question for mix engineers-who owns the tracks?

Hi guys,
A general question for you engineers out there.  Imagine a client is doing a tracking session and the job has to be finished in a big rush (what a surprise!).  You finish the mix job, but the client may need to do some tweaking or revisions on the mix (there has not even been time to test the mixes).  Is it common practice for the client to walk with the session files if you've been paid in full?  I don't want to get into too many details of my own situation, but let me add this the the mix-we just finished mixing our record and it had to be done today as my mix engineer moved across the country (today).

From what I know, it all depends on what your agreement is. Is the client paying for the studio, engineers time, materials (CDs, etc) and the session materials(protools session files) or is it just the studio time, engineers time, materials and final mix?

In general from my experience, the client is not entitled to the whole session and documentations, etc. unless they request it from the beginning and that is part of the agreement. If they wanted it, then a person can charge on an hourly basis the cost organising and gathering the session for the client or rasie the rates for releasing how the session is done to produce the mix.

The thing is, in your session, you may have done some mixing tricks etc, that you do not want to share. Maybe did some mixing arrangements as well within the mix.

Again it depends on your rates and whether you have accomodated for the release of the session files in your price.

Also, most studios I have gone to, do release copies of the session to the client(sometimes they charge to release it and some dont), but the rates they are charging, it makes up for it. I usually give the session files. If they want to edit it themselves, that's fine as long as they don't put it down that I mixed it.

Well this has been a hybrid mixing session anyway...IE: the last few tunes I had to finish the mix and I had to do a lot of the editing tweaks because we ran out of time, and I had to do four 20 hour days in a row to finish.  I guess I (the client) feel some ownership in the mixes as well now-even though the magic that happened on the vox and drums were not my doing (and the reason I went there in the first place)!  Bottom line for me is we finished the mixes, and the mix engineer moved across the country and I haven't had a chance to even check the final mixes on a few tunes, so slight edits are quite possible (though I plan on doing them in the same studio with the same plug-ins, etc).

I guess I really don't understand, but if you pay or have been paid by someone to record and mix, the person who paid is the sole owner of all the tracks and may take them and do what with them as they please at anytime. Unless otherwise agreed upon by both parties. If you paid an engineer for their SERVICE, they are in no way entitled to the sound recordings. And if you were the one paid for a service you are also in no way entitled to the sound recordings. However, if the client decides to change studios mid session,  the client is only entitled to the sound recording and not the artistic work put into the mixing. There is no mix on tape, usually, and most studios use OMF files to transfer sessions to other studios to save the artistic work they put into the mix. Plus most engineers do not want half way mixed sessions and if possible will usually start over. Is someone trying to keep files from you?   

Used to be more simple in ye olden days ;D,

You would buy the multitrack tape yourself & the tracks are your property unless the studio bill has not been paid in full for the recordings. Most studios also used to let you buy the hire tapes latter on if you wanted to keep them anyway.

Personally I think you should have the right to tracks including those that have been edited / composite, I would believe that you would , anyway,  be entitled to your own recording performances by law.

It would be up to the engineer if he wants to hand over the Pro Tools / Logic ect: sessions complete with his own mix & FX settings though??

In ye olden days I wouldn't give out my recall sheets and ssl disks, so now when a client wants masters I give them zeroed out files with no plugs or automation. I do, generally, run full mix stems as well, which the client is welcome to.

trancedental said:

It would be up to the engineer if he wants to hand over the Pro Tools / Logic ect: sessions complete with his own mix & FX settings though??

Click to expand...

there is no such thing....
this is not a simple issue, but basically
clients are entitled to take away, what ever made in paid sessions. that includes engineers FX/edits etc...
if session needs to be transfered to a different media/format... client pays for the extra time and materials...


edit: typo

From a legalistic point of view, the client is not entitled to anything outside of the agreement.  But I can't fathom why anyone would want to withhold any product of the session...  What would the engineer or studio owner want with it? Other than to use it as a strong arm tactic to make the client book more time for fixes,etc.  I would hope that the time could be booked on the merits of what the studio and/or engineer have to offer.  Of course the client has to pay for the time involved in properly archiving and transfering what they want.


I'm also having trouble with the idea of proprietary/secret mix moves.  To me the session is a collaborative effort, one in which the engineer is being stimulated in his/her craft by the artistic output of the client.  Without the clients work the engineer has nothing to respond to, nothing to do, so those efforts are as much a product of the clients input as of the engineer.  I think that each (good) session is  full of new and wonderful engineering creations, and that reliance on a secret bag of tricks is not going to make for creative engineering.  So really anyone who is either protecting or 'after' such secrets is bound to have limited possibilities for artistry and success in the long run.

.02

Legalistic, cash grab???  :

Since when is making a living at your art a cash grab.

Let's turn back the clock about 10-15 years before Protools was in every bedroom and everyone was an "engineer".

There was a master tape, it got delivered to the mix engineer, he performed his mix, wrote down settings for PAID recalls if needed and delivered a professional mix. In return, the client received stereo mixes, and his master tape.

Ask Andy Wallace, CLA, Dave Pensado or anyone doing mix work if they deliver the bathwater, washcloths and soap with the baby.

Here's a question; there's a ton of outboard that gets incorporate into making these mixes. Is the client also entitled to all of the mixers outboard gear when they finish just because their tracks were run through it?

Mark

From a legal point of view the contract in writing talks rest walks. If you end up in court who said what is irrelevant, what is written on the paper matters.

And if there is no written agreement which I assume is the case here, then all the work belongs to the studio owner even  if you did the editing/mixing. Because it was done in their premises and using their equipment. However, for the fee they received for the period of time you used their studio, they are certainly obliged to give you a copy of the full session files.  You can not ask them to delete what they have in their computer/tape.

in any situation studio owns nothing...
if you dont pay the studio, they can only hold on to the recordings...
studio owners can not re-use even a second of those recordings in any other session....
neither can make a sample from  those sessions... neither they can release it...

once you paid in full; you can make them delete what ever in their HDs... besides, you record to your own HD anyway...
or, in the analog session, you take your tapes with you...

they can only keep final mix sessions, with permission... as per for reference for future clients....

they cant not play any of your recording sessions to any other clients without permission.... even they are not still paid...

EDIT: studio may attempt to hold on to your tapes,  HDs or some of your equipment, until the payment made in full... but that is totally different legal issue....

I guess everyone has their opinions but personally once I get paid for something, I let them have everything I can give.  I see my work as a service, not a good, so they are paying me to track their stuff and make it sound good.  the tools I use are part of tracking/mixing which is my service.  See what I mean? 

The thing about it is that I use a lot of outboard and 3rd party plugs on mixdown so the tracks technically won't have a lot of the stuff I do to them to get that sound anyway.  So essentially what I give them is raw tracks, which is pretty much all I can give them unless they pay extra to render every track with the effects that I use, which is not generally part of the service.

Anyway, there comes a time when you can't please a customer no matter what you do so if this is your case I say cut your losses and give them everything just to get them away and leave time for other customers.

Svart is absolutely right...

usually you do not make any written agreements with the recording or mixing studio. its a nature of business...
they provide service, you pay....

at the end of the day, for some reason, if client decides to leave the studio, for any reason, and  dont pay the studio....
and if you think studio owns the recordings, then you are making a big mistake... if you act as you own the recordings, due no payment, and make those recordings public, or use them for your own production, or re-sell them; and see how much trouble you are going get involved with in a flash of a light....

you can only hold on to them, until the issue is resolved...

kambo said:

if you act as you own the recordings, due no payment, and make those recordings public, or use them for your own production, or re-sell them; and see how much trouble you are going get involved with in a flash of a light....

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is advocating that a studio or mixer can reuse the material on a clients tape, that's just not cool and would surely contribute to a short lived career.

Mark

oh, yes, surely...
i was only trying to explain who owns what, and who doesnt

Interesting thread.

;D

Just to be clear-none of these diverse scenarios actually have anything to do with my current situation (which is explained in post #3).

I don't have a bad relationship with the studio owners or the studio (or the mix engineer for tha matter).  Bottom line:

1) mix engineer did some great work that I couldn't have done
2) mix engineer had to leave town unexpectedly and we had to rush the project to completion
3) mix engineer is now gone, but I may have a few edits that I need to still have done and I want to use the same studio with same plugins, etc-I never even had time to do a listening session to the final mixes which I think should be essential.

kambo said:

Svart is absolutely right...

usually you do not make any written agreements with the recording or mixing studio. its a nature of business...
they provide service, you pay....

Click to expand...

Let me remind you something. I am Turkish and I know how the business is run in Turkey. Yes you do not make a written agreement in Turkey, and it indeed is the nature of business there because all the studios work cash in hand. But you know its a wild east there. ;D

However, you do not have a written agreement with the studio in Europe or UK or in US? End up in court see who owns the rights. Not recording business related but I ended up in court twice, sued a non paying clients twice which resulted in early setllement two days before the court and to top that probably spent about $5,000 in lawyer fees in US for intellectual rights related issues. So it cost me some to acquire this knowledge.

In the eyes of the law a written contract talks and rest walks. Again in the eyes of the law if the work is done in somebody else's premises and using their own equipment they own the rights to that work. I am not talking about the intellectual rights, I am talking about the property rights. Hence they own those zeros and ones in the hard drive, and you can not ask them to delete it unless you have a clause that says so in your written agreement.

I do not remember who it was but a few years back a well known engineer in REP said he had some John Lennon tracks on his tape and he offered it to his son for sale. He could do that because the work was probably done in his studio and he paid for the tape. He does not own the intellectual rights to the content but he owns the tape and all the magnetic data on it. He sure can not use it but he can not be forced to erase it unless there was a written agreement.

Second example would be from my own. Couple of years ago we recorded a song in our studio and a close friend of mine whom is a reasonably well known keyboard player in the business did some synth work for us. Even though I told him  that he was part of that recording as a gentlemen's agreement, his reply was that it was done in our studio and the whole recording belonged to us.

I do a bit of professional photography too. Now, you ask me to photograph an object for you. Unless we have it in writing the whole film belongs to me.  All  you get for the fee you pay is a scan or a print, and you can not force me to tear that film up. In the case of digital media, I shoot a digital and you get a copy of the file. I own the rights to the data. Make the analogy with the mixing.

Bottom line is, we can talk our own views until the cows come home but if you had a bit of legal experience you would realise that the written contract talks not the verbal. Incidently in Scottish law a verbal contract is also accommodated to a degree but nevertheless it is still weak.

That is why, get it in writing always.

I thought the question was more so , in essence
who owns the automation & plugin information ?
which is a tool that the engineer has honed to a degree

the client gets the file , with his recording on it
done by the skill of the engineer which has been paid for
but if you want the particular thing that , that engineer does
you'll have to hire him again or find out if you can duplicate it

You could have an engineer mix one song and then try copy
the sound doing the rest yourself , he's been paid
often for his name on the project
and you bought some guidence

oh, glad some other turkish people around here
i am currently based in turkey,but  its family matters...
i have been living in london/ny/la since 1985... so my studio/artist experience based from those places...
and i am very much interested with the legal side of things... as two of our managers are top lawyers in NY and london.
i have no idea how business runs here in turkey btw.

back to subject... you have a point and not...
if you leave your recordings with studio ie: lennon recordings... property owner can sell them as tape, not as artistic material.

once, we were looking for a  photographer for our band, in NY  for some terrace shoots... many of them asked for ownership
of the negatives... as they are actually putting in all the artistic work... we didnt agree ( well actually our management didnt ) but, we finally managed to get one... they had all rights for asking that ownership... but

when it comes to recording, engineer is not a real part in any song... engineer records whats played... he cant ( in general ) make miracles out of crap performance... but photographer can make miracles with his/her camera... as its an artistic work...
dont get me wrong, i doint mean to bully engineers here...
i can record a hit song with you, or Andy, or engineer X.... it doesnt really matter... hit song is a hit song, as long as you get decent  production... it still be a hit song... i agree some engineers may make things really good, and some really messes it up.
but, if there is no hit, engineer cant turn that in to a hit... but sure they can add some mojo... but that involves production... and thats a different ball game...
hope that explains, my point... there is a difference between artistic work, and service...

you can own the actual meterail, ie HD or tape... you cant own whats on it ( ones and zeros, or what ever )
so, back to your lennon sale.... it was a sale of actual tape material ... who ever bought it, still doesnt own whats recorded on to those tapes....
meaning of ownership; in the case of recoding, you can freely release them, make them public, or you use them in any way you want....
i havent heard any legal lennon CD lately from those tapes... have you ?

what you saying is right when artistic/creative work is involved... ie: architectural office / photography...
but not recording studios.... cause its a service....

people, again, i dint mean to bully engineers here... just trying to explain some facts...
i know some engineers are real magic...

Biasrocks said:

Legalistic, cash grab???  :

Since when is making a living at your art a cash grab.

Let's turn back the clock about 10-15 years before Protools was in every bedroom and everyone was an "engineer".

There was a master tape, it got delivered to the mix engineer, he performed his mix, wrote down settings for PAID recalls if needed and delivered a professional mix. In return, the client received stereo mixes, and his master tape.

Ask Andy Wallace, CLA, Dave Pensado or anyone doing mix work if they deliver the bathwater, washcloths and soap with the baby.

Here's a question; there's a ton of outboard that gets incorporate into making these mixes. Is the client also entitled to all of the mixers outboard gear when they finish just because their tracks were run through it?

Mark

Click to expand...

This clearly hit a nerve for you...

I only said that I would not choose to keep my work secret in that way.  If I was the client, I wouldn't choose someone who works this way.

It's not the old days.  'Nuff said.  Let's deal with where we are, not where we have been.

As far as marquee mix engineers go, they write their own ticket because they are in demand, but I seriously doubt that they worry about people stealing their methods.  Remember that their clients are also generally big shots as well, so things get a little more cold and down to business because everyone knows that big money is being thrown around and they want to get their share. Joe engineer and Johnny musician are just hoping to have a good time working together and I hope they can both afford to buy groceries at the end of the day.

As to your last point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

As always, each is entitled to his own point of view and has the right to see if it leads to the desired outcome, for better or worse.