|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
Please can someone from PG Music answer this question for me.
I am having problems releasing my original songs through LANDR when they include BIAB Realtracks.
My latest release has stalled because of this very issue and I have received the following email from them:
Hey there,
Thanks for releasing with LANDR!
Looks like you may have used samples or borrowed content in your release with UPC 628810692224.
No worries, this happens a lot. We’re here to help you avoid problems with your music after it’s released.
We just need to double-check that you have permission to use any copyrighted material.
Here’s how to get your release live as quickly as possible. Reply to this email with:
- Any beat license(s) and proof of payment
- The source of your samples (DAW, sample marketplace, etc.)
If you’re releasing a remix, reply to this email with:
1. Authorization from the original creator for use of the composition
2. Authorization from the master recording owner to reuse the audio
If you are moving previously released tracks, reply to this email with:
- The name of your former distributor
The faster you reply the quicker we’ll be able to get your release live!
Thank you for your patience,
The LANDR Team
Do I have permission, or do I need to formally request it from PG Music, or even the individual session musicians who provided the recordings ?
I cannot readily find anything in my BIAB manual regarding this subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 18,864
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 18,864 |
Hi Andy, You have permission. Click on the below link and it will take you to PG Music's frequently asked questions (FAQs). You can read their clearance there. https://www.pgmusic.com/salesfaq1.htm#22When you upload your tracks, don't reference the Realtracks as being performed by any particular artist because you have not paid anyone to actually do a recording for you. Your songs are your own work. PG Music has paid each Realtrack Artist who then signs over their work to PG Music for use with BIAB and for you to create songs with BIAB. I've noticed over the years that some people like tagging their uploads with things like 'Drums by Craig Scott', 'Piano by Blair Masters', etc. This is not accurate because no RT artist played firsthand for these songs. The artists are actually one or two steps removed from the final product created by the songwriter. From a copyright perspective, I imagine that such information could also be counter-productive and cloud the mind of those who filter for copyright on upload sites. In relation to using RT Artists names as having played on a song when loading a song onto a website, Peter Gannon has commented a couple of times over the years in the forums that this is not something he encourages. Regards, Noel
MY SONGS...Audiophile BIAB 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 280
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 280 |
There are a whole lot of independent Smooth Jazz artists releasing records that are not much more than a BIAB-made backing track with a single instrument playing the melody... Just saying... 
Last edited by LtKojak; 09/07/19 08:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
Thank you for confirming this, Noel.
I will quote the clearance link in my response to the LANDR support team and hopefully my release will now go ahead with monetization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113 |
The interesting thing to me about this, and I mentioned it when you brought up this same topic a while ago, is I'm curious how LANDR is determining that not all the instruments are live.
It has to be some sort of AI program they are using, but what is it looking for to determine that?
Anyway, please update this thread once you hear back from them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 737
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 737 |
There are a whole lot of independent Smooth Jazz artists releasing records that are not much more than a BIAB-made backing track with a single instrument playing the melody... Just saying... This I believe. It takes real effort using BIAB for backing tracks for live performance to keep them from sounding like smooth jazz and/or elevator music. I'm not criticizing either. I've heard some pretty compelling elevator music over the years. I once hear a great cover of a Bela Fleck tune in a Food Lion Grocery store. I actually stopped under the speaker and hear it out. Anyway, its not a sound I'm after all the time. Seems like a lot of the BIAB jazz/funk/latin styles cultivate that sound. Its easy to get if you want it. For me, I only want it a little. George Benson- yes. Wes Montgomery.... not so much.
biab2023(Mac)
Logic Pro X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,095
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,095 |
Hi Andy. Is this song, UPC 628810692224, one of the songs you were having issues with Landr back in July? If it is, have you modified it since the July rejections or are you trying to get it accepted as it was originally recorded?
Regardless whether you've worked on this song and resubmitted it or if this is a new song. Landr is telling you the same thing now as they were back in July. Your problem is not 'permission' but rather, your songs continue to be so generic sounding they are triggering kick backs from Landr's review system.
I suggest you not quote or identify BIAB as your accompaniment band as that's not going to solve your issue long term with LandR and it also could create issues for other artists that may use BIAB on their submissions to Landr. There's no need for you to chance continuing rejections or to possibly create unnecessary issues for other artists when having permission is not the actual issue.
I'm not trying to sound harsh or pass judgement on your music, writing or musicianship, It's LandR that is rejecting your productions. The issue is in the studio arrangement and production of the songs. You stated back in July you are not skilled with advanced techniques of BIAB and you're not interested in learning RealBand. That's fine and it is what it is. What it is, is your lack of expertise with those techniques are what's lacking in your current song projects. Using BIAB the way you do, is not meeting the quality threshold for LandR and YouTube's agreement for monetized postings.
Being what it is, my suggestion would be that you hire a producer to help you arrange and produce your songs and also maybe contract with someone to create custom RealTracks if it's appropriate for your song. I understand you're a multi instrumentalist and I'm not sure if you play keyboards, but regardless, if you decide not to hire a producer, you should hire a skilled keyboardist to come in and program midi styles and backing tracks for your song projects. That's a very good and inexpensive way to get live and unique sounding tracks and allow you to concentrate on your strengths rather than spin your wheels trying to work around techniques that aren't working for you.
Good luck with your projects
BIAB Ultra Pak+ 2024:RB 2024, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
Hi Charlie, In answer your question, this is a new release of a song that has only just been written and recorded. My previous songs were all released through Landr to Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon, Googleplay, Deezer, etc, and all of them ARE currently monetized. However, in July after the songs had successfully been released, I noticed that Landr had marked some of them as not being passed for YouTube monetization. As I explained in my July post, this was not a problem to me because, even though I have a YouTube account and do occasionally upload the odd video, I do not actually qualify for YouTube monetization. Furthermore, I'm not really interested in making money from my humble low budget videos to begin with. What I was interested in though, was finding the precise reason for Landr's disapproval, and so I emailed them in an attempt for some clarity in the matter. It was their answer that prompted me to post the July forum topic, as I felt that some BIAB users may be interested to know of my experience, especially if they were planning to monetize YouTube videos that include music created using BIAB Realtracks. The outcome of the dialog that I had with Landr was rather inconclusive because they did not provide a precise reason for why the songs were regarded as 'not sufficiently distinct', and merely offered possible reasons why any release could be flagged, such as the use of samples without permission, or copyrighted material. In conclusion, we can only speculate as to the precise reason and to the sophistication of the AI detection used by LANDR. However (not that it makes any difference in my case), but they did inform me that they had reversed their original decision and that all of my songs were now approved for YouTube monetization on their system, although they warned that this doesn't guarantee that YouTube would also approve them for monetization if they were ever to be used in a video. With this new release, it is a different situation because this time they have notified me in advance that they have detected samples or borrowed content, and if you read their email again you will see that all they are requesting is confirmation that I have permission to use any copyrighted material before going ahead with the release. So as far as I am aware, I simply need to confirm that the only third party content is BIAB Realtracks and that I have full permission from PG Music to use them. Hopefully this will meet with their requirements and then my release will also be approved for distribution and YouTube monetization. Thanks for offering your opinion and advice Charlie, but I'm perfectly happy with my music making process and the rewards that it has brought me over the last 40+ years before and after the introduction of music software. I find it convenient to use BIAB Realtracks in my recordings, but they are non-essential as I have the skills and knowhow to play many instruments myself if necessary, and to a professional standard. I will of course update this thread when LANDR respond to my email reply. https://andyshearer.wixsite.com/music
Last edited by Andyman; 09/08/19 05:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,095
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,095 |
Thanks for replying Andy. I'm glad you're posting these updates as I agree with you that your situation could be helpful to others wanting to monetize YouTube videos using BIAB tracks. I worried my post sounds more harsh than what my intent is. My previous post intends to addressing others with similar concerns as much as your particular issue.
To clarify, I think there are two different skill sets at play with this situation getting songs cleared through Landr. Your musicianship and ability to play multiple instruments to professional levels is one skill. The other skill is Audio Production and Engineering. I see the issue with Landr to be an audio production/engineering issue and not a musicianship issue. As skilled, experienced and diverse as you are, BIAB session players and the audio tracks they record are on equal footing with you. Raw BIAB recorded audio and your recorded audio at the beginning of a mixing session are no different. What happens in the editing, processing, manipulation, duplication, balancing and rendering of those tracks is what's important to success in passing the Landr review for monetization or for any personal and commercial use of a song project.
Both skills are an art within themselves and although related, are separate from each other. There are many highly skilled musicians that know nothing of production and many highly skilled producers that can't play any musical instrument beyond a beginners level if they can play an instrument at all. The two skills correlate to each other but the individual skill sets are not dependent on each other.
My point in this post is to reassure others that have concern if their use of BIAB tracks may also face rejection for monetization, as professional quality demos or even commercial releases. They may get rejects, but they don't have to. By applying their time and resources to learning production and engineering skills, BIAB generated tracks can fill their needs. If they don't want to learn production skills, simply hire someone or corroborate with someone that has the skill set.
BIAB Ultra Pak+ 2024:RB 2024, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
There are a whole lot of independent Smooth Jazz artists releasing records that are not much more than a BIAB-made backing track with a single instrument playing the melody... Just saying... I couldn't agree more. By definition, Smooth Jazz creates a relaxing mood and often tends to feature a single soloist playing over a fairly generic-sounding backing track, whether the backing track has been created using BIAB Realtracks or live session musicians. For that reason alone, BIAB is a useful tool to many musicians. That is the reason why I decided to use only BIAB Realtracks on this particular release, although I could just as easily have recorded the guitar, keyboard and bass guitar parts myself to achieve a similar result. My music tends to cover several different genres and I have previously released original tracks featuring just a single live instrument (ie. solo acoustic fingerstyle guitar or piano). What I am saying is that I would never be content with just relying on BIAB Realtracks in all of my music making, but there are occasions when I feel that it helps me to achieve the result that I'm aiming for, and it is simply more convenient and time saving.
Last edited by Andyman; 09/09/19 02:35 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,567
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,567 |
With all these elaborate but interesting speculations about why Landr rejected a BIAB song I am surprised no one mentioned the obvious (and likely) reason for rejection.
BIAB produces identical riffs for users of the product! And these riffs alone, if detected by software, would be sufficient to get you a rejection.
The odds of your BIAB song containing a riff identical to my BIAB song are actually pretty good!
1) if we both choose a BIAB style that includes distinctive riff(s)
2) if we both use similar key and chords
3) if we both use a similar tempo
Not a lot of other factors that I am aware of. I can almost hear someone saying "yeah but odds are it won't happen" and I admit maybe it is not highly likely but it is something I worry about in my songs.
As an example let's say BIAB 2020 comes out December 1 with a cool new style that attracts a lot of attention from BIAB users. And that style includes distinctive riffs since the RealTracks do seem to be getting more complex.
A lot of songs are written in a handful of common keys. And it is also pretty common to write songs around 120 bpm.
All it takes is two BIAB users writing a song using those new distinctive riffs in a common key and bpm and Landr (or other online systems) may quite easily detect the second one as a copy!
Last edited by JohnJohnJohn; 09/09/19 04:42 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113 |
I try and avoid using BIAB realtracks that have distinctive riffs for the very reasons you mention J*3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
With all these elaborate but interesting speculations about why Landr rejected a BIAB song I am surprised no one mentioned the obvious (and likely) reason for rejection.
BIAB produces identical riffs for users of the product! And these riffs alone, if detected by software, would be sufficient to get you a rejection.
That sounds as good a reason as any for LANDR to identify content as 'insufficiently distinct', but let me reiterate that they did not actually reject any of my previous eight releases. They merely marked some of them as not approved for YouTube monetization, and then they instantly reversed this decision after I requested more precise information on what constituted 'insufficiently distinct'. Although LANDR have put my ninth and latest release on hold, their email clearly states that this is only until I provide confirmation that I have full permission to use the third party content that they have detected in my song. (ie. the BIAB Realtracks). Thay say that this is to avoid any problems AFTER it has been released. Something else has just occurred to me which could explain how their detection system works. I've noticed that they advertise copyright free sample packages for sale on their website. Mainly for use in house/trap/hip hop music. It makes me wonder if their AI monitoring system is automatically programmed to allow these samples, but not other third party content, such as BIAB Realtracks ? Of course there are alternative distribution services to LANDR that are available, but it seems likely to me that they all probably use a similar type of AI monitoring system for flagging up third party content that may require the permission of the owner. It's all speculation I know, and anyone's guess is as good as yours, mine or Charlie's, but I'm eagerly waiting to see what they do when they receive my reply to their email. In any event, I'm sure that there'll be a few sighs of relief from other BIAB users when/if LANDR accepts my confirmation that I have full permission from PG Music to use BIAB Realtracks, and they allow my latest release to go ahead.
Last edited by Andyman; 09/10/19 01:55 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,055
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,055 |
FWIW, we have two albums released to all the major streaming platforms w/o any question ever arising. While around half of the songs feature friends playing guitar the other half features a large variety of solo RT's and all of the songs use RT/RD rhythm tracks. I have nothing in the song meta data regarding who played what.
i may be naive (ample precedent) but I don't see how a perhaps one or two bar riffs could trigger any algorithms. Given the different progressions used and the different permutations regenning yields it's all a mystery to me.
I don't use a lot chords (4-7 typically) or complex chords but I do try to have a lot of changes. To me for RT solos that gives more distinct sounds that if they don't exactly support the melody than at the least they don't distract from it. Also all of the RT solos I've used on our productions are comped up from multi regens which further reduces the likelihood of them being identical to something else.
Given that chord progressions can't be copyrighted I don't see how a non melodic riff (non melodic in that it doesn't copy a known melody) could trigger an issue or why some entity would care enough to create an algorithm to search for them.
All very strange I think.
Bud
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
Hi Bud,
I previously released two double compilation albums and an EP through Songcast without any questions asked, and I did use BIAB Realtracks on some of the tracks (mainly just drums though). I also used other third party content with permission from the author(s).
It's only my latest release that has stalled whilst LANDR check that I have permission to use the third-party content that they appear to have detected whilst reviewing it. The song 'You Make Me Think About Love' is an original composition, but it's the first time that I have used only BIAB Realtracks as the accompaniment to my vocal performance. I don't mention anything in the metadata regarding any other contributor than myself.
My previous eight releases contained a mixture of BIAB Realtracks and live instruments, and they were all successfully distributed to Spotify, Apple Music, Google Play, Deezer,etc with monetization for streaming and downloads.
I've even had five of these tracks aired on local and national BBC Radio here in the UK, and the BBC are known for being particularly strict and sensitive regarding the use (or misuse) of any copyrighted material in their broadcasts.
I'm confident that my release will go ahead when LANDR receive my reply to their email, but if I experience any further problems, I will simply release through an alternative distributor instead. Stay tuned for the conclusion to this mystery.
Last edited by Andyman; 09/11/19 09:45 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,324
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,324 |
I've had several songs rejected by a library I was trying to get approved for. The rejection reason was... "sounds too midi. Record with live instruments and submit again in 6 months." Funny thing was, there was zero midi in it. And this was a number of years ago. Some of the real tracks at that time sounded kind of wonky in some places. That has fortunately, been less of an issue in the more recent versions of BB.
Quality of the real tracks and the production are a huge factor with many libraries. I know a library is different from the monetization platforms being discussed but I think the principle is the same.
And yes, I've heard several users here post music with the same exact licks in their song as is in mine. It can and does happen when the same real tracks are used in the same style.
Regarding disclosure. I know, and you know that PG grants permission for use of it's material in our original songs. So when a library asks if I have permissions as needed, I simply state that I own 100% of the song's rights. I don't recall any of them asking for signed release documents. If it's a cowrite, I add the other writer's PRO info and everything is good. All of that is usually done in their online forms or in the original agreement you sign with them that all material you will be submitting is original, and any and all clearances have been obtained, there is no intentional copyright infringement, and you control and own 100% of the song's rights for commercial use.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,055
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,055 |
We were offered a contract by Crucial Music based on an all BiaB track (had to also sign a non-disclosure agreement so that about all I can say about it!). Mood Media has licensed 22 of our songs and they all include RTs including many solo RTs. There’s never been a question regarding the source of the tracks. We just state we own 100% of everything unless, as Herb mentioned, it’s a co-write.
Bud
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113 |
It seems there are two different things at play here, at least from what I've been reading this morning over at CDBaby (I use CDBaby to release my music). For the digital music places like Spotify, iTunes, etc., it seems only necessary that you have the rights to use all the tracks used to build your song, and of course we do when using realtracks. It seems that Youtube monetization is different however. I found the following: Eligibility:
Songs that you control all of the master and publishing rights to.
Use only your own material for which you have exclusive rights.
Use third-party material for which you have exclusive rights.
The following examples are Ineligible and cannot be used for YouTube or Facebook Monetization:
Content licensed non-exclusively from a third party (such as samples that are not exclusively licensed) I don't claim to understand legal stuff, but wouldn't the above sentence exclude realtracks because we don't have exclusive rights? Having said that, every song I have ever released through CDBaby is also opted in for YouTube Monetization and I have never received a warning from them about it. The article I quoted from is here: https://support.cdbaby.com/hc/en-us/arti...t-be-monetized-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,567
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,567 |
The following examples are Ineligible and cannot be used for YouTube or Facebook Monetization:
Content licensed non-exclusively from a third party (such as samples that are not exclusively licensed) I don't claim to understand legal stuff, but wouldn't the above sentence exclude realtracks because we don't have exclusive rights? Seems pretty clear. And like Herb said, I have also heard BIAB songs with identical riffs so technically RealTracks would be a problem in the case you outlined. As a practical matter it may never come up. Some things you can do to reduce the chances of a problem... - mix and match RealTracks on your own instead of using RealStyles - mix in a good amount of your own playing - mix in a good amount of MIDI parts - use obscure keys and timings (don't use the default 120 bpm) - edit RealTrack riffs in your DAW to make them more unique sounding All of this represents more work but if you simply open BIAB, use default key and bpm settings, enter standard chords and choose a popular RealStyle, you are far more likely to sound like another BIAB song.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Band-in-a-Box for Windows
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179
Apprentice
|
|
OP
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 179 |
It seems there are two different things at play here, at least from what I've been reading this morning over at CDBaby (I use CDBaby to release my music). For the digital music places like Spotify, iTunes, etc., it seems only necessary that you have the rights to use all the tracks used to build your song, and of course we do when using realtracks. It seems that Youtube monetization is different however. I found the following: Eligibility:
Songs that you control all of the master and publishing rights to.
Use only your own material for which you have exclusive rights.
Use third-party material for which you have exclusive rights.
The following examples are Ineligible and cannot be used for YouTube or Facebook Monetization:
Content licensed non-exclusively from a third party (such as samples that are not exclusively licensed) I don't claim to understand legal stuff, but wouldn't the above sentence exclude realtracks because we don't have exclusive rights? Having said that, every song I have ever released through CDBaby is also opted in for YouTube Monetization and I have never received a warning from them about it. The article I quoted from is here: https://support.cdbaby.com/hc/en-us/arti...t-be-monetized- Very interesting to read what CDBaby say Dave, and it supports what LANDR told me back in July when I queried why all of my releases were monetized on Spotify, Amazon Play, Google Play, Deezer, etc, but had not been approved for YouTube/Facebook monetization. They explained that it is because the criteria is different and more strict for YouTube and Facebook. I did a bit of research on YouTube monetization and discovered that they changed the rules about two years ago with the aim of improving content. To qualify for YouTube monetization, your channel must now have at least 1000 Subscribers and 4000 Watch Hour time in last 365 days. The video content must also comply with the stricter copyright ownership requirements (as you stated). See https://youtube-creators.googleblog.com/2018/01/additional-changes-to-youtube-partner.htmlAs my YouTube channel falls a long way short of the required number of subscribers and watch hours, it's totally irrelevant whether the content of any of my videos complies with content requirements anyway, so you can understand why it really doesn't matter to me that my LANDR releases were not approved for YouTube monetization. However, at the time, I was curious as to the precise reason why LANDR had not approved them, and this was the reason why I queried it with them. Without referring directly to any of my releases, they simply answered by giving me a list of YouTube's criteria and offered the suggestion that their review system must have flagged something that didn't meet the required criteria. To their credit, they unexpectedly said that they were happy to approve all of my releases for YouTube monetization on their system but warned me that, in the event of the material being used in a YouTube video, it would ultimately be up to YouTube themselves to decide if it fulfilled their own requirements for monetization. As the only material I used on these releases was a combination of my own live performances and BIAB Realtracks, I would tend to agree with you that BIAB Realtracks are not exclusively licensed, therefore all that LANDR were doing when they didn't approve some of my releases for YouTube monetization, was letting me know in advance that I could run into problems if I was to use the music in a YouTube video. Of course, it would depend on the sophistication of YouTube's detection system in identifying BIAB Realtracks within the recording, and their interpretation of what constitutes 'insufficiently distinct'. So like you say JohnJohnJohn, a lot of BIAB songs use the same Realtracks, and every Realtrack uses the same 8 bars riffs. Therefore it's not beyond the realms of possibility that a sophisticated AI system could identify a commonly used riff when reviewing a release, and subsequently not approve it for YouTube/Facebook monetization.
Last edited by Andyman; 09/13/19 03:09 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update Your PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024 Today!
The Newest RealBand 2024 Update is Here!
The newest RealBand 2024 Build 5 update is now available!
Download and install this to your RealBand 2024 for updated print options, streamlined loading and saving of .SGU & MGU (BB) files, and to add a number of program adjustments that address user-reported bugs and concerns.
This free update is available to all RealBand 2024 users. To learn more about this update and download it, head to www.pgmusic.com/support.realband.htm#20245
The Band-in-a-Box® Flash Drive Backup Option
Today (April 5) is National Flash Drive Day!
Did you know... not only can you download your Band-in-a-Box® Pro, MegaPAK, or PlusPAK purchase - you can also choose to add a flash drive backup copy with the installation files for only $15? It even comes with a Band-in-a-Box® keychain!
For the larger Band-in-a-Box® packages (UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition), the hard drive backup copy is available for only $25. This will include a preinstalled and ready to use program, along with your installation files.
Backup copies are offered during the checkout process on our website.
Already purchased your e-delivery version, and now you wish you had a backup copy? It's not too late! If your purchase was for the current version of Band-in-a-Box®, you can still reach out to our team directly to place your backup copy order!
Note: the Band-in-a-Box® keychain is only included with flash drive backup copies, and cannot be purchased separately.
Handy flash drive tip: Always try plugging in a USB device the wrong way first? If your flash drive (or other USB plug) doesn't have a symbol to indicate which way is up, look for the side with a seam on the metal connector (it only has a line across one side) - that's the side that either faces down or to the left, depending on your port placement.
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows® Today!
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows for free with build 1111!
With this update, there's more control when saving images from the Print Preview window, we've added defaults to the MultiPicker for sorting and font size, updated printing options, updated RealTracks and other content, and addressed user-reported issues with the StylePicker, MIDI Soloists, key signature changes, and more!
Learn more about this free update for Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows at www.pgmusic.com/support_windowsupdates.htm#1111
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 Review: 4.75 out of 5 Stars!
If you're looking for a in-depth review of the newest Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows version, you'll definitely find it with Sound-Guy's latest review, Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows Review: Incredible new capabilities to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs.
A few excerpts:
"The Tracks view is possibly the single most powerful addition in 2024 and opens up a new way to edit and generate accompaniments. Combined with the new MultiPicker Library Window, it makes BIAB nearly perfect as an 'intelligent' composer/arranger program."
"MIDI SuperTracks partial generation showing six variations – each time the section is generated it can be instantly auditioned, re-generated or backed out to a previous generation – and you can do this with any track type. This is MAJOR! This takes musical experimentation and honing an arrangement to a new level, and faster than ever."
"Band in a Box continues to be an expansive musical tool-set for both novice and experienced musicians to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs, as well as an extensive educational resource. It is huge, with hundreds of functions, more than any one person is likely to ever use. Yet, so is any DAW that I have used. BIAB can do some things that no DAW does, and this year BIAB has more DAW-like functions than ever."
Convenient Ways to Listen to Band-in-a-Box® Songs Created by Program Users!
The User Showcase Forum is an excellent place to share your Band-in-a-Box® songs and listen to songs other program users are creating!
There are other places you can listen to these songs too! Visit our User Showcase page to sort by genre, artist (forum name), song title, and date - each listing will direct you to the forum post for that song.
If you'd rather listen to these songs in one place, head to our Band-in-a-Box® Radio, where you'll have the option to select the genre playlist for your listening pleasure. This page has SoundCloud built in, so it won't redirect you. We've also added the link to the Artists SoundCloud page here, and a link to their forum post.
We hope you find some inspiration from this amazing collection of User Showcase Songs!
Congratulations to the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!
We've just announced the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!
There are 45 winners, each receiving a Band-in-a-Box 2024 UltraPAK! Read the official announcement to see if you've won.
Our User Showcase Forum receives more than 50 posts per day, with people sharing their Band-in-a-Box songs and providing feedback for other songs posted.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums66
Topics81,587
Posts734,722
Members38,500
| |
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean