[Milo B.]

For people posting their home recordings, why did you choose Soundcloud, YouTube, or another platform?

Hoping to get some pro’s and con’s for the different services, thanks.

 

[Milo B.]

For people posting their home recordings, why did you choose Soundcloud, YouTube, or another platform?

Hoping to get some pro's and con's for the different services, thanks.

I'm reviving this question, because I finally figured out how to record myself in Logic Pro X with Aebersold backing tracks and want eventually to start sharing music.

I'm curious about the copyright issues with backing tracks, which have been discussed here a little bit. Should I just forget about posting solos with backing tracks and wait until I've developed original material? Or should I go ahead and start posting solos+backing tracks to either Soundcloud or Youtube?

Thanks for any thoughts.

 

[Pete Thomas]

I'm reviving this question, because I finally figured out how to record myself in Logic Pro X with Aebersold backing tracks and want eventually to start sharing music.

I'm curious about the copyright issues with backing tracks, which have been discussed here a little bit. Should I just forget about posting solos with backing tracks and wait until I've developed original material? Or should I go ahead and start posting solos+backing tracks to either Soundcloud or Youtube?

Thanks for any thoughts.

Yuotube for years has always done content matching - ie they atomatically find copyright infringements. The rights holder then has the right to order a take down or to monetise the video with ads. So if the clip gets thorough that system and stays up then I think it is reasonably safe to assume it is OK re: copyright. I'm totally sure , but I think Soundcloud may have something similar.

 

[Milo B.]

Yes, Soundcloud definitely checks on copyright, too:

Here's how it works: when you upload a track, our system checks your upload against a database of tracks that copyright owners have asked us to block. If the system detects a match, then your upload is blocked, because that's what the copyright owner has asked us to do. ( https://soundcloud.com/hc%2Fen-us .)​

I guess I can use trial and error, but does anyone know whether we're allowed to use the Aebersold backing tracks that we've purchased? I heard the license extends to "personal" and "educational" uses, but am not sure if this includes posting tracks over which we've soloed.

And again, if anyone has thoughts on using Youtube, Soundcloud, or both to post recordings, I'd love to know.

 

[Pete Thomas]

And again, if anyone has thoughts on using Youtube, Soundcloud, or both to post recordings, I'd love to know.

Sound cloud is preferable in that you don't need to make any kind of video, however it is seriously bad the way it embeds on mobile. - The play button is masked by an ovelay that makes people try to get their app - so often they just think it isn't working.

Youtube has a better embed in that it works on mobile fine.

There are other possibilities such as clyp.it - but I don'tb think they check for copyright issues.

 

[lesacks]

If you just want to share a track or so, all of; Dropbox, box, Google drive etc. Allow you to share a link to a sound file and - largely - recognise it's a sound file and provide play back in a browser.

 

[Milo B.]

If you just want to share a track or so, all of; Dropbox, box, Google drive etc. Allow you to share a link to a sound file and - largely - recognise it's a sound file and provide play back in a browser.

That's probably what I should do for now. But after the burst of excitement over learning to record with a backing track, I got excited about the possibilities of sharing music on a dedicated platform. I should probably temper my enthusiasm until I've recorded at least a handful of tunes.

 

[Pete Thomas]

If you just want to share a track or so, all of; Dropbox, box, Google drive etc. Allow you to share a link to a sound file and - largely - recognise it's a sound file and provide play back in a browser.

True but those won't help with copyright issues as do YouTube. I never bother clicking on those as I prefer the embedded players

 

[lesacks]

If you just want to share a track or so, all of; Dropbox, box, Google drive etc. Allow you to share a link to a sound file and - largely - recognise it's a sound file and provide play back in a browser.

True but those won';t help with copyright issues as do YouTube. I never bother clicking on those as I prefer the embedded players

It won't help the licencee. A copyright holder would have to chase you and get the courts to enforce it, as opposed to letting tech do both. They would have to decide if the damage is worth it. "fair use" determined at the point of the checkbook.

 

[Milo B.]

I emailed Aebersold about whether it was okay to use their backing tracks on an uploaded video, and they explained:
====
1. We cannot give anyone permission to record any copyrighted composition. We only lease these songs ourselves.

2. We, as a publisher, cannot allow for-profit use of our tracks in any way. Likewise, even though we, as musicians, don't mind other musicians making a few free demo tapes to promote themselves, we make no legal claim to the right to grant permission. In other words, *we* won't confront you for such a benign usage, but we can't guarantee that someone else won't.

3. These play-a-longs were designed to make musicians better, not put them out of work. The legendary musicians on our play-a-longs recorded the tracks with the trust that they would be used for educational purposes only. We feel obliged to honor that trust.

====
That all makes perfect sense, so it seems better to leave the Aebsersold tracks for practice and focus on developing my own tracks and compositions for sharing. I guess it's a good incentive to improve my keyboard chops!

Youtube is starting to look like a better option than Soundcloud, but if there are any other platforms to consider, I'd love to know, thanks.

 

[JohnInDenver]

I've been using Reverbnation.com for years (free version, no add-ons) and it's been great. My usage is consistent with Aebersold's statement #2 "making a few free demo tapes to promote themselves".

 

[Pete Thomas]

1. We cannot give anyone permission to record any copyrighted composition. We only lease these songs ourselves.

Seems like they don't quite get into the distinction between a copyright in the recording of tghe backing track (which they could grant). They obviously have no right to grant any permissions for a composition copyright of what you record over it.

2. We, as a publisher, cannot allow for-profit use of our tracks in any way.

It looks like this means they would grant you the right to publish their backing track plus your own recording (provided you have given yourself permission) on a non-monetised platform, which could include Youtube.

I think maybe they are being deliberately a bit vague because to be less vague might open them up to a (probably spurious) legal claim. Fair enough.

3. These play-a-longs were designed to make musicians better, not put them out of work. The legendary musicians on our play-a-longs recorded the tracks with the trust that they would be used for educational purposes only. We feel obliged to honor that trust.

I think most Aerbersolds were created before the internet as we know it and the use on Youtube was never even in their minds. The musicians would have been paid a session fee that in no way recompensed for those tracks being published all over the internet.

And of course, when you record a copyright tune over the Aebersold, and the rights holder (quite rightly) monetises it on Youtube, this goes agaisnt what Aeber sold have said in point 2 above: We, as a publisher, cannot allow for-profit use of our tracks in any way.

Ideally they should also have the right to monetise it and then hopefully pay some to the legendary musicians as royalties. Theoretically, they should be able to do that but to be on the content matching database I think it has to be a track put out on general release and distribution. And the problem there is that they are backing tracks. It's an interesting but frustrating legal conundrum I think.

 

[Tzadik]

Vimeo is more tollerant for copyright infringement claims.
No monetization on Vimeo.

 

[Pete Thomas]

Vimeo is more tollerant for copyright infringement claims.
No monetization on Vimeo.

It could be a double edge sword, it means you personally are less protected against copyright claims. They shift the blame to you

 

[Milo B.]

I've been using Reverbnation.com for years (free version, no add-ons) and it's been great. My usage is consistent with Aebersold's statement #2 "making a few free demo tapes to promote themselves".

Thanks for the heads up on this! I'll check it out.

 

[Milo B.]

Vimeo is more tollerant for copyright infringement claims.
No monetization on Vimeo.

Right, I forgot all about Vimeo - thanks!

 

[Milo B.]

Vimeo is more tollerant for copyright infringement claims.
No monetization on Vimeo.

Right, I forgot all about Vimeo - thanks!

 

[Guto]

does anyone know how they compress or otherwise process the audio between these platforms?
very often we discuss very subtle perceived audio differences here.

 

[Milo B.]

does anyone know how they compress or otherwise process the audio between these platforms?
very often we discuss very subtle perceived audio differences here.

Not sure how they process audio, but the consensus seems to be that they're pretty close on audio and video quality, with Vimeo being a little better with audio. See, e.g., https://filmshortage.com/youtube-vs-vimeo/

 

[neilslade]

I have found Youtube more than adequate for high quality much reproduction. I export my mp4 files to Youtube, and the sound remains faithful to my 320Kbps mp3 file. Take a listen for yourself: FUNKY BUDDHA

This track contains two soprano and two alto saxes.