Covers bands - are they just parasites? (& how PRS works)

[Frank Blank]

[asingardenof]

2 minutes ago, cetera said:

If you're a songwriter you need to take care of your 'business'. You can't leave it to someone else.....

So songrwiters are supposed to contact every venue in the country on the off chance someone has played one of their songs? 

[cetera]

Of course not. I was referring to their own performances.

 

It is absolutely impossible to trace every performance of every song..... and an absolute administrative/processing no-go. It would cost more to research/process/pay than there would be money in the pot.

[asingardenof]

4 minutes ago, cetera said:

Of course not. I was referring to their own performances.

 

It is absolutely impossible to trace every performance of every song..... and an absolute administrative/processing no-go. It would cost more to research/process/pay than there would be money in the pot.

Exactly my point. The system as designed relies on every venue where live music is played, or every band that plays live, reporting what songs are played at every gig. That's never going to happen, as you say.

Edited September 25, 2023 by asingardenof
Expanded for reason

[Al Krow]

43 minutes ago, cetera said:

Anyway.... these cover bands...... Parasites innit?

 

Nah, I think the consensus on this thread is that we're not.

Phew!! Although there's nothing like marking our own homework, is there? 😄

 

More seriously - there's been some corking discussion/comments along the way and I've learned a thing or two about the freedom to be playing covers without having any obligation to pay to do so, whilst flagrantly nicking other people's original material, as a performer.

 

Guess I'd best get onto learning some of the new covers material my band's agreed to try out at our rehearsal on Thurs...

[Baloney Balderdash]

On 23/09/2023 at 19:28, BigRedX said:

As a musician:

It's not for me. I'd been in one "proper" covers band, and I've got any need to be in a similar band completely and utterly out of my system. In my personal opinion playing in a covers band (compared with the sorts of originals bands I've been in over the last 30 years), for too much effort for too little financial gain and almost no artistic satisfaction. I went in to playing covers having seen the band I ended up joining because one of their guitarists was a very good friend of mine, because I thought it would be great playing songs that I had enjoyed when I was getting into music in the 70s. The reality was that I ended up hating several of the songs we played and quite honestly I would never want to hear them again under any circumstances. I always felt that our audience would have been just as happy and probably better served by an appropriately stocked video jukebox.

 

As an audience member:

Not at all for me. In the past the only covers bands I have gone knowingly to see are ones where I knew at least one of the musicians. They tend to play in the sorts of establishments I wouldn't normally frequent, that appear to be mostly filled with the sorts of people I would want to avoid. To me it always seemed as though the music at these gigs was little more that aural wallpaper, or to behave badly under the influence of too much alcohol using the excuse that they were "getting into the music"to justify their actions. I'm probably out of the ordinary as a musician in that I don't see anything special about "live music" per se. So to me most covers bands come across as a random set of musicians playing a random selection of songs to a random audience. I think most of the time the typical covers band could be replaced with a well-chosen playlist and no-one who had come out for the evening would really complain.

 

As a composer:

Bring it on! Every time someone covers one of my songs it's going to be money in the bank. So far it has only happened once, and the earnings were meagre, but that doesn't rule out something better in the future. Of course I'd rather it was my version that was successful, but I'll take someone else's version of one of my songs being successful as a very good second best.

This!

 

Well except I've never played in a cover band, and was born in 1976.

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Baloney Balderdash

[UglyDog]

From the ethics of playing Sex On Fire at the Dog & Duck to dreams of a quasi-socialist utopia in the space of 5 pages. God I love this place.

[Waddo Soqable]

3 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Nah, I think the consensus on this thread is that we're not.

 😄

I can't be arsed to go back and read the whole schmozzle, but surely there can't be many that actually think they are (parasites) Shirley...? 

[Richard R]

I think the conclusion is that it's not parasitic. BUT there are two important lessons: 

1. If you play covers you should do the honourable thing and submit your set lists to the PRS so that artists do get a share of the pie (even though it IS the venue's responsibility)

2. If you play originals, especially if you wrote them,  then you absolutely should submit the set lists, otherwise you will miss out on 2½d per year royalties.

 

 

 

 

 

( 3. @Dad3353 must be a great employer on a T&M basis, but don't ever put an apostrophe in the wrong place)

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Richard R
apostrophe in the wrong place!

[TimR]

https://www.prsformusic.com/royalties/report-live-performances

 

 

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, Dad3353 said:

No-one consuming their basic needs for living is a 'parasite'.

 

In general a parasite is just consuming their basic needs for living. A tapeworm isn't doing much investing, it is just growning. They just happen to be taking that resource from something else

[Dad3353]

6 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

... A tapeworm isn't doing much investing, it is just growning. ...

 

So that's the rumblings in my stomach..! 

 

...

 

 

[Steve Browning]

Just now, Dad3353 said:

 

So that's the rumblings in my stomach..! 

 

...

 

 

That's the rumblings in its stomach!

[Stub Mandrel]

4 hours ago, cetera said:

Plenty of disinformation on this thread so to put a few things straight:

 

Venues are licensed by PRS/PPL, not the hirer.

 

The 'main' business of the venue is what they are licensed for. A pub may have a jukebox, the radio and/or occasional live bands but if they do not have 'regular' ticketed events then they will just have a 'general' licence. If you regularly play at one of these establishments then you will need to apply for the 'Gigs & Clubs Scheme' at PRS. If you write your own material then you will see a small payment every so often for your trouble. If you play covers then you will reward the original songwriters, as you should...

There is also a similar scheme for buskers on the Underground.

https://www.prsformusic.com/royalties/live-performance-royalties#:~:text=If members play at a,is performed at the event.

 

If the main business of a venue is ticketed events i.e. concert venue, arts centre, theatre, etc then approx 4% of box office is payable to PRS from the gross. This money is then paid out to the songwriters/publishers of the music performed after a small deduction for processing (under 10% - the lowest deduction of ANY worldwide Rights society). This 4% is SUPPOSED to be raised/paid by the venue (5p on a pint etc) and NOT charged to the band..... however, it often is added to band deductions which defeats the object if you write your own material. However, contrary to what some ignorant people think, PRS is NOT the music police and doesn't have any power to enforce the way a venue raises it's payable PRS licence fee.

Also, because ticketed venues are often rubbish at asking for setlists from artists and supplying them on to PRS it is always recommended that for those performances a writer use the online PRS live set list hub to upload their set info.

 

https://www.prsformusic.com/royalties/report-live-performances

You're welcome...

 

 

It's unfortunate that the PRS site doesn't explain thing with that level of succinctness.

I'm still trying to get my head around teh busking thing. Do buskers get a fee for playing their own songs, or does submitting a setlist just trigger a payment of £1.47?

[Stub Mandrel]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

 

Nah, I think the consensus on this thread is that we're not.

Phew!! Although there's nothing like marking our own homework, is there? 😄

 

More seriously - there's been some corking discussion/comments along the way and I've learned a thing or two about the freedom to be playing covers without having any obligation to pay to do so, whilst flagrantly nicking other people's original material, as a performer.

 

Guess I'd best get onto learning some of the new covers material my band's agreed to try out at our rehearsal on Thurs...

 

So that's all settled.

 

What about tribute bands?

[EssexBuccaneer]

2 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

So that's all settled.

 

What about tribute bands?

SPLITTERS!!!

[Al Krow]

Just now, Stub Mandrel said:

 

So that's all settled.

 

What about tribute bands?

 

Couldn't possibly comment. Given that I'm not in one, surely that would be trolling...trolling, trolling down the river...? Although I'm sure @Dad3353 would approve of us all leaving a good job in the City to spend our time doing that?

[BigRedX]

44 minutes ago, Richard R said:

2. If you play originals, especially if you wrote them,  then you absolutely should submit the set lists, otherwise you will miss out on 2½d per year royalties.

 

I know that's said in jest, but just to give you an idea of how much you can make in performance royalties from gigging your own songs, The Terrortones made enough to cover most of our recording, mixing and mastering costs for 2 singles, a 5-track mini album and a full LP from playing 30-40 gigs a year over 5 years plus some local and national radio play. That's a decent enough income.

[Paul S]

6 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

 Writers should be paid for the time spent writing, 

 

How about this one, Douglas.  I was asked to write a book on my particular subject.  The actual words took me, I would estimate, a solid 300 hours of writing.  Taking pictures for the book is tricky as I have travelled all over the country in order to do this.  Sorting the pictures and deciding where within the text they should be placed and how much of the page they should take up is probably going to take me as long as the writing.  But the only reason I have been asked to write the book is because I have 30 years experience in my field.  What do I get paid for, would you say?  

[Dad3353]

9 minutes ago, Paul S said:

How about this one, Douglas.  I was asked to write a book on my particular subject.  The actual words took me, I would estimate, a solid 300 hours of writing.  Taking pictures for the book is tricky as I have travelled all over the country in order to do this.  Sorting the pictures and deciding where within the text they should be placed and how much of the page they should take up is probably going to take me as long as the writing.  But the only reason I have been asked to write the book is because I have 30 years experience in my field.  What do I get paid for, would you say?  

 

It's always the same response: you should be paid for all the hours you spent on the Planet, living and breathing, just like everyone else. You can't have spent more than twenty-four hours a day doing whatever you were doing. Once you have enough to live on, the same as everyone else on the Planet, whet more is there..? Writing and preparing a book is worth just as much, in Time spent, as planting and gathering carrots, or open-heart surgery. It's only hours of our lives that have any 'real' value at all.
I realise, of course, that this makes no sense in parallel with the current 'worth' system, where one's worth is measured against a different yardstick. Time is my yardstick, and we all have our own 'capital', all of identical 'worth'. 

[Richard R]

2 hours ago, BigRedX said:

The Terrortones made enough to cover most of our recording, mixing and mastering costs for 2 singles, a 5-track mini album and a full LP from playing 30-40 gigs a year over 5 years plus some local and national radio play. That's a decent enough income.

 

From which I conclude that The Terrortones wrote far more and almost certainly better songs than I have to date. 

[DCS222]

2 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

always the same response: you should be paid for all the hours you spent on the Planet, living and breathing

I would have thought the issue of “payment” is the problem in your thought pattern… not the quantity of payment? Payment attaches an inherent value to things and time… And in a universally equal society, it’s unnecessary and brings about bias. Should one producer provide what is regarded a better service or product, more people will want that “thing” and buy it from them… even at the same price of other producers, this special producer will become inherently richer because more people want that product. So why have payment at all… just people get what they want!!?!!

Edited September 25, 2023 by DCS222

[DGBass]

I would say no. I've spent most of my playing life as a bass player in originals bands and admittedly had a slightly less favourable opinion of covers bands during those years. I'm quite late to the covers band party having only got into it by accident as a dep bass player for what was supposed to be one gig. That was over four years ago and at present I don't see me gigging ever again in an originals band. There are a few posts that strike a chord when discussing the differences between originals bands and covers bands and for me at least the most obvious ones are always getting paid for a covers gig while rarely ever getting paid for originals gigs in the past. Getting a Tennents Lager rider at King Tuts for a one hour originals set never really counted as getting paid. As far as I am aware, a typical pub venue I'd play would be covered under the likes of the PPL PRS license scheme for live music so something is going back to creators they rep and that doesn't seem parasitic to me. It's not big money you get paid to do covers but nice to have help with your fuel/replacement strings and out goings. Originals gigs were also rarely longer than an hour whereas a local covers gig at the dog and duck could be 3 x 1 hour sets and the bar manager is timing you to make sure he gets his contracted hours from you. I don't think covers bands are making it any harder for originals to get gigs. IME, there tends to be originals circuits and venues who still support new/upcoming originals bands and covers bands tend to also keep to their own haunts.

I find it a bit more business like being in a covers band, dare I say harder work, and I have gained a deep respect for any covers bands who put in the work to make a good show. Once I'm up on stage and playing for a crowd who engage with the band, all the differences between covers bands and originals don't matter to me and I'm sure don't matter as much to the audience.
 

[Dad3353]

1 hour ago, DCS222 said:

I would have thought the issue of “payment” is the problem in your thought pattern… not the quantity of payment? Payment attaches an inherent value to things and time… And in a universally equal society, it’s unnecessary and brings about bias. Should one producer provide what is regarded a better service or product, more people will want that “thing” and buy it from them… even at the same price of other producers, this special producer will become inherently richer because more people want that product. So why have payment at all… just people get what they want!!?!!

 

I'm OK with that, too.  I don't mind people getting paid for the time they spend doing something, but at a fixed hourly rate (worldwide...), the same as everyone. That could (should..?) be motivation enough for those with something to offer the World. As long as it doesn't allow anyone to become rich to the extent we see currently, I'd allow their time to be rewarded, at its just value.

[Downunderwonder]

6 hours ago, UglyDog said:

quasi-

Nowt quasi about it.