sailaway

Last time I caught Aero live was the Eat the Rich tour, loved "living on the edge", kinda lost the vibe for me after that for innumerable reasons,

Think we can all agree AC/DC is a one trick pony but the Bon Scott era is magnificent, sometimes one trick is enough when done well, for balls to the wall rock AC/DC is the sheeholanit.

So I have seen a lot of discussion lately on here about the song choices on GnR's "Greatest Hits" album. Especially with the fact that Ain't it Fun and Since I Don't Have You are on it. Also, that five of the songs are covers. If you were put in charge of creating the Greatest Hits album, what would you include on it. Here's the CURRENT Greatest Hits set-list: 1.) Welcome to the Jungle2.) Sweet Child O' Mine3.) Patience4.) Paradise City5.) Knockin' on Heaven's Doors6.) Civil War7.) You Could Be Mine8.) Don't Cry (Original)9.) November Rain10.) Live and Let Die11.) Yesterdays12.) Ain't it Fun13.) Since I Don't Have You14.) Sympathy for the Devil *RULES* - You can pick 12-16 songs- Base it off of what you like. We all have different opinions and nobody should be criticized. - In cases such as Don't Cry, you can use the alternative lyric version... or even demos of songs if you'd like.

I have a latent distaste for Greatest hits albums, so predictably I'm not going to play by the rules, no reason there couldn't be a "deep cuts" G.H. album, including "sailing", it's alright, only women bleed, dead flowers,perfect crime, DITW,Bad Time-BC,Sail Away Queen,YATF, DTJ, throw in BOB...Coma, would love to hear some Elton,Floyd and Queen "spread ur wings", and some Nazareth,Imagine,OIAM electrified,MTTC, DOTF, some Doors WTMO, ...maybe an ELO for good measure, and a pitcher of strawberry margaritas to go

I honestly wouldn't give a shit. He's practically dead already.

No one here gets out alive, shall we sing a Hanoi Rocks Xmas song, or maybe a verse or two of Dark Globe ?

Technically gifted, very talented but legendary? No,not yet...a good G3'r fit, and in the same league as say, Petrucchi but he hasn't achieved that chutzpah of "legendary" quite yet imo. Not dissing or taking any of his achievements away, Nice guy, but not legendary. Nothing against him, simply being objective and considering all things

I think Axl left the follow up to ChiDem 75 percent finished. He probably has enough releasable music right now, but I think with music sales going up, he'll start focusing on the studio again. I don't blame him for not being enthusiastic to do it.

No blame in being careful to be xtra careful to avoid the "tentative" terminology when discussing (or not discussing) release dates either.

All the varied responses from different members regarding progress of next Album could be likened to the often told adage of a handful of blind men attempting to describe an elephant in the room, all partial views and all are correct in their version of their particular vision (no pun intended) of said elephant.

Wow I thought that was fat Steven Segal or something.

Anybody have a pic of Segal handy for comparative purposes?

OFF TOPIC: I do. Me too. I try to read as much as I can. I love reading in the languages I've learned. In fact, I can't remember the last time I read a book in Spanish, my native language I've read most Stephen Kings books twice, even three times, in different languages EDIT: Dave Ellefson talks about the royalties and the music biz

Talking my language there tomb raider, Stephen King writes some wonderfully twisted and sick stories that embed themselves deep into the grey matter, like Clive Barker,Dean Koontz and a few others for the same reasons..some biographies are quite chilling as well, just read one about an everest mountain climber that was frozen alive, fun topic! Imo, anything that opens your mind is a great thing and useful to boot! I don't speak/read anything other than engrish (save for a handful of assorted and asundry profane words) so props to you!

On topic...

Helpful and absolutely essential to have a full and complete understanding/knowledge of precisely what is included in every single peice of paper that a mega label has you sign, sort of a Murphy's law adage ie: whatever can go wrong will, and at the worst possible moment. There are some real horror stories involving artists vs. Labels, and you don't have to look far to find a happy dozen incidents.

Every successful person mentions good timing as an important element of success, easy to look at some label horror stories and think " there but for the grace of god go I" :0

Joining one of the big 3 performing rights organizations is essential in collecting royalties. A songwriting contract is a complex matter,a long term contract is a uber complex matter,and an efficient music biz lawyer isn't a waste of money. But times they are a changing and cyber worldism has cracked open a number of brand new cans of worms,for better or worse.

The fact that the labels are plunging faster than drano serves to make them more bloodthirsty than previously,and the trend of "artist de jour" works in the favor of the labels, expendable and ultimately disposable artists are an added ingredient in the recipe of Label stew in recent years, at the expense of artists, and ultimately the listening public, very precarious situation.

Is it feasable/believable that UMG has a big hefty paw and a monkey wrench jamming the works? Absotively posolutely not hard to concieve nor believe. And ultimately, "you can't please everyone so you got to please yourself"

I read a lot, a waste Is a terrible thing to mind, or something along dem lines... dontchoo agree?

How long until another member comes out and says something contradictory?

The only one who has really said something that might be interpreted as contradictory, is Bumblefoot, which has made me wonder if he is out of the loop in regards to the next record.

Nice conclusion. One could also say that it's bullshit from the others.(like before) The only one with a clue as to when it might be released is Axl. That's been obvious for a long time. I doubt that it's changed. "Hair's breath."

Bumblefoot doesn't seem too comfortable with the idea of releasing Chinese leftovers.

Ron wants writing credits, period. Of course he isn't gung Ho about releasing something else.

Then he better get busy creating something better than Glad to be here.

Agree with you there.

Surely the case with CD2 is unprecedented. The label spent 14m and recouped that with the best buy deal. Presumably they made a nice juicy profit from sales worldwide.That means presumably they have in excess of 10 tracks that they could release without having to advance Guns any cash at all.So for the label, releasing CD2 will cost them comparatively very little - namely promotion and manufacturing. So this begs the question what is the hold up? Do guns want a further advance for the new guys to record? Is there an impasse with a promotional strategy? Is the label reluctant to sink money into an album following the mix up surrounding the Chinese release? Or are guns just not ready to release another record yet? So many questions and no clear answers to be found...

Oh there are definate answers, just not on this site.

Oh, I thought he'd sung. .... so they hired one guy to play that? You'd think one of the guys in the band could've done that.

Like zig zag, with the Trex arms

As we all know the label didn't spend 14M on just the 14 tracks that were released on Chinese Democracy. What about all the other tracks that were recorded? Does the label own them? Can they release them whenever they want? Do they have to? Can GNR release something independently if the label doesn't want to release them? There is certainly a hold up somewhere.....is there anyone that knows the biz that can enlighten us?

I own Axl. He is my "grasshopper"

And that makes you the old dude with cataracts right Kung Fu?

Blah, I like my crazy in bread

Meanwhile, Chinese Democracy 99¢ at your local Dollar Tree store.

Whoa, is it really? Hotdog!

Yeah, it's true. Go visit your local DT store and you'll find it. Nobody buys it.

What is a dollar tree ?

Bumblefoot doesn't seem too comfortable with the idea of releasing Chinese leftovers.

Ron wants writing credits, period. Of course he isn't gung Ho about releasing something else.

There's nothing "spiffy" in Guns N' Roses. And the t-shirt they first sent to their members was awful.

I'm sure you would find it a "fat,bloated,washed up" shirt though

http://business.songstuff.com/article/recording_contract_basics/

A least give the guy credit for his article.

A$hba$wag owns the past, the present and the future of Guns N' Roses.

Thanks for your very mature and informative input.

We need more members like you around here.

Wow you need to calm down, I don't call a fan forum and furthermore a purely speculating topic without any direct input from the band itself something informative either. The internet seems to be serious business for you, isn't it, LOLcano62?

Just admit you trolled my thread and move on with life...it's ok to admit things. No one is upset and no one needs to "calm down" What we do need is for you to stop trolling other members threads and stay on topic. Can you do that champ?

A$hba$wag owns the past, the present and the future of Guns N' Roses.

Thanks for your very mature and informative input.

We need more members like you around here.

Like a hole in the head, right Cano?

Indeed. What's new Sails? Haven't seen you around lately.

http://business.songstuff.com/article/recording_contract_basics/

A least give the guy credit for his article.

Well, its the age old clusterfuck involving irresistable forces and immovable objects.

*could* collaberate and *will* r two completely diff matters, to quote a Brian Wilson song "God only knows"

The two tshirts were worth the $50 it costs for a year membership!

With that kind of mentality, you're going to be abused a lot.

Nah, dressing spiffy ain't cheap, don't make me call bullyville on you P2loc

$45 for a fake GN'R t-shirt? :rofl-lol:

Do you ever shop online for tshirts? 45 is at the low end of the cost spectrum. Try ordering a Labbit or Dunny shirt

Record contracts come in many forms. This stems from the fact that there are hundreds of different record companies. From the so-called "major labels" (EMI, Sony, Warner, PolyGram, BMG or one of their related corporations) to "mini-majors" (A&M, Island and Virgin, in the days of their independence, were the most obvious examples) to the "independents", the contract depends largely on the type of record company offering it.

When you first see your contract, if you are like most bands, you immediately sit down and read it. However, you soon realize that it is written in a manner which defies grammatical english. Sentences run on for 14 lines, with little if any punctuation. There are terms and words which you have never encountered. Finally, the sentences constantly make reference to each other ("pursuant to 1(A)3©(ii)"). Where do you begin? The first place is with someone familiar with record contracts. This is usually an entertainment attorney, though not all of the time.

Often, a band will be aware of and have already negotiated the "deal points" prior to retaining independent counsel on their behalf. Deal points are the basics of the contract: the advance, number of albums and royalty rate. However, the devil is in the details.

In all record contracts, you will be signing an exclusive agreement. This means that you will not be able to record for anyone else other than the record company during the "term" of your contract. The term is how long the contract lasts. Contrary to popular belief, record companies do not sign you and guarantee you seven albums. It may be a seven album deal, but nothing obligates the label to record seven albums. The seven albums means that the record label has the option to record seven albums. Typically, a record company will record one album and see how it does. If it sells well, they will exercise their option to record a second album. If the first album does not do well, the label usually drops you. Record companies require long term option contracts because if the band does do well, the label wants to make sure that the band stays with their company. Since they invested so much and signed the band in the first place, they want to be able to share the success of the band over a long period of time. For example, REM recently finished out the last of their options with their record company. REM's new contract guarantees a $10 million advance per album in the future. Try getting that advance for your first contract! Finally, the "territory" of most contracts is world-wide meaning that the record company has exclusive rights to your services as a band throughout the world.

I find that almost all bands initially form to make music, as opposed to make money. Think back to when you began, it was for the love of music and not money that was the motivating factor. However, when it comes to a record contract, it is about money. A record company puts a record out to make money. Creativity and integrity play a part, but it is a financial relationship.

In many contracts, the financial terms will run over 15 pages. The rule in record contracts is what the record company gives you with one hand, it takes away with the other. The fundamental touchstone of record contracts are "points." Points refer to how many percentage points a band will receive as their royalty rate. On a major label, this will run between 10 and 15 percent and typically 9 to 12 percent on a smaller label. The percent royalty rate is just the beginning however. The first question you should ask is, "a percentage of what?"

Generally, the royalty rate is based on a percentage of the standard retail selling price. You will get your full royalty rate for each full price CD or tape you sell through normal retail channels. Normal retail channels are usually record stores like Tower Records or Sam Goody. What about other places you sell your CD's? Record companies will pay you a fraction of your royalty rate for sales not through normal retail channels. For example, you may receive 75% of your royalty rate for sales outside the United States, 60% of your royalty rate for CD's sold below standard retail price (i.e. albums sold at a discount) and 50% of your royalty rate for sales through record clubs. In fact, most of your CD's will not be sold through normal retail channels. Although you may have a 12% royalty rate, you will only get a 6% royalty rate on record club sales. Confused yet?

Record companies try to make the royalty rate paid to artists as attractive as possible. They may give you a generous royalty rate. However, in addition to the reduced royalty rate on CD's sold outside normal retail channels, there are also many reductions in your royalty rate. I said that the financial terms are often 15 pages or more. Well, your royalty rate is on the first page and the remaining pages are all the reductions. It is impossible to determine how much a band will get for selling a CD without a calculator. When I represent a band negotiating a record contract, I sit down with them and show them the calculations to determine how much (or little) they will receive for each CD and tape sold.

There are entire chapters in books written about all the various deductions. I will mention but a few here. First, you get no royalties on records given away free for promotional purposes. A large deduction is the so-called "packaging" deduction. The theory behind this deduction is that the band pays for the packaging of the CD and tape. Typically, these deductions range from 15 to 30 percent of your royalty rate. In effect, a 12% royalty rate and a 25% packaging deduction lowers your rate to 9%. In addition, your royalty rate is often an "all-in" royalty rate which means that you must pay the producer out of your royalties. Typically, a producer will take 3 points (3%) which lowers your royalty rate even further. Your royalty rate is meaningless unless it is viewed in the context of all the deductions. A band can expect an average of $1.00 in royalties for each full-priced ($16.98) CD sold through normal retail channels.

Did I say the band was going to actually receive royalties? Not so fast. The other major concept involved in record contracts is the term "recoupment". Recoupment is a fancy word for pay back. Record companies expend a lot of money on bands. They pay for all the studio time, give the band an advance, promote the band, etc. All of this money is a loan to the band which the band must pay back. This is recoupment. The band pays back the record label out of their royalties. For example, if a major label spends $250,000 to record an album, the band must make over $250,000 in royalties until they receive their first royalty check. Once a band sells enough records to pay back the amount to the record label, the band has recouped and will receive royalties on future record sales. Approximately 80% of albums never reach this point which means that most bands NEVER receive any royalty checks. Do the math yourself, if you owe the record company $250,000 and you make $1.00 per CD, that is a quarter of a million CD's you must sell before you collect royalties. The one redeeming feature is if the band does not sell enough CD's to recoup, they don't have to pay the record company back. It does not come out of the band's personal pocketbook.

There are other places a band can make money when they have a record out other than royalties. In past articles, I have discussed publishing. There is also money from live personal performances (concerts). This is money that the band gets to keep-most of the time that is. Some record company contracts, particularly small independent labels who cannot afford to lose as much money as the major labels, allow the label to recoup money from other sources, such as publishing. Although this should be called robbery, the practice actually has a name and is called "cross-collateralization". This term means the band will not receive ANY money until the label gets paid back, i.e. the band is recouped. Of course, you don't need to sell as many albums to become recouped on an independent label, but this can come as quite a shock.

Now for the topic everyone asks about: "How much is my advance?" Not surprisingly, this question is also not as simple as it seems. In the past, record labels would sign a band and write a check to the band as a signing bonus and then pay and record an album. Some bands abused this and went over-budget on recording, much to the record company's dissatisfaction. To remedy this abuse, record companies developed the "recording fund." The recording fund is the recording budget AND the advance rolled into one. The contract states that you have one lump sum to record your album, and if you are under-budget, anything left over is your advance. If you want to stay at the Ritz and waste time in the studio, that means less money for you for your advance. This has proved a marvelous incentive for bands to be efficient in the studio.

How much of an advance is good? Once again, this depends on the label and the circumstances of your signing. Generally speaking, the larger the label, the more of an advance you should expect. In addition, the more interest in the band, the higher the price becomes. However, is a large advance always the best? There is much disagreement on this issue. Keep in mind, the more money you get as an advance, the more money you have to pay back (remember recoupment?) before you receive royalties. If you take a huge advance and your album does not live up to expectations, a label may be quicker to drop you and cut its losses. On the other hand, most bands who sign record contracts never reach recoupment so the advance may be the only money they ever get from the label so why not take as much as possible? There is no right or wrong answer to the size of the advance and I try to get a sense from my clients as to their feelings. Some have a "show me the money" attitude and others think about longevity within the industry.

These are a few of the main points in record contracts. Often, a contract will be over 40 pages long. Needless to say, there is a lot more in there than I have had a chance to get into. However, I hope this column has given you a better sense of how record contracts operate. Don't think that you have finally "made it" simply because you get offered a record contract. Often, it is a deal with the devil. There are many attendant drawbacks to signing a record contract. Most importantly, however, is to have someone knowledgeable about record contracts negotiate the agreement on your behalf. Record contracts are routinely negotiated. A slight change in wording here and there can have a huge financial impact for a band.

(This was originally written by an attorney)

*labels are evil*

A$hba$wag owns the past, the present and the future of Guns N' Roses.

Thanks for your very mature and informative input.

We need more members like you around here.

Like a hole in the head, right Cano?

A song is separate from a master recording. Labels own the masters and artists own the song/ publishing. All depends on their contract but if the label drops or releases them they can hold onto the recordings of the album (which happened to Duff).

The options are to re record the songs, try and buy the masters back from label, or negotiate a licensing agreement. All of which are a pain in the ass and almost impossible to accomplish.

Now the label can own those master recordings but the band usually has rights and has to sign off on anything the label officially releases.

Basically a lot of negotiating and uphill battle if label doesn't want to release a follow up album.

This is how most normal old record deals work. Really depends on their contract and what it says.

This pretty much, kinda sad that an Album can go triple platinum but the band can still be indebited to the label, it happens.

Hunter S. Had a lovely quote about the music biz....

Bumping a May topic in June? Sure there r more songs, but this speculation circlejerk is seemingly neverending.

Missed you? No.

Just tired of seeing certain people claiming you're banned to see you pop back up under your old name weeks later.

Don't listen to scuttlebutt Rusty, its usually as unreliable as the "daily mail" or "national enquirer"

I work for a living, so I'm not always able to come here and play with you kiddies.

You're repeating yourself, Sybil.

In some circles that would be known as an unintentional double post, but you call it whatever makes you happy.

Double posts don't happen 3 minutes apart. Anyways, this isn't a topic about you so go have fun at your fanclub!

Guess I'm simply an anomaly, not quite home yet so my apparently shawking double post is due to connections.

I'm on Nightrain,Backplane and numerous other forums to discuss GNR with all the nice people.

On topic: levitating is a talent! Wonder if David Blaine gives those lessons?

You're repeating yourself, Sybil.

In some circles that would be known as an unintentional double post, but you call it whatever makes you happy.

Oh yay. Warchild is back.

Yea, I know people can spend their money however they want and people can also point out how stupid they were for doing it.

Enjoy the shirts, candles, patches and towels. I really couldn't give a shit what they have going on over there. Just don't bitch about spending your money on something people warned you about.

Been away on the necessary evil of business, glad u missed me

I never did listen to things that *some concerned* citizens warned me about. Life is 2 short!

I'm pretty sure those shirts only took a few dollars to make. If you're adding retail mark up to the fan club shirts to defend the "club," LOL.

Same old blah,blah,blah ad nauseum. Newsflash: people are actually allowed to spend their money as they see fit. A shocker, that revelation eh?

I'm pretty sure those shirts only took a few dollars to make. If you're adding retail mark up to the fan club shirts to defend the "club," LOL.

Same old blah,blah,blah ad nauseum. Newsflash: people are actually allowed to spend their money as they see fit. A shocker, that revelation eh?

In 88 they, and others inspired me to get my first ink, So yeah the Hanoi Rocks look was intriguing, along with the music...It was the overall impression of the band that got people hooked.