The Berkleemusic Blog Network brings together music industry professionals, music educators, and Berklee College of Music faculty to discuss topics and current events relating to the music business, music production, songwriting, music theory, performance, and online education.
Brian John is a Student Advisor at berkleemusic.com. He has a Bachelors in Piano Performance from Miami University of Ohio, and a Masters in Composition from Longy School of Music. Brian’s background is primarily in Classical music, but a 4 year stint in a home-grown jam band gives him a unique perspective on both genres. He continues to compose and perform for people across the US.
SOPA and PIPA – two acronyms that were made infamous on Jan. 18th 2012 as thousands of individuals and dozens of websites took part in what is now being called “Blackout Day”. The Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act were originally drafted to allow US Government agencies to bring criminal charges against, and to subsequently shut down, overseas websites illegally hosting copyrighted content. The broader Internet community, including giants like Google, Wired, and Wikipedia, became involved because these bills contained wording that was dangerously vague and open to interpretation and abuse. With these two bills now essentially dead in the water, it will be months or even years before another piece of legislation is in place to combat the piracy of copyrighted content.
A major portion of pirated content is media, which includes television, movies, books, and music. While this attempt at legislation was intended to punish those websites which provide pirated content, very little attention has been given to why pirating websites are so problematic in the first place. The true issue here is one of access. When creators do not make media available, consumers will search for, and find, other ways of acquiring it.
While governments need to step forward and create laws to protect copyrighted content, and in turn the copyright holders, no amount of legislation will be able to stop piracy. World-wide, the expectation of consumers is shifting to one of immediate and complete access anywhere at any time. The biggest piracy deterrent will be media companies catching up to the ‘access race’, thus making pirating websites obsolete and unnecessary. It is incumbent upon these companies to make their product easy to find and affordable to acquire. The average consumer will only turn to piracy websites if/when the company refuses access. By making the content available, the creator not only discourages piracy, they also control the medium in which it is distributed, which in turn allows them to control any and all revenue streams.
Independent musicians have been following this trend, and capitalizing on it for the past few years. It is common now for musicians to give music away for free to build a fan base, and to build a social media following. This trend actually allows independent musicians to capitalize on music piracy – by encouraging the sharing of their music, they are able to reach more people and build a larger group of fans. Once consumers become fans, they are more likely to have a vested interest in an artist and to support them by purchasing what the artists is selling, whether it be music or merchandise.
Established artists have also found ways to catch up in the ‘access race’ by allowing the sale of their music via sites such as iTunes and CD Baby. There are now also streaming sites such as Pandora, Rdio, and Spotify that offer access without ownership. If Sweden is to be any indicator, this increase in access directly leads to a decline in music piracy. According to Media Vision, a Swedish polling firm, illegal downloading of music is down by 25% since 2009. Considering that Sweden was the origin of some of the world’s largest pirating services, such as Pirate Bay and Pirate Party, this is a clear indication that legal avenues of access directly result in a decline in piracy.
One would expect the large, established organizations to take advantage of this trend. They have a captive audience that is clamoring for access to their product. A study released by telecommunications giant Ericsson indicates that over 70% of consumers are streaming, downloading, or watching recorded content and 36% of consumers are watching streamed on-demand movies. With access to the Internet now widely available through televisions, this trend is only expected to increase.
If content creators, especially the creators of major motion pictures, were to invest in direct-to-consumer access portals, their potential for profit due to monthly fees and advertising revenue is immense. Copyright holders, and the organizations that represent them, know that the content is out there and available already, so there is nothing to be lost in such a venture. In fact, there is everything to gain. Netflix, the predominant television and movie streaming company, currently claims more than 20 million subscribers globally, and they don’t even have the rights to stream the latest blockbuster films. Major networks like NBC, PBS, and Fox stream full episodes online. Consumers are starting to expect that their media will be available to stream online, and if it is available legally or illegally, they will find it.
The discussion surrounding copyright-protected material and how to best protect the creators of such material in a digital age will continue long after this blog is written. While SOPA and PIPA have been tabled, comprehensive reform is needed that takes into account all of the concerns raised in the recent debate. Whatever regulations are finally passed, it is up to the people involved in media creation to recognize and capitalize on all forms of distribution. It is also up to the people consuming this media to respect the work that has been done, and to recognize that these artists deserve be paid for their efforts.
Brian
Berkleemusic’s next term begins on April 2nd, 2012.
Michael Moyes is a Senior Student Advisor at Berkleemusic.com. He finished his studies at Baylor University, where he studied Piano Performance and Business. Michael has performed Piano as a soloist, in combos, and accompanied by full Orchestra. He holds Master Certificate in Arranging and Orchestration from Berkleemusic. You can hear some of Michael’s music on the Berklee Music Network and on Soundcloud.
“Learning licks and expecting to know how to improvise is akin to memorizing phrases in a French book and expecting to know how to speak French. One can only truly learn language by conversing with other people”
This paraphrased quote showcases the ‘vibe’ (sorry) that Gary Burton gave off throughout our conversation about his new Gary Burton: Jazz Improvisation course. Gary taught his style of improvisation here at The Berklee College of Music for over 20 years while at the same time playing with Chick Correa, George Shearing, Stan Getz, and other world renowned improvisers.
Every song has a story to tell and it is our job as improvisers to provide our own unique accent, inflection, timing, etc. Simply playing mixolydian runs every time we see a dominant 7th chord or dorian arpeggios over ii chords is missing the point of improvisation. True improvisers should be fine tuning ideas and giving them emotional content as they perform much like you would do with words when having a verbal conversation.
Gary stressed the importance of knowing what you are going to say and planning how you will say it before opening your mouth, striking the keys, or lifting your mallets. When a president gives a speech, they have some ideas prepared: an introduction, main points, and a conclusion perhaps. Without having an idea of what you are going to say you might sound like this…
“Hello, my name is President Burton and um, today I’m going to talk about some very important things…like the errr…economy and…global warming…”
Sure, the speaker hit some points: the economy, global warming, etc. but failed to tell us a story. As listeners, we are left craving more information, hopefully from a better speaker. As a former transcriber of Jazz solos, I have fallen into the trap of parroting others styles and licks without really saying much of anything. Lucky for me and many of you, Gary is sharing his extensive wisdom with us so that we can form our ideas and communicate on much higher levels. See you in class.
Michael Moyes
*(this class filled up almost immediately last term so we recommend getting in early)
Check out this video of Gary for more…
Berkleemusic’s next term begins on April 2nd, 2012.
Ben Newhouse has worked as a music supervisor and composer on dozens of television shows, films, and stage productions for media corporations including ABC, FOX, MTV, and Disney. He has arranged movie themes, sixties pop music, Broadway shows, and scored for several full-length feature films using Digital Performer.
Learn more about Ben and his online courses at Berkleemusic.com.
Surprisingly, I had quite a bit of time to work on this piece since my last post. As you might remember I had the skeleton of the piece completed, but the orchestration and background ideas needed to be added. Here is a pdf version of the score:
The instrumentation is harp, oboe, clarinet, flute, 5-string violin and acoustic bass. The hardest part of working with a simple melody is creating enough ways to keep it sounding interesting. Adding background lines, counter melodies, changing orchestration, changing keys, adding rhythm to the melody and adding additional sections of new material are all techniques I employed to attempt to do so.
When listening to the demo there are spots that sound like melodic material is missing. If you follow the score you will see that these sections will be filled in with improvisation from the clarinet, flute and finally the violin. The live performance will be February 27th here in Boston.
Hope all is well and that you’re enjoying the new year so far!
NAMM is here and frankly I am much more excited about it this year than in several of the years past. Seems like there’s much more of a buzz about it this year. Maybe the economy is turning around (hmm?), maybe musicians are making money again (what?), or maybe its just that we all are jonesin’ for new gear (probably!). Regardless, being the Pro Tools head that I am, I’m happy to see Pro Tools 10 in action, as well as a whole slew of new developments surrounding it. In fact, I’m giving a clinic on Pro Tools, sponsored by Berkleemusic, on Friday, Jan 20 at 3pm in the NAMM H.O.T. Zone. If you’re at NAMM, plesae come by and check it out. Stick around to say hi afterwards.
The NAMM H.O.T. Zone also features talks from other Berkleemusic luminaries like Dave Kusek and Mike King… experts in their fields for sure, as well as good peeps and good friends. Check us all out here: http://www.namm.org/thenammshow/2012/hot-zone-grid
And, for all the Berkleemusic.com peeps, all of my courses on Berkleemusic.com have been updated for Pro Tools 10, so you’ll be up to speed with using the latest version if you take any of the Pro Tools courses I authored, including Producing with Pro Tools and Advanced Production Techniques with Pro Tools.
The real question I have for you is, how many of you are using Pro Tools 10, and do you like it? And maybe more to the point, has it been worth the upgrade price? I think being able to run a session from RAM is worth it, but that requires either Pro Tools HDX or the Complete Production Toolkit… both expensive propositions. Granted there are other improvements in PT10, but that’s the most significant in my view.
I’ll post a post-NAMM report, and hit me up if you plan on being at NAMM and want to meet up.
I recently read an interesting book called “How We Decide” by Jonah Lehrer. In a nutshell, it broke down the human decision-making process into decisions made with our rational brain versus decisions made with our emotional brain. The book was very interesting reading, going through various situations (from selecting strawberry jam to attempting to crash-land a plane) and talked about how decisions were made in those situations.
While reading, I began to think about how we listen to music and what parts of the brain we use while listening. What strikes me most is how much that differs from person to person…
In one category you have non-musicians. Essentially by definition, they listen to music primarily with their emotional brains. This is simply because they haven’t been trained to analyze music rationally. When I play a piece of music for a non-musician, I hear comments like “I liked it because it made me sad” or “I liked it because it reminded me of something in my life”. These are fundamentally emotional responses to the music.
In the other category you have trained musicians. While we listen to music emotionally on some level, we also listen to it very rationally. When I play a piece of music for a trained musician, I hear comments about structure and form. “I really like the way it changed meter here” or “I like the way that the theme came back with different instrumentation” or “I like the way it delayed the resolution to tonic” and so on.
Among musicians, you then have many sub-categories of people based on different rational preferences. In essence, we all analyze the music rationally, but we disagree about what rational structures are inherently **good**.
I recently played a piece of music for two musicians. The first musician said… “I really like that it’s tonal.” The second musician said… “Well, it’s just too tonal for my tastes.” Both musicians listened with their rational brain, analyzed the music’s harmonic structure and deemed it to use tonal harmony. The first musician concluded that the tonal structure was a good thing. The second musician concluded that the tonal structure was a bad thing.
I thought in this blog that I’d tell the above little story and then pose two questions…
Question 1
As trained musicians, our “rational brains” are extremely active when we listen. We listen to music and break it down into structures and theory. This raises the question…
What structures should be deemed inherently “good”?
Question 2
Given that musicians listen to music “rationally” and non-musicians listen to music “emotionally”, how does that affect us as creators of music? Should it affect what we write? Should it affect how we present our music to others?
I don’t believe that there are definitively right or wrong answers to these questions, but I thought they were worth posing. Feel free to answer them to yourself or state your opinion as a comment on this blog. After I’ve given you all a little time to respond, I’ll add my own two cents.
I recently had the opportunity to chat with up-and-coming electronic music producer and DJ, Lucky Date (Jordan Atkins-Loria). He uses Reason to produce these fantastically phat dance tracks and remixes. Plus he regularly shares his production secrets on his YouTube channel, luckydatevideos. The music that he pumps out of Reason is truly inspirational, so I wanted to ask him about how he gets such a huge sound and what other software besides Reason is part of his production and DJ arsenal. He gave a great interview and had a lot of wonderful insight and advice. Watch out for Lucky Date, I predict he’ll be producing many mega-dance-floor hits in the coming years.
Since my last post I’ve been able to spend quite a bit of time sketching the piece. I’ve even decided on a title, “The Other Side.” The title is simply representing that this is something different than what I usually write. It’s really beginning to take shape. You can download a pdf of it below:
As I said in the last post, before I start orchestrating I usually like to know “where I’m going.” To this end I try to sketch in as many notes as I can, but the main idea is to get a sense of total form of the piece (intro, interludes, “A” sections, “B” sections, Solo sections and an ending if something presents itself). To me, this stage is usually the really hard part as ideas don’t always “magically appear” as much as we would hope they do. Even when they do, we still have to like them! (some of us are more critical about that than others)
Note the following within the sketch:
1. Measure numbers
2. Chord symbols (for my reference mainly)
3. Articulation where I hear it
4. Notes as to possible solo sections
5. Tempo marking
6. Possible solo and interlude sections
7. Mostly melody on the sketch with a few flourishes here and there. The next version will have more background ideas, fills, etc.
The next version will include the orchestration process. Let me know if you have any questions before then, though! In the meantime, have a good weekend,
There’s never a busier day on the publishing calendar than the day after a holiday, and the first working day after New Years is the mother of them all. Having had a nice two week break to sit and contemplate the future of music, the inadequacies of their present situation, the wealth of unexploited future classics sitting in their song catalogs, and the disturbing similarity between their circumstances this year and last, songwriters the world over wake up on the first day of the new working year with one single mission forefront in their minds:
CALL PUBLISHER!
I know this because I used to be a songwriter, and I did the same thing. Every year.
Of course, it’s only natural to want to reassess, re-organize, and restructure in order to get a fresh start on the new year. It’s what we should be doing, whether we’re songwriters or publishers. But often it’s too easy for songwriters to bring a list of complaints and goals to the conversation, without providing any ideas as to strategy. Likewise, too many publishers are prone to offer up a plan that’s amounts to more of the same—“keep writing, keep pitching and let’s hope we get that big break”. Both approaches leave a very good percentage chance that songwriter and publisher will be having the very same conversation next year. And no one needs that.
So what does it take to move things ahead in 2012? Of course, the detailed strategy will vary for every writer and publisher in every genre across every part of the world. Nevertheless, there are a few resolutions we can almost all agree to make, that will pay off regardless of our professional level or musical market.
In lieu of a champagne toast, I offer you a no-cost kickstarter for the new year:
12 Resolutions for 2012!
1. Get the paperwork right.
When I moved from being a songwriter to a music publisher, one of the great surprises was to see first-hand how much songwriter and publisher income vanishes every year due to paperwork errors, omissions and general sloppiness. Settle your split disputes, check your song registrations around the world, read your royalty statements, make sure your PRO (BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, PRS, etc) has your correct address. There’s no excuse for a paperwork error in publishing. Paperwork is pretty much what publishing is.
2. Expand your territory.
When investment-backed companies like BMG Rights make billion dollar investments in the music-publishing sector, one of the key motivators is the anticipated expansion of the global music market. And yet many songwriters and publishers, particularly in genres like country, hip-hop, r&b, and even rock rarely think about the world outside their own borders. Beef up your sub-pub relationships, check out internet radio to familiarize yourself with markets outside of your own territory, use YouTube and other tools to find talent all over the world. There’s almost always more than one geographical market for any type of music.
3. Don’t demo.
Songwriters are the only ones left still using the word. Rough work tapes for reference are fine. But when you record, make masters. That way you can license them to film & television, commercials, video games and other venues.
4. Live the single life.
Please…. no more unknown artists making their “album”. At this point, superstars are struggling to sell albums. We live in a singles market, so make singles—one memorable “hit” song will move your career further than a thousand interesting album tracks. Unless you’re Radiohead or Adele, put your focus on making singles.
5. Tighten your belt.
The tragic truth is, there’s a lot of money that’s gone out of music publishing over the past five years, and it’s not coming back. Plummeting mechanical income, some ugly days at the bargaining table for ASCAP and BMI, the complete bungling of the negotiations for the rates on “streaming” services, and wild, cutthroat competition in the sync world all add up to one thing: less. Less money for everyone, so get used to it. We’re all going to have to cut waste, reduce overhead, and eat fewer lunches at Bice. Let’s start with the cutting waste and reducing overhead part.
6. Loosen your grip.
Publishers like control—it’s our nature. But with more and more of the entertainment universe being covered by blanket licenses, rather than specific song by song licenses, we’re going to have to be willing to put our music out there, with less and less control over how it will be used. Whether it’s a homemade YouTube video made by a stranger or a mix on turntable.fm, songs are being used all the time—we’re just not being asked for permission. Those uses are what keep songs alive, even if it’s not yet something remotely profitable. But squeeze those songs too tight and you’ll kill ‘em.
7. Don’t sweat the small stuff.
In a world in which the income for publishers and songwriters has been cut drastically, we cannot continue to waste time on meaningless matters. Does the split dispute get settled at 17.5 percent or 20 percent? Unless the record goes 4x platinum, it just doesn’t matter. Someone changed a line in the lyrics without permission? Just hope a listener is paying enough attention to notice. What matters is what makes money. All else can be ignored.
8. Put your head in the clouds.
For better or worse, the industry is embracing new cloud-based streaming services like Spotify, which means that iTunes will soon be going the way of Tower Records. Given that this technology didn’t exactly sneak up on us, one might have hoped that the same mistakes made with mp3s might have been avoided this time around. Incredibly, the record companies managed to get this one right, while the publisher’s income seems to be lost somewhere in the grey, murky ether. But publishers are going to have to figure out how to turn this technology into something profitable, or the only clouds we’ll be seeing will be those we pass as we plummet to our demise. This is the battleground for the next five years.
9. Don’t lose that syncing feeling.
Welcome to the only game in town. In the past ten years, the focus of publishing has shifted almost entirely, from records and radio, to film, television and advertising. At this point, the transition is complete, and the sync world is the one that every songwriter and publisher has to be a part of. Depending on the style of music you work with, it might be video games, advertisements, source music libraries, branding campaigns, television spots or web-based advertising programs. But your business has to have some strategy for licensing your music in sync uses.
10. Get the money in.
Easier said than done. It now seems that every record label uses songs without mechanical licenses in place, theater shows routinely drop songs into a revue without clearing the dramatic rights, advertisers sign sync licenses long after ads are on the air, and everyone pays late, if at all. It takes a new kind of tenacity to get paid, and only those who are the most persistent, the most unrelenting, and the nastiest will get their money. You can’t just put your registrations in place and wait for the payment to show up. Those who snooze will be abused.
11. Move your business beyond music.
Despite a slightly better year in 2011, the writing is on the wall: the music business is in an almost permanent state of contraction. It simply is no longer the singular cultural defining force that it was 30 years ago. The good news is, the entertainment business as a whole is growing constantly, from new cable channels to internet tv to virtual worlds to a myriad of different venues for live entertainment. The best news is, music remains a vital element in almost every entertainment form. Sometimes it’s okay to be the supporting actor. Music publishers who rely solely on the music business can’t survive. Better to be one small part of the larger industry of show business.
12. Move your music beyond business.
Clearly 2011 was the year of Adele. Coming out of an environment knee-deep in Dr. Luke sound-alike records and generic auto-tuned voices over a Euro dance track, “21” was a breath of fresh air that above all else, sounded honest. Public taste always swings like a pendulum and one can be sure that whatever is popular in 2011 will change to at least some degree in 2012. But Adele’s triumph signals a move away from things that sound blatantly contrived. Songwriters are going to have to be more subtle, more daring, and dig a little deeper. Music that sounds more like a marketing strategy than a song may be on its way out.
Everything always looks good at the start. I’m sure that for all of us, 2012 will have its high points and low points, and enough inspiration and frustration to keep us all battling for the next 12 months. Still, now is a moment to make some plans beyond just calling your publisher, or assuring your songwriter that this could be his or her big year. Here’s to making, not letting, things happen in 2012. Happy weaseling in the new year!
Hey there everyone, I just started my new course Composing and Producing Electronic music, and I am totally excited. In preparing for the course I made a series of videos using Ableton Live, you may have seen them featured on the Ableton site. Well as a present for visiting me here you can download the live set and experiment with the sounds yourself, enjoy!
It has been several weeks since my post, but in the meantime I’ve gotten quite a bit organized. In my last post I had determined an “A” melody, a variation and a “B” or contrasting melody and a variation. I also provided some accompaniment ideas. Now it is time to start organizing these ideas.
It can be helpful to think about this in a “conceptual” way. In other words, writing in text where you want certain things to happen – like a basic road map. I like to describe it in terms of traveling – we know we are going to take a trip by car from say Boston to Los Angeles, a distance of around 3,000 miles (this could be likened to the completed piece we are going to compose). We also know that we are going to stop in several cities along the way such as Philadelphia, Nashville, Memphis, Dallas, Fort Worth, Albuquerque, Phoenix, Flagstaff, Barstow and finally Los Angeles (similar to introduction, verses, choruses, solo sections, interludes and ending in our piece). What we don’t know is where we will stay in each city, where we will eat, take in any museums/sporting events or what we will do along the way. This type of detail would equate to the notes, harmony, accidentals, dynamics etc of our piece – the fine tuning!
So far, I’ve come up with the following layout:
Intro – A – A1 – B – B1 – Interlude (based on Intro) – A – A1 – B – B1 – Interlude (new harmony) A – A1 – First Improvised Solo (new harmony section 1 + A & A) – Second Improvised Solo (B – B) – Third Improvised Solo (new harmony section 2 + A & A) – B – B1 – A – A1 – Ending
A = verse, A1 = verse with a variation, B = chorus, B1 = chorus with a variation
Both the A & B type sections are 8 measures long. I don’t know how long the Interlude and new harmony sections are going to be yet, but I am going to use these sections as a way to keep the listener interested (I hope!). We’ll see how this goes.
When I lay it out like this, one thing that strikes me is that depending on the tempo, the piece is going to be long. This should be okay though as I am creating a piece that is 8-10 minutes in length. I also allowed for three improvised soloists. Being that the overall form of the piece is long, three improvised solos should be fine as long as the solos are performed on contrasting instruments and the ideas behind the solos are varied.
Since my last post I’ve also been able to finalize the instrumentation. Deciding on this also helped me work through the overall form because I will engage players that can improvise as jazz or rock players do. I will use the following instruments:
1. Harp, 2. Flute, 3. English Horn, 4. Clarinet, 5. Violin and 6. Acoustic bass
Important note: Always keep in mind that at anytime during the composition and orchestration processes to come, the above form and ideas can change as you might have a better idea as you really get to know your piece. But, by doing the above work first I at least have an idea about how I want to approach the overall form. Now, to start deciding where we will eat and stay on our hypothetical trip – the musical details!
This post is the first in a series I call “Tone Profiles”. This will be a periodic post that that features artists who have something valuable to say about electric guitar tone. This week the artist is Julien Kasper and you should know about him, because this guy knows tone! Enjoy!
JULIEN KASPER BIO:
“Soul, groove, melody, tone, and the element of surprise are my priorities as a composer and an improviser… as a guitarist I am coming equally from the schools of rock, jazz, and blues.” (Guitar World, October 2007) The subject was Julien Kasper’s 2006 CD The New Imperial and with the release of his latest effort Trance Groove, Julien has upped the ante while remaining true to his vision.
As with The New Imperial (Nugene Records, 2006) and Flipping Time (Toulcat Records, 2003), on Trance Groove Julien’s guitar is the nuanced, expressive singing voice of this all instrumental journey. Funky grooves, catchy melodies, psychedelic soundscapes, soulful gospel blues, epic rock guitar, and a stunning acoustic ballad coexist with rare, natural continuity.
Trance Groove features a guest appearance by Hammond B3 organist T Lavitz of the Dixie Dregs, Widespread Panic, and Jazz is Dead. Live and on record Julien’s choice of rhythm section reflects his aesthetic of groove and group interaction. Bassist Jesse Williams and drummer Zac Casher have, between them, performed and/or recorded with a who’s who of American roots and groove masters: Johnny Adams, Duke Robillard, Mighty Sam McClain, Immani Coppala, Mighty Sam McClain, D’Angelo, Jay McShann, Henry Butler, and countless others.
The international community of blues and jazz fans became aware of Julien through his work with pianist and Hammond B-3 organist Bruce Katz on their extensive tours throughout the US and Europe. He recorded two CDs with the Bruce Katz Band on Audioquest: Mississippi Moan and Three Feet off the Ground. Julien has also recorded with Mighty Sam McClain: Journey and Soul Survivor on Telarc.
Julien was born in France in 1962 to American parents and spent his youth as an army child moving around the American south. Inspired by Bob Dylan and the Beatles, he took up the guitar at the age of eight. In 1978 at sixteen, while living in Tallahassee, Florida, Julien began touring with the legendary blues/rock band Crosscut Saw featuring harmonica virtuoso and singer Pat Ramsey. After several years and one album (recently reissued on Akarma), Julien decided to seek more challenging musical terrain. He moved to the fertile music town of Austin, TX where he gigged constantly, honing his skill among the city’s heavy hitting players for four years.
Despite the great musicians in Austin, Julien was frustrated by the lack of a vibrant jazz scene so he accepted a scholarship to attend the jazz program at the University of Miami. He put himself through school playing with IKO IKO, the house band at Tobacco Road, Miami’s blues and roots mecca, which allowed him to share the stage with a who’s who of blues legends and touring artists. An improvisational blues/jam band, IKO IKO gave Julien the opportunity to develop and organically integrate the advanced concepts he was learning in school into his virtuosic blues/rock sound. After graduating from UM Julien received another offer too good to refuse – a jazz guitar fellowship at University of North Texas – which brought him back to Texas in 1992 to complete his Master’s degree. While in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area Julien expanded his musical boundaries by gigging in country, blues, rock, and jazz groups and launching the first edition of the Julien Kasper Band with drummer Keith Carlock (Steely Dan, Sting, Wayne Krantz).
Julien is now based in Boston, Massachusetts where, in addition to writing, performing, and recording his original music, he is a professor on the guitar faculty at Berklee College of Music and an avid all-season surfer. “The Berklee gig is ideal in that I can impart my values and extensive performance experience to younger generations of talented musicians while interacting with a faculty of renowned international artists. The school encourages me to tour and record as my professional profile serves to enhance the reputation of the college and my own artistry. Surfing brings me into elemental contact with nature. Riding a wave is interaction with pure energy and the closest thing I can find to musical improvisation in that technique, knowledge, and experience all are at play but, ultimately, one must improvise and react to the purity of each passing moment.”
————
JULIEN’S THOUGHTS ON TONE:
I don’t consider myself a gear head or a vintage snob but it seems to have turned out that the gear that helps me realize the tones in my mind’s ear is usually vintage or of vintage pedigree. I grew up playing a Strat through a Fuzz Face, Echoplex, and an old four input Marshall. I love the unforgiving clarity, honesty, and anarchic nature of this rig and it continues to be the center of my tone universe. My music and playing have evolved to embrace a more chromatic aesthetic but my basic rig remains the same. I strive to hone my technique so that complex lines pop out of such an unforgiving rig with power and clarity but I love to turn on dime and unleash the fury that is lurking just under a small twist of the guitar volume knob.
JULIEN’S GUITARS:
My primary guitars are Stratocasters either one of a couple of older Fenders or amazing strat style instruments made by D’Pergo. I seek a combination of warmth, responsiveness, and extreme clarity, which is hard to find on most guitars, particularly newer Fenders. D’Pergo has created recipes to make this happen with every guitar he builds. My main gigging guitar right now is a D’Pergo Signature Limited, which has an enormous maple neck with no truss rod. In the studio I’m likely to grab a Tele, SG, or Les Paul on the spur of the moment, to make myself play differently or to better serve the track. Occasionally I’ll bring a Gibson on a gig to use on a few tunes.
JULIEN’S AMPS:
I prefer the natural response of simple low gain vintage amps without master volumes, channel switching, or reverb. I record overdriven sounds with high wattage vintage Marshalls or a Vox AC-30 but usually gig with lower wattage amps as the volume curve in just about every venue has dropped so dramatically. In the studio I love the clean tones of small vintage amps – a Fender Princeton, tweed Deluxe, tweed Champ, and Vox AC-10 cover the clean tones on Trance Groove. I generally use the stock speakers originally intended for the amps.
My live set up has changed since recording Trance Groove. The new material has a broad array of clean textures so I have converted to a two amp rig which consists of either a Vox AC10 or Marshall 1974x 18-watt combo for overdrive tones and either a Vox AC30, a modified Fender Bassman, or a Fender tweed Bandmaster for clean sounds.
One piece of new gear that has become indispensable to me is the Faustine Phantom attenuator. It the first attenuator I’ve found that doesn’t destroy the tone and the feel of an amp. Venue size permitting, it has allowed me to return to my higher wattage amps live and for really small rooms I’ve successfully used it with my 18 watt Marshall. I’m also using the Faustine as a load box/ D.I. in my home studio. The speaker emulation circuit in the attenuator works quite well and I’m experimenting with impulse response speaker modeling in conjunction with the D.I.
JULIEN’S PEDALS:
My pedals constantly change depending on amp selection but I always use some form of Fuzz, boost, and delay. For color I’ll add an Octavio, tremolo, Univibe, and occasionally chorus. I avoid overdrive pedals because I’m so accustomed to natural cranked amp overdrive and nothing comes close to that. However, when I’m forced to play through a clean and/or horrible amp for a fly in gig or clinic I’ll use a JAM Rattler or a Xotic AC Comp.
Fuzzes: Custom Jeorge Tripps (Dunlop) Fuzz Faces, JAM Fuzz Phrase, Fulltone Soulbender and ’69 Deluxe, JAM Red Muck, Dunlop Octavio, MJM Roctavios
This post is the first in a series I call “Tone Profiles”. This will be a periodic post that that features artists who have something valuable to say about electric guitar tone. This week the artist is Julien Kasper and you should know about him, because this guy knows tone! Enjoy!
JULIEN KASPER BIO:
“Soul, groove, melody, tone, and the element of surprise are my priorities as a composer and an improviser… as a guitarist I am coming equally from the schools of rock, jazz, and blues.” (Guitar World, October 2007) The subject was Julien Kasper’s 2006 CD The New Imperial and with the release of his latest effort Trance Groove, Julien has upped the ante while remaining true to his vision.
As with The New Imperial (Nugene Records, 2006) and Flipping Time (Toulcat Records, 2003), on Trance Groove Julien’s guitar is the nuanced, expressive singing voice of this all instrumental journey. Funky grooves, catchy melodies, psychedelic soundscapes, soulful gospel blues, epic rock guitar, and a stunning acoustic ballad coexist with rare, natural continuity.
Trance Groove features a guest appearance by Hammond B3 organist T Lavitz of the Dixie Dregs, Widespread Panic, and Jazz is Dead. Live and on record Julien’s choice of rhythm section reflects his aesthetic of groove and group interaction. Bassist Jesse Williams and drummer Zac Casher have, between them, performed and/or recorded with a who’s who of American roots and groove masters: Johnny Adams, Duke Robillard, Mighty Sam McClain, Immani Coppala, Mighty Sam McClain, D’Angelo, Jay McShann, Henry Butler, and countless others.
The international community of blues and jazz fans became aware of Julien through his work with pianist and Hammond B-3 organist Bruce Katz on their extensive tours throughout the US and Europe. He recorded two CDs with the Bruce Katz Band on Audioquest: Mississippi Moan and Three Feet off the Ground. Julien has also recorded with Mighty Sam McClain: Journey and Soul Survivor on Telarc.
Julien was born in France in 1962 to American parents and spent his youth as an army child moving around the American south. Inspired by Bob Dylan and the Beatles, he took up the guitar at the age of eight. In 1978 at sixteen, while living in Tallahassee, Florida, Julien began touring with the legendary blues/rock band Crosscut Saw featuring harmonica virtuoso and singer Pat Ramsey. After several years and one album (recently reissued on Akarma), Julien decided to seek more challenging musical terrain. He moved to the fertile music town of Austin, TX where he gigged constantly, honing his skill among the city’s heavy hitting players for four years.
Despite the great musicians in Austin, Julien was frustrated by the lack of a vibrant jazz scene so he accepted a scholarship to attend the jazz program at the University of Miami. He put himself through school playing with IKO IKO, the house band at Tobacco Road, Miami’s blues and roots mecca, which allowed him to share the stage with a who’s who of blues legends and touring artists. An improvisational blues/jam band, IKO IKO gave Julien the opportunity to develop and organically integrate the advanced concepts he was learning in school into his virtuosic blues/rock sound. After graduating from UM Julien received another offer too good to refuse – a jazz guitar fellowship at University of North Texas – which brought him back to Texas in 1992 to complete his Master’s degree. While in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area Julien expanded his musical boundaries by gigging in country, blues, rock, and jazz groups and launching the first edition of the Julien Kasper Band with drummer Keith Carlock (Steely Dan, Sting, Wayne Krantz).
Julien is now based in Boston, Massachusetts where, in addition to writing, performing, and recording his original music, he is a professor on the guitar faculty at Berklee College of Music and an avid all-season surfer. “The Berklee gig is ideal in that I can impart my values and extensive performance experience to younger generations of talented musicians while interacting with a faculty of renowned international artists. The school encourages me to tour and record as my professional profile serves to enhance the reputation of the college and my own artistry. Surfing brings me into elemental contact with nature. Riding a wave is interaction with pure energy and the closest thing I can find to musical improvisation in that technique, knowledge, and experience all are at play but, ultimately, one must improvise and react to the purity of each passing moment.”
————
JULIEN’S THOUGHTS ON TONE:
I don’t consider myself a gear head or a vintage snob but it seems to have turned out that the gear that helps me realize the tones in my mind’s ear is usually vintage or of vintage pedigree. I grew up playing a Strat through a Fuzz Face, Echoplex, and an old four input Marshall. I love the unforgiving clarity, honesty, and anarchic nature of this rig and it continues to be the center of my tone universe. My music and playing have evolved to embrace a more chromatic aesthetic but my basic rig remains the same. I strive to hone my technique so that complex lines pop out of such an unforgiving rig with power and clarity but I love to turn on dime and unleash the fury that is lurking just under a small twist of the guitar volume knob.
JULIEN’S GUITARS:
My primary guitars are Stratocasters either one of a couple of older Fenders or amazing strat style instruments made by D’Pergo. I seek a combination of warmth, responsiveness, and extreme clarity, which is hard to find on most guitars, particularly newer Fenders. D’Pergo has created recipes to make this happen with every guitar he builds. My main gigging guitar right now is a D’Pergo Signature Limited, which has an enormous maple neck with no truss rod. In the studio I’m likely to grab a Tele, SG, or Les Paul on the spur of the moment, to make myself play differently or to better serve the track. Occasionally I’ll bring a Gibson on a gig to use on a few tunes.
JULIEN’S AMPS:
I prefer the natural response of simple low gain vintage amps without master volumes, channel switching, or reverb. I record overdriven sounds with high wattage vintage Marshalls or a Vox AC-30 but usually gig with lower wattage amps as the volume curve in just about every venue has dropped so dramatically. In the studio I love the clean tones of small vintage amps – a Fender Princeton, tweed Deluxe, tweed Champ, and Vox AC-10 cover the clean tones on Trance Groove. I generally use the stock speakers originally intended for the amps.
My live set up has changed since recording Trance Groove. The new material has a broad array of clean textures so I have converted to a two amp rig which consists of either a Vox AC10 or Marshall 1974x 18-watt combo for overdrive tones and either a Vox AC30, a modified Fender Bassman, or a Fender tweed Bandmaster for clean sounds.
One piece of new gear that has become indispensable to me is the Faustine Phantom attenuator. It the first attenuator I’ve found that doesn’t destroy the tone and the feel of an amp. Venue size permitting, it has allowed me to return to my higher wattage amps live and for really small rooms I’ve successfully used it with my 18 watt Marshall. I’m also using the Faustine as a load box/ D.I. in my home studio. The speaker emulation circuit in the attenuator works quite well and I’m experimenting with impulse response speaker modeling in conjunction with the D.I.
JULIEN’S PEDALS:
My pedals constantly change depending on amp selection but I always use some form of Fuzz, boost, and delay. For color I’ll add an Octavio, tremolo, Univibe, and occasionally chorus. I avoid overdrive pedals because I’m so accustomed to natural cranked amp overdrive and nothing comes close to that. However, when I’m forced to play through a clean and/or horrible amp for a fly in gig or clinic I’ll use a JAM Rattler or a Xotic AC Comp.
Fuzzes: Custom Jeorge Tripps (Dunlop) Fuzz Faces, JAM Fuzz Phrase, Fulltone Soulbender and ’69 Deluxe, JAM Red Muck, Dunlop Octavio, MJM Roctavios
Recently had an opportunity to spend a very impressive evening at Berklee College of Music’s “Perfect Pitch” event, which matched student songwriters with student vocalists for a concert that gave hope to any of us planning to stick around the pop music business for the next five years. Out of a dozen or so songs, there were at least three or four songs with real radio potential, and a couple of potential stars among the performers. That’s a percentage that would satisfy any A&R person or publisher.
However, what was even more satisfying was the acknowledgement implicit in the structure of the event itself, which was that pitching songs is no longer a business of sending out mp3 files or cold-calling A&R execs. A perfect pitch is now about artist development, finding performance opportunities, building a story and measuring results. I took onthe same subject in my own “Perfect Pitch” event, at the New York Songwriters Collective, in October. Songwriters sending out demos to record execs or managers because they “have a song that’s perfect for your artist” are missing the point. No one’s looking for songs.
In the new music eco-system, there are 3 things the music industry needs, and the success or failure of any songwriter’s pitch can be predicted almost entirely on the basis of how many of those 3 things are in place. If you can provide a clean sweep of 3 out of 3, you’ll likely be signing a deal memo before leaving the building. If you’ve got 2 out of 3, you will probably get an offer, though it might not be exactly the deal you were hoping for. Bring only one out of three and the best you can hope for is a polite invitation to come back sometime in the distant future. Here are the three things that every weasel wants and will pay for—the essential components to a “Perfect Pitch”:
1. Product
This just means ready-made artists and productions—records that are ready to go. In case you didn’t get the memo, major music companies are no longer in the business of developing artists or “making records”. A&R staffs have been slashed, and frankly, the track records of most A&R people were abysmal anyway. Record labels and even publishers today are looking for people who have product in hand—artists who they’ve developed, records they’re releasing, shows they’re producing. Don’t bring demos. No one in the record business even knows what those are. Bring product.
2. Platforms.
Every artist needs a platform—or three. A platform is a stage, but not in the obvious way. It just means a venue for exposure, a way of reaching an audience. For about eight decades now, radio has been the dominant “platform” for breaking new artists, and while it remains important, it’s certainly no longer the only game in town. In most cases, radio is simply too limited, too expensive and too difficult to control to be the sole platform for an artist. You need some other ways to expose the artist to the public: mixtapes, club play, a television talent show, a spot on Glee, a touring spot, a YouTube video. Needless to say, songwriters and artists that can bring with them a platform, whether it’s a writer/producer like David Guetta, who also can use his status as a superstar DJ to give an artist and record exposure, or an actress/singer with a Disney show, or a band with a guest spot on a prominent tour, are bringing their labels and publishers a big head start.
3. Proof
Not only has the internet brought a vast array of potential new platforms, it has also brought the ability to measure results in a very precise and visible way. The blather of a manager hyping the band’s live show (“you gotta see the crowd reaction—the girls go nuts for these kids…”) is now just so much white noise—much of the proof is plain to see: How many YouTube views? Facebook friends? What are the sales figures like? How many Twitter followers?
Of course there are varying degrees of proof. As many labels have learned the hard way, 500, 000 Facebook friends, signing up free of charge, will not necessarily put gold records on the walls. Ticket sales and downloads speak much louder than YouTube views. Nevertheless, an artist or producer with a platform that delivers proven results, whether it’s a Top Ten Nielsen rating or a buzz on the key blogs, has the kind of story that A&R people want to hear, and to believe.
At the risk of raising songwriter cynicism to new levels, it’s worth noting that the actual quality of the music itself is not necessarily a predominating factor in any of these three elements. Presumably, a badly made recording of a meaningless song performed by an uninteresting artist will not find many readily available platforms, and even if it does, it will not gather the kind of reaction that proves its suitability to the market. On the other hand, stranger stuff has happened.
The truth is, most modern music execs are neither qualified or interested in being Simon Cowell-like judges of talent. If there is a proven audience for a particular piece of product, and there is a way of getting that product to the audience, that’s enough to greenlight a project at any record company or publisher still left in business. Whether it’s an artist like Drake, who brought a story of success from platforms like mixtapes and Degrassi, or Karmin, who signed their deal at Epic on the strength of a YouTube buzz, the contemporary songwriter needs more to their business model than just a bag full of demos, regardless of the quality of them. If the business is now about product, platforms and proof, then a songwriter has to be:
1. Producer
Producers make product. They are talent magnets; they are people that develop talent.
This does not necessarily mean that you have to be a “producer” in the sense of being able to create records. If you’re a lyricist or a topline writer, or someone who can write but doesn’t really know anything about record making, then you’ll need to team with someone who can do those things. Your role will be to write songs that define the artist and give them a reason for existing. Just as not every songwriter is a record-maker, not everyone who can program and mix is a producer in the sense of having a vision, drawing out and developing an artist, and giving a project a unique identity. But however you and/or your team go about accomplishing it, the business now requires both elements, the song and the record, in order to create a product that anyone actually needs or wants.
2. Partner
You can make product by yourself. But no one develops a platform by themselves. Syco can make records all day, but they can’t develop a TV show like X-Factor on their own. Drake can write songs and sing them, but he can’t break on a mixtape without featuring Lil Wayne, or Trey Songz, or others. DJs need singers, singers need television talent shows, rappers need guest spots, bands need opening slots on tours. As Dean Martin put it, everybody needs somebody sometimes. If you want a platform, you have to build it by working with others.
In a larger sense, this means that songwriters need to be in the entertainment business, not in the music business. The entertainment business is growing, in areas including TV, cable, internet TV, film, games, internet content, books, fashion, and clubs. Songs are a part of almost every entertainment form, and opportunities for music will continue to grow. But you cannot live in a music business vacuum. First, you have to create product. Then you must learn to partner, in order to build a platform. And if you want to be able to provide proof that your product and platform work, you’re going to have to be a:
3. Promoter
In the big sense of the word. You, or your partners, are going to have to take the initial steps to get your product into the world, at least in some limited way. Maybe it’s a local release, or a test market, or a pilot, or small tour, or a mixtape. But YOU will have to be the catalyst to make something happen and to show that what you’re doing connects with people. You can’t just write the songs, you’re going to have to pitch them and place a few—at least enough to show that they’re placeable. You will have to put your artist in a place where they can develop a following, whether it’s YouTube or a residency or a foreign release.
That’s what I liked best about Berklee’s “Perfect Pitch”. Here was a group of songwriters happily embracing each of the challenges in the creative process. Not just the challenge of writing a great song, but finding an artist to present the song, putting together a performance venue to create a platform for the music, and soliciting the reaction of a live audience and industry judges to gather some proof that the product was hitting its mark.
Even better, it showed a creative community networking amongst each other to find the singers, producers, arrangers, background vocalists, organizers and musicians needed to put the whole show together. More than any of the talent on display that night, and there was a considerable amount, that willingness to partner and collaborate will be the key to these students’ future success. Compliments to Berklee’s Songwriting club, and to the faculty that supported them, in putting together an exciting look at what the next generation has in store for the music business…
Happy Holidays everyone! Thanks for all your support for this blog, and I look forward to catching up with you in 2012. Keep weaseling…
Now that I’ve got contrasting A & B ideas started it is time to think about accompaniment for them.
While composing these melodies, ideas were floating around in my head as to the rhythms and harmony. Indeed, it is never an exact “step by step” process to compose music. In most cases the general idea for the accompaniment will come while you are working on the melody because the melody is suggesting the style. Sometimes you might have an idea for accompaniment first (like a groove) and then write a melody that fits. However, note that I said “general idea” because once you focus on the aspect of accompaniment you will determine more of the detail.
In the last post I presented a basic accompaniment, but that one idea isn’t going to stay interesting for a whole piece. The accompaniment doesn’t have to change radically every time we hear it, but like the melody, it should change at least a little bit to keep the overall sound fresh to the listener (and the players!). Listed below are some ways we can alter the melody or accompaniment:
1. Alter the rhythm (even slightly).
2. Alter the pitches (add passing tones between the target pitches).
3. Alter the harmony (use different chords for the same melody).
4. Add additional lines within the accompaniment.
5. Add rests to keep a repetitive part from getting boring – the listener and the player.
Below I’ve illustrated variations created for this piece. As a review, I’ve first uploaded the melody and basic accompaniment:
Next, I’ve uploaded the first variation of the above original and basic accompaniment. Note that the difference in the first A sections is in the melodic aspect of the bass line. I’m a bass player at heart so it is second nature for me to try and find ways to make the bass line more interesting (hopefully without getting in the way of the melody!). In the B sections, the upper part of the grand staff part gets a bit more rhythmic while the bass part gets less rhythmic.
I’ve also created a 2nd variation of the accompaniment for this new piece. Depending on the length of the composition I may need other variations as well, but between the original accompaniment and these two variations I’ve got a good amount of source material to get started with. The differences in this variation are more active rhythms and harmonizing lines within the accompaniment.
The next step is to start bringing together the elements I’ve created so far into a piece of music. The performance is getting closer (February 27th) and I’d like to have a rehearsal before that just to really hear what I’ve created and get critical feedback from the players – I better get some serious writing done!
Now that I’ve got contrasting A & B ideas started it is time to think about accompaniment for them.
While composing these melodies, ideas were floating around in my head as to the rhythms and harmony. Indeed, it is never an exact “step by step” process to compose music. In most cases the general idea for the accompaniment will come while you are working on the melody because the melody is suggesting the style. Sometimes you might have an idea for accompaniment first (like a groove) and then write a melody that fits. However, note that I said “general idea” because once you focus on the aspect of accompaniment you will determine more of the detail.
In the last post I presented a basic accompaniment, but that one idea isn’t going to stay interesting for a whole piece. The accompaniment doesn’t have to change radically every time we hear it, but like the melody, it should change at least a little bit to keep the overall sound fresh to the listener (and the players!). Listed below are some ways we can alter the melody or accompaniment:
1. Alter the rhythm (even slightly).
2. Alter the pitches (add passing tones between the target pitches).
3. Alter the harmony (use different chords for the same melody).
4. Add additional lines within the accompaniment.
5. Add rests to keep a repetitive part from getting boring – the listener and the player.
Below I’ve illustrated variations created for this piece. As a review, I’ve first uploaded the melody and basic accompaniment:
Next, I’ve uploaded the first variation of the above original and basic accompaniment. Note that the difference in the first A sections is in the melodic aspect of the bass line. I’m a bass player at heart so it is second nature for me to try and find ways to make the bass line more interesting (hopefully without getting in the way of the melody!). In the B sections, the upper part of the grand staff part gets a bit more rhythmic while the bass part gets less rhythmic. The audio can be found at:
I’ve also created a 2nd variation of the accompaniment for this new piece. Depending on the length of the composition I may need other variations as well, but between the original accompaniment and these two variations I’ve got a good amount of source material to get started with. The differences in this variation are more active rhythms and harmonizing lines within the accompaniment.
The next step is to start bringing together the elements I’ve created so far into a piece of music. The performance is getting closer (February 27th) and I’d like to have a rehearsal before that just to really hear what I’ve created and get critical feedback from the players – I better get some serious writing done!
The Nocturne series at MUTEK are club nights that focus more on dance music and concert sets, and are held at Metropolis, a large Montreal concert club. Headlining acts were scheduled Wednesday through Saturday nights, and a smaller lounge, the Savoy Room, hosted mostly Canadian up-and-coming artists. Metropolis was used for shows at last year’s MUTEK, but one clear difference was a serious upgrade in the hardware used for this year’s visual presentations. While last year’s sets all used concert lighting, this year’s addition of multi-projector HD video enhanced the overall experience. Not all the acts took full advantage of this, but the ones that did ended up being the most memorable performances.
The biggest event of the MUTEK came the first night with Amon Tobin’s North American debut of ISAM. While the CD itself is a sound design tour-de-force, the visuals for the show were nothing short of spectacular. The stage set was a structure made of 3D shapes that served as display surfaces for multiple streams of video and lighting effects. The entire show was tightly scripted and the visual portion of the show was integrated with the music. The imagery ranged from abstract video, to live footage, and pure color. Throughout the show these elements were intertwined with the music. Amon Tobin himself was in a control room in the middle of the structure. Translucent material revealed only his shadow. While what he was doing was never really clear, the effect was of some sort of alien DJ directing the entire show from mission control. From an audience perspective, the show was about the music and visuals, and Tobin’s presence was merely a validation of “liveness.” It didn’t really matter what he was doing, he was there.
Amon Tobin ISAM
One of the most visible electronic artists performing these days is Ritchie Hawtin, also know as Plastikman. Originally from Canada, and a seminal part of the early Detroit electronic music scene, MUTEK was excited to host Hawtin’s Plastikman Live show for the first time in Canada. Hawtin is known as a prolific producer and DJ. With Plastikman Live he’s focused on providing the audience with an immersive sonic, visual and cyber experience. Onstage, Hawtin is surrounded by a metallic mesh scrim that serves as a surface for projected images. Unlike Tobin’s ISAM that incorporates video clips, Hawtin’s show uses mainly computer generated images and lighting effects. The audience sees Hawtin inside the scrim, surrounded by gear, and clearly in control of the musical material. There’s an element of showmanship here with clear references to Rock/Pop stage theatrics.
Plastikman at MUTEK 2011
Hawtin has taken the idea of performance further by using social media as a way to engage his audience. There are two Plastikman iPhone apps available, Remixx and SYNK. SYNK was developed specifically to be used with a WiFi system set up at Plastikman performances, and allows the audience to interact with each other, as well as Hawtin, during a performance. Although SYNK is touted on his website, there was no evidence of its use at MUTEK this year.
Audiences need to respond to artists in a live setting, and one of the main differences between electronic artists and DJs is that an audience expects a certain level of performance from an electronic artist that they don’t from a DJ. Both Tobin and Hawtin are clearly sensitive to this, and although they have both performed as DJs, their current touring shows are designed to provide the element of “liveness” that an audience demands in a concert setting.
While ISAM and Plastikman Live were standout performances at MUTEK this year, and made full use of the A/V technology available, other artists performing on the Metropolis main stage were world-class. Modeselektor curated a club night at MUTEK, as they did for the 2011 CTM festival in Berlin, as part of their Modeselektion tour. The artists chosen for the evening either reflected Modeselektor’s musical tastes, or were upcoming artists they are producing. The duo hails from Berlin and their music reflects the kind of electro dance music that arose in post-reunification Germany. Their studio productions are solidly crafted, and their performance was mainly a DJ set. On-stage they are more party provocateurs than performing musicians. They hosted a strong bill of similar artists, with the exception of Anstam, who performed a solo laptop set that was much darker, with a heavy IDM/glitch influence. His set began with an ambient feel and progressed to a pulsing groove that served as an underpinning for some fresh sound design. His performance style was in stark contrast to the groove-happy Modeselektor, as he came across as more of a serious artist, more engrossed in manipulating sound than an entertainer.
The styles presented as part of the Nocturne series ranged from old-school House to Dub-Step to Minimalist Techno. Standout artists for me were Badawi, Four-Tet, and Gold Panda. Badawi mixes elements of world music with rhythms that strayed from the typical four-on-the-floor dance cannon. Four-Tet, a.k.a Keiran Hebden often performs with a live drummer, but for MUTEK this year, he went with solo laptop. He’s perhaps best known as a remix artist working with artists like Radiohead and Aphex Twin. His set reflected a kind of free-association of audio clips, undoubtedly in Ableton Live. He works with a wide range of source samples, from Folk to Jazz to Techno, however his set was surprisingly cohesive and offered unexpected twists and turns. Gold Panda is another artist who uses unexpected sound design elements in his set, more from a Hip Hop/LoFi perspective. All of these artists have established profiles but have yet to reach the level where they are able to incorporate high-end visuals. Nonetheless, the festival stage lighting was able to create distinct moods for each, making their performances more interesting visually.
Note that in measures 9-12 I have placed the melody an octave higher than measures 1-4. This is a simple way to restate the idea. Composers have been using this technique for centuries. When you factor orchestration into the equation, the effect can be quite profound (more on that later). I also wrote a little glissando to get up to the first note of the second statement of this melodic phrase.
Putting both the A & B” sections together sounds like this:
Now I’ve got an “A” and a “B” section that I’m reasonably happy with. I think I’ll start putting this together (Intro ideas, how many A’s and B’s etc.) and see where it takes me.
Debbie and Friends has a song on an album that was nominated for a 2011 Grammy Award in the Children’s Music Category! “Walk Away” is our song on the anti-bullying compilation called All About Bullies Big And Small. It is one of five nominees for Best Children’s Album this year! The winner will be announced at the 54th Annual Grammy Awards Ceremony on Feb. 12.
Here’s the cartoon music video version of our song that is on the nominated CD.
I participated in a panel at MIT a couple weeks back, discussing the future of music with some folks I have a ton of respect for: Nancy Baym (University of Kansas), João Brasil (Brazilian artist), Chuck Fromm (Worship Leader Media), Erin McKeown (musical artist and fellow with the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University) and Brian Whitman (The Echo Nest). The Futures of Entertainment folks just made the video available. It’s long (two hours!) but I think we covered a fair amount of ground without getting boring.
Here are two visions for the future, one from Corning and one from me. The Corning video is from earlier this year and shows their vision for a visually connected communications environment. This is not unlike the future that Gerd Leonhard and I described in the Future of Music in 2005.
Can you imagine organizing your daily schedule with a few touches on your bathroom mirror? Chatting with far-away relatives through interactive video on your kitchen counter? Reading a classic novel on a whisper-thin piece of flexible glass?
The video depicts a world in which interactive glass surfaces help you stay connected through seamless delivery of real-time information – whether you’re working, shopping, eating, or relaxing.
Does the world showcased in “A Day Made of Glass” seem like something out of a fantasy movie? Just a decade ago, pay phones, VCRs, and film cameras were also commonplace. Today, we’re accustomed to movies streaming on demand to a 60-inch television hanging on the wall and to video calls on notebook computers, essentially for free.
What might this mean for music? Well, today we have Spotify and Rdio and Mog all providing on demand music for free or nearly for free. Listen to this vision for the future and see how far we have come in the past 5 or 6 years from our book on the Future of Music.
Last year I posted some of my thoughts and processes while I was working on “Innocent Wonder.” I’m working on a new piece, so thought I would run the risk of doing the same thing again since it brings up a lot of issues that composers all face.
The scenario:
I was asked to write a piece for a concert in late February 2012 here at Berklee. It will be on a program with other pieces. No parameters were given other than length – perhaps around 10 minutes. This means that the instrumentation, style and tempo is up to me. I know that the stage is not large however, so will need to keep the size of the ensemble small – no more than 10 players. The leader of the concert, Peter Cokkinias (if the instrument has a reed on it, he owns and plays it!) will be included in my instrumentation and I’ve also been wanting to write a piece that features the wonderful harpist, Felice Pomeranz. She is available on the date in question (February 27th 2012). So, at least I know that whatever I compose, the piece will include at least one woodwind and a harp.
On to the composition:
Prior to actually looking for pitches and rhythm, I spent a bit of time thinking about “what” I wanted to write for this concert. If you have time, doing this one step will help you focus on ideas so that you won’t get side tracked into a lot of different areas that might not help you. Knowing I would have a harp to work with made me immediately want to write something fairly pretty and perhaps even Celtic in nature – something I hadn’t done before but wanted to. This immediately told me that the harmony and melody should probably be fairly simple (maybe not rhythmically, but certainly from a pitch point of view). I also decided that some sort of triplet feeling would be involved such as 3/4, 6/4, 12/8, 9/8 or 6/8 since traditional Celtic music is often in these meters.
As I began to think about the initial melody I came up with the following:
A couple of things to note from a craft standpoint:
1. The first 8 measures are very similar to second 8 measures (two “A” sections as denoted by the double bar lines)
2. The second 8 measures varies what was stated in the first. Specifically, look at the small changes I made in rhythm at measure 10 beat 4, measure 11 beat 4, and measures 15 and 16 where adjustments were made to both the rhythm and octave of the melodic idea.
One thing that I find student writers do not often indicate is articulation or “how” is a specific pitch to be played. With today’s technology it is very easy to try out a few ideas in the privacy of our head phones After applying some thought to articulation of the melody I came up with the following:
Melody with Articulation
I think you can see and hear how the simple addition of articulation changes the character of the line.
More to come as I progress on this project. Until then, happy writing!
If you have taken the plunge and updated to Sibelius 7, the first thing that you will notice is a completely new visual interface.
If you are familiar with the previous look of Sibelius up to version 6, here are some tips for you to get quickly up and running.
Use the Shortcuts
T for time signature, K for key signature, Q for clef, L for the lines menu and most other shortcuts are the same in Sibelius 7. There are a few minor adjustments to the shortcuts which you can view by going to Help > What’s New in Sibelius 7. The Shortcuts are listed at the bottom of the PDF file.
Contextual Menus
Like older versions of Sibelius, the contextual menus are the same. If something is selected and you right-click the mouse (Mac laptops with a 1-button mouse: hold down Control and click the mouse button) you will get the same editing contextual menu.
The Inspector
The one new item in the Edit Contextual menu is the Inspector. The Inspector has most of the functions from the Properties Window, which has been removed from Sib 7. The Inspector is smart in that it will change according to what is highlighted in the score. If you highlight text and then choose the Inspector, it includes text editing information.
Inspector with text selected prior to opening it:
If you select notation or a blank bar, and choose the Inspector, it will display only the items particular to notation.
Inspector with notation or a bar selected prior to opening it:
The things that were in the Properties Window that have been removed from the Inspector window are now included in the various tabs listed in the new toolbar. For example, to change noteheads to X noteheads or slash notation, go to the Notation tab and select Noteheads > Type. And, the shortcuts are still the same. For example, Shift+Alt+1 = X notehead (Shift+option+1 on Mac).
Create Menu via the Contextual Menu
If you have used Sibelius 5 or 6, you are most likely quite familiar with the Create menu. Since the menus have been totally redesigned, the Create menu items are spread throughout the new task bar.
Press Esc and nothing is selected, and you right-click the mouse, the Create menu appears as it looked in Sib. 6 and earlier versions.
Choose the desired item from the contextual menu.
Double-click the mouse in the location where you want to add the entry and then enter it as you would normally do.
The “Find in Ribbon” box
The Find in Ribbon search box has been a life-saver to me in my transition to Sibelius 7. Just type in what you are looking for such as Make Layout Uniform, Make into a System or other Sibelius terms. Sibelius 7 will give you the various options where to find what you entered in the search box.
Do check out the what’s new in Sibelius 7 videos on the Sibelius website. Watching these helped me to get familiar with the new interface.
Debbie and Friends is working on our first-ever Christmas song called “Santa & Baby.” The song’s groove is inspired by the Spin Doctors and the song itself inspired by this picture of my friend’s dog named Baby.
Baby! Photo by Beth Oram Photography.
Our friends at Planet Sunday are hard at work on the cartoon version while my producer, Michael Carrera and I finish up the production of the recording. Below is an “animation rough” also known as a storyboard. The finished version of this cartoon music video will be ready in time for Christmas 2011.
As I’ve mentioned in previous posts, we always like to give our fan families an inside view as what’s in the works with Debbie and Friends!
Enjoy the (preproduction) story of “Santa & Baby”!
This post I wanted to share something that might not be as directly related to tone as it is to your overall development as a musician. I was involved in the development of the product, so it is certainly something I would like to share with you.
At the most basic level, the Berkleemusic Scale Variator app can be used as a simple scale and mode fingering guide for most of the scales we use on a regular basis.
A convenient scroll wheel allows the user to choose keys and scale type. Currently, the available scales are Major, Natural Minor, Minor Pentatonic, Jazz Melodic Minor, Harmonic Minor, Harmonic Major, Diminished, Whole Tone, and Japanese Minor Pentatonic. Fingerings for ALL positions of the scale are easily toggled between traditional notation and TAB.
A quick flip of the thumb or a touch of the arrows scrolls the TAB or notation pages up the fretboard to the next position or mode. The user can choose from 2 different views of the scale, either Parallel or Modal. Modal of course, being the view of the modes of the scale (where applicable) and Parallel being the view of the scale and fingerings with labeled degrees from the perspective of the parent scale. The user can choose to highlight the roots of the parent scale in either case. Tapping the right side of the screen plays the scale for the user so that they might familiarize themselves with the tonality of the chosen scale before practicing. Another button allows you to toggle between ascending or descending versions of the same scale. Using the app in this basic way eliminates the need for pages of scales with fingerings and notes. A built in metronome allows the user to practice his or her scales in time, facilitating good rhythmic development.
It is even possible to easily isolate triad and 7th chord arpeggios using the Scale Variator to create fingerings in all positions. There are many creative uses at this most basic level of usage of the app…the sky and your creative imagination is the limit!
Once the scale is learned, as soon as you start getting that “I sound like I am playing scales when I solo!” feeling, the Scale Variator takes you to the next level of improvising. Four (4) buttons allow you to variate or permutate your scale with a chosen constant. A fifth button allow you to choose the frequency at which the constant continues through the scale. This might sound a little more complicated than it really is. In simple terms, you can write a pattern that, in essence, disguises the scale as something much, much more musical than a simple ascent and descent through the degrees! Practicing patterns and exercises like these are building blocks for becoming a great improviser.
One of the exciting lessons today in the music world is the concept of Octave Displacement. It is quite amazing how much this simple device can create lines that sound so much more “expensive”. The Scale Variator takes the headache out of octave displacement calculations. In an instant you can choose from 4 different combinations of Octave Displacement. Keep in mind that you can hear what these lines sound like before you choose to practice them and incorporate them into you improv lines.
In addition, the app allows you to choose your highest fret. This means, for example, for users who play acoustic guitar with only 12 frets, the highest fingering is calculated and then the other positions of the scales or lines you have created will show up in the lower portion of your fretboard.
If this sounds like a lot in an iPhone app, I would have to agree! Don’t panic, a very helpful set of directions/instructions for use is a click away with arrows outlining the features and function buttons clearly.
The Berkleemusic Scale Variator app is currently available for your iPhone only, but will at some point be available on other platforms, such as Android and iPad. The cost is a modest $4.99 which is very reasonable for the power it places at your fingertips.
Here are some tutorial videos to get you started! Happy Scale Variating!!!
A new survey from the Gartner group shows digital music revenues forecast to grow less than 5% per year. This is close to flatlined if you factor in inflation. Not good news for most of the world.
■ Online music revenue from end users will grow more than 31% by the end of the forecast period: from $5.9 billion in 2010 to $7.7 billion in 2015. By comparison, consumer spending on physical music (CDs and LPs) is expected to slide from around $15 billion in 2010 to around $10 billion in 2015.
■ Online music subscription services, such as Spotify, will be the main growth sector in this market, showing fivefold growth from 2010 to 2015. A la carte sales will drive the bulk of overall revenue.
■ The highest growth rates will be in regions such as Latin America and the Middle East and Africa, which have not historically been strong in paying for tracks or albums from online services or stores (although perhaps stronger in paid-for ringtones from their service providers).
Just a quick post. I’ll be hosting an Open House via Berklee’s website on Monday November 14th at 4:00 PM EST. It will be a 30-minute session of Q&A covering orchestration topics.
If you’re interested in joining the event, Berklee has a sign-up page here:
Here’s a switch— instead of an interview with another industry player like we did last summer, this week I thought I’d turn it around, and share some excerpts from an interview that I did for Songtrust.com. For those who don’t yet know, Songtrust is a fantastic new service that I believe could be a vital tool for many songwriters who are accepting my challenge to become their own music publisher.
As those who have taken my Music Publishing 101 class at Berkleemusic can attest– the business of music publishing is a challenging one, and the challenges always seem to increase the closer you get to the actual money. Exploitation, the business of getting your songs into situations where they can earn money, whether it’s a movie, a video game, a record, or a plastic singing fish, is hard enough. But getting paid from those opportunities is even more difficult, and seemingly getting tougher all the time. That’s where Songtrust comes in– helping independent music publishers and songwriters collect their money around the world. It’s one of the most innovative business models in music publishing, and one perfectly suited to the DIY ethos of today’s music world.
http://wwww.songtrust.com
Many thanks to James Aviaz for his work on the interview– for the full text, check out the blog at songtrust.com.
What motivated your move into publishing from songwriting?
My entry into music publishing was really a case of an opportunity simply landing in my lap. Steve Lunt, who was an A&R person at Jive Records at the time (later moving on to Atlantic), had been an old songwriting partner of mine and he called me one day to suggest I might want to consider a job that had just opened up at Zomba on the publishing side. It was completely out of the blue—I was sitting at my desk working on a lyric. But I knew the company because I had been signed to Zomba back in the Eighties, and I thought it would be an interesting opportunity to do something different. It just seemed like one of those rare chances to see the other side of the industry. As it turned out, those were remarkable years at the company—I feel incredibly fortunate to have been a part of it. Steve and Richard Blackstone took a big chance bringing me into something for which I had minimal experience. It was one of those crazy, lucky breaks.
What are some of the key ways emerging songwriters and artists can best manage their song copyrights?
This is a challenging time for songwriters to find music publishing deals—most of the time, songwriters have to get something going on their own, to show that their songs can generate income, before they can expect offers from a larger publisher. Many publishers are in transitional periods where they’re being bought or sold, and attention to administering and protecting their copyrights may be missing. I think many songwriters can benefit from either trying to operate their own publishing entity, or perhaps partnering with another larger company to administer their copyrights—which is to say that the administering publisher handles a lot of the registrations and collects the money from around the world.
I do think that Songtrust is one of the most innovative models along these lines, as it allows songwriters to continue to control and own their own material, but at the same time, gives them the support they need in order to administer their copyrights. It is not easy to register songs around the world and collect the money—especially these days. Realistically, I think most songwriters will need a partner in that area. Songtrust is a very good option in that respect.
What inspired you to start teaching at Berklee? Who should sign up for the class, and what can they expect to learn?
Music Publishing 101, the class I designed for Berkleemusic, grew out of my book,Making Music Make Money, which was published by Hal Leonard and Berklee Press. After completing the book, Berklee asked me if I’d be interested in designing a course for the online school, and it seemed a logical extension of what I’d started doing with the book. One of the core principles of the class is that anyone in the music industry who is a songwriter, or who regularly comes into contact with songwriters and artists, from studio owners to record producers to managers, should have a music publishing component to their business. The course really is designed to take students through the step-by-step process of creating their own music publishing company, and helping them understand the issues and challenges that they’ll face.
Why would a student want to start her own music publishing company today?
What most songwriters don’t realize is that if they’ve written a song, they already are a music publisher. They automatically control their own publishing on that song as soon as it’s created. The question then becomes how to be an effective music publisher. As I always say, songwriting is not actually a business. There’s no financial element to songwriting—it’s just something you do. It’s the job of the music publisher to turn songs into something that can generate income. That’s why my book was called Making Music Make Money. For people who want to write songs for a living, it’s also a reason that songwriters need to learn to be effective music publishers.
What advice would you have for a young songwriter afraid that a business-oriented mindset could obscure a clear creative vision?
Songwriters need to learn to wear more than one “hat”. Of course you need a certain amount of isolation to create, but you also need some reality checks to look at your own music objectively and to figure out where the music fits in the market. In the end, that alternative perspective will actually help the creative vision, at least on a commercial level, by raising the quality of the writing and focusing it in a way that makes it easier for audiences to grasp. For myself, and I think for most professional songwriters or music publishers, it’s always a battle to balance the time demands of running a business with those of creating music— they’re both full-time jobs, and the more you do of one, the more work there is to do on the other. It’s never a completely comfortable fit, but the tension between the two is a big part of what pushes us to do our best work.
The book also places a heavy emphasis on the “exploitation process” of music. Can you explain this term?
Exploitation is one of those things that sounds bad—but in fact, it’s the essential component that makes all of music publishing and songwriting work. Without it, nothing happens. Exploitation just means getting your music into places where people can hear it, and where someone can pay you for it—whether it’s on television, on radio, in an advertisement or from “Billy Bass” the plastic singing fish. Most songwriters want their song exploited as much as possible.
What are some of the most important lessons you’ve learned about the music industry since starting out?
In general, it’s very important that songwriters not put themselves in a position of always relying on others—they need to understand the business of music and be able to take a pro-active role in their own career.
*******
That sense of independence, of taking control of your own career is really the fundamental principle behind all that I try to do with this blog, with Music Publishing 101 at Berkleemusic, and with my books, Making Music Make Money and The Billboard Guide To Writing and Producing Songs that Sell. It’s always what I’m hoping to talk about at Guitar Center this week– if you’re in NYC, drop by and see me at 7pm on November 9, 25 West 14th Street. Look forward to seeing you there!
It was asked of me recently if I could discuss my thoughts on what is the best way to submit scores for composition competitions (thank you Dreux!). Not having been involved in these types of competitions myself, I decided to research this question through my network of people here at Berklee that have submitted music for these types of events or have been adjudicators (there are hundreds of competitions worldwide). Here are a few things I found out, in no particular order (most of these you would do for a commercial client as well):
1. Follow the directions that are posted for the competition: This may be obvious, but you would be surprised how many people overlook various submission requirements simply because they didn’t double and triple check what they were submitting in the package, when they were submitting it and how they were submitting it.
2. Don’t miss the deadline: An often missed detail and one that will usually disqualify you right away because of the sheer number of submissions that need to be reviewed.
3. Scores should look professional and created in Finale, Sibelius or other high end notation software. Of course, just because one uses notation software doesn’t mean that they know how to use proper page layout techniques. This one detail could make a big difference in whether your score even gets looked at so give it the priority it deserves. There are several good books on this in print. Another option is to simply have a professional create the score or at least “fine tune” what you’ve already started.
4. Use 11 x 17 inch score paper, in portrait view, for an orchestral size instrumentation. I know from my own experience as an educator how difficult it is to review a score that has 25-30 staffs. Printed on 8.5 x 11 inch paper only makes the job incredibly more difficult and worthy of discarding the score – get out the magnifying glass!
5. Be sure to put a front and back cover on the score. Often, the front cover is clear plastic and the back is black and firm, but there are no absolute rules on this – it just makes the whole score look professional (and special) when this is done.
6. Related to number 5, be sure to bind the score. This is usually done with wire spiral binding or plastic spiral binding. Both of these options are normally pretty easy to take care of at most photo copying centers.
7. Send a sound file of the best quality that you have access to. I’ve noticed in my own research that it is often okay to send a MIDI representation of your work in addition to the score. This is just to speed up the review process and normally a point that is made in the submission guidelines.
8. If the competition is looking for music in the style of George Gershwin, your composition should not sound like something that A.R. Rahman wrote for “Slum Dog Millionaire.” Be sure that your composition fits any stylistic requirements that are called for.
I can’t say enough how important it is to proof read, proof read and then proof read again before sending out your package. The proof reader doesn’t have to necessarily hear the score the way you do, but a second or third set of eyes will more easily see things that you won’t (they can often be far more objective as well). When ready to proof read, DO NOT do it on the computer. Print out the score so you can REALLY see what it is going to look like. Many mistakes not seen on the computer screen become quite obvious on the printed page. Often, a competition will require several scores from you, so make sure you have thoroughly gone through the score BEFORE printing these extra copies (that are also bound and covered).
I’ve uploaded a couple of scores with different instrumentation and layouts for you to get an idea what is required. I’m certainly open to hearing of anyone else that has had experience with these types of submissions.
It’s a perfect defining moment, encapsulating the state of music publishing in 2011:
In the middle of negotiating a multi-million dollar sale to BMG Rights (who else?), Bug Music overlooks one small thing on the to-do list and fails to pick up a contract option for superstar Bruno Mars. This petty oversight causes them to lose the services of the biggest contemporary pop star the company has ever had. Nice one.
It would be funny if it weren’t so familiar—not in its specifics (as most companies don’t necessarily make this particular mistake) but in its substance. While the deal-makers at the top occupy themselves with acquisitions, mergers, funding schemes and due diligence (or does anyone do that anymore?), the demoralized and depleted staff, those employees who actually do the work of music publishing, are either too disinterested, distracted or disgusted to manage even the basics—registering songs, collecting money, paying the money, or yes, picking up contract options on the people who actually generate income. From the outside, one looks on and thinks “How could this possibly happen?” Those of us on the inside wonder how it could not.
Underneath the usual legalese of the court filing, the actual issues at stake here are simple, rooted in the fundamentals of music publishing that have been discussed often in this blog. It’s a matter of minimum delivery commitments (this stipulates the number of songs that the writer must submit during the contract period), minimum release commitments (this identifies the number of “commercially released” songs that must be part of the minimum delivery), and the contract period and subsequent options, which constitute the “term” of the deal. Judging from the filing, which you can check out below, there is not a great deal of complexity here. But as with most matters contractual, there are a few different angles that have to be considered.
As with most writers signed to exclusive co-publishing agreements, Mars was bound for an initial contract period, and Bug had options to continue the deal for several additional periods. In each contract period, there was a specific minimum delivery commitment that set the number of songs that Mars would need to submit before Bug was required to initiate the next option (and pay the advance associated with that option).
Nothing is more important for songwriters to understand: most co-publishing contracts do not build their term around calendar years, but rather the completion of contract periods. Conversely, most publishing administration deals are based on calendar years (usually 3-5 years, then automatically renewing until termination). It’s vital that songwriters understand what constitutes a contract period under their particular deal. It’s good for publishing companies to have a grasp of it as well.
One of the elements that frequently adds confusion to the minimum delivery commitment is the clause that usually follows it in the contract, which is the minimum release commitment. This provision outlines the number of songs within the minimum delivery that must be “commercially released” during the contract period. For example, if Bruno Mars had a 12 song minimum commitment (the actual numbers on this have not been revealed) , the minimum release commitment might stipulate that at least 4 of those songs had to be released for commercial sale to the public. Together, the minimum delivery and release commitment is usually identified as the MDRC. That’s the easy part.
In reality, the minimum release commitment inevitably raises all sorts of questions:
Is a song put out on the writer’s own label, or simply made available on iTunes “a release”?
Should a song released only in one small territory (Canada for instance) count as a full “release”?
Is something commercially released when it appears in the stores or online, or when the record company completes the mechanical licensing of the song? Split disputes between songwriters can often delay licensing for months or even years after the record is in the stores.
Is a song that’s licensed for synchronization (in a movie or game) “commercially released”, or does it need to generate a mechanical license?
Should the same song, recorded and released by two different artists, count only once toward the minimum release?
That’s all before we even start talking about song splits. The other key factor to understand about an MDRC is that only the percentage of the song that a songwriter controls counts toward his or her commitment. So if Bruno Mars co-writes every song, and receives 50% of the ownership on each one (in fact, he probably often received less than that), he would need to write 24 songs, and 8 of those would need to be commercially released, in order to satisfy the 12 song, 4 release MDRC. If you are part of a three-person writing team that always splits songs evenly, you would need to write 30 songs to hit a 10 song MDRC, complete your contract period and trigger your next advance.
I don’t know, but I strongly suspect that some or all of these issues will come into play in the upcoming court case between Bruno Mars and Bug. In reports I’ve seen, Bug asserts that Mars did not complete the MDRC when he claimed to, and therefore the publisher was not legally required to pick up the option at that time. On the other side, Mars alleges that Bug confirmed that the MDRC had been met, and only changed their position once he notified them that the contract was terminated. Keep in mind that any changes in the copyright ownership on a song, even after a commercial release (because of a sample issue or a dispute between writers, for instance), could change the amount that a song would count toward the MDRC. There are a lot of gray areas, and in this particular case, Bug is probably glad of it.
What does seem clear is that Bruno Mars notified Bug in October of 2010 that he had fulfilled his minimum release requirement; in February 2011, he notified them that he had completed the full delivery requirement. According to the filing, Bug acknowledged at each point that the commitments had been met. Of course, this will likely be a highly contentious issue as the case moves ahead. But after receiving notification that Mars had completed the MDRC in February, Bug had 30 days in which to exercise the next option, which simply meant sending him a letter and inevitably cutting a fairly hefty check.
When Mars did not receive any notice that Bug was exercising the option, he was required to send the company an Option Warning letter, which alerted them to the fact that the contract was on the verge of being terminated, and gave the company 10 days in which to act. Again, this is a fairly standard “notice to cure” clause, that allows a company to cure a breach (like the failure to issue a royalty statement ) or pick up an option within a prescribed window of time.
One surprising thing here is that Bug’s window was quite small—most such clauses allow for 30 days. The other surprise is that even with the warning, Bug failed yet again to exercise the option for their Grammy-winning, chart-topping songwriter. Companies frequently miss option periods, but most are jolted into action by the warning notice. On May 24 and again on May 31, Mars notified the company that the contract had been terminated. Only on June 6 did Bug get around to sending a letter exercising the option, paying the advance, and claiming that the MDRC had not been met in February, but rather several months later.
For most casual, non-industry observers, the operative acronym here will not be MDRC, but rather WTF. Why would a company allow the relationship with their superstar songwriter and artist to deteriorate to the point of niggling over song percentages , release dates and delivery requirements? It would seem that Mars was doing a pretty good job—handing in satisfactory songs, staying reasonably active, making some hits, winning a Grammy, and doing what most publishers would like their writers to do. Wouldn’t it have made sense to pick up the option in advance, or at least when the minimum release requirement was fulfilled? In fact, most publishers concern themselves much more with the minimum release commitment than the larger delivery requirement. And why would a company not at least respond to the option warning within the 10-day period, rather than risk losing an extremely valuable asset? If this were a criminal trial, Bug might do better to plead insanity.
In fact, insanity is exactly what it is. Even after losing Mars and making a public show of flunking Music Pub 101, Bug was purchased by BMG Rights for more than $300 million (according to reports). That’s a pretty high price, especially for a catalogue largely built on administration deals, most of which can be terminated on very short notice. The music publishing business has been reduced to an endless series of catalog swaps, but the people making the deals have no understanding that the assets in the company are the staff and the songwriters themselves. Sooner or later, that staff needs some leadership and vision at the top. And those songwriters require a certain level of attention and service.
This insanity is not limited to any one company. You can find it at Warner Chappell, where months after a purchase, employees are still wondering what the go-forward plan actually is. Having lost Chairman and CEO David Renzer back in April, Universal is still waiting to find out who the new boss will be, and what that will mean for the future. For now, it runs on auto-pilot. At EMI, the guillotine has been hanging over everyone’s head for months, which can’t help anyone focus on business. The company’s recent royalty fiasco was just one more passing scene in a long downward slide.
Is anyone running these companies? Is anyone actually taking care of the business of music publishing? The lesson here for songwriters is three-fold:
Read your contract. Know how your contract period is defined, and understand your MDRC.
Notify the company in writing promptly upon meeting each MDRC requirement, and get written confirmation that the commitment has been fulfilled.
Keep a calendar handy. You might be the only one who has one and actually knows how to use it.
SOPA and PIPA – two acronyms that were made infamous on Jan. 18th 2012 as thousands of individuals and dozens of websites took part in what is now being called “Blackout Day”. The Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act were originally drafted to allow US Government agencies to bring criminal charges against, and to subsequently shut down, overseas websites illegally hosting copyrighted content. The broader Internet community, including giants like Google, Wired, and Wikipedia, became involved because these bills contained wording that was dangerously vague and open to interpretation and abuse. With these two bills now essentially dead in the water, it will be months or even years before another piece of legislation is in place to combat the piracy of copyrighted content.
“Learning licks and expecting to know how to improvise is akin to memorizing phrases in a French book and expecting to know how to speak French. One can only truly learn language by conversing with other people”
