Old 08-27-2019, 01:22 PM   #1
DogsoverLava
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Default Zeppelin cover - Ten Years Gone

Created this in Reaper over a period of 18 months. Tried to do a N4N cover and match Page's original mix/production with the resources available to a home studio workflow. Found a vocalist at the last minute to help us complete the project. Very pleased with the results.

Reaper
M-Audio Profire 610
GuitarRig Pro 5
various Fender guitars, basses, and a Hamer guitar
Various (mostly stock or free) plugins
Superior Drummer 3.0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyKNl4ynAJg

Last edited by DogsoverLava; 08-27-2019 at 04:57 PM.
DogsoverLava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2019, 03:05 PM   #2
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Who did you go through for the cover licensing?
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2019, 06:15 PM   #3
DogsoverLava
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Who did you go through for the cover licensing?
Great Question. Normally, any cover songs I record and make available for PDD or sale as physical media I license through the Harry Fox agency (using Songfile) if they have dominion over 100% of the rights.

For projects that are part of our (non-profit) education series (like The Stairway Project) where the song is recorded as part of an online recording and mixing tutorial, we make a fair use claim under section 107 of the copyright act of 1976 citing teaching or educational purposes. Under this claim we actually make the project stems available for PDD to students and hobbyists who want to try their hand at mixing and mastering the track themselves. We have a whole website built around this.

Sync licenses for YouTube content are similarly handled under this claim, though YouTube's automated content ID system does allow Warner Chappell to make claims on content unilaterally if they want to monetize it for themselves. We've kept on the good side of what can be a complicated and murky area of copyright law by eschewing any monetization ourselves and complying with our obligations under the Fair Use claim.

The project stems will be made available in the next couple months. For our "Stairway" cover we made the project stems, the Reaper project file (unpopulated with the coded time base), available in many different iterations including wet & dry.

Regards
DogsoverLava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 04:15 AM   #4
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Thanks for explaining so well. I'm just learning about this subject. So what about this section though? Do you just do it until told you can't and then the only penalty is taking it down or can people lose big money over this ?

Nature of the copyrighted work: This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished work is less likely to be considered fair.

I really enjoyed listening to the song. Super job !

Last edited by Coachz; 08-28-2019 at 04:20 AM.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 05:55 AM   #5
tspring
Human being with feelings
 
tspring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Eastern shore of Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,237
Default

It all sounds really good. I especially like the guitar tones/textures that you get. You definitely know what you are doing. IMHO the vocal could be a couple of dB louder but perhaps this matches the original production. If this track is going to be used in an educational setting as an aspirational goal for trainees, it sets a high bar for quality.

T
tspring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 07:23 AM   #6
DogsoverLava
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Thanks for explaining so well. I'm just learning about this subject. So what about this section though? Do you just do it until told you can't and then the only penalty is taking it down or can people lose big money over this ?

Nature of the copyrighted work: This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished work is less likely to be considered fair.

I really enjoyed listening to the song. Super job !
It's easy (usually ) to get a license for a song cover - you have to pay up front and it covers either the reproduction/sale of physical media (CDs etc) or PDD (permanent digital downloads). What's harder is a sync license as these have to each be negotiated with the rights holder (at whatever rate they decide - plus they can say no) where as the others are compulsory and statutory in terms of permission and rate (about 9 cents a copy).

Even if you are giving away your song for free (be it in physical form or download) you still are required to pay for each instance.

On YouTube, you can bet very few people have sync licenses for anything and lots of people have either had their stuff demonetized, or the monetization taken by the rights holder, or have found their audio blocked..... and the whole thing is administered by the content ID algorithms unless a specific claim has been made.... it's a real murky area (as I said before) because there's still a whole component of the monetization that is performance based that is in limbo.... but this area of law and of best practices in terms of how rights holders view YouTube is evolving -- rights holders have themselves seen the value in earning revenue from streams of covers etc so there is less "blocking" going on today than ever before.

"Fair Use" is itself murky as there are only general guidelines to follow and each claim could find itself needing to be litigated in a courtroom if ever challenged.
DogsoverLava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 07:30 AM   #7
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogsoverLava View Post
rights holders have themselves seen the value in earning revenue from streams of covers etc so there is less "blocking" going on today than ever before.
Yes, that's correct. I have a handful of covers on YT, the rights holders decided to allow them to remain and they collect any ad revenue; I'm perfectly fine with that as it allows me to keep my cover up and they get paid minus all the red tape. There's a certain win-win aspect to that.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 07:39 AM   #8
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Not to derail the thread but let's say you do a cover and distribute it using a common distro service. When you paid the cover rights at easy song licensing or songfile, and you only bought 25 licenses, do the distros manage the additional royalties on future sales so you don't have to track the number of sales if you sell a 1000 or 10,000 ?
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 11:55 AM   #9
DogsoverLava
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Not to derail the thread but let's say you do a cover and distribute it using a common distro service. When you paid the cover rights at easy song licensing or songfile, and you only bought 25 licenses, do the distros manage the additional royalties on future sales so you don't have to track the number of sales if you sell a 1000 or 10,000 ?
That's also a good question. I think you have to keep buying licenses yourself (and prepay) if your sales are below a certain threshold -- if your sales are above a certain threshold (or will be) I think you have to do quarterly reports and pay as necessary.... but you need to be at a certain sales volume for that and you prepay otherwise... This is of course for PDD sales.... streaming I have not looked into yet for covers.
DogsoverLava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 11:58 AM   #10
DogsoverLava
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Yes, that's correct. I have a handful of covers on YT, the rights holders decided to allow them to remain and they collect any ad revenue; I'm perfectly fine with that as it allows me to keep my cover up and they get paid minus all the red tape. There's a certain win-win aspect to that.
More like Win/draw.... because it removes any monetization from said video for the content creator (an errant sound clip from a passing car while doing an on-the-street remote interview can trigger content ID) and it also leaves the question of performance royalties (ie the cover creator's performance) unrealized as a revenue stream.... but it at least allows the video to remain.

As the paradigm changes this will all change.... but it's going to be a process.
DogsoverLava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 12:03 PM   #11
DogsoverLava
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 25
Default

Here's a couple links about getting a sync license for Zeppelin songs in recent Hollywood productions.... bottom line - a big "get"

https://www.businessinsider.com/insi...objects-2018-8

https://variety.com/2018/music/news/...ew-1202901865/
DogsoverLava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2019, 12:07 PM   #12
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogsoverLava View Post
That's also a good question. I think you have to keep buying licenses yourself (and prepay) if your sales are below a certain threshold -- if your sales are above a certain threshold (or will be) I think you have to do quarterly reports and pay as necessary.... but you need to be at a certain sales volume for that and you prepay otherwise... This is of course for PDD sales.... streaming I have not looked into yet for covers.
So I called CD baby and they said yes I would have to manually keep track of the sales on either easy song licensing or song file depending on where I registered. And based on the number of downloads or physical sales of CDs are vinyl I would have to buy and make sure I have enough licenses to cover those sales. A guy on Reddit also added some nice tips which are here

There's two music life hacks about covers that will save you money:

1) If you ONLY release a cover to streaming services, ie no iTunes or whatever, you do not and should not pay for HFA licenses because the streaming services legally have to pay mechanicals themselves. HFA just tries to double dip on that shit.

2) If you do want to release to an actual DL store, buying into a distro's service is often cheaper. Distrokid has that for example, and it's $1 a month to handle it for you. Not totally sure about others' costs.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.