This site is a blog for musicians and music industry people. It is a free educational resource and it is also the way I advertise my music consulting services. I am an entertainment professional with deep roots in the music industry. Throughout my music career I have been a major label A&R representative, a music supervisor, an artist manager, a reality show producer, a bass player and the head of a digital record label.
Kevin Weaver is the Executive Vice President of the Atlantic Records Group. He is responsible for overseeing the creation and placement of music and artists in film, television and video games. Kevin is also in charge of developing and overseeing soundtrack projects, strategic alliances, licensing opportunities, and marketing initiatives. He has been working with sync licensing at Atlantic since the early-mid 1990s and has managed a variety of projects over the years that have significantly shaped the label’s and other labels’ music licensing business models.
Recently I talked to Kevin about how he got into music licensing, changes he has witnessed in the sync licensing market in the past 15 years and how modern music placement works.
Thanks for taking some time to talk to me, Kevin. How did you come to be Executive VP at Atlantic, and what does that position entail?
KW:
I started as an assistant at Atlantic in 1994 working for the Vice President of soundtracks an A&R. I subsequently became an A&R guy at Jason Flom’s label Lava Records in the middle of 1995. I signed some records and was doing A&R. But those records weren’t really happening. Because I was an assistant to this soundtrack executive, I had a ton of relationships in the film, television, advertising and sync communities. And I thought, “What do I need to do to turn these records around and make some value out of them?” I knew I had these relationships, and that no one was pushing content into the sync world; it was a very laid-back business at that time, where you had people at the special markets divisions of record companies fielding incoming requests via fax. There was no sexiness to it, and nobody that had direct relationships with the artists playing the middle. There was no one aggressively pitching and pushing the content for licensing.
I took out the records that I was A&R’ing as well as some of the other records that Jason Flom, who was my mentor for many years, was working with. Jason was very supportive and encouraged me to do this. With his support, I was able to go out and get in front of the relevant folks at the time who were using music in media and basically give them quality content while at the same time help with the process to make sure it was seamless and that things were getting approved quickly. Over the first couple years of doing that we were able to significantly increase the licensing income at Lava.
That subsequently led to me becoming the first shared Lava/Atlantic employee and executive. I started doing the same thing for the Atlantic content in addition to the Lava content. And I was also able to increase Atlantic’s numbers really significantly over a short period of time. And when Lava folded into Atlantic in 2002, at that point I became the head of the department at Atlantic and all the Atlantic affiliate and division labels.
Very few people have as much time in as you do. I remember when I was working on placement for a commercial a few years ago. And everyone was coming out of the woodwork claiming, “Sync and licensing? I do that!”And I knew you’d actually been doing it since the very beginning. How has that sync marketplace changed over the last 15 years that you’ve been working within it?
KW:
Obviously it’s become much more competitive. People have realized the value of these opportunities to break artists. The media around these opportunities can be critical if timed right – around the launch of the single or the record. We’ve found that we’ve been breaking records over the last handful of years by way of these opportunities while also putting money back in the till to support subsequent marketing and promotional efforts. And everyone has realized to a certain extent that with the decline in income in other areas of the music business, sync is still a major revenue supplier. The importance of sync has become even that much more significant now. And because of all those factors, everybody is out there aggressively chasing sync opportunities, and it’s become more competitive.
I’m fortunate because I’ve been doing this for so long and somewhat built the model of how this works at a record company. I have tons of relationships that go back 15-plus years. And it’s very important to me that the people I do business with feel good about that business at the end of the day and feel it was an easy process and positive experience. I’ve had people continue to want to come back and drink from this well because they know we have great records, are easy to deal with and get stuff done. Because of this, even though sync is a competitive market, we still do great business.
Do you find that the huge number of independent and unsigned artists and the many aggregators of DIY content have brought the overall price down for you?
KW:
It can, and it has a little bit. I think the quality of music that we’re creating with our artists speaks for itself. People who are willing to give their music away for free can hurt us a little bit, but I believe that we’re making really strong records over here, and that people are willing to pay for quality.
We do price super competitively around developing artists. I never want to lose a great opportunity because of money. The visibility is important, so we look at everything on a case-by-case basis. And if there’s a look we can deliver for an artist, but it means I need to waive a fee or help get something approved below fair market value; I’m always willing to entertain those requests and make those deals, if the marketing opportunity mitigates the loss of income on the fee. I’m competitive as it relates to pricing. Wherever there’s a smart marketing play, I’m willing to make the same kind of deal that an indie artist would make, as long as I feel like the visibility is worthwhile.
There have been so many placements since placements really exploded with that first iTunes commercial six or seven years ago. Do you feel the impact of getting music placed in a commercial has diminished because now we have seen it so many times before?
KW:
Not really. It really depends on the scope of the placement, how great the song is, and how well it’s used. At the end of the day, great music is going to react, and it just needs a platform. What I’ve found is that you don’t want to just give away music and not look at the place it’s being used and how it’s being used. If it’s a meaningful placement, it’s going to translate.
Going back to your earlier question about competition with independent music, what we have at Atlantic is the whole company going after a record at the same time. I’m not just out there in a vacuum getting placements. I’ve found that it’s very hard for a singular placement to move the needle in a significant way, even if it’s a huge placement where the song is used really well and has great visibility, without other drivers in place. Not many labels – especially smaller labels – are able to use placement opportunities as effectively as we are and work with the other departments within the label. This really makes a difference when it comes to the power of these placements.
What is standard practice once the Atlantic Group gets the placement? How are you supporting the placement with marketing, sales and promotion?
KW:
We connect the pieces. We use the artist’s social media platform to create awareness around it and connect the fact that the placement you’re hearing or seeing is the artist’s song. We bring back all of the info and a clip of every placement to every department in the company, so they have the actual use and can take that out to show folks. A lot of it is talking points that help build momentum. But, everyone can use these drivers to show radio, video, digital/new media and sales and show these different accounts and partners the visibility we have going on around an artist. Generally, that in and of itself is an incredibly useful tool, because people see a song is out there and getting plays in a significant capacity. And that helps them feel better about getting behind it as it relates to their specific area of the industry.
You have A&R roots. Do you feel that artists getting placements before they’re on a label contributes to their ability to get signed?
KW:
It can. Recently, we signed Christina Perri. She had a single “Jar of Hearts” out before she was signed to a major label. She had her song featured on Dancing with the Stars in a really significant way. She immediately released the song on iTunes on her own, and it sold a lot of digital singles over a short period of time, which immediately put her on the radar of a lot of major labels. She then went on the show and did a live performance of the song, which made an even more significant impact. She went on to sell a few hundred thousand singles around those two uses alone. Every label really jumped in and went after her based on the fact that not only was she getting visibility by way of sync placements, but also, it was reacting.
I think that’s the key to most of these placement situations: If somebody’s getting sync placements but it’s not doing anything – helping with their sales or online searches and hits – then there’s a disconnect, and there’s a reason there’s a disconnect. It’s not often that these placements are going to move the needle significantly without the other drivers I’ve mentioned earlier – having the company and all the resources at the company behind it connecting the dots. I think the Christina Perri example is the real anomaly there; without the real drivers, the use of the song on television a couple times still managed to really make an impact, which ended up getting her a significant record deal. That being said she’s needed the power and the machine of our company behind her to build on this initial success and visibility.
You know a lot about how music is placed in film, and sure you often get asked, “How do I get my music placed in film and TV?” What would your best advice for somebody who is trying to make it happen in their own?
KW:
To be honest with you, I think it’s incredibly hard. It’s a very relationship-driven industry. And one of the reasons I’m able to get so many placements is because of the relationships we have with the folks who control this various media. They trust us. And they know when we’re serving something up, it’s going to be at a certain quality level and easy to clear and use. So, that is something that really helps us get placements and visibility that other smaller independent folks don’t have the benefit of.
But the one thing that these people can do is try to be super targeted and really chase opportunities where their music has real relevance. And they should get to people via real relationships – getting to know people who know the right people. And then they need to be really easy to deal with. Anyone who is a pain in the ass, especially in the developing stages, is not going to get much support. And there aren’t going to be many fruits that come out of that. If they are easy to deal with, and the quality of their music is good, they have a much better chance.
To learn more about Kevin Weaver and the work he does, visit the Atlantic Records Group website.
Melinda Lee is the co-founder of Uncensored Interview and Deputy General Manager (GM) of Getty Images Music. A lifelong music fan, she was first attracted to the music industry while attending law school in Philadelphia, where she befriended local artists and developed an admiration for musicians writing their own music, playing constantly and collaborating with other artists. Melinda’s focus in law school was on intellectual property, and she eventually found her way to New York City in the late ‘90s, where she went to work for MTV Networks. During her career, she has worked with networks and companies including MTV Networks, Lifetime and Joost, a peer-to-peer streaming media company started by the founders of Kazaa and Skype. She has over a decade of experience handling content licensing in the digital space. Melinda started the “Web 1.0” version of Uncensored Interview – a video interview site that captures rare moments with a variety of indie artists and other personalities – in the late ‘90s. She revived the concept almost a decade later with a new partner, Marisa Bangash and a new team. The current version of the site launched in 2008 as a source for musician interviews and in 2010, expanded to interview key influencers in other areas of the entertainment industry, including film, food and film/TV.
I recently spoke to Melinda about her career path in music and entertainment, why all artists need to closely monitor their own licensing in the complex, ever-changing climate of today’s industry and how she sees Uncensored Interview and Getty Images Music contributing to the hopefully more artist-friendly music business of the future.
How did you get started in the entertainment and music industry?
ML:
I was a really big music fan. In the late ‘90s, I was living in Philadelphia while I was in law school, and I ended up becoming friends with a lot of the local musicians and artists. I really started to develop a love for musicians who actually wrote their own music and were out playing day and night, whenever they could, and collaborating with as many other artists as possible.
From there, I finished up law school. I concentrated on intellectual property and found my way to New York City. I ended up getting into content licensing at MTV Networks. I continued to primarily work in TV, but as it goes in the entertainment business, you’re constantly in flux and you go from company to company. I came back to MTV Networks eventually and ended up taking up a role heading music and content licensing for the international group and digital media groups. What was great about that was that it was across all of MTV Networks. So, I got to work with MTV, VH1, Spike, Comedy Central and Nickelodeon. By then, that was the early to mid 2000s, where everything that was on TV was trying to make its entrance into the digital space.
At that point, rights were messy. No one knew what to clear for. But there were a lot of deals going on. People were making deals in the mobile space internationally. And every channel wanted to have an online broadband channel. So, I started to take on less of a clearance and rights type of role and more of a strategic role. I worked with most of the business development and business strategy groups as well as the head producers on how to put content into shows or into other formats and make sure the rights were in place from the get go, so we could actually embrace all the business models that were developing in the digital space, even internationally; because at that point, MTV was growing by leaps and bounds internationally. For example, you’d come across a channel that was launching in Africa, and you would need a different type of strategy for implementing the content on that channel.
What I really learned there was just how to think about content from an overall perspective. I would ask, “As we’re making more content, how can we get the rights in place so that this is scalable and will actually fit into whatever business models that might emerge?” I’ve worked with a lot of music companies doing that type of thing.
I find it wonderful and a bit of a sad statement that you love music and helped found a company that works with musicians, but you probably put together Uncensored Interview because you were looking for non-music content from artists, in part because music licensing is such a nightmare.
ML:
You hit the nail on the head. While I worked at MTV, the easier content to work with was images and footage. Of course, there are rights within that too. But music is where it got really complicated. With music, the models were set. And when you’re dealing with labels and publishers, they have this dance – and it was especially strong then – that they did together. It was really difficult to get those rights and to get someone to quote experimentally. You would say, “This is primarily for TV, but you know it’s probably going to be on the internet and on radio. Can you give me one quote instead of options that will address all those spaces?”
What I find really funny about that is that you were calling from Viacom. It’s not like you were Joe from Armpit, Ohio.
ML:
Exactly. And I do have to say, I did a bunch of work for other companies. And what was great about MTV is that the publishers and the labels did call us back quickly. They may not have given us what we wanted, because the whole idea was, “If it’s going to be a different kind of use from the one we agreed to, we’re going to need an additional fee.” That gets really difficult, especially when everything is going digital.
Back in the day, you had television with an option to renew and then maybe a DVD quote. But all of a sudden, nobody could really predict whether it was going to go beyond TV to the internet or mobile. The way it was structured was that you had to get a quote on each of those uses just in case. When I was at MTV, one of the few companies willing to go into the new media space as far as giving us those broad rights up front was Getty Images. Pump Audio was the other. And I think that’s what made Pump Audio separate from the rest of the music libraries out there; they put that “all you can eat” blanket option out there that allowed our producers to really create and be able to embrace the new models that were popping out without worrying about uncleared rights.
So, after MTV, you put together Uncensored Interview. And as a result of that, you put together a partnership with Getty Images?
ML:
Right. But actually, I did Uncensored Interview prior to joining MTV. My first iteration – a Web 1.0 version – was me interviewing bands and giving them a platform to be able to talk about their music. When I started it back in 1999, if you liked an indie band, you really couldn’t get access to them unless the local paper wrote about them or maybe if they were on NPR. But there weren’t that many outlets. It was right when digital video cameras came out. That was when I got the domain name.
A lot of the things I learned through working with content, rights issues and licensing really helped me develop a fuller strategy with the content we were creating over at Uncensored Interview.
I have a few questions I want to ask you that you’re more than suited to answer given your licensing expertise. First, what should musicians doing things for themselves have prepared in order to increase their chances of their music getting licensed?
ML:
There are so many different types of musicians. It’s a different strategy for each category, whether you’re a singer/songwriter, composer, indie band, etc. There are so many other trends that are popping up right now too. But one thing would be to really decide if you want to be a member of a Performing Rights Organization (PRO) – ASCAP, BMI or SESAC. Deciding which one you want to become a member of is an individual choice.
There is also a growing trend for direct-licensed music. What’s really great in the U.S. is you can be a member of these PROs and still retain the option of doing direct licenses.. I think that’s great and overall, in the spirit of what these PROs aim to do, which is protect their artists. Internationally, this not necessarily the case. The second you get into the EU, performing rights organizations and royalties get really complicated. Simplification is really something they should consider; because the back end of royalties today still remains a really lucrative way to generate revenue for artists. You don’t just make money on the upfront sync placements.
What does a direct license look like? Is that just someone saying, “I’m going to pay you a flat fee for this song?”
ML:
In practice, yes. Everything’s just bundled in at the beginning. It’s just saying, “All rights to this song, including what you would’ve gotten on the royalties side are included in this price.” At least this is how many licensees see it.
Is it re-titled then, with the royalties going to the person that paid for the rights?
ML:
Re-titling is something different. The way re-titling first came about was as a mechanism against being able to figure out how to administer payments based on who placed the music. It emerged because there were a lot of nonexclusive deals with several parties trying to place music. When people started to re-title, it was a way to identify who did a placement. So it’s basically an administrative tool that is far from perfect.
When you look on the production side of things, you note that people aren’t always very buttoned up about cue sheets. When no one is clear about what’s really going on, it can get really confusing on the back end when the producers have to report the song. Let’s say you have a song that is being represented by several different production libraries. Sometimes it’s hard to tell where it was grabbed from. Re-titling was really developed to assist PROs in tracking which party did which placements and then determine who gets the payment at the end.
I figured it was something like that. But I never realized the genesis of it.
ML:
It’s all because of non-exclusive deals. If there’s no sharing on the back end, there’s no reason for a production library to re-title. Most of the music production libraries out there that have non-exclusive deals and that also share a backend administrative fee will have a need to track it. A lot of artists have non-exclusives and are working with several libraries. It gets really confusing.
It is what it is. And most people know that it’s convoluted.
ML:
It really just comes down to the fact that it’s common among many of the music production libraries to re-title. And it’s really due to the fact that there are so many non-exclusive agreements.
As you’ve built up Uncensored Interview, have you discovered that non-musical content – interviews, stories, etc. – is valuable for artists? How have you seen this kind of content serve musicians?
ML:
The idea behind Uncensored Interview is to sit down with an artist or a band – and we’ve sat down with artists and bands on all different levels. For example, we sat down with Henry Rollins. But then we sat down with Margaret Cho, who is not necessarily known for her musical projects. And we also sat down with the up-and-coming bands you’d find in places like Pitchfork.
The questions we ask vary depending on who you’re talking to; because you always want to make whoever it is you’re talking to feel comfortable so they can actually be themselves. It’s video, so you can tell if it’s something that is media trained or rehearsed. We’re after catching those raw moments. What starts to happen after a while is that people start to talk about their experiences. And with any recap of an experience, there’s advice that comes out of that. What we find the most is that people who watch the videos that are also musicians themselves say, “Wow, that was a really great tip for touring. We should try to avoid those things,” or, “Sure, this band that I really feel influenced by get distracted too when they’re writing music. And here are what their issues are.” And what’s great too is to see the differences between different bands that you might classify in the same genre.
What we’ve noticed is the bands that really start to get that buzz and get those placements where they’re generating revenue may not be “famous.” But they’re constantly playing and constantly touring and really buttoned up on the back end. The rights are all sorted out. And the agreements are amongst members of the band if there are multiple writers. They understand that sync licensing is a business, and digital downloads and deals with streaming companies are a different business. Their expectations are set. And then, they’re present for those phone calls to use their music.
You’re somebody who knows exactly where this non-musical content goes, because you take footage of bands – some that are well known and some that are not very well known – and see where it has value. Is there any advice you could give to artists that want to put together, promote and use non-musical content?
ML:
There’s no shortage of videos of bands online. There are a lot of slice-of-life-type videos out there. I think that’s cool, especially if you’re a fan, because you end up feeling closer to your favorite artists. However, I think that content is somewhat disposable. I do think it’s helpful to do sit-down interviews. A lot of times you can garner fans just by virtue of who you are as a personality. They may love your music. But they could also love what you stand for, that’s just another in road into a fan base that might really like who you are.
There are ways to monetize that for sure. I think with band videos though, the value has to do with the question, “What do these video say?” What’s the message within a particular sound bite or clip? Is the artist commenting on politics, on his/her music or on the economy? Then, based on the content and context within that clip itself, it can actually be monetizable. What that is, is the building block towards another video piece that can show yet another vantage point. That one clip can tell a larger story.
That’s really the whole core concept of licensing and revenue based off a piece of compelling content. When you’re looking at how valuable it is, you have to first ask, “Who’s in it?” It could be someone that is not particularly famous. But if the person is talking about something that is relevant or something that is compelling in some way, it can make itself into a larger piece and there is value in the context or message. It can be something that’s newsworthy. It can be told in retrospect talking about a certain time from a certain vantage point. All of these elements add value to the clip.
Are there specific artists you’ve seen do this particularly well?
ML:
Amanda Palmer is pretty good at it. She gives a lot of really great sound bites about things that are newsworthy at the time of the interview. But she delivers them in a way that’s timeless. For example, if she was talking about Twitter, it matters now because Twitter is important now. But the overall message she’s giving is timeless because she’s saying she likes Twitter because it allows her to connect with her fans. So, whether Twitter is gone next year or not, she’s still talking about music trends and how through technology, artists have direct access to their fans now. And I think that concept and message is never going to change.
And with her, you’ll really see examples of different types of video. She does really high quality interviews as well as stuff that is more fan shot or handy-cam-type videos. She uses video really well. And that’s not that surprising given her roots are in visual performance art.
I know you’re also now working with Getty Images Music. What’s coming next with that?
ML:
Getty Images Music is doing a lot of great stuff.. We’re really just looking at music licensing as a whole and saying, “We’re not just one thing.” We’re lucky to have Pump Audio as a collection, which has really done a great job. It was the original crowd-sourced music model, if you think about it. They said, “Let’s get all the rights in one place and make it easy for content creators to license out music for different uses.” It’s a fantastic model. And I think that so many music production libraries are copying that. But Getty Images Music has done some great deals in addition to that with collections like Sony/ATV and Elias Arts.
We’re also partnered with a music production company called Ah2, which was founded by the two composers that compose for almost all of Mark Burnett’s shows – like The Biggest Loser, The Apprentice, etc. These guys pretty much created the “reality TV” sound. Their tracks are so special because not only do we have the original track but we also have stems, which come in handy for editors. Often times the original track may be too powerful for a scene, so with Ah2’s collection we offer different stem options so you can get the tracks with just drums or just the piano – no problem. Our deal with Ah2 is an exclusive deal and we get to be their sync licensing arm.
The world of music licensing is interesting, because there are all these little tools that help you get where you need to go. We’re finding now, with the economy the way it is, fewer and fewer companies out there are doing straight composition, where everything is composed end to end. A lot of hybrids are popping up. And this is a comfortable place for us to be, because not only do we have almost every kind of track and genre that fits the “production music library” label, but we also have cinematic score music, indie artists and bands, and we have music composition services.
And we have imagery and footage as well. For the indie band and artist that also contributes their music to our platform, that is a powerful trifecta. We’re trying to open up different distribution and marketing opportunities for indie artists just by incorporating these opportunities into our licensing model. This is additional promotion that is difficult for them to do themselves. In a way, we are crowd sourcing cleared compelling content in music, footage and photos to content producers and leaving it to these creators to do the tastemaking. What’s cool is these are not just producers or content creators at major media companies that could pick up your stuff; there’s a whole slew of semi-professional producers out there that are creating content and they know about licensing!
I think combining all these different elements together will push where media is going to go as a whole. There are a lot of stories to be told, and this is a fantastic new distribution model for a lot of artists that are looking for new ways to market themselves and their music.
To learn more about Melinda Lee and the work she does, visit the Uncensored Interview and the Getty Images Music websites.
I got asked this the other day and I didn’t know the answer.
I happened to be chatting with my friend Barry Heyman who was kind enough to answer the question for me. Barry is an entertainment attorney with a focus in the areas of entertainment, intellectual property (copyrights and trademarks), and new media law.
Barry has worked in the Copyright Administration department at PolyGram and Universal Records and was in-house counsel for Eagle Rock Entertainment (producer, publisher, and distributor of music programming for television and DVD, comprising live concerts and documentaries). He has also consulted clients such as MTV and Razorfish. Barry currently runs his own practice out of New York and was an adjunct professor at NYU where he taught a graduate course entitled Law and the Music Industry.
Barry- thanks for taking the time to answer this. Tell me what the legal ramifications are for recording a cover song and then giving it away free for promotion to promote the artist who covered the song? Do artists need to license the song to do this legally?
BH:
Recording a cover song can be a great marketing tool—providing artistic interpretation on a song that your audience may already be familiar with. A cover can also bring notoriety to your art from people who were previously unfamiliar with your work. However there are legal implications to covering a song even if you are giving it away for free.
Let’s begin with the basics. A song has two copyrights: the sound recording (often called the master) and underlying musical composition. Recording a cover song implicates the latter of these copyrights—the underlying musical composition. The composer and/or songwriter is the copyright owner of song. The Copyright Act lays out certain exclusive rights that the copyright owner has with respect to their copyrighted material, such as the exclusive rights to manufacture and distribute the musical composition. In order for an artist to not violate the copyright law, the artist covering the musical composition with the intent of manufacturing and distributing it would need to obtain the proper license from the owner, usually the songwriter or the songwriter’s publisher (either directly or through an agent).
Even if an artist is giving away the song for promotional purposes, the song still needs to be licensed. The type of license required to record a cover version is called a mechanical license which allows an artist to use a copyrighted musical compositions on different formats, such as CD and as a digital download.
Typically, cover songs are licensed with the songwriter(s)’ publisher(s). Publisher contact information can be found at the following performance rights organization websites ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC or with The Harry Fox Agency, a licensing agent used by many music publishers. In addition to licensing directly with the songwriter(s), the publisher(s), or The Harry Fox Agency, another option is using the licensing service, Limelight.
There is a license fee (royalty) associated with licensing and using the composition. This is called a statutory mechanical royalty rate. This Federal rate is currently set at $.091 for songs 5 minutes or less in timing, and payable per song for each unit distributed. For recordings given away as promotional products, it is not uncommon to try and negotiate a reduced rate (e.g., 75% of the Statutory rate), or even gratis (free), however the copyright owner is not required to grant it.
Now, if the artist/band wants to create a promotional music video based on the cover song, this requires license(s) as well, except that the license required is called a synchronization license. The statutory rate does not apply, as the license fee would need to be negotiated with the copyright owner in all instances. A couple of factors affecting video synchronization rates include the nature of the use, for example, promotional versus commercial use, and the length of use.
For more information regarding synchronization licensing, you can read an article Barry wrote here and be sure to check out his website at Heylaw.com
I recently had the pleasure of speaking with a music Licensing Executive named Tanvi Patel. Tanvi is the President / CEO of Crucial Music, a company that places songs for labels and independent artists. They do not accept everything that is sent to them but rather select only the songs and artists that they think can get placed. Crucial has placed songs in academy award winning films such as Brokeback Mountain and a Beautiful Mind and Emmy winning TV shows like six feet under, Malcolm in the Middle, The Simpsons and National commercials by Sprint and Verizon.
Tanvi, first of thanks for taking the time to speak with me. One of the most common questions I get asked when working with artists is “How do I get my songs placed in Movies, TV or Commercials?” I often suggest that it is difficult for an artist on their own to get the attention of a music supervisor when cold calling because music supervisors respond better to people calling with a large volume and variety of music – would you agree?
TANVI:
Yes, I agree with that point. It’s really best for the artist to work with companies that have great relationships with the supervisors to get their music heard and possibly used. Companies like Crucial exist because it’s a full time job. The artist needs to be aware of all aspects of the business, but unless they are remarkably gifted, and can work 24/7, there is no way one person can manage writing great music, recording, touring, selling CDs, securing film/TV placements etc.
If you can get a fair deal with Crucial or other companies, then making 50% of something is way better than 100% of nothing. Also from the viewpoint of a supervisor, they’d rather work with a company that has the legal stuff with the artist already worked out, then having to chase down multiple parties to get things cleared during a time crunch, especially in television where the deadlines are weekly. Also, they are bombarded with music every day, and I’m not saying most supervisors are like this, but they are probably going to spend their attention on material that comes from respected sources, even in discovering new artists.
You have had great success in getting to know music supervisors who are notoriously difficult to approach. Do you have any advice on how to do this?
TANVI:
Persistence, knowledge of the production they are working on, and having the goods to deliver. You’ve got to know what type of music the show or film is using. Then you’ve got to have something that fits within the framework of the production. After that, assuming that the song(s) is (are) lyrically applicable and the production quality is high, then it’s a matter of pitching the music without becoming a nuisance. Which is hard to do. Your chances are better if you follow up only once a month, versus weekly.
Also, start pitching at the beginning of the season or when a film is in pre-production; it may take a month just to get the material heard, and then it may take a few months to find the right opportunity for a placement.
What is it about a song or an artist that makes you think you can get them placed? Is it song-craft or is it more about texture? It is clearly less about the type of song craft that used to get songs on the radio – any thoughts?
TANVI:
Regardless of the genre, there is a quality that a song has that makes it perfect for audio/visual use. It’s really hard to pinpoint but I (or any film/TV (et al) supervisor) can hear it in the first 30 seconds. What makes a song a great album cut or radio single may not make it a great film/TV track. At the end of the day, the song has to be a hit, lyrically applicable (universal in nature), have a great hook, masterful production quality and great vocals. Sometimes you get a song that has all but one of any of the above and it kills it. A song has to have energy, evoke emotions and create a mood. It has to support the visual in all matters. A great placement is when a person is moved by the whole visual/auditory experience.
Is there anything an artist should be wary about when signing either their masters or the publishing to one or different companies? Can this hinder getting songs cleared and therefore getting placed more often in your experience?
TANVI:
If the artist owns its own masters and publishing, its best to assign both sides to one company, that way the company can negotiate for both clearances. It doesn’t make sense to split that up. It’s not unusual to have the song (master & synch) repped non-exclusively by different companies, and the more savvy artists have done that. I’ve come across this on a couple of songs in our catalog, and really it is all down to relationships…whomever has the better relationships gets songs placed. Crucial’s contracts are non-exclusive, so that the artist can work their own material as well as having others work it. When a song has been pitched by more than one person to the same supervisor, I let the supervisor decide who gets the placement. I’m not going to jeopardize a long-standing relationship with someone over a few dollars. This is becoming a common place. Remember, in commercial music, you have the same thing happening… you have labels pitching, publishers pitching, film/TV reps pitching. They are all going for the same spots.
What should people be vary of when partnering with music placement services like crucial – surely there are some terms in contracts out there that you would consider pitfalls that could harm an artist’s career, what are they?
TANVI:
Never ever give up any Writers share to a publisher. Publisher receiving Publisher’s share is standard. Sometimes if you are an artist, and have created something specifically for a production library, you may be asked to give up a % of the writer’s share. This in my opinion is unethical. For placement companies, there is no reason to sign an exclusive deal; there are way too many companies out there that offer non-exclusives. The artist may not make the best choice on the first round so it is better to have more people working for them and see which one really delivers.
Also, beware of single page contracts and verbal commitments. Licensing music is a complex procedure and you want to make sure that you and the company understands the terms and responsibilities each party has. Copyright infringement is not a laughing matter.
I am told that many placements for developing artists are buyouts, meaning that the ad agency or their client or the film makers / movie studios collect the ASCAP and BMI royalties – do you have supervisors asking you for this kind of deal often?
TANVI:
No. The only time I’ve come across that is when a studio is looking at theme songs for episodic television. Obviously the performance revenue can be quite large for a series, and so it does make sense for the studio to want to have a theme song they own. However, it’s really NOT in the best interest of the artist for the studio to own the publishing revenue on their songs for single needledrop placements.
I often hear about developing artists getting called from major networks who offer to use their music but want a gratis license- is there any push back that a lone artist can ask for that you think they could get?
TANVI:
I don’t believe in GRATIS licenses. It devalues the music, and is degrading to the artist. After all, isn’t the artist trying to make a living as an artist? A TV producer wouldn’t allow his TV show to be used for free by the network. An employee of the network wouldn’t work for free. Why should the artist allow his music be used for free; regardless of how much promotion is promised? Promotion can’t be definitively quantified into revenue. At the very least the artist should ask for $500 for the use of master and synch for broadcast productions and indie films; anything less is not worth your time.
Musician coaching:
If you were suddenly to start your life over as a musician and were able to retained all you have learned about music placement and licensing what would your plan be to get your music placed?
TANVI:
As an indie musician, out there working on my own, I would research all of the various placement companies on the internet, and review their credit list, their history in the business, their deal terms, their contract, the look of their site (seriously, the way their site looks is an indicator of their legitimacy), and listen to the songs that the company is representing. A placement company is only as good as its catalog. I would contract the A players in the market to work my catalog; so that I can focus on what makes me happy, which is creating music.
———
If you are interested in getting music placed by Crucial please visit Crucial Music’s music submission website.
Josh Zandman is the CEO and founder of the music licensing company Song and Film. He is also a writer, producer and a musician. Prior to starting Song and Film Josh was signed to A&M / Interscope records as the keyboard player of the band Burlap To Cashmere.
Josh, thanks for taking the time to speak with me today. Before we get into what you are doing now tell me what it was like for you as a major label recording artist?
JZ:
They wanted us to basically have a grassroots following because of the genre of the music, so we toured over 300 days a year. We were constantly on the road for five years. Even when we got a tour bus, we were showering in truck stops. If we were lucky enough to get one hotel room, and sometimes there were bloodstains on the sheets. We stayed in crappy places. We always would say, “We’re living the dream.” Even when we were playing for 10,000 people, it could be rough.
Many people just don’t really realize just what constant touring entails.
JZ:
The experience is and was incredible. I always say the prize is an empty box, but it’s all about the journey, especially in the music industry. There’s usually nothing to hold on to but the people you meet and the music itself – that’s what it’s about.
There aren’t a lot of artists that do 300 days per year. Today, very few people have tour support and DIY is the rule not the exception. Most people gig doing the weekend warrior thing with three-day weekends if they’re lucky and it seems that almost everywhere you go audiences are as jaded as they are in New York and Los Angeles.
JZ:
When we started, it wasn’t like that. We started in late 1995. The digital stuff wasn’t as popular as it was now.
It was also a very different economy. People had some spare money too.
JZ:
Exactly. We would book ourselves initially. We started out slow. Then we got picked up by PGA when PGA was booking REM and others. Our conga player wanted to be on the road all the time, so he would say, “Put us out.” And he just booked us. When you’re playing for the Christian industry there are so many shows. It’s very supportive from the fans. There are endless numbers of shows. Of course, you’re not playing every day. Back then we were saying we shouldn’t be playing all these shows and just be doing the big ones so we could concentrate on writing and radio, which I think we’d still be together if that had been the case.
You did this for five years- what would you have done differently had you had all that experience when you started out?
JZ:
You need a leader in the band. You need somebody to make final decisions, and we didn’t have that. We had seven people all complaining, and nobody was making decisions. Also, the best thing to do is if you’re a writer in a band and living together and working together, you need to give some of that publishing to the other guys. Because otherwise in our situation, the writer was making all the money, and we never made anything except towards the end, when made a little bit. But when you’re making $20,000 per show playing for 10,000-40,000 people and not making anything because it’s going all back into tour support, you wonder why you’re doing it. You look at bands today that have been around for 20-30 years and they split the publishing. They’re all considered writers, and that’s why they’re together. They’re all making money and all happy and having fun. I also would have made different choices regarding our management.
So the band split up- then what happened?
JZ:
I left the band and was in a crappy apartment. I couldn’t afford rent in Jersey. I had done a demo of a song called Beautiful out in Nashville. It was just a demo, and I did it for free with a guy named Rick Elias, who has had some really big songs on albums in the Christian industry. I sat on that song for a year and didn’t do anything with it until that website Demo Diaries was up and running and popular. I e-mailed Gary there and said, “This song has a Dawson’s Creek kind of feel. Can you put it on your site?” At the time A&R execs would contact you if they liked it when you were posted on that site. Gary asked me “Was this ever on Dawson’s Creek, and do you want it on?” When I said “Not it hasn’t” and “yes please” he told me to e-mail this girl who was the editor to the show and to say that I was recommended by him, and she said, “Thanks, I love it.”
No joke, a week later the music supervisor said, “I need a song for the closing scene in this episode.” And she said, “I just got the perfect song.” Two weeks later, this song was on one of the biggest shows on TV at the time. I was floored. I had been ready to give up on music, and then that happened. Then I tried to get publishing companies to help, but there were no companies out there like Film and Song that pushed songs to TV and film. There were only publishing companies. Nobody would push my stuff. I decided to do it myself and started Song and Film as a tips sheet like Demo Diaries to gain contacts for myself. So I would find bands I thought were awesome and put it up on the site with their contact info. I wasn’t doing it for the money. I was just trying to gain relationships with people. What happened was, in the first two weeks I had the Vice President of Fox Music pick four bands for two pilots coming out. I didn’t know what to do, so I just told him to contact them. Within four months I became known in the music industry because I was doing something different. Putting links in e-mails to music was something nobody was doing at the time. People were excited to be able to just click and listen. That gained a lot of attention. That was seven years ago. Since then, we’ve tried different things, and it has become what it is now. During that process I also wound up playing piano for Kanye West on his first album, which was fun.
You’ve gotten music placed on Dawson’s Creek, you’ve started Song and Film. What other victories have you had for your music and other people’s music?
JZ:
That was just the first thing that happened. During that time I also signed with Cherry Lane Publishing. So I had songs I wrote with them that were placed in movies, and I was writing with people. What happened with Song and Film was that I got more excited about other people’s music, so I never even pushed my own. We have over 300 major placements in A-List movies, from Epic Movie to movies with George Clooney, Patrick Swayze along with national and regional commercials, iPhone and iPad games, indie films, corporate CDs. We work with anything or anyone that licenses music, we’ve had great success.
When people ask me “How do I get my stuff into film and TV?” I never have a clear cut answer except that doing so is a full time job. What I try to explain is that when you’re calling up and say, “Hey, I’m an artist and I have three albums worth and they generally sound like this,” anybody on the phone is generally listening and thinking, “Okay, great, but I’ve got Sony on the other line and they have all of Western music. Can you hold?” Was the idea to work with more music than just your own a strategy to build a bigger catalogue so you could have more conversation currency with these people?
JZ:
Honestly, I wasn’t even thinking that. All I was thinking of was, “One day I want to be a music supervisor, and in order to do that, I need to get music placements.” I thought that at the time, but now I realize it’s just who you know to be a music supervisor. At the time I wanted to build relationships and placements. When I would find a band, all I was going off was my passion for music. That’s it. I get very excited when I hear a new song, and it really excites me and I want to do something with it. This was the vehicle by which to do it. And that was my passion – to play stuff in TV and film. So for me it was, “I love this song and want to send it to these people.” I think it’s your passion and desire that fuel that whole process. It just took off from there. I built up relationships over the years, and everyone was saying, “Wow, these guys are sending me incredible music, and they’re nice. They’re not hard to deal with, and they are simple.”
What kind of deals do you do with artists? Exclusive vs. Non Exclusive etc etc… ?
JZ:
We have two different deals. We opened a publishing company called Snow Jacket. It’s basically still Song and Film, but Snow Jacket is under the same umbrella. We’re only signing single song deals, and we’re doing more of a campaign-style push to break the artist, an that’s brand new.
Elaborate on campaign style.
JZ:
Campaign style is basically that Song and Film runs as a library. Usually leads come in and we say, “Yes, I have this song” and we send it. Campaign style is, “Okay, I have this song, and this band is touring, and we want to help break this artist into the music industry.” So we try to get them high-level placement, promotion, anything that can promote them like crazy by getting links on websites or spots on TV where it mentions their CD is available on iTunes. We do anything we can do to help break the artist. And we pull in our favors from all our clients to say, “Hey, we want your help in breaking this artist and want you to be part of their success as well.” That’s basically the campaign style theory. It’s more that we’re managing a song.
I was a player, but I was never much of a writer. What do you recommend in light of the fact that there are so many placement agencies that are non-exclusive, and you have to worry about people going out and signing up for 15 of these things and that pissing off supervisors because they’re getting pitched with 15 re-titled songs from 15 different people? You now have seven years worth of experience on almost every side of the film and TV placement and scoring, and you’re fortunate enough to have a publishing company doing your placement for your own material. What would you recommend for someone that wants to get songs placed?
JZ:
What I would recommend is not going with a bunch of different companies. And I tell that to artists when they sign up with us. We have a non-exclusive deal as well. We take 50% of the licensing fee, and that’s it. If you work with multiple houses the music supervisors can say, “Who do I give this licensing fee to, because I got the same song from two different pushers?” They hate that because they lose their relationships with one of those people. So, don’t go with all these different people. Find a company that can showcase all their placements. On our site we put up all our placements because we have nothing to hide. We say, “This is what we do. We have nothing to hide. If you like it, great. If not, this is what we do.” And also, do research on the people that run the company. Google them and do tons of research because you want to be working with somebody that is enthusiastic and passionate about what you’re doing. I hear so many stories from artists that their song has been sitting in the place for so long and not doing anything.
Frankly, that’s the rule and no the exception. Artists sign up their music with a library or five libraries and more often than not they never hear back at all.
JZ:
Yes, exactly. And that’s the problem. These people are just trying to gain a huge catalogue. It’s like a mission that you’re going to get so many songs. We only have 40 artists. We’re very selective about who we pick and what songs we pick. We have actual friendships with all the artists rather than them just being clients. They call us up for advice on other stuff, and we encourage them all the time. That’s what it should be like. It’s exciting and is supposed to be fun.
I find that when working with some of the larger catalogues, now you don’t have to work the music supervisors but you have to work the person that has your song because they forget what they own they have such a large catalogue.
JZ:
Here’s the funny thing. When I first started this, there was nobody in TV and film. Now TV and film has become really popular. Artists became aware of it and now these startup companies are just all over the place and saturating all these people. But it’s all about the relationships, and they’re learning that. They’re here, and then they’re gone, because they don’t have relationships with the supervisors.
That’s where our relationship building comes into play. After seven years, they can’t forget us because we’re on their short list. When a new movie comes out, we’re one of the few companies that are notified of the lead. All these other companies are chasing it, and we’re just getting them handed to us now, which is awesome. It takes a lot of work to get there, and it doesn’t mean we limit ourselves to just that. We go out and get new clients all the time.
I know talent and writing a great song and all that is kind of an X Factor, and it might seem a little ridiculous to reverse engineer this process, but I remember that when I was doing campaigns on the agency side, certain themes kept coming up, so everybody wanted “Here Comes the Sun” by the Beatles or “Walking on Sunshine” by Katrina and the Waves. If you had a song about sunshine, you had a shot at getting heard because of the thematic element. Are there artists or themes or things that reoccur?
JZ:
Definitely. And you said it. “Sunshine” or the word “shine.” If you put it in and make it positive and generic so it can be used in a million ways, you’re golden. It’s amazing how much they’ll get placed. And then if you do anthematic-type choruses. We’re working with a song right now called “Believe.” And the message is “you gotta believe.” It can be used in so many different things. Don’t tell a story. Stories rarely get placed. You have to fit the story they already have.
I did an interview with Bill Meadows – a supervisor with Crispin Porter, and he told me a majority of the things he placed were instrumental. Do you find that to be true as well?
JZ:
We do place instrumental stuff, but not as much with what we work on. Bill Meadows works on TV commercials, and they use instrumentals more than the stuff we work on as far as movies and TV shows where they are trying to get a specific message across and need a lyric to support that. We have a deal with MTV and place hundreds and hundreds of songs with them for artists. And they use tons of instrumentals for background because they use so much music. It’s typically more lyric based.
It’s still handy for musicians to have their instrumentals and stems handy though, correct?
JZ:
Yes. Definitely. Always have your instrumental ready and if possible the stem of the whole song.
Any other thoughts in closing or stuff we didn’t cover?
JZ:
The best advice I love to tell artists is when you’re submitting to a company to push your songs, don’t write a story about yourself in an e-mail and read the instructions on the site. I say, “Send me an mp3. If we like it, we’ll get back to you.” And I get ten mp3s in an e-mail or links to all these different places like Sound Cloud. I just delete them now because I’m too busy. An mp3 is the easiest way. Make the e-mail as short as possible. Introduce yourself and let your music speak for itself. You don’t have to try to sell me in an e-mail. A song is a song, and the song is what sells.
What do you want to hear from someone that approaches you cold? Do you want them to give you ideas of how it should be used? Do you need to hear about the artist’s accomplishments? What gets your attention?
JZ:
Definitely don’t say what it could be used for, because you want the person listening to it to make that decision. When I hear it, I know my clients and what I work on. Introduce yourself and mention your placements or deals or that you’re touring. Send three sentences. Don’t tell me you have 50 songs in your catalogue. That’s the worst, because I know I’m going to have to go listen to them if we work together. Just say, “Here’s an mp3” or send a direct link to your Myspace. Don’t link to your website where I have to go and click “music” and then go find it. The simpler you make it, the better it is. Just “Hi, my name is John and I’ve had a few placements on TV. Here’s a song I think you’ll like.”
Are you in fact looking for something that’s off the radar, or are you looking for someone with key performance indicators?
JZ:
It definitely makes a difference. It is worth mentioning if you are doing something notable and not just playing boring coffee shops. If you’re touring right now, it will grab my attention, because a lot of music supervisors want to help break a band. And we get requests sometimes saying, “Is there a band from New York right now that’s doing well? We want to place them in this show.” They’ll request a certain band from a certain area. It doesn’t happen often but it does happen. It’s eye candy. Mention a cool little couple things you’re doing. It doesn’t matter, but it’s subconscious. I think, “Oh cool. This is a working musician and someone that is doing stuff.” And then when you listen to a song, that’s subconsciously in the back of your head. It’s all about the song no matter what. But if it’s a short e-mail, I know who I am contacting and how to talk to the person. I don’t have to figure out how to start the conversation.
——-
Learn more about Josh and Song and Film
