Quote: $12,000 for ten songs comes out to $1200 a song. If you assume that each song is only one minute long, then he's actually charging just slightly below the standard industry rate. However if you add in the 500 SFX you also needed, then he's actually charging less. Let's assume that he normally charges $1 per SFX asset created. This is INCREDIBLY cheap!! Then the SFX take $500 and leave $1150 per song. Let me remind you this is assuming that each song is only one minute and each SFX asset only costs $1. If this wasn't the case then you're getting an even better deal that you first thought! Then comes the part where this is a collective of composers-sound designers so each individually is getting a smaller piece of the pie.

Yet you call these high rates?

Nah not high rates, just higher than offshore. And yeah I agree with you, it was a great deal :). The songs were from 1-3 minutes long, most on the shorter side.

Also, he used offshore labor as well and had a huge bank out sound effects he made on his own time that he could tweak, so lets just say he had good tooling in his factory which reduced his personal time on it immensely. He worked smarter, not harder.

He runs a really efficient operation, so he's able to crank things out fast and charge what seem like crazy rates, but to him, he's making out really well. Honestly, it blew us out of the water too - we never expected it, but it's reality and we're loyal to him and not others. Trust me, we've sent a ton of business his way as have his other customers, his tenacity has paid off for him.

Quote: You should see what some of the A-list composers in Hollywood charge!! That's high!! :P And you know, very few fault them for it.

Well good for them. We don't care to pay for some glittery hollywood composer, we pay for people who are into our making it work out for our business.

Quote: Original post by ZaphrodBeeblebrox
Nah not high rates, just higher than offshore. And yeah I agree with you, it was a great deal :). The songs were from 1-3 minutes long, most on the shorter side.

I just pointed this out because earlier you stated:

Quote: Original post by ZaphrodBeeblebrox
So, for a guy like this, we LOVE to pay high rates.

Perhaps this was just a typo or perhaps I just misread it but it sounded like you were calling these rates high. That's all.

Quote: Original post by ZaphrodBeeblebrox
Well good for them. We don't care to pay for some glittery hollywood composer, we pay for people who are into our making it work out for our business.

No need to get snippy. I'm simply pointing out that there are folks that charge a good deal more than the standard or average for exclusive rights. Also, with the current trend of film score composers moving more and more into video game scores, you might end up looking to one of these guys as a possible resource in the future. You just never know.

Quote: Original post by ZaphrodBeeblebrox
Well, all I'm saying is that a composer has to do better than just show a good portfolio. Because offshore guys who are happy to do the work at lower rates can do exactly the same quality work.

That's fine, I mostly agree with this point. I know many composers that do step up and go beyond just the "look at my portfolio" approach. Having said that, the portfolio is the meat and potatoes of the composer's impression, is it not? To me the most important factor for a composer is how good (or bad) the music he or she can write. This is made evident directly by the portfolio provided as well as any audio tests required by the studio. All of the other stuff simply supports and enhances the composer's standing.

Quote: Original post by ZaphrodBeeblebrox
I mean, sorry, but we're a business we go for great quality at great value. And we've found it by doing only by doing many many many trials with different composers. Self-professed credentials such as possessing an advanced degree, being super-experienced, long lists of customers (who you're not sure were happy customers or not) are all secondary to work you see them do and their pro-activeness towards your business during the first part of your working relationship. Also, many quote "industry-standard rates" it like it's something they're owed. Nope, you're not owed it because of a degree and your past success, you're owed it when you give us great value.

Well I can't speak for other composers but I list my credits to show that I've gone through this process before. To show that I'm familiar with the process of taking many teams and many elements and making them work and meld into one cohesive and effective experience, be it a film, TV show or video game.

I have an advanced degree which means I've done further study of music. Does this mean my music is automatically better than others? Not necessarily but it does mean I've invest time, money and energy into further studying my craft.

For the record I charge below industry standard rates. I also never approach this like "I'm owed this." I approach it like so: This is the norm in the industry that I work in, so I'm going to charge X." I explain this to the client because the expectations of clients varies to a HUGE degree. Some clients feel that paying $100 for a full game soundtrack is very expensive while others don't bat an eye at dropping $20,000 for a full soundtrack. So this provides context and not an explanation of what I'm owed. Perhaps you just take this the wrong way?

Quote: Original post by ZaphrodBeeblebrox
Again bottomline is, we'll pay high for great value, but the composer has to show they'll go above and beyond. We've been shown that by a few people, and they win the business and profit greatly from our relationship. As much as you may not like to hear it, composing is a commodity service, so you have to show a client real value beyond what the 5000 other composers out there are. I'm not saying you don't deliver that, I'm saying that composers really need to be pro-active in their business with clients to ensure they meet their needs, because your clients have many MANY options.

Completely agree there. Never said I didn't. After all, in my own experience I started with zero contacts and zero formal game audio experience. I was a music school teacher with a dream. I've literally clawed my way up to where I am now and learned many lessons along the way. Over the past 4 years I've worked on over 140 projects and have had two in-house jobs so I know what it takes to get clients to recognize your talent and ability and have enough faith to invest in that for their product. I completely understand the business side of things and have no issue with companies trying to create the best work for the least amount of money. It's simply the way business works.

[Edited by - nsmadsen on August 21, 2009 8:09:35 AM]

">The ZaphrodBeeblebrox/Composer Relationship

I find it interesting that Zaphod is basically making the argument that outsourced talent to other countries is just as good as anything in the US or UK, but at a cheaper price. For some projects this is probably true. However, with projects where quality is more of an issue than budget, this argument breaks down.

I just worked on the live elements for a videogame soundtrack for a major developer. The composer and developer had thought the costs were quite high for what they were getting. ("But we can get an ensemble twice that size for the same price in <other place>!") Then we had our day in the studio.

The music was orchestrated by a Hollywood talent. The sessions were recorded at a studio in Hollywood sought after for great recordings because of its warm sound and legendary reverb chambers. Because the contractor knew Hollywood, he knew when the other film and record dates were happening and was able to schedule the recordings at a time when A-list talent would be available. This meant that everyone from the players, to the music editor, to the engineers, was one of the best in their field.

By the end of the first day, the composer sat in stunned silence. He was stunned that all these people came into the studio with the same great attitude and goal of making his music sound the best it could. They genuinely cared and kept asking if he was satisfied. But what shocked him even more was the skill of all these people. They backed up that positive attitude with the ability to work together seamlessly and deliver a quality of sound he had never heard before with unsurpassed efficiency. The intonation, playing, and expressiveness was perfect - often on the first take, the mix was fabulous, and we had recorded 25 cues by the end of the first day.

This composer had gone overseas in the past to search for the cheapest option possible, and had gotten what he thought were perfectly fine results. He never knew his music could sound like this. For the first time he realized that at the top end of the spectrum there really is a reason why good people charge what they do. Given the quality he received, he even commented that in the future he would rather record here with a smaller ensemble than a larger one overseas. It just sounded better, and the experience was so much more pleasant. It was just plain fun to record all that music with such great people and get such wonderful results!

Now, this is not saying that price alone determines quality. But it is saying that if someone does charge "more" for their work and has the proper experience to merit that, it's worth checking some references to find out why. It may be that the value they deliver is something that can't be found elsewhere. Granted, there are those who charge more just because there is a lot of hype surrounding them, especially in the videogame industry. But with a few well placed phone calls, you can usually cut through the hype. Most good people are happy to provide honest references and welcome your checking them.

So don't be too quick to assume that you can always get the same quality for cheaper. If you can find the quality you need for a cheaper price overseas, fabulous. I applaud you. However, don't expect someone to cut prices just to compete with offshore vendors. At the highest levels there are things that you just can't do elsewhere because the personnel and resources aren't available everywhere. Otherwise when budgets are not a concern and quality is paramount, people would still go to cheaper overseas vendors. But they don't do that, do they?

[Edited by - Muzo72 on August 29, 2009 11:26:55 PM]

Muzo- Wonderfully stated!!!

A good relationship is worth more than ego. Ego may get you noticed but going above and beyond earns you good will. Developers would rather go back to an audio contractor that ensures that their clients are looked after than someone who's all about the credit or even worse about the money.

I agree, looking after your clients is paramount to running a successful audio consultancy. You're joining a project to make a game, not get your music or name out there. It should be all about the game what does the client need from you to make the game. Obviously you don't want to be taken advantage of but that's where a good relationship comes into play, there's a level of trust that runs both ways.

I'm somewhat surprised to hear that some of your composers didn't want to provide revisions, that just reflects badly on their name. Obviously, if you're changing your mind about the style of the music written that's a spec change and time should be paid for. If you've committed to provide music for a project, it's your professional obligation to provide revisions. A lot of composer have to understand, it's not about YOUR music, it's about THEIR project. Understandably compositions are an expression of one's self so it's easy to be protective over it and your skill, but to be successful you need to put that behind you and concentrate on what your client needs.

I've worked on a project where I was micro-managed as a composer. I had to change the smallest things around multiple times, re-sequence sections, change orchestration, even , revert those changes at a later time after other changes had been made. Believe me it was really really frustrating. My typical turn around is 1-2 revisions, on this particular project I did about 15-20 revisions. Not because the music was bad, but because the producer had a particular idea in their head and they wanted to hear it exactly how they heard it. It took a good 4 weeks for 1 song instead of 1-3 days. Unfortunately this was just the producer's personality and wanting what was in their head. I just grit my teeth and made the revisions to the best quality I could and gave the developer exactly what they wanted quickly. They were very happy with the result and the game shipped and has been successful. Did I work with them again, no :) I was offered more work, but the dynamics of the relationship they were after was too draining and counter productive for myself.

I'm curious, when you're talking to prospective composers if you've ever asked them for references for you to check up on their quality, delivery record and professional attitude?

Quote: Original post by yjbrown
A good relationship is worth more than ego. Ego may get you noticed but going above and beyond earns you good will. Developers would rather go back to an audio contractor that ensures that their clients are looked after than someone who's all about the credit or even worse about the money.

I agree but I don't feel this conversation is directly about this. I feel that for whatever reason ZaphrodBeeblebrox has an organic, negative response to composers who charge more than ZaphrodBeeblebrox feels is fair or more than what others charge.

Quote: Original post by yjbrown
I'm somewhat surprised to hear that some of your composers didn't want to provide revisions, that just reflects badly on their name. Obviously, if you're changing your mind about the style of the music written that's a spec change and time should be paid for. If you've committed to provide music for a project, it's your professional obligation to provide revisions.

Well, yes and no. I feel that there is a balance of responsibility here. Yes composers should be willing to do revisions when needed and requested by the client. The client should also do their research and have a very clear vision of what is needed so they can help guide the composer and the rest of the team. Two examples of what I mean:

Back in 2006 I worked on a space game by one of the members of GD.net. The game looked AMAZING and I was really excited to be part of it! Before starting any of the compositions I asked for any reference material to help guide me. The client wasn't a musician so I told him that referring to other game soundtracks, films, cds, anything would be helpful! He provided none. I also told him that descriptive words could help like: angry, intense, fast-paced music. He provided none. So I just started writing what I felt would work for the visuals and type of game he was making. When I'd get his feedback it was completely vague. Here's one for example:

Him: I like the piece but something about it doesn't work.

(By the way I understood he wasn't a musician so I started asking questions that could help narrow down what he didn't like about the piece.)

Me: Is it something that sounds high or low in the music?

Him: I don't know.

Me: Is the music going to fast or too slow?

Him: I don't know.

Me: Ok, can you tell me where in the music, time-wise, it starts happening?

Him: No.

Me: Okay, you're not giving me very much to work with here.

After doing over six drafts and never getting any solid feedback from the client I quit the project. To date this is the only project I've ever quit.

My friend and fellow composer, Will Loconto, once said to me:

Iteration just for the sake of iteration dooms a project to failure.

I completely agree! So yes I agree that a composer must be willing to make revisions, the client needs to provide the needed info to help the composer. One way I put it to my clients is "the more info you give me now, the better I can create the perfect song for this project on the first try." It is my policy to include 3-4 revisions bundled with the original rate I charge. Any revisions beyond that cost the client extra. This does something interesting to the client: it forces them to consider the changes they're requesting. For some personality types if they know the revisions will always be free then they'll be more likely to request many changes without considering if they're really needed or not. I've witnessed this first hand. But if they know that it comes at a cost or they have a limited amount of re-dos available then they'll be more cautious with them and use them when they're really needed and valid.

On top of this, I provide updates for every 30 seconds or so of music composed. This enabled the client to get frequent updates and help keep me on track instead of reacting to a full, complete song which may or may not be what they wanted. With the exception of the game I listed above, I've never had to go beyond my revision limit.

One more example (which is shorter! :P )

I've worked on a team where they wanted to iterate with every dept all of the time. "We'll keep iterating until we get it perfect!" While this sounds good and can look good on paper it is ultimately a doom state, much like Will said. Over three years later this project is still focused on making the first small section (roughly 1.5 levels) instead of focused on the overall game. Iteration for the sheer sake of iteration doesn't make good games nor does it keep teams on schedule. You must have a clear vision of what your goal is otherwise you'll be running around in circles.

Quote: Original post by yjbrown
It took a good 4 weeks for 1 song instead of 1-3 days.

All that this means is that if we can be expected to do this, we should charge per track, enough for 4 weeks of work.

This is why composers are expensive.

In my contracts, I explicitly outline the revision process and I provide my clients with up-to-the-hour/day works in progress so that things outside of the clients needs are not committed needlessly.

I also specify time-lines and milestones in my contracts to avoid a situation where I spend 7 times longer than expected on a track, as in Yannis' case.

If I can be expected to take up to 7 times longer, than I have to make sure I charge 7 times the price for 3 days of work.



The contractors triangle:

Quote: danthr said:
In my contracts, I explicitly outline the revision process and I provide my clients with up-to-the-hour/day works in progress so that things outside of the clients needs are not committed needlessly.

Fortunately this was a once off case and very early on in my career. I didn't have a revision clause or relationship established as it was a new client. So I treated it as I had committed to the project and just give the client what they needed and part on good terms. I wouldn't say it was 4 weeks of full work, but the revisions did drag on over 4 weeks, perhaps 1-2hr per revision. Still being micromanaged like that wasn't pleasant.

A revision clause is definitely a good idea so both parties understand the boundaries.

There is as nsmadsen says 'a balance of responsibility' is necessary from both parties.

Quote: nsmadsen said:
On top of this, I provide updates for every 30 seconds or so of music composed

That is a really good mechanism for ensuring that you're giving your client what they need, and they're knowing where you're going before wasting too much time.

Quote: nsmadsen said:
I feel that for whatever reason ZaphrodBeeblebrox has an organic, negative response to composers who charge more than ZaphrodBeeblebrox feels is fair or more than what others charge.

The whole pricing factor is not the issue he's trying to make in his original post. Unfortunately, it probably was not a great example to use comparing apples to oranges (cheaper Eastern EU composers vs comparitively more expensive Western composers). The underlying statement here is comparing value between two composers.

Quote: ZaphrodBeeblebrox said:
in general when a composer comes to us and listens to our needs first, and then creates a package that really suits our needs, that's when we'll pay the high rates.

.


We can't control that composers in cheaper countries can charge less because their intrinsic base costs are much lower. The only thing you have to remain competitive is your service and quality and professionalism and that's the point he's trying to get across.

A lot of audio providers here are trying to break in and need to know what they need to do to obtain and retain work. A good relationship developed between a developer and a content provider will ensure that fairness runs both ways. I think we're all a little scared of being taken advantage of from historic experience.

[Edited by - nsmadsen on August 31, 2009 6:04:52 PM]

Quote: Original post by yjbrown
Fortunately this was a once off case and very early on in my career. I didn't have a revision clause or relationship established as it was a new client. So I treated it as I had committed to the project and just give the client what they needed and part on good terms. I wouldn't say it was 4 weeks of full work, but the revisions did drag on over 4 weeks, perhaps 1-2hr per revision. Still being micromanaged like that wasn't pleasant.

Yeah, 20 revisions is a pay-able offense. I'd say that 3-4 revisions are reasonable.

Also, I agree with Nathan. It's important to provide direction to the composer. I'd say that sometimes producer don't always know that, so if you sense he's a reasonable guy, give him tips on references.

Quote:

Quote: nsmadsen said:
I feel that for whatever reason ZaphrodBeeblebrox has an organic, negative response to composers who charge more than ZaphrodBeeblebrox feels is fair or more than what others charge.

Quote: ZaphrodBeeblebrox said:
in general when a composer comes to us and listens to our needs first, and then creates a package that really suits our needs, that's when we'll pay the high rates.

.

The whole pricing factor is not the issue he's trying to make in his original post. Unfortunately, it probably was not a great example to use comparing apples to oranges (cheaper Eastern EU composers vs comparitively more expensive Western composers). The underlying statement here is comparing value between two composers.

We can't control that composers in cheaper countries can charge less because their intrinsic base costs are much lower. The only thing you have to remain competitive is your service and quality and professionalism and that's the point he's trying to get across.

Yeah, all I'm saying is that Western Composers need to do better than their cheaper counter-parts elsewhere. I just get so many solicitations from composers that offer exactly the same quality than our offshore guys, but charge 5x more.

I think the hollywood composer was a really good example of why someone would pay more. If they can produce an above and beyond quality, and that's what the game needs - that's worth paying for. A lot of the solicitations or applicants we've seen though don't go above and beyond what cheaper guys in other regions can do. But some do. Some offer either a better quality or go to heavy lengths to customize their offering to our needs and that's the posting's main point.

We Americans like to THINK we're somehow better, but you'd be surprised how far people in other countries have caught up to us. Even when I was part of a game development service company here, we found many other competitors offshore had just as much to offer as we did. So we had to work hard to out-do them :).

Quote: A lot of audio providers here are trying to break in and need to know what they need to do to obtain and retain work. A good relationship developed between a developer and a content provider will ensure that fairness runs both ways. I think we're all a little scared of being taken advantage of from historic experience.

Yes, my advice would be to make your offering suit your customer's needs %110. I don't mean undersell yourself or agree to 20 unpaid revisions. What I mean is to really ask questions about what your customer wants and then come up with an offering and quality that they can't refuse. Don't just give an "industry-standard" deal, give a deal at industry-standard rates that really addresses what they're trying to do.

For example, take a space game that has several levels that need sci-fi sounds and the customer is not sure exactly what would fit it, and is looking for composers to make the sounds. He'll probably hear this.
Composer 1: "Okay, I see, I'll offer XX sound effects, for XX dollars"
Composer 2: "Okay, I see, I'll offer YY sound effects, for YY dollars, I've done sci-fi before, here, look at my portfolio"
Composer 3: "Okay, I see, I can give you several references for sound effects that I think would fit you, and then we can discuss what from the references sound good, and what we should do to make sounds that really fit these levels"

Composer 3, is definitely the winner. Not because they offered a lower price, but because they offered something that seems like it'll make the project a success.