It seems AudioJungle is the cheapest place in the market (I’ve read the forums complaining about the prices here) so why would anyone else want to buy from other sites? Yes, often they have more “veteran” producers and they are stricter with their standards, but some of those places sell tracks for triple the price of here. Also, the “best” stuff here is just as good as the stuff on the more expensive sites. Why anyone would shop elsewhere is a mystery to me. And in that respect I’m assuming that eventually AudioJungle will begin to crush the competition and soon it will be one of the last shops on the street (as in, the dominant music stock website), so I might as well stay exclusive.
Figured I’d chime in on this bit…
“Cheapest” doesn’t always equate as the “Best” for customers. Sure there are a lot of good tracks here, but there are others that are…lacking in one way or another. For the professional community using stock music, spending a lot of time searching for the right track isn’t an option. And that’s one problem as I see it in AJ. There are older “traditional” stock music sites that don’t list their catalogs in public; you basically have to be a member of sorts. Their prices can be quite high depending usage. It would be easy to spend $500~700 for a track.
Why would anyone want to do that? A few reasons. First, the music is GOOD. I mean, nearly all of it. Some tracks you hear, you’ll wonder how they can be considered “stock” music. So time is saved searching for the right track.
Second, if you’re client is a fortune 500 business, then budget may not necessarily be a big issue. But finding a quality track that meets the project’s needs (and again, quickly) IS an issue.
Also, some of these ‘exclusive’ type libraries have perks. For example, there’s one here in Taiwan I occasionally frequent who will have an employee search and send me the tracks he/she thinks fits my project description. That right there is a HUGE benefit. I spend a few minutes typing an email describing my project, and a few more minutes searching through what they’ve chosen. I love it. And when the customer is footing the bill for the music (that they really like) it just saves me time that I can use on other projects.
Lastly, with those other expensive stock music sites, I can usually feel confident that the music can be edited down to what I need, easily and quickly. In other words, the songs are “structured” with edits in mind.
I learned a little about AJ with this recently. You may recall I posted about a “funny coincidence”. Well, as it happens, that track was a nightmare for me to edit down to 60 seconds. A complete time waster for me. There were just too many variations throughout the track and no real good places to cut. I had to get extremely creative and do some things I shouldn’t need to do to get it to work. To me, that says the author has inexperience in this area. He/She wasn’t thinking of the bigger picture for the track. Perhaps just “making music”. That’s all fine and dandy, but if you’re going to sell your music for this purpose, you must consider all of its possible end-uses.
All just my opinions and experiences. So take it for what you paid to get it.
@ BuddhaBeats. That was really interesting, what you said about the track you had to cut down and how you felt the composer was just writing music rather than making stock music with an end-user in mind. Here on the AJ forums we have very little client activity let alone end-user activity to it’s great to hear from someone that is connected to the final product.
If you don’t mind sharing with us, what particular traits make a piece very bad for stock music purposes? What made that piece hell to edit?
I’ll be honest, even though I do try to imagine the use for an end-user I am also horribly guilty of uploading tracks I enjoyed writing with little thought of how and where the track would be used….
Yes, very interesting read buddhabeats!
Like TortoiseTree, I’m also very curious about what makes a really good and user-friendly (easy to edit) stock track. Just pauses/breaks in the music, or something else? Should we think about having pauses at or around 30 secs, 60 secs, etc…?
Maybe you can point to some excellent examples?
Hey guys, didn’t want to leave you hanging. I’ll post again later when I have time to describe what was the issues with that particular song (no names will be mentioned).
In the meantime, perhaps I can give some general advice.
First and foremost, the best possible scenario would be for you to make a 30 and 60 second version. That would solve most problems. For the most part, I’ll use those as-is. On some rare occasions, maybe the beginning doesn’t build up quick enough or too quick. In those cases, I’ll go back to the main track and cut what I need from there.
Now, if you can’t make a 30 or 60 second version, this is what I would do. When your track is completely finished, render it and open the completed file in whatever DAW you use. See if you can manually cut it down to 30 and 60 seconds on your own. How easy was it? Or how difficult?
By doing this, you hopefully can see where the problem areas are. Then maybe you can adjust things in the original project to solve these problems.
Now, every track is different and maybe some can’t be set up in a way easy for end users to edit. That’s understandable. Every song can’t be a “cookie cutter” song, so to speak. Just hopefully there aren’t major key changes, pitch variations or “strange” elements that are difficult to work with.
Anyhow, take a couple of your recent uploads and let me know if you can cut them down to 30 and 60 seconds. AND, done in a way that’s natural sounding. (Discernible beginning, body, and ending – No fade outs allowed!) Your homework for tonight.
Should we think about having pauses at or around 30 secs, 60 secs, etc…?
Definitely NOT this. As mentioned above, for MYSELF, I prefer to have a beginning, middle and ending. Try to make it sound like it was written that way. At the 30 second mark, the song may just be getting momentum; bad place to end it.
Later I’m going to attach a picture that may help describe how I work. Oh, and please keep this in mind. This is the way that “I” do things. Others may work a different way. So please don’t take my comments as how everyone does it. This is just one possible way.
Thanks for all this!
So rather than being able to cut the song easily after the first 30 secs, and just use that first part – you want to easily be able to extract say, 5 secs from the intro, 15 from the main part and 10 from the outro/ending to create a 30-sec version?
Meaning the whole song can’t change tempo/key/mood/instrumentation too much.
Am I understanding this correctly?
Thought I’d throw some light on the subject. This, incidentally is something that’s been discussed quite a few times in the past on these forums. However, back then I was still an exclusive author here, and last July I decided I wanted to work full-time as a composer and made the leap over to non-exclusive status.
The decision to be exclusive or non-exclusive all really boils down to how you want to work and how you want your music/effects to work for you. Somebody who has limited time to write, produce and upload material will most likely be better off with sticking with one site and remaining exclusive.
However, if one is looking to ‘earn a living’ from royalty-free stock music marketplaces (such as myself), then it would only make sense to do a bit of research (not naming any sites! ;)) and spread that material around the internet, thus gaining a wider ‘catchment area’, so to speak. The payoff being that you’ll have a lot more admin, uploading, tagging, promotion, etc to contend with. But that’s all part of the job, if doing it full time.
Sure, there are window shoppers who do look around for the same track cheaper elsewhere, but it’s not just the price that has an influence. The scope of the stock music buyer is quite wide and there are a few variables at play. Some buyers may work for a company who will only use one site, or maybe the required usage license they need is only available from a certain site – that the less expensive site is unable to offer. Or more simply, maybe people are unaware of the choice or just can’t be bothered to shop around to save a few dollars, as RF stock music is generally regarded as low-priced anyway.
Also, as I mentioned on another thread recently, sales go up and down everywhere, so when there are low sales on one site, the others will provide, and vise versa.I’m still in my first year of my non-exclusive venture, and it’s going pretty well so far, and I’ve now been able to put back into my business (buying new kit, software, etc) in order to increase the quality of my material. So, for me at least, it has been worth it.
+1 to everything
Matt actually encouraged me to do the same last year and I am so glad I did it. Within almost exactly one year I managed to make a living out of selling stock music alone.
AJ is a great site with a very helpful and vibrant community, so it’s a great starting place to get one’s feet wet in the RFM business, and some even manage to make a living here being exclusive. There is no rule to it, you just have to figure out what works best for you.
AJ does a fantastic job of motivating new authors with nice badges, paws , the author ‘charts’ etc., and it really made me produce lots of new music and I learned a lot from other authors, but it’s also veery nice and satisfying to see your music being sold for much larger amounts than here