Piracy and income for session folks

Nicholas Dedring · From: Beacon, New York, USA

I had a conversation with a techie friend of mine regarding piracy and copyright issues, and was wondering, for those of you folks who earn a living playing, about where the income comes from.

Do session players get paid by album sales? If so, what is a typical payment?

What portion of income that you subsist on comes from royalties for sales, versus radio play, versus actual fees for the session, and how does all this compare to live work?

Essentially, how much of a loss is represented by flat out theft of recordings?

I have heard headliners make more on a decent tour than they make on record sales... but I don't know how that compares to the players.

For what it's worth, I haven't downloaded music that wasn't licensed for it in a long long time... but just wanted to see from the professionals' perspective what the impact is.

Donny Hinson · From: Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.

Zero impact for backup musicians. They get paid to play the session...and that's it. So, it doesn't matter to them whether the song sells 200 or 20,000,000. The money's the same.

chas smith R.I.P. · From: Encino, CA, USA

The work that I derive royalties on comes from film sound tracks. Known as the "back end" or more accurately as the Special Payments Fund. It only happens on union jobs and it's a small percentage based on how much I was paid relative to how much everyone else was payed. So it's way more better it was just two of us playing on a sound track, compared to having to split with an 80 piece orchestra.

As I understand it, the only people who make any money on airplay are the publisher and the writer and unless you're the label, or the artist has a very good relationship (or lawyer) with the label, you can forget about sales. Most likely, the only money that you're going to see is what you got paid for the session or the tour.

I have a very good relationship with my label, partly because it's a "vanity label", which means I pay for everything up to delivering the finished cd's to Cold Blue, (the label is in charge of distribution and marketing), and because not too many people buy this kind of music, so we're like a small family.

I have been getting some airplay so because I'm my own publisher and the sole writer, I get two checks from BMI. My US royalty was $0.75, the international royalty was $179.97. Not bad, considering I've been composing for over 30 years. Somewhere around here I have a stack of uncashed checks. I didn't deposit checks when it was going to cost me more to drive to the bank and deposit it.

John Macy · From: Rockport TX/Denver CO

Actually, there is a royalty from playing on Master sessions that run through the union. The labels pay into the Performance Trust Fund based on the number of sales. At the end of the year, this amount is divided by the number of total session, and this per session amount is paid to the players times the number of sessions they had on the books that year. This can be a pretty good sized check if you played a lot of sessions.

Of course, when downloading reduces sales, this is passed on to the players in smaller checks.

Also, the employer pays an additional 10% of the session fee into the union pension fund of the player (including demos), so that is an additional benefit (or kind of a royalty) for the session player. There is also a fee paid for health insurance.

Of course, it takes a lot of session for this to add up...

Bob Hoffnar · From: Austin, Tx

I just get paid for the recording part or touring. The piracy issue does affect me in a big way though. The money that is used to pay me for my part of the deal comes from product sales. Things are very screwy right now with recording and tour support budgets. Between all the money lost from people stealing music on the net and corporate radios strip mining of the industry its a difficult time.
People come up with all sorts of explainations and excuses for why its ok for them to steal music but it is still stealing.

I hope whatever comes up after the current music distribution system falls apart and the dust settles leaves room for musicians to make a living.

Bob

Earnest Bovine · From: Los Angeles CA USA

In addition to the AFM Phonograph Record Special Payments Fund, there is also a Motion Picture Special Payments Fund. Money from these funds is supposed to to distributed among the musicians according to how much they worked, not how much product is sold. So the SPF would pay you as much for a session for a CD that was never released as they would for a hit CD.
I say "supposed to" because recently our checks went way down (less than 50% of previously distributions) after the guys who administered the fund stole most of the money for themselves. They got caught last year, but I don't think the Feds can spare the resources to prosecute them just yet. Maybe that will happen when Ashcroft finishes prosecuting people for making movies that he doesn't like, and for talking to the wrong Invisible Man In The Sky.

If you want more info, try Google and "Special Payments Fund" and "Motion Picture" or "Phonograph".

Bruce Bouton · From: Nash. Tn USA

Piracy and Radio Consolidation is having a terrible impact on our businees. Labels aren't selling as much product and it costs them a small fortune to get records played on the radio. Consequently they are producing fewer albums which means fewer sessions. At the same time, due to decreased sales and fewer records being played , publishers are cutting fewer demos.This is the real trickle down economy.
Bruce

Jerry Brightman · From: Ohio

Bruce and John Macy beat me to answering this. They are both very correct, and they know because they both do Master Sessions...
Hey, come to think of it, so do I

Jerry
http://www.slidestation.com

Ken Lang · From: Simi Valley, Ca

So here's the deal as I see it.

Radio plays only a small selected varity of music because that's what they think people want to hear. They are afraid if they go too afar from that list, they will lose listeners and ad revenue.

Record companies curtail artists and recording schedules fearing those who stray too far from the radio playlist type of song will not get picked by radio and that means no sales.

Publishers curtail the songs or writers they pick up who do not fit the "mold" of what radio has called playable. In addition publishers cut the number of demos they produce for the same reason.

Songwriters are forced to turn out formula drivel to have any hope of a publishing deal. The hook in a song is still ok but severly limited.

Gone is the inventive artists, both good and not so good, who might set the music world on it's ear....'cause no one will take that chance.

So.......The whole music industry chain weeps and wrings their hands about the decline of record sales.

And they don't understand why.

Al Marcus · From: Cedar Springs,MI USA (deceased)

The few sessions I did were through the Union and John is right, I got small checks from the trust fund. The last one was $1.98 and like Chs.Smith, I didn't cash it. I still have it around here somewhere.....al

------------------
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus/

Roger Rettig · From: Naples, FL

There was a major upheaval a few years back in the UK - the Musicians' Union had been collecting from record sales since the beginning of time, with the money purportedly being used for the MU Benefit funds.

With our entry into the EEC, this was deemed illegal, and a body called PPL(?) was formed to distribute vast sums of money to all musicians who had ever done sessions.

What an undertaking - we were all scrambling for our diaries and collating all the info we could on the sessions we'd done. I had to go back to 1962 but it was worth it - I had a pretty big cheque at the end of the day. Now, I receive much smaller, but regular, cheques based on airplay on those recordings; naturally, as time goes on, they're played less and less, so.....

The other source of retrospective income for me is the TV work I've done - as the various programmes are repeated, or sold to cable, money automatically finds its way to my account. This, too, gets less and less as I'm no longer active in the London music scene, but, as we say in the Old Country, it's better than a poke in the eye with a pencil.

RR

Franklin · Posted 30 Jan 2004 6:20 am

Ken you said "And they don't understand why?"

The entire music community (Songwriters, musicians, artists, producers, labels, etc.) certainly understands why? and would love to see it change.

Maybe you can understand "Why?" the dilemna we face is impossible to change at this juncture, with this scenario.

Think of radio as Walmart. It is the only complete source for selling your quality line of clothing to the masses in the USA. You offer them a suit line made from the finest materials and explain how they will outlast everything on their floor three times over.

They say repeatedly, "NO", "Our demographic doesn't want it so we will not stock it. Bring us a line of suits cotton / rayon mix and we don't care if it unravels after the fourth drycleaning, nor does our consumer care, judging from how much we sell, we'll take all you got......"

What would you do?

Everyone is hoping the internet, satelite radio and television will offer in the future an alternative solution to getting great music out to the masses. The labels for the last ten years or so are remastering alot of their archived music for catalogue sales which is why we can find cool box sets and CD compilations of many of the greatest artists of the past. Everyone cares about the history. Nobody has solved the dilemna of how to get past radio to the consumer.

Radio reaches over 200 million people, The internet and satelite radio gets to a few million at present and that is not enough to support an entire music community.

Music is a buisiness of selling art.

"When there are no dealors for the real stuff, the artists have to paint road signs for a living".

...Paul

[This message was edited by Franklin on 30 January 2004 at 06:27 AM.]

[This message was edited by Franklin on 30 January 2004 at 06:53 AM.]

Roger Rettig · From: Naples, FL

A good analogy, Paul.

Bill Hatcher · From: Atlanta Ga. USA

In my very humble opinion the downloading of music on the internet has hurt recording musicians only slightly compared to the advent of computers and sampling etc. being used to completely do away with their services being needed in the recording process at all.

Doug Brumley · From: Nashville, Tennessee, USA

I think the consumer is to blame as well for the current state of radio. It's clear that there are a preponderance of casual radio listeners who could care less about what songs are played or how relevant the art is. They take the spoon-fed stuff and are content with it. They have no desire to look elsewhere for music that might broaden their horizons. It's akin to getting all of your news coverage from the networks as opposed to digging deeper with online news sources, or buying all of your artwork at Pottery Barn instead of looking for unique and vital works to enrich your wall.

Fortunately, those who look beyond the conglomerates are giving rise to Internet radio and low-power FM stations, which may have hope of eventually (it'll be a while) breaking the stranglehold that the Clear Channels of the world have over one's access to art and information. I think one positive from downloading is that, with it's popularity, many participants may hear something fresh and creative that really grabs them and ignites their curiosity enough to turn them from a casual listener to an active listener. That said, it is imperative that the copyright holder have the final say as to how his/her music is treated. Some artists like the free publicity of having their songs trading across the Internet. Others think it is hurting their sales. Each party needs to be able to call his/her own shots and have the decision be enforceable.

If you have any question as to why listeners might be putting up with such small playlists of relatively bland material, just look how little value the conglomerates place on art. Lowry Mays, CEO of Clear Channel, told Fortune magazine in March: "If anyone said we were in the radio business, it wouldn't be someone from our company. We're not in the business of providing news and information. We're not in the business of providing well-researched music. We're simply in the business of selling our customers products." Such cheapening and exploitation of art is bound to bring about a backlash eventually. It's just going to be a pretty boring ride until large numbers of people begin taking their demographics to alternative sources. But if people remain complacent, things will likely never change.

On a side note, I discovered Mr. Bob Hoffnar's employer Hem through Internet radio (www.kexp.org--actually an Internet simulcast of a nonprofit terrestrial station in Seattle). I know I never would have heard of them otherwise, though they certainly are more deserving of FM bandwidth than the No Doubts of the world.

Nicholas Dedring · From: Beacon, New York, USA

Seems like the impact such as it is is an indirect one: fewer albums sold, fewer albums made with less money, fewer sessions for less money per engagement. Sound about right?

To reiterate, I don't myself download music. I tend to listen to bands that are comparitively "Mom and Pop" operations, on small labels. I know that I am putting my $10 or $15 directly into that artists pocket (pretty much). I don't buy things I've heard on the radio, at least not in the longest time I can remember... digital music feeds, local bands, following threads of recommendations based on artists I love etc.

But I didn't want to make this into a thing about "The radio business is awful" or "Downloading is good/bad theft/not theft"... though let the thoughts go wherever they may.

I really wanted to get a direct impression from real live pros on their experience wallet-wise in the past few years... but this is all insteresting and instructive.

So thanks to all you guys who shared your time, and impressions on it... keep it coming!

[This message was edited by Nicholas Dedring on 30 January 2004 at 09:56 AM.]

Franklin · Posted 30 Jan 2004 10:16 am

Nicholas,

I was told last week by a pretty heavy hitter that the main reason sales are off is because Radio has impacted our ability to showcase new artists and songs. New music promotes sales. Most of the time folks hear their favorite songs so often that they have no desire to purchase the CD.

Not being able to get music on the air is a trickle down problem felt by all....Paul

chas smith R.I.P. · From: Encino, CA, USA

One of the bands I've done some recording with wanted to put a tune on the air, of course. When the numbers came in for what it was going to cost for "slotting fees" and promotion, it was unaffordable for them and the label on their level.

Cold Blue and I have had an ongoing conversation about why we aren't selling much, besides the fact that people don't buy this stuff, and the best that we can come up with is copying. There are small goups of people who like this music and most likely one of them will buy a cd and make copies for his immediate friends. In that regard, the copying becomes a form of word-of-mouth. It's also unrealistic for us to assume that all of them would have bought the cd anyway.

David L. Donald · From: Koh Samui Island, Thailand

Paul has said a mouthful.
If you didn't get signed 15 years ago had a few good hits, AND maintained relavancey today you're relegated to a few vanity lables...

OR you create pap for the masses that sells products to demagraphic markets that the advertisers will pay to reach.
Nothing more nothing less.

And yeah, that sucks.

Nathan Delacretaz · From: Austin, Texas, USA

Music is getting hit from both directions:

A) Demand is being controlled/managed by ever-larger corporations whose only goal is to turn a profit (a la Clear Channel, which controls not only a hug amount of radio but alos an increasing number of concert venues)...As the CEO implied, they're nothing more or less than a cash machine.

B) Supply is undergoing a revolution is the form of home-based digital recording, which allows for an excellent quality product at a fraction of yesteryear's price.

So it's a quandary - in a sense, there's a growing number of ballplayers and a diminishing number of fields to play on...

Bruce Bouton · From: Nash. Tn USA

In 1996 or so there was a telecomunications bill that was stalled in the House of Representatives.It was designed to de-regulate wireless communications. At that time Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House and he was not going to deliver the votes for this bill. Well lo and behold, Rupert Murdoch,(FOX NEWS)media mogul, gave Newt a five million dollar advance on his memoirs. Soon after that Newt deliver the votes. He also delivered an addendum to the bill allowing unlimited radio station ownership by corporations.Prior to Newts sellout corporations were only allowed forty radio stations in the whole country.This opened the door for Murdoch and all the other media moguls to take over. One of these guys was a fellow named Lowry Mays. You may recall him from the Texas Ranger Stadium deal with George Bush. Mr Mays owns Clear Channel which now owns upwards of two thousand radio stations, most of the big concert sheds,half the billboards in America and controlling interest in ticket master. They have single handedly raised the cost of doing business at least five fold.Ask any advertizer how much it costs these days to buy an add on a clear channel station. I know how much it costs to get a record played. Ten years ago you could break a record regionally . No more.
In addition Colin Powells son , Michael is chairman of the FCC. In case you didn't know he is trying to roll back federal regulations to make it legal for Clear Channel to own the television and newspapers in the same market they own the radio. Now that's what I call fair and balanced. Your'e already hearing the music they think you should hear . How Bout when they can control the news they want you to hear.
Wake up folks. It's getting farther and farther away from our freedom of the press.
Before you call me an alarmist or a conspiracy nut let me point out that John McCain is trying to go after these guys. He was one of two Republicans that voted against radio de-regulation.
If you don't believe what I say do a little research on your own.Check out media consolidation on your Google search engine.
Back to the music. Nowadays it's at least a million dollar commitment from a label to break an artist.The implications alone are staggering.
Peace
BB

[This message was edited by Bruce Bouton on 31 January 2004 at 10:03 PM.]

Greg Derksen · From: Alberta, Canada

Roughly 20 years ago, Highway 40 Blues was
a hit, How many Solo's in that tune?
Toto had a hit with "Rosanna" a masterpiece
of a work, freaking incredable record. Any
of you recording guys need to listen to that record and tell me if we've advanced in sound
since then,
Yes came out with "Owner of a lonely heart"
another great record,

Short attention spans and its "My Right
to download" coupled with a 'NOW" generation
is quite a problem to overcome.
Greg

Guest · Posted 2 Feb 2004 1:07 pm

When I first got broadband internet access back in 2000, I downloaded some music and I was breaking the law. Want to know what happened? Two things.

First, having access to new kinds of music awakened my interest in artists and genres I never knew about. From the time I downloaded my first illegal tune, my CD purchases have increased about five fold over what they were previously. And most of those purchases are of artists that I never would have known or cared about previously.

The other thing that happened is the emergence of legitimate online music services. I no longer download illegally, but I'm convinced that if I (and others) hadn't, the legitimate online services would never have come about. With eMusic, iTunes, mp3.com, etc., I'm happy and legal.

Frankly, I think the impact of music sharing on the industry is greatly exaggerated and largely self inflicted, given the crap they are churning out.

Franklin · Posted 2 Feb 2004 1:23 pm

Greg,

Ditto's!!!
I love all three of those records. Yes and No is my answer to advancement. Both of those records sound very digital to my ears and alot of todays records have gone past that hard digital sound. Norah Jones and alot of non mainstream artists are making great sounding records.

On the Yes record there is alot of recorded tricks, or smoke and mirrors, but it is still brilliant art to the max. Personally, I still prefer making records as a band and not completely layering a record one musician at a time.

As for solo's I wish we would go back to more picking and less dancing on stage.

I am usually asked to play long solos on most of Alan's and Strait's records. Five O'clock Somewhere turned out to be the biggest hit Alan has ever had and there is over 16 bars of steel and about the same amount of guitar solo's counting the fade. I have already experienced a change in requests for solo's because of that records impact.

I'm with you, I wish the sounds of instruments were featured more often. If you can judge anything by my calls, steel solo's seem to be coming back.

Paul

Franklin · Posted 2 Feb 2004 1:29 pm

Bruce,

I agree. Our only hope lies in congressional intervention.

Paul

Forum Index > Steel Players	Goto page 1, 2 Next	Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic