Entries in collaboration (5)

Saturday

21Nov2009

How to Publish Your Music (wikiHow)

20091121 at 15:41

I’m evaluating wikiHow, and considering contributing music-related content. It’s very easy to cross-publish content from there, as I’ve done with “How to Publish Your Music” below. I disagree with much of the content in this article, which is remarkable considering its brevity.

via wikiHow.com

How to Publish Your Music

from wikiHow - The How to Manual That You Can Edit
Have you made some good music and want to get it published? This article will show you the way to publish your music!

Steps

Get a sheet of the music piece. It can be written, or printed out from computer, but the main point is that you have it when you contact a publisher. This will make things easier on them, and overall make them want to publish you quicker.
Find publishers in your area. ‘Google’ it. Realize there might not be one within 20 miles of where you live (publishers are located mainly in larger cities). When searching for a publisher, make sure the publisher publishes the genre (type of music) that you have composed. Many specialize in specific fields, such as Rock, Classical, etc…
Once they hear or see the music, (assuming they continue with you) they might tell you to edit some parts in the sheet music to fix blurps, mistakes, etc… This is great! you’re about 74% there! Clean up the mistakes, and take it back. Now they’ll be almost ready to publish it.
Here’s where the paperwork comes in. If you want to go into Rock/Pop/Rap/etc…, an agent would be a plus to acquire, as they will help with company relations and other miscellaneous tasks. Whenever you sign contracts, take your time and read through everything! It might seem boring, but you want your share of the pay to be more than a few measly dollars, right? Well, make sure that before it’s published, that the company gets it formally copyrighted. Most companies do this for you, but just in case they don’t, you’ll most likely have to file paperwork with the state. This way, nothing is stolen.
Get your music known (if you are willing to provide a song or a 30 second demo for free download) at Moture, a musicians portal.

Tips

Stay calm… as in all processes, publishing takes time.
Try to find an experienced publisher, as inexperienced publishers may not understand the process of publishing, not have as good as reputation and could lose or change your work while publishing.
For sheet music, alternatively (or at least until you’ve found a satisfactory publisher) you could opt for ‘DIY publishing’. Websites like lulu.com and myscorestore.com enable you to offer content worldwide; although the first seems focused on print on demand for both books and scores, the latter on music only.
When talking to a publisher, there are only two options…either they continue helping you, or they throw you out the door. If they ask to hear your music, you’re already 45% there. This means they are willing to take the time to see what you’ve got. If they ask you to come show them the sheet music, or a recording, you’re halfway there.

Warnings

Don’t be overbearing on royalties. Especially if it’s your first time.
This is a generalized guide! Mainly focusing on minor publications such as classical music and small town music.

Things You’ll Need

A song
Persistence
Patience

Related wikiHows

Article provided by wikiHow, a wiki how-to manual. Please edit this article and find author credits at the original wikiHow article on How to Publish Your Music. All content on wikiHow can be shared under a Creative Commons license.

note | tagged

collaboration,

diy,

music,

sheet music

richardwalker | |

Email Article |

Permalink | Comments Off

Monday

21Sep2009

What I'm reading -- The Art of Community

20090921 at 12:55

by Jono Bacon - download pdf here.

with a 4-paragraph Foreword by Leo Laporte

The Art of Community - Watch more Videos at Vodpod.

The Art of Community - 1ed.pdf

book | tagged

book,

richardwalker | |

Email Article |

Permalink |

Unbridgeable Chasm: Lane Hartwell & The Richter Scales (2007 - 2009)

20090919 at 01:47

Illegal Prop.: Abuse & Damage the Source (Letter to Lessig)

UPDATE: January, 2010 — Version 1.1

Created in late 2007 by removing the Hartwell photo, this is the only remedy to Hartwell’s takedown request. Via “Here Comes Another Bubble” Credits (Versions 1.0 and 1.1)

Kara Swisher (shown only in Version 1.1)
Photo found on Kara Swisher’s All Things Digital bio, photo by Adam Tow

Owen Thomas (shown only in Version 1.0)
Photographer: Lane Hartwell, photo appears in Wired News

UPDATE: February, 2009 — Hartwell: “no expert”

For want of a nail the post was lost
For want of a post the horse was lost
For want of a horse the rider was lost
For want of a rider the battle was lost
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost
All for the want of a freakin’ photo of Owen Thomas

UPDATE: December, 2008

This post was written in December of 2007, but one year later, the video is still missing from YouTube; copyright and “fair use” of images remains an issue in spite of Lessig’s efforts, and those of Creative Commons.

I found a copy of the video at the center of this controversy. Judge for yourself! (Original music video using a Billy Joel song and various internet images)

Video (2:45): Here Comes Another Bubble - The Richter Scales (via “antifreeze”)

“Owen Thomas” Google search

Let’s assume: high-resolution digital media should be licensed, “paid for” and not pirated.

For lo-fi photos, lo-fi audio, etc. we could make use and re-use “free”, “low flat fee” or “attribution only”.

This finesses a problem that businesses and artists have had before; many things don’t get enough money or attention because they are too heavily guarded.

There have been successes making things free or very cheap, letting crowds and time do their magic. Then later you make money in sheer volume, in the tell-all book, the director’s cut, the audio re-master, or the glossy magazine cover.

Ms. Hartwell should not have needed to yank all her photos; perhaps she could have replaced them with lo-fi versions, her name inside the image frame, and never made public her hi-res collections.

Most people should still use lo-res public galleries so people know where to go if they do want the “good stuff”. Unless, of course, you have all the fancy rich clients you need, and don’t care whether new people discover you.

The music industry has missed this exact opportunity as well (thanks to Alex Lindsay of PixelCorps.tv for providing a crucial piece long ago)

Very-lo-fi DRM-free audio tracks everywhere
Two levels of paid-for service: normal (limited hi-fi), or premium all-you-can-eat
Playlists then make sense, because playlists should always “just work”, and be portable
Missing track is a thing of the past
Lo-fi track is what happens when you are cheap or are trying before buying.

General Solution: Make lo-fi versions of most every photo and audio track available, for free or very low cost, and make it easy for “creatives” to pay to license hi-res media, be it one photo, ten seconds of music, etc.
Benefit: things don’t have to be “taken down”, just replaced with lo-fi versions where people haven’t paid creators or gotten permission.

This could enable a whole bunch of non-commercial activity, and should the Richter Scales start becoming commercial, they’d license the work or get permission, maybe share royalty. If they used the photo out of laziness, and don’t care about the fidelity, I think the argument leans toward their side. Maybe there weren’t other recent photos of the “new media d***-bag” (Owen Thomas).

One shouldn’t find the hi-res media by searching. One shouldn’t find lo-res either if one is going to be sued or taken down after the fact. Perhaps this is Wired’s fault? The implication is that Ms. Hartwell’s snapshot is worth more than the final music video, which I refute. How can we let a lot of hard work and talent go down the (you) tubes because the rules favor accusers, corporations and lawyers and provide no clarity, no recourse, no compromise, no simple legal guidelines for simple artistic goals.

(I should mention here that Ms. Hartwell was very aware of the large number of views they were getting. She may feel robbed, but others may feel extorted)

I think what angers some is that briefly showing a likeness, photo and subject not unusual or artistic, requires a pre-negotiated license. I do not think it reasonable to make a career of selling licenses to use ordinary (in this case) pictures of people that you* have access to and others don’t.

That would put you* half-way toward becoming a paparazzo, wouldn’t it? A paparazzo who doesn’t have to compete and has the cooperation of the “celebrities.” These are big celebrities only in their small insular world.

We aren’t talking Princess Di and Dodi, fer cryin’ out loud!

you* is a “hypothetical” you.

Update on 20100111 at 16:16 by

richardwalker

Richter Scales live at the Crunchies party performing “In the Valley”

article | tagged

collaboration,

law,

profit,

remix,

solution

richardwalker | |

Email Article |

Permalink |

Collaborative Improvisational Composition: Debussys Mis takes

20090804 at 08:00

Debussy’s Mis takes by Richard Walker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

This is another piece that was put together for Robert Elvin’s film. This time, I received the clarinet and bass parts recorded previously. I then added a piano part, recorded it and mixed the audio together.

Sheet music is avaliable in PDF format at Free-scores.com

Stream the audio right off Archive.org with the player, or go there to download it

Debussys Mis takes

View more documents from Richard Walker.

(.mp3 RSS media enclosure)

Debussy's Mis takes

audio,

improv | tagged

collaboration,

composition,

improv,

music,

savant,

sheet music,

sound track

richardwalker | |

Email Article |

Permalink | Comments Off

Saturday

25Jul2009

Collaborative Improvisational Composition: Etude for Clarinet and Piano

20090725 at 11:00

Etude for Clarinet & Piano by Richard Walker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

This piece of music has a very unusual genesis. So unusual, I’m calling it “collaborative improvisational composition.” My collaborator was a bit less than “composer,” and I bit more than “arranger.” Also, what a lovely feature of this method - that no-one is ever faced with the Blank Page Terrors.

Robert Elvin was (and still is) making an independent film, and had improvised some music on his clarinet, for use in the film. (Robert used to play winds professionally; he was rusty, but not very!)

I listened to it and was able to easily deduce things like meter and key signature.

I then created a score for the solo clarinet part. That was a fair bit of work, mostly because of the fast runs and other unusual figures.

Etude Clarinet Piano Clarinet In Bb

View more documents from Richard Walker.

I composed (arranged?) a piano part after seeing the music on paper… and then performed and recorded the piano part (in a sub-optimal acoustic space) and mixed the audio together.

Finally, we got the score in decent shape, suitable for other uses, such as a chamber music performance. Don’t tell anyone there is no Lone Tortured Genius Composer for this piece!

Please share away, Robert and I agreed to make everying Creative Commons licensed. We would like to hear the piece interpreted and performed by others; Robert is curious how the”improv vs. sheet music” issue will play out for the clarinetist.

Sheet music (full score & clarinet only) is avaliable in PDF format at Free-scores.com

Stream the audio right off Archive.org with the player, or go there to download it

Etude for Clarinet & Piano

View more documents from Richard Walker.

(.mp3 RSS media enclosure)

Etude for Clarinet and Piano

audio,

improv | tagged

collaboration,

composition,

improv,

savant,