Not all music has the right appeal or market for a big publisher to take it on. For me, I'm not a big fan of monetizing my works that aren't published. If someone asks, I give it away with my thanks for using it. 99% of what I write is practical music that was written to address a specific need that isn't already filled, or that isn't well filled. As lovely as it is to be published, it's not a way to earn a living (with few exceptions), and I'm just happy to know others are making use of what I've written.

The efforts of CMAA'ers Allen, Rice, Jones, Oost-Zinner, Pluth, Kwasniewski, Bartlett, Wood, Giffen, Koerber, Morber and others are admirable for supplying to a need (choral copies.)

Some of those people have GOT PAID, using a handful of business models.

no one makes a living from sales

That's not exactly accurate. Publishers make lots of money from sales. And I'm willing to bet that I could live comfortably on the royalty checks being sent to any one of several very popular song writers featured in most contemporary hymnals.

The real question isn't what is possible, but what is likely. Also, what is important to you personally.

Adam, you clearly misunderstood me. All of those chose to self-market for the specific need of choral copies that are, if nothing else, very convenient for people like me. Why would I need to Xerox on Sundays or any day if I have their ubiquitous works stored for regular usage? And, for the record, I (not my parish), paid for those volumes in sets. That philosophy goes back to my first colloquium, where I negotiated with Arlene to purchase a quantity of that summer's book (surplus from event) for my schola.

there is no money in excellent music publishing because very few can perform it and few are interested to hear it. it is why Beethoven, Mozart and Wagner fill the concert halls... they appeal to the masses... Bach is better than them all ten times over, yet the proportion of performances of JSB works is smaller by far. Mediocrity will always draw a crowd. A crowd is where money is made and that is the dilemma of being a composer who hopes to create fine art. You can never be in it for money or making a living. Performance is the way to make a living. Composing is simply a labor of love.

I went to the concert hall a few nights ago to hear an excellent choir from Scotland. On the program was Ludwigs 9th (yawn!) the choir did a concert the night before of music most of us never heard before. we were all stunned and electrified. I wish there was a lot more of that in the concert hall. it was only half full that night and the 9th was sold out. I was bored to tears hearing Beethoven and those screaming Divas.

So goes the status quo.

BTW... for example, look up my Choral Managerie link which is a few posts down. There are only a handful of choirs in the world that will even attempt it. It's not for sale (at the moment)... I composed it as a gift for the choir I heard the night before I wrote it. Inspiration, fascination with beautiful harmonies and the drive to share it with others was my only motivation.

I should have told you about my model of self publishing. It works quite well and choirs have purchased my scores around the globe from this one website. The home page explains my sales philosophy. Hope this helps.

http://www.MyOpus.com

Kathy, what you wrote makes it sound like it's 5 times more for reprints when in actuality it's 50% less.

If a hymn text you've written and assigned copyright to WLP appears in one of its hymnals, then you receive a pro rata share of the aggregate 10 percent royalty paid by the publisher to composers and text writers. If that text later appears in a hymnal published by Hope Publishing Company, WLP will receive the pro rata share of the 10 percent royalty and you will receive half of that royalty (50 percent).

That's not the only way reprints are done.

True, but in every case I think the result is the same.

Let's take the case of one of your texts, now copyrighted by WLP, which is included in an octavo with original music by a composer other than yourself. If that octavo is published by WLP, you will receive a 5 percent royalty on sales and the composer the other 5 percent (10 percent total royalty on sales). If that octavo is published by a publisher other than WLP, the composer will receive a 5 percent royalty for the music from whatever publisher it is, and WLP a 5 percent royalty for the text (and you will receive 50 percent of that royalty from WLP).

The same goes for royalties from licensing agreements. If a tune of mine with copyright held by GIA appears in a GIA hymnal, I will receive a pro rata share of the aggregate 10 percent royalty paid by GIA to composers and text writers. If that same tune generates royalties through OneLicense reprints, I will receive 50 percent of those royalties and GIA the other 50 percent.

Do you know of another reprint scenario that has a different result?

Mechanical royalties are chump change. 10% of "what the market will bear" isn't much. The problem with sacred music is that, unless it gets done outside the liturgy, you don't get paid for performances (I'm cool with that, actually). My BMI checks have run between $200-$1400 a year (Mostly closer to the lower figure). The main advantage of mainstream publishing is the curatorial and publicity advantage.

...

Publish something that you really believe in and feel that there is a market for it. Stick with it for the long run and know that it may never do much more than maybe pay the monthly utilities. And when it does...and it can, be thankful.

Francis, there's not a lot of future in temporary local Uses. Definitely Latin. You'll be remembered after you're dead. Which will probably happen sooner than if you'd written in the vernacular
.