Masters vs publishing: what you're actually selling when you sell your catalog.

1. Clear definitions, no jargon

Masters (also called master recordings, sound recording rights, or "the recording") are the copyright in a specific sound recording. Every time a song is recorded, a new master copyright is created. Your studio take of your song is one master. A cover of your song by another artist is a different master. A remix of your song is a third master. Each of those recordings has its own master copyright, owned by whoever paid for, produced, or contractually owns the recording.

Publishing (also called composition rights, songwriter rights, or "the song") is the copyright in the underlying musical work — the melody, lyrics, harmony, and structure. It exists independently of any specific recording. When you wrote your song, you (and your co-writers) created the publishing copyright in the same moment.

The relationship is one-to-many. One composition can have many recordings. The composition has one publishing copyright; each recording has its own master copyright.

If this still feels abstract, the next section makes it concrete with examples.

2. Worked example: covers, samples and remixes

Scenario A: You write and record an original song

You write "Sunset Avenue" with your co-writer. You go into the studio and record it. You release it via your distributor.

• Publishing belongs to you + co-writer (split per your songwriter split sheet, e.g. 50/50).
• Master belongs to you (and possibly your producer or label, per your master split sheet).
• When the track streams: master-side royalty flows through your distributor; publishing-side royalty flows through ASCAP/BMI/SGAE/SACEM/PRS/GEMA and the mechanical society (MLC/MCPS) to you and your co-writer.

Scenario B: Someone covers your song

Another artist records a cover of "Sunset Avenue" without changing the song.

• Publishing still belongs to you + co-writer. The cover artist did not create the composition.
• Master of the cover belongs to the cover artist (or their label).
• When the cover streams: the cover artist's distributor gets the master royalty. You and your co-writer still get the publishing royalty through your PROs, because the underlying composition is yours.

Scenario C: You cover a famous song

You record a cover of a famous song.

• Publishing belongs to the original songwriter / their publisher. Not you.
• Master of your cover belongs to you.
• When your cover streams: you get the master royalty via your distributor. The original songwriter gets the publishing royalty.

This is why so many independent artists do well covering classics: they earn master-side income on streams without owning the underlying composition.

Scenario D: A producer samples your song in a new track

A producer takes 4 bars of your master and builds a new song around it.

• This requires both a master clearance (from you, the master owner) and a publishing clearance (from you + your co-writer, the publishing owners).
• Negotiated terms typically split future royalties between the new track's contributors and the sampled work's contributors. Sample clearances are their own deep topic and usually involve a music lawyer.

Scenario E: A DJ remixes your track

Same as samples — the remixer needs master clearance from you and (usually) publishing clearance too. If the remix is officially licensed, the original master and publishing owners typically receive a percentage of the remix's revenue.

The pattern in all five scenarios: master copyright is per recording, publishing copyright is per song. Selling one does not automatically sell the other.

3. What each right actually generates

Master income streams

• DSP streaming royalties. Master-side payments from Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube Music, Amazon, Tidal, Deezer, Pandora, TikTok and others, flowing through your distributor.
• Beatport / dance store income. For electronic catalogs, Beatport, Traxsource, Juno Download and similar stores pay master-side.
• Sync fees (master side). When a TV show, film, ad or video game uses your recording, they pay a master sync fee to you (separate from the publishing sync fee paid to the songwriter).
• Neighbouring rights. Income from performances of your sound recording in public (radio, TV, bars, gyms) collected via SoundExchange (US), AGEDI (Spain), PPL (UK), GVL (Germany) and similar bodies in other territories.
• Physical sales (vinyl, CDs). Direct revenue from physical product where applicable.
• Mechanical-style payments for downloads. Master-side share of paid downloads on iTunes/Beatport.

Publishing income streams

• Performance royalties via PROs. ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, SGAE, SACEM, PRS, GEMA and others pay for public performance of your composition — including streams (yes, streams also generate publishing performance royalties), radio play, live performances, TV broadcasts, and venue play.
• Mechanical royalties. For each reproduction of the song (streams, downloads, physical), a mechanical royalty is owed on the composition. In the US, this is collected by the MLC. In the UK, by MCPS. Different territories have their own mechanism.
• Sync fees (publishing side). When a TV show, film, ad or video game uses a recording, they pay a publishing sync fee in addition to the master sync fee. The publishing fee goes to the songwriter / publisher.
• Print music income. Sheet music, songbooks, educational use of your composition.
• Cover song income. If anyone else records your composition, you earn publishing royalties on their streams forever.

The key economic distinction

Master income flows through commercial intermediaries (distributors, sync agencies, neighbouring rights bodies) and is generally more volatile. It tracks DSP economics and consumer behaviour.

Publishing income flows through statutory and society infrastructure (PROs, mechanical societies) that has existed for over a century. It is structurally more predictable, has slower decay curves, and continues paying for decades after a release — as long as the composition itself remains in use anywhere.

This is why a track that earned $20K in master royalties last year might earn only $4K in publishing royalties — but the publishing $4K is much more likely to still be $3K in fifteen years, while the master $20K may have decayed to $2K.

4. Why SpinFund typically buys masters only

Most SpinFund deals are master-only buyouts. There are three reasons.

It's better for the artist. For an artist who writes their own material, publishing income pays for decades through PROs. Selling publishing converts that long-tail income into a lump sum, which is fine if the artist needs the cash, but for many artists keeping publishing is the smarter long-term financial choice. A master-only deal gives liquidity while preserving the lifelong income stream.

It's faster. Master ownership transfer is well-understood and verifiable through distributor records. Publishing involves PRO registrations, co-writer acknowledgements, mechanical society notifications, and territorial transfers that can add weeks or months to a deal.

It's cleaner for the buyer too. Master rights pay on a faster cycle (1-3 month delay) and are easier to model and exploit. Publishing rights pay on a slower, more variable cycle (3-12 months) and require more administration infrastructure to collect properly.

5. When we do buy publishing too

There are specific cases where SpinFund will buy publishing rights alongside masters or as a publishing-led deal.

• Artist explicitly wants a full exit. Some artists want to close the chapter completely and get one lump sum for everything. We respect that and structure accordingly.
• Estate / inheritance situations. When the catalog is inherited and the heirs want a clean liquidation, publishing usually gets included.
• Publishing-led catalogs. Some catalogs (especially singer-songwriter / folk / Americana) generate more publishing income than master income because their compositions get covered by others. In these cases buying publishing makes economic sense.
• Sync-heavy catalogs. When a catalog has strong sync placement history, holding both masters and publishing gives the buyer cleaner sync licensing because they only need to clear with themselves.
• Co-writer consolidation deals. Sometimes a deal involves buying out fractional publishing from inactive co-writers to clean up administration.

If you're considering a publishing-inclusive deal, expect a higher headline number but a meaningfully different long-term outcome. Talk it through with a music lawyer and CPA before signing. See our how to sell music masters guide for the full process.

6. What happens to songwriter splits when you sell masters

Short answer: nothing changes. Songwriter splits are tied to the publishing copyright, not the master.

Example: You co-wrote "Sunset Avenue" with your collaborator, with publishing split 50/50. You also paid for the recording and own 100% of the master. You sell the master to SpinFund.

• The master sale transfers your 100% master ownership to SpinFund.
• Your collaborator's 50% publishing ownership is completely untouched. They keep collecting their 50% of publishing royalties through their PRO forever.
• Your 50% publishing ownership is also untouched. You keep collecting your 50% of publishing royalties through your PRO forever.
• SpinFund collects all master royalties (DSP, sync master side, neighbouring rights) on the recording.

This is one of the reasons master-only deals are simpler than publishing-inclusive deals: you don't need your co-writers to sign anything related to the master transfer (they may need to acknowledge ownership of the master if they had a share, but their publishing is unaffected).

If you are going to sell publishing, every co-writer needs to be involved — they own their share of the publishing and you cannot sell their share without their consent and signature. This is why fragmented splits with unreachable co-writers tank publishing-inclusive deals.

7. Decision framework: what should you sell?

Walk yourself through these questions before you decide.

Profile 1: Indie artist who writes and produces own music

You're the songwriter, the producer, and the performer. Your music is yours start to finish.

Recommendation: sell masters, keep publishing. Your publishing income will pay you through PROs for decades. Master sale gives you the lump sum without sacrificing the long-tail composition income. This is the highest-value path for most independent artists.

Profile 2: Producer who builds beats and licenses to artists

You produce instrumentals and sell or lease them to other artists who then write top-lines.

Recommendation: depends on the deal structure with your artists. If you retained percentage publishing on each beat (typical 50/50 producer/topliner split), keep publishing for long-tail income. If you sold beats outright with no publishing share, you mostly have masters to sell anyway.

Profile 3: Performance-only artist with hired songwriters

You perform but don't write. Your songs are written by other writers (paid as work-for-hire or with split sheets).

Recommendation: master-only sale is most of what you have. You probably don't own meaningful publishing on these works, so the question of selling publishing barely applies. Focus on the master sale.

Profile 4: Estate or inheritance

You inherited a catalog and want to liquidate.

Recommendation: consider publishing-inclusive sale. If long-tail PRO administration is a burden, including publishing in the sale gives a clean exit. Get tax advice — the basis treatment of inherited catalog rights can be favorable.

Profile 5: Active DJ / producer with growing electronic catalog

You're touring, releasing regularly, and have a back catalog of 30-100+ released tracks.

Recommendation: master-only sale, often with a carve-out structure. Sell the back catalog masters for liquidity, keep publishing for long-tail PRO income, keep newer or signature releases that anchor your live set. This is the most common SpinFund deal in our specialty genres.

Profile 6: Singer-songwriter heading toward retirement

You've written and recorded for 20+ years and are slowing down.

Recommendation: depends on cash needs. If you want full liquidity, publishing-inclusive sale at a higher headline price is reasonable. If you want to leave heirs an income stream that pays for decades, keep publishing.

Whichever profile you fit, the underlying math is in our valuation guide and the 2026 market context is in our multiples guide. For specific Spotify-focused questions, see how to sell Spotify royalties.

And again — none of this is legal or tax advice. Talk to your music lawyer and your CPA before signing anything.