NOT The biggest secret in the music industry

[SteveK]

Now, we all know that Sting has a *coughs* certain reputation. I've had no personal experience of the man so don't really like to comment.
However, I came across this:
[media]http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/entertainment-articles/fun-fact-sting-makes-2000-royalties-every-day-every-breath-take/[/media]

In the other [i]similarly titled[/i] thread, Bilbo talks of the unfairness of songwriters royalties - I disagreed with him.
But in the case above, I think it totally unfair, and Sting only confirms, at least to me, that he is the [s]schmuck[/s] person that most of the world thinks he is.

EDIT: BTW the interview is 14 years old, so may not be news to some.

Edited January 9, 2014 by SteveK

[John Cellario]

I always thought Sting was just a tad...pretentious. My wife went to the school opposite him in Geordie Land so where does the accent he uses now come from? And, he used to be a milkman.

[TimR]

I think they're just messing around aren't they. They're all multi-millionaires. It's like Brian May arguing with Freddie Mercury over one particular song.

I heard a story where someone saw some royalty cheques sitting on a desk at a record company. They were waiting to be 'picked up'. One was for 'sting' for several thousand pounds. According to the date, it had been on the desk for a few months.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1389302408' post='2332703']
Now, we all know that Sting has a *coughs* certain reputation. I've had no personal experience of the man so don't really like to comment.
However, I came across this:
[media]http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/entertainment-articles/fun-fact-sting-makes-2000-royalties-every-day-every-breath-take/[/media]

In the other [i]similarly titled[/i] thread, Bilbo talks of the unfairness of songwriters royalties - I disagreed with him.
But in the case above, I think it totally unfair, and Sting only confirms, at least to me, that he is the [s]schmuck[/s] person that most of the world thinks he is.

EDIT: BTW the interview is 14 years old, so may not be news to some.
[/quote]

Yes, it's very unfair. But, I think there's something about being a high-profile musician. Quite a few seem to have very large egos and a very "I can do what I like" attitude, and it makes me wonder if it's the money and fame that corrupts the person and makes them like that, or are people with that mentality just more likely to go further in the music world? It's all very peculiar, I think. Of course, there are some very altruistic and honest musicians out there with great personalities. It's awful to say, but I think I would pass on the opportunity to meet any musician that I really looked up to.

[SteveK]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1389302953' post='2332720']
I think they're just messing around aren't they.
[/quote]
You may be right, maybe these lines from the article are an attempt by the journalist to jeuje it up a bit:

"Andy Summers is still understandably bitter about what happened with "Every Breath You Take" "

and

" "Every Breath You Take" was discussed and it was clear that emotions were still unresolved:"

[TimR]

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1389308627' post='2332813']

You may be right, maybe these lines from the article are an attempt by the journalist to jeuje it up a bit:

"Andy Summers is still understandably bitter about what happened with "Every Breath You Take" "

and

" "Every Breath You Take" was discussed and it was clear that emotions were still unresolved:"
[/quote]

Obviously they're going to be touchy about it but as the journalist says at some point they'll have gotten over losing sleep about it.

A few sarcastic comments maybe. I think one of the comments in the article alludes to the fact they've all made a lot of money out of each other.

Edited January 9, 2014 by TimR

[peteb]

This seems to be a bit of a grey area, where sometimes the guy who comes up with a distinctive riff that defines a hit song gets the credit and sometimes they don’t. I’m damn sure that Richie Blackmore did alright out of Smoke On The Water…!

It most have been a pretty good guitar riff that Andy Summers came up with as it inspired three US no 1 hits – the other being Missing You by John Waite! Come to think of it, I’m surprised that Waite didn’t sue P-Diddy as well, as the subsequent version owes more than a little to Waite’s take on this musical idea. Perhaps Waite didn’t sue as it would have left him open to questions about where he got the song from and perhaps Sting didn’t sue John Waite as he didn’t write the riff in the first place…

[Dad3353]

We're back to this old chestnut on how to pay for 'creation'. I shan't go through it all again, but an hour's pay for an hour's work seems fair to me. Royalties and copyright were invented, and, imho, have no justification. They are indecent and immoral, and should be done away with; problem solved.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1389315651' post='2332897']
We're back to this old chestnut on how to pay for 'creation'. I shan't go through it all again, but an hour's pay for an hour's work seems fair to me. Royalties and copyright were invented, and, imho, have no justification. They are indecent and immoral, and should be done away with; problem solved.
[/quote]

That's all well and good, and I agree with your premise, but here's when i stumble - If I spent maybe 100 hours recording a couple of songs, what's that worth? Well, 100 hours labour, yes? Ok, but how do we know what to pay me? The music hasn't earned any money yet, and we don't know whether it will be a hit or a complete failure, so if I took £1000 for the 100 hours work I did, then the song went on to be a massive hit, I would feel done out. After all, It is my music, and I put the time and effort into it, and I'd be glad people are enjoying it so much - why shouldn't I get the money it produces? If somebody wants to use the song in their movie, why shouldn't I be able to charge a little for that, as it will presumably be in a movie that will make money for the producer.

Like I said - I agree with it in principle, but I feel it would be very difficult to introduce this today. Maybe you want to go into more detail on this?

[Dad3353]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1389320077' post='2332909']
That's all well and good, and I agree with your premise, but here's when i stumble - If I spent maybe 100 hours recording a couple of songs, what's that worth? Well, 100 hours labour, yes? Ok, but how do we know what to pay me?...[/quote]

As a car mechanic, one gets paid for the 100 hours. When a car goes on to win rallies, or get sold for thousands as a collector's item, the mechanic has still been paid. If the car goes to the scrap heap the week after, the mechanic has still been paid. I don't hold with the notion that "if it becomes a hit, I become rich." An hour's work is an hour's work, and deserves appropriate recompense. Any more, in my book, is profiteering.
I doubt if my notions would meet with popular approval, more so on a music forum, so Tin Pan Alley can (probably...) sleep easy tonight. I still don't see how these huge sums can be justified in the hallowed name of 'artistry'. Is that clearer..? I've no qualms with expansion, or debate on the subject, as long as it's considered 'in scope' here, or in a dedicated thread. Agreement on all fronts will be difficult, I'm guessing...

[MiltyG565]

Yes, I see what you are saying. But your analogy is a little flawed, I believe. My point was - How do you know what to pay an artist? If an artist takes an hourly wage, as you suggest, where does it come from? If their work sells well, what do they do with the money earned above their hourly rate? If it doesn't sell well, where does their hourly rate come from?

[chris_b]

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1389315651' post='2332897']
....Royalties and copyright were invented, and, imho, have no justification. They are indecent and immoral, and should be done away with; problem solved....
[/quote]

Are you for real?

A salesman doesn't get an hourly rate, Bankers bonuses are not based on hours worked. Authors and musicians are paid for the volume of sales and the amount of use of their property. That is right and proper.

Car mechanics are the session players and literary editors.

What would an hourly rate be for me when I drove from Surrey to Lancashire and back in the same day to play the Colne Blues Festival last year? Do you think I should just be paid for the playing time or am I also allowed to claim for the rehearsal and travel time?

Roy Orbison said that he knew a song would be a hit if he wrote it in 10 mins. 1 million sales or 10 mins. What should he be paid?

[xilddx]

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1389344923' post='2332997']
Are you for real?

A salesman doesn't get an hourly rate, Bankers bonuses are not based on hours worked. Authors and musicians are paid for the volume of sales and the amount of use of their property. That is right and proper.

Car mechanics are the session players and literary editors.

What would an hourly rate be for me when I drove from Surrey to Lancashire and back in the same day to play the Colne Blues Festival last year? Do you think I should just be paid for the playing time or am I also allowed to claim for the rehearsal and travel time?

Roy Orbison said that he knew a song would be a hit if he wrote it in 10 mins. 1 million sales or 10 mins. What should he be paid?
[/quote]

Dad IS serious

I completely disagree with him of course because by his reasoning, no amount of training or imagination or innovation or creativity, or ability or skill or knowledge is factored into Dad's theory. If you are a heart surgeon you get paid the same as a strawberry picker or an arc welder.

[urb]

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1389323037' post='2332915']
As a car mechanic, one gets paid for the 100 hours. When a car goes on to win rallies, or get sold for thousands as a collector's item, the mechanic has still been paid. If the car goes to the scrap heap the week after, the mechanic has still been paid. I don't hold with the notion that "if it becomes a hit, I become rich." An hour's work is an hour's work, and deserves appropriate recompense. Any more, in my book, is profiteering.
I doubt if my notions would meet with popular approval, more so on a music forum, so Tin Pan Alley can (probably...) sleep easy tonight. I still don't see how these huge sums can be justified in the hallowed name of 'artistry'. Is that clearer..? I've no qualms with expansion, or debate on the subject, as long as it's considered 'in scope' here, or in a dedicated thread. Agreement on all fronts will be difficult, I'm guessing...
[/quote]

So in an age when actually selling a physical product - i.e. CD or even a download (which isn't physical) - and there are increasingly fewer gigs for an ever expanding number of musicians - how exactly do you propose people make a living from producing and playing music?

Licensing music so that an company can use it as a familiar soundtrack (i.e. using a Blur track on a British Gas ad) to potentially make millions of pounds of sales - mainly thanks to that lovely familiar piece of music that you'll be humming all day after hearing it - surely justifies the artist/composer of that piece of music being paid something? There are countless ways music is exploited like this and whether you agree with it or not it's one of the few ways that musicians can make something close to a living wage - I agree that in an ideal world music would be created purely for its own merits - i.e. for the life-enhancing thing that it is - but the idea that it everyone should simply give away every piece of WORK that they do for free is, at least in our current socio-economic environment, ridiculous. Top photographers charge a lot for their pictures because they help sell newspapers - the skill involved in taking that one special shot would have taken (in most cases) years of dedication and skill to capture that one micro-second of magic - is that any different to writing a song in five minutes that becomes a huge hit? Intellectual property is a tricky one but I'm on the side of those doing the creating and think that they, like anyone else at the top of their game, should be able to earn a living like everyone else - copyright and publishing rights are a perfectly justified means of doing this.

[discreet]

^ ^ Yes. When I was composing music for film and TV a few years back, I would get paid for the initial composition and production and get regularly recurring PRS payments too, dependent on how many times the pieces were played in various territories and across which media.

It was great to receive these payments - apparently for doing nothing - but that's the way it works. I regarded them as a bonus, as those using the material were making money from it. Should I have refused the payments, or given them to charity or whatever because they were 'unfair'?

Edited January 10, 2014 by discreet

[Japhet]

It's always the way that smug gits like Sting come out with the old 'the world is a tough place' routine when they have just sh*t on people. It's mainly a tough place because people are greedy (in his case, quite obscenely) . However, I don't suppose Andy Summers or Stewart Copeland are exactly destitute so I won't be losing any sleep.

[lowdown]

[quote name='urb' timestamp='1389346240' post='2333015']
So in an age when actually selling a physical product - i.e. CD or even a download (which isn't physical) - and there are increasingly fewer gigs for an ever expanding number of musicians - how exactly do you propose people make a living from producing and playing music?

Licensing music so that an company can use it as a familiar soundtrack (i.e. using a Blur track on a British Gas ad) to potentially make millions of pounds of sales - mainly thanks to that lovely familiar piece of music that you'll be humming all day after hearing it - surely justifies the artist/composer of that piece of music being paid something? There are countless ways music is exploited like this and whether you agree with it or not it's one of the few ways that musicians can make something close to a living wage - I agree that in an ideal world music would be created purely for its own merits - i.e. for the life-enhancing thing that it is - but the idea that it everyone should simply give away every piece of WORK that they do for free is, at least in our current socio-economic environment, ridiculous. Top photographers charge a lot for their pictures because they help sell newspapers - the skill involved in taking that one special shot would have taken (in most cases) years of dedication and skill to capture that one micro-second of magic - is that any different to writing a song in five minutes that becomes a huge hit? Intellectual property is a tricky one but I'm on the side of those doing the creating and think that they, like anyone else at the top of their game, should be able to earn a living like everyone else - copyright and publishing rights are a perfectly justified means of doing this.
[/quote]

It's this really. (IMO of course)

Edited January 10, 2014 by lowdown

[pst62]

The way he is isn't surprising!
Years back he was asked about his then non-existent Geordie accent, his reply was, "Why the hell would I want to keep that accent?"
Roll on to 2013 everyone has forgotten about him, so wot does he do? He releases an album of songs (sang with a Geordie accent)
of his so-called nostalgic fond memories about life in Wallsend and growing up around shipbuilding.
No doubt he'll be trotting out the Why aye's, the are ye alreet pets, and the how ye dee'in bonny lads etc etc ten to the dozen now.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Rich
Language

[BigRedX]

I know that musicians were less business savvy back in the late 70s when the Police formed, but Andy Summers having been a professional musician since the mid 60s was hardly a wet behind the ears newbie at the time. TBH he's got no-one to blame but himself (or maybe his manager/legal adviser) if he didn't get a share of the songwriting credits and royalties from all the Police songs.

Looking at the credits on the early Police recordings it appears that the songwriting credits went to whoever came up with the original idea. That's the way lots of bands work so it was hardly a new concept. Maybe it wasn't fair but it seems to be how the credits were agreed at the time. Both of the other members of the Police are credited with songwriting on the first album and remember that Stewart Copeland's brother was managing the band, and he doesn't seem to have got any preferential treatment on the song writing front. Andy Summer's songwriting contribution to the first album reveals that he wasn't even remotely in the same class is Sting.

In the end earning money through songwriting is a gamble. The potential returns could be massive (if you have a hit song), but most songwriters see little more than pocket money in royalties each year. Would anyone want a return to the days of "Tin Pan Alley" when songwriters were just paid employees having to write continually to order for a wage and no royalties while someone else takes all the big money? Be thankful that it is still possible (even if it is very unlikely) to make a living out of being creative musically.

It's very easy for ex-band members to be bitter after the event, but most of the time these things come down to the musicians making poor decisions usually based on short-term gains (do you take a little bit of money now and that's it or do you take nothing for the moment and hope that the songs will be hits at some point in the future - like I said it's a gamble). Of course in the case of "Every Breath You Take" it wasn't helped by P Diddy's record company making an even poorer decision later, but that was entirely out of Andy Summers control. Besides he should be getting royalties as a musician on both recordings (if the P Diddy version is a sample and not a recreation) through the PPL so it's not like he lost out completely.

So if any musician in the 21st century still hasn't got the message, it is this: learn how to write songs and make sure you get the appropriate credits for your work.

[EliasMooseblaster]

Re: that Geordie accent. Imagine if he [i]had [/i]kept it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaI3WEEnMkQ

[DaveFry]

Be careful where you sing " Happy Birthday To You " before 2016 in Europe ;
[url="http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/jun/14/happy-birthday-lawsuit-copyright-warner"]http://www.theguardi...opyright-warner[/url]

[KevB]

[quote name='pst62' timestamp='1389350281' post='2333074'] No doubt he'll be trotting out the Why aye's, the are ye alreet pets, and the how ye dee'in bonny lads etc etc ten to the dozen now. [/quote]

I'm half expecting him to have a guest spot in the next series of Hebburn, maybe doing a kareoke session down the pub

[MilkyBarKid]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1389303222' post='2332725']
Yes, it's very unfair. But, I think there's something about being a high-profile musician. Quite a few seem to have very large egos and a very "I can do what I like" attitude, and it makes me wonder if it's the money and fame that corrupts the person and makes them like that, or are people with that mentality just more likely to go further in the music world? It's all very peculiar, I think. Of course, there are some very altruistic and honest musicians out there with great personalities. It's awful to say, but I think I would pass on the opportunity to meet any musician that I really looked up to.
[/quote]

Probably quite a good axiom to abide by, but in the case of someone like Allan Holdsworth who is well known for being incredibly modest you'd probably find he was delightful in person; but his playing is so stellar that it's pretty demotivational, I suspect that quite a high percentage of the audience give up playing their guitars after seeing him. I know I did for years - I just thought what's the point - I could never play like that.

[TimR]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1389351214' post='2333084']
I know that musicians were less business savvy back in the late 70s when the Police formed, but Andy Summers having been a professional musician since the mid 60s was hardly a wet behind the ears newbie at the time. TBH he's got no-one to blame but himself (or maybe his manager/legal adviser) if he didn't get a share of the songwriting credits and royalties from all the Police songs.

...
[/quote]

They've also produced every album. So they'll all still be getting royalties in some form.

[discreet]

[quote name='MilkyBarKid' timestamp='1389353090' post='2333111']
...his playing is so stellar that it's pretty demotivational, I suspect that quite a high percentage of the audience give up playing their guitars after seeing him. I know I did for years - I just thought what's the point - I could never play like that.
[/quote]

Isn't that why punk happened - to give everyone the opportunity to get up there and do it, regardless?