Generic samples, loops and getting paid

[mikehalloran]

I am not certain whether this belongs Off Topic, Music Business or even General Recording. I'll post here and, if it's moved, it's moved.

I used Shazam recently to listen to a well known commercial and got 9 different results as to the original recording. Not once did it correctly identify the commercial which was listed correctly in the ASCAP/ACE database. I then heard another commercial, found the cues in BMI and got similar results. It wasn't that Shazam couldn't ID the commercial -- it was that the software kept identifying it incorrectly -- but never the same way twice.

Shazam uses the same software engine that BMI uses to listen on the web although they no longer own the company or application. ASCAP has a similar application but I don't recall the name and I'm pretty certain that there's no commercial version of the software.

The PROs, USA and others, are relying more and more on listening software to identify what is being played. Incorrect ID means performance royalties lost or going to the wrong people.

Moral: Commercially samples and loops are convenient but they are also generic. If you want the listening 'bots to ID your music correctly, then put some work into giving your music something unique for those 'bots to tag.

Sermon over.

[mikehalloran]

I'm sure that the 'sound similar' was not accidental but it's a twin edged sword.

[David Polich]

I'm sure that the 'sound similar' was no accidental but it's a twin edged sword.

Couldn't agree more. Most of the time, a client wants something that sounds
like "something else" they like. Meaning, you pretty much have to recreate the
original reference, and tweak it just enough to avoid copyright infringement.

[mikehalloran]

If it's a work for hire, there are no cues to be paid on but if you'd like to see royalties, you have to do something to set your cues apart.