That second one in particular has me raising an eyebrow. I've only used it a bit (and as an end user, not a musician), but definitely doesn't seem cool.
(And yeah, reading this maybe I should move away from Primal as a client.)
121 sats \ 12 replies \ @k00b 23 Apr
I support being uniquely suspicious of VC funded businesses, but a business being VC funded isn't proof of anything. It's like a motive without a crime. I know for a fact @MaxAWebster and @rheedi0 are good people and wouldn't do anything intentionally grimy. I suspect the primal team, who I don't know personally, are also good people considering how highly people I do know speak of them.
@rheedi0, founder of Wavlake, is on here. He can maybe tell the story if there's one to be told.
reply
0 sats \ 11 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 23 Apr
That's good to hear; the lack of any response over the last couple of days (unless I missed it) was something I'd been concerned about, but the nature of social media is such that I may reasonably have seen something other people haven't.
reply
121 sats \ 10 replies \ @k00b 23 Apr
Speaking from experience, it's impossible to see, let alone respond, to all the accusations, and blind hate frankly, that you get while you're killing yourself to bring something new into the world.
reply
121 sats \ 9 replies \ @rheedi0 23 Apr
Thanks @k00b, appreciate you giving us the benefit of the doubt. What you said is spot on.
A lot of these criticisms are rooted in a very specific ideology about how podcasting 2.0 is supposed to work according to some people. Some of it is also based on a mistaken perception of what Wavlake is simply because we operate in the space.
Fact is: we've always been upfront about what we're trying to do and how we do it. That will surely evolve over time as we figure things out, but for now I think it's safe to say we've helped a lot of artists discover a cool new way to share their music and earn. We're just gonna keep focusing on doing more of that. And even better.
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears OP 23 Apr
Noted, and apologies for any stress this caused.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @rheedi0 23 Apr
Not at all. Comes with the territory :)
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @TresDMan 23 Apr
Could you elaborate on how podcasting 2.0 is supposed to work versus how Wavlake is using it? Furthermore, as a music rights owner (music publisher,) I've been trying to find more details about how Wavlake works at the royalty level. I'd love to present this as a potential outlet for the clients I represent, but need more info than what is displayed in your FAQ.
reply
10 sats \ 5 replies \ @rheedi0 23 Apr
We follow the spec closely, it's why all our music can appear on the likes of Fountain, etc. The truth is we don't know how all this will evolve over time, we're just making choices based on what seems to be working for people.
Royalties are complicated and we don't make any claims to solve for the different publishing, mechanical, streaming, over-the-air, licensing, etc categories. As you may know, each of these are enforced by different entities and can also change depending on jurisdiction. That said, direct payments to creators does create an opportunity to simplify a lot of this bureaucracy and accounting. We're just in the very early stages of unlocking this potential.
reply
335 sats \ 4 replies \ @TresDMan 23 Apr
As far as royalties go, I figured that was the case. Though, I'd still be curious to see what the onboarding process could look like for a potential client that is representing the rights of other artists and songwriters. In some cases only on the publishing side, in others on the master side, and yet in others on both sides.
Is it more of trial and error, or do you have support in place to help make the process more efficient?
Also, in thinking about how royalties are traditionally split up for songs and compositions, does v4v have solutions for potential clients that could come in as rightsholders (publishers, labels, etc.), but not necessarily as the direct creators?
I suppose I'm just thinking of the future of this. If it can't accommodate the bigger players (I don't consider myself that, my roster is only about ten or so artists) then I don't see a compelling path. In all my years working with artists, there are some that dig into the business end of things and they control all of their IP, but the majority would prefer someone else to take care of those details, even if they possess the knowledge.
I'm not knocking Wavlake (I love that it exists!), I'm genuinely interested in having more in-depth conversations around music and the intellectual property tied to it, and how processes can improve in this space.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @rheedi0 24 Apr
My naive take is that royalties are complicated because so many parties are involved outside of the artists and their management. When you boil it down splits are relatively simple.
view replies