The next morning, my comment was approved, and the composer/blogger who wrote the original post responded. Unfortunately, his response didn’t really address any of the points that I made, and instead continued to plug the legacy publishing system without offering any support for why he thinks it’s a good idea. Here is his response (which you can also find here):

Dear Dennis,
Thanks for your response to my article. I’m not surprised by your comments, and I can see where you’re coming from. No question, great music deserves to be published, recognized, and performed, and I know it can be extremely difficult, or impossible, to find an established publisher that considers the work to be a profitable investment. But, when I see self-published music that does have the attributes of a profitable publishing investment, I like to encourage the writers of those works to go the route of commercial publishing. I realize that in some cases self-publishing might be the composer’s only reasonable alternative.

And here is my lengthy response:

I still completely fail to see the benefits of going the route of legacy publishing (if you want to know why I use the word “legacy”, Google the phrase “legacy system“).

First, I have to give up *all* rights to my creative efforts. I give away my copyright, and all claim I have to the piece I just spent days, weeks, or months writing, to a corporate entity with no real stake in its success or failure.

I can’t even write an arrangement of that piece anymore without asking the permission of my publisher. I wrote it, and they own it now. In exchange for what? I have absolutely no say in cover design, pricing, distribution or marketing methods, or whether or not my piece actually makes it to print. A publisher has zero obligation to actually put the piece into print once the contract is signed – they own it, they can do with it what they will. And unless it’s stipulated in the contract, they don’t have to create parts (another horror visited upon one of my friends – he wrote a piano trio, which was published by one of the big houses, yet they never made parts; instead, the score is sold in sets of three for over $100 – it’s never been bought, ever, and it’s been sitting in a warehouse since the mid-’80s). If a particular piece turns out to have been a “bad investment”, then it’s just left on the shelf, and no further effort is put into promotion. And if they decide to license the work for a cause that I find completely abhorrent – oh, well – they own it, and can do with it what they will.

So: I lose all claims to the piece, and have no control over its uses. Fun!

Editorially, there’s not much benefit. Publishers are now requiring composers to engrave their works themselves or at their own expense.

Monetarily, I’m entitled to royalties, but royalties are net of all expenses incurred by the publisher. But what expenses exactly? That’s a good question, and one you’ll never get a publisher to answer with any level of specificity. Salaries of the marketing / legal / art / editorial staff? Rent for their offices? Pencils / paper / office supplies? All are needed to sell my piece, but not all are direct expenses, especially once the piece is printed and on the shelf of some warehouse. However, the accounting departments of publishing houses are quite creative places, and any expense can be used to justify keeping a little more of the pie. Generally, though, in the end I’m left with a royalty of around 10%. Plus, if the piece is ever commercially recorded, the publisher banks the bulk of the recording royalties, as well. Good luck paying your mortgage with that!

And the fun continues! Brick and mortar music stores are essentially off-limits to concert music composers. Patelson’s shut down years ago; the two music shops in my hometown don’t stock concert music, except the Czerny exercises and some beginner piano stuff; and the music shop in the town where I went to college – there were two big schools in town that both had good music programs – didn’t stock anything written after “Mikrokosmos”. Brick and mortar stores are mostly around for instrument sales and rentals, or to peddle the Glee songbook.

Promotion is one of your big reasons for working with a legacy publisher, but again I have to ask: what can a big publisher do that I can’t? I’ve not seen much of this promotional muscle you mentioned, and I do enjoy buying scores and looking for new works to perform – both for myself as a vocalist, and as a concert presenter. In fact, I couldn’t tell you a single new thing that any of the major publishers have picked up in the past few years. I know that Boosey represents Du Yun, but only because I read it on Twitter. Beyond that, I, as a consumer of concert music, have not been marketed to. At all.

And if Twitter is the best promotional tool at the disposal of the big publishing houses, then I should point out that it’s one of the promotional tools at my disposal, too. I have slightly over a quarter of the number of followers that Boosey has, half of Schott, nearly as many as G Schirmer and Peters, and almost two and a half times as many as Subito. If this is the future of concert music promotion, then I’m playing with the big boys.

Ok, yes, the publishers have an easier time going to conventions, and have more clout with the major orchestras. But what’s to stop me from banding together with some of my composer friends, renting a booth at one of these conventions, and marketing our works directly? Just by being there, we’ve gained some name recognition, and we can market our works directly to performers and directors – much more passionately and personally than a publisher could do.

A publisher is interested in making sales. Any sales. They have no interest in the individual welfare of their composers. Individuals who work for a publisher may take an interest, but the corporation itself is interested in one thing only: maximizing profits and minimizing risk/loss. And to romanticize the role of the publisher is, frankly, silly. A publisher is a business partner, not a friend, and should not be a source of artistic validation. The gatekeeperism inherent in the system has been romanticized to a degree that has crippled countless composers’ careers. My works are only valid or good if some faceless corporation says they are? I’m sorry, no, my works are valid and good because I stand behind them, because performers enjoy presenting them, and because audiences enjoy hearing them.

While you didn’t really address any of my points in your response, this idea seems to be at the center of it: composers who are good enough should get a publisher (*snap*, get one, just like that), and those that aren’t good enough, well, self-publishing is a reasonable alternative whose relative obscurity won’t get in the way of works that have been vetted by the sales department of X Publishing.

There are a lot of composers who are very successful, and who self-publish their works. Most notably, of course, is Jennifer Higdon, who I think it’s safe to say is good enough to get a publisher if she wanted. And she has some pretty interesting things to say on the nature of publishing and self-publishing at the NewMusicBox. That a composer as successful and respected as Ms. Higdon should consider the idea of giving her rights to a legacy publisher to be “absurd”, I think is very telling.

Meanwhile, I’m making sales this week and pocketing 92% of the cover price (these are digital sales). That’s a royalty rate that no publisher could ever offer. And while my score sales aren’t going to be paying my rent (yet), I’ve covered my web hosting fees for the month (read: I’ve recouped my marketing expenses). I made those sales the way that composers have been making sales for ages: one person heard me perform one of my own song cycles with the American Opera Projects recently, and the other is filling out a series of recitals and found me by Googling a phrase that is particularly pertinent to me and my music.

And unlike with a legacy publisher, I’m creating a personal relationship with both – I’m thankful for their support and for the fact that they enjoy my music; and in creating this relationship, I’m hopefully paving the way for new collaborations or commissions or score sales. With a legacy publisher, there’s a monolithic wall between the composer and the score buyer that discourages such a personal connection. Had either person I mentioned bought my music through a legacy publisher, I wouldn’t know it, they wouldn’t know me, and there would be no way to know that there are already plans to perform those song cycles in various parts of the country.

One final point, and then I’ll stop typing for now.

Author Kristine Kathryn Rusch (www.kriswrites.com) has been making some great arguments in favor of self-publishing for writers (as have Dean Wesley Smith and Joe Konrath, whose blogs I encourage everyone to check out), and while there are some qualitative and quantitative differences between the book publishing world and the concert music publishing world, certain tenets hold true across the board. I’m not completely against legacy publishing, but I don’t think it’s a very good *business* decision at this point in time. (As I said before, I’m much more interested distribution at this point, which doesn’t require a publisher.) And that’s the heart of my argument – every decision a composer makes regarding her scores and their uses should be sound business decisions. I’m not speaking of artistic choices, which are entirely separate – it’s after the artistic choices have been made, we must be savvy in the way we approach our careers. So I’ll end with a quote from Ms. Rusch’s blog, substituting “Composer” for “Writer”:

Composers Are Responsible For Their Own Careers.
Composers Are Professionals.
Composers Are In Business, And Should Behave Like Business People.

As always, thoughts and responses are welcome in the comments section!

My response:

Hi Steve,

I really can’t disagree more with the idea that composers should go with legacy (i.e., traditional) publishers. It’s certainly hard enough to find a reputable publisher that will even accept your work. But to find one that will also promote it in a way that results in sales is nigh on impossible. Publishers are only going to buy scores that they think will sell, but their guess as to what will sell is a) as good as yours or mine, and b) just that: a guess.

I have several very well-established composer friends who are represented in various ways by legacy publishers. One is represented exclusively by one of the big houses and has a Pulitzer to boot – a big composer with a big name, who should, by all rights, be selling well. However, until recently, his career has languished – his publisher did very little to promote his music to orchestras and other ensembles, they did nothing to assist in the recording of his works, and they wouldn’t even look at half of the works that he had written in those years – they’re only now, in some cases 10 years after having been written, starting to make it into print. His career has recently gotten a major boost, but no thanks to his publisher – he went out and hired an agent at his own expense, who is doing a bang-up job at getting orchestras and performers around the country to perform his music and commission new works. His complete piano music is also in the process of being recorded, but here again, the publisher is merely granting permission – the pianist is left to do all the fundraising for the project.

Another friend has won most of the major awards and sits on all the big panels. Many of his works have been published by a number of major houses. Yet his royalty checks are negligible. The International Society of Bassists wanted to promote one of his works that was just released on a disc by Naxos, but the publisher who owned the rights to the work refused to return his calls requesting that they send several copies to the organization so that they could review it and do proper promotional efforts. Guaranteed sales for the publisher, but they wouldn’t even talk to the composer.

If this is how publishers treat composers with decades-long careers and significant respect within the concert music community, I shudder to think how poorly a composer such as myself would be treated. I’d much rather prepare my scores myself, have them available on my website and NewMusicShelf.com, and promote them at concerts and events.

Add in the pitiful royalty rates that composers are paid by publishers, the prohibitive prices that publishers charge for scores, and the fact that I’m putting my trust in a corporation to accurately report and pay royalties when they have every incentive not to (and if you doubt that a publisher would do such a thing, look no further than the ebook royalty reporting scandals currently making waves in the book publishing world), and self-publishing looks quite a bit more attractive to me.

Sure, I don’t have the built-in relationships with music dealers that a publisher does, but there’s nothing stopping me from creating those relationships myself. It may take more work, but I guarantee that those relationships will be much more fruitful because they’re much more personal. And I’m happy to do the legwork for my own career, especially when I can make more money on fewer sales because I claim the full profit, and don’t have to share 90% with a publisher. And I’d be more than happy to offer the traditional discount to a distributor like J.W. Pepper.

And a fear of rejection is absolutely no reason to avoid self-publishing. There are no rejections in self-publishing, only sales. If you don’t make a sale, no one mails you a form letter telling you that you’re not good enough. They just move on, and you’re none the wiser. Meanwhile, I have an order to go fill.

What are your thoughts? Weigh in in the comments

Of course, it can be awkward when you’re limited to 140 characters – especially when you’re as prolix as I can be! So over the next few days, I intend to re-answer some of the questions that resonated with me right here on the blog.

In the meantime, two fun bits of news:

I’m nearly finished with a new choral piece commissioned by Illinois State University, titled To a Poet a Thousand Years Hence. The piece commemorates two events: the 55th Annual ISU Madrigal Dinners, and the 40th Anniversary of the founding of the ISU College of Fine Arts. As always, it’s an honor to be asked to write for ISU’s choirs, and I look forward to their performance of it on the Madrigal Dinners in early December. I’ll be attending one of the later performances with a sizable entourage of friends and family. I encourage anyone in the area to check out the Dinners, which are a great event (I was one of the Madrigal Singers during my ISU years, and had quite a bit of fun singing, eating, and wearing silly costumes – particularly the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis Memorial Pillbox Hat™, which I promise to find a photo of). I’ll have the piece finished in the next day or so, as all that remains to be done is to compose music for half a line of poetry, flesh out harmonies for two other lines, and finish the engraving and proofreading.

And Saturday, October 16, the ISU Madrigal Singers will perform one of my slightly older choral works, Fair Robin I Love, which hasn’t seen the light of day since it was premiered 5 years ago (!) for the 50th Annual Madrigal Dinner. I’m glad it’s being done again – I particularly like it, and it’s a refreshing departure from the bulk of my choral works.

More happy news soon about day jobs, planned works, and more upcoming performances. A new little side project that I’ve been tinkering with. And some heavier, more personal posts coming reflecting on my recent difficulties composing, and responding to some very sad recent events.

Until then!

The Gallant Weaver
About a month ago, I finished a solo guitar transcription/arrangement of "The Gallant Weaver" from And He’ll Be Mine. The piece will be premiered at the wedding of my good friends Danny Stone and Kaity Volpe in Santa Fe, NM on Sept. 18.

Soliloquy
Last week I finished revisions to my first solo flute piece from 2004, Soliloquy, for Kristi Benedick, a flautist I went to Illinois State University with. Mostly, the revisions took the form of renotation of the original score into traditional notation. However, I also tightened up a few sections – dropped a few phrases here and there, and elided others. Kristi will perform the piece on November 14 at Southeast Missouri State University. She will also premiere the flute and piano version of at least a moment in Spring 2011.

Duo for Violin & Piano
I’m also revising my Duo for Violin & Piano, which should be finished soon. I’m extending the opening section, and fixing a pesky transition that didn’t work in the original.

MichaelKorie.com
I’ve picked up a new web client. (Did I tell you this? I’m too lazy to check.) I’m currently designing a website for lyricist/librettist Michael Korie, who I met through another of my clients. More news as the site develops.

Keyed Up Concerts
I started a mock-up today for another client, the Keyed Up Concerts, run by my good friend Marc Peloquin.

PatriciaLeonard.com
Next month, I start yet another site for composer Patricia Leonard!

DavidShohl.com
More websites! I’m in the data entry stage of the creation of a website for my friend David Shohl, also a composer. David was actually my first web client, but as we both have an amazing capacity for procrastination, and David later fell seriously ill (he’s much better now – hooray!), we haven’t gotten around to making it happen until now.

Split Second Piano Ensemble
Yet another website that’s in the data entry stage is for the Split Second Piano Ensemble, made of the duo Marc Peloquin and Roberto Hidalgo.

New Commission
In the next week, I’ll be starting work on a new choral work for the Illinois State University Madrigal Singers. Karyl Carlson, the Director of Choral Activities, has been a great proponent of my music, and she’s commissioned this new work for the 55th Annual ISU Madrigal Dinners, which coincide with the 40th Anniversary of the founding of the ISU College of Fine Arts. The new piece will be performed alongside two of my other choral works, Fair Robin I Love (2005) and Take All My Loves (2009), both written for the ISU Madrigal Singers.

NewMusicShelf.com
NewMusicShelf is chugging along – I’m still building the composer roster, which is taking a little more time than expected, as getting composers to put their scores together is like herding cats. However, I’ve made a lot of improvements to the site, and am still looking for ways to make the site better.

New Day Job
To top off this list of busy-making things (and in addition to a 10-day trip to visit family in Illinois), I’ve started a new short-term, part-time day job assisting the Finance Office at New York City Center. I’ll be there through the end of September, when I’m back out on the streets looking for more ways to pay the bills.