nonexclusive beats?

[dvyce]

From an artistic - and 'vanity' - standpoint, agreed, makes no sense. The thing is, some beats are so bloody catchy they can be milked until the crowd knows them better than the originator. DJs over here call it 'rinsing out'. It's actually common with Jamaican dancehall stuff.

What I am saying has nothing to do with the "artistic" or "vanity" part of it. It is purely from a marketing standpoint.

If a label is going to put money into an artist, they want that artist to have "original" distinctive recognizable songs.

They are not going to put hundreds of thousands of dollars into promoting and marketing an artist when a consumer can get the same stuff anywhere.


I am not talking about beats that sound similar (I am talking about the same recording used on multiple albums.)


I am not talking about mixtapes or tracks intended for the dancefloor.



I am talking about selling "real" tracks for "real" albums.

[PlanetHitzProduction]

Man Dvyce you gotta post more threads LOL. Always got good stuff to say.

[zionproductions]

What I am saying has nothing to do with the "artistic" or "vanity" part of it. It is purely from a marketing standpoint.

If a label is going to put money into an artist, they want that artist to have "original" distinctive recognizable songs.

They are not going to put hundreds of thousands of dollars into promoting and marketing an artist when a consumer can get the same stuff anywhere.


I am not talking about beats that sound similar (I am talking about the same recording used on multiple albums.)


I am not talking about mixtapes or tracks intended for the dancefloor.



I am talking about selling "real" tracks for "real" albums.

I understand what you're saying, but there are instances when even "real" artists may choose to cover a song. Look at older music. Popular songs were re-corded with different artists, records cut and re-sold to the public. How is this possible? because the songwriter owned that song and can re-sell it and did. This doesn't necessarily dis-credit the artist. While I agree with your point, I still must play devil's advocate and say there are possible cases when the music resonates so deeply with said artist that he/her doesn't mind using recycled instrumentals. The public and record company won't necessarily balk at this idea because it already has something going for it, instant recognition (in the case of a popular song). A real artist will still bring his/her unique voice to it and hope it will be well-received...

Okay I'm done... and yes I know artists capable of re-making great songs are few and far between, but I'm saying...

[dvyce]

I understand what you're saying

No, you actually don't understand what I am saying.

but there are instances when even "real" artists may choose to cover a song. Look at older music. Popular songs were re-corded with different artists, records cut and re-sold to the public. How is this possible? because the songwriter owned that song and can re-sell it and did. This doesn't necessarily dis-credit the artist. While I agree with your point, I still must play devil's advocate and say there are possible cases when the music resonates so deeply with said artist that he/her doesn't mind using recycled instrumentals. The public and record company won't necessarily balk at this idea because it already has something going for it, instant recognition (in the case of a popular song). A real artist will still bring his/her unique voice to it and hope it will be well-received...

Okay I'm done... and yes I know artists capable of re-making great songs are few and far between, but I'm saying...

This is not about "cover versions"...

Not in any way whatsoever.

(and, by the way, the songwriter does not re-sell it or have to give permission for an artist to cover a song... once a song is out there, anyone can do a cover of it and just pay a mechanical royalty... even if the songwriter hates the cover version, he can't say anything about it.)


There are plenty of great covers that have been done throughout the history of music. But that has absolutely zero to do with the topic at hand.



This is about selling a "beat" on a "nonexclusive" basis.

Meaning: a "producer" makes a "beat" and sells it as is to several different artists. Now, each of these artists have the same exact backing track for their individual songs with different lyrics and vocal melodies. So if any of those songs comes on the radio, it will take you 30 seconds to figure out what song you are listening to because you have to wait for the vocals finally start due to the fact that is the only part that varies from one song to the other.

[bknot1]

dvcye ..real nice post fam..educate some people fam.. you need to post this in the Music/Industry section also

[PlanetHitzProduction]

Dvyce/bknot1

I'll move it there.

[bobsmitt]

i believe shondrae sold the same beat to both Kelis (Bossy) and Young City/Chopper.

usually it's rare to see it done in the industry but if random dudes hit u up on myspace i'm not gonna sell them exclusive to a beat. i wanna milk that mutha****a!! lol. and it will be hard to realize that's happening. majors/big indies are another story but i'm not interested in giving a song to one guy exclusive for cheap when i can sell it to a bunch of guys.

sample cds aren't the same. i don't think there are that many $30 sample cds with 3000 GOOD beats. prolly just some lame crap.

[dvyce]

i believe shondrae sold the same beat to both Kelis (Bossy) and Young City/Chopper.

usually it's rare to see it done in the industry but if random dudes hit u up on myspace i'm not gonna sell them exclusive to a beat. i wanna milk that mutha****a!! lol. and it will be hard to realize that's happening. majors/big indies are another story but i'm not interested in giving a song to one guy exclusive for cheap when i can sell it to a bunch of guys.

sample cds aren't the same. i don't think there are that many $30 sample cds with 3000 GOOD beats. prolly just some lame crap.

1. I said 1000 beats... not 3000

2. if the sample CD's have "just some lame crap" then it will be no different than the lame crap so many people try to sell from their soundclick pages

[johnnyluke]

It's kind of a double edged sword in a sense tough because if you sell a beat "non-exclusively" and you have, like ten artists jumpin on it, it's a testament to how good you are as producer. Sure it's gonna get played out, but an upcoming producer can use this kind of exposure to move into the world of "exclusive" beatmaking. I think it's a nescessary evil and something you just gotta except.

To use an analogy, look at some of the biggest actors in Hollywood, were they always making 10 million a picture? Hell no, they started out doing Inde films and C-list movies for table scraps! It's all about exposure man.

[junebugz]

Some full time musicians and producers do not want to sell ANY exclusive beats and that is totally fair.

If the BEAT is SUPER hot, their is potentially MORE money to be made via Non Exclusive licenses.