John Braheny Archive on the Craft and Business of Songwriting

A John Braheny Songmine column from the archives…

Accession Number: C000000137-005 Document/Digital File, “Publishing III ” by John Braheny, OCR converted text under same Accession Number

(Digitally converted text. Some errors may occur)

Songmine: PUBLISHING III 

by John Braheny

There are two areas I haven’t covered in the last two columns: the daily duties of publishers and the variety of outlets for songs. I’ve discussed broad areas, but in every active publish-ing company there are lots of daily activities. They include: 1. Screening songs; 2. Meeting with writers; 3. Critiquing and other-wise working with staff writers; 4. Negotiating contracts with writers, managers or attorneys; 5. Initiating or suggesting col-laborations between staff writers or lyricists and producer/writers or artists; 6. Reviewing songs in the catalog; 7. Calling producers and A&R reps to learn what songs they need for their artists; 8. Reading the trades and tip sheets to discover projects that may need material, including film and advertising trades; 9. Producing demo tapes; 10. Making and mailing tape copies; 11. Having lead sheets made; 12. Having casting meetings with staffers and staff writers to determine which songs are appropriate for certain pro-jects; 13. Seeing producers; 14. Maintaining files on producers, the songs they liked and why, what they didn’t like and why, who’s holding songs and for how long; 15. Making calls to radio stations, record companies and managers of acts who’ve recorded your songs to work out ideas for promotion; 16. Negotiating and granting licenses to users; 17. Filing copyright forms; 18. Filing notices with BMI, ASCAP, SESAC for songs that have been released for airplay; 19. Filing notices with the Harry Fox Agency or other agen-cies which collect mechanical royalties (for records, tape sales) or making collections from record companies yourself; 20. General ac-counting, financial planning, filing taxes, etc.; 21. Initiating and maintaining contacts with foreign sub-publishers.

I’m sure my publisher friends will let me know if I’ve left something out. There are big companies who hire people to do these tasks, and small, independents who must, to some degree, do it all. There are yet others who seem to be publishers in name only and, in effect, are holding companies, as is often the case with managers or producers who use a song once with a particular artist and have no staff to exploit the song beyond that first use.

The uses of songs are limited only by lack of imagination and perception. The bottom line for any publisher is making money by finding as many uses as possible for the song. Ob-viously the big ones are sales of records and tapes, and synchroniza-tion—the use of songs in films and video. If a song is successful there, sheet music can be a major source of revenue. The song might be suited to a choral or band arrangement for high schools and col-leges. It also might have value as a commercial. Manufacturers of autos, audio equipment and the like put together special compila-tion tapes and records to demonstrate auto sound and stereo equip-ment. There are K-TEL-styled compilation records, and airlines, restaurants, hotels, doctors’ offices, elevators and supermarkets all use collections of songs for which royalties are paid. Manufacturers of music boxes, musical toys and video games are also licensed to use appropriate songs. Greeting card manufacturers use song lyrics, and there are more uses.

It’s not always enough just to be aware of those possibilities. A creative publisher will initiate compilation albums using songs already in the company’s catalog and possibly outside songs as well. The publisher might think of a children’s album with a philosophy compatible with a new children’s book being written, have his writers or outside writers tailor songs for it, produce it and offer it as part of the book. So instead of griping about how bad the music business is doing because artists aren’t cutting their songs or they’re not getting paid enough, they could actually be creating new business. There are very few publishers like that around. At its best, publishing demands imagination, creativity, intuition, tenaci-ty and good business sense. A publisher must be willing to make mistakes and face daily rejection of songs he/she believes in. A knowledge of how the music industry operates, a familiarity with the work of a great variety of recording artists, both established and new, is also required. It’s a special combination of ingredients that makes a great publisher, and few have it all. If you are one, thank you! You’re the ones who will grow and prosper because you’ll change with the times and with the technology. You’ll take chances and lose and win and, hopefully, inspire everyone else.

SEPT. 30-OCT. 13

Previously in the Songmine Collection:

• Songmine: Leave Your Ego at the Door
• Songmine: “Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it”
• Songmine: Dealing with Rejection by John Braheny
• “Music in Print” – A Songmine Column from Music Connection Magazine March 19-April 1, 1981

About Songmine and Music Connection Magazine:

John Braheny met Eric Bettelli and Michael Dolan right before they were going to publish Music Connection magazine. Eric and Michael wanted to get their publication out to as many songwriters as they could. They had already heard of the LA Songwriters Showcase, and of John and his partner, Len Chandler. John’s goal was to advertise the schedule of guest speakers and performers at the weekly Showcase… so they made a deal. 

They published John’s Songmine column (he had never before written a magazine article!) in their very first edition, in November 1977. Trading out the column for advertising, this arrangement continued for many years. Plus, Eric and Michael came to the Showcase each week and distributed free copies to the songwriters!

Those articles became so popular that (book agent and editor) Ronny Schiff offered John’s articles to F&W Media, where they became the backbone of John’s textbook, The Craft and Business of Songwriting. As a follow-up, Dan Kimpel (author, songwriter, teacher), who had also worked at LASS, took on the Songwriting column at Music Connection magazine which continues to this day! You can subscribe to get either hard copies or online.

“Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it” by John Braheny

A John Braheny Songmine column from the archives…

Accession Number: C000000137-004 Document/Digital File, “Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it” by John Braheny, OCR converted text under same Accession Number

(Digitally converted text. Some errors may occur)

LEAVE YOUR EGO AT THE DOOR 

by John Braheny

Despite the fact that you may be writing very personal songs and exposing delicate parts of your being, people in the business must look at your creations as a product. They, in turn, must try to sell your product to someone else on the merits of it’s commercial potential alone. It’s understandably difficult, though, for a writer to keep from feeling that it’s him or her who’s being rejected, rather than the song. Some of the most powerful songs written are very personal statements and confessional revelations that make the writer’s ego quite vulnerable to destruction when rejected. So, don’t stop writing those kinds of songs, just get a grip on your ego and leave it at the door when you shop your wares.

One of the first important things you have to do before knocking on doors is to become a good self-critic. There’s got to be a point during or after the writing of a song where you step away from the song and try to look at it as though you were another person, a J.Q. Public, a publisher, a recording artist, a radio program director. Sometimes, in order to get that perspective, writers put a song away for a few days, weeks, etc. so they can look at it fresh. Ask yourself some questions: Is this a song about an event or feeling that a lot of people can relate to? Will the people most likely to relate be in a certain age group? Will the music appeal to the same age group? Can the lyrics be understood by everyone? Is there a better, more powerful, more graphic way to say it? Is every line important? Is this a song that can compete with the best songs (not the worst) that I hear on the radio? Doing this kind of self-critique will help you in some big ways. It will help you write better songs. It will help you choose, from among your songs, those which are the most commercially viable and consequently, the least subject to rejection. It will help you develop that professional detachment that will make it easier to look at your own work as a product, like someone who makes omelettes or clothes or anything else. In accomplishing that, you’ll find it much easier to leave your ego at the door and to welcome the comments of the buyers.

You should also be sure to play your songs for friends before approaching the buyers. Even if they can’t or won’t give you honest criticism, it gives you some instant perspective. I’ve written songs that, when sung to myself, I was perfectly happy with, but when I read the words out loud or song the song for someone else, suddenly sounded really stupid. Scratch one song!

Another kind of perspective you should have is an awareness of what happens on the other side of the publisher’s or producer’s door. It does neither you nor them any good if they publish a song they’re not genuinely enthusiastic about and in which they see little commercial potential. They have to spend money to demo it, and they have to put up with your Continued questions about what they’ve done with your song. They have to keep telling you nothing’s happened or avoid your calls. So if they can’t really get excited about your song as a product, they have to reject it. No point in your ego trying to talk them into it. You shouldn’t want someone to publish your song unless they’re very enthusiastic about it. When they get rejections on your song you want them to retain enough enthusiasm for the song to continue to pitch it. Two publishers told me that they had songs in their catalogs that had been rejected over 100 times! In spite of that they continued because they totally believed in those songs. Sometimes songs or styles are ahead of their times. Three or four years ago, for instance, it was common for L.A. writers to get rejections because their ‘country’ songs were ‘too country’ for L.A. and ‘too pop’ for Nashville. Now country artists, smelling big pop money, are crying for country crossover (country/pop) material.

There are more reasons why you’re more likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong song than vice-versa. Probably 99% of those reasons have nothing to do with you personally, but with the marketplace, your product and the buyers ability and inclination to deal with it. It may be your sweet dream, but to them it’s just apples and oranges.

Nov 30 – Dec 13

Previously in the Songmine Collection:

• Songmine: “Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it”
• Songmine: Dealing with Rejection by John Braheny
• “Music in Print” – A Songmine Column from Music Connection Magazine March 19-April 1, 1981

About Songmine and Music Connection Magazine:

John Braheny met Eric Bettelli and Michael Dolan right before they were going to publish Music Connection magazine. Eric and Michael wanted to get their publication out to as many songwriters as they could. They had already heard of the LA Songwriters Showcase, and of John and his partner, Len Chandler. John’s goal was to advertise the schedule of guest speakers and performers at the weekly Showcase… so they made a deal. 

They published John’s Songmine column (he had never before written a magazine article!) in their very first edition, in November 1977. Trading out the column for advertising, this arrangement continued for many years. Plus, Eric and Michael came to the Showcase each week and distributed free copies to the songwriters!

Those articles became so popular that (book agent and editor) Ronny Schiff offered John’s articles to F&W Media, where they became the backbone of John’s textbook, The Craft and Business of Songwriting. As a follow-up, Dan Kimpel (author, songwriter, teacher), who had also worked at LASS, took on the Songwriting column at Music Connection magazine which continues to this day! You can subscribe to get either hard copies or online.

“Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it” by John Braheny

A John Braheny Songmine column from the archives…

Accession Number: C000000137-003 Document/Digital File, “Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it” by John Braheny_, OCR converted text under same Accession Number

(Digitally converted text. Some errors may occur)

“Feedback” – why some publishers won’t give it by John Braheny

Last time I was talking about getting information not only from the trade magazines and consumer ‘trades’ (Rolling Stone, Crawdaddy, BAM, etc.) but from individual pro-fessionals in the business, who I’ve always found more than willing to help. It is, however, necessary to ask! I often ask writers how they’ve been received by publishers I know about. I’ve gotten some stories that were definitely on the negative side like “Your song sucks!” In all fairness to publishers in general, that’s a rarity. It’s not as rare, though, for them not to offer any feedback or constructive criticism. More often it’s a stock answer; “That’s not the type of song we’re looking for.” “I wouldn’t know who’d record a song like that.” “I don’t think the song is marketable.” All those lines, though stock, are also probably true but they don’t help you know how to write better or more marketable songs. I decided to do an informal survey of some publishers about this situation and got some fairly typical responses. One publisher said, “I won’t give writers a critique anymore unless they’re very close to writing hit songs and I know I want to get involved as their publisher. Otherwise, it’s more hassle than it’s worth. I used to do it all the time because I wanted to help but I stepped on too many egos and got into arguments. They don’t really want to be criticized. Even when they asked for it, they just argued with me.” On the other hand he said, “Bob (a writer we both knew) is the kind of writer I will work with. He’s come a long way because he listens. The first time I heard his tunes I knew he had a basic grip on how to write a good song. I told him that one of the tunes was close but I thought it would be stronger with a bridge. Next day he came back with two different versions of a bridge and we took it (published it). Now that’s professionalism! I mean he didn’t say, “What do you mean it needs a bridge! I wrote it without a bridge and it sounds okay to me!” He just gave it a shot.

So I was beginning to get an idea about how these gaps are widened and what the story was on the other end. Another publisher said, “Hey, if I wanted to spend all my time teaching people how to write songs, I wouldn’t have time to deal with the songs I’m already committed to. Besides, most writers don’t even want to hear it!”

Another, who is very good about critiquing songs and does it tactfully and well, told me a story about a writer to whom he volunteered a criticism. The writer couldn’t believe his song was being critiqued and replied incredulously, “But I wrote that song in Topanga Canyon!” To that writer, the act of writing the song was akin to receiving a sacred message from the great spirit. To suggest any change by himself or someone else was unthinkable. That attitude is, un-fortunately, common. It is also unprofessional. I’m not going to tell you that it’s wrong to have that attitude about your songs. Only that if you have any aspirations to be a professional songwriter, it’s a counterproductive attitude and it will be a near impossibility to find a publisher who will want to deal with you. There are simply too many other good writers around who are open to criticism and willing to rewrite: after all, the rewrites are still coming out of your head. There’s another angle to this that should also be brought out. Publishers are still people who, as my old football coach used to say, “Get into their jocks one leg at a time just like you.” Consequently, they aren’t infallible and you don’t need to believe their every opinion as gospel. You’ll definitely find, in going from one publisher to another, a great diversity of tastes and opinions. They may be wrong or they just might be right in a lot of different ways. Pay attention to the criticism and don’t argue. They happen to be holding the cards. 

Previously in the Sanguine Collection:

• Songmine: Dealing with Rejection by John Braheny
• “Music in Print” – A Songmine Column from Music Connection Magazine March 19-April 1, 1981

About Songmine and Music Connection Magazine:

John Braheny met Eric Bettelli and Michael Dolan right before they were going to publish Music Connection magazine. Eric and Michael wanted to get their publication out to as many songwriters as they could. They had already heard of the LA Songwriters Showcase, and of John and his partner, Len Chandler. John’s goal was to advertise the schedule of guest speakers and performers at the weekly Showcase… so they made a deal. 

They published John’s Songmine column (he had never before written a magazine article!) in their very first edition, in November 1977. Trading out the column for advertising, this arrangement continued for many years. Plus, Eric and Michael came to the Showcase each week and distributed free copies to the songwriters!

Those articles became so popular that (book agent and editor) Ronny Schiff offered John’s articles to F&W Media, where they became the backbone of John’s textbook, The Craft and Business of Songwriting. As a follow-up, Dan Kimpel (author, songwriter, teacher), who had also worked at LASS, took on the Songwriting column at Music Connection magazine which continues to this day! You can subscribe to get either hard copies or online.

“Feedback: Why some publishers won’t give it” by John Braheny