Quote:
Originally Posted by Seafroggys
If he's spent all that money on quality outboard gear, he'd be crazy to offer it free. Does he not have a name for himself? If not, then maybe investing in all that gear would be a bad idea.
|
I think your assessment is accurate, but there's a minute chance nothing weird is going on here. You could make the same accusations about me and my setup (I haven't done a session since March), though my gear isn't quite at the same tier of expense as he is claiming about his.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seafroggys
1: Sounds like a good idea, although what about people who do cover songs that have mechanical licensing and shtuff like that?
2: Makes sense, although he seems to be an *** about it.
|
(01) I tend to hold the same stipulation, though in an official capacity. Generally speaking, it's a lot of legwork to make sure that the client has jumped through the proper hoops to make this legal. It's easier to side-step the whole situation entirely (though I'll generally record a cover so long as I have in writing that it won't be used for commercial release).
(02) This is another stipulation I maintain, and very strictly: when you're working for nothing or next-to-nothing, the credit is probably the biggest payment involved. Here's my question: how would you phrase it differently so it doesn't make you seem like an ***?
I didn't get that impression reading it, and I can't think of a more straight-forward way to say it (this isn't me arguing, it's a legitimate question).