General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Return to General Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Inside the business of hit song writing

216.228.191.161

Posted on April 9, 2021 at 14:42:47
Mike K
Audiophile

Posts: 13975
Location: 97701
Joined: September 23, 1999
Very informative article:

https://variety.com/2021/music/news/dirty-business-hit-songwriting-1234946090/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Lack of skill dictates economy of style. - Joey Ramone

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Interesting article, thanks Mike (mt), posted on April 9, 2021 at 17:54:02
Rod M
Web Geek

Posts: 16245
Location: So. California
Joined: March 1, 1999
Contributor
  Since:
March 1, 1999
.
-Rod

 

Interesting article., posted on April 9, 2021 at 18:36:36
srdavis2000
Audiophile

Posts: 10707
Location: Deep South
Joined: January 11, 2003
Contributor
  Since:
December 16, 2004
I read most of it, but it kept jumping around on my screen making me have to re-find where I was. It's a shame and unfair that things work the way they do sometimes.

 

You left off the key word, "dirty." But then, it's almost an oxymoron... nt, posted on April 10, 2021 at 05:22:03
tinear
Audiophile

Posts: 65782
Location: Kansas City, KS
Joined: April 9, 2006
d

 

RE: Inside the business of hit song writing, posted on April 10, 2021 at 08:15:56
mlsstl
Audiophile

Posts: 1079
Location: Midwest
Joined: September 1, 2015
The music business has always been dirty - anyone remember "payola"?

They only need some hit men to rival the mafia. (And it wouldn't surprise me to find out that some of that exists....)

 

RE: Inside the business of hit song writing, posted on April 10, 2021 at 08:54:47
Alpha Al
Industry Professional

Posts: 2958
Location: N. Carolina
Joined: February 16, 2004
Contributor
  Since:
December 3, 2015
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." Hunter S. Thompson

 

I don't see anything wrong the Elvis example, posted on April 10, 2021 at 09:45:08
A hit single requires songwriter(s) and performer(s). I can't think of any reason why the contributors shouldn't negotiate the revenue split. They are free to work with each other, or not work with each other if they can't agree on an equitable split.

You can write the most wonderful song in the world, but if you can't perform it for a large enough audience, or get somebody else to perform it for a large enough audience, then it isn't going to be worth anything. Having a very popular artist perform your song is an easy way to ensure that it will reach enough people to have a chance of it catching on.

So what's wrong with negotiating a cut of the revenue with the performer(s) as long as the songwriter is credited?

 

Your example is a one-way street, posted on April 10, 2021 at 14:35:14
mlsstl
Audiophile

Posts: 1079
Location: Midwest
Joined: September 1, 2015
The songwriter -- no matter how good and already well-known -- never gets a cut of the performer's royalties.

One can make your argument for any number of other situations in other lines of business. Those arrangements are typically called kickbacks and often even illegal. I know of a few people in the insurance industry that actually went to jail for taking a share of commissions to which they were not legally entitled.

But, the music business is its own world.

 

Only because the top performers are more valuable than the top songwriters, posted on April 10, 2021 at 16:16:24
And just to be clear, I'm talking about market value, not artistic value.

The market for popular music cares more about the performer than the songwriter. It may not be fair, but that's the way it is.

Same goes for cinema. There's more people who will watch a film because it stars their favorite actor than people who will watch a film because it was made by their favorite director or producer. EDIT: And I even forgot to mention the screenwriter. Goes to show you.

 

RE: Your example is a one-way street, posted on April 10, 2021 at 16:32:05
b.l.zeebub
Audiophile

Posts: 9361
Location: 52deg 28'N,1deg56'W
Joined: April 17, 2006
The deal is that the credited writer gets 50% of the money a song generates and the performer the other 50%.

However the record company charges the performer for promotional costs, recording costs, musicians, meetings, business lunches, percentages paid to producers etc.

In the end the writer always gets more money than the performer.
Which is why The Beatles started to write their own songs.
I know a number of songwriters who are financially substantially better off that the artists who recorded their songs.

 

PS: For example Oasis, posted on April 11, 2021 at 02:48:07
b.l.zeebub
Audiophile

Posts: 9361
Location: 52deg 28'N,1deg56'W
Joined: April 17, 2006
Liam Gallagher was worth £10million (5 million after divorce) while brother Noel is worth over £50 million.

Difference being Noel has the writing credits for the Oasis songs while Liam was just a band member.
No doubt a cause for the acrimonious split between the two and therefore the band. Seems Liam is very bitter about that.

 

Joni quote: "The popular music industry has always been run by crooks . . ., posted on April 12, 2021 at 11:18:10
Brian H P
Audiophile

Posts: 1291
Location: Oregon
Joined: December 18, 2012
But at least back in the 'sixties and 'seventies, some of the crooks loved music."

 

Page processed in 0.032 seconds.