|
|
Posted by tysonjm on 02/06/07 02:35
On Jan 30, 3:40 pm, "Steve King"
<steveSPAMBL...@stevekingSPAMBLOCK.net> wrote:
> "Bill" <t...@chromehorse.net> wrote in message
>
> news:Tpidnd5Rn69kKCLYnZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d@golden.net...
>
> > Reading my own message over again, I think I sound annoying. Don't mean
> > to. Let me just say that I think you can work with local musicians, but
> > Steve is right to point out that there are advantages and disadvantages,
> > and it might depend on if you're lucky enough to know the right people.
>
> > I do like the idea of supporting local musicians where you can because
> > life is better when we nurture our own communities.
>
> I like that idea, too. Unfortunately, I don't have the luxury of hanging
> out with my musician friends in the hope that they can come up with a score
> that lifts my video to another level. The likelihood of success seems
> pretty slim to me. My perspective is influenced by my own experience. I
> spent almost ten years of my life as a recording studio engineer in Chicago.
> The studio I worked with was busy. We did jingle commercials all day and
> R&B and R&R all night. The day-clients, commercial music producers,
> typically booked one hour of set-up, one hour to do music tracks (often with
> larger groups with percussion, horns & strings), and one hour to do vocals.
> Mixes took one to two hours. The composer/producer, the musicians, and the
> singers were thorough professionals. Often the music house received an
> assignment one day and recorded the next. As a contrast, I have spent
> countless hours watching bands struggle in the studio to work out
> arrangements and to get their "sound" from live performance to jell in the
> studio. The percentage that came within a country mile of the skill-level
> of the commercial music producers and the session players was very small.
> So, for commercial film and video projects, where it makes sense, I try to
> get the budget from my clients for original music. Then I go to people who
> do that for a living. On the other hand, I recently worked with some
> friends on an independent short feature. For that the producer did put the
> arm on a bunch of musician friends and a studio owner. We spent the better
> part of two days trying this and trying that, playing footage over and over
> in the hopes that it would inspire wonderfullness. For the most part that
> didn't happen. In the final edit about three-quarters of the film score
> ended up being created from library music. It might have happened
> differently. But, it didn't. So, I remain a skeptic. My advice to video
> producers, if one cannot afford professionally produced original music,
> still is to rely on library music. And, to spend enough time in the
> selection process so that the dreadful stuff can be avoided.
>
> Steve King
>
>
>
> > Bill wrote:
> >> All sounds very corporate and institutional to me. If that's what you
> >> feel you need to go to to feel safe, so be it.
>
> >> However, the idea that you need a studio, a producer, and engineer, and a
> >> team of session musicians is ridiculous. That's what you do if you have
> >> lots of money to spend and want to take a committee approach. It
> >> certainly doesn't guarrantee that the resulting product will by any more
> >> distinguished than downloadable tracks.
>
> >> I know some local musicians-- and this is not a big town-- who have their
> >> own digital eight-track recording equipment and are highly capable of
> >> creating distinctive original music with a bit of flavour and personality
> >> to it. All of the money you could put into having the arrangements
> >> "written" and hiring an engineer and producer could buy these men and
> >> women more time to develop their work.
>
> >> If I was doing a lot of productions in this area, I would develop some
> >> relationships with these people.
>
> >> But I grant you, it might be possible to find some interesting music
> >> available in the libraries if, as you say, you avoid the electronica, and
> >> spend enough time searching and listening.
>
> >> Steve King wrote:
>
> >>> How so? The composer would still have to spend time 'customizing' the
> >>> music. The arrangments (unless you're in Nashville) would have to be
> >>> written. A studio and engineer would have to be hired. The musicians
> >>> would have to return to the studio, at least some of them. Now, instead
> >>> of from $20 to $150 per track a producer could be looking at well into
> >>> four figures or more, unless everyone's working for free.
>
> >>> I find that there is a wonderful variety licensable music available.
> >>> Much of it using real instruments. Admittedly much of it all
> >>> electronic, too. And dreadful. But, if one cares to look among the
> >>> many, many libraries there is quality music to be had. For me, the real
> >>> cost of a good library music track is in my time spent making the choice
> >>> .- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
So, that said ("that" meaning everything mentioned above about the
reasons and obstacles faced when hiring musicians for original music),
if you're going to use the alternative and spend time searching for
some decent and workable library music, what about that process could
be made easier for you? Since it's time-consuming to wade through
endless samples, is there anything that might make it faster or more
efficient? Is it just about having to wade through the crap to find
the gems? Or is the challenge more about wading through crap AND
quality, but finding just the right track(s) that will work
creatively? It just sounds like the biggest problem with this option
is the time it takes...
If you could create your ideal music library site, what are some
things you'd look for that would keep you coming back again and again
and refer others to it? Lots of questions, I know, but I'm genuinely
interested in what everyone's looking for when using stock music.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|