Conflict with future labels if you release your own material

[mnmlmike]

There are many reasons why you see the same track on many labels but the two most common are.

Territory based:
One label will sign the track for certain territories of the world. They will then license it to another label
for a fee to another label in a different territory (for multiple reasons)

Compilation:
Often on beatport you'll see a track on 2-3-4 even 5 different labels. Usually what it is is a label will
put out a compilation with that track on it, beatport usually just puts the most recent release at the top
so it can be kind of confusing.

As for releasing your own stuff. It really depends. For example

The track "Asteroidz" was released a while ago by D.O.N.S. and DBN on their own label. It's a quality record
but due to the labels lack of resources it didn't do that great. Later Yoshitoshi picked it up, had a bunch of big names do
remixes for it and bam into the limelight for the track.

So keep pumpin away your tunes. If the label wants it bad enough they'll make exceptions

[UKRuss]

Good point that. Get it out there Ravester!

[mnmlmike]

[.

I am guessing I can always pull the track from the shops anyhow if it gets signed. Dunno if you can really do that mind



@russ cheers

Yes you can and you'll be fine. Release away. What kind of music do you make?

[ethios4]

Every label I've sent material to has noticed if the track is on myspace or elsewhere and commented about it. They've all mentioned that many labels are very interested in exclusivity and don't even want anyone to have heard the track before if they are going to sign it. No one has turned me down because of having the music already available, but it is always mentioned, eve if only to say they disagree with the practice.

[Hidden Driveways]

If you were a label, and you could sign one artist, and there were two that you liked. One of them put out their own music and consistantly sells albums. The other has been sitting on their music and no one has ever heard it. Do you sign the artist who has fans and consistantly sells records, or do you sign the totally unknown artist?

[lunabass]

Every label I've sent material to has noticed if the track is on myspace or elsewhere and commented about it. They've all mentioned that many labels are very interested in exclusivity and don't even want anyone to have heard the track before if they are going to sign it. No one has turned me down because of having the music already available, but it is always mentioned, eve if only to say they disagree with the practice.

putting preview versions up on your myspace instead of the full versions keeps many labels happy regarding exclusivity.

i'd go for it rave. if the tunes are good, labels will want to sign it regardless

[H20nly]

putting preview versions up on your myspace instead of the full versions keeps many labels happy regarding exclusivity.

this is a good point. maybe keep your solo projects up as preview/demo status while you feel around that way its an easy fix if the label wants some of that material too... or... in case you need to become dedicated solely to them.

it would be way cool if you got such a fatty deal that you had to take all your other pokers out the fire, but could do so with peace of mind.

best of luck regardless.

[Pitch Black]

As mnmlmike pointed out, its quite common. It's called a non-exclusive license. It means many different labels are able to sell as many copies of a tune or album as they are able to.

Sometimes such non-exclusive licenses will dictate the territory, or perhaps the medium of distribution, but often they don't. Each label or outlet is able to sell as much as they want, how they want.

For example, we have a physical CD deal for NZ/AUST, another one for Europe/USA, and one for Asia. Plus an internet deal thru various net outlets based in NZ and Aust, and another net deal for the rest-of-the-world thru a net aggregator. The net aggregator (Ingrooves) makes our stuff available to many different net outlets/iTunes etc. Those territories are all defined and everyone is happy.

Go for it - there's nothing like having a ready-made buzz about your tunes to entice a label!

[Khazul]

If you get something out yourself, and it get even a small measure of sucess, then it can put you in a much better position with a potential label and of course attract more useful labels too.

I think its mainly the big 3/5 owned labels that tend to want to exclusively own your ass and have you pass the soap etc...

Smaller more specialist ones tend to be thankful for whatever business they can get and alot more open to discussion.

[The Carpet Cleaner]

Interesting topic.
What about releasing and trying to promote a few songs by yourself, like for example, on Bandcamp, or itunes (I dont know...). Then in the same time, try to get a contract with labels for the same songs that you have already released by yourself. Is it alright?

[The Carpet Cleaner]

Interesting topic.
What about releasing and trying to promote a few songs by yourself, like for example, on Bandcamp, or itunes (I dont know...). Then in the same time, try to get a contract with labels for the same songs that you have already released by yourself. Is it alright?

This is what is being discussed fella. It appears to be ok to a certain degree.

cheers, I wanted to have a confirmation that I understood the discussion correctly.

[ethios4]

Good to know it's not as black and white as it's been described to me....makes me overly cautious!

[beats me]

I could be wrong here, but with tons of labels out there I see having tracks on a label as mostly an ego stroke and resume builder for the artist, similar to having your name on a double sided color glossy flyer. It's really not going to be a huge career booster unless you and the label are close to the top tier.

I think in a lot of cases both parties are asking "What can you do for me?" and the answer to that question in a lot of cases is "not much".

[Pitch Black]

I could be wrong here, but with tons of labels out there I see having tracks on a label as mostly an ego stroke and resume builder for the artist, similar to having your name on a double sided color glossy flyer. It's really not going to be a huge career booster unless you and the label are close to the top tier.

I think in a lot of cases both parties are asking "What can you do for me?" and the answer to that question in a lot of cases is "not much".

It's been said that the music industry is built on two sets of dreams: the dreams of the fans about the stars, and the dreams of musicians to be stars.

The reality of the industry is that there is very rarely ever a "huge career booster". It's much more an incremental series of steps. You do a small deal, and if it works out, you grow, you gain knowledge, and you do a slightly bigger deal the next time. Anyone promising you a "huge career boost" is indeed very likely to be a con-artist blowing smoke up your skirt (unless they're a Richard Branson or a David Geffen - and those guys would probably be fairly calm and laid back in laying out their expectations of success).

You're absolutely right that both parties should ask "what can you do for me?", and if the answer for both parties is "more than I could do by myself" you then have a basis on which to possibly form a relationship, on whatever level is appropriate.

For example, Mike and I signed with Ingrooves four years ago and we now sell around 10,000 tracks a month via the internet. Sure a lot of those sales might be for 1 or 2 cents each, but getting our stuff out there has helped us to build a profile around the world. We sure as sh*t couldn't make that happen by ourselves. We're musicians, not web techs or promoters or salesmen. We're not rich or famous, but we get to do what we do for a living. The thing is to be optimistic, be realistic, and don't be deluded - or worse, self deluded - that having a deal = success. It was never that way. Each deal is just another step up the ladder, each track you put out or album you release is like another lottery ticket in the game. Each deal is (potentially!) a chance for incremental growth.

[boomstix]

[quote="Sure a lot of those sales might be for 1 or 2 cents each

really??

that seems quite cheap, even for the internetz. i suppose royalties on a cd were pretty small back when people still bought those but still..

at least with that kind of audience, you can do some pretty big shows i imagine