Probably should be in random NIN comments. Plus this is essentially spam. Plus TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED FOR SOMEONE TO USE GARAGEBAND?

This is awesome!

I wish you all the best with this, but really it can go in Your Music.

Thanks for the reply, Dan. I did see the ETS thread but I'm waiting for my account to get approved so I can reply to the various comments/criticism/accusations over there. I do appreciate your support and open-minded approach even if this isn't your thing.

I'm a pretty chill individual; I'm not really interested in being pushy with chiptune or NIN fans, I simply want to assert that there is quite a bit of crossover that exists and maybe this is something they could get down with. As someone that is into both, I hope I can put together something that won't upset folks horribly, but if they're not into one or the other, I'm not shoving it down anyone's throat.

One thing I do want to make painfully clear is that I'm not here to solicit. While I am interested in sharing what I do with others, I have an account here because I'm a fan and a listener. I don't really post on the forums (obviously) but I do chat on IRC and stuff.

Last but not least, SheepDean's yell of $2600 in all-caps still echoes in my head, as I'm sure it was intended to do, so I feel like maybe I should point out that the total had to be bumped up at least a few hundred dollars (to where it is now, not past 2600) just because of the fees involved with things like kickstarter, accepting money (amazon payments in this case), etc.

Thanks InversePhase and OnslaughtSix. I knew the news about the Chiptune NIN Kickstarter wasn't made to solicit. The thread was like you both said, made to spread the word about an interesting NIN chiptune project.

Good luck InversePhase. I'll keep checking in to see how everything is going. Cheers!

Clever project; not dropping $15 on CDs anymore. Or do you think it is actually 1991?

SarahConner posted:

Clever project; not dropping $15 on CDs anymore. Or do you think it is actually 1991?

The physical items are for people that want physical items. You don't have to get the physical items. The lowest pledge reward still gets you a digital download of the entire album. You pick what you want, not me. =]

OnslaughtSix posted:

The only people who never made money on CDs were people signed to major labels. When you pay money for something like this, it goes into the cost of making it and the artist's pocket--presumably so they can either continue to eat, or to make more stuff for you to buy.

The money is going into ordering the items that you're pledging for in the first place. The high dollar ones, well, I didn't really expect anyone to go for those, and there's no obligation to, but people did anyway. They'll get some special love. Don't forget licensing, which means virtually half of the money I end up with is basically going towards royalties. This money is not going towards my personal welfare.

OnslaughtSix posted:

That said, he's going to release it on Bandcamp anyway, so.

Yes, and now that I'm funded by the way, I'm celebrating by releasing a track. I submitted it to remix.nin, but I don't know how long it takes for those to go up. In the meantime, try this link instead:

The Only Time (Gameboy Monomix)

brickisred posted:

I don't believe this guy should be asking for pledges for this project. I mean, if you gave me a week, I could probably find a better chiptune artist who would do it for free. It's supposed to be about "the love of music". None of our covers ask for money.

I didn't start this thread, and I outright claim I am not here to solicit.

I was laid off at work and can't afford to pay the licensing myself.

I have a dream to make this a full album.

I am doing this because I love NIN, otherwise I could simply cover/parody something else.

Your week starts now.

OnslaughtSix posted:

It's a pretty simple thing--he's going to make it and release it for free anyway. The donations are simply for physical items and t-shirts and cool shit, and for licensing fees.

Well, the downloads may or may not cost, this depends on whatever licensing agreement I am (or am not) able to work out. The real problem here is the way licensing, royalties, and labels operate. To release a cover, even for free, there is an obligation for the cover artist to pay royalties or get mechanical licensing. In this scenario, downloads do count as a "unit" to licensing agencies, so I pay royalties whether it's digital or physical.

Licensing/Royalties can be waived by speaking directly to someone that holds the copyright or is able to speak on behalf of that individual. I'd love it if TR just stepped in, okayed everything, and said "please go ahead and do this, I don't want any royalties" but he's likely got better things to do than pay attention to this project. Also someone else may be entitled to them and probably only he knows for sure!

That doesn't mean I won't try to reach out in a few different ways. It just means that I am ready for the possibility that I won't be able to reach him. If I were to suddenly luck out in that department, I would definitely try to do something amazing for the pledges since I no longer had to worry about half of my expected costs.

OnslaughtSix posted:

As for "find a better chiptune artist who would do it for free," I can only echo IP's last line there. (And IMO I challenge you to even find a better chiptune artist--how do you even judge that quality, really, given the limitations of the artform? It's like saying "I'm gonna find the guy who can Photoshop the best colour red!"

I judge a good chiptune artist by their attention to detail, the relative complexity of their music, and their ability to do both of those on the same playing field as other chiptuners. It helps if the tune is catchy or gets stuck in your head.

Although I might listen to a chiptune and say "I could do that" or even "I could do better than that" every once in awhile, I prefer not to judge myself against other chiptuners and simply aspire to be everything in other chiptuners that I respect. We're all people, and we're all doing what we can with what we've got.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I don't feel that we should debate who is better or worse unless someone wants to step forward and compare their final product with my final product. Otherwise, it's just a pointless argument to make.

That's fine, I don't mind answering, you're welcome to ask me questions about the project, and I've done a lot of homework on this.

Licensing is somewhere in the $1k territory for the number of units I intend to produce. You're looking at, on average, a dime per song sold for royalties. PHM is 10 tracks, so around a dollar from each CD (or download) has to go to licensing/royalties (before someone chimes in in all-caps, yes, that means I think I can sell a thousand units). Mechanical licensing is purchasable outright; that is, you don't need to specifically talk to someone and obtain permission. So why even do it then? Sometimes, a lower rate (or even free) can be negotiated. I'm taking the permissions route as "Plan A" because I believe the licensing money I could save might be better-spent on the actual product itself, and I want to deliver something interesting, cool, and worth holding onto, and I don't want to have to charge a lot for my own product.

You're right that I do not employ vocals (though I do employ their melodies) and I do not use the recordings. However, the word "parody" is commonly associated with a comedic value and there are some people that think that chiptunes/chipmusic/8-bit/gamemusic/whatever are a serious form of expression and artwork. People listening to parodied lyrics can often "get the joke" right away. People hearing chiptune versions of NIN might say "oh, huh, I recognise that from somewhere...." but not instantly know. Now, I do use punny titles and some people do find them funny, as well as the people that do know NIN rather well, so there's a whole "oh ha, that's funny, it's an 8-bit nine inch nails!" factor... but I'm in enough of a grey area that I need to clarify my intentions.

So, let's do that by quoting fair use law. I'm judged under these criterion:

posted:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

My project is of commercial nature. I perform shows and then people will ask me where they can purchase what I played. I do want to fill that need.

posted:

2. The nature of the copyrighted work

The original nature of the copyrighted work is a commercial album of music.

posted:

3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

I intend to tribute the entire album (the precedent you linked/Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. is only about one song).

posted:

4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

First, I do not intend to impede on NIN's ability to sell music. There is no way that anyone would mistake my song for an original NIN work.

Second, I do not intend to steal any of their market share. Judging from the amount of backlash I've received from various NIN fans and forums, I think I can safely say that this is something that not all NIN fans are going to be into, and I never had any inclination to believe otherwise. I consider that reasonable proof that I am not going to hurt their bottom line.

Sadly, even though #4 is pretty great, I'm not looking good on the first three.

One speed bump with fair use law is that nowhere in does it question the intentions of the artist that intends to fall under fair use. Is the artist making a mockery of the original artist, or is the material intended to honor the original artist in some way? And while some might say "it doesn't matter, that's what free speech is about", the original artist still wrote the original work, and should have a say in what is done with the original work, and that's how we arrived at where we are today. Mechanical licenses probably exist largely because of this (and perhaps partly because musicians don't want to have to deal with it half the time).

Now, this isn't a mistake, legal systems aren't supposed to be about theories and conjecture, they're supposed to be about how one might affect another. That's probably why the copyright office themselves state:

posted:

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

....which, in turn, is why I want Plan A to work. If not, Plan B is to pay a sum of money to an agency, and then they give me a license, and everything is "easy". However, "easy" doesn't address that I want to do a Nice Thing by being forthcoming with NIN and say "Hey, I'm not trying to rip you off, I'm a fan and I really love your work, this tribute is for you".

Hopefully this helps/explains a few things.

I searched the forums and it seems this hasn't been discussed yet
so here's the completed project by InversePhase, the chiptune artist.

[inversephase.bandcamp.com]

this is a remake of the entire PHM album produced from sounds made by vintage computers and/or gaming consoles (Atari, Commodore, NES, etc.)
this is something outstanding among the plethora of nin covers songs.

you'll most probably find it awesome even if you are not a geek for old videogames

There was a posting of 8 bit versions of OK Computer and Kid A as well about a month ago. I managed to d/l one of them, but the 2nd kept getting pulled down. I think Kid A is the one I don't have. Checking this out after work

InversePhase posted:

brickisred posted:

I don't believe this guy should be asking for pledges for this project. I mean, if you gave me a week, I could probably find a better chiptune artist who would do it for free. It's supposed to be about "the love of music". None of our covers ask for money.

I didn't start this thread, and I outright claim I am not here to solicit.

I was laid off at work and can't afford to pay the licensing myself.

I have a dream to make this a full album.

I am doing this because I love NIN, otherwise I could simply cover/parody something else.

Your week starts now.

Licensing? So you're selling this album then?


Also, don't recreated alternate renditions such as MIDI and chiptunes count under parody laws? Or if the riffs are the same do you still need to pay royalties?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2012 10:23PM by rodheh.

Not sure where I fall opinion-wise on this quite yet.

So you're basically taking sound effects, used prior in games (and made by someone else) and putting them to the tune of certain songs (which were also made by someone else). And you want people to pay you for putting them into that tune cleverly?

In the art world, this would be like re-creating the Mona Lisa out of Warhol’s soup cans, and then charging for it as if it were a “new” piece. And I suppose you pay all due royalties to the respective Warhol and Michaelangelo foundations, while also taking a personal profit for your efforts?

I wasn't bashing, to clarify, just trying to understand what exactly was going on. That's why it's all phrased with questions up there (but I realize I came off that way). So, sound chips are like the soundcard you would put in a synthesizer, and he's doing an instrumental cover with those sounds. I thought all those sounds were made specifically for games on those systems, as in, they were proprietary to those companies that made the games for those systems originally (since the sounds are on a chip ripped directly out of a proprietary gaming console). He lists their origins on his website:

<sup>POKEY (Atari 400/800/XL/XE/5200)
- 2A03 (Nintendo Entertainment System)
- SN76489 (Sega Master System)
- LR35902 (Game Boy)
- SID/6581 (Commodore 64)
- YM2413 (Japanese Sega Master System, MSX-MUSIC)
- SCC-I (MSX Konami soundchip; went in Metal Gear 2 and Snatcher)
- VRC6 (NES Konami soundchip; went in Castlevania 3 and Madara)</sup>

Still, what this chiptuner is doing is cover/parody/tribute that NIN made, with pre-used sounds already owned by other companies. The sound a guitar string makes is not proprietary, but I thought that the sound that the whip makes in Castlevania would be (on the chip). Maybe it’s not and it’s under Creative Commons or something? When you get into chord progressions and melodies that’s a whole different license I think (thru the owners of the song, like NIN or TVT).

Don't get me wrong I like the sound of it and I get the 8bit retro tie-in. If I made this kind of thing I would just share it with friends, free. But he wants to share it with a broader community, that involves licensing costs, and he has to charge for it to pay for that. I suppose I understand that.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 07/03/2012 10:41AM by votiVe.