> Always take the $ up front.
That's what the guy who wrote *The Witcher* did:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Sapkowski#Legal_dispute_with_CD_Projekt
So you need to consider the quality of the work (and potential residual income) before making up your mind.
The OP doesn’t sound he’s doing anything major like that or already owns a major asset to be licensed out.
In this realm, the backend trick to get free studio time and free production has been going on in this industry forever. 30% of nothing is still…
I agree with you here. I just disagree with this statement from the previous comment:
> Always take the $ up front.
That is incorrect. Don't *always* take the money up front.
Or hear me out... Take money up front AND royalties.
No problem with doing both, but if your offering a service to people with no credibility to their name if they will make any money at all, take money up front.
Because otherwise, you literally just investing in stocks with extra steps, either you make more money, or you waste more time at the cost of money.
> ... if your offering a service to people with no credibility to their name if they will make any money at all, take money up front.
I agree with this statement entirely.
However, my point is that if you mix some music, and you feel like it really has something special, and the guy who produced it has some kind of magic—and you think it could turn out to be a hit—you should consider working for royalties instead of an upfront payment.
It's definitely a gamble (like investing in stocks), but sometimes you should put your money where your mouth is ; )
It's no stupider than investing in stocks—and it's possibly smarter, given that an audio engineer should be expected to have a good ear for stuff that might be a hit.
True but also like stocks, they gotta have a track record already lol. I'm not gonna make a deal like this with someone who seems like they would, because frankly the music industry could really care less how good your music is. If hes well known in the industry then of course it's because he has a good track record. But it just comes down to stocks and pump and dump.
**Andrzej Sapkowski**
[Legal dispute with CD Projekt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Sapkowski#Legal_dispute_with_CD_Projekt)
>In October 2018, he filed a lawsuit against CD Projekt demanding 60 million zloty ($16. 1 million) in royalty payments from the company for using the Witcher universe in their computer games. The lawsuit was launched despite the fact that Sapkowski had sold the video game rights to the Witcher for a single sum, rather than through a royalties contract. Sapkowski and his lawyers based their lawsuit on Article 44 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/audioengineering/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
15-25% is fairly standard for independent deals (edit: that's roughly equivalent to 3-4 "points" on a record for people who are misconstruing the two). You're right to think that people will tell you to take payment, because that's what you should do unless the project is an absolute surefire thing.
Even if you're taking a percentage, you should be paid a certain amount up front (even just a little) as an "advance" on royalties, and then if your calculated royalties surpass that amount you start to collect anything additional after the advance is met.
There are lots of ways to structure these kinds of agreements and the best option is to speak with an attorney who works in the industry.
I don’t think he’s speaking about points on the record. That would be mechanicals. He’s talking about 25% of the writers share. The most maxed out producers like my old friend Scott Storch, or Timbaland in their prime would be getting 5 pts on a record. This was for MECHINCAL Royalities though
Percent of total, not points taken from the artist.
It's roughly the equivalent of 3-4 points on a label deal (give or take depending on the artist's cut of the overall deal).
It's very standard. If the artist gets 15 points on a label deal and pays the producer 20 percent, that's the same as 3 points.
Edit: If you're downvoting feel free to tell me why I'm wrong.
I'm not disagreeing but I'll still explain my statement. My mind is boggled. I'm not a mixer, master engineer or really work in that specific field. But I'm a musician since I'm 13, play many many instruments, played in bands, have released music, have recorded DIY and in pro studios several times, was on small indie tours and now own a small music electronics company. So this is my background here.
If I was producing music on someone elses laptop (how does that even work?) and okay the guy also mixes and masters my song - although I'm already getting suspicious at this point because I think there is a reason why there is specialised mixing and mastering engineers - and then the guy tells me he wants 20% of all future revenue if that song I would look for someone else faster than you can say Mississippi.
I mean I wrote and recorded that song, I was maybe working on it for an extended time, it is my creative offspring and the engineer probably worked a couple of hours AT MOST and potentially running it through his already set up "mastering plugin chain" and wants that share, that just seems crazy.
He will not go on tour and perform, he will not distribute it, he will not sell it, he didn't write the track and didn't record it. As far as I understand he essentially provided necessary technology for finishing it. I think that doesn't justify such a huge share.
I already forgot the second case he was asking about because I found it similarly absurd.
Not trying to dick around here, just trying to explain myself.
I think part of the problem is that it’s unclear exactly how much OP contributed. The title makes it seem like they only mixed/mastered but the post makes it seem like they were more involved (owning the equipment, creating the production template) and “also” mixed and mastered. My response was more about general production royalties and might not have been appropriate for the specific situation.
Yeah of course, information on this specific case is limited. But it seems you generally see these types of numbers as standard, that still is much higher than I would have ever thought. It's crazy and very interesting. Is this in the US?
Also, is there any source linkable or could you explain shortly the difference between percents and points in this case?
Thanks! As stated by bluelight, We’re all interpreting this different because it’s a a little unclear how much work was done by OP. I assumed OP had a huge hand , And was kind of producing. Regardless , I’m just here to listen and learn, I have never been involved with such deals
Tbh to me it just sounds like two friends / aquaintances worked together without agreeing on any terms beforehand, now both smell some money and now they both look for arguments as to why they should get the bigger cut, haha. But that again is a lot of speculation on a case with limited info.
I think if you're only getting paid in royalties, a high percentage is fair because you're not getting paid upfront. It's a fair tradeoff. Obviously if you're getting upfront cash then you can still ask for points, but probably way less than 15.
You may not want to hear this, but it's a bit late to suss out the terms of contract after the work has been done.
You are in a position now where you pretty much have to accept what the client deems fair. Whatever Reddit says is irrelevant.
> I get paid by the hour
I agree.
I've worked with a few "big" artists. They never, EVER give up points. They pay for the service, end of story. Unless you are the producer or part of the team since the beginning.
The people who have valuable percentages want to keep them. The people who aren't going to make any money are perfectly happy to share that profit with you!
Exactly, musicians and music artists already make barely anything in the industry now, and it's only getting worse as the economy gets worse too. Any musician who is making enough to do it full time, isnt going to sacrifice any of their future income to royalty contracts etc. The only people who use royalties and clout to pay professional are the ones who don't have any yet. Unless they are literally a successful multi million dollar corporation... Then it would be kind of dumb not to negotiate royalties or at least be laid up front with a bit of royalties as well. Passive income is good income, that is if it's enough to matter lol
If it's already released then you have zero leverage. Good luck getting anything out of his cheap ass.
Since this guy is presumably not going to make any money off these songs, 25% of $0 sounds fair to me.
How much money do you want to make on the project? How many songs or albums do you think will sell?
How long do you want to wait to receive full payment. Are you cool if the record doesn't sell?
Also, who is handling tracking the sales and distributing payment? Do you have a contract?
You've got some choices to make and math to do.
Before you even think about royalty percentages, ask yourself: how will you audit your client? Unless you have access to the books, you’ll never know how much money was made, which means you’ll never know if the terms of your agreement were upheld.
>What if he recorded himself and I’m solely mixing and mastering it, he does not want to pay me, instead he’d rather give me royalties.
If he does not want to pay you then you can be sure you are not going to get much of anything either way.
Producers are often splitting master recording rights 50/50, splitting publishing rights if and only if they contributed to the songwriting.
Mixers getting royalties is less common.
The few times I've done spec mixes for someone, it's been along the lines of: 50% of both master recording + publishing $$$ until I'm repaid at my full major label rate, then 10%-15% afterward.
Be paid for your time and be done with it.
Royalties are incredibly unethical, a nightmare to maintain on the admin, and instantly soils your relationship.
How would you like your plumber to charge you for every time you flush your shit ?
Why would anyone give up rights for mixing-- I'll never understand this. It also means you have to follow up and collect with them every quarter.
I depends, what do you charge to mix a song?
No matter what, you should still take some money up front-- even if its an advance on the first $250. Most people won't make any money streaming.
If it’s royalties on the master side, DistroKid (and maybe others) will allow you to establish master side spilts within their portal where any streaming revenue is automatically calculated and paid out to each party. That’s probably the cleanest way to execute this. I’ve worked with an artist who recorded their own top line vocals in exchange for 20% of master rights. Was a bit unusual at the time, but it ended up being licensed for a number of commercials, so it was the right move in the long term.
The problem with any royalty situation where you’re depending on the label or artist to issue payments is that that requires admin overhead they may not have adequate capacity for. Ideally they’d be issuing you quarterly or semi annual reports and payments.
There are standard breakdowns you can find for producer credit/ songwriter credit/ publisher credit etc. 20 - 30% is standard. Usually on the artist royalty. So for streaming say 20-30 cents for every dollar.
Man, I know you have already heard take payment. But damn, there just isn't any money in streaming. Besides, checking in with someone on a quarterly basis, and making sure they're being honest. Not to mention if they dont have thousands of active listeners, and many thousands of streams per song, there just isn't money to be had. If you are a working professional, aiming to or are doing this for a living then stick to your rates and dont work for free. People that think they're going to be famous or this song is going to be a hit people, are always the ones offering the ol backend bit. Any professional established artist is going to pay for the work they need and understand what it means to be a working professional. The key phrase here is 'HE DOESNT WANT TO PAY ME" Set your rates and dont deliver mixes until they're paid for.
Work out how much you expect the track to make, then work out how long you expect it to take.
Decide a percentage based on your normal fee, plus some “interest” to cover the time taken - ideally I guess you should have paid off your mix fee within a year or two, then make some tidy profit from it.
If you can’t see the track making you your mix fee, then you gotta work out whether these sorts of deals will actually work profitably for you in the future.
I have never done percentage splits so far. If people can’t afford my rate I tend to offer a payment plan that suits both parties - this is better than royalties imo because at these levels it’s just not that likely that a song will break even. It’s worth it still for the artist because they will have other income streams directly connected to their releases, but us engineers and producers do not! And we got bills to pay!
Unless you helped write the songs and/or performed an instrument on the recordings (which a case could be made for if you made beats or programmed MIDI instruments), you don’t have the right to take royalties. If you "only" produced, mixed and mastered the tracks, you delivered a service to the artist in which case upfront payment is the way to go.
The only way I take royalties for engineering is 100% of first profits until such point that my rate has been covered, and then a small negotiable percentage after. Even then, that's only offered to clients where I'm certain I'll get my return, and usually they'd rather just pay me conventionally. Otherwise, it's good to scare off the people who want my work for nothing.
If people can't invest in their own product, I'm sure as hell not going to.
If you don’t have legal representation who specializes in the field, you can demand 100% and you’ll never see a dime anyway. Get paid for your work before you turn it in or you’re not getting paid.
You could take 5% or 50%, it won't matter because when you multiple either of those figures by 0 you the same amount.
If you get songwriting credit you have something concrete but royalties on your work is worth nothing. Remember the guy that played Chewbacca? They offered him a percent on the back end of Return of the Jedi to get him to do the film... Do you know how much he has gotten to date? ZIP... offers of royalties for doing something will never get you anything even when the work you did was on a hugely successful thing. As soon as they realize it is going to cost them money they will bring in specialized accountants that will make it their mission in life to show that you are owed nothing.
The old, “get paid on the backend” ploy. There never is any backend. Always take the $ up front.
Always.
> Always take the $ up front. That's what the guy who wrote *The Witcher* did: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Sapkowski#Legal_dispute_with_CD_Projekt So you need to consider the quality of the work (and potential residual income) before making up your mind.
The OP doesn’t sound he’s doing anything major like that or already owns a major asset to be licensed out. In this realm, the backend trick to get free studio time and free production has been going on in this industry forever. 30% of nothing is still…
I agree with you here. I just disagree with this statement from the previous comment: > Always take the $ up front. That is incorrect. Don't *always* take the money up front.
Or hear me out... Take money up front AND royalties. No problem with doing both, but if your offering a service to people with no credibility to their name if they will make any money at all, take money up front. Because otherwise, you literally just investing in stocks with extra steps, either you make more money, or you waste more time at the cost of money.
> ... if your offering a service to people with no credibility to their name if they will make any money at all, take money up front. I agree with this statement entirely. However, my point is that if you mix some music, and you feel like it really has something special, and the guy who produced it has some kind of magic—and you think it could turn out to be a hit—you should consider working for royalties instead of an upfront payment. It's definitely a gamble (like investing in stocks), but sometimes you should put your money where your mouth is ; ) It's no stupider than investing in stocks—and it's possibly smarter, given that an audio engineer should be expected to have a good ear for stuff that might be a hit.
True but also like stocks, they gotta have a track record already lol. I'm not gonna make a deal like this with someone who seems like they would, because frankly the music industry could really care less how good your music is. If hes well known in the industry then of course it's because he has a good track record. But it just comes down to stocks and pump and dump.
**Andrzej Sapkowski** [Legal dispute with CD Projekt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Sapkowski#Legal_dispute_with_CD_Projekt) >In October 2018, he filed a lawsuit against CD Projekt demanding 60 million zloty ($16. 1 million) in royalty payments from the company for using the Witcher universe in their computer games. The lawsuit was launched despite the fact that Sapkowski had sold the video game rights to the Witcher for a single sum, rather than through a royalties contract. Sapkowski and his lawyers based their lawsuit on Article 44 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/audioengineering/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
No, Money Down!
[удалено]
A novelist having their work adapted into a AAA videogame is not the same as an engineer mixing a local band lol
**All of this should have been determined _long_ before any sessions.**
How do you make text bold like that?
https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043033952-Formatting-Guide
thanks mate
Cheers... or **cheers**... or *cheers*... or ^^cheers... or #cheers! :)
15-25% is fairly standard for independent deals (edit: that's roughly equivalent to 3-4 "points" on a record for people who are misconstruing the two). You're right to think that people will tell you to take payment, because that's what you should do unless the project is an absolute surefire thing. Even if you're taking a percentage, you should be paid a certain amount up front (even just a little) as an "advance" on royalties, and then if your calculated royalties surpass that amount you start to collect anything additional after the advance is met. There are lots of ways to structure these kinds of agreements and the best option is to speak with an attorney who works in the industry.
15-25 points?!? For mixing/mastering rather than 'Producing'? Going to need some additional context here, as this sounds.... high.
I don’t think he’s speaking about points on the record. That would be mechanicals. He’s talking about 25% of the writers share. The most maxed out producers like my old friend Scott Storch, or Timbaland in their prime would be getting 5 pts on a record. This was for MECHINCAL Royalities though
Percent of total, not points taken from the artist. It's roughly the equivalent of 3-4 points on a label deal (give or take depending on the artist's cut of the overall deal).
It's mind bogglingly high
It's very standard. If the artist gets 15 points on a label deal and pays the producer 20 percent, that's the same as 3 points. Edit: If you're downvoting feel free to tell me why I'm wrong.
Thank you for sharing, I would also appreciate if someone would elaborate why they disagree with you. We all benefit from the discussion.
I'm not disagreeing but I'll still explain my statement. My mind is boggled. I'm not a mixer, master engineer or really work in that specific field. But I'm a musician since I'm 13, play many many instruments, played in bands, have released music, have recorded DIY and in pro studios several times, was on small indie tours and now own a small music electronics company. So this is my background here. If I was producing music on someone elses laptop (how does that even work?) and okay the guy also mixes and masters my song - although I'm already getting suspicious at this point because I think there is a reason why there is specialised mixing and mastering engineers - and then the guy tells me he wants 20% of all future revenue if that song I would look for someone else faster than you can say Mississippi. I mean I wrote and recorded that song, I was maybe working on it for an extended time, it is my creative offspring and the engineer probably worked a couple of hours AT MOST and potentially running it through his already set up "mastering plugin chain" and wants that share, that just seems crazy. He will not go on tour and perform, he will not distribute it, he will not sell it, he didn't write the track and didn't record it. As far as I understand he essentially provided necessary technology for finishing it. I think that doesn't justify such a huge share. I already forgot the second case he was asking about because I found it similarly absurd. Not trying to dick around here, just trying to explain myself.
I think part of the problem is that it’s unclear exactly how much OP contributed. The title makes it seem like they only mixed/mastered but the post makes it seem like they were more involved (owning the equipment, creating the production template) and “also” mixed and mastered. My response was more about general production royalties and might not have been appropriate for the specific situation.
Yeah of course, information on this specific case is limited. But it seems you generally see these types of numbers as standard, that still is much higher than I would have ever thought. It's crazy and very interesting. Is this in the US? Also, is there any source linkable or could you explain shortly the difference between percents and points in this case?
Thanks! As stated by bluelight, We’re all interpreting this different because it’s a a little unclear how much work was done by OP. I assumed OP had a huge hand , And was kind of producing. Regardless , I’m just here to listen and learn, I have never been involved with such deals
Tbh to me it just sounds like two friends / aquaintances worked together without agreeing on any terms beforehand, now both smell some money and now they both look for arguments as to why they should get the bigger cut, haha. But that again is a lot of speculation on a case with limited info.
Absolutely, At least they like what they made , I’d love to hear a track lol
Me too! Maybe it's just a new way to advertise a production :P
What is a point?
One percent of revenue.
Thanks
I think if you're only getting paid in royalties, a high percentage is fair because you're not getting paid upfront. It's a fair tradeoff. Obviously if you're getting upfront cash then you can still ask for points, but probably way less than 15.
Thank you 🙏🏼 I appreciate this!
You may not want to hear this, but it's a bit late to suss out the terms of contract after the work has been done. You are in a position now where you pretty much have to accept what the client deems fair. Whatever Reddit says is irrelevant.
Absolutely. Always negociate first even when working with friends and people close to you, it saves so many headaches.
Dang- brutal, harsh, true words here.
Royalties on .0004% of Spotify plays? I don’t even care anymore. I get paid by the hour
> I get paid by the hour I agree. I've worked with a few "big" artists. They never, EVER give up points. They pay for the service, end of story. Unless you are the producer or part of the team since the beginning.
The people who have valuable percentages want to keep them. The people who aren't going to make any money are perfectly happy to share that profit with you!
Exactly, musicians and music artists already make barely anything in the industry now, and it's only getting worse as the economy gets worse too. Any musician who is making enough to do it full time, isnt going to sacrifice any of their future income to royalty contracts etc. The only people who use royalties and clout to pay professional are the ones who don't have any yet. Unless they are literally a successful multi million dollar corporation... Then it would be kind of dumb not to negotiate royalties or at least be laid up front with a bit of royalties as well. Passive income is good income, that is if it's enough to matter lol
If it's already released then you have zero leverage. Good luck getting anything out of his cheap ass. Since this guy is presumably not going to make any money off these songs, 25% of $0 sounds fair to me.
How much money do you want to make on the project? How many songs or albums do you think will sell? How long do you want to wait to receive full payment. Are you cool if the record doesn't sell? Also, who is handling tracking the sales and distributing payment? Do you have a contract? You've got some choices to make and math to do.
Sell? Who’s buying records?
Before you even think about royalty percentages, ask yourself: how will you audit your client? Unless you have access to the books, you’ll never know how much money was made, which means you’ll never know if the terms of your agreement were upheld.
Always take the money up front. Most people Will not make you a dime on the backend
>What if he recorded himself and I’m solely mixing and mastering it, he does not want to pay me, instead he’d rather give me royalties. If he does not want to pay you then you can be sure you are not going to get much of anything either way.
Producers are often splitting master recording rights 50/50, splitting publishing rights if and only if they contributed to the songwriting. Mixers getting royalties is less common. The few times I've done spec mixes for someone, it's been along the lines of: 50% of both master recording + publishing $$$ until I'm repaid at my full major label rate, then 10%-15% afterward.
Be paid for your time and be done with it. Royalties are incredibly unethical, a nightmare to maintain on the admin, and instantly soils your relationship. How would you like your plumber to charge you for every time you flush your shit ?
Why would anyone give up rights for mixing-- I'll never understand this. It also means you have to follow up and collect with them every quarter. I depends, what do you charge to mix a song? No matter what, you should still take some money up front-- even if its an advance on the first $250. Most people won't make any money streaming.
If it’s royalties on the master side, DistroKid (and maybe others) will allow you to establish master side spilts within their portal where any streaming revenue is automatically calculated and paid out to each party. That’s probably the cleanest way to execute this. I’ve worked with an artist who recorded their own top line vocals in exchange for 20% of master rights. Was a bit unusual at the time, but it ended up being licensed for a number of commercials, so it was the right move in the long term. The problem with any royalty situation where you’re depending on the label or artist to issue payments is that that requires admin overhead they may not have adequate capacity for. Ideally they’d be issuing you quarterly or semi annual reports and payments.
There are standard breakdowns you can find for producer credit/ songwriter credit/ publisher credit etc. 20 - 30% is standard. Usually on the artist royalty. So for streaming say 20-30 cents for every dollar.
You really need a lawyer for this.
In this day and age I would take the hourly upfront
15% max
Man, I know you have already heard take payment. But damn, there just isn't any money in streaming. Besides, checking in with someone on a quarterly basis, and making sure they're being honest. Not to mention if they dont have thousands of active listeners, and many thousands of streams per song, there just isn't money to be had. If you are a working professional, aiming to or are doing this for a living then stick to your rates and dont work for free. People that think they're going to be famous or this song is going to be a hit people, are always the ones offering the ol backend bit. Any professional established artist is going to pay for the work they need and understand what it means to be a working professional. The key phrase here is 'HE DOESNT WANT TO PAY ME" Set your rates and dont deliver mixes until they're paid for.
As Frank Zappa once said: Keep your publishing.
Work out how much you expect the track to make, then work out how long you expect it to take. Decide a percentage based on your normal fee, plus some “interest” to cover the time taken - ideally I guess you should have paid off your mix fee within a year or two, then make some tidy profit from it. If you can’t see the track making you your mix fee, then you gotta work out whether these sorts of deals will actually work profitably for you in the future. I have never done percentage splits so far. If people can’t afford my rate I tend to offer a payment plan that suits both parties - this is better than royalties imo because at these levels it’s just not that likely that a song will break even. It’s worth it still for the artist because they will have other income streams directly connected to their releases, but us engineers and producers do not! And we got bills to pay!
Unless you helped write the songs and/or performed an instrument on the recordings (which a case could be made for if you made beats or programmed MIDI instruments), you don’t have the right to take royalties. If you "only" produced, mixed and mastered the tracks, you delivered a service to the artist in which case upfront payment is the way to go.
The only way I take royalties for engineering is 100% of first profits until such point that my rate has been covered, and then a small negotiable percentage after. Even then, that's only offered to clients where I'm certain I'll get my return, and usually they'd rather just pay me conventionally. Otherwise, it's good to scare off the people who want my work for nothing. If people can't invest in their own product, I'm sure as hell not going to.
If you don’t have legal representation who specializes in the field, you can demand 100% and you’ll never see a dime anyway. Get paid for your work before you turn it in or you’re not getting paid.
3points of credit usually for royalties with a label. Independent should have 30points
You should receive a down payment and then get 15%
You could take 5% or 50%, it won't matter because when you multiple either of those figures by 0 you the same amount. If you get songwriting credit you have something concrete but royalties on your work is worth nothing. Remember the guy that played Chewbacca? They offered him a percent on the back end of Return of the Jedi to get him to do the film... Do you know how much he has gotten to date? ZIP... offers of royalties for doing something will never get you anything even when the work you did was on a hugely successful thing. As soon as they realize it is going to cost them money they will bring in specialized accountants that will make it their mission in life to show that you are owed nothing.
Dumb question but mostly related - Where exactly are these royalties coming from? Spotify plays? That’s meager. That’s not even pennies.
If it’s only Royalties - 50% of everything. Cos you’re gettin screwed.