of advertising out of it seeing as it kicks some serious ass. Likely paved the way for his success right now. Urs if you're reading this, I just wanted to say thanks a lot. I really like that synth and use it often in my productions. Anyway like all things in life there needs to be balance. You should get paid for your work BUT you should also find value in giving something back as well and no making the best instruments is not that something. That is something that you do to make money, not to give back. Doing the best job you can do should be the de facto standard of everything you do...period. There is no one size fits all here and blanket statements rarely help. Sometimes working for free can lead to other things. It certainly has in my life but I'm good at people so I know who is who. I'm also good at giving which has maintained the forum you all are "standing" on right now for a number of years and hopefully it has enriched your lives in at least some small way. My point is that things are rarely black and white, gotta look at the greys. I guess if I have time I might swing by and actually get in-depth with this but it would likely turn into a dissertation so I don't know.

I took the liberty of upgrading the post a little, hope you don't mind. No charge.

Check out this article concerning a very in-depth study that some students in Norway worked on. Thought it might add to this discussion in new and interesting ways: ARTISTS MAKE MORE MONEY IN FILE-SHARING AGE THAN BEFORE IT

 

I've done free projects that have lead to paid ones. It's hard to break in from the bottom. Sometimes you need to meet new people--and the only way to do that is to do a FEW free projects. But at the same time, I'm a student--which means I need to get paid or I don't eat. There is a personal balance to find. If I was rich, I would have absolutely zero problem with giving away my music. Hell, I'm on the AudioSexed Album (free project)--and I consider that to be a very worthwhile endeavor indeed.

 

Well put Catalyst. Grey indeed. I'm a hypocrite because I fight for musicians rights, but also check out stuff on this sister site. I can live with it. I buy what I use. And am glad I haven't been fleeced by a lot of bad products. Filesharing has killed a lot of us producers/musicians, but has also opened doors to new stuff we could never afford to demo and realistically evaluate. It's a slippery slope, but I know you and others, and I'm really happy to see a growing trend on the sister site to people actually using it for it's purpose, and giving back to the devs when they can or should. That's the way it should be. I don't expect people to buy my music without having an idea of what it is... and I have bought many plugins and libraries that have sucked, and the copy protection has brought havoc upon my working system. It's sad, because the k'd Arturia stuff works more efficiently and with less problems then everything I have bought from them. and hundreds to thousands of dollars later (they didn't have "collections" back then..., I have absolutely no problem using the k's.... as I fucking paid for them... Some people draw their line in the sand. I do not. Simplistic viewpoints exist on both sides.... so that's why I think your use of the word "gray" is appropriate. Try and do the right thing. and hope that others do the same. That's the only way it can work in the big picture. You can't expect everyone to be altruistic, or everyone to be thieves. It's up to you as an individual to look at yourself in the mirror.

 

... but I will say this: artists are NOT making more money off file sharing, that is not true at all. Some may get exposure, hence the argument goes, but with stuff like spotify etc.... it's a zero-sum game,,,, unless you have a particular gaming of the system. convenient for NIN and Radiohead to give their stuff away for free when they can make it up in 1 night with merchandise at a show, but get real, most artists have no way to fund their recording, let alone touring, and fans, well they are thinking, fuck, if i get free records from those artists, why the hell should I pay anything for these blokes...? !!

Some artists may have done well with this system, most have not. it's simply not a sustainable business model. And I have argued heavily in person with Sean Parker about this. These fuckers are clueless. And hiding under the "information" and "data" and "art" should be free shield has worked out very well for them, and google has been profiting off this stuff.... they make millions-billions, the artists whose backs they stand on to say their bullshit platitudes, well, simply... have not.

 

I don't think you're a hypocrite, I think you're just human. Aren't we all just walking contradictions? I wrestle with this myself at times because I'm good at not forcing the pieces to fit even when they don't but I also don't think the answer lies with 8Dio's simplistic view of the situation because it's not so cut and dry. Then when we factor in that they're also a multi-million dollar company it gets really hard to be in their corner. Also like you said devs like Arturia who make the experience so horrible that you already throw the idea of support out the window because pirates do it better. Scene releases almost always work better than legitimate versions. I think it's easy for Troeles to say something like that in his nice house in a first world country. What about all the musicians that live in third world countries for whom purchasing one of their libraries is equivalent to not paying rent for a month or two or three? Oh and there's no demo version of most libraries so the only thing you have to go by is some demo track on Soundcloud produced by masters of their craft.

Personally I don't believe that musicians are making more though I appreciate that there is ongoing research from all angles and possibly this varies based on country. Musicians that are uber popular and tour a lot might be making bank but there are a lot of challenges today to overcome as you said like file-sharing, Spotify, etc. There are many bands that I listen to that make their money in other ways. Psy'aviah for example: Yves Schelpe is a developer like myself and Emélie Nicolaï is a social worker. It certainly isn't stopping them from making kick ass tunes however so whoever in the comments of that article (Aaron I believe) stated that money dictates quality art is really a bunch of garbage. No it doesn't...and it never has. *no* Ever heard of Techno born out of the poorest area in America: Detroit? Or Industrial a genre of artists that are likely to never make a good living on their music? Or many famous artists, composers and writers throughout history? Never heard of Vincent Van Gogh perhaps or Edgar Allen Poe? That's why I say this is not a cut and dry subject and requires a lot of research and a lot of open mindedness. That's why everyday I remind people that we have to support the creators of the things we enjoy because it's all too easy to align with one camp or another (file-sharers or devs) but I think we can have both.

I'm in a unique position to bring another perspective to this subject that never gets brought up and possibly offer up a solution. File-sharing should be completely private as much as it can be at this point. I say that keeping in mind that some things people will share even if the whole scene went underground. This whole mess was never really meant to happen. The original scene didn't share with the public both for security and because it minimized impact. I think those that took it upon themselves to begin leaking the team's work outside of that closed system opened up a can of worms out of their naive caring is sharing mantra. Napster and the like just exacerbated the problem because when file-sharing was under the radar it was sustainable for both camps but now that it is so ingrained in culture and easily accessible it isn't anymore and it will eventually consume itself until there is nothing left. That's why we have so many assholes about on the sister site, they've grown perverse on their own gluttony. In my opinion in the past we were out of balance in favor of the recording industries but now it's moving in the other direction. Wait until 3D printing becomes mainstream. How will we look at this issue when it comes to someone in a poor country synthesizing food or medicine?

 

Thanks spidervis for this article.

I'd sincerely like to add something so specific about 8dio, but after reading this post, I dunno where to start. Troels, you're both right and wrong.

 

I feel like my music does not suck so badly that it needs to be given away for free, but rather that I want to share it with the world. I definitely feel like this is an arrogant blog. I am a bedroom producer in my spare time and for me music is a hobby. Exposure is nice and there is no way that i would be able to have as many people listen to my hardwork if I were to charge for it. The whole industry seems to be focused on making rather too much money for their efforts. Not to say that they shouldn't get paid, however, the fact that everything seems to me to be sooo overpriced is a hindrance. If I were able to pay a reasonable amount for an instrument then I would be much more inclined to purchase said instrument. As it is, I don't think that the amount that they are looking to get paid for the products really balances with the amount of work and money that went into them. Money truly is the root of all evil. Music is art and I believe that the purpose of art is to be shared with people to let them see the beauty that you saw, the inspiration that you had, and the feelings that you put into it. Starving is quite often referenced with the word artist and too many musicians were never really appreciated in their time (nor compensated for their efforts). Money should not be the goal. This topic has so many aspect to it that there is no way to address them all. I am sure that a reasonable view of opposition could be found for any one of them . Life is never black and white; there is always going to be gray area. I think that as an artist it should be a personal choice to get paid and how you get compensated should be completely up to you.
@Catalyst: Thank you for choosing to dedicate your time to this forum. It makes a huge impact on so many people's lives.
Hail Saint the creator of this amazing place that has enabled me to make music and share it with the world.

 

Musicians aren't supposed to be rich..they're supposed to be eccentric and crazy.

Music when published by RECORD INDUSTRY sounds like 'anaconda'...whereas it should be a expression of the free mind like - can you name it?

A song shouldn't appeal to masses..it should appeal to the one who is connected to the musician via soul.

A ten thousand dollar compressor cannot make a song great..it can only make it come out of the speakers properly.

The industry forces musicians to do things they don't want to do so that their MBAs and CEOs can take home millions...perhaps buy the wife a yacht?

Instead of money we should be asking for 'creative freedom' and because we don't do that every other guy sounds like the other one..in the end the audience doesn't want to buy stuff that sounds just like the other stuff he brought..better still why not download the same sounding shit for free?

In this case even if 8DIO sells 1000 copies of a product for 200USD thats = 200000USD or 130,00,000 INR - this amount is quite big...Hey Mr. 8DIO CEO no need to buy that new BMW because people like me can't even dream of it pre-owned..yet we love making music!!

All I'm saying is - the world has changed - don't bitch about it. You can't make that kind of money anymore in the age of internet - but also without the computer/internet duo 8DIO won't even be here..

Its MUSIC not MONEY - can't pay your bills off it? - Get a day job..

Its Metallica not Moneylicca - not need to buy a mansion just to record drums..stupid Lars

Music is for the soul, Money for the stomach..Act accordingly..Stop asking Musicians to pay off other Musician's debts..its the Audience's job to support us - and if they don't then learn to live with it..


rant alert

 

its always - "dude i got a SSL bus comp and now i got the industry sound"

its never - "dude i spilled milk on my mixer and now its distorting and that is sick!!"


list of people who don't make hot money besides poor musicians - school teachers, vets, social activists, soldiers, public doctors, journalists (not those heartless ones), webmasters, customer care guys, content writers, sweat shop workers, dancers....etc etc...waiters, ticket collectors...Entire Working Class? Lower Middle class? even the Upper middle class says they are not rich enough..hehe..the surgeon cannot afford the new Cessna..

if the 0.1% of the human species keep more than half of all resources to themselves then HTF is someone going to pay for music??

INEQUALITY

this is the economic and technological revolution, innovate or die.. and innovation surely doesn't mean DRM and rootkits..

 

That was really well said Kaylix. And it's always my pleasure, I thought it was a good example of how sometimes we get paid back in other more meaningful ways. I don't feel that my value as a human being or a developer is any less because I choose to maintain these forums for free. If anything it's what has given my work it's meaning. I also agree with you that developers overcharge, that the industry is oversaturated with vapid garbage both in the musical and development world and that the music industry overcharged for decades when people would run into Tower Records and pay 20 bucks for a CD when the artists were getting pennies on the dollar. Money dictates quality art, someone tell that to Skrillex.

Gogoi
Nice.

 

Our goal should be to create music which long after we are dead and gone may resonate with someone..imagine deep into the future someone is listening to you..

Our goal is not to stand naked and shake our butt in a music video..get viral then get forgotten..

I'd rather be a Poe than a Miley..


goodnight guys..

@Catalyst: Thank you for choosing to dedicate your time to this forum. It makes a huge impact on so many people's lives.
Hail Saint the creator of this amazing place that has enabled me to make music and share it with the world.

 

it is already a miracle they get payed

 

That's not the profit they make. They have also costs (recording, hiring musicians) etc .. It's difficult to say how much money they actually make but I doubt they are that rich in the end. Maybe he drives a volkswagen instead of bmw..

Making sample libraries IS their day job..