|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075 |
I tagged along to one of my son's jazz gigs on Saturday... they played at a vineyard that offers live music and wine-tasting. The venue is very small, low key and rural.
At break the owner asked the band not to play anything but original songs because ASCAP and BMI reps have visited them in the past and tried to get money from them.
I'm curious to hear everybody's thoughts on this. I know there are many opinions about the topic and also about the implications of leaning hard on the very small venues that already aren't making any money. The cover charge was $5, and attendance was insufficient to take in what they paid the band.
on a different note: true to my theory about live music demographics, EVERYONE at this gig was a baby boomer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,325
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,325 |
At break the owner asked the band not to play anything but original songs because ASCAP and BMI reps have visited them in the past and tried to get money from them. I'm curious to hear everybody's thoughts on this. IMO....(even though there may be points I'm missing). I think it's absurd (read: chicken s____) that BMI/Ascap insists on patrolling and trying to pressure monies from these small venues and their performers. I'd wonder who actually dictates that this should occur? Is it just BMI/Ascap or are the big money makers in music really behind it. How pervasive is this policing in the small or even larger venues? The way I see it if a performer is doing a copy tune of any said 'money makers' it's great FREE advertising/marketing of their song and should be thankful. I don't have a clue...but I do think many are pretty full of themselves. Maybe that's easy for me to say because I'm a nobody in the money making music world. This topic could be just as stellar as that 'playing for free' thread which I chose to read only.  That's my take on it...carry on.
Last edited by chulaivet1966; 06/02/14 10:58 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
BMI and ASCAP license rates are based on several factors: size of the venue, how many hours/days of copywritten music is played, seating capacity, etc.
Take the small winery, for example. They book professional musicians to play copywritten music at their wine tastings. They also possibly hire a caterer to supply food, a rental company to rent a tent, etc. They reap a financial benefit from the live music.
ASCAP approaches them and demands $1000 for a one-year license to play any of the tens of thousands of song titles they represent. Pretty draconian, no?
Not really. That comes to $3.77 per day, or $26.41 per week. So, if they have a wine tasting once a month, their monthly cost for the license is approx. $105.64. Go and try to rent a tent for 200 people – tell me what that costs.
Contrary to popular belief, music is not free. BMI and ASCAP represent songwriters, and those songwriters are entitled to compensation for their work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,471
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,471 |
Who makes this happen? Copyright laws written by congress.
Yes.... music is not free. It's intellectual property and is owned by someone (unless in the public domain) and to use it requires that someone pay the cost.
I played in a house band at a club for 2.5 years. There was an ASCAP sticker on the door. I recall one time the ASCAP rep came around and did a survey of the songs on the jukebox since it was owned by the club owner and not a leased jukebox. In addition, he wanted our set lists for as far back as we had them.
As far as what Pat said in the OP.... about the club owner telling the band to play only original material..... that sounds a bit odd. Really, how many bands out there are 100% original and playing boomer clubs? I'm thinking maybe the ASCAP guy just happened to walk in the door and the club owner had told him previously that he only used original bands to avoid paying the license.
Like 90db said, they have a formula that they apply to every single place they license..... clubs of varying size and genre, restaurants, even the oil change store and the doctor's office are subject to their jurisdiction.
As songwriters, the ASCAP and BMI folks are on our side of this issue. I have no problem with them collecting the license fees. Maybe one day they will be collecting on my behalf.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,325
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,325 |
ASCAP approaches them and demands $1000 for a one-year license to play any of the tens of thousands of song titles they represent. Pretty draconian, no? Based only on Pat's comment: "venue is very small, low key and rural". Yes...in my irrelevant opinion I see it as 'draconian'. I could be totally off base but my perception is none of these 'very small' venues are getting rich trying to provide some entertainment in their marketing. But....currently, we all know the stories of artists getting ripped off in one fashion or another so I guess this policing/revenue generating scheme was an idea to re-coup lost royalty revenues. I've got no dog in this fight and have not thought about it until this thread. This is a system of capitalism. Carry on....
Last edited by chulaivet1966; 06/02/14 03:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075 |
On one hand, I do support the idea that these guys are collecting money for the song writers.
But then I wonder how much of the collected money actually goes to the song writers.
I've heard stories of musicians who set up an experiment in which they played their original (C) songs regularly at clubs that were supposed to be BMI/ASCAP licensed, but they never got a check once... even though the club owner paid the dues, and the musician notified BMI/ASCAP that they had played the venue.
If the justification for the extortion is that they are collecting money for the artists.. but the artists never get any of it... then it becomes a straw man argument.
John Desjardins (Silvertones) mentioned once that at least one of the places he had been playing stopped offering live music because the enforcers showed up and demanded retroactive payments. I know of places here in Winston-Salem that also stopped offering live music for the same reason... and at least one venue that allows only originals for the same reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,114
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,114 |
I know one local restaurant that stopped having live music after an attempt by BMI to collect more than they could afford. Most of the musicians who played there did covers. However, my wife, who plays primarily originals registered with BMI, lost a regular job in the rotation. Irony?
Yes, we each get checks from BMI but together they won't buy a sandwich. Ever been to the palace that is BMI headquarters in Nashville?
BIAB 2025 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 7 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6, Song Master Pro, Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus 192 & Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, et al are not a perfect system of collecting royalties. Far from it. They operate like a Mafia “protection” scam. Should they limit their collections to the larger venues? Perhaps. Are songwriters entitled to compensation for their work when it is used by businesses for profit? Definitely. Publishers get the lion's share of these royalties, not songwriters; but that is a result of unscrupulous publishers (go figure!) and ignorant songwriters – not BMI/ASCAP. Van Morrison's “Brown-Eyed Girl”, one of the most-played songs in recording history, made next to nothing for Morrison. Why? Because he signed a contract with Bang Records without the advice of an attorney that stated all recording/promotion costs would come out of his royalties. After these were paid, Bang did a lot of “creative” accounting, and kept almost all of the royalties. On the other hand, my next door neighbor in Socal was a guy named Rico Reyes, who had written a bunch of stuff for Carlos Santana. He was a single father, and he was raising his young daughter on the royalty checks he was receiving. If you ever write a smash hit, you will thank God for the PROs. Providing, of course, that you consult a lawyer before you sign anything. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,492
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,492 |
You are not alone, we have a similar problem in here Germany that is called GEMA (an investment company for publishers and heirs).
Whenever we have a public performance we are required to send a playlist to GEMA with as much information as possible about the songs we use. Then GEMA has a chance to give money to the respective authors, arrangers and publishers.
If you spin records or their successors then GVL (similar to SoundExchange in the US) takes care of royalties for recording makers (musicians, labels). Also: As much information as possible please.
Here you have to announce a public performance before the event -- and if there is just one song played that is under their control you have to pay for the entire event. You [that is, the event organizer] even have to pay if you play your own songs only, if they are registered with a PRO.
The tariff takes into account room capacity. If there is room for 10000 you have to pay for 10000 even if there are only 154 people on the premesis...
The payment goes to the rights owners if they can be determined. If not the fees are given to the rights owners who currently sell the most music and whose music is played the most on radio and tv stations.
Desktop; i7-2600k, 8 GB mem., Win 10 Pro, BIAB 2017; RB 2017 - latest build
Laptop: i5-2410M, 4 GB mem, Win 10 Pro, BIAB 2017; RB 2017 - latest build
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,395
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,395 |
I have mixed feelings about that.
On one hand I see the songwriters should get paid for their work - BUT - and it's a big but - how does ASCAP/BMI know what songs are being played and who to direct the royalties to.
On the other hand, shouldn't some instances of playing songs that have become part of our common language be part of the fair use laws?
Technically, if we were to sing "Happy Birthday" to my sister in a restaurant, the restaurant is required to have an ASCAP license. And the writers of the words to "Happy Birthday" are long dead (the "Good Morning To You" song is public domain) and Warner/Chappell makes about $2Million per year on that song. Is that right?
How about a few people sitting at a piano at a retirement village clubhouse for a bunch of friends? Technically it's illegal. But why sell sheet music if you are only allowed to play it in your living room?
Of course, the copyright laws were written by legislators who received handsome campaign funds by the publishers which I'm sure influenced their voting (tacit bribery?).
Somewhere there is a better place between the two extremes, but I don't think we are going to see that happen. Plus I wouldn't consider myself the expert to draw up new guidelines if it fell in my lap.
So I guess my opinion is the copyright laws need to be re-written but not by the publishing industry.
Notes
Bob "Notes" Norton Norton Music
https://www.nortonmusic.com
100% MIDI Super-Styles recorded by live, pro, studio musicians for a live groove
& Fake Disks for MIDI and/or RealTracks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,075 |
my guess is that this is still a carryover from the old paradigm. If the old paradigm still worked, the publishers would be making big bucks from music sales, and they wouldn't have to bother the little guys.
But, we've already discussed the phenomenon of how people now see music as being free... both in terms of downloading recordings, and hearing live performances... so the river of money to the publishers has stopped.. but they still have to make payments on the palaces they live in.
It will be interesting to see how the current trend of many unpublished artists making their music available online without necessarily forming any relationship with BMI/ASCAP/SESAC plays forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“On the other hand, shouldn't some instances of playing songs that have become part of our common language be part of the fair use laws?” “Gone With The Wind” is certainly a part of our 'common language', is it not? Who hasn't seen it? By your logic, a theater owner should be allowed to run GWTW to packed houses and not pay any royalties, right? And make DVD's of the film and sell them, royalty-free? After all, everyone involved in making the film is dead, right? Why stop there? Our 'common language' includes a myriad of works; literary, musical, theatrical. Do these works lose their value once they become part of the 'common language'? Why should Yoko Ono receive royalties for Lennon's work? After all, she didn't write it, and he's been dead for 34 years. Without the songwriter, there would be no music business, period. Songwriters profit from the recording and performance of their work, and compared to the cut the record companies, performers, lawyers, publishers, retail outlets, et. al. make on a song, the writer makes a pittance. “So I guess my opinion is the copyright laws need to be re-written but not by the publishing industry.”The original copyright law was actually signed into law on May 31, 1790, when it was signed by President Washington. Granted, Edison wouldn't invent the phonograph until 1877, but even the first Congress recognized the fairness in protecting intellectual property. Musical compositions would not be protected until the Copyright Act of 1909. Citation: http://digital-law-online.info/patry/patry5.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,492
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,492 |
Why should Yoko Ono receive royalties for Lennon's work? After all, she didn't write it, and he's been dead for 34 years.
The copyright laws originally did intend to provide some income to two generations of heirs. After all, if one learns a craft, gets self-employed, hires hands to work for him/her. This achievement can be transfered to heirs, why should a song be treated differently than a, e.g. plumbing shop? But in many instances somebody else, often a company, buys the rights to songs and makes more money than the intended circle of persons. And I have knowledge of labels who force writers of songs to transfer their rights to them or their songs will not be recorded or, if already recorded, not be published. There is something wrong with the current system, be it in the US or in Germany.
Desktop; i7-2600k, 8 GB mem., Win 10 Pro, BIAB 2017; RB 2017 - latest build
Laptop: i5-2410M, 4 GB mem, Win 10 Pro, BIAB 2017; RB 2017 - latest build
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123 |
I 100% agree with 90db. I gig for my living & the cheques I get for playing my songs live add up quite quickly & so becomes an integral part of my income (income per song per night depends on the size of the crowd & venue). It can at times be more than the actual gig fee! I of course agree that music is not free  What I do not understand is that venues only have "original" music because (in my case) even if the songs are original, but registered with bmi/ascap etc, then they have to pay for them anyway.
Last edited by bupper; 06/04/14 04:43 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,471
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,471 |
responding to a few points from several conversations above.
Experiment to see if one can get royalties on original songs in a night club..... yeah, that won't work for a number of reasons. I mentioned that there is a formula the PRO's use. It's heavily weighted to the songs that are on TV, radio, and being sold as CD's in stores. Songs that get good rotation in the major radio markets get the advantage through the sheer numbers of spins. Songs that are actually on the charts. Since the songs only generate a few cents per airplay, it takes massive numbers of spins to get any real money happening.
They would also need to have registered the songs with their PRO first. If the songs are not registered, the PRO doesn't know they even exist or who to pay. Second, they would need to have generated enough radio spins to get on the PRO's radar with the formula used. Since most original local bands can't get more than a few spins on a back water tiny local radio station (at best) without the backing of a big label, there's no way they even factor into the formula at any significant level. Third, the PRO isn't going to cut a check for 12cents.
Copyright laws don't care who the songwriter is. They care who owns the copyright. In the example of Lennon & Yoko, John's work is owned by a publisher. The money generated in royalties goes to the publisher and the songwriter. Generally a 50/50 split. Since John is dead, the income stream still goes to his heirs. When Yoko dies, likely Julien, their son, will inherit that royalty income stream. Intellectual property rights are passed down just like real property rights.
When I sign a song with a publisher, it's either a non-exclusive signing, meaning I'm still free to use it and sign it with other publishers and libraries for anyone to use....or..... it's an exclusive signing. Exclusive means that no one else can sign it. I am signing 100% of my rights and ownership of that song away to the publisher or the library. At that point, I don't own it and if I wish to record that song, legally, I need to get the permission in writing to do so from the publisher. People who are not familiar with publishers and libraries think this is a bad deal. "You don't own your own song anymore"!!! Exactly right. BUT.... the contract I signed is a legal document and it specifies how much compensation I get in every instance the song is used by someone else. So regardless, I get paid. Even if the publisher's catalog is sold, that original contract remains in force.
A number of the songs I wrote are placed with publishers and libraries. Depending on the contracts I have signed..... some of those songs, I no longer own. Even though I wrote the song, I don't own it, the publisher I signed it with owns it, and my rights as to recording it and what I can do with it are subject to the wording of that contract. I could be sued (or at least warned to cease & desist) if I violate that contract. With some other contracts, I still retain some rights. No matter what the contract specifies, I get credit as the writer and I get the agreed percentage (50%) of the income royalties and license fees for my lifetime and when I die, it will go to my heirs.... my daughters, and if the songs are still making money at that point in time, to their children. All of the published and signed songs are listed in my PRO account with the publisher. The PRO pays each of us from performance royalties. The publisher/library pays me direct from licensing fees. Since all my songs are TV/Film at this point, there are no mechanicals from actual sale of records and CD's.
FAIR USE? For all practical purposes, there is no such thing in copyright. That is a myth. Anyone using any portion of the work of another person must pay the copyright owner for that use. Exemptions exist in limited areas for educational purposes in mostly a classroom setting.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123 |
responding to a few points from several conversations above.
Experiment to see if one can get royalties on original songs in a night club..... yeah, that won't work for a number of reasons. I mentioned that there is a formula the PRO's use. It's heavily weighted to the songs that are on TV, radio, and being sold as CD's in stores. Songs that get good rotation in the major radio markets get the advantage through the sheer numbers of spins. Songs that are actually on the charts. Since the songs only generate a few cents per airplay, it takes massive numbers of spins to get any real money happening.
They would also need to have registered the songs with their PRO first. If the songs are not registered, the PRO doesn't know they even exist or who to pay. Second, they would need to have generated enough radio spins to get on the PRO's radar with the formula used. Since most original local bands can't get more than a few spins on a back water tiny local radio station (at best) without the backing of a big label, there's no way they even factor into the formula at any significant level. Third, the PRO isn't going to cut a check for 12cents.
In fact, I fill in gig sheets for every gig & send it to my pro & am paid for every one of my songs I sing live. I live in France but am a member of BMI. I send along these sheets to BMI and wait to get paid. The french PRO (sacem) gets these sheets too & they pay my share to BMI who in turn distribute it to me. These gigs can be from a very small bar to a big concert halls, it makes no difference, I get paid for every "original" song every time I sing it in public. I also work with production libraries but my earlier post was not about that but about getting paid royalties from gigging
Last edited by bupper; 06/04/14 06:50 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,395
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,395 |
To me there is a big difference between playing "Happy Birthday" in a restaurant and a theater screening "Gone With The Wind".
Playing "Happy Birthday" in a restaurant it more like quoting "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn." from "Gone With The Wind".
I would not confuse playing a song that has become part of our common heritage with recording it or reproducing another recording of it. There is a big difference so that comparison is neither logical nor valid.
------
Don't get me wrong, I respect the right of the copyright holder to profit from his or her work. I own a few dozen copyrights myself.
The first song I wrote was when I was in 1964. So the copyright has been in effect 50 years. If I die tomorrow, the work is protected for 125 years.
That many years for that simple little juvenile song that I've forgotten by now is absurd.
If I were to find a cure for cancer, I'd have less than 20 years protection. This tells me that 12 bar blues song with juvenile lyrics is more important to protect than a cure for cancer.
Like I said, there is a place between the two extremes of the copyright law that is probably right. I don't profess to know that sweet spot, but I can discuss points and speculate. BTW, I comply with the laws as written even if I don't agree with them.
And yes, there are fair use laws that have been tried and upheld in court.
The best example is a music teacher can copy and distribute copyrighted sheet music to his or her students. The only thing that can be contested in court is whether they are really students or not, or if they just pretend to be students to get free sheet music.
Parodies are fair use, as proven by Weird Al and 2 Live Crew.
------
The most extreme case I can think of...
Here is a Public Domain song:
Good Morning to you
Good Morning to you
Good Morning Dear ____
Good Morning to you!
Replacing the words "Good Morning" with "Happy Birthday" and singing the same melody nets Warner Brothers $2 Million per year.
The last of the two sisters who substituted the words died in 1946. That means Warner or whoever they sell the copyright to will continue to make $2 million dollars per year until 2051.
Who among us thinks that this is fair?
Insights and incites by Notes
Bob "Notes" Norton Norton Music
https://www.nortonmusic.com
100% MIDI Super-Styles recorded by live, pro, studio musicians for a live groove
& Fake Disks for MIDI and/or RealTracks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,471
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,471 |
And yes, there are fair use laws that have been tried and upheld in court.
The best example is a music teacher can copy and distribute copyrighted sheet music to his or her students. The only thing that can be contested in court is whether they are really students or not, or if they just pretend to be students to get free sheet music.
Parodies are fair use, as proven by Weird Al and 2 Live Crew.
Yes... fair use is granted to educational use. The 1976 act states " for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research. Also factors to consider in this is whether the use is commercial or non-profit educational purposes, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount of the copyrighted work used, and the effect it has on the market and value of the work. Parody of a copyrighted work requires extreme caution. Only a court can decide after the fact, whether the song is a unique song or a copyright infringement. Court cases through the years on parody songs have gone in both directions. It can often be safer to buy the license to the original song if the melody and lyrical content are going to be extremely similar as Weird Al tends to do. Often, a parody song will be registered as a derivative work of the original song. If you're planning a parody song, to be released commercially as Weird Al does, a consultation and retainer to a good music attorney would be a really good idea. Another aspect to this is "answer songs". For example, Kenny Rogers recorded Lucille. Some time later Sherri Jericho recorded an answer to the original. The melody is exact. Original song: Lucille Answer song: Thanks for leaving Lucille Again... a music attorney's advice would be the way to go
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 06/04/14 08:38 AM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“To me there is a big difference between playing "Happy Birthday" in a restaurant and a theater screening "Gone With The Wind".” No difference at all, legally. Both works are intellectual property, protected by copyright.“Playing "Happy Birthday" in a restaurant it more like quoting "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn." from "Gone With The Wind".” Margaret Mitchell might disagree. There is quite a bit of 'difference' between singing a song in a restaurant and writing an epic novel. “I would not confuse playing a song that has become part of our common heritage with recording it or reproducing another recording of it. There is a big difference so that comparison is neither logical nor valid.” Granted. There is a difference between performing a song and recording it. Nonetheless, both activities are protected by copyright. “Don't get me wrong, I respect the right of the copyright holder to profit from his or her work.” It doesn't appear that you do. “If I were to find a cure for cancer, I'd have less than 20 years protection. This tells me that 12 bar blues song with juvenile lyrics is more important to protect than a cure for cancer.” There are reasons that medical patents are so limited, most having to do with saving lives. Apples and oranges. Once again, without the songwriter, there would be no music business, and you would have nothing to sing in restaurants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs Special Extended Until August 31st!
XPro & Xtra Styles PAKs Special Extended Until August 31st!
The XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAKs special offers are now available until August 31st at 11:59pm PDT!
Ready to take your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 experience to the next level? Now’s the perfect time! Expand your style library with XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs—packed with a wide variety of genres to inspire your next musical creation.
What are XPro Styles and Xtra Styles PAKs?
XPro Styles PAKs are styles that work with any version (Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition) of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). XPro Styles PAKS 1-9 includes 900 styles!
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). With over 3,500 styles (and 35 MIDI styles) included in Xtra Styles PAKs 1-20, the possibilities are endless!
Get the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Listen to demos and order now! For Windows or for Mac.
Note: XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
Get Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 19 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Listen to demos and order now! For Windows or for Mac.
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 19 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Don’t miss this chance to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box setup—at a great price!
Mac 2025 Special Upgrade Offers Extended Until August 15th!
It's not too late to upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® and save! We've extended our special until August 15, 2025!
We've added many major new features to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, including advanced AI tools like the amazing BB Stem Splitter and AI Lyrics Generator, as well as VST3 plugin support, and Equalize Temp. Plus, there’s a new one-stop MIDI Patches Picker with over 1,100 MIDI patches to choose from, all neatly categorized by GM numbers. The MultiPicker Library is enhanced with tabs for the SongPicker, MIDI Patch Picker, Chord Builder, AI Lyrics Generator, and Song Titles Browser, and the tabs are organized into logical groups. The Audiophile Edition is enhanced with FLAC files , which are 60% smaller than AIFF files while maintaining identical audio quality, and now ships on a fast 1TB SSD, and much more!
Check out all the new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® here:
Purchase your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac during our special to save up to 50% off your upgrade purchase and receive a FREE BONUS PAK of amazing new Add-ons. These include the 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK, Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana, Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes, MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano, Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7, Playable RealTracks Set 4, RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark, and more!
Upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and add 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and 20 RealStyles, FLAC Files for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks, Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster, MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster, Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8, and RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe.
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs!
New RealTracks Released with Band-in-a-Box 2025!
We’ve expanded the Band-in-a-Box® RealTracks library with 202 incredible new RealTracks (in sets 449-467) across Jazz, Blues, Funk, World, Pop, Rock, Country, Americana, and Praise & Worship—featuring your most requested styles!
Jazz, Blues & World (Sets 449–455):
These RealTracks includes “Soul Jazz” with Neil Swainson (bass), Mike Clark (drums), Charles Treadway (organ), Miles Black (piano), and Brent Mason (guitar). Enjoy “Requested ’60s” jazz, classic acoustic blues with Colin Linden, and more of our popular 2-handed piano soloing. Plus, a RealTracks first—Tango with bandoneon, recorded in Argentina!
Rock & Pop (Sets 456–461):
This collection includes Disco, slap bass ‘70s/‘80s pop, modern and ‘80s metal with Andy Wood, and a unique “Songwriter Potpourri” featuring Chinese folk instruments, piano, banjo, and more. You’ll also find a muted electric guitar style (a RealTracks first!) and “Producer Layered Guitar” styles for slick "produced" sound.
Country, Americana & Praise (Sets 462–467):
We’ve added new RealTracks across bro country, Americana, praise & worship, vintage country, and songwriter piano. Highlights include Brent Mason (electric guitar), Eddie Bayers (drums), Doug Jernigan (pedal steel), John Jarvis (piano), Glen Duncan (banjo, mandolin & fiddle), Mike Harrison (electric bass) and more—offering everything from modern sounds to heartfelt Americana styles
Check out all the 202 New RealTracks (in sets 456-467)
And, if you are looking for more, the 2025 49-PAK (for $49) includes an additional 20 RealTracks with exciting new sounds and genre-spanning styles. Enjoy RealTracks firsts like Chinese instruments (guzheng & dizi), the bandoneon in an authentic Argentine tango trio, and the classic “tic-tac” baritone guitar for vintage country.
You’ll also get slick ’80s metal guitar from Andy Wood, modern metal with guitarist Nico Santora, bass player Nick Schendzielos, and drummer Aaron Stechauner, more praise & worship, indie-folk, modern/bro country with Brent Mason, and “Songwriter Americana” with Johnny Hiland.
Plus, enjoy user-requested styles like Soul Jazz RealDrums, fast Celtic Strathspey guitar, and Chill Hop piano & drums!
The 2025 49-PAK is loaded with other great new add-ons as well. Learn more about the 2025 49-PAK!
Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac!
With your version 2025 for Mac Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition or PlusPAK purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons FREE! Or upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49 to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks!
These PAKs are loaded with additional add-ons to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box®!
This Free Bonus PAK includes:
- The 2025 RealCombos Booster PAK:
-For Pro customers, this includes 33 new RealTracks and 65+ new RealStyles.
-For MegaPAK customers, this includes 29 new RealTracks and 45+ new RealStyles.
-For UltraPAK customers, this includes 20 new RealStyles.
- Look Ma! More MIDI 13: Country & Americana
- Instrumental Studies Set 22: 2-Hand Piano Soloing - Rhythm Changes
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 44: Jazz Piano
- Artist Performance Set 17: Songs with Vocals 7
- Playable RealTracks Set 4
- RealDrums Stems Set 7: Jazz with Mike Clark
- SynthMaster Sounds and Styles (with audio demos)
- 128 GM MIDI Patch Audio Demos.
Looking for more great add-ons, then upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for just $49 and you'll get:
- 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums with 20 RealStyles,
- FLAC Files (lossless audio files) for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums
- Look Ma! More MIDI 14: SynthMaster,
- Instrumental Studies Set 23: More '80s Hard Rock Soloing,
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 45: More SynthMaster
- Artist Performance Set 18: Songs with Vocals 8
- RealDrums Stems Set 8: Pop, Funk & More with Jerry Roe
Learn more about the Bonus PAKs for Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®!
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Mac!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! XPro Styles PAK 9 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and higher for Mac!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 9 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 29 RealTracks/RealDrums!
We've been hard at it to bring you the latest and greatest in this 9th installment of our popular XPro Styles PAK series! Included are 75 styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres (25 styles each) that fans have come to expect, as well as 25 styles in this volume's wildcard genre: funk & R&B!
If you're itching to get a sneak peek at what's included in XPro Styles PAK 9, here is a small helping of what you can look forward to: Funky R&B Horns, Upbeat Celtic Rock, Jazz Fusion Salsa, Gentle Indie Folk, Cool '60s Soul, Funky '70s R&B, Smooth Jazz Hip Hop, Acoustic Rockabilly Swing, Funky Reggae Dub, Dreamy Retro Latin Jazz, Retro Soul-Rock Fusion, and much more!
Special Pricing! Until July 31, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 9 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 9 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box 2025 and Higher for Windows!
Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2025 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
We're excited to bring you our latest and greatest in the all new Xtra Styles PAK 20 for Band-in-a-Box! This fresh installment is packed with 200 all-new styles spanning the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres you've come to expect, as well as the exciting inclusion of electronic styles!
In this PAK you’ll discover: Minimalist Modern Funk, New Wave Synth Pop, Hard Bop Latin Groove, Gospel Country Shuffle, Cinematic Synthwave, '60s Motown, Funky Lo-Fi Bossa, Heavy 1980s Metal, Soft Muted 12-8 Folk, J-Pop Jazz Fusion, and many more!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 20 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 209 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 20.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 20 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 20 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,624
Posts781,936
Members39,707
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean