Members Jotown Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 [YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] I don't take a piss without getting paid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GuitarPlayerFL Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 Unfortunately, there are so many who want to be a part of the scene that they will work for nothing just to (possibly) get noticed. With computers and Auto-tune, anybody can compete. More supply, less demand. It's only going to get worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 I saw that rant closer to when it first showed up on YouTube. I wonder if ol' Harlan is getting paid for the 315,000+ views on YouTube. Not that I disagree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted October 28, 2009 Author Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 I wonder if ol' Harlan is getting paid for the 315,000+ views on YouTube. Not that I disagree with him. Probably not. But artist's who value their work and who expect to get paid usually do. Artists who give it away with hopes of a future bonanza usually don't. The Youtube clip is promoting a film about him though, so even if he is not getting paid, he is promoting a project that he will benefit from. And most of us would never have heard of his film otherwise. So indirectly I guess he is getting paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 Yup. I saw this about two years ago. Love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slider Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 I have never seen this clip before, but I can tell you that I have experienced the very same thing many times in my art career.'it would be good publicity' way too many times.pay me. pay me. pay me or nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted October 28, 2009 Author Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 Here is another good rant of his. [YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Karma1 Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 Very interesting. There's been a lot of controversy lately about this topic on Craig's List. There are some sections in the employment/jobs area of Craig's List entitled "Gigs" which is usually for short term jobs or projects. There always seem to be people posting in there looking for film editors, photographers, musicians, writers, etc. that offer no pay, but say things like - "you'll get your name in the credits" or "it's good publicity". It's been bringing up a lot of outrage from job seekers and some people have been calling for everyone to "flag unpaid gigs". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 A year ago I was offered $2500 for a song I wrote. The catch was to give up all songwriting credits to the producer and executive producer. I told them, no thanks. No regrets. However, I was disappointed with this rationale but I`m not surprised. Greed is the new king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 "the amateurs make it tough for the professionals" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 28, 2009 Members Share Posted October 28, 2009 "the amateurs make it tough for the professionals" In a way, I agree with what Ellison says here. On the other hand, I feel like the performance of the professional is worth the money, while the unpredictable output of the amateur is a big risk for the people creating the product. On a musician-specific basis, when you accept a gig where you're not being paid, you do two things: - You take a job away from a professional musician.- You lower the standard of the value of music, since it becomes the norm to get it for free. But what happens, especially in a bad economy like we're in, is that the people who pay for music start compromising, and care less about the quality of the product (be it a recording, a live performance, whatever), and prioritize who they hire based on price alone. You get a "good enough" mentality happening. It's kind of a bummer. On the flip side, it represents more opportunity for amateurs who really are talented and need a doorway into the industry. But then, compensation goes downward for everyone as a result. Ask most musicians, and they'll tell you they earn less from music than they did 20 years ago, while cost of living has gone way in the meantime. Again, a bummer. It's a tough tightrope to walk. I love my music, but I think it has value, based on the time, effort, and money I put into making my stuff, and the less-definable value of music as art. I know I'd play music for the rest of my life regardless of making money at it. At the same time, I'm not going to have someone else making money off it (film producers, bar owners, record labels, whoever) while I'm being screwed. Tough situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 29, 2009 Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 In a way, I agree with what Ellison says here. On the other hand, I feel like the performance of the professional is worth the money, while the unpredictable output of the amateur is a big risk for the people creating the product.On a musician-specific basis, when you accept a gig where you're not being paid, you do two things:- You take a job away from a professional musician.- You lower the standard of the value of music, since it becomes the norm to get it for free.But what happens, especially in a bad economy like we're in, is that the people who pay for music start compromising, and care less about the quality of the product (be it a recording, a live performance, whatever), and prioritize who they hire based on price alone. You get a "good enough" mentality happening. It's kind of a bummer.On the flip side, it represents more opportunity for amateurs who really are talented and need a doorway into the industry. But then, compensation goes downward for everyone as a result. Ask most musicians, and they'll tell you they earn less from music than they did 20 years ago, while cost of living has gone way in the meantime. Again, a bummer.It's a tough tightrope to walk. I love my music, but I think it has value, based on the time, effort, and money I put into making my stuff, and the less-definable value of music as art. I know I'd play music for the rest of my life regardless of making money at it. At the same time, I'm not going to have someone else making money off it (film producers, bar owners, record labels, whoever) while I'm being screwed. Tough situation. In the last 10 years, I have lost one wedding gig because of my fee. I average about 60/year. So one out of 600 is not so bad. Over the summer, I had a potential studio client walk away because they wanted a lower rate to transfer audio for them, edit it and master it. I believe for the most part, you get what you pay for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scud133 Posted October 29, 2009 Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 "is WB begging for money on the street? f*** no!" "you go to the store and buy it mutha {censored}a" haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted October 29, 2009 Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 "is WB begging for money on the street? f*** no!" "you go to the store and buy it mutha {censored}a"haha Hey it's Harlan!!!I mean I think he was BORN curmudgeonly [don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about agreeing/disagreeing with IP views - I'm talking about the Harlan way] Ever hear him light up on time travel?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Synonym Music Posted October 29, 2009 Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 In a way, I agree with what Ellison says here. On the other hand, I feel like the performance of the professional is worth the money, while the unpredictable output of the amateur is a big risk for the people creating the product. I think we're also losing people with the ability to discern between good and bad work. Standards are getting lowered too, but if you let in more amateurs with amateur ears.. Well... Those are the results you generally get. I feel there's a lot of overinflated confidence going around. Couple that with bottom-feeders and market scabs and it's a recipe for disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted October 29, 2009 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 "the amateurs make it tough for the professionals"I am with Harlan on that one as well. There is a name for people who work for free, or for much less than the job is worth. They are called scab's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members axuality Posted October 29, 2009 Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 A year ago I was offered $2500 for a song I wrote. The catch was to give up all songwriting credits to the producer and executive producer. I told them, no thanks. No regrets. However, I was disappointed with this rationale but I`m not surprised. Greed is the new king. Greed may be the new king, but greed is on its way out. EVERYBODY knows it's wrong. Just watch for it to go and you'll see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 29, 2009 Members Share Posted October 29, 2009 Greed may be the new king, but greed is on its way out. EVERYBODY knows it's wrong. Just watch for it to go and you'll see it. I hope you`re right but I have seen nothing of late to make me think otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted October 30, 2009 Author Members Share Posted October 30, 2009 I hope you`re right but I have seen nothing of late to make me think otherwise. In the mid to late 80's and even into the 2000's things were changing. It was not uncommon to get to keep some, or all, of your publishing. In the last few years I have seen a regression back to old practices. I have had two situations in which not only did they want the publishing and some of the writers percentage, but also to put their name on the song. That's how it was in the bad old days of the music biz. The fact that it has happened to me personally in the last couple of years tells me that the perception of desperation has made some of those in the position of power to be taking advantage of the dismal state of the recording biz. I always say if they want your song they will pay you for it. But there are so many out there willing to compromise that taking that stance will unfortunately limit some of your opportunities I am afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Synonym Music Posted October 30, 2009 Members Share Posted October 30, 2009 In the mid to late 80's and even into the 2000's things were changing. It was not uncommon to get to keep some, or all, of your publishing. In the last few years I have seen a regression back to old practices. I have had two situations in which not only did they want the publishing and some of the writers percentage, but also to put their name on the song.That's how it was in the bad old days of the music biz. The fact that it has happened to me personally in the last couple of years tells me that the perception of desperation has made some of those in the position of power to be taking advantage of the dismal state of the recording biz.I always say if they want your song they will pay you for it. But there are so many out there willing to compromise that taking that stance will unfortunately limit some of your opportunities I am afraid. And just to follow up: yes, they will settle for less if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 30, 2009 Members Share Posted October 30, 2009 In the mid to late 80's and even into the 2000's things were changing. It was not uncommon to get to keep some, or all, of your publishing. In the last few years I have seen a regression back to old practices. I have had two situations in which not only did they want the publishing and some of the writers percentage, but also to put their name on the song.That's how it was in the bad old days of the music biz. The fact that it has happened to me personally in the last couple of years tells me that the perception of desperation has made some of those in the position of power to be taking advantage of the dismal state of the recording biz.I always say if they want your song they will pay you for it. But there are so many out there willing to compromise that taking that stance will unfortunately limit some of your opportunities I am afraid. Well thats the thing, I did not give them the songs. I refused their $2,500.00. Sure, the chances are most likely that nothing would have happened with the song but its the principle. Just because this guy had some $$$ is to "produce" a project for his gf, does not give him the right to use my songs and put his name on it. Hilarious. Yeah it happens but I have to draw the line there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted October 30, 2009 Members Share Posted October 30, 2009 In the mid to late 80's and even into the 2000's things were changing. It was not uncommon to get to keep some, or all, of your publishing. In the last few years I have seen a regression back to old practices. I have had two situations in which not only did they want the publishing and some of the writers percentage, but also to put their name on the song.That's how it was in the bad old days of the music biz. The fact that it has happened to me personally in the last couple of years tells me that the perception of desperation has made some of those in the position of power to be taking advantage of the dismal state of the recording biz.I always say if they want your song they will pay you for it. But there are so many out there willing to compromise that taking that stance will unfortunately limit some of your opportunities I am afraid. Well, when the economy was going gangbusters and you had money flowing like water, they would allow the artists to drink a little. Tight economy, the skimmers take it all for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.