Music Business: Am I being played?

B

Blakx

New member
1.What is the difference between an executive producer and the composer?
2. Where can I go to read and educate myself on this stuff?
3. Am I getting played [read below]?

I recently started working with a friend of mine who owns a decent home studio unlike me. He wants to do a business venture where he will be the executive producer and I will be the "composer" as we sell beats.

He cannot make beats so it would just be me making all the beats. He mixes, I do not yet know how to mix but i am working on it.He has connections to major artists [relatively major in the small place we live in] BUT i am pretty sure I could get connections without him.

So basically I would make the beat in his studio, he might mix it and he would be executive produce and me composer. I can do this all in my own "studio" besides maybe some mixing he might do and some immediate connections.

AM i getting played? Basically what am asking is would he be getting an unfair amount of the profits from label himself the executive producer for royalties?
 
Last edited:
Executive producer generally makes the business decisions with regard to the music. I don't think you're being played, if anything you're getting a good deal as see it as he's taking on the engineering role as well, especially if you're splitting the venture 50/50. Good connections aren't easy to come by, you need to be in the right place at the right time and be someone that they like and want to work with, which makes it contingent.

Just look what you're getting. Access to a studio, an engineer and connections and all you have to do is make music. Done deal as far as i see it. 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing

Consider their work ethic. If it's good and they're a busy person then it's a good idea. If they're not a busy person then the venture will go nowhere. Also consider the connections. You say major in a small place but that doesn't really mean anything. Quantify them. Look at their history and past success. Are they real connections or are they just an online label that doesn't appear to be doing much? Where do you see their names appear? Who uses them?
 
Producer is the guy/gal with the artistic vision and is charged with bringing that vision to bear within budget provide by

Executive producer is the guy/gal who puts the money up and expects results/returns on that investment

Composer (how refreshing to see someone refer to themselves as that here) is the guy/gal who creates the actual music

Engineer: depends on which phase of the project as there are at least 5 types I am familiar with

Live Sound - hardest of the jobs as they make decision in real time that affect the audiences perception of the performance; charged with getting best sound from the performers as it happens so gurus on mic placement and live eq/fx
Tracking - recording from live sources to tape/hdd; getting good levels and capturing nuances of performances
Mix - combining all elements of the recorded music into a cohesive artistic vision; can be the same as the tracking engineer
Mastering - brings all of the tracks in a project into the same sonic vision; adds additional data readying the material for distribution
Broadcast - ensuring that tracks are fit for broadcast by applying broadcast standards of fx and eq to material presented to them by mastering or mix engineers

pretty much all of these engineering roles/jobs are paid for on the basis of a fee for service, whether that be a salary or a hourly rate

as for being played: hard to tell

If he can't create then he gets no writing credits; if he wants writing credits then he needs to contribute to the creative process in ways other than being an engineer (which is usually a fee for service deal). Put more bluntly, if he does not write a musical or lyrical line (or play it as a creative contribution - i.e. improvises an important component of the final composition), then he is not entitled to any form of writing credit or split on the copyright/performing rights/mechanical reproduction rights/synchronisation rights.

Avoid a 360[sup]o[/sup] deal where he takes a part of all of your income. Do not allow him to act as your manager unless that is what you want. Even as manager he is not entitled to a writing credit, only a flat percentage of all income generated by his efforts in managing you - i.e. unless he secures the publishing deal he gets nothing from your royalties/residuals. Do not sign any agreements without having a lawyer look them over - you do not want to get stung later on by some abstruse clause that gives him sole ownership of the catalogue if you walk away without his consent or other such shenanigans

He can request that you pay him a reasonable fee for his services to you as engineer and connections broker.

He can even request that you set aside a % of income through which he to recovers these costs at a future point - this is known as escrowing funds. This escrowing of income to cover his costs must stop once his fees have been paid (be wary of allowing him to add shark interest rates on fees charged - CPI annualised is a better respecter of your obligation to him)

However, do not give him a cut of royalties/residuals: they are your retirement package, especially if something you write blows up.
 
Don't you think you're being too restrictive there Bandcoach? It's like you've approached the situation from the standpoint of an already established entity that has capital. Maybe that's true as it's hard to tell but i read it as just 2 bedroom producers. If they are 2 bedroom producers then the restrictions you've laid on the exec will likely turn them away and the op will just end up where he is now, which appears to be nowhere. I also think you've undervalued the connections. Good connections are worth a fortune and i can't imagine that anyone would give their connections for such a small amount. Personally, if those connections are good i would take it in a heartbeat. I pay 15% to my connections (doing all the production and engineering work myself), and i'd drop them in a heartbeat and give 50% commission to a good connection.

I think people put too much stock in owning 100% of what they create. Owning 100% of your creation is neither here nor there because ideas and the people who have them are a dime a dozen. What matters is market presence, and only good connections can give you that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I mostly agree with bandcoach, but it's hard to say.
Is this a friend you really trust?
If my best friend I've known since kindergarten wanted to get into the music business with me I'd give him 50% of anything I got and he would do the same.
It's really up to you on the money terms part, but as bandcoach said you should make sure you don't get into anything where you get screwed over in the end.
But as yada says, it sounds like you two are just trying to startup something and I think you should just go for it, but be clear on what will go down in terms of money, especially since major artists/connections are involved.
 
yada said:
Don't you think you're being too restrictive there Bandcoach? It's like you've approached the situation from the standpoint of an already established entity that has capital. Maybe that's true as it's hard to tell but i read it as just 2 bedroom producers. If they are 2 bedroom producers then the restrictions you've laid on the exec will likely turn them away and the op will just end up where he is now, which appears to be nowhere. I also think you've undervalued the connections. Good connections are worth a fortune and i can't imagine that anyone would give their connections for such a small amount. Personally, if those connections are good i would take it in a heartbeat. I pay 15% to my connections (doing all the production and engineering work myself), and i'd drop them in a heartbeat and give 50% commission to a good connection.

I think people put too much stock in owning 100% of what they create. Owning 100% of your creation is neither here nor there because ideas and the people who have them are a dime a dozen. What matters is market presence, and only good connections can give you that.
Click to expand...


I am finding it hard to understand why you are complaining about a low fee - I never stated a number just made suggestions about making them one-time single fees for single services: pay for what you receive not for some future maybe

I am trying to convey best business practice not good buds business practice - nothing screws a friendship faster than realising that you have been played later, I am writing from bitter experience, so please understand that I am pointing out the ways in which you need to protect yourself rather than suggesting how do I screw my bud

I would never ever give a percentage of my royalties to any connections, it just does not make sense to continue to pay for an introduction years after it happened
- if they are introducing me to people then I will pay an introduction fee that is mutually agreed upon; a one time never to be repeated fee
-- paying a percentage commission is for suckers as this can bleed you dry quickly if you cut every man and his dog in on your income stream
 
Well i can't argue with most of that as it's sensible, although personally i prefer looking at them as a team rather than two individuals. But i guess that's just what i'd do as i like teams. However,

bandcoach said:
-- paying a percentage commission is for suckers as this can bleed you dry quickly if you cut every man and his dog in on your income stream
Click to expand...

Is too general of a statement. Sure, if you don't watch your percentages you can lose everything, but paying a percentage is also a quick way to get investors and connections on your team, investors and connections who would probably never look twice at you otherwise. It's an alien concept i know, particularly in music i'd imagine, but you'd be surprised who will do what for you if you give them a percentage.
 
there is only so much to go around: if you give 15% to everyone who helps you by the time you have 7 people helping you, you are losing money because you are paying out 105% of what you make: never ever good business sense and definitely not advised when you consider that the taxman wants his cut as well

i.e. you need to make sure that you are giving a cut of nett, not gross; most folks assume gross when offered a percentage and get offended/start legal action when they get a percentage of nett

I still stand by every word I have written above and do not recommend giving a % as you will ultimately lose out: if folks won't work with you any other way and you really want to work with them, then negotiate a sunset clause - a fixed cut for so many years and no more - limit your exposure to the life of the working relationship not forever
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top