About three months ago, I moved with my studio into a new room with no online connection.
Being ‘off the grid’ for the time I’m working really turns out to be a huuge advantage for me. I get more things done, I am way more concentrated because I dont get distracted at all, neither by emails or by checking social media (or sales, which is the hardest part, lol) nor by ANY annoying browser or program or anti virus software or flash player etc etc wanting to update.
In short, and that is the main reason I am posting my experience here, this is a call to all you wonderful software and plugin companies out there: Please continue to make/keep it EASY for people like me who simply prefer to work offline, to authorize and update your stuff.
I will definitely keep it that way, having one offline PC to work with and another for my online administration etc. I will definitely continue to invest a lot of money in software and libraries, but ONLY if it doesnt ‘tie my to the grid’.
What are your thoughts, fellow authors, does anybody of you have a similar experience?
Congrats, nice achievement and well deserved
Congrats, Dirk. That’s a great milestone. Alles Gute und viele Grüße
Thought I’d throw some light on the subject. This, incidentally is something that’s been discussed quite a few times in the past on these forums. However, back then I was still an exclusive author here, and last July I decided I wanted to work full-time as a composer and made the leap over to non-exclusive status.
The decision to be exclusive or non-exclusive all really boils down to how you want to work and how you want your music/effects to work for you. Somebody who has limited time to write, produce and upload material will most likely be better off with sticking with one site and remaining exclusive.
However, if one is looking to ‘earn a living’ from royalty-free stock music marketplaces (such as myself), then it would only make sense to do a bit of research (not naming any sites! ;)) and spread that material around the internet, thus gaining a wider ‘catchment area’, so to speak. The payoff being that you’ll have a lot more admin, uploading, tagging, promotion, etc to contend with. But that’s all part of the job, if doing it full time.
Sure, there are window shoppers who do look around for the same track cheaper elsewhere, but it’s not just the price that has an influence. The scope of the stock music buyer is quite wide and there are a few variables at play. Some buyers may work for a company who will only use one site, or maybe the required usage license they need is only available from a certain site – that the less expensive site is unable to offer. Or more simply, maybe people are unaware of the choice or just can’t be bothered to shop around to save a few dollars, as RF stock music is generally regarded as low-priced anyway.
Also, as I mentioned on another thread recently, sales go up and down everywhere, so when there are low sales on one site, the others will provide, and vise versa.I’m still in my first year of my non-exclusive venture, and it’s going pretty well so far, and I’ve now been able to put back into my business (buying new kit, software, etc) in order to increase the quality of my material. So, for me at least, it has been worth it.
+1 to everything
Matt actually encouraged me to do the same last year and I am so glad I did it. Within almost exactly one year I managed to make a living out of selling stock music alone.
AJ is a great site with a very helpful and vibrant community, so it’s a great starting place to get one’s feet wet in the RFM business, and some even manage to make a living here being exclusive. There is no rule to it, you just have to figure out what works best for you.
AJ does a fantastic job of motivating new authors with nice badges, paws , the author ‘charts’ etc., and it really made me produce lots of new music and I learned a lot from other authors, but it’s also veery nice and satisfying to see your music being sold for much larger amounts than here
reubenchng saidAh, ok, I understand. So yes, I guess Cubase then would also still be my first choice if I really needed those features.
Hey Basspartout, I tried Studio One and I like it a lot. However, I felt the software wasn’t for me with the lack of an integrated music score which would be handy when I decide to teach my students a thing or two. Also, the lack of a surround mix in Studio One. I don’t do much work in surround, but its something I can play with. But again, Studio One, fast, easy and really nice to work with, but lack a few essentials that I need.
Guess what, I just bought Cubase 7! I’m a full time Logic user but I decided to try something new while I also think using a software that runs on both the PC & Mac platform would be great for collaborations/work these days.So while waiting for the box to arrive, I was just wondering if anybody have Cubase tips for me. Especially for me, I’m so used to the Logic workflow. I’ll appreciate any comments and tips given!
My tip would be, dont open the box yet and give Presonus Studio One 2.5 a try first, but I guess it’s already too late for that
I was assisting at a post host last year-working on a fairly major spot. I helped source music with the engineer and I found something here on AJ that worked and he could NOT BELIEVE how cheap it was. Literally shocked. This is a guy who spent years in Chicago’s once thriving advertising music scene as a engineer, back when composers actually had a budget to have an engineer to mix for them. So, basically, any amount of money not spent licensing music here went towards the hourly rate of the post host for the music search ($500/hr). The even more ridiculous part is the author AND audiojungle are not able to earn PRO money for the spot.
This is exactly why it is critical that the AJ licenses become stair-stepped so that the price of licensing music for a national TV commercial is significantly (very significantly) higher than the price for licensing a track for a YouTube cat video.The royalty-free marketplace is maturing and these changes need to happen soon in order for this business model to better match the expectations of buyers and authors.
It’s a great idea, why is it so hard to implement this. The little youtube type guys don’t get hurt or scared off by higher pricing and the big companies that want to use stuff for TV broadcast type usage pay a higher price, which would still probably be a joke.Add a TV Broadcast license, so simple.
but guys, there’s more:
talked to a close friend of mine today who is a producer with a pretty big reputation and he said he knows several cases of agencies buying their music on AJ while charging their BIG clients BIG numbers and keeping the money themselves. In one recent case he said a client of his told him that he received a budget for the music only! of ,converted, $3300,- Dollars, bought a track on AJ and you can guess the rest. He could go on a nice holiday for the difference!
So keep that in mind next time you’re boasting about a big company using your music.
While I admit that such practice is hard to prevent and there obviously will always be black sheep who put ethics way behind a quick dollar, it is a) a matter of refining the licensing (which thank god is getting done step by step!) and b) also definitely a matter of reducing the huge price gap.
Audiojungle URGENTLY needs a price increase!
It is not fair any more to such a huge growing number of items and authors!!! I repeat: It is NOT FAIR. This is not complaining or whining, this is simple maths! Simple Maths!
When I started here the number of items on AJ was 30.000 and now one year later, it has tripled!
I dont believe that the growth rate of the whole Envato marketplace can make up / justify the unchanged prices on AJ.
So what is AJ without this huge number of authors uploading their great music day by day?!? While Envato for sure doesnt lose a single cent in this game, faithful authors do when the pricing doensnt reflect the evolution of the marketplace, right?!
So I say it again: A price increase is long overdue! Simple Maths!
Noise-n-Music saidHaha, so far from the truth. 44.1 / 16 bit was not more or less than a compromise made by the industy in the 1980s. Although mots of listeners/consumers (and sound engineers!!) got used to it, it’s ridiculous to say that it covers human perception.
This resolution completele covers potential of the human perception.