Thanks for the update Eric.
I would like to congratulate all of the authors contributing to creating music kits for adding yet another nail in the coffin for the music business. Although I understand it is a ‘good idea’ in the sense you are giving your clients more options when putting music to picture, you are also:
- Facilitating the process of illegal remixing of your own music by letting people use your acapellas and stems
- Rendering digital fingerprinting of your work useless - yes, I asked a companies like AdRev about this and for the most part your separated stems will not be identifiable on their own and largely because the parts are too short to be considered for their programmes or the technology cannot match parts that are mixed together differently i.e. you can’t match a morphing fingerprint.
- Lowering the price of what people are willing to pay for separating out parts (yes, even $39 is too low for this kind of work)
- Reducing the rates one can charge for revision work here now that you’ve set a new standard
By providing a kit of parts to the public, you are willingly selling a bunch of extra work for just $21 extra on the list price of a single track and people will be able to mix and match to make their own music (particularly if they match by bpm).
Also, whereas before when applying plugins to a track you could hear the original or it was just plain hard to hide what the original track was, now, people will be able to take rhythmic parts, melodic elements and anything else offered in the pack and do what they wish with it.
And what is considered an original work now? If AJ was ever considering allowing PRO registrations, it will make it pretty hard to identify what that track is if it contains various parts.
So I’m sorry, but I’m really not a fan of this.