BryonDavis

Ok now this backs me up. Check out option 1. This is why i check with AFM. My guess per Roger's take is Avatar crossed the 15k threshold and unlike a 5000 pre 2005 soundtrack adds on to the sales which means fees must be paid. This is how 1 release i worked on was set up. https://theteamcompanies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/AFM-PHONO-PYMT-OPTIONS-140324.pdf

My legal friend pointed me to this. Looks like this makes a lot of sense. http://afmrecording.org/?page_id=460 The deals I have worked on involved festival or indie films. In my mind I thought this also applied to other soundtracks.

We can release anything. The issue is what some studios charge, availability of sources and if the studio even wants to do it. Ok. I went and asked a lawyer I know about this as I might be confused. Its complicated. There are some AFM deals you can opt into that allow sales up to 15k without Reuse. Other deals require payment upfront. Mike is right. I am mixing up deals. I'm out on this. I always check with AFM on all releases recorded in L.A. to verify obligations.

The only obstacle is the studio in some cases. 5k pre 2005. 15k post 2005. AFM L.A. and NY recordings. Abbey Road and the Newman Scoring Stage. If any part is recorded in L.A. it is under AFM rules.

Those cowriter credits are provided by the label. Batu works for John. Streaming is unlimited. Paid downloads counts towards the limit before reuse kicks in. 5000 is for scores before a date I cant quite remember. Pre 2005. Anything after is 15k. I usually consult the union. Digital rights usually stay with the studio. The fees vary for each release.

Not the reason but yes, being able to do that allows for us to revisit reissues and such.

I have released many AFM scores of the last few years that allow you to sell up to 15k with no reuse. With a couple of big releases I've worked on AFM grants us no reuse for up to 15k on scores after a certain date (not remembering that date). So I doubt Disney is going to pay reuse on anything under 15k for this expansion.

There would be no reuse fees on any album selling less than 15K. Also, streaming is forever. There is another reason why bigger labels do this, the AFM does not count streams against the reuse payment threshold. 100% agree.

One should not rule out that Intrada might be able to make it happen. They've done Marvel titles so why not Solo? They do. Universal Music handles it. If they provide an HD version to them, it will be on all the distributed 24 bit sites (HDT, Qobuz, Tidal, 7Digital, Amazon's new service).

It's not a trendy buzzword. It's how we pay royalties and mechanicals. Whatever floats your boat dude but if you refer to it as a download as far as I'm concerned you are talking about paid downloads NOT subscription services. We cool...bye.

But its not but ok. Downloads are dying. Streaming is thriving. In the breakdowns of the business there is physical, paid downloads then various streaming on demand. Just sharing a fact. True. That's why its streaming. If the internet dies I still have my paid downloads and physical media to play.

Anything by Steve Moore

Fair point.

A download is purchased. A stream is a subscription. There is a difference. The download business is dying too. Nobody talks about that. Streaming is like a lease. You pay monthly to listen to as much music as you want. When somebody says downloads I assume they are talking about paid individual purchases. The decline of the CD has a lot to do with streaming. Not in breakdowns of business revenue. Streaming is not downloads. Yes, services let you download files to play them without internet service but in the end you do not own those streams.

Streaming is killing downloads and CDs.

True but if the plants go away like they did when vinyl declined it will increase the price to manufacture. That is happening now. I firmly believe there will always be releases on CD. For small labels its a better cost risk than the bigger labels where the risk is higher due to the need to sell more. Look at dvd labels like Arrow or Shout! That is a snapshot of where the Cd can go.

Even if we did every unit wholesale through a distributor the profit is better than a wholesale CD. Say all 1,000 of a run sell through. Lps are non returnable (stores who buy stock cannot return their dead inventory) while CDs are and that also kills profitability as those return eat into the money a label receives. Other factors come into play: did we license this with an advance vs having rights and previous sales paying that advance off, having perpetuity or long term rights, no advance deal? The margins still are better on an LP that sells 1000 units than a CD. The only time I'd say a CD blows away an LP in margin is if we sell over 2000 on the website. That is, if we sell over 2000 units anymore.

Simple, they own the material outright. Classical mechanicals are not an issue for music hundreds of years old in some cases. In the case of film music we pay mechanicals. Take the Manicini box. A huge company like Sony has cheaper deals to manufacture these. They own those scores in perpetuity and many have sold hundreds of thousands of units. In some cases Pink Panther alone has gone gold. That's the other factor. That set sold pretty well. A box of rerecordings that is going to be of interest to film score collectors won't sell the kinds of numbers that a Sony box of Mancini or wrll known classical pieces will. For us to make money on an idea like this we'd need to know we can sell at least: A $99 box via retail channels will pay the label about 40-50 a unit. Website sales won't do much for these. So at say 40 bucks a pop we will spend about 30 bucks to make and would need to sell a minimum of 700 to 800 to break even. That could be doable but there are other built in labor costs that are wasted just to break even. For it to be appealing we would need to sell 1500 to 2000 through Universal for it to be appealing at the barest of minimums. The big labels divested themselves of physical distribution centers and manufacturing plants. Sony owns old recordings that in many cases have sold so many units it doesn't hurt to squeeze a few dollars more out of a new configuration. Again, its not worth the time and money to hopefully squeeze a few bucks if we do at all.

Understood but the economics of vinyl for labels is more preferable right now. If I prepare a vinyl and CD of a studio archive release. On a lp sellout of 1k units we could see a profit 14k. A cd is could net a 3rd of that. Some prefer the digipak.

$12-25 for mechanicals It would need to be jewel cases as anything made out of paper products is costly contrary to popular belief. $99.99 is the price it would need to sell for and I fear that it would not sell sadly. 100% right.

That was sarcasm on mp3. Good post. I stand by my layman's take on depth and range but I respect what you are saying here. You are correct on many points but keep in mind its also a preference. I listen to the 24 bit premaster on many albums I produce to look for issues. Sometimes all I have is the 16 bit to listen to. In the end I prefer the natural depth of an uncompressed 24 bit file.

Please do. Again, with Cd mastering you do get some compression of instruments. A true studio quality 24 48 recording is uncompressed. The music breathes. I disagree with anybody trying to push the cynical you can't hear it. True, we can't hear but we still can pick up depth, warmth and range improvements. But I suggest you go play MP3s. I mean hey...Spotify sounds great on my phone (sarcasm).

My point is based on clarity and depth. Your point was to baselessly attribute something to me i never said. I was describing depth and range. Our ears can pick up those differences. Why do sound engineers make movies in 24/48 and not 16/44? But hey why not MP3? I mean they sound fine too using your argument. Not here to argue. I just want to talk about stuff i love. I deleted those comments because I just realized I gotta stop wearing my heart on my sleeve and just stick to answering questions. I have no problem debating but you took it past a debate point then doubled down with that snarky comment. Its cool. Moving on.

No. I realized you were taking everything I said out of context. I never said you could hear it. I said its a matter of clarity and depth. But go ahead i ceded the conversation to you seeing you think your take is the only legit one. Maybe we should all listen to mp3s because hey, you can't truly hear the difference right? When I post a point there is always the person who inserts a point i was not making. I love people who think only their point is right. But hey...MP3 for all seeing nobody can hear anything. I'll officially leave this topic now. Thanks. I get some people need to be right. Sad part here is those who need to be right sure love attributing things because of this need to own another's take. MP3s hehe.

Anything is possible. Issue is always how many can we sell.