Good Starting Flat Rate for Composing, Programming, etc.?

[Garrett Williamson]

So I'm starting to get paid work for my music, and I'm trying to get more paid work to do composing for games, background music, jingles (like intros/outros), synth/beat programming, and mixing as well. A couple people that I've worked with are asking me what my flat rates would be if they told others about me and unfortunately I had no idea.

I've talked to my professional musical father of over 25 years of experience but unfortunately he didn't have much info to give me because he doesn't really know this specific field very well.

What he did say is that he feels as though if I were to do a 3 minute+ track that's completely original from scratch, that should be at least worth 500 bucks to charge, though he talked about how crappy money is in the industry nowadays and how much people take advantage of musicians, which is unfortunately very true. Also, the statement he made there was very specific; I listed plenty of other things I'm also trying to get paid work for.

What I do know is that I don't wanna charge too little but I don't wanna charge too much as both can potentially cause major issues. Do you guys know a safe flat rate to start with, because I don't want to screw things up here, of course.

[Meteo Xavier]

Well, before you start getting $ signs in your eyes like a lot of young (and old) new composers do when asking this question, consider this:

1. Are you really worth $500 a minute? Take away any pride or ego you have and try to decide if you are really worth that.

2. If you were wanting music and the young guy you hired presented to you the track you are capable of doing, would you pay $1,500 for it? Would you pay slightly more than the price of some used cars for it?

3. Are you willing to make a never-ending series of changes to it to satisfy your client? Are you willing to work all those hours and still be unlikely to satisfy them enough to get your money?

4. What are your credentials for charging a premium price on it? What have you done to prove you're worth it?

Really not trying to be cynical here this time, this is what you and every professional has to ask themselves to truly justify the price. Just because game composers and other freelancers nowadays are pushing more and more to get paid higher prices for their art does not mean everyone who does music is worth $500 a minute. Just because you charge that does not mean the market will bear it.

For $500 a minute, I could get someone who's worked and proven themselves in the field for over 30 years to give me something awesome. I can ask someone I've not only heard of but been a big fan of for years. I won't name names but I could even get someone who worked at Squaresoft and has been remixed many times over on this website for that price.

And anyone who can afford to buy custom music at $500 a minute knows this too. Can you compete with that?

Again, not trying to be cynical this time, just trying to be real. There's more to getting rich doing music than charging high prices.

*

*

Edit: I guess that doesn't really answer your question directly. I think you should not charge a safe/flat rate until you've really proven yourself to be worth what you want to charge. If I were you, I'd take just about any half-decent offer for $ you can get, because you'll get more secured jobs that way and you'll get more clout to tout about.

And don't come back to me and say, "But I can't afford an apartment on $35 a song." Then do what smart artists do and keep your day job. The real irony of success in the music business today is that not making a career out of music is probably the best guaranteed way to be successful at music you can get now. Don't turn music into your job unless you're really making enough money per year to substitute a job's salary.

Edited October 2, 2014 by Meteo Xavier

[Garrett Williamson]

Hahaha, let me remind you I said $500 for a 3+ minute song. Not $500 a minute.

But I gotcha.

[Meteo Xavier]

Errr... ok, I misread you, but much of what I said still stands and I'm leaving it there for it to apply to anyone else thinking in that range.

[Garrett Williamson]

That's fine. It was useful. Thanks.

[timaeus222]

I would offer an hourly rate such that it comes out to about $120~300 a song (mixing/mastering), depending on how hard I perceive that it will be, but that's just me afaik. I'd compensate for whatever the person has on hand, but I'd try starting a little high and go down. Does that seem reasonable to anyone else? Easy mixing = less expensive, hard mixing = more expensive is the idea.

http://theproaudiofiles.com/charging-hourly-rate-vs-per-song/

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/470478-general-hourly-cost-mixing-pre-mastering-what-do-you-charge.html

Edited October 2, 2014 by timaeus222

[Garrett Williamson]

I would offer an hourly rate such that it comes out to about $120~300 a song (mixing/mastering), depending on how hard I perceive that it will be, but that's just me afaik. I'd compensate for whatever the person has on hand, but I'd try starting a little high and go down. Does that seem reasonable to anyone else? Easy mixing = less expensive, hard mixing = more expensive is the idea.

http://theproaudiofiles.com/charging-hourly-rate-vs-per-song/

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/470478-general-hourly-cost-mixing-pre-mastering-what-do-you-charge.html

Thanks for the articles! Does $120 an hour even seem a little expensive to start with or is that just me? I know I can negotiate, but I don't wanna scare people off starting with something too expensive. I'm obviously no beginner to the art but I'm clearly a beginner to the business side of it, at least for getting paid (I'm getting the marketing side down ). At the same time, I don't wanna become the "cheap option" and screw with the industry.

[ShrackAttack]

I wouldn't set a flat rate across the board either. I would have an idea in your mind about how much a specific genre of music would cost to do in hours and go around that. For example, doing a full orchestral song with a 150 track template can take a lot longer than a dance track or whatever. (Just an example ) So maybe where you're at with orchestral music right now, you feel like it takes you 10 hours to write 1 good minute of music. Let's say you want to make 20$ an hour on such and such game before taxes. 20$ x 10 hours = 200$ per minute.

Depending on who you're working for, you can also try to gauge how much they are honestly able to pay you. People will try to lowball you since they're trying to hang onto as much of their money as they can (and that is fine), but just make sure you always start at the high end of negotiation first. Prices tend to never really go up when negotiating, so if you start on your low end with no where to go: you're screwed.

I agree with Meteo on a lot of that, but also at the same time it becomes really easy to be down on ourselves and overly critical of our writing, production skills, etc. That is natural. However, The general game playing public really doesn't give a shit if your music isn't produced amazingly well or sounding like an AAA game. Most people just want to hear something they can relate to that sounds kind of cool. Catchy melodies, cool progressions, good character, interesting sound design.

Also, You may not think your music is worth 500$ or even 100$, but some game developer down the road might really like it and think it sounds great. So don't totally undersell yourself. Even if you feel like you're not where you want to be musically yet, you can still make decent money off of your stuff while you continue learning.

Kind of repeating what Meteo said: Keep your day job if you have one, especially for the first couple of years. Make sure you are stable. This shit is super, super fickle. I made the mistake of quitting my day job 1-2 years too early and it was really, really tough and a lot of not having any money in my bank account . As you progress through the years (and hopefully advance musically) make sure you are ramping up your pay grade if you are trying to do this as a legit job. Even if you are really good it can be terribly difficult to get any sort of music gig unless you know people as well, so spend a couple years meeting people. People like to work with people they know and trust.

This is probably a bit too personal, but I don't really care. This was my own personal music/game audio/whatever job progression not counting any sort of royalty gigs as royalty jobs tend to go on forever until they release (unless you're lucky early on ):

2010: Started writing music for the first time ever

2011: Graduated college

2012: 5,000$ from game audio (still had my day job though so the 5k was extra cash)

2013: 8,000$ from game audio (quit my day job, bad move, luckily I had roommates and a supportive family and got through it )

2014: 22,000$-30,000$ (game audio only...still roommates)

As you know, 20-30k isn't that much money and I just got back to the salary I was making with a day job that was much, much easier and way less stressful. In my case, I didn't even know what a DAW was until I was 21. Luckily for you, you're young and have extra time to flesh out your skills. My income could easily slip in 2015 if I am not working my ass off to get better, get better jobs, and keep finding cool stuff to work on. It is a scary as hell thought and certainly stresses me out at times. I also work a lot of overtime that goes unpaid.

TLDR version: Figure out what you want to make per hour and generally how long things take you to do. Learn how to negotiate and do business if you want to make money. Keep your day job if you have one until you know for certain you are good enough to make money.

And sorry for getting off topic of the flat rate question, but I felt like it all applied.

[Garrett Williamson]

No that's all great info, thanks dude.

[ebuch]

For flat rate jobs, a good technique I learned at PAX is setting up two different brackets for your clients to fall into. For example, a $50 bracket and a $500 bracket. (small jobs and big jobs)

Let's say you think something is in the general "$50 bracket," but you're not sure if they can pay more. High-ball it a bit and say "I normally charge $150 for this, but how much of that do you feel comfortable paying?" That gives you a nice price ceiling to bargain down from, and let's them decide where in their budget they can afford to meet you at.

Another good suggestion is to ask what their audio budget is. Get a number out of them first so you have a ballpark estimate of where to start negotiations at.

When doing small tasks for a high budget client, always charge hourly. $10/hour isn't a bad place to start,

[timaeus222]

Another good suggestion is to ask what their audio budget is. Get a number out of them first so you have a ballpark estimate of where to start negotiations at.

I would actually start by suggesting a price first. Hopefully it's not just me, but I wouldn't want to pay more than I have to if I were to be the "customer". i.e. what if the person gives their audio budget as a low number, whether on purpose or out of necessity? They probably won't willingly haggle upwards, but reluctantly.

[ebuch]

I would actually start by suggesting a price first. Hopefully it's not just me, but I wouldn't want to pay more than I have to if I were to be the "customer". i.e. what if the person gives their audio budget as a low number, whether on purpose or out of necessity? They probably won't willingly haggle upwards, but reluctantly.

The first number given in a negotiation will become the central anchor for negotiating. If you have a good idea of what the project's budget is, it could be to your advantage to be the first to throw the anchor.

If you're not sure what the budget is, ask the other party. If it sounds like a great deal right off the bat, go for it. If it's lower than you'd like, make an offer that's higher and negotiate down from it.

This is assuming you want to be flexible with your rates. If you want to quote all of your clients the exact same price regardless of their budget, you're bound to miss out on a higher paying job eventually.

The last thing you want to do is sell yourself way short, or offend all of your clients by quoting them way too much.

[Nabeel Ansari]

The first number given in a negotiation will become the central anchor for negotiating. If you have a good idea of what the project's budget is, it could be to your advantage to be the first to throw the anchor.

If you're not sure what the budget is, ask the other party. If it sounds like a great deal right off the bat, go for it. If it's lower than you'd like, make an offer that's higher and negotiate down from it.

This is assuming you want to be flexible with your rates. If you want to quote all of your clients the exact same price regardless of their budget, you're bound to miss out on a higher paying job eventually.

The last thing you want to do is sell yourself way short, or offend all of your clients by quoting them way too much.

The problem as Timaeus said is that there is an inherent dishonesty towards musicians and composers in the industry. For example, game teams will allocate large sums of money for programmers and artists, but tell the composer they don't have a big audio budget. It's not that they don't have the money, it's that they don't think you're worth that money and they pump it elsewhere.

If you pander to their "budget" in these kinds of scenarios, you're going to perpetuate the problem of unfair distribution of wages. Maybe you don't care that you're hurting the industry by doing so, but you are. It's food for thought, at least. Also, of course maybe other clients won't have a dishonest budget; there's no real way to tell, so the important thing is to have a minimum flat rate so you can at least survive.

If you have a dayjob, then softening towards their budget number won't really hurt you that much. It just won't help you that much either.

[Meteo Xavier]

If you pander to their "budget" in these kinds of scenarios, you're going to perpetuate the problem of unfair distribution of wages. Maybe you don't care that you're hurting the industry by doing so, but you are.

Wow. Where do I even begin here? Let's just start randomly.

1. Not all games and companies are required or can even have huge budgets for audio anyway. Not all games are AAA Titanfalls and, as much as composers like to bill how important music is to the game, it's really one of the least important aspects in the fundamental construction of the game.

This is demonstrated by the MUTE button of a TV remote control. If you turn the graphics or TV off, can you play the game? If you turn off certain layers of the programming code, can you play the game? If you turn off or unplug the controller, can you play the game? If you turn the music down or off, can you play the game? That one, yes, as many gamers do at one point or another, it's just the experience of playing it that diminishes.

Music is most definitely important to a game for many reasons, but from the perspective of the people building it, it's essentially garnish. You can't blame companies for favoring programmers and artists. You have artists and musicians but no programmers, you have no game (you have an album). You have programmers and musicians but no artists, you have no game (or something like Zork). You have programmers and artists? You have a game, it just needs some royalty-free tracks or something.

2. The whole problem with musicians getting what could be generally considered to be "fair" rates for music is that it's basically trying to put an objective value to highly, highly subjective work.

In fact, this simple infrastructure is why the gap of success from artists is so widely varied throughout history anyway. Art falls in an odd place as far as being essential for humanity to live. Without art, you're not really living, but you're not exactly dying without it either. An example is: I'm in the market for a trailer song and I have one guy who wants $4,000 for it because he uses a live orchestra and one guy who wants $800 for it because he uses EWQL I listen to both, and they both sound like what I'm looking for and I'm not enough of an orchestral obsessive to really REALLY hear the difference, which one do I go with? Do I take the smart option and go with the guy who has the talent to make it sound real enough to me, or do I take the expensive option to help out an industry I'm not part of in the first place?

I'm pretty sure neither has intentionally paid a much, much higher price to make sure the industry I work in is healthy...

3. On that point, a lot of this kind of talk goes into how much musicians SHOULD get paid because musicians should get to put the value they want on their work, but it never goes into what justifies a musician to charge professional rates in the first place. What actually qualifies someone to be a professional musician in the first place?

Are they required to be licensed by the state like many other professional freelance fields? Are they required to have 2 years orchestration residency, 2 years apprenticeship in electronica, 1 year experience performing live? Are they required to have the full range of professional grade music hardware and software? Is it illegal to do music without Omnisphere?

Nope. If you wanted to, you could just quit your job, spend all day doodling around Fruityloops, charge a high price and that's all you'd have to do to call yourself a professional. What you're telling me is that I should charge the same amount of money that Virt charges for music, even though I'm not even 1/10th as accomplished or versatile as Virt is, and there is absolutely nothing requiring me to be as good as Virt is to justify that price.

Wouldn't that seem like a problem in the infrastructure there?

4. And on THAT point, the music industry is already fucked up beyond all recognition right now, how could it get hurt any further?

Music as an industry has NEVER been good. I don't think there's been one time in history where there has been a huge demand for musicians and not enough supply. Maybe the 60s, I'm not sure. It is a job that can safely be assumed will never get any easier as the ability to make it gets better introduced to the general public at large. More artists means more competition, and there's only so much $$$ to go around for that.

5. Oh, and btw, a little known thing many composers, even ones that talk about "undercharging killing the industry", engage in is... well, undercharging.

Anyone with even a lick of sense knows how hard it is to make money in this industry, and it therefore follows that "well, even a reduction rate is still better than nothing." In my wheelings and dealings, I've nearly hired two quite famous VGM composers (I won't name names out of courtesy) to work with on previous things, and both offered, straight out, to work with major reductions to their rates. Hell, I've even been given reduction rates for VST sample sets! From successful companies!

Working within a budget hurts the industry? Give me a break. Let's examine a hypothetical scenario.

FurryFreedom: Hi, is this Neblix?

Neblix: Yes

FurryFreedom: hey man, I'm a big fan of yours from ocremix. I have an indie game coming up and I need about an hour of music. Would you be too busy these days to hire?

Neblix: Nope, I'm available!

Neblix: I charge $800/minute. That includes mixing and mastering, and is royalty free. At 60 minutes, that comes out to about $48,000.

FurryFreedom: Oh... I only have $20,000 I can spend on a soundtrack.

Neblix: Ok, well, $800/minute is a firm price. If I reduce it from there, the industry will collapse ass over elbow. $20,000 will get you 25 minutes of music though.

FurryFreedom: Umm... no, I kinda need a full hour of it.

FurryFreedom: Thanks anyway, I'll keep looking.

Are ya seriously telling me you wouldn't take $20,000 over NOTHING? Just to help an industry that's already in a slow terminal slide that this one sacrifice could not have possibly saved?

Sorry man but... no, just no. Undercharging doesn't kill an industry. If it did, nothing you'd ever go to a store for would EVER HAVE SALES.

I suppose I could've just saved myself a lot of writing by just writing that one paragraph, but, eh, there it is.

[timaeus222]

Sorry man but... no, just no. Undercharging doesn't kill an industry. If it did, nothing you'd ever go to a store for would EVER HAVE SALES.

Well... depends on how you define undercharging. For example, if you have an item that has an MSRP of $5, and the cheapest place sells it for $2. If you have a sale and charge it for $2.50, then you'd still be more expensive than that other place, but if you charge $0.05, then wouldn't you officially be undercharging relative to the cheapest price? That's what I'd call undercharging, at least---charging less than the current least, or less than a reasonable bare minimum.

$20000 is still pretty high with respect to $48000. I mean, that's like $333/min vs. $500/min, which is on the high end of your scale. But anyways, that's a small point I guess.

Edited October 3, 2014 by timaeus222

[Nabeel Ansari]

Bunch of stuff and also making fun of Neblix cool beans

Good points (could've done without the prodding).

But I'm not talking about reduction rates for people who don't have money, I'm talking about not accepting low rates for people who do have money. There's a subtle difference.

And you're taking what I said about the industry a little too seriously. I'm not saying the industry will fall apart because of reduction rates (that's called a straw man ), I'm saying working for cheap for clients who have money but choose not to give it to you is setting a low bar for yourself and tells that client that good product doesn't have to be paid for. If you don't agree that the first step to solving a problem is avoiding its propagation, then we have a fundamental disconnect and that's the end of that discussion.

Also, if you're actually bad at making music and charging for it like in the Virt scenario you pointed out, I'm pretty sure there's no good reason to hire you anyway. I don't see the problem here. The person doesn't get paid and the client finds a better composer (there are *plenty* out there).

To answer your question, I would take the $20,000, which bunks your whole scenario. Try understanding my argument instead of twisting it to sound ridiculous and in your favor. I have no patience for people who do otherwise.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Neblix

[ebuch]

You're also using the "subjective charging" fallback, which doesn't really work at all. Music isn't paid for in isolation. There are other people who are paid to do other tasks, like programming, 3D animation, etc. Asking for the same money-time value as the other aspects of the project isn't subjective, it's self-respect. Music composition and production takes time and effort. It may subjectively not feel like time and effort, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that for all the other workers doing their job and getting paid, you should be just as valued as them, because music is just as important to a game as the visuals and the engine.

I don't think anybody is disagreeing that composers should charge a rate that values their time and skills. But if you aren't able to be rate-flexible depending on the client/project, aren't you going to be missing out on a lot of gigs? This doesn't matter so much if you have a day job (because you won't go broke), but if music is your day job, you need those jobs to survive.

So many musicians/composers will take to the internet complaining how overworked and underpaid they are, and how they never find any good producers who actually value their work. They want to try and "fix" the music industry so people will just magically start paying them more money. Meanwhile there are people taking advantage of all of the opportunities being left open by the people who are unwilling to reduce their rates and/or make other negotiations (royalties, publishing rights, etc.). There will always be someone who is willing to work harder for less money than you.

Let's say you somehow calculate out your rate to be $500/min. That's the quote you put on your website, and the quote you tell everyone who calls you. You get a call from a podcast host looking for an intro theme, and a AAA studio who wants a main theme (each 1 minute long). Would you not adjust your rates accordingly? If not, you're probably not going to get the podcast gig, and you're going to get ripped off on the AAA theme.

Also, if nobody wants to pay you $500/min for your music, is your music really worth $500/min?

I'm saying working for cheap for clients who have money but choose not to give it to you is setting a low bar for yourself and tells that client that good product doesn't have to be paid for.

I can agree on that, for sure. Stay away from those assholes!

Edited October 3, 2014 by ebuch

[Nabeel Ansari]

Let's say you somehow calculate out your rate to be $500/min. That's the quote you put on your website, and the quote you tell everyone who calls you. You get a call from a podcast host looking for an intro theme, and a AAA studio who wants a main theme (each 1 minute long). Would you not adjust your rates accordingly? If not, you're probably not going to get the podcast gig, and you're going to get ripped off on the AAA theme.

Cool. So we agree.

Also, if nobody wants to pay you $500/min for your music, is your music really worth $500/min?

No, it isn't. So there's no issue here...?

[ebuch]

So there's no issue here...?

I dunno.. My issue was with your idea that adjusting rates per client was somehow hurting the industry.

If you pander to their "budget" in these kinds of scenarios, you're going to perpetuate the problem of unfair distribution of wages. Maybe you don't care that you're hurting the industry by doing so, but you are.

Your average client is going to have a general budget range. You either negotiate mutually agreeable terms or the client moves on to someone else who will.

That is how all industries work.

[timaeus222]

I dunno.. My issue was with your idea that adjusting rates per client was somehow hurting the industry.

Your average client is going to have a general budget range. You either negotiate mutually agreeable terms or the client moves on to someone else who will.

That is how all industries work.

The main issue is that you don't really know how the client is going to present their budget. Is it an honest budget, or a convenient budget (for them)? Neblix and I were saying that if you go with this claimed 'budget' your client proposes, it may just be an inexpensive deal for them, and not a deal that is a fair compromise for both of you. Yeah, a general budget range is a thing, but the real question is, how do you verify that your client is telling the truth if they are online clients (or if they are crafty even in person or on the phone)? There's always that bit of doubt, unless you start at a high, but not overly high, suggested charge, and then go down from there, maintaining control but leaving room for compromise so that the client doesn't leave you or try to underappreciate your talents.

Edited October 3, 2014 by timaeus222

[ebuch]

The main issue is that you don't really know how the client is going to present their budget. Is it an honest budget, or a convenient budget (for them)? Neblix and I were saying that if you go with this claimed 'budget' your client proposes, it may just be an inexpensive deal for them, and not a deal that is a fair compromise for both of you. Yeah, a general budget range is a thing, but the real question is, how do you verify that your client is telling the truth if they are online clients (or if they are crafty even in person or on the phone)? There's always that bit of doubt, unless you start at a high, but not overly high, suggested charge, and then go down from there, maintaining control but leaving room for compromise so that the client doesn't leave you or try to underappreciate your talents.

Ahhh, I gotcha. You're right, there really is no way to tell if their music "budget" is proportionate to the rest of their budget. That's the fun part of negotiating, huh?

In this case, it'd still help to gather all the intel you can on the client.. past projects, any signs of production value, and THEN make your initial offer based on their budget and your findings. As long as everything is still mutually agreeable, then it's a fair deal, right? I'm not even sure if you'd ever have a way of finding out if they could have paid you more.

[ShrackAttack]

3. On that point, a lot of this kind of talk goes into how much musicians SHOULD get paid because musicians should get to put the value they want on their work, but it never goes into what justifies a musician to charge professional rates in the first place. What actually qualifies someone to be a professional musician in the first place?

Are they required to be licensed by the state like many other professional freelance fields? Are they required to have 2 years orchestration residency, 2 years apprenticeship in electronica, 1 year experience performing live? Are they required to have the full range of professional grade music hardware and software? Is it illegal to do music without Omnisphere?

Nope. If you wanted to, you could just quit your job, spend all day doodling around Fruityloops, charge a high price and that's all you'd have to do to call yourself a professional. What you're telling me is that I should charge the same amount of money that Virt charges for music, even though I'm not even 1/10th as accomplished or versatile as Virt is, and there is absolutely nothing requiring me to be as good as Virt is to justify that price.

Only problem is, this happens with every other field in games as well, so it is not really a fair point. It's not like everyone who does art has certain qualifications. Anyone can download Maya or 3dsMax and start modelling shit. Anyone at any time can start learning pixel art. Anyone can go spend 100$ for a level design class, make some mods, then finally do a little crappy original game and call themselves a professional. Same with programming, sound design, voice over, etc. If you are good at something then you are good at it. The difference here is just supply/demand. If you're aim is to fill a professional role in the development of a game, you should get a professional rate whether you think you've met the imaginary requirements of becoming a professional or not. The only person who you need to prove that you're a professional to is the employer. If they're willing to pay you 500$/min then that is that. You're worth 500$/minute to someone.

Comparing yourself to Virt and what he does or doesn't charge on specific game titles doesn't somehow mean you should never charge 500$/minute for a soundtrack. Just because Virt is a highly talented guy, he isn't you. You make Meteo music and Virt makes Virt music. I make shitty Shrack music. No one else can make shitty Shrack music as shitty and Shrack-y as I can and maybe that's what a specific game dev wants.

What people charge will always vary and a majority of composers will change their rates accordingly to get a gig (I agree with you on this ) because working is almost always better than sitting there and doing nothing. I've undercharged before, especially when I was first starting out. There is a real learning curve to it. You have to be flexible with people's budgets if you want to work. However, you don't want to be working for someone where it is detrimental to you. Getting paid 50$/minute for a game with a solid budget just isn't fair to you. Period. Game audio (SFX+Music) budgets generally range from 2% to 10% of a total budget for a game depending on the size of the company. You should always aim for that 10% at least. If a small indie game has 50k to spend for their game, game audio should get 5k.

Edited October 3, 2014 by ShrackAttack

[Garrett Williamson]

I feel like I should figure out what their budget is, but then again they could be buttheads and lowball me and claim a lower budget than they actually have which would then leave me undercharging if I based my flat rate off their "budget". That is, if they have an established budget. Some people (like YouTubers) simply want music and they often don't really have a game plan together, which is usual for YouTubing, from experience. Ha.

Sorry, I'm thinking aloud. I've been enjoying what I've been reading thus far.

[Nabeel Ansari]

I dunno.. My issue was with your idea that adjusting rates per client was somehow hurting the industry.

Your average client is going to have a general budget range. You either negotiate mutually agreeable terms or the client moves on to someone else who will.

That is how all industries work.

That's not at all what I was saying and if you continue responding to such an idea, then I will just ignore you altogether and assume you're not responding to me but some phantom straw man (see what I did there). Same goes for Meteo.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Neblix

[zircon]

Calm down folks, no need to get hostile.

I feel like I should figure out what their budget is, but then again they could be buttheads and lowball me and claim a lower budget than they actually have which would then leave me undercharging if I based my flat rate off their "budget". That is, if they have an established budget. Some people (like YouTubers) simply want music and they often don't really have a game plan together, which is usual for YouTubing, from experience. Ha.

Well, this is a good point. It's very hard to figure out what a project's budget is. You can try to figure it out using a few criteria like...

* Has the company released any other games? Do they seem successful? (i.e. lots of Facebook likes, YouTube video views, ratings in the app store)

* Are they releasing simple flash/mobile games or console/boxed titles?

* Are they greenlit?

* Is there a kickstarter or other crowdfunding involved?

* Does the team have any prior credits or are they just a group of internet friends?

Keep in mind that no matter what rate you quote, keeping the rights to your music is important. If a developer wants to do a "buyout" or work-for-hire deal, than you need to charge significantly more, as you have no way of monetizing that music going forward.

Another consideration is the amount of music. If you're only writing one minute of music, you might want to charge your full rate, whereas if you're being contracted for 60 minutes, you can (and probably should) expect a lower per-minute rate since the project itself will be more lucrative overall.

So, with all that in mind....

I would personally recommend NEVER accepting buyout for less than $300 per minute of music, UNLESS you're doing a larger volume of music, and/or getting some sort of backend or other compensation. That is a rule of thumb. If an indie developer wants to OWN your music, they need to pay, period. But they don't *need* to own your music.

If you're just starting out, $100-200/track is a fine place to begin for a non-exclusive thing. This assumes you retain the right to sell the soundtrack yourself and earn some extra money.

If they can't afford your standard rate (let's say, $150/track, or $75/min, or whatever) you should absolutely ask for backend royalties. ~10-15% is a good number. If they're doing a Kickstarter or other crowdfunding, same deal.

To put it in perspective, the 'base rate' I have in my head for my own work is $375/min. For an AAA project I would ask more. For indie projects, I still list that rate, but I rarely get paid that much because they usually don't have a budget like that. Instead I might accept $100 or $150/min and negotiate royalties instead.

Another option you can offer to devs with low budget is licensing. You could write them a little bit of custom music, and then let them license something you've already written for $50, $75, $100, $150, etc. That is competitive with music libraries and you're still getting credit.