I don’t know if this has spread throughout Europe yet but I’m sure it will it seems big labels are adding a little clause into contracts (I’m talking big labels here, Armada, Spinnin etc). Basicly because the money is getting so bad these labels are starting to ask for a percentage of the producers DJ earnings for their tracks to be released on said labels. I dunno if this is old news it just seems like another low point for the music industry but I guess there’s no other way? What you guys make of this?
Really?!
The label has no right to earn anything from DJ performance, unless they’re also acting as an agency in which they are supplying you with the work.
[quote]jjdejong0 (29/09/2010)[hr]I don’t know if this has spread throughout Europe yet but I’m sure it will it seems big labels are adding a little clause into contracts (I’m talking big labels here, Armada, Spinnin etc). Basicly because the money is getting so bad these labels are starting to ask for a percentage of the producers DJ earnings for their tracks to be released on said labels. I dunno if this is old news it just seems like another low point for the music industry but I guess there’s no other way? What you guys make of this?[/quote]
Thats a bloody joke, they can get stuffed, I would rather start my own label. In fact thats not a bad idea, Sonic Records! Already looked into start one in the past… humm, some food for thought I think…
Yeah but if you notice all the fairly big name dj’s that start their own labels will 99% be a sub label of one of the bigger music labels eg John O’callaghans new label is a sub label of Armada, Sander van Doorns label is a sub label of Spinnin etc. Now for a label to demand this it means that you are a well established name and have your income via your performances. To keep performing regularly you of course need to release tracks and so your back at the start. You could say ok I’m just gonna release my tracks on a relatively unknown label BUT you miss out on all the promotion and suave that these big labels can bring to the table. Also this is totally seperate from your Booker they will still require their cut and now a small percentage to the label. Also guys this is a very seriouse thing but the good news is aparantly the cut the labels want isn’t that big and is scaled to how much you actually get paid to DJ somewhere. It’s all well and good telling a label to suck it but I still feel as a budding DJ/producer that you need them still for your ongoing promotion as an artist, remember no one wants to go and pay money to see a DJ that hasn’t released anything for 5 years. The other good news and kind of the artists retaliation is that they are trying to earn back this money by upping their remix fees. This I think is quite clever because the power is switched from the label to you in this particular situation as here the label needs YOU! Gonna be interesting to see how the music labels will retaliate and what they can think of screw over the artist some more. I personally don’t think the problem lies here I think more time and money needs to be spent on protecting music and prosecuting illegal file sharers even harder. Just catch one, send em to the gas chamber and watch how quickly mp3 sales rise
[quote]jjdejong0 (29/09/2010)[hr]Yeah but if you notice all the fairly big name dj’s that start their own labels will 99% be a sub label of one of the bigger music labels eg John O’callaghans new label is a sub label of Armada, Sander van Doorns label is a sub label of Spinnin etc. Now for a label to demand this it means that you are a well established name and have your income via your performances. To keep performing regularly you of course need to release tracks and so your back at the start. You could say ok I’m just gonna release my tracks on a relatively unknown label BUT you miss out on all the promotion and suave that these big labels can bring to the table. Also this is totally seperate from your Booker they will still require their cut and now a small percentage to the label. Also guys this is a very seriouse thing but the good news is aparantly the cut the labels want isn’t that big and is scaled to how much you actually get paid to DJ somewhere. It’s all well and good telling a label to suck it but I still feel as a budding DJ/producer that you need them still for your ongoing promotion as an artist, remember no one wants to go and pay money to see a DJ that hasn’t released anything for 5 years. The other good news and kind of the artists retaliation is that they are trying to earn back this money by upping their remix fees. This I think is quite clever because the power is switched from the label to you in this particular situation as here the label needs YOU! Gonna be interesting to see how the music labels will retaliate and what they can think of screw over the artist some more. I personally don’t think the problem lies here I think more time and money needs to be spent on protecting music and prosecuting illegal file sharers even harder. Just catch one, send em to the gas chamber and watch how quickly mp3 sales rise :P[/quote]
really good tip there Mr Jong .D
[quote]jjdejong0 (29/09/2010)[hr]Yeah but if you notice all the fairly big name dj’s that start their own labels will 99% be a sub label of one of the bigger music labels eg John O’callaghans new label is a sub label of Armada, Sander van Doorns label is a sub label of Spinnin etc. Now for a label to demand this it means that you are a well established name and have your income via your performances. To keep performing regularly you of course need to release tracks and so your back at the start. You could say ok I’m just gonna release my tracks on a relatively unknown label BUT you miss out on all the promotion and suave that these big labels can bring to the table. Also this is totally seperate from your Booker they will still require their cut and now a small percentage to the label. Also guys this is a very seriouse thing but the good news is aparantly the cut the labels want isn’t that big and is scaled to how much you actually get paid to DJ somewhere. It’s all well and good telling a label to suck it but I still feel as a budding DJ/producer that you need them still for your ongoing promotion as an artist, remember no one wants to go and pay money to see a DJ that hasn’t released anything for 5 years. The other good news and kind of the artists retaliation is that they are trying to earn back this money by upping their remix fees. This I think is quite clever because the power is switched from the label to you in this particular situation as here the label needs YOU! Gonna be interesting to see how the music labels will retaliate and what they can think of screw over the artist some more. I personally don’t think the problem lies here I think more time and money needs to be spent on protecting music and prosecuting illegal file sharers even harder. Just catch one, send em to the gas chamber and watch how quickly mp3 sales rise :P[/quote]
Brilliant! clicks ‘likes this’
[quote]jjdejong0 (29/09/2010)[hr]I don’t know if this has spread throughout Europe yet but I’m sure it will it seems big labels are adding a little clause into contracts (I’m talking big labels here, Armada, Spinnin etc). Basicly because the money is getting so bad these labels are starting to ask for a percentage of the producers DJ earnings for their tracks to be released on said labels. I dunno if this is old news it just seems like another low point for the music industry but I guess there’s no other way? What you guys make of this?[/quote]
Where did you hear about this?
Mental Theo (yes he is the guy that brought Basshunter over to the UK).
I will buy every release on beatport if we gas basshunter
LOL! You guys are lucky at least you got an English version. Here in Holland he went to number one with the Swedish version singing about an IRC chat room bot named Anna. We also got delighted by some Dutch folk music covers, including one singing about having a boat called Anna lying in a pond. All this no matter how unbelievable is 100% true. I also want to say that when I was younger I used to download music illegaly via Kazaa. When I had my first release and saw it that same day on every file sharingsite and music sharing forums I said I would never download music illegaly again and support the artists who’s music I liked. It really hits home hard when it happens to you. So I propose a ‘three strikes your out’ policy, get caught for the third time and it’s the noose or the chair (whichever you prefer). Expect mp3 sales to gradually increase
[quote]jjdejong0 (29/09/2010)[hr]LOL! You guys are lucky at least you got an English version. Here in Holland he went to number one with the Swedish version singing about an IRC chat room bot named Anna. We also got delighted by some Dutch folk music covers, including one singing about having a boat called Anna lying in a pond. All this no matter how unbelievable is 100% true. I also want to say that when I was younger I used to download music illegaly via Kazaa. When I had my first release and saw it that same day on every file sharingsite and music sharing forums I said I would never download music illegaly again and support the artists who’s music I liked. It really hits home hard when it happens to you. So I propose a ‘three strikes your out’ policy, get caught for the third time and it’s the noose or the chair (whichever you prefer). Expect mp3 sales to gradually increase :P[/quote]
hahaha I remember the Anna Bot track! Terrible
Thing is it’s a weird one isn’t it because we all hate people who illegally download music, but at the same time, there are producers out there who hate people illegally downloading their music which was in itself actually made with illegally downloaded software lol.
Food for thought
When I was at music collage I did an essay about music downloads. When get time I’ll do a digest version of it an post it here. Will make for some interesting debate