Music Producers and Live Performance Fees (???)

[Stayf]

Hi everybody,

This is for the music producers and business entrepreneurs among us.

I hereby would like to open a conversation/thread about MUSIC PRODUCERS and one particular source of music-industry-income-stream; LIVE PERFORMANCE FEES.

So,.. I would like to know what you all think about the idea that music producers (who only do music studio work) should also get some percentage (%) of the Live/performance-income stream from artists. As far as I know this doesn't really happen yet. But maybe it isn't a bad idea, I mean, at a time where income on music sales isn't what it used to be, we (as producers) have to get/be creative about how to make money.

Record companies started with the 360-deals years ago, why can't we as producers make money on some more income-streams (from the artists); "live-performance" income for instance.

What do yall think??

(please, try to keep the conversation on-topic )

[johnny h]

Too much faff in practice. You want to go round and get every DJ in the world to write down their tracklist every night? Good luck

[Stayf]

I understand your thoughts, but what about artists (no DJ) with a band or tape-act. They perform songs they have rehearsed, so the playlist would be kind of the same for a tour.

[Stayf]

And it would be like a deal.. Just like a royalty-deal for a producer is being made. There has to be a person/department who is registering all of the performed songs from that particular artist.

But that's not difficult or strange or anything. Artists WANT to keep track of all the songs they performed. Because when the artists is also (or for a part) the songwriter, they make money on rights when they perform their own songs live in front of a big crowd.

[GaryM]

I understand your thoughts, but what about artists (no DJ) with a band or tape-act. They perform songs they have rehearsed, so the playlist would be kind of the same for a tour.

I've played live gigs with bands where we have filled in reports for PRS that list the songs we played, and I hope some money found its way to the songwriters whose songs we played. But why would a live gig generate any royalties for a producer? The band are performing the song, not the record.

[Stayf]

You've got an excellent point there.

My 2 replies;

1. It's a live performance of the song, they're not playing the record. You're right. BUT; Record Companies nowadays are earning income from almost all the incomestreams (360 deals), sometimes without doing the extra work. They do that because they CAN. They're the record company, and almost every artist somehow wants to be signed, so... Why can't a producer do the same? If an artist really wants a producer to do a song, the producer could ask for a 'performance-royalty'. It's a matter of supply and demand and when an artist really wants you to be the producer, why not???

2. A producer nowadays is also a lot of the times an author of the song. So we're talking about 2 (with 1 'possible') incomestreams for the producer; 'performance-royalties' and 'performance rights (paid to the author by the PRO)'.

[GaryM]

Why can't a producer do the same? If an artist really wants a producer to do a song, the producer could ask for a 'performance-royalty'. It's a matter of supply and demand and when an artist really wants you to be the producer, why not???

Imagine a record producer is negotiating with a band or label. The producer thinks the offer on the table isn't good enough for him. Which of these changes do you think is most likely to get made?

1) A higher flat fee or hourly rate for the producer or greater percentage of income from record sales.

2) The creation of a whole new system of royalties for performances of recordings. Who is going to set up the collection society and convince music users to pay even more money to use recordings? Or are you going to try and take this new producer's royalty out of existing royalties? If so, good luck convincing songwriters, performers and phonographic copyright owners to agree to that.

Also, this "producer's royalty" still wouldn't affect live gigs, would it? If I buy the sheet music for "Jump" by Van Halen and perform it at a gig, why would they guy who produced the record (Ted Templeman) get any money from that gig?

2. A producer nowadays is also a lot of the times an author of the song. So we're talking about 2 (with 1 'possible') income streams for the producer; 'performance-royalties' and 'performance rights (paid to the author by the PRO)'.

If a producer is the writer then they already get paid as a writer.

[Stayf]

Thank you for your reply.

I'm not talking about a whole new collection society by the way.

The only thing I'm saying is;
If a producer is being asked to produce/create a song for the an artist, why can't he ask for a % of the performance income? I'm talking about a % connected to the particular artist & that particular song. Not (!) a % connected to the song in general, as your example of sheet-music states.

There are artists who don't sell a lot of music but do perform a lot. A producer(author) could make a deal for the live-income-streams so he gets money, even if the song doesn't sell.

I'm thinking about this with an eye on the future. If a producer only gets money on sales, and sales keep on declining, what else is left? The flat fee or advance? Production-budgets aren't what they use to be either.

[johnny h]

Thank you for your reply.

I'm not talking about a whole new collection society by the way.

The only thing I'm saying is;
If a producer is being asked to produce/create a song for the an artist, why can't he ask for a % of the performance income? I'm talking about a % connected to the particular artist & that particular song. Not (!) a % connected to the song in general, as your example of sheet-music states.

There are artists who don't sell a lot of music but do perform a lot. A producer(author) could make a deal for the live-income-streams so he gets money, even if the song doesn't sell.

I'm thinking about this with an eye on the future. If a producer only gets money on sales, and sales keep on declining, what else is left? The flat fee or advance? Production-budgets aren't what they use to be either.

You need to gig or you are out of luck. Complex systems like you are proposing aren't going to work.

I have released a lot of music .. and gigging is about 99% of my income.

[Emmet]

With sales and therefore producer points decreasing its already becoming a more common practice for some producers to obtain songwriting credits to makeup the deficit.

[Stayf]

With sales and therefore producer points decreasing its already becoming a more common practice for some producers to obtain songwriting credits to makeup the deficit.

That's what I mean... Being more creative on making (enough) money. Producers getting songwriting credits without really earning them.

I think it's just a matter of time before producers will try to get some of the Live-Performance-Cake

It took a while before the labels did, but in the end....they did...

[Trumpetman1234]

I think it's a hideous idea. Musicians/artists already pay percentages to management, agents, promoters and sometimes labels and theres the enormous expense of touring with a decent crew, PA etc. The thought of giving any extra cash away fills me with a huge sense of doom and foreboding.

Maybe the lady who made tea at the studio that the overdubs were done in deserves a little something too? Milks not getting any cheaper.

T-Man

[Stayf]

Milks is not getting cheaper indeed.. I agree.

But, don't forget, the are still a lot of player behind the scenes. Read: the people in the music industry who are not actually performing on stage but ARE working hard to create the opportunity for artists to perform in front of a audience that loves the artist. Of course there are also people who DON'T work hard and DO receive money without actually doing anything for it. But, I don't consider myself as being a person who doesn't work hard. I'm just trying to be creative here.

These behind-the-scenes-players have to be creative on how to make money as well.
The music industry changes.. the way people consume music changes.. the way people experience a show changes.. We all have to adapt, so do the player behind the scenes.

And I think it's a good thing that (in this case), producers start thinking about alternative/new business models to make money.

But, T-Man, I don't really want to start a (personal) discussion about what's Hideous and what's not. We can do that in person, joined by a couple of beers

[Scramble]

Bear in mind that there's not really that much money in live performance except at the top level. For most bands you'd be asking for a slice of b*gger-all. This idea that everyone is rolling in money on the circuit these days is greatly exaggerated.

[Lukas Pearse]

If the producer's role is important enough, get songwriting credit. In some places, live performance actually does generate royalties, but you need to report the performance set lists for it to work. Otherwise, charge a higher rate up front.

Being a producer doesn't mean a specific enough thing to warrant a new set of rights, in my mind. One bands' producer is another bands' songwriter is another band's guitar tech is another bands' arranger etc... it's just too open ended to organize.

[Emmet]

If the producer's role is important enough, get songwriting credit. In some places, live performance actually does generate royalties, but you need to report the performance set lists for it to work.

If most bands are in a position to be using a medium/high profile producer, they'll be playing venues that take the PRS off the door. Most decent venues still have the PRS forms in the dressing room and sometimes chase you AFTER the gig to get them filled in