How ParamountSong.com REALLY works
David Robinson
notorious SONGSHARKING operation, and how it works. The person who
posted the original question had come across them on the web,
apparently, and wanted to know if they should get involved or not. Smart
question.
But then a couple of people, well-stocked in Scare Tactic theory, piped
in with their two-cents on a company they know absolutely nothing about
and proceeded to accuse them of everything short of downright
broad-daylight armed robbery. They don't know anything from first hand
experience, because they've never been involved with the company. What
they know is what they've read about 'Song Sharks' in general (no
specific company at all). It's very easy to read horror stories from
songwriting books and then regurgitate them as fact from memory. But I
digress....
I'm going to tell you how ParamountSong really works. I don't want to
spam the list, so for the purposes of this discussion, I really don't
care if you use their services or not. I just think it's only fair that
if people who don't know anything about it can flame the company, a
person who works for the company on a day to day basis should be able to
tell you how it actually does work. Please don't submit material to me
personally through this newsgroup; if you're interested, look up the
website and learn more first hand before you do anything.
Paramount caters to people who live outside the Nashville area and do
not have access to the facilities that a city like Nashville, Los
Angeles or New York would have access to. We don't work with local
writers other than our own writing/demo staff.
First, you send your tape or lyric into Paramount. I open up your letter
or package and read your material. I open virtually all of them; that's
my main job. This also goes for material submitted via e-mail. I am the
person who decides if we can work with your material or not. I send out
quite a few rejection letters; some because the work is simply not
enough material to start with. We tell those people to keep writing, and
submit more when they have a little more experience.
Some we reject because the material sent in has already been demo'd
elsewhere and it's a good demo. What would be the point for us in
working with it? Our job is to work with writers and develop their
material to a point where it can be pitched; not to pitch material that
has already been developed. We're mainly looking for un-demo'd work;
fair enough to say "that's how we make money."
Other reasons for rejecting material:
We don't work with convicted felons, or anyone incarcerated in a
prison of any kind. Those people may write well, but we cannot seem to
be 'taking advantage' of someone like that, someone who has little
control over their resources to begin with. I wonder the validity of any
contract a prison inmate might sign.
I usually send a nice letter to teenagers, anyone under 21, or
anyone who I think is unable to sign a legal contract as an adult, for
obvious reasons. I like to encourage young writers, but when money is
changing hands things get a little tricky. You can't be seen as 'taking
advantage' of children, either.
I trash anything that has objectionable language in it, or any lyric
that I wouldn't personally want to demo myself. You may consider that
art, and I might even agree with you sometimes, but I won't ask my
colleagues to work on something we'd be embarrassed to put on public
display. My Grandmother (if she were alive today) would never be able
to download an MP3 file of a demo made at Paramount that contained the F
word. Or was racially biased, gender biased, or homophobic. At least,
not since I've been there.
We also don't work with persons other than the writer; if your
Mother sends in one of your songs and asks me what I think, I will tell
her it's an interesting idea but YOU need to submit it yourself.
Experience has shown that when well-meaning spouses/friends/relatives
submit material, it often just enrages the writer (and legal owner of
the work). Co-writers are the only exception. You or your co-writer(s)
can submit material on each others' behalf.
If the song meets certain criteria (mostly having to do with form,
structure, etc.), we will offer you a 'Songwriter Contract' on it.
Not to toot my own horn too loudly, but I couldn't think of a better
person suited for this job. I have a Bachelors' Degree in Music, with
dual concentrates in Songwriting and Production/Engineering from Berklee
College of Music ('96). I've been writing songs since before most of you
were born. When I started recording, a home studio set up consisted of a
1/4 inch mono reel to reel tape deck and a lapel-type clip on
microphone...electronic reverbs hadn't been invented yet.
The contract basically stipulates the cost of the demo, the type of demo
(guitar/vocal, full band, back-up singers). We do not have a set-price
list of how much we charge for demos; the simple reason is that we
don't know how much it's going to cost until we see your lyric and have
a chance to figure out what your song needs.
People who submit words and music get one version of the contract, those
who write lyrics-only get another. This is not a publishing contract; we
DO NOT take 50 percent of your royalties outright. There is a
ten-percent management fee that applies IF AND WHEN a song gets cut.
A writer who submits words and music still owns 90 percent of the
property. Anyone who has actually been in the music business will tell
you they're doing pretty good; if you ever hope to do anything with your
songs, you can expect to give up at least 50 percent of it to someone.
But I really don't feel as though this needs a defense; it's a simple
business proposition, and is stated clearly as such in the contract.
For a lyrics-only writer, we match the lyric up with a
music-writer/composer. That isn't done haphazardly; it's not a matter of
"I'll take the first ten, you take the next ten." The Creative Director
actually sits at his desk all day going over the lyrics and assigning
them to the various writers. He's been in the business 17 years, he
hired all the writers (including me), so he is in the best position to
determine which composer can do the best job. I have to agree with his
choices since I hear all the finished demos, even though I wish he would
just assign the first ten to me sometimes--I need the money.
There is no charge for matching your lyric up to a composer. There is no
charge for the composer setting your lyrics to music. The money you pay
for the demo covers the cost of recording the demo, and nothing else.
The composer retains his or her rights to the music. So far the split
is: 10 percent management (if the song gets cut), 25 percent for the
composer (who owns the music half), 25 percent for the composers'
publishing, and 40 percent for the original writer. Check that against
any other deal in the world.
At this point, the original writer and Paramount are even. Paramount
insists that writers actively pitch their own material; it's a smart
strategy--that keeps you as a writer in the loop. In addition to the
demo, you get a list of publishers and a newsletter with tips, etc. We
offer copies at cost (what they cost us) plus a little for postage. So:
No, this is not a service where you can simply sit at home and expect
someone else to 'publish' your work and send you royalty checks.
Do we pitch your songs? Here's the trick: if we like it and really
believe in it, we will. If you believe in the material yourself and
pitch your own song to the publishing company, there is a good chance we
will anyway. Included in that list of publishers, of course, is the name
and address of 'the publishing company' associated with Paramount, which
itself is a 'Songwriter Management' company.
Who do we pitch to? I pitched one to Lee Ann Womack about a month ago. I
just happened to have access for that pitch, and we felt the song was
right. I don't normally pitch songs; Norm Daniels, the Creative
Director, does. He has his contacts, I have mine. If your song is right
for James Ingram, Hank III, Sammy Kershaw or that new Shelton guy ("PS,
If This Is Austin...."), and they are looking, I might. We don't
guarantee we're going to pitch any particular song, because we can't
guarantee the pitch opportunities are going to be available when your
song is; we have to have your song in hand when the opportunity opens
up. But we certainly don't sign publishing contracts on songs we have no
intention of pitching; we don't have to. I also have little postcards
that read 'Thanks, but no thanks' which I can send out at any time.
Those are even cheaper to send out than rejection letters.
Are our pitches successful? We have a filing cabinet full of
testimonials. We have a lot of independent artists sending in requests
for material, I get about 2 or 3 a week. One of the songs we demo'd was
recently placed in a film soundtrack; I can't remember all the details,
but I do remember it was being handled by a 'name' publisher, a
publisher with a very successful catalog (she inherited it from her
father, but it's a viable catalog nonetheless).
The people who write music and cut demos for us are all working
Nashville musicians and writers with their own studios. I have two
studios, a home studio and a full-production studio (I don't own it, I'm
on the staff). My full production studio has cut records with John
Hiatt, Lee Ann Womack, James Ingram, Hank III, Kenny Rogers, Clint
Black...you want me to go on?
A lot of the people who flamed Paramount in the original thread will
tell you that companies like this prey on the gullible amateur writer,
the writers who wouldn't stand a chance with 'REAL' 'LEGITIMATE'
publishing companies. Grandmas and hopeless wanna-be's. They are about
half right, but we don't prey on anybody. Most of our writer-clients are
amateurs that major publishers won't talk to, much less 'develop' or
work with in any way. The kind of people that Best Built in Nashville
won't even accept a phone call from much less return a phone call to.
How well do they write? I've been on this NG and involved with other web
based songwriting groups for a couple of years now. The material I see
coming into Paramount is comparable to anything I've seen on here;
certainly comparable to anything I've seen Danny Taddei post (sorry,
Danny). And I've seen a lot of good work on here, too; Dolores and Irene
are some of my favorite writer-friends, as well as the others. The
point--for me, anyway--isn't how good they are when they submit their
work, it's how good the work sounds when the demo leaves the office.
So if you want to call this a song-sharking operation, that's your
privilege, you have a right to speak your peace no matter how
ill-informed you are, no matter how irrational and false your
assumptions and perceptions can be. Of course, the same people who call
us a Song Shark operation won't offer to do anything for you at all;
they don't have anything to offer (try them sometime and see for
yourself). We offer the earnest, eager writers with no other contacts
and resources a way to have professional demos cut. Work with us and
we'll set you up with a professional looking package that you can shop
around. You can go to another demo house and pay about the same money
for just the demo (and a copy of the demo at that). I have been in the
music business as a songwriter, singer-songwriter, musician, producer
and engineer (along with quite a few less glamorous jobs) for going on
30 years, and have yet to see any business quite like this. If it was
truly dishonest I wouldn't have anything to do with it; ask around on
this NG, people will tell you I'd rather starve (and have). As it is, I
am trying to Figgie out how to establish my own version of it.
just to set the record straight,
that's how ParamountSong.com works.
David
The Emery's
experiences with bad operators. I guess sometimes it is easier to paint 'em
all with one brush so to speak. Sorry about steppin' on them toes. Don't no
David personally, but he has always conducted himself as a stand up guy.
Now I must go to try to pry foot from mouth.
Jim Emery
David Robinson <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B79B0D2...@home.com...
OSSONGS
If I had to say, of anyone that I have met on line or off and feel I 'know' ,
then David Robinson is one of the classiest, smartest guys you'll find in the
business.
Savvy and sharp as he is, I personally feel that any org David's standing up
for and in for, that to me is an OK org, because he wouldn't be associated with
them if they were not..
I haven't had any work recorded there, but if David is an example of their work
force, then it's A OK with me.
Dolores
Snabbu
David Robinson wrote:
<snip>
just to set the record straight,
>
> that's how ParamountSong.com works.
>
> David
Hi David
I have a strong dislike of song sharking operations as you may have
noticed. I have not commented on this thread to date. I found your post
very interesting.
I'm sure I remember a thread about Paramount before, there was some comment
about the name, because it sort of intimates an association with the well
known picture company which it isn't. But I am sure we established in that
thread that it wasn't a song poem scam thing, because of the rights
retention of the melody writer.
A question I have is if you give 10 percent of the song to a service like
Paramount plus cash in return for a pitching demo, Is there then a
problem with getting a publishing deal or does the writer end up with 40
percent and songwriter management 10 percent and publisher 50 percent.
Wouldn't it be better to pay for the demo in cash and retain your rights.
The way the question came up probably influenced posters responses I guess,
I think the guy said "I've won a song writing contest and the prize is
$20.00 off the cost of a demo" and what went through my mind was $20? a
demo? $350.00 to $450.00 $ 20 bucks off! Some prize! Some contest! Big
whoop! Sounds like lead generation to me.
Is this correct what the original poster said? I think this is what needs
addressing here, was there a song writing contest and if so what were the
rules?
Because if it looks like fish and smells like fish it probably is fish,
don't matter much if you smother it in thousand island sauce or tatare,
it's still fish. The fact that you don't do everything that's sent to you
makes me think of the John West slogan "It's the fish we reject that make
John West the Best" Could be true but it's still fish. So if the "contest"
thing is correct I don't think you have the right to be too upset at the
groups reaction.
Anyway let us know about the contest.
Cheers
Gary
-- -- semper sume remedium ante casum
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/188/gary_yeomans.html
Snabbu
The Emery's wrote:
> Err... color me embarrassed! I have had a lot of freinds have nightmarish
> experiences with bad operators. I guess sometimes it is easier to paint 'em
> all with one brush so to speak. Sorry about steppin' on them toes. Don't no
> David personally, but he has always conducted himself as a stand up guy.
>
> Now I must go to try to pry foot from mouth.
>
> Jim Emery
Well Jim lad, before you eat your Hat as well :-), something is not quite
right here because the original poster said
"I've won a song writing contest and the prize was $20.00 of the price of a
demo." So
it sounded bad from the start. I am interested in what actually occurred.
Which David didn't address in his post. I didn't know David was associated
with Paramount, now I do I find it hard to believe that the original post was
completely on the up and up.
Perhaps there was a misunderstanding.
The Emery's
Snabbu <sna...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B79DC51...@optushome.com.au...
> Well Jim lad, before you eat your Hat as well :-), something is not quite
> right here because the original poster said
> "I've won a song writing contest and the prize was $20.00 of the price of
a
> demo." So
> it sounded bad from the start. I am interested in what actually occurred.
> Which David didn't address in his post. I didn't know David was
associated
> with Paramount, now I do I find it hard to believe that the original post
was
> completely on the up and up.
> Perhaps there was a misunderstanding.
>
> Cheers
>
> Gary
> -- -- semper sume remedium ante casum
> http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/188/gary_yeomans.html
>
not on purpose, that is what happened. He is a good contributor to this
network and like you, has given free contributions to my work as well as
many others.
Every company has a marketing strategy agree with it or not. I am sure there
are legitimate businesses doing this type of work, it certainly would be a
useful service to someone. I am also sure that David would associate himself
with that type of company. He has never spammed me or the group concerning
this matter.
I only have one hat that comes in very handy on Saturday morning to cover
bad hair days due to hangovers. So I won't dine on it tonight.
Jim
David Robinson
$20.00 off the cost of a demo" and what went through my mind was $20? a
demo? $350.00 to $450.00 "
Those prices are too high (last time I checked). Plus, your guy didn't
win--he got the equivalent of an 'honorable mention.' The winner got a
full-production demo.
"$ 20 bucks off! Some prize! Some contest! Big whoop! Sounds like lead
generation to me."
Better than nothing. Not everybody gets one (I don't think, but then I'm
not all that involved in the contest). I do know that the winner gets a
free demo; I arranged one last week. There is a winner every month
(June, July, August). Big difference in a free full-production demo and
a certificate for $20 off. Your comment sounds like sour grapes to me...
They also run Christmas contests. Not unlike Goodnight Kiss, or East
Coast Music Publishing, or Lynn-Ashley Music. Then again, it's not all
that different from 'winning' a free Coke at McDonalds, I suppose.
David
TRUSSELL
I certainly don't have any expertise in the business of music. It was a
good post and you did clear up some things.
I'm one of these people who question everything when it comes to business.
So nothing against you personally or against Paramount which I know nothing
about.
But the part I'd have to question, is why sign over 10% of your rights to
your song for a demo that you are paying for? If a person were trying for
a publishing deal, it seems that having only 40% of the publishing left to
give them would hurt the writers chances. Why would a publisher want a song
with 10% of it's publishing already tied up? If a person has a publisher
very interested in them, and it's a good publisher, one they feel will work
hard for them, I think that publisher is going to be very disappointed to
find out they won't get but 40%. (Especially since they would have probably
been willing to have paid for the demo costs anyway and recouped it IF and
WHEN the song made money.) I would think it would most likey kill the deal.
The IF and WHEN they get cut, means absolutely nothing, because nobody gets
any money unless and until they get cut.
But you stipulate that pitching isn't the company's job and not what the
contract is for. So again, why would a person sign over 10% publishing,
that's what I don't understand. What is the 10% for? If I signed away 10% I
would want some type of assurance that something were being done on my
behalf, something more than help with a demo. You state it's a management
fee, so I would have to ask what type of managing would you be doing for
me? A list of publishers and a tip sheet? It wouldn't be worth 10% to me.
I know that publishing companies exist for independents and I suppose for
people who feel they can pitch their material directly to an artist, which
charge a smaller part of the publishing, I think usually 10-15%, which act
as an administrator of sorts, collecting royaltie fees, and such. So I can
see, in certain circumstances, where there would be a need for that, and
35% or 40% of publishing would be more attractive to an artist or their
label, if they use outside publishing on a regular basis anyway. If they
use an outside publisher, they aren't getting any or at least aren't
getting all, of the publishing anyway, so even a small amount could be
attractive. But then, I don't think your company takes on these
administrative tasks, or if so, you didn't mention it.
Some artists and labels won't cut a song without also having the publishing
rights, and they have their own publishing company. So, again, if you have
10% tied up in making a demo, they may be inclined to move along to another
song in which all the publishing rights are available.
I'd be extremely careful signing my rights away to anyone, traditional
publishers included. Some of those, from what I gather, amount to zilch,
and could end up costing you a deal which could amount to something. I
don't see the point is signing away any rights to a song unless someone is
willing to perform some type of valuable service for you.
Anyway, just a different perspective from someone who has merely researched
the music biz, not been directly involved with it. If I've gotten any
information incorrect or assumed anything incorrectly, please do correct
me.
Cyndy
David Robinson <whiske...@home.com> wrote in article
<3B79B0D2...@home.com>...
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
>I'm sure I remember a thread about Paramount before, there was some comment
>about the name, because it sort of intimates an association with the well
>known picture company which it isn't. But I am sure we established in that
>thread that it wasn't a song poem scam thing, because of the rights
>retention of the melody writer.
I think I wrote the comments on the name thing about a month ago or so when
David posted about this contest starting. I think that thread just died
without establishing anything. At the time, and I don't know about now, it
seemed that Paramount was doing some things awful close to what every song
shark I've ever seen does. THIS DOESN'T MEAN PARAMOUNT IS A SONG SHARKING
ENTERPRISE, HOWEVER. From what I've seen in this group, I have a lot of
respect for David and I think his post was honest and informative.
At the same time, that 10% management fee bothers me. If it is 10% off the
lifetime royalties of the writer's share, that could be a mighty expensive
demo.
Danny Taddei
you I would like to point out to people here that you are indeed a major
shark trying to protect your feeding ground. The first part of your post
has been left in so that people can refer back to it and see the pitch. You
have been ambiguous and clever but I have pointed it out to the public.
Please take the time to read down for the following points of interest,
there are many:
> People who submit words and music get one version of the contract, those
> who write lyrics-only get another. This is not a publishing contract; we
> DO NOT take 50 percent of your royalties outright. There is a
> ten-percent management fee that applies IF AND WHEN a song gets cut.
You are still charging and representing under the same roof. Modeling
agencies and photographers do this too and called a similar thing. This
isn't a good practice. Companies that charge a fee to to perform a
fiduciary responsibility are sharking even if they themselves don't think
they are. Representation should be done on the pretense that the
representative believes in the product. The post that this post was derived
from stated that you folks charge a production fee and then try to "get a
cut" for percentage. *THAT IS SHARKING* even if your intention it in a good
place.
>
>
> A writer who submits words and music still owns 90 percent of the
> property. Anyone who has actually been in the music business will tell
> you they're doing pretty good; if you ever hope to do anything with your
> songs, you can expect to give up at least 50 percent of it to someone.
But you wouldn't expect to pay up front and then pay a percentage!
>
> But I really don't feel as though this needs a defense; it's a simple
> business proposition, and is stated clearly as such in the contract.
>
>
> For a lyrics-only writer, we match the lyric up with a
> music-writer/composer. That isn't done haphazardly; it's not a matter of
> "I'll take the first ten, you take the next ten." The Creative Director
> actually sits at his desk all day going over the lyrics and assigning
> them to the various writers. He's been in the business 17 years, he
> hired all the writers (including me), so he is in the best position to
> determine which composer can do the best job. I have to agree with his
> choices since I hear all the finished demos, even though I wish he would
> just assign the first ten to me sometimes--I need the money.
EVERY publisher that is actually in business to place and exploit music for
their writers will do the exact same thing for free and even cover some
costs if necessary. They never charge a fee. Ask some of the writers here
that I have set up with others. I never try to collect a fee because I am
not a shark. Your business is doing people wrong.
>
>
> There is no charge for matching your lyric up to a composer. There is no
> charge for the composer setting your lyrics to music. The money you pay
> for the demo covers the cost of recording the demo, and nothing else.
I would remark to this statement with a simple, Do the math as you wish.
You are still charging a fee and doing it where there can easily be a
conflict of interest. You are acting as manager and producer. Plain and
simply put, that is illegal in most states if challenged. Even the state of
California recognizes that to be an illegal activity. This in not opinion,
it is fact of california and most other states laws. If brought up on
charges (which you probably won't do to the low dollar amounts involved)
you would have little defense.
>
> The composer retains his or her rights to the music. So far the split
> is: 10 percent management (if the song gets cut), 25 percent for the
> composer (who owns the music half), 25 percent for the composers'
> publishing, and 40 percent for the original writer. Check that against
> any other deal in the world.
A manager that would represent anyone would usually do it based on the
employers cut. (the employer would be the one hiring the representation)
Manager contracts have a way to terminate. Even publishers have a clause
that reverts songs back to the writer if the publisher is not successful
getting a cut. You can ethically keep half a songs copyright if you compose
the music however, to first charge (any amount) and then take half and then
scoop up another 10% is a fancy way of sharking but it is absolutely, and
indeed sharking!
>
>
>
> At this point, the original writer and Paramount are even. Paramount
> insists that writers actively pitch their own material;
At least a publisher wants to work for their percentage. Artist promotions
is always a good idea but it is hardly common to expect it. That is why a
publisher gets the 50% of the copyright in the first place.
> it's a smart strategy--that keeps you as a writer in the loop. In
> addition to the
> demo, you get a list of publishers and a newsletter with tips, etc. We
> offer copies at cost (what they cost us) plus a little for postage.
Nice up sell! What else can we charge 'em for?
> So:
> No, this is not a service where you can simply sit at home and expect
> someone else to 'publish' your work and send you royalty checks.
Hey, did you guys have anything to do with that little boys arm down in the
pan handle of Florida?
>
>
> Do we pitch your songs? Here's the trick: if we like it and really
> believe in it, we will.
Let me guess, either way you still keep the 10% and the 50% right?
> If you believe in the material yourself and
> pitch your own song to the publishing company, there is a good chance we
> will anyway. Included in that list of publishers, of course, is the name
> and address of 'the publishing company' associated with Paramount, which
> itself is a 'Songwriter Management' company.
Songs don't need managers! Songwriters do but so far you haven't said
anything that would lead me to believe that you perform any management
services other then to offer cowriting services for a fee plus percentage
plus more percentage!
>
>
> Who do we pitch to? I pitched one to Lee Ann Womack about a month
> ago.Ijust happened to have access for that pitch, and we felt the song
> was
> right. I don't normally pitch songs;
Self admitted to not doing what you said you do. By the way, anyone can
pitch to anyone. What makes you special? What cuts have you ever had???
What a lame statement. I personally know and chat with weekly, to the heads
of many top companies. My songs have the same chances of getting cut as
anyone else's songs of the same quality no matter who they are or who I
am.... and I have been around a long time too.
> Norm Daniels, the Creative
> Director, does. He has his contacts, I have mine. If your song is right
> for James Ingram, Hank III, Sammy Kershaw or that new Shelton guy ("PS,
> If This Is Austin...."), and they are looking, I might. We don't
> guarantee we're going to pitch any particular song, because we can't
> guarantee the pitch opportunities are going to be available when your
> song is; we have to have your song in hand when the opportunity opens
> up. But we certainly don't sign publishing contracts on songs we have no
> intention of pitching; we don't have to. I also have little postcards
> that read 'Thanks, but no thanks' which I can send out at any time.
> Those are even cheaper to send out than rejection letters.
Again, what do you do for the 10% and why do you charge up front for it???
>
>
> Are our pitches successful? We have a filing cabinet full of
> testimonials.
How about royalty checks?
> We have a lot of independent artists sending in requests
> for material, I get about 2 or 3 a week.
Form letters! I have about a thousand of them. They are computer generated
and meant to keep the tunes rolling since they are the life blood of the
industry.
> One of the songs we demo'd was
> recently placed in a film soundtrack; I can't remember all the details,
> but I do remember it was being handled by a 'name' publisher, a
> publisher with a very successful catalog (she inherited it from her
> father, but it's a viable catalog nonetheless).
Who got the placement, you or the songwriter? Also, I have had national TV
network and National released feature films that have netted less then $100
for the use of a song. this means squat to anyone that knows but then you
are trying to catch the unknowing so that you can scam them aren't you?
>
>
> The people who write music and cut demos for us are all working
> Nashville musicians and writers with their own studios.
So you are farming out the demos to the best bidder. I knew some sharks in
LA that did the same thing.
> I have two
> studios, a home studio and a full-production studio (I don't own it, I'm
> on the staff).
then you don't have them.
> My full production studio has cut records with John
> Hiatt, Lee Ann Womack, James Ingram, Hank III, Kenny Rogers, Clint
> Black...you want me to go on?
They aren't your studios! you just said so!!! What exactly are you on staff
with them to do????? cleaning toilets doesn't count much in this business.
>
>
> A lot of the people who flamed Paramount in the original thread will
> tell you that companies like this prey on the gullible amateur writer,
> the writers who wouldn't stand a chance with 'REAL' 'LEGITIMATE'
> publishing companies. Grandmas and hopeless wanna-be's. They are
> abouthalf right, but we don't prey on anybody.
No, those writers often stand a great chance with legitimate publishers.
I'm still flaming you because you are the shark and this group has lots of
food for you. They need to see through you and your spin!
> Most of our writer-clients areamateurs that major publishers won't talk
> to, much less 'develop' or
> work with in any way. The kind of people that Best Built in Nashville
> won't even accept a phone call from much less return a phone call to.
Is this a scare tactic? it really sucked.
>
>
> How well do they write?
Bait?
> I've been on this NG and involved with other web
> based songwriting groups for a couple of years now.
And still getting away with it.
> The material I see
> coming into Paramount is comparable to anything I've seen on here;
> certainly comparable to anything I've seen Danny Taddei post (sorry,
> Danny).
What in the world have you ever seen from me. i don't post songs because I
have legitimate outlets for them like most real publishers do. You want to
protect yourself from someone that actually can see through you? I bet you
do. All you have to do is address each and every part of my rebuttal and
then fend off the fact that I have never tried to sell anything here nor
will I. Some people like to promote song writers and song writing. OH YEA!
I own my studio and am not on toilet cleaning staff at any.
> And I've seen a lot of good work on here, too; Dolores and Irene
> are some of my favorite writer-friends, as well as the others. The
> point--for me, anyway--isn't how good they are when they submit their
> work, it's how good the work sounds when the demo leaves the office.
Don't try to make friends with those that post to gain credibility. You
have financial gain interest and I don't. You are a shark and you know I am
a hunter of sharks. FIN SOUP ANYONE?
>
>
> So if you want to call this a song-sharking operation, that's your
> privilege,
and properly identified....
> you have a right to speak your peace no matter how
> ill-informed you are, no matter how irrational and false your
> assumptions and perceptions can be.
You are a shark. Your functions are sharking. It is commonly know to be so.
You are double dipping. You are charging for services that you don't
perform. You are alleging to clout you do not have. You are keeping bigger
proportions then are industry standard. You are charging for what
legitimate people in the industry do for free. You are misleading in every
possible way you could possibly mislead!
> Of course, the same people who call
> us a Song Shark operation won't offer to do anything for you at all;
> they don't have anything to offer (try them sometime and see for
> yourself). We offer the earnest, eager writers with no other contacts
> and resources a way to have professional demos cut.
I like the way you infer that you give services but then neatly chop your
services off at professional demo. you don't do anything but a demo do
you? **** People... Please read closely, The very words of this shark
show what he is and how he tries to trick you. . He is trying to stay legal
and he gives himself away. "We offer the earnest, eager writers with no
other contacts and resources a way to have professional demos cut. " He
alludes to all the other services above and then states directly that all
he does is a demo service.
> Work with us and
> we'll set you up with a professional looking package that you can shop
> around. You can go to another demo house and pay about the same money
> for just the demo (and a copy of the demo at that). I have been in the
> music business as a songwriter, singer-songwriter, musician, producer
> and engineer (along with quite a few less glamorous jobs) for going on
> 30 years, and have yet to see any business quite like this. If it was
> truly dishonest I wouldn't have anything to do with it; ask around on
> this NG, people will tell you I'd rather starve (and have). As it is, I
> am trying to Figgie out how to establish my own version of it.
The words "Trust Me" come to mind. In the 3 paragraph of this post was this
statement: "I'm going to tell you how ParamountSong really works. I don't
want to spam the list, so for the purposes of this discussion, I really
don't care if you use their services or not.
He tries to sell himself in ever other paragraph from then on! he uses
sympathy and con all the way through. He attacks me so that he can denounce
what he knows I will say. He is selling something and I am not. Use your
own discretion but think about this. even if he has been part of this group
since the start of it, that doesn't make him legitimate. It only makes him
smart for knowing his hunting grounds.
>
>
> just to set the record straight,
>
> that's how ParamountSong.com works.
>
> David
I think this post will help set the record straight.
Danny Taddei
Danny Taddei
I considered doing business with David and he sounded very up front over
the phone. I liked him and would never have attacked him except for the
fact that I read through his post and found it to be unbelievably cunning.
He may not even know that he is doing wrong but that doesn't matter in the
reality of him still doing it. He is known to me to be an engineer and I am
sure that is a hard line of work in his town. It doesn't afford him the
right to stack unknowing writers though and his attack on me was strategic,
subtle as it is.
David, I had still thought you to be a solution for the needs that we
discussed last winter. I am thoroughly surprised at this information and
can only thank good karma that I didn't entrust you with my business. I
hope that you look at what you are doing and clean up your act to help and
not take advantage.
Danny Taddei
Danny Taddei
Jim,
If you have the time, read through the post I sent. Point by point I show how
David is sharking. He is either very cunning and good or very naive to what he
is doing and still sharking.
In regards to his contributions to this group I would say this... You spend
time on the water so I assume you know that the best way to catch fish is to
chum the waters first.
Danny
Snabbu
The Emery's wrote:
>
Yeah fair enough, but David doesn't deserve to be trashed. Indirectly, and
not on purpose, that is what happened. He is a good contributor to this
network and like you, has given free contributions to my work as well as
many others.
Every company has a marketing strategy agree with it or not. I am sure there
are legitimate businesses doing this type of work, it certainly would be a
useful service to someone. I am also sure that David would associate himself
with that type of company. He has never spammed me or the group concerning
this matter.I only have one hat that comes in very handy on Saturday morning to cover
bad hair days due to hangovers. So I won't dine on it tonight.Jim
As you say fair enough.:-)
Snabbu
David Robinson wrote:
Well there you go, now if the guy had said I entered a competition and
didn't win but got a consolation prize of $20.00 off then that would have
been different.
The prices I had in my mind came from staff writer pitching demo budgets
Nashville based. I forget the article it might have been in Muse News. It
did include extras which they listed it was something like so much for the
basic then acoustic and electric guitars were extra harmonies were extra,
and special instruments like a solo fiddle or sax were about $70 on top of
that.
In regard to the winner getting a free demo I think that's a pretty good
prize for someone who can't do it themselves. So I would say this is a
fair enough way to generate leads.
I don't understand the "Sour grapes comment.." I was merely pointing out
why the groups reaction might have been as it was. I.E. that the facts were
misrepresented in the first place. I agree there is a big difference
between a full blown demo and a $20.00 voucher, note I was merely
describing my reaction when I read the initial post.
Snabbu
TRUSSELL wrote:
> <snip>
Hi Cyndy
This is something I am curious about. Danny's comments on this would be
interesting as well.
Seth Jackson
<trus...@peop.tdsnet.com> wrote:
>But you stipulate that pitching isn't the company's job and not what the
>contract is for. So again, why would a person sign over 10% publishing,
>that's what I don't understand. What is the 10% for? If I signed away 10% I
>would want some type of assurance that something were being done on my
>behalf, something more than help with a demo. You state it's a management
>fee, so I would have to ask what type of managing would you be doing for
>me? A list of publishers and a tip sheet? It wouldn't be worth 10% to me.
I'm wondering the same thing. It sounds like you're taking 10% of the
song just to record a demo. Plus, you're charging for the demo. Any
writer can go to any of the hundreds of demo services in Nashville and
have them cut a demo without having to give up a share of the song.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not seeing any advantage to your
service, and I'm seeing quite a downside. Based on what I've read
here, I'm afraid I have to agree with Danny.
- Seth Jackson
Jerry Garcia tribute: http://www.mp3.com/SethJackson
The music of Loudspeaker: http://www.musicbuilder.com/loudspeaker
Songwriting & Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
Danny Taddei
>
> > Some artists and labels won't cut a song without also having the publishing
> > rights, and they have their own publishing company. So, again, if you have
> > 10% tied up in making a demo, they may be inclined to move along to another
> > song in which all the publishing rights are available.
> >
> > I'd be extremely careful signing my rights away to anyone, traditional
> > publishers included. Some of those, from what I gather, amount to zilch,
> > and could end up costing you a deal which could amount to something. I
> > don't see the point is signing away any rights to a song unless someone is
> > willing to perform some type of valuable service for you.
> >
> > Anyway, just a different perspective from someone who has merely researched
> > the music biz, not been directly involved with it. If I've gotten any
> > information incorrect or assumed anything incorrectly, please do correct
> > me.
> >
> > Cyndy
> >
> > <snip>
>
> Hi Cyndy
>
> This is something I am curious about. Danny's comments on this would be
> interesting as well.
>
> Cheers
>
> Gary
>
> -- -- semper sume remedium ante casum
> http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/188/gary_yeomans.html
I have commented on this before in other matters. No publisher will take a song
if it has been entered into a contest... not many anyway... The fact that it has
10% tied up would seal that deal even faster.
There is all kinds of spin going on here but the fact remains that he is a demo
service that is preying on unknowing writers that are signing way rights for
nothing. Remember all the threads on stock music and lyricists? They are
referring to people like David. I am appalled to find out that a contributor to
this group would be involved with this kind of group but it makes perfect sense
that he would be. If the feeding grounds are rich then why not hang out there.
My comments are hardball for sure. If folks remember back a little, I am usually
the one that defends a little advertising for those that need to and stick up
for the business man. I am exposing this business because it needs to be
exposed. I posted a long one that does a pretty good job of it. I know there
will be more spin but anyone smart will see through it.
Danny Taddei
Danny Taddei
is 10% of the publishing AND 10% of the song writing!!!!!
Good questions...
Danny taddei
Peter
my question about Paramount.
I had entered their Summer Song Contest 2001 by submitting a demo with one
of my tunes, the application form, and a $20.00 submission fee in form of a
check.
A little over a month later I got my "Directors Award of Merit" in the mail.
A pretty document with squiggly lettering, stating that said award is
'hereby presented to' (my name) 'for the excellence in songwriting as
exhibited in the 2001 Summer Song Contest". Looks like a certificate one
could have framed and hang on the wall. (Like those commonly seen in
doctor's or lawyer's offices, displaying the qualifications of the person).
Together with my certificate came two letters, both signed by a Norman
Daniels, Creative Director.
The first one simply informed my that I was a winner, and that enclosed I
would find a Rebate Certificate good for $20.00 off on my choice of any new
demo ordered between now and December 30, 2001.
The second one read like a softsoapy sales pitch for selling demos. "What a
great contest entry you sent us .... Every Nashville recording artist,
including Garth Brooks, Reba McEntire, George Strait, Faith Hill and every
other star you've ever heard are all continually on the look out for great
songs to record. And at Paramount, we're in the middle of it all .....
Warner president and star producer Jim Ed Norman's parking space is right
next to mine, so we see each other frequently ... " and so on and so forth.
Then it goes into how important it is to have professionally produced demos,
and how "Nashville's best talent works with us daily to create world-class
demos that will show off your songs at their very best."
Also enlosed were two copies of a contract to be completed and returned by
me ('herein referred to as "Writer"') with my payment. Among other things,
the contract stated that 'Writer shall be responsible for: .... A recording
charge of $129 (1 singer w/guitar) or $299 (singer w/harmony & five or more
instruments) for each song recorded .... A management fee of 10% of any and
all royalties received by Writer on song(s) commercially recorded through
Company's efforts. It is fully understood that Writer will not be expected
to pay the 10% management fees until after royalties are actually received
by writer .... '
I assume my $20.00 prize had already been deducted from the amounts stated
in the contract.
I read David Robinsons defense piece on the Paramount Group, and I believe
he sounded very sincere. David ought to be in charge of writing the business
letters for Paramount. He's much more convincing than this Norman Daniels
characer with his rather inane whose-parking-lot-is-next-to-whose ramblings.
I also e-mailed Paramount to ask how many contest entries there had been,
and how many of these 'Directors Awards of Merit' were given out. In there
reply they stated that only ten of these prizes had been given out, among
how many submissions they didn't know because there had been so many.
Basically, I'm as smart as I was before. But it's an interesting thread
nonetheless. Lots of opposing points of view. Just like in real life.
Peter
"David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B79B0D2...@home.com...
Danny Taddei
You aren't the first time this has come up. Danny Arena, who is a worthy man in
this industry, posted this post a while back in response to the above post by
David:
"David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B378B04...@home.com...
>
> http://www.paramountsong.com/index.html
>
> "We are happy to let you know about our Summer Songwriting Contest. You
> are invited to enter. Please
> see the info below for details........... snip
David, I just wanted to pipe in that the Paramount group is getting a
not-so-great reputation in Nashville. We along with NSAI advocate against
using them because some of their practices are very questionable. They make
a practice of offering "publishing contracts" to completely novice lyric
only writers as long as they agreed to have their song demo-ed by Paramount.
I'm guessing this contest will simply be a feeder for their services.
Anyway, I'd advise extra-caution when dealing with them.
Best wishes,
-Danny
----------------------------------------------------------
Danny Arena/Sara Light
The Songwriting Education Resource
www.craftofsongwriting.com
It was a rather polite response and because of Danny's polite manner was
probably not remembered.
Thanks for bringing this up. You may have saved a few from something that often
ends up ending a career. The raw feelings that follows figuring out that you've
been taken can feel a lot like rape.
Danny Taddei
Snabbu
Peter wrote:
Aha Peter
Now what you should do now is go to Richard Honchos links page on there you
will find a link to songshark.com you should immediately go there and email the
web master and submit what you have submitted here, they will then pretend to
be be a dewy eyed newbie and investigate Paramount and if they find what I
think they will they will post a warning on their page with all the gory
details of the scam. You owe it as a public service.
Plus you will enjoy reading the scams that are already there one of which is
Identical to what you've described I think it will amuse you. Even down to the
wording of the letters.
What a cack. :-) that means how hilarious like in short for (Cackle i.e. laugh
like a chook (which is slang for chicken) if you know what I mean. Thank you
for a very interesting thread.
Peter
songshark.com link, I came across Richard's definition of song shark:
"Song shark is the trade name for any individual, or firm who, with the
deliberate intention to defraud, solicits business from amateur songwriters,
advising them that by having music written to their lyrics, or vice versa,
they will have a finished composition which will immediately be snatched up
by a music publisher."
Now I'm confused again. I submitted a finished tune, lyrics AND music.
According to Richard's definition, however, the concept of song sharking
only applies to songs that are lacking either music or lyrics. What if I
submitted both? Can I still be a target for a song shark???
Charles Bubba Miller
This is demo making is very interesting to me.
I'm currently starting negotiations with a local
producer. Initial conversation got me quoted
possibly $500.00/per for a 'radio quality' CD.
I asked, "well, ok, what if one of my songs (lyrics only) is a simple
song that I feel could
be properly demo'd with basically acoustic guitar and some beat". He
kinda laughed and
said he didn't do 'demo type work per se', that
he only did the 'radio quality' type recordings.
BUT, he would work with me and not charge
me as much as an established artist. (I have
this man's mother-in-law living in the same
apt. building wing I do, btw.)
I have instinctfully shied away from hooking up with some demo business
I learned from over this internet. I wanted to keep it close to home,
have some input and control over what was done with the song musically.
To know exactly
what I was getting. It appears from these post,
I could easily pay 1/3 of what I may be paying
locally to get demo's made. But I have no idea
of the quality or what I'm getting into.
After reading all these post twice, it appears
fairly cut and dried to me. Using Paramount
I pay virtually the same money for a demo, as other services I could
locate w/search, and for some mysterious reason, give up 10% of the
song, which sounds like that little caveat alone could make the song
less attractive in the marketplace.
As it stands now, I'm inclined to keep working
with my local producer, ...I can work on the price..., and know exactly
what I'm getting. I guess I'm asking someone who understands what I'm
describing, to advise me. I don't want
to feel I have a reasonable handle on what's going on, and be completely
wrong.
Thanks,
Bubba Charles
OSSONGS
you start off saying "I certainly don't have any expertise in the business of
music. It was a good post and you did clear up some things.
I'm one of these people who question everything when it comes to business."
Having read your post I'd say you were a lot more clued up on the music
business than some I've known that have spent a good part of their life in it.
Your slant on the attractiveness or otherwise to some artists/A&R's if the
publishing is not available is spot on.
Dolores
Richard Wilcox
Firstly, some of you must be wondering why I haven't posted to the
Paramount threads before. Simple answer, David has been a very helpful
contributor in the past to RMMS and although we've now had a few spats
over "songsharking" both on and off-RMMS my opinion hasn't changed -
basically he's a good guy, but let me take you back, David posted the
following back in March (copied from Google):-
"From: David Robinson (whiske...@home.com)
Subject: Paramount Group
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.songwriting
(This is the only article in this thread)
Date: 2001-03-05 15:42:59 PST
has anybody ever heard of this group (or the 'Paramountsong.com') or
done
business with them? Any anecdotes, pro or con?
http://www.paramountsong.com/index.html
thanks,
David"
Firstly, if Paramount is as important as David would now have us
beleive he wouldn't have needed to ask RMMS about it. If Nashville is
the same as London was in it's heyday there'd always be someone who
knew someone who you could ask.
I had seen Paramount Group before this post, I'd looked at it for
inclusion in my golf links, but decided that any advertiser that said
(this is paraphrased because the web pages have since been changed)
"Do you know who writes the words for Shania Twain, Vince Gill (etc) -
You can - with the help of Paramount who will put music to your
lyrics." On the same page were photos of Twain and other big "country"
stars who, being from the UK, had never heard of. Hmmm. There was
absolutely no doubt in my mind to which side of the music business
Paramount sat.
As I say, David is basically a good guy (even if he's now going
grayer) and like everybody else he's entitled to make a living and if
somebody is going to make a living from this type of operation I'd
much rather it was somebody like David. That is why I never made any
private or public comments to his request for information.
Most of the points that I would have raised have now been raised, so
there's no need for me to go on and on, so I shall tackle this
particular thread from a different angle.
In the UK only 10% of actors are working at any given time, the others
would be "resting" or working as waiters, telesales etc etc. God knows
what the percentages for either musicians or songwriters. Guess it's
even more horrific. So, without even considering the big "if" which is
talent, to earn any money in the business you need to have the right
style, face, door, contacts, management, production, ability to change
a lyric at a moment's notice, re-write a middle 8 in the studio, even
sing new words to the singer because he/she objects to one line in the
song, re-write the chord structure, understand recording equipment,
know where to find a great drummer, understand contracts, marketing
and a hundred and one other things which some of us can only dream
about (this reminds me why I'm not in the music business). The record
companies and publishing companies will look more seriously at those
that can do some, if not all, of the above.
If somebody thinks they can get you cut, make you a star they will
stump up the cash for studio time etc. (that famous advance often
talked of, but rarely seen). A bona fide publisher/ record company may
not stump up the money but might make suggestions which you can take
or ignore, but in any event, will not be looking to take money off
you.
I use demo studios, that suits me, I've even talked with David about
him arranging a demo for me (not that Paramount have a cat in hell's
chance of getting 10% - even if it amounted to nothing) There's
nothing I would hate more these days than been cooped up with a bunch
of bolshy musos all day, but if you are serious about getting cuts and
deals get yourself down on the recording studio floor yourself and
learn the rest of the craft that goes with songwriting. In other words
- control your own output, including hiring individual musicians - it
really is the only way .
If like me, you are around here for the fun and companionship, by all
means use Paramount, David has said he needs the money, and as I said
earlier, he's not a bad guy, just some of the company he keeps these
days isn't as straight as it should be.
Because I've not indulged in my usual banter, I've saved just a couple
of comments :-
David Robinson wrote (snipped) :-
" Other reasons for rejecting material:(snipped) but we cannot seem to
be 'taking advantage' of someone like that",
That takes care of the potential lawsuits. Buyer beware !!!!
"I have a Bachelors' Degree in Music, with dual concentrates in
Songwriting and Production/Engineering from Berklee College of Music
('96)."
That makes you better qualified than Bob Dylan, The Beatles and even
Britney.....
"The contract basically stipulates the cost of the demo, the type of
demo
(guitar/vocal, full band, back-up singers). We do not have a set-price
list of how much we charge for demos;"
Hmm, a cynic might suggest that the price is variable according to the
writer's wealth and not talent.
Sorry, David, I hope you write that megaseller which means you can be
a songwriter, or failing that win the State Lottery and retire - or
whatever it takes to get you away from Paramount - in this I am truly
rooting for you.
Still your friend, David, even if we violently disagree on this one
matter.
Richard
Richard Wilcox
Firstly the songshark definition is not mine, but a link I put in the golf
links.
Originally the meaning of songshark would be anybody who preyed on lyricists
(not musicians) promising riches and success, but like most words they do
change meaning (the obvious example is "gay"). I would use the word "songshark"
to include anybody that said "pay me money and I'll get you success in the
music business"
Going this route you'll probably finish up with a hole in your pocket and not
much else.
However, and this is important, this is not to say you can't hire musicians,
arrangers, engineers, make up artists, etc etc etc to put the package together.
As a writer and/or performer you are a potential asset and if you find the
right person / company they will stump up the $$ (probably an "advance") to
make money out of the public on behalf of both of you.
For those that are still not sure I really do suggest that you obtain one or
more of the many books about the music business rather than only taking notice
of RMMS posts.
The following is David Robinson's recommended reading
http://sites.netscape.net/WhiskeyJackProd/reading
Peter wrote :-
>Thanks. I logged on to Richard Honcho's site, and looking for the
>songshark.com link, I came across Richard's definition of song shark:
>
>"Song shark is the trade name for any individual, or firm who, with the
>deliberate intention to defraud, solicits business from amateur songwriters,
>advising them that by having music written to their lyrics, or vice versa,
>they will have a finished composition which will immediately be snatched up
>by a music publisher."
>
>Now I'm confused again. I submitted a finished tune, lyrics AND music.
>According to Richard's definition, however, the concept of song sharking
>only applies to songs that are lacking either music or lyrics. What if I
>submitted both? Can I still be a target for a song shark???
Songwriting & creative links
http://www.angelfire.com/music2/richhoncho/index.htm
A selection of RMMS people at
http://www.angelfire.com/music2/richhoncho/RMMS.htm
& 13 of my songs at
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/richhoncho.htm
David Robinson
to make it clear that I am not advertising any services, but for the
purposes of comparison I will mention relative pricing and equitable
services.
"This is demo making is very interesting to me. I'm currently starting
negotiations with a local producer. Initial conversation got me quoted
possibly $500.00/per for a 'radio quality' CD. I asked, "well, ok, what
if one of my songs (lyrics only) is a simple
song that I feel could be properly demo'd with basically acoustic guitar
and some beat". He
kinda laughed and said he didn't do 'demo type work per se', that he
only did the 'radio quality' type recordings. BUT, he would work with me
and not charge me as much as an established artist. (I have this man's
mother-in-law living in the same apt. building wing I do, btw.)"
Not sure what his mother-in-law has to do with it, Charles, but:
Demo prices around here (Nashville, USA) range anywhere from $30 for a
guitar/vocal demo to $1000 per song for full production, top notch
demos. Most producers I know would not hesitate to mix guitar/vocal
demos with full production efforts when they are quoting a deal; they
might cut them in separate sessions, might even bill them separately.
Why your producer balks at it is something you'll have to figure out for
yourself. Maybe he just doesn't want to cut guitar/vocal demos. Don't
cut those demos with him, he may have a reason for not wanting to that
he doesn't feel comfortable in telling you.
Tip of the day: never put someone 'on the spot.' If a producer says he
really doesn't produce Back Street Boys type material, don't force the
issue. He may eventually agree to it, even though he feels much more
confident producing country or blues or alligator songs....
I don't have a set price list for demos, because like Paramount I no
longer look at it as a simply proposition of 'songs come in, songs go
out.' But it would cost me about $300 per song to line up a band, studio
and engineer IF I were doing 3 to 5 songs at a time (not practical to do
less), and all I had to do was walk in with charts, run through the
songs a time or two and hit the record button. Other factors will affect
the price--you can't expect me to charge you the same price for
arranging a song, working up a rough demo, adding more parts, and
pressing a batch of 100 CDs for the same price I charge another person
to simply put the charts on the music stand and hit record and send them
a tape when it's done. And we're not even talking about critiques yet.
radio quality? That's a vague term at best. Who knows what radio quality
is anymore? I haven't heard anything with any kind of 'quality' I liked
on the radio since the Cater administration...
"I have instinctfully shied away from hooking up with some demo business
I learned from over this internet."
It's a beautiful thing, isn't it? It's also a double edged sword....
"I wanted to keep it close to home,
have some input and control over what was done with the song musically.
To know exactly what I was getting. It appears from these post, I could
easily pay 1/3 of what I may be paying locally to get demo's made. But
I have no idea
of the quality or what I'm getting into."
I don't either, cause I'm not sure where 'locally' is. I have observed
that the difference between a demo made by 'a good country band in
Nashville, Illinois' can be dramatically different that a demo made by a
local Nashville studio. And that has nothing to do with the quality of
the studio equipment nor the players abilities in either location. Just
a fact.
"After reading all these post twice, it appears
fairly cut and dried to me. Using Paramount
I pay virtually the same money for a demo, as other services I could
locate w/search, and for some mysterious reason, give up 10% of the
song, which sounds like that little caveat alone could make the song
less attractive in the marketplace."
As I was recently saying to Cyndy in a private post:
"The 10 percent is because Paramount is a
management company, not all that different from artist management. They
are managing you as a songwriter. To that end they send out newsletters,
advise songwriters on a case-by-case (person-to-person, song-to-song)
basis, etc.
In short, they are working with you after the demo is cut as well.
If it was just a demo deal, you'd pay for the demo and be done with it.
But they don't do just straight demos, either; you can't send in X
amount of dollars and a tape and say "I don't want a contract, just cut
me a demo and let me know when it's done." Paramount is about managing
songwriters, developing their talent and their products.
PLEASE Keep in mind that I am not saying anything for or against the
contract
or the company; I'm not recommending you submit work to them, that it's
a good deal or a bad deal. I'm simply trying to tell you 'what the deal
is.'"
"As it stands now, I'm inclined to keep working with my local producer,
...I can work on the price..., and know exactly what I'm getting. I
guess I'm asking someone who understands what I'm describing, to advise
me. I don't want to feel I have a reasonable handle on what's going on,
and be completely wrong."
I don't know your producer, don't have samples of his work available, so
I really can't give you any advice about working with him/her one way or
the other. There's nothing wrong with working with a local producer, and
I think if you can afford it you are better off being involved in the
process first-hand. I personally would never commit myself to mail-order
demos; I have acquiesced to co-writers who insisted on it and the
results were okay, but that's not how I like to cut demos. I like to be
right there in the studio, guitar in hand and standing in front of the
mic myself.
If you don't have the wherewithal to find a producer and go into the
studio with him/her, it might be a different story.
You'll certainly get what you pay for, I'm sure. If nothing else, the
experience will do you good.
later,
David
David Robinson
for them, much less working for them. I asked that question in order to
get truly unbiased (as much as possible) answers--how people who had
actually dealt with the company felt about their experiences.
So I then went to work for the company and it has been five
months---what is your point in bringing up that post now?
I truly don't get it,
David
Richard Wilcox
Hi David,
The wonders of the net - your e-mail to me showed up before my post did.
Simple - if Paramount is what you are now claiming, with all the contacts
around Nashville you claim you would have got the info from people whose
judgment you would appreciate better that anybody at RMMS.
Did the quoting of this post really upset you? - not my intention. But if I
hadn't posted most would have thought something wrong anyway.
BTW just posted a link to your recommended reading site - but it's a broken
link, is that temporary or permanent?
Also I did mean that you are a "good guy" but I unless you change your mind on
this particular subject I can see no reason us crossing swords on it again.
Even if Paramount is 100% genuine it sails so close to the wind..........
In all other respects I shall listen and learn from you.
Keep the muse,
Richard
David Robinson wrote:-
David Robinson
When did I ever say Paramount was important? I said that I didn't think
it was right for someone who had no experience with the company to flame
them perfunctorily, without checking any of the facts. That's ignorance,
plain and simple. And to that end I related my experiences having
**actually** worked in the company. A lot of people on this NG are fond
of saying that "in my experience, song sharking operations like this
blah blah blah." I challenge any of them to back that up with
FACT--actual, first-hand experiences. But you don't--you never cite
first-hand experience, you ALWAYs cite some vague story from a 'friend
of a friend (that I met on an internet newsgroup)' who tells what
amounts to an Urban Legend. I am beginning to believe that Song Sharks
are to songwriting what the rodent in the chicken bucket is to the fast
food industry: the industry boogie man. No one can actually recall ever
having gotten a fried rat along with their chicken nuggets, but they've
heard the story repeated so many times that they actually believe
it--and will re-tell the story as if it actually happened to them.
note--I'm using the word 'you' broadly. That's the general 'you,' it
could be anybody.
What's 'important' to me is that if you're going to criticize this
company (or any other), I would rather you did it with a rational and
reasonable argument, not hysterical half-truths. You want to take issue
with the provisions of the contract? Fine, that's your prerogative. But
argue the facts; don't go off half-cocked like the guy that started this
particular thread who said he 'won' a so-called 'contest' the prize of
which was a $25 certificate good towards a demo. He didn't 'win' the
contest, someone else did. He reported a half-truth, which set the rest
of you off on a name calling tangent.
I know someone else did because I helped pick the winner. I also sent
her a letter telling her she had a freedom coming. I probably sent that
guy his certificate. You can make that out to be as sinister as you
want. He didn't win. Nice try, but no banana....
"That takes care of the potential lawsuits. Buyer beware !!!!"
You see something sinister in the fact that we won't enter into
contracts with minors or felons? Those are known propositions, you are
damned if you do and damned if you don't. Of course, I don't think any
of the major automobile dealers would sell a vehicle to an unlicensed
minor either, and for the same reason. A minor can get a license to
drive at a certain age in certain states, but cannot legally enter into
binding contracts. And the US government won't allow convicted felons to
vote for similar reasons; they have been stripped of certain legal
rights. Good enough for Ford and Uncle Sam, good enough for me...
"That makes you better qualified than Bob Dylan, The Beatles and even
Britney.....'
That makes me better qualified than the office temp from Ranstad who
knows all about Word, Excel, 10 key data entry and handling a multi-line
call center but doesn't know the vaguest thing about meter, prosody,
making two lines rhyme, or resolving to a G chord from a minor 7 flat
five, you snot.
And in point of fact, I've always been better qualified than either
Dylan or the Beatles; I was born 'better qualified.' Britney needs to
develop a little bit more before I can even consider her for the
position of house maid....
"Hmm, a cynic might suggest that the price is variable according to the
writer's wealth and not talent."
A cynic can suggest anything he wants, and invariably will. If you're
cynical, turn and RUN, do not walk, away. I don't have time for cynics.
Cynics don't make good songwriters; cynicism rarely makes good grist for
the songwriting mill.
But in point of fact, I have no way of telling whether one song is from
a rich client or a poor one. I get hand-written messes from either. I
get CDs with four-color labels and graphics from either: anybody can buy
a decent computer and photo quality ink jet printer these days. And it's
not my job to determine whether a client has money enough to cut a demo
or not; they either do or they don't. If they don't, arrangements can be
made...
"Still your friend, David, even if we violently disagree on this one
matter."
The violence is all on your end, my friend. As for the rest, as Paul
McCartney said,
"I sleep very well at night, thank you."
David
David Robinson
Charles Bubba Miller
Thanks David, I must say I feel you are being
honest, maybe to a fault. <g> I think I see
where paramount is in business to 'help' the
novice, or 'out of range' songwriter. I definitely
get the impression that Paramount would give
more 'attention' to my songs than the multitude of other 'mail services'
I explored that Dolores sent me to show what is out there, as I imposed
for her advice. It does appear the 10% is the 'sticking point'. It
would keep me from using your services, and make me willing to dig
another couple of C notes out to avoid that. Not so much the 10% (of
zero,lol) but in the way it may make my songs less marketable. No doubt
guidance, critiqueing, is something I need greatly. But I'm finding
more than I can take in available from fellow rmms'ers, songwriting web
sites, and bookstores.
However, if none of all this has prejudiced you
against me, if my local connection doesn't work for me, (Precision
Digital Mastering Studios, Bossier City La.) I will send a song to your
co. for a low-cost demo, we'll have a run at it ...in short, because I
trust you. Things are going great right now though. ;-)
Now, I can't believe you said this regarding
the producers Mother-in Law living a wet rag toss from me.
<<Not sure what his mother-in-law has to do with it, Charles, but:>>
You better believe that nice elderly lady has my phone number, knows
where I am, for any help she may need. She has been informed I have a
full compliment of 'handyman' tools, and knowledge of use thereof. I'm
not above using
any angles I can, ...isn't that what it takes?
Haha, ...umm, .....I'm serious. <G>
Thanks David
very respectfully,
Bubba Charles
David Robinson
marketable."
For what it is worth, I haven't seen that the 10 percent affects
marketing either way. Our clients bring us publishing contracts all the
time, generally when they need advice on whether they should sign or
not. They are not trying to get out of the deal they have already signed
with Paramount, the 10 percent doesn't propose any apparent problem.
For anyone who might interpret this as 'vague' or sinister in any way,
let me make it as clear as I possibly can:
To date, I have yet to receive any correspondence from anyone who has
said that the contract they signed with Paramount has negatively
affected any publishing deal they have sought or come across. And
believe me, I have my eyes peeled for just that kind of correspondence.
One of the first things I did when I started working there was set up a
folder in their e-mail program so that I could set any sort of
complaints aside and address them.
But to each his own.
David
David Robinson
"You better believe that nice elderly lady has my phone number, knows
where I am, for any help she may need. She has been informed I have a
full compliment of 'handyman' tools, and knowledge of use thereof. I'm
not above using
any angles I can, ...isn't that what it takes?"
David
Snabbu
Danny Taddei wrote:
> Peter,
>
> You aren't the first time this has come up. Danny Arena, who is a worthy man in
> this industry, posted this post a while back in response to the above post by
> David:
>
> "David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B378B04...@home.com...
> >
> > http://www.paramountsong.com/index.html
> >
> > "We are happy to let you know about our Summer Songwriting Contest. You
> > are invited to enter. Please
> > see the info below for details........... snip
>
> David, I just wanted to pipe in that the Paramount group is getting a
> not-so-great reputation in Nashville. We along with NSAI advocate against
> using them because some of their practices are very questionable. They make
> a practice of offering "publishing contracts" to completely novice lyric
> only writers as long as they agreed to have their song demo-ed by Paramount.
> I'm guessing this contest will simply be a feeder for their services.
> Anyway, I'd advise extra-caution when dealing with them.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> -Danny
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Danny Arena/Sara Light
> The Songwriting Education Resource
> www.craftofsongwriting.com
>
Yes that was it Danny
I knew this had come up in dispatches before.
Such an interesting discussion.
"Oh the shark has pretty teeth dear and he keeps them pearly white"
David Robinson
neither you nor Danny pointed that out.
Peter
you wrote the following:
".....don't go off half-cocked like the guy that started this
particular thread who said he 'won' a so-called 'contest' the prize of
which was a $25 certificate good towards a demo. He didn't 'win' the
contest, someone else did. He reported a half-truth, which set the rest
of you off on a name calling tangent.
I know someone else did because I helped pick the winner. I also sent
her a letter telling her she had a freedom coming. I probably sent that
guy his certificate. You can make that out to be as sinister as you
want. He didn't win. Nice try, but no banana...."
I'm "the guy who started theis particular thread", and I strenuously object
to your accusing me of 'going off half-cocked' and reporting a 'half-truth'.
I never claimed that I 'won the contest', like I got the first prize or
something. According to the cover letter that came with my 'Directors Award
of Merit' the first prize winner for July was a Michelle Mostoller of Salt
Lake City.
I'm not THE winner, I'm A winner, as stated in the first line of said cover
letter: "The judging has been very close, but I'm so pleased to let you know
that you're a winner in our Summer Song contest." My prize was $20.00 off a
demo produced by Paramount. And that's exactly what I reported.
My dear David, since you're so bent on getting the facts straight and are
very critical of name calling based on spin and distortion, please don't
accuse me of reporting half-truths without furnishing the VERBATIM
statements in my original post that you believe are counterfactual and
'half-cocked'.
Thanks,
Peter
"David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B7AC8A6...@home.com...
Peter
." I participated
in their last songwriting competition, and submitted one of my tunes
together with the $20.00 submission fee. Back came a letter of
congratulations and a "Director's award of Merit" certificate, meaning that
my song was among the winners. My prize is $20.00 off for having them
produce a demo of said song."
I said I was AMONG THE WINNERS!!!! Where's the half-cocked half-truth????
Peter
"David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B7AC8A6...@home.com...
Snabbu
Charles Bubba Miller wrote:
<snip>
Hi Charles
There are schools of thought re demo quality.
Some people say, do a really good radio ready production so that your
possible customers can see you believe in your product and so that the A&R
guys don't have to use any imagination because it's all there.
Others say do a basic demo that presents the song without the instrumental
solo let the A&R guy transfer his own style things onto the song and if the
lyrics and tune are good the song will sell.
Still further people say all sorts of a combination of things in between.
I do not know what is right I have the urge to do the best I can with what
I have.
I record at home and do all the stuff myself or just get a mate in to do a
bit of guitar so it doesn't effect me much.
Consider this if you make a radio ready demo it can be used for two
purposes,
(1) As a demo
(2) As actual performance music.
This may not always be applicable, if you go to the Taxi web site and look
at one of their sample want lists you can see which types of music "Radio
Ready is applicable too" if that is your type of music then you should
consider doing the radio ready if not then you have a choice to do (a) Do a
demo with real instruments with a limited number of instruments.
(b) Do a Demo with a midi studio with just the lead guitar being a real
instrument to add flavor.
Option B will allow you to do a more complex arrangement.
But if you don't have the arranging skills option B is a no goer as you
will have to pay someone to do it. My view is no arrangement beats a bad
arrangement.
Something else if you do do a radio ready make sure you have a master
without vocals as well.
Charles Bubba Miller
<<whiske...@home.com (David Robinson)
===================================
HEEHEE, I would respond in more length but
I have some shelves to put up for a really nice
lady <g>.....I'm a 'shark' now! Kewl! I'm a headin' for Nashville to
jump in the big tank!
(I help 'em all out around here, ...but she IS
getting preferred treatment) lol.
Snabbu
Peter wrote:
> Thanks. I logged on to Richard Honcho's site, and looking for the
> songshark.com link, I came across Richard's definition of song shark:
>
> "Song shark is the trade name for any individual, or firm who, with the
> deliberate intention to defraud, solicits business from amateur songwriters,
> advising them that by having music written to their lyrics, or vice versa,
> they will have a finished composition which will immediately be snatched up
> by a music publisher."
>
> Now I'm confused again. I submitted a finished tune, lyrics AND music.
> According to Richard's definition, however, the concept of song sharking
> only applies to songs that are lacking either music or lyrics. What if I
> submitted both? Can I still be a target for a song shark???
>
Yes the "song poem" scam which Richard has as a definition of song sharking is
one of the most common forms but not the only one. The song contest scam that
you described
is the next most common, there are others. And variations on all and
combinations exist as well. The site address is here
http://www.geocities.com/songshark/
There is also a message board there.
Snabbu
Richard Wilcox wrote:
Hi Peter,<snip>
For those that are still not sure I really do suggest that you obtain one or
more of the many books about the music business rather than only taking notice
of RMMS posts.The following is David Robinson's recommended reading
Ha you've overloaded his server busy or down, maybe down.
Snabbu
Richard Wilcox wrote:
<snip>
> "I have a Bachelors' Degree in Music, with dual concentrates in
> Songwriting and Production/Engineering from Berklee College of Music
> ('96)."
>
> That makes you better qualified than Bob Dylan, The Beatles and even
> Britney.....
>
>
Oh I thought that was a qualification from Dec's Serious writers guild:-)
Snabbu
Peter wrote:
> David,
>
> you wrote the following:
>
> ".....don't go off half-cocked like the guy that started this
> particular thread who said he 'won' a so-called 'contest' the prize of
> which was a $25 certificate good towards a demo. He didn't 'win' the
> contest, someone else did. He reported a half-truth, which set the rest
> of you off on a name calling tangent.
>
> I know someone else did because I helped pick the winner. I also sent
> her a letter telling her she had a freedom coming. I probably sent that
> guy his certificate. You can make that out to be as sinister as you
> want. He didn't win. Nice try, but no banana...."
>
>
DING DONG DING DONG
Oh my gosh is that the alarm bells ringing.
Hang on wait a minute! didn't David say in reply to my post about the contest
that he was not too up on the contests or something like that, and that he
didn't have much to do with them, now he's the judge and knows who the winner
was? For those of us with an attention span longer than a gnat who can still
remember yesterdays posts this is a bit confusing. Do you or do you not run
these contests?
A simple yes or no will suffice.
David Robinson
still
remember yesterdays posts this is a bit confusing. Do you or do you not
run
these contests?
A simple yes or no will suffice."
I don't personally run the contests. I send out some info about it. I
think my vote was the tie breaker in the contest in question, maybe not.
I remember who won because I handled some phone calls from her regarding
it.
That's about it.
David
Seth Jackson
wrote:
>He isn't asking for 10% of the publishing. He as taking 10% of the total which
>is 10% of the publishing AND 10% of the song writing!!!!!
Oops! That's even worse. Much worse.
- Seth Jackson
Jerry Garcia tribute: http://www.mp3.com/SethJackson
The music of Loudspeaker: http://www.musicbuilder.com/loudspeaker
Songwriting & Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
Seth Jackson
"Bubba" Miller) wrote:
>Not so much the 10% (of
>zero,lol) but in the way it may make my songs less marketable. No doubt
>guidance, critiqueing, is something I need greatly. But I'm finding
>more than I can take in available from fellow rmms'ers, songwriting web
>sites, and bookstores.
You can get plenty of guidance and critiquing just by joining NSAI for
$100/year. I can't see any excuse for a company like Paramount
taking 10% of writers' songs.
Seth Jackson
<whiske...@home.com> wrote:
>Demo prices around here (Nashville, USA) range anywhere from $30 for a
>guitar/vocal demo to $1000 per song for full production, top notch
>demos.
I've never heard of anyone paying $1000 per song in Nashville. 3
weeks ago, a Nashville publisher played me some top-notch demos done
at County Q with 7-piece band, and those demos cost $600 per song.
You can certainly pay $1000 or more for a pop demo in LA, but that's
LA.
>I don't have a set price list for demos, because like Paramount I no
>longer look at it as a simply proposition of 'songs come in, songs go
>out.' But it would cost me about $300 per song to line up a band, studio
>and engineer IF I were doing 3 to 5 songs at a time (not practical to do
>less), and all I had to do was walk in with charts, run through the
>songs a time or two and hit the record button. Other factors will affect
>the price--you can't expect me to charge you the same price for
>arranging a song, working up a rough demo, adding more parts, and
>pressing a batch of 100 CDs for the same price I charge another person
>to simply put the charts on the music stand and hit record and send them
>a tape when it's done. And we're not even talking about critiques yet.
I don't know what you mean by "working up a rough demo", but except
for pressing CDs, the demo studio I use in Nashville handles all of
the above when I record there. The only extra charge is $75 for
charting. They also do things like create intros and turnarounds, if
needed. No extra charge. The demos come out to $400/song or less,
including vocals.
>If it was just a demo deal, you'd pay for the demo and be done with it.
>But they don't do just straight demos, either; you can't send in X
>amount of dollars and a tape and say "I don't want a contract, just cut
>me a demo and let me know when it's done." Paramount is about managing
>songwriters, developing their talent and their products.
So, what exactly do they do for you for that 10%?
Richard Wilcox
This is a very serious matter in the UK, I can think of 2 world renown
Brits, who purchased their University Degrees from the U.S. and would,
without those letters they put after their name be unable to con the
rest of us. The world would have been a better place without the two
of them.
And, while on the subject of University Degrees somebody pointed out
last night they'd dealt with a music-biz type at one of the major
companies who had a degree in business studies and was not
particularly complimentary about said individual. Now if my memory
serves me right (and it often doesn't) back in the days when the music
business was exciting and everybody bought records rather than CDs you
used to have to understand music to work in A&R.
Perhaps that's what wrong with the biz. Just a thought that scuttled
round my brain.
Richard
Snabbu <sna...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:<3B7AFED0...@optushome.com.au>...
Andrew Cameron
<snip>
>The second one read like a softsoapy sales pitch for selling demos. "What a
>great contest entry you sent us .... Every Nashville recording artist,
>including Garth Brooks, Reba McEntire, George Strait, Faith Hill and every
>other star you've ever heard are all continually on the look out for great
>songs to record. And at Paramount, we're in the middle of it all .....
>Warner president and star producer Jim Ed Norman's parking space is right
>next to mine, so we see each other frequently ... "
I'd like to point out that I would be wary of any company whose main selling
point is "sometimes I talk to this guy...". My personal advice is to
destroy any links you have to a business venture which relies entirely on a
parking space.
Not to mention that already David Robinson has made a complete twat of
himself in this thread. Oh, I just did mention it.
--
Tags: af #1730 (remove LOVENUT to reply)
EAC Paradox Division
--
"i've been too honest with myself
i should have lied like everybody else"
David Robinson
total
which is 10% of the publishing AND 10% of the song writing!!!!!"
Bullshit. The way you have it written it amounts to 20 percent. It's ten
percent, period.
David Robinson
"I've never heard of anyone paying $1000 per song in Nashville."
Your problem is you hang around amateurs and wanna-be's and are starting
to believe your own hype about yourself.
David
Richard Wilcox
David wrote :-
I've spent over $1000 on songs (allowing for our old friend - inflation), but
that don't count because it was in London, England.
But then I used real violins - why have nylon when you can cotton?
Did I spend my money wisely? History tells me "no".
How much should somebody spend on a demo? That's the equivalent of "how long is
a piece of string? You won't get what you want without spending the money and
you still might get what you want having spent the money.
BTW I'm an amateur & no longer a wannabe. OK?
Richard
Richard Wilcox
"Bullshit. The way you have it written it amounts to 20 percent. It's ten
percent, period."
Not necessarily - it really depends on how Paramount's contract is worded. And
as I haven't seen a copy of Paramount's contract I couldn't possibly comment.
could I?
OSSONGS
Richard>
Hey, Richard - think positive - make that a gonnabe ;-)
I pay $250 - $350 for demos in Nashville.
I have three demo companies I really love, and a couple of fall backs - cheaper
- that do a good job for the price.
I have known of writers who pay $1000.00 plus for a state of the art demo -
wish I had that much money to throw at a demo.
Dolores
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
Danny Taddei wrote in message
> I would like to point out to people here that you are indeed a major
>shark trying to protect your feeding ground.
Wow, this is gonna be a nasty thread. I like Danny and David both and I
feel like Ringo Starr must have felt.
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
About 10 years ago I decided to go back to school and take some accounting
courses. I decided to go to a technical school. As part of their
advertising, they talked about how much someone can make as an entry level
accountant. I thought it was pretty good money but I just wanted a one very
basic course and I knew I couldn't become an accountant with just one
course. I had also visited a private business school that called itself a
college and they did pretty much the same thing--talking about accountancy
when they should have been talking about bookkeeping. But, after I realized
I wouldn't be returning to Nashville, I took some college courses and they
use some of the same books that the tech school uses.
This is no different that what Paramount is offering the songwriters. There
is always a chance that they will indeed write a big hit, just as there is
the chance that someone will indeed become an accountant with a tech school
education. If David was being honest in his post, and I have no reason to
doubt that he was, it all sounds pretty level handed. I always wanted to
take one of those little drawing tests where you draw the guy with the cap.
They would probably take a lot of people we don't think qualified as
artistically talented. From what I saw of his work, Picasso wasn't
artistically talented either. So taking this all into consideration,
although I wouldn't use Paramount, I can't say how wrong they are. Some of
you might want to ask yourself how "honest" you are when selling a used car,
used house, or giving someone a reason you can't do something. There is
really not a lot of difference in what Paramount does if David told the
truth.
I have another story but I'm too tired now.
Richard Wilcox
>Hey, Richard - think positive - make that a gonnabe ;-)
Thanks Dolores, much appreciated, but I'd be just as happy to see some of you
real serious writers get the breaks. Won't name names, but we all know who we
mean :-)
I'd be able to say I knew So-and-so when they used to post to this NG.
Richard
>I pay $250 - $350 for demos in Nashville.
>I have three demo companies I really love, and a couple of fall backs -
>cheaper
>- that do a good job for the price.
>
>I have known of writers who pay $1000.00 plus for a state of the art demo -
>wish I had that much money to throw at a demo.
>
>Dolores
Songwriting & creative links
Richard Wilcox
>Wow, this is gonna be a nasty thread. I like Danny and David both and I
>feel like Ringo Starr must have felt.
>
Shall we go down the pub for the next 20 years now or wait a little longer?
Richard
David Robinson
longer?"
From my many years experience as a professional pub-crawler, I would
have t' say the arguments there are much more interesting than the one
in question.
If you're really interested, though,
I know a guy who can give you a
state of the art,
Music Snow class argument
for only $16,000.
David
(puffing up chest,
oh-so-self righteously)
OSSONGS
Dolores
Snabbu
Richard Wilcox wrote:
Hey Snabs,<snip>
And, while on the subject of University Degrees somebody pointed out
last night they'd dealt with a music-biz type at one of the major
companies who had a degree in business studies and was not
particularly complimentary about said individual. Now if my memory
serves me right (and it often doesn't) back in the days when the music
business was exciting and everybody bought records rather than CDs you
used to have to understand music to work in A&R.Perhaps that's what wrong with the biz. Just a thought that scuttled
round my brain.
See Honch when you get old you get this good old days syndrome,
back in those days A&R men were always 50 with short hair and the only
music they were into was Mantovani. They were also usually the "Sales
Manager" as well. believe me you wouldn't have allowed your mother
to go out with one.
Danny Taddei
This either proves you as a total liar or complete idiot. 10% of a copyright is 10% of the publishing and 10% of the writers royalties or any combination that equals 10% of the copyright because a copyright is equal to 100% of the writers royalties PLUS 100% of the publishing. I know you know that and most others do to so the only people you are writing to are the new folks that may not and most likely would fall prey to your tactics.
What is that old saying..... there is no such thing as bad publicity? I think the good folks that gang out here are trying to see to it that there is such thing as bad publicity..... At least for the Dread Pirate Robinson!
Danny Taddei
about LA or NY prices and POP music, not Nashville.
Danny Taddei
but I think he needs to get himself far away from these practices and I
will hound his butt until he does. He knows better. He must because he has
been around for a long time.
David, If you read this take me seriously. You are doing people wrong and
most of us including you know it. If you have talent, I will be glad to
lend any hand that I can but if you don't stop and even go against this
thing you are doing, I for one will be a tenaciously advisory to you.
Danny Taddei
Charles Bubba Miller
(Snabbu)
Charles Bubba Miller wrote:
<snip>
<<Hi Charles
There are schools of thought re demo quality. Some people say, do a
really good radio ready production so that your possible customers can
see you believe in your product and so that the A&R guys don't have to
use any imagination because it's all there. Others say do a basic demo
that presents the song without the instrumental solo let the A&R guy
transfer his own style things onto the song and if the lyrics and tune
are good the song will sell. Still further people say all sorts of a
combination of things in between.
I do not know what is right I have the urge to do the best I can with
what I have.
I record at home and do all the stuff myself or just get a mate in to do
a bit of guitar so it doesn't effect me much.
Consider this if you make a radio ready demo it can be used for two
purposes,
(1) As a demo
(2) As actual performance music.
This may not always be applicable, if you go to the Taxi web site and
look at one of their sample want lists you can see which types of music
"Radio Ready is applicable too" if that is your type of music then you
should consider doing the radio ready if not then you have a choice to
do (a) Do a demo with real instruments with a limited number of
instruments.
(b) Do a Demo with a midi studio with just the lead guitar being a real
instrument to add flavor.
Option B will allow you to do a more complex arrangement. But if you
don't have the arranging skills option B is a no goer as you will have
to pay someone to do it. My view is no arrangement beats a bad
arrangement.
Something else if you do do a radio ready make sure you have a master
without vocals as well.
Gary
-- -- semper sume remedium ante casum
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/188/gary_yeomans.html
Well, I just met with the owner/producer. I wish
it was an easy decision for me. Negotiated a
$500/per for three songs. I'm only going to get
the 'Train' song done, and put others on the back burner, probably
looking for a better deal/price on them. I told him for $500, I wanted
full ownership, he agreed, would only want music credit mentioned.
My problem is, I'm not sure of his experience
in various genre's, and inparticularly the Country/folk the "Train"
would be. I'm wanting
to find out that even if I'm sitting there the whole
time of production, with approval status, I wouldn't be better off with
a Nashville studio
doing it, as they are totally experienced in
that genre'. And if I did send it out to a
highly rated (quality) studio, would I be
able to keep 100% ownership? I'm thinking
$500 should buy me a pretty professional
job there. If they don't have any long-term interest (rights) to the
song, will they put as much into the song as if they had potential
royalties from it? (excuse me but I think
like a winner) <g>
If I wasn't totally undecided about this, I
wouldn't be posting hoping to get advice
on these things I don't know about. I don't particularly enjoy exposing
my ignorance
like this.
TIA for any help I can get, I'm sitting on this
deal for 2-3 days before I make my decision.
(btw, the obscure "window-pane" line
has been replaced for anyone that remembers
it. Also, as I watched this guy navigate all over
his puter screen, playing me his previous work,
I found it odd that as much as you guys talk about recording music, and
the tech's of it,
how could he not even have heard of this newgroup? Is that
understandable?)
Respectfully,
Bubba Charles
David Robinson
Danny, if you read this take ME seriously. You have completely
disappointed me. You are vain, arrogant, rude, self centered,
condescending and petty. I don't approve of you, I don't like you, nor
do I need your help or advice.
take a hike.
David
Danny Taddei
bother me. None of what you are calling me fits and you know it. Keep it
up and so will I.
If you think you are going to scam anyone else from the group you can
probably stand in line at the welfare office right now. The bit about 10%
of the copyright not meaning 10% of publishing and writers? be real...
Everyone knows what's up with this. Me vain? You thinking that you can
rip folks off because you can out smart their trusting nature is so wrong
I don't don't how you can sleep at night.
David Robinson wrote:
> You are so full of yourself it's absolutely pathetic.
yea sure I am. David, you are ripping folks off and you know it. I
started going after you without knowing who I was going after. when I
found out it was you I was really upset. I thought pretty highly of
you and this thing just bugs me. you know better and you are scamming
folks.
If you really don't think you deserve a bashing then take a step back
and look at what you are doing. Representing and producing the same
artist is an illegal act and for a good reason.
I am truly sorry that this has come out and you and I are at wits
against each other but I have a strong conscious and can't do anything
but what i am doing.
Danny
David Robinson wrote:
> Danny,
Danny Arena/Sara Light
Our cap on our demos at Curb is $600. We just finished a session at David
Malloy's studio (he's cut records for Reba McEntire, Kevin Sharp and Mindy
McCready in this studio) with some of the best studio musicians in town,
including Reba's keyboard player Jimmy Nichols and Garth's electric guitar
player Chris Leuzinger and drummer Steve Brewster who plays on Lonestar's
records. We came out at $543 per song for our five song session. Sara and
I have gotten holds on $300 demos and "There's Your Trouble" was a simple
home demo that writer Mark Selby put down. It didn't cost a dime. There
are no rules regarding how much you need to spend on a demo. You need to
spend enough to get a decent quality demo. You CAN spend $1000 a song in
Nashville, but you don't need to in order to get a decent product. And in
fact, you can get a pretty darn good demo in Nashville for less than $500.
One problem I have with the Paramount is when amateur "songwriters" are
convinced to spend money on a song that isn't worth demoing in the first
place. David, I know you said that you reject people because their songs
aren't "ready". Perhaps not everyone who works at Paramount has the same
standards as you. I've heard from at least 4 people in the past two months
who wanted me to listen to their "poems" they had written which had been
demoed by Paramount. I really don't think people who don't even know what a
lyric is should be told to be investing money in demoing their "poem" unless
they fully understand that it will be a poem set to music. Personally, I'd
rather tell them to buy a book like Sheila Davis' that will teach them the
difference between a lyric and a poem. But of course, that's just my
opinion.
Best wishes,
-Danny (the other one)
----------------------------------------------------------
Danny Arena/Sara Light
The Songwriting Education Resource
www.craftofsongwriting.com
"David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B7C0591...@home.com...
Bob Olhsson
Arena/Sara Light <arena...@home.com> wrote:
>We came out at $543 per song for our five song session.
That's just about exactly what Ellen and I came out paying last
November also using top flight players having hundreds of hits under
their belts.
--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery Recording Project Design and Consulting
Box 90412, Nashville TN 37209 Tracking, Mixing and Mastering
615.352.7635 FAX 615.356.2483 Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
40 years of making people sound better than they thought possible!
ACEford1
Ace "I wish I was back in Texas" Ford
www.texpatriate.com
Torch Singer
demo as an honorable mention? And you sign over 10% of any future
earnings of any song that YOU paid thm to demo as a "management fee"?
Danny is right on target about ParamountSong being a songshark outfit.
As far as I can see you paid $20.00 for that lovely plague they sent
you.
Cid
PS Thanks Danny for going out on a limb for everyone here. You saw the
shark outfit and you exposed it.
My Sites Links Page:
http://community-2.webtv.net/Cynthiangel/Cidzsites/
My Guestbook: http://cidsworld.cjb.net/
Seth Jackson
No, 10% of the song amounts to 10%. If it were only publishing, that
would amount to 5% of the total income. Do the math.
Seth Jackson
Really, now? I suppose you're going to tell me that County Q caters
to amateurs and wannabes? And I wonder exactly what "hype" you're
referring to.
I notice that, in this thread, you've been quick to respond with
personal attacks against those who've challenged you, but so far,
you've failed to address any of the points being made by those people.
Seth Jackson
<arena...@home.com> wrote:
>Our cap on our demos at Curb is $600. We just finished a session at David
>Malloy's studio (he's cut records for Reba McEntire, Kevin Sharp and Mindy
>McCready in this studio) with some of the best studio musicians in town,
>including Reba's keyboard player Jimmy Nichols and Garth's electric guitar
>player Chris Leuzinger and drummer Steve Brewster who plays on Lonestar's
>records. We came out at $543 per song for our five song session. Sara and
>I have gotten holds on $300 demos and "There's Your Trouble" was a simple
>home demo that writer Mark Selby put down. It didn't cost a dime. There
>are no rules regarding how much you need to spend on a demo. You need to
>spend enough to get a decent quality demo. You CAN spend $1000 a song in
>Nashville, but you don't need to in order to get a decent product. And in
>fact, you can get a pretty darn good demo in Nashville for less than $500.
As a matter of fact, I just cut some demos for $400/song using players
like Chris Leuzinger and Dave Pomeroy, all guys who play on albums.
$400/song is the most I've ever had to spend. Chris is one helluva
guitar player, isn't he?
Michael
> have t' say the arguments there are much more interesting than the one
> in question.
I don't know you or the others involved in this argument, but I can
say a few things:
1) You were very convincing at first. I'm a beginner and everything
you said made sense and sounded sincere.
2) After reading the replies, I now agree that giving away 10% for the
demo is not a good deal for the writer. Before I didn't know if this
was normal or not. Now I know.
3) Your tone started changing from your first post to your follow ups.
You started out looking very sincere and honest, and now you're
starting to look unprofessional and vindictative. My advice here
would be to let the whole thing drop. The worst thing for you is to
have numerous threads of bad publicity in Google.
Michaël
Richard Wilcox
> See Honch when you get old you get this good old days syndrome, back in those days A&R men were
> always 50 with short hair and the only music they were into was Mantovani. They were also
> usually the "Sales Manager" as well. believe me you wouldn't have allowed your mother to go out
> with one.
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Gary
>
> -- -- semper sume remedium ante casum
> http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/188/gary_yeomans.html
So, alright, I'm no spring chicken, but I aint that f*****g old, in
fact, I may be months younger than you :-))))
Richard
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
thread going.
Richard Wilcox wrote in message ...
Richard Wilcox
> I just want to say that I am SO happy someone besides me got a contentious
> thread going.
Eb, sorry to disappoint you, but YOU really ARE one on your own :-))))
Of course, The Wizard of Oz may have a different opinion.
Richard
Richard Wilcox
<snipped>
".... A management fee of 10% of any and all royalties received by
Writer on song(s) commercially recorded through Company's efforts. It
is fully understood that Writer will not be expected to pay the 10%
management fees until after royalties are actually received by writer
.... '"
The above is a direct quote from Peter's post quoting Paramount's
letter to him, so assuming the contract and the letter have some kind
of co-existant relationship with fact, it is 10% of royalties received
by the writer.
Still don't make it a good deal tho'.
Of course you could then assign the whole song to a trustworthy
relative for 10 cents and then you'd be able to give Paramount their 2
cents worth :-))) Oh no you wouldn't - it wouldn't be "commercial
recorded" at that stage.
Richard
OSSONGS
lyric is should be told to be investing money in demoing their "poem" unless
they fully understand that it will be a poem set to music.>
I must admit as soon as the phrase 'my poems' come into the conversation,
they've lost me.
JMO.
Dolores
OSSONGS
Hmmnn...not the first time I have noticed the name Country Q - all saying good
things about them.
Since the people who mention it have good vibes about them, I have placed that
name at the top of studios to visit when (WHEN) I hit Nashville.
Dolores
David Robinson
You started out looking very sincere and honest, and now you're
starting to look unprofessional and vindictative. My advice here
would be to let the whole thing drop. The worst thing for you is to
have numerous threads of bad publicity in Google."
Michaël,
Unprofessional and vindictive? It's 'vindictive' by the way, not
"v-i-n-d-i-c-t-a-t-i-v-e."
I hardly see that; I didn't call anyone names simply because they
recited the facts as they knew them. Personally, I think you'll see
things differently over the course of a few exchanges of your own.
First you'll try to put in your two cents worth. Thereafter a few of
these jerks will start attacking you personally. As soon as they run out
of credible contentions, the logic will turn circular, then vague. Then
cryptic altogether, until someone you hardly know (and haven't had any
exchanges at all with) is piping up with the truly astonishing
admonition that you're "unprofessional and vindictative." And all this
garbage will come in so fast that you can't possibly keep up with it;
you'll be outnumbered by at least 3 to 1 to begin with, because these
guys have nothing better to do then send in post after post, petty
remark after petty remark. If you're smart you'll ignore them from the
beginning. Admittedly, you'll have to be smarter than me, but that's
easy enough to accomplish.
Suppose there were a thread on here about Cars for Songwriters. It
isn't out of the question; I've seen that thread in a similar forum. You
got on and told what you knew to be true about Cars for Songwriters. Not
that you either liked them or disliked them, but simply 'what you know
about them' having had some kind of experience with a Songwriter Car or
two. The replies quickly turn nasty; instead of arguing about whether
your comments concerning Cars were true or not, people started attacking
you personally as a used car salesman (regardless of whether you're
actually in the business of selling cars, used or not) and attributing
everything you say as a sales pitch. You might get a little hot under
the collar and tell one or two of them off yourself.
Personally, I'd cut you some slack; you shoulda seen what my
response would have been last year. I think my replies were quite
reserved, considering.
As far as the 10 percent goes, my point was simply that it's '10
percent.' Not that giving up the 10 percent is a good idea or a bad
idea, not that you SHOULD do it or SHOULD NOT do it; I was more than
willing to leave that for others to argue about. But it's 10 percent,
not 20 percent or 50 percent, just 10 percent. Instead, this group of
people you are taking sides with hammered me for citing that it was '10
percent.' And they think that if they repeat the slander long enough it
will stick. They are probably right about that; you're post shows it.
Here's a neat little test for you; ask if any of them have ever
actually SEEN the contract in question. I have, but I am certain that
most of them haven't. Their position is based on rumor, gossip, and
distortion; they will say they have seen contracts 'like' it (maybe they
have, maybe not) or worse yet, have ;heard about' contracts like it..
Even though they are not lawyers, that somehow qualifies them to
interpret a contract they have never seen, the details of which they are
filling in for themselves in a manner that facilitates their diatribes.
Moreover, it also justifies their moral indignation towards me
personally. If that's the kind of 'expertise' you rely on, I sincerely
wish you luck on your journey...
I am fond of telling people that if you read through these
newsgroups and other internet forums long enough, you will learn to
discern a difference between people simply by HOW they are saying what
they are saying in a given post. "There are people who know their shit,
and people who don't know shit..." Crude, maybe, but true; a simple,
logical and objective analysis of their statements will say it all. Sit
back for any length of time and the content of their posts will speak
volumes about their character. I am confident that over the course of
time you will find the people I have been 'arguing' with set themselves
up as petty soap-box 'experts' and the moment your view point diverges
from theirs they will resort to name-calling and character innuendo
against you, too. I use that term 'argue' loosely; I didn't contribute
very much to the thread by comparison. My voice was definitely in the
minority, and I didn't offer much in the way of a 'fight' at all.
As far as the publicity goes, I am sure you're right. I am sure
there are worse threads you could point to in a Google search. But I'm
also positive that I could care less about bad publicity on here; I
don't advertise on here, that's not what I come here for. I'll stand by
my posts and what I have said, for better or worse. I may come to regret
a slipped detail here or a missed point there, but not the tone nor
intention. As I said before, I sleep very well at night, thank you very
much. I'm not likely to lose much sleep over anything that gets said on
RMMS.
good luck to you,
David
David Robinson
".... A management fee of 10% of any and all royalties received by
Writer on song(s) commercially recorded through Company's efforts. It
is fully understood that Writer will not be expected to pay the 10%
management fees until after royalties are actually received by writer
.... '"
The above is a direct quote from Peter's post quoting Paramount's
letter to him, so assuming the contract and the letter have some kind
of coexistent relationship with fact, it is 10% of royalties received
by the writer."
Danny Taddei
David Robinson wrote:Michaël,
> Unprofessional and vindictive? It's 'vindictive' by the way, not
> "v-i-n-d-i-c-t-a-t-i-v-e."
> I hardly see that; I didn't call anyone names simply because they
> recited the facts as they knew them. Personally, I think you'll see
> things differently over the course of a few exchanges of your own.
> First you'll try to put in your two cents worth. Thereafter a few of
> these jerks will start attacking you personally. As soon as they run out
> of credible contentions, the logic will turn circular, then vague. Then
> cryptic altogether, until someone you hardly know (and haven't had any
> exchanges at all with) is piping up with the truly astonishing
> admonition that you're "unprofessional and vindictative." And all this
> garbage will come in so fast that you can't possibly keep up with it;
> you'll be outnumbered by at least 3 to 1 to begin with, because these
> guys have nothing better to do then send in post after post, petty
> remark after petty remark. If you're smart you'll ignore them from the
> beginning. Admittedly, you'll have to be smarter than me, but that's
> easy enough to accomplish.
David,
I posted a list of things that needed to be discussed. You avoided each
one. I did it in your extremely long post and following would have taken a
long time so I will outline them here and mirror the post with it's own
thread so there will be no mistake that things have been made simple. Look
for the thread "QUESTIONS TO DAVID" and answer the question simply and this
can be over. Don't bother listing them here because you will have to
realist them again and I don't want to burden anyone's' time more then I
have to.
1) You offer a song contest with at least 1 prize.
A. How often do you run the contest?
B. What is the prize?
C. Do you infer that the songs may be used for a commercial product if
they win?
D. Has any song from your company EVER received ANY royalties?
E. Who has actually won the prize and what is their relation ship to
you or anyone else in the company?
F. Is your contest registered with the state and does it comply with
contest rules set forth by the state of TN?
G. How many songs enter the each run of the contest?
H. How many honorable mentions are given out?
2) You co-write music with some of your clientele. Please answer these
questions.
A. Have you ever used the same or similar music for more then one song?
B. Do you imply that you will be mating composer with lyricists?
C. Are all your composers actually part of the company or to put it
another way, if an outside composer that isn't part of your circle showed
up, would you actually use him/her?
D. If you said you would use an outside composer, please name one of
them?
E. What percentage of the lyrics that need music do the insiders
actually do assuming that some is actually done by outsiders as mentioned
above?
F. Which of these songs have ever been used and did the songwriter even
break even with his costs of producing the demo (most known sharks seed
their own success rate but hardly ever pay out more then the cost of the
demo)?
3) You have stated in other posts that you KEEP 10% and yet specifically
deny keeping both 10% of publishing and 10% of writers royalties. Please
post the clause you use to close the deal and explain what you take in the
10%. This part may be a misunderstanding and is the major thing convicting
you as a shark. Then, please also answer the few last questions below.
A. What do you do to earn your 10%?
B. Does the state of TN have laws against double representation?
C. Are you denying that you are acting as both producer and agent?
D. If you denied in "C" above, what are your promises or inferences
made in the sales pitch and why are you taking 10% of anything?
Producers are known to take a percentage of the "MASTER" and sometimes
(often) control the publishing. That is common because they are actively
shopping the song and make their major portion of their income from the
actual bonefide sale of the music. When a producer pretends to do the
shopping and does not it is called fraud. It is not common for a producer
to act as a representative of the artist and it is considered to be a
conflict of interest because the representative CAN NOT act as a FIDUCIARY
to both parties in a negotiation. For those that don't understand that,
that would be the same as going to trial for something and having your
defense attorney also be the prosecuting attorney.
Anxiously waiting your response
Danny Taddei
Danny Taddei
Richard Wilcox
"He's quoting the contract, not the letter."
>
>".... A management fee of 10% of any and all royalties received by
>Writer on song(s) commercially recorded through Company's efforts. It
>is fully understood that Writer will not be expected to pay the 10%
>management fees until after royalties are actually received by writer
>.... '"
Which, IMVHO&LK, means Little Stormin' Norm of Paramount should drop the
contract anyway - the words "coach", "horses" and "driving through" come
together quite nicely.
Anyway, what's wrong with "goodwill"? - seems if a Paramount customer got a cut
they'd keep coming back. Most legitimate business do quite well with goodwill,
or doesn't Paramount have any goodwill?
Richard
Songwriting & creative links
http://www.angelfire.com/music2/richhoncho/index.htm
A selection of RMMS people at
http://www.angelfire.com/music2/richhoncho/RMMS.htm
& 13 of my songs at
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/richhoncho.htm
Seth Jackson
County Q is one of the biggest, if not the biggest demo studio in
Nashville. At one time, they were inexpensive, but nowadays, they're
pretty much top-of-the line. A lot of hit writers and major
publishers do their demos at "Q".
I personally haven't used them, although I certainly know a lot of
people who use them on a regular basis. A publisher I know played me a
batch of demos he did there that knocked my socks off. The demos cost
$600/song for a 6-song session.
There are a lot of great demo studios in Nashville, and it's possible
to get great demos without spending $600/song. I've personally never
spent more than $400, and I couldn't be happier with the results.
I'm not sure there's a lot of difference between a $600 demo and a
great $400 demo. I doubt most people could tell them apart The studio
I record at uses a lot of the same players as the more expensive
places. The top-of-the-line places probably have more and better
equipment, but a skilled engineer can get great sound out of less
elaborate gear. There are a lot of good engineers in town.
Seth Jackson
wrote:
>".... A management fee of 10% of any and all royalties received by
>Writer on song(s) commercially recorded through Company's efforts. It
>is fully understood that Writer will not be expected to pay the 10%
>management fees until after royalties are actually received by writer
>.... '"
>
>The above is a direct quote from Peter's post quoting Paramount's
>letter to him, so assuming the contract and the letter have some kind
>of co-existant relationship with fact, it is 10% of royalties received
>by the writer.
>
>Still don't make it a good deal tho'.
I had been under the impression that they were getting 10% of the song
merely for doing a demo. That would have been a horrendous deal.
But 10% of the song for getting a cut isn't bad at all. A lot of
songpluggers give similar deals. The exact wording of the contract, as
quoted above, is open to interpretation regarding what "the Company's
efforts" entails, and whether the 10% would apply to addition
recordings that might be secured later on. So, that would have to be
clarified.
I went to the Paramount website, and found that there were really no
details provided about how they work, other than that they do demos
and pitch songs. There was quite a bit of hype, however, which makes
them suspect right off the bat.
I clicked on a few of the audio clips on the site, which were samples
of their work. It's really hard to tell how good the recordings are
when listening through Real Audio, so I can't comment on that. But I
think it's safe to say that none of the songs I heard are likely to
ever get cut by a major label.
OSSONGS
I have had some excellent demos too for under $400.00 from The Songwriters's
Studio and a couple of others.
Dolores
Richard Wilcox
>I had been under the impression that they were getting 10% of the song
>merely for doing a demo. That would have been a horrendous deal.
>But 10% of the song for getting a cut isn't bad at all. A lot of
>songpluggers give similar deals. The exact wording of the contract, as
>quoted above, is open to interpretation regarding what "the Company's
>efforts" entails, and whether the 10% would apply to addition
>recordings that might be secured later on. So, that would have to be
>clarified.
Clarification? I think it needs re-drafting - and quick - whatever Paramount's
intentions are.
I've not commented on below - I'd like to see David's comments first. The
website has certainly been toned down since I first saw it :-)
>I went to the Paramount website, and found that there were really no
>details provided about how they work, other than that they do demos
>and pitch songs. There was quite a bit of hype, however, which makes
>them suspect right off the bat.
>I clicked on a few of the audio clips on the site, which were samples
>of their work. It's really hard to tell how good the recordings are
>when listening through Real Audio, so I can't comment on that. But I
>think it's safe to say that none of the songs I heard are likely to
>ever get cut by a major label.
Peter
contract' with Paramount:
"Writer shall be responsible for:
A. Guaranteeing that the song(s) submitted are his or her own original work.
Signing below so indicates.
B. A recording charge of $129 (1 singer w/guitar) or $299 (singer w/harmony
& five or more instruments) for each song recorded as checked in paragraph
1-A. (For duet/group-singer recordings add $50 for each additional singer)
C. A management fee of 10% (Ten Percent) of any and all royalties received
by Writer on song(s) commercially recorded through Company's efforts. It is
fully understood that Writer will not be expected to pay the 10% management
fees until after royalties are actually received by writer."
For the life of me I don't see anything in there adding up to 20%. So if -
hypothetically speaking - I made $100.00 in royalties with my tune, $10.00
would go to Paramount, and I'd get $90.00 (before taxes) to waste on booze
and hookers. That's what it sounds like to a simpleminded yokel like myself.
What am I missing?
Peter
"David Robinson" <whiske...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B7C0511...@home.com...
Danny Taddei
songwriters royalties and 10% of publishers royalties which at the time of a
demo you own all of. At the time of signing a publishing deal you will give
away all of your publishing... at least that is most common... and once you
give away 50% of what you own, that other 10% will have to come from somewhere
else. If you then made $100 from a songs royalties after it had been published,
the contracted amount of 10% would actually amount to $20 from the $100 .
Either way, a managers fee for doing nothing is sharking. A managers fee on top
of a producers fee is considered to be a conflict of interest. A publishing fee
(if they decide to call it that) is inappropriate since they serve no function
as a publisher (or manager for that manner)
I listed a few question for David which he has yet to answer. I am waiting to
see what he has to say. He has insulted me and I have constantly said that I
would like to be his friend. I ask him to do what is right and he insults me
more. All he has to do is answer the questions.
Danny Taddei
Snabbu
Peter wrote:
>
>
> For the life of me I don't see anything in there adding up to 20%. So if -
> hypothetically speaking - I made $100.00 in royalties with my tune, $10.00
> would go to Paramount, and I'd get $90.00 (before taxes) to waste on booze
> and hookers. That's what it sounds like to a simpleminded yokel like myself.
> What am I missing?
>
> Peter
>
Hi Peter you are missing that in song writing there are two 100 percents.
(1) Writing
(2) Publishing
So If you give away 10 percent of a song in total you give away
10 percent of the publishing and
10 percent of the writing.
When you sign a straight publishing deal without staff writing or advances the
standard deal is the publisher gets 100 percent of the Publishing you get to
share the writing with your co writers if any.
So if you have had 10 percent of your song stolen from you by a song shark such
as Paramount the following will occur.
Paramount 20
Publisher 100
You 80
Total song 200
If you had been astute enough not to allow your rights to be stolen the
following will occur.
Publisher 100
You 100
You being an astute chap who has not been taken in by such a blatant song
sharking operation will immediately see that the difference for you between
option one and two is Twenty percent I.E. 100-80=20
I hope that clears it up for you. Put simply Paramount is a song sharking
operation and Song sharks are liars and con men. In addition they are stupid
because it is nearly impossible to get a song sharking operation past this news
group anyone reading the list on a reasonably regular basis will understand
that. Rule number two in business never get into a business relationship with
stupid people.
Snabbu
David Robinson wrote:
> "David, If you read this take me seriously."
>
> Danny, if you read this take ME seriously. You have completely
> disappointed me. You are vain, arrogant, rude, self centered,
> condescending and petty. I don't approve of you, I don't like you, nor
> do I need your help or advice.
>
> take a hike.
>
> David
And you can't answer his questions Why?
They are valid they are on topic so what's the problem David. I am
waiting in fascinated anticipation. I just love the application of the
blowtorch to the belly.
Sniff Sniff...........is that fish burning?
Peter
hookers ..... right?
Please tell me I got it now, because otherwise I'd feel really stupid, in
which case I shouldn't even get into a business relationship with myself,
according to your kind recommendations.
lol :-)
P.
"Snabbu" <sna...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B7DA0F6...@optushome.com.au...
Snabbu
Richard Wilcox wrote:
Eh Senor Honcho
I was so pleased with myself yesterday I read one of Ebs death to all criminals posts and resisted the temptation to say anything.
Cheers
Garribaldi
Richard Wilcox
I took the view with Eb's comments that if Americans want to kill Americans in
America it's none of my business, save I got rid of my Amex card - just in
case.
Which reminds me, I have had a few visits from the US military on the golf
links site - I think they hit wrong site :-))
Richard
>Eh Senor Honcho
>I was so pleased with myself yesterday I read one of Ebs death to all
>criminals posts and resisted the temptation to say anything.
Songwriting & creative links
gitfiddler
are a lot of demo studios in town, but this one is extremely popular
and very consistent in what it delivers. I think most of the demos I
heard were for by large publishing entities such as Sony Tree. You
will not find it on Music Row. It is over in the Berry Hill District.
BTW, Berry Hill is a neat little area to visit... it is actually a
tiny town inside Nashville... they have their own police force, a
little house for city hall, etc... Berry Hill is just north of 100
Oaks Mall just off I-65 at Thompson Lane.
OSSONGS
Garribaldi>
LOL!
Dolores :-)