That might have been true decades ago, or maybe if you are a famous composer (think: Eric Whitacre, John Williams, etc.), but I don't think it is true now, at least in most typical cases.
Generally things can go one of two ways:
- The group contracts the composer to write a piece for them. The composer is paid a sum for this. For example, a friend of mine was commissioned to write a big-band arrangement for a jazz ensemble and was paid for this by the ensemble.
- The composer contracts a group to play their piece for him/her. The group is paid a sum for this. For example, a friend of mine who is a moderately successful composer wanted to get a piece recorded, so he had to pay the orchestra.
In general, whichever party is the cause behind the choice of the material, has more leverage/clout, or must do the greater amount of work, is the one which receives the money. If you are approached by an orchestra which has heard one of your compositions and wishes to perform it, then you have the position of being able to charge for it if you so wish. Conversely, if you approach an orchestra and request that they play one of your pieces, they have the right to charge for it if they so wish. It is to some degree a question of inconvenience- how much is it worth for you to waive the public performance copyright for the group, how much is it worth for the group to fit your piece into their schedule.
Of course, this gets much more complicated when looking at community orchestras vs. school orchestras vs. professional orchestras, each of which have their own organization and rules behind them.
Lastly, nothing says that if you have the 'initiative', or if they have the 'initiative', that money then must cross hands. In some cases, out of charity, kindness, or any number of factors (including some more subtle, self-serving kinds), the right to charge may be waived by either party.
Generally things can go one of two ways:
- The group contracts the composer to write a piece for them. The composer is paid a sum for this. For example, a friend of mine was commissioned to write a big-band arrangement for a jazz ensemble and was paid for this by the ensemble.
- The composer contracts a group to play their piece for him/her. The group is paid a sum for this. For example, a friend of mine who is a moderately successful composer wanted to get a piece recorded, so he had to pay the orchestra.
In general, whichever party is the cause behind the choice of the material, has more leverage/clout, or must do the greater amount of work, is the one which receives the money. If you are approached by an orchestra which has heard one of your compositions and wishes to perform it, then you have the position of being able to charge for it if you so wish. Conversely, if you approach an orchestra and request that they play one of your pieces, they have the right to charge for it if they so wish. It is to some degree a question of inconvenience- how much is it worth for you to waive the public performance copyright for the group, how much is it worth for the group to fit your piece into their schedule.
Of course, this gets much more complicated when looking at community orchestras vs. school orchestras vs. professional orchestras, each of which have their own organization and rules behind them.
Lastly, nothing says that if you have the 'initiative', or if they have the 'initiative', that money then must cross hands. In some cases, out of charity, kindness, or any number of factors (including some more subtle, self-serving kinds), the right to charge may be waived by either party.
Sample library developer, composer, and amateur organologist at Versilian Studios.
