Recording system for a school auditorium

[TheaterEd]

Started research on this and this is my first stop... but looking for some answers, opinions, and comments about recording School Concerts using both video and audio formats and then selling these to create revenue for the Music Program for the school. Example a parent would pay $5 for the music CD of the performance or $8 for a DvD video. This would only be for concerts as it is against copyright laws to record (and sell) plays, musicals, etc...

If anyone has experience with actually doing this, could you offer some feedback as to what type of recording audio equipment/software you used and how your revenue was affected?

I'm also looking to do Webcasting of these events (may get a Sport Contract also). I'm beta-testing several stream links but haven't found a good switcher and IP Cameras or Digi ones to use. Any advice on this subject welcomed too... (or should that go under a new thread?)

Thanks all!

This is against copyright law as well. Your school purchases the rights to perform the music, however that does not include the rights to record the music and sell it. I believe you are allowed to make ONE copy for use in the classroom as an educational resource, but anything more than that is violating the copyright of the original artist. In order to do this you would need to get separate rights from the copyright holders of each song.

I just recently attended a conference session on this topic, so I am fairly certain I am correct, however I have been wrong before, and I will be wrong again (just don't tell my students).

 

[AudJ]

Started research on this and this is my first stop... but looking for some answers, opinions, and comments about recording School Concerts using both video and audio formats and then selling these to create revenue for the Music Program for the school. Example a parent would pay $5 for the music CD of the performance or $8 for a DvD video. This would only be for concerts as it is against copyright laws to record (and sell) plays, musicals, etc...

If anyone has experience with actually doing this, could you offer some feedback as to what type of recording audio equipment/software you used and how your revenue was affected?

I'm also looking to do Webcasting of these events (may get a Sport Contract also). I'm beta-testing several stream links but haven't found a good switcher and IP Cameras or Digi ones to use. Any advice on this subject welcomed too... (or should that go under a new thread?)

Thanks all!

I would recommend checking with ASCAP. Distributing any music without permission/royalties is against copyright law. If you are actually paying for the recording and distribution rights for the music, you will find your cost per CD dramatically higher. Some musicals/plays will also sell recording rights to schools, but most don't. Again, it is costly, and difficult to use as a fundraiser unless you can get a close prediction of sales in advance.

That being said, it is very possible to do it the right way, and obtain appropriate permission. It will take a little work, which I sometimes utilize a parent volunteer to coordinate the legal stuff.

As far as recording, I have used Protools, a Roland Edirol recorder and the recorder on my Yamaha LS9. Honestly, to the average listener, the differences are minor between these three recorders in end-product. Microphones are a different story for me. There are awesome recording mics hanging permanently in our room, which I know were several hundred dollars, but I never saw them before they were hung, and I don't know what they are. Using quality equipment is a time-saver. As far as making the CD's and artwork, enlist as much student help as possible.

 

[Billizfun2]

I went to a NAfME site and saw that there is a recorded webinar of the very topic... except its about an hour long. Need some time to dedicate watching it. However, yes... any musical piece performed from an original artist is copyrighted unless a Rights Release is met. It makes me sick to know that schools would have to go out of their way to protect their 'assets' when you now have parents (family or friends) in the audience recording their little ones with iPhones and such... then posting them onto YouTube or Facebook. You can make all the public service announcements you want over the PA, but they do it anyways. Question: There's no copyright after an original artist is dead after 20yrs, correct? Question 2: What about Dance Recitals? Seems like these laws were created per-Napster and only enforced during LimeWire era... but with everything being able to be recorded and posted publicly within seconds, how can that be enforced? Would it be easier (legal) to create the CDs and just ask for a donation rather than actually sell them?

As far as the recording equipment goes... I have a 36ch mixer board with various OUT ports. I have a wide selection of mics (wired & wireless). Some mics I hang, most I place on stands, and some select choir members get lapels. This isn't for recording, but more for audio enhancement in the auditorium. I just need something that would plug in to the OUT port to record. A Digital Recorder. I used my laptop tonight for a rehearsal and I could only get Windows Media Recorder. It recorded fine, but in WMA format. I would rather have a stand-alone recorder.

 

[DuckJordan]

Nope still illegal weather you charge or give freely. And its still up to the school to enforce the copy write policy

 

[Les]

Sad thing is, the school could actually be held responsible if parents are recording a performance. I believe dance recitals are covered under ASCAP and (the music) can be performed/played publicly, but still not recorded. As for enforcement, yes it is difficult. YouTube periodically removes videos with blatant infringements, but there are millions out there. The best thing is to just eliminate yourself from the possibility of being named in a lawsuit as best you can. The punishments can be severe - especially if the copyright holders decide to "make an example" out of you, which they could.

Sorry, I don't know the intricacies of the law besides that.

 

[MNicolai]

Sad thing is, the school could actually be held responsible if parents are recording a performance. I believe dance recitals are covered under ASCAP and (the music) can be performed/played publicly, but still not recorded. As for enforcement, yes it is difficult. YouTube periodically removes videos with blatant infringements, but there are millions out there. The best thing is to just eliminate yourself from the possibility of being named in a lawsuit as best you can. The punishments can be severe - especially if the copyright holders decide to "make an example" out of you, which they could.

Sorry, I don't know the intricacies of the law besides that.

You have enough plausible deniability if you include a No Recording/Filming clause in the playbill or announce it, and make a reasonable effort to prevent patrons from recording. For example, if only one recording ended up online, you could still form a substantial, defense around your announcement and playbill notice. After all, you can make as many warnings as you want -- it's just not possible to police all several hundred patrons simultaneously while they are at your performance. However, if 15 different, lengthy films show up online, it illustrates that neither the venue nor the promoter cared at all to provide any level of enforcement. That is harder to defend against.

This is not to mention that in know of a lot of dance studios and school groups ignoring ASCAP. A video or audio track showing up online could lead down a deeper rabbit hole where cases are made for music played without rights.

To give a little perspective on this, trademark law is based on enforcement by the trademark holder. I cannot speak for copyright law, but I imagine it's a similar "use it or lose it" type thing. If Coca Cola has 200 cases of trademark infringement and they only issue cease and desists or lawsuits to a handful of those, the handful that go to court can make a very valid case that they thought it was okay because everybody else was doing it. The only way for Coca Cola to prevent that is to actively seek out infringement cases and take action against as many as possible whether through a cease and desist or through legal action.

With that in mind, holders of intellectual property, trademarks, and copyrights have ample motive to seek out any and all possible infringement cases. Your school's activities may be small game for the rights holders, but to not seek action against you for violations leaves them open to substantial risks when big game comes along. Otherwise big game points to little game and goes "Everyone else was doing it."

 

[Les]

To give a little perspective on this, trademark law is based on enforcement by the trademark holder. I cannot speak for copyright law, but I imagine it's a similar "use it or lose it" type thing. If Coca Cola has 200 cases of trademark infringement and they only issue cease and desists or lawsuits to a handful of those, the handful that go to court can make a very valid case that they thought it was okay because everybody else was doing it. The only way for Coca Cola to prevent that is to actively seek out infringement cases and take action against as many as possible whether through a cease and desist or through legal action.

With that in mind, holders of intellectual property, trademarks, and copyrights have ample motive to seek out any and all possible infringement cases. Your school's activities may be small game for the rights holders, but to not seek action against you for violations leaves them open to substantial risks when big game comes along. Otherwise big game points to little game and goes "Everyone else was doing it."

This is similar to patent holders. If you have several companies copying your copy patented design for a product and don't actively protect your assets, the other company might get away with it. This is why (in both the worlds of copyrights and music) some people get away with a lot while others get shut down right away. Company/Copyright Holder 'A' just might be better at protecting their property than Company/Copyright Holder B.

 

[AudJ]

Regarding the length of time copyright is in effect after death of the composer; I am not positive of the specifics, but my understanding is the family members can extend the copyrights after death. In addition, since most of the music we perform has been arranged or edited, the rights change from those of a single composer. In some cases, the publisher can maintain control of the copyright, in which case the time frame also changes.

In short, In my opinion, there is no way to be certain if some works are in public domain unless they are researched for current copyright.

I agree iThings cause a great deal of stress in this area. There is one local festival that actually escorts parents from the event if they pull out a device. Although that policy solves a miriad of issues and prevents disruption, I can't see it flying in my own auditorium, with the parents of my own students. All I can do is state the policy, and politely redirect obvious infractions. I let administration deal with it beyond that.

 

[MNicolai]

I agree iThings cause a great deal of stress in this area. There is one local festival that actually escorts parents from the event if they pull out a device. Although that policy solves a miriad of issues and prevents disruption, I can't see it flying in my own auditorium, with the parents of my own students. All I can do is state the policy, and politely redirect obvious infractions. I let administration deal with it beyond that.

That they're parents is one part of the issue. A larger issue I've seen is ushers and house management not being comfortable trying to pull someone from the audience during a show. They're rather displeased at the prospect of A) alienating that particular audience member and B) disrupting the nearby audience members during the process of either removing or discouraging that audience member. Concerts aren't as bad as they're tend to be breaks between songs, but theatrical performances are the worst because they're tend to not be good moments for an usher to assert their authority without causing a greater disrupting than the person filming/recording or with their camera/phone out.

I know a growing number of dance studios and high school theater departments that curb this by offering sales of recorded performances. They figure that the best way to discourage parents and family from taking photos and filming videos during shows is to offer a professionally recorded version. Then if someone says, "But that -- that right there is my kid on stage. You're saying I can't record them at all?!?!" the usher can respond with, "We offer a professionally recorded version that we assure you is of much better quality than your phone will capture, and doesn't disturb fellow audience members in the process."

That requires some forethought on the front end of securing the rights to produce the recording. I believe most groups skate by and wait for someone to slap them on the wrist. Others are more particular and reserve that for productions of shows by Shakespeare that are so unequivocally in public domain.

My personal favorite for school events is the 1/2-price dress, which applies more to theater than music. The night before opening, you offer admission to family members of the cast, crew, and pit at 1/2-price, and offer them the ability to take their own photos of their kids on stage. It's understood that if you as a parent want to photograph your kid on stage, you either do it this night or not at all. Generally there tends to be a professional photographer present as well, either hired or invited from the local newspaper.

The most candid opinion I can offer relative to music is, how many parents actually want to listen to their kids' musical performance several months or years after the concert? A video, maybe, for family movie night, but not an audio recording. The quality of a live recording most schools are capable of doesn't attribute itself to being listened to time and time again.

As a music program, if you really want to preserve the performances in time, once a school year or once every couple years book a day or two in a recording studio. Make sure every work performed is a work you can get the rights to, and then produce a CD that's of a quality people will be willing/wanting to listen to time and time again. Something that sounds like it wasn't recorded in a cavern or someone's garage. To that end, in a recording studio you can do a few takes and choose the best, and mic the performers more specifically -- in a live symphony or choir performance, more than a couple microphones tends to freak directors (and performers) out, besides being visually hostile.

Back when my brother was in high school, the jazz band went this route and record a CD. It was enough of a special project that they got a graduate of the music program their who had gone into musical composition to compose the title track, "Chimps on the Loose". It doesn't sound like a professional symphony spent a few weeks in a recording studio recording it, but it's of great enough quality that my ears don't bleed when I want to listen to it. I don't believe they've recorded again in the last 11 years since they recorded that CD, but the tracks they recorded for it have been appropriately memorialized within the department and to the families of the musicians. The track they had composed specifically them gets the most applause every year or so when they play it at their concerts as a matter of tradition.

 

[Joshua Sedgwick]

In my theatre, I bought 3 wide-angle condenser microphones. One hangs above the projector we have hanging center stage about 10 feet into the house and 25 feet up angled center stage, and the other two hang angled on the underside of our box booms on either side about 10 feet into the house and 15 feet up. They are connected to our monitor speaker in the light booth, and connected to a small 4-input mixing board attached to the wall. It is connected via USB to our Windows 8 desktop, and we use audacity. Having the dedicated mixer lets us adjust the level accordingly, and having the connection as USB allows us to record the sound, as well as run sound cues at the same time. The dedicated mixer also allows us to have an output to a camera if a TV station is recording the show, concert, etc. Personally, if you have the budget, I would spend the money on Adobe Soundbooth.

 

[museav]

I don't see the issue as the devices but rather general ignorance of copyright issues and it being part of the venue's responsibility to support copyright and help inform the public.

I think the most misunderstood aspect of copyright is that it relates to any party receiving benefit. That is not limited to financial benefit and can include any form of benefit. When you think about it, anyone wanting to perform a play or piece or record a performance almost by itself reflects there being some associated benefit, otherwise why are they wanting to do it? The very fact that someone feels there is some benefit to performing or recording something almost inherently makes it a copyright issue.

Copyright is a situation of the rightsholder deciding to pursue any alleged violation based on their assuming some damages, again, not limited to financial damages. One aspect of that is that rightsholders may decide to go after certain parties or situations more than others. Since venues aren't as likely to move or disappear and tend to have something of value in the venue itself, they are often prime targets for copyright actions and thus why they are often the party to procure associated rights.

 

[Billizfun2]

I don't see the issue as the devices but rather general ignorance of copyright issues and it being part of the venue's responsibility to support copyright and help inform the public.

I think the most misunderstood aspect of copyright is that it relates to any party receiving benefit. That is not limited to financial benefit and can include any form of benefit. When you think about it, anyone wanting to perform a play or piece or record a performance almost by itself reflects there being some associated benefit, otherwise why are they wanting to do it? The very fact that someone feels there is some benefit to performing or recording something almost inherently makes it a copyright issue.

Copyright is a situation of the rightsholder deciding to pursue any alleged violation based on their assuming some damages, again, not limited to financial damages. One aspect of that is that rightsholders may decide to go after certain parties or situations more than others. Since venues aren't as likely to move or disappear and tend to have something of value in the venue itself, they are often prime targets for copyright actions and thus why they are often the party to procure associated rights.

What I find interesting nowadays is the play-script acquirement. You pay a clearing house to release to you a script (about the same price as 20yrs ago!) and they email you the electronic version of it. With today's technology these scripts should be cheaper (to obtain). What bothers me is that now you have a digital copy of script to which can be stored and/or used at a later time or worse yet sold or given to another venue for their performance. Its like a peer-to-peer file share with play-scripts and its only going to get worse. There must be new legislation to reflect on today's electronic trends to soften the use of using copyrighted material, especially for Educational venues. A professional theater or play-house should have exclusive rights to certain play-scripts while the Educational venues should adhere to others, or "lite" versions.

Its hard to stop recordings and even more daunting to have to pull or interrupt a performance to resolve the issue... but if "lite" versions of a play-script were adopted to be limited in their copyright, then it could be manageable. The idea of having a "Half-Priced Dress Rehearsal Admission" would work if it allowed for pictures and video... then it wouldn't interrupt during the main performances. Its also like going to a corporate sponsored event at a sports stadium and recording the event yourself. We can't beat the system of recording devices and there will always be 'some' that will challenge the policy.

 

[museav]

What I find interesting nowadays is the play-script acquirement. You pay a clearing house to release to you a script (about the same price as 20yrs ago!) and they email you the electronic version of it. With today's technology these scripts should be cheaper (to obtain).

The value involved in copyright is not the actual physical media, it is the value of the work or performance itself and the fact that the costs are the same as 20 years ago does seem to reflect some of the related costs involved actually dropping.

There must be new legislation to reflect on today's electronic trends to soften the use of using copyrighted material, especially for Educational venues. A professional theater or play-house should have exclusive rights to certain play-scripts while the Educational venues should adhere to others, or "lite" versions.

How is an educational venue any different than other venues unless the use is directly related to teaching, which is already treated differently? You have to differentiate a school as a venue from schooling as an activity as it is the activity, not the venue, that creates a different scenario in terms of copyright.

Some examples of this is that someone home schooling children or a community center offering performing arts classes may have a similar situation to a school in terms of it being educational use even though the venue is different. Thus why it is the use rather than the venue that matters.

 

[Billizfun2]

The value involved in copyright is not the actual physical media, it is the value of the work or performance itself and the fact that the costs are the same as 20 years ago does seem to reflect some of the related costs involved actually dropping.


How is an educational venue any different than other venues unless the use is directly related to teaching, which is already treated differently? You have to differentiate a school as a venue from schooling as an activity as it is the activity, not the venue, that creates a different scenario in terms of copyright.

Some examples of this is that someone home schooling children or a community center offering performing arts classes may have a similar situation to a school in terms of it being educational use even though the venue is different. Thus why it is the use rather than the venue that matters.

Yes. The venue shouldn't matter where its held, rather the type of performance of a copyriighted material being presented. A school (for example) is using students, not professional/paid persons, to perform a quality of work based on a previous 'professional' version of script. These students are learning the value, ethics, and skill of being 'performers' and it should be proper to have 'keepsakes' of their work. In a professional setting, where there are paid actors, tech crews, and others... its expected to not be able to take pictures and record video.

On another note: What about the copyright works relating to people 'performing' covers, or 'tributes' to bands. Is the music industry less lenient to pursue people portraying their works than a actual playwright?

 

[DuckJordan]

I don't think there should be a difference. When are you going to teach them that being an actor is about them its about the art? The worst thing I've ever seen "directors" do is make a kid a "star" they get an attitude that its all about them (sound a lot like my generation and younger), then they get into high school or college and realize that they are a diva who will likely never be apart of a real show.

 

[Billizfun2]

I don't think there should be a difference. When are you going to teach them that being an actor is about them its about the art? The worst thing I've ever seen "directors" do is make a kid a "star" they get an attitude that its all about them (sound a lot like my generation and younger), then they get into high school or college and realize that they are a diva who will likely never be apart of a real show.

Thats what I meant by 'value & ethics' of a performance. I have seen many students get the 'future star' attitude and they go around thinking their God's gift to the stage and then bark orders as to how THEY should perform. My argument isn't about teaching these students the 'hows & whys' but rather about the whole copyright issue pertaining to amateur performances not meant for income. I just want to find that loophole that would allow me to run a webcast of the event to help 'share' the exposure of what these students have practiced for.

 

[josh88]

A school (for example) is using students, not professional/paid persons, to perform a quality of work based on a previous 'professional' version of script.

But in part of that performance there are paid people involved, a director, TD, musical director etc, so that doesn't quite hold up. What about programs where the actors have to pay to be involved? Part of the "education" and teaching the kids can be telling them its against copyright to record or broadcast which is how it will be when they leave and enter the real world.

I can think of regional theatres that have low production values and produce... junk, but are "professional" and I know of high schools with $30,000 programs that work with the same scripts and create products that are far more professional.

Have you run any kind of survey to tell you that your webcast would actually be viewed? My experience is that people tend to seek theatre out. I'd rather go to a show than stream it and many people who wouldn't go to a show also wouldn't watch a stream if put up in front of them for free. So you're not increasing their exposure really, while upping the risk that someone might come down on you with the hammer. There's a children's theatre that I've worked with that went bankrupt because someone showed up at a show, saw they were selling things and had made a few changes. The fines killed the company and they'd been doing it for years, they just finally drew the short straw.

 

[Billizfun2]

But in part of that performance there are paid people involved, a director, TD, musical director etc, so that doesn't quite hold up. What about programs where the actors have to pay to be involved? Part of the "education" and teaching the kids can be telling them its against copyright to record or broadcast which is how it will be when they leave and enter the real world.

I can think of regional theaters that have low production values and produce... junk, but are "professional" and I know of high schools with $30,000 programs that work with the same scripts and create products that are far more professional.

Have you run any kind of survey to tell you that your webcast would actually be viewed? My experience is that people tend to seek theater out. I'd rather go to a show than stream it and many people who wouldn't go to a show also wouldn't watch a stream if put up in front of them for free. So you're not increasing their exposure really, while upping the risk that someone might come down on you with the hammer. There's a children's theater that I've worked with that went bankrupt because someone showed up at a show, saw they were selling things and had made a few changes. The fines killed the company and they'd been doing it for years, they just finally drew the short straw.

I did do a survey, and in the context of explaining the survey I added that in no way would streaming be the new form of viewing any production, but rather as an alternative to those that can't make it out to the venue ~ such as the elderly, disabled, or enlisted & overseas. The general consensus was that it was a good idea, however it was a mixed response about free or fee viewing. Most wanted the webcasting to be part of School Club that could also broadcast sport venues. A separate survey on that showed a stronger favoritism towards sports-casting over theatrical productions/concerts. And with sport-casting, sponsors would be acquired to help fund the program.

Obviously, there's still much debate and discussion ahead of me to finalize any plan. So I'll just work on the basics, play around more with different casting sites, and let select people be my beta testers. By the way... just started using Wirecast 5 (computer based video/audio switcher). Has anyone had any experience using this? If so, what is your complete setup that hasn't failed you?

 

[applstew]

I did do a survey, and in the context of explaining the survey I added that in no way would streaming be the new form of viewing any production, but rather as an alternative to those that can't make it out to the venue ~ such as the elderly, disabled, or enlisted & overseas. The general consensus was that it was a good idea, however it was a mixed response about free or fee viewing. Most wanted the webcasting to be part of School Club that could also broadcast sport venues. A separate survey on that showed a stronger favoritism towards sports-casting over theatrical productions/concerts. And with sport-casting, sponsors would be acquired to help fund the program.

Obviously, there's still much debate and discussion ahead of me to finalize any plan. So I'll just work on the basics, play around more with different casting sites, and let select people be my beta testers. By the way... just started using Wirecast 5 (computer based video/audio switcher). Has anyone had any experience using this? If so, what is your complete setup that hasn't failed you?

Copyright issues aside, what you are asking to do in regards to video and audio and streaming is possible and has been done. There are a few solutions out there I would recommend and both have their ups and downs. The first solution to look at is the Newtek Tricaster. They offer both SD and HD formats, can input and output audio, and can also playback files internally. They offer discounts to educational facilities as well. The downside to the tricaster is that it is essentially a windows computer running some software full time so it can crash on occasion. If you have the budget to consider video in the HD route I would recommend looking at Black Magic Design as well. They are almost entirely hardware based in regards to their video switching, offer enough pieces of gear to integrate all of the features you would want in a tricaster unit, and are much more budget friendly in my opinion. I currently have a school who uses an entirely black magic system to record, and stream events for parents and family who cant make it. As for the actual streaming service, they run their own server through the IT department using Adobe Flash Media Server instead of contracting out. Again this has its ups and downs. Let me know if you have any questions.

 

[Billizfun2]

Great resource, thanks! Yes, I know it 'can' be done but just looking for ways of 'how' it can be done. Talking with my IT guys and getting IP and/or server use isn't a problem... but at what cost effective manner is best to present to the Board for approval. I can deal with the copyright issues. My biggest concern is how I can do this on a shoestring budget to make it presentable and then get funds (Board appropriated and/or Sponsors) to upgrade to modern means.

Anyone had any experience with Telestream Wirecast?