tegs07

11 hours ago, peteb said:

I saw the Hamsters a few times. They were professional musicians who toured around the country playing dedicated music venues, rather than local pubs putting live music on a weekend. They had a policy of insisting that punters had to pay to see them and refused to play places that didn't charge for admission. 

Insert: So your saying that they were a band that got good enough to attract a following and charge for entry.
 

 

I agree with them that people should ideally at least pay a nominal fee to see live music, but unfortunately that is not necessarily how the general local pub gig market works. 

Insert: See above

Personally I believe making punters pay to watch unknown bands in pubs will be a barrier to entry for most artists starting their career in music, particularly artists that don’t do covers. 

 Pick up the pieces- AWB

10 hours ago, Daz39 said:

Nobody needs music? Why does it exist then? That’s along the lines of letting all creatives suffer as most seem to be doing in these constrained times: after all what have they done for us? (Goes the refrain)

Nobody needs average music. I wouldn’t pay an amateur plaster to get better honing their craft on my walls. A decent plasterer will always have work but needs some way of getting the skills required.

Free pub gigs and community festivals IMO are a good thing and a rite of passage for most musicians. My teenage years were spent watching various mates bands play pubs. If people had to pay to get in then they would never have got the gigs to start with. Most of them were crap, but it was always fun.

At least one of the guys I went to see got good enough to make a living from playing their own music. Everyone has to start somewhere. 

Edit: As I have said this exists in every industry. In my own career I have seen endless paper CCNA and MCSE guys shocked that no company will let them loose on their network. They start on a help desk and work their way up. The hours spent and cash spent on the exams is the start not the end of the journey.

12 minutes ago, peteb said:

That is exactly how it works for pub gigs!

However, when the tribute or the original band that I'm in play gigs, then people have to pay to see us. How much we make or, in the case of the originals band, whether they are paying to see the main band rather than us is another matter. Completely different types of markets. 

Back in the day I would pay to see the hamsters frequently even though plenty of other middle aged  blokes were playing blues/ rock for free in pubs. I would even drive miles after work. The Hamsters had an audience and made a living playing pubs and bike shows etc as they were better than the amateurs. The vast amount of people playing pubs won’t make a living playing their music. I don’t feel this is down to the competition playing for free.

42 minutes ago, peteb said:

But people want to go and see a band playing cover tunes in a pub and to drink beer. No one is forcing them (at least not for my bands)!

If they really  want to see you they will be willing to pay. If they aren’t willing to pay then it’s not because another band is playing for free. It doesn’t work like that.

3 minutes ago, peteb said:

I'm sorry mate, but you have no idea of what a market is. 

There can be a market for anything where there is a demand and a supplier can meet that demand, i.e. in this case a pub with a demand for bands to play and therefore encourage punters to go to that pub and drink beer. It doesn't matter if it is a necessity or if the musicians playing those gigs have other jobs - it is still an economic activity and there is a market for it. 

No one needs a luxury car and of course, people doing DIY their own properties has an effect on the market for tradesmen to carry out work on people's homes. 

To have a market you need a willing consumer. You can’t force people to pay for something they don’t need or want. I don’t need an average pub band and plenty of times I don’t want one either.

5 minutes ago, peteb said:

Why don't you believe that the live music is a free market?? It is a very good example of how a market operates and how it can be distorted.

Nobody needs music. They chose it. Artists that are good enough to make a living from music will do so. People doing it for free won’t take anything from them as they are simply good enough to get paid for what they do.

I don’t think it can be compared to other market activities unless you compare qualified plumbers, electricians or decorators with DIY folk.

3 hours ago, Steve Browning said:

... The live music scene is a free market. Cheap bands drive down the price for other bands, that's a fact as a matter of simple economics but it won't ever stop. Everyone has to accept it in the same way uninsured drivers drive up the cost of insurance. We may not approve but we won't stop it.

I don’t believe this for a moment. I am happy to pay for decent live music from artists that connect with an audience and have something special. These artists find an audience and they do so from hard graft and something I don’t have or really understand.

They will always outshine the talented amateur that plays for free. The sad reality is they are rare. Really rare.

Making a living from original material is really hard and few have the qualities to do so no matter how gifted they may be. Music as with photography or literature is really hard to make money from. I know countless gifted painters and photographers. I don’t know any that make a living from their original art though.I do know several that have managed to find ways of making a living by being creative with the talent they have though. Function bands, cover bands, wedding photographers, sign writers etc. A compromise maybe? Others get a career doing other work and play for fun (often for free) whenever they can.

1 hour ago, peteb said:

Decent bands get paid

That’s all folks. Nothing to do with Judas hobbyists. Get good. Get paid. It takes time and starts from scratch. Some go from zero to a salary. Most don’t. 

1 hour ago, SteveXFR said:

As I see it, if a profit making event or venue is advertising live music as an attraction the band should always be paid. If a pub uses a band to get more people in to buy beer, it's only right the band gets a share of that extra profit 

The problem is I have seen hundreds of pub gig bands. Apart from very rare occasions they are crap. Even the ones that are competent musicians rarely have any material that will get them out of a pub circuit. If I had to pay I wouldn’t go and I was (less so these days) a member of a dying breed that sought out live bands playing their own material.

The tradition of passing round a hat and allowing bands to sell Merchandise and cd’s is probably the only way a venue can offer some way of a band or artist getting paid if they are an unknown quantity.

Very few bands at pub level playing their own tunes will attract a paying audience.

5 minutes ago, Daz39 said:

There’s a difference between unpaid and very poorly paid. Also a difference between unpaid overtime (implicit in some employment contracts) and volunteering.

Personally I don’t expect to be paid for skills I haven’t honed nor to be given opportunities I haven’t earned. If I started a career as a musician I would expect to start at the bottom and work my way up. Pub gigs and local events are unlikely to be paid.

6 minutes ago, Barking Spiders said:

Question is, why should punters pay to watch bands they've never heard of or which don't have an established following on the circuit. Surely it should be a privilege for any untried and untested band to have the opportunity to perform to an audience?

This is exactly the issue. In the early days I would see a lot of gigs. Most of the ones that I paid for (that had little media coverage) I had seen at various festivals (where I suspect they played for free). I saw plenty of pub bands who I would never have paid to watch as they were crap. 

Just now, Daz39 said:

Nonsense! I’ve learned my career skills while working and being paid. If I needed training they would pay for that too.

I’ve frequently volunteered to work for no pay as well as putting in many hours of study to get the skills required for the next step up. Any professional has to put in unpaid or very poorly paid time to get the qualifications and experience to progress. A working musician at the dog and duck is doing the plasterers apprenticeship, the TV execs runner days or the surgeons sleep deprived, gruelling junior doctor days but that’s just my opinion.

2 minutes ago, Daz39 said:

If I were to change careers I would still expect to get paid by my new employers, even if I needed time to become fully productive.

In order to progress in my current career I have put in hundreds of hours of unpaid labour over the last couple of decades. People don’t pay for practice in any industry.

19 minutes ago, Newfoundfreedom said:

Which is a perfectly valid point for someone who has been done the block a bit, and been a musician for many years with plenty of experience under their belt.

Not so much for a 17 year old in their first original material band trying to even find an audience to play to. 

Or someone in their late 40’s/early 50’s who hasn’t played in a band since their teenage years. If I were to form a band again I would expect not to get paid until I got good enough. In the same way as someone who is in an established  but not particularly successful local band would play Glastonbury for free (entry to festival provided for free) or an established middling band would have their management pay or get paid beans to support a big name act on a large tour. It’s all relative to where you are in the food chain.

I think I would need to pay to get anyone to listen to me play live.

As others have said though an entire line up of unpaid bands and an alcohol free bar. Throw in a vegan BBQ and you have the worst event ever. 
I think free support acts to a pro headline isn’t a bad way of getting exposure and experience but can’t see all the bands being unpaid as being good for musicians or audience.

Lay lady lay - Dylan 

8 hours ago, Ricky Rioli said:

I bought the Tranvision Vamp album and after one listen was so horrified with myself that I sold it to a friend for £1.50

I saw them live at Brixton Academy I think. A school friend was obsessed with Wendy James and persuaded me to go in return for him going to a gig of my choice. They weren’t great but it was worth the fun of watching his face as soon as Loop (my choice) started their set a few weeks later.

Going Up To The Country, Paint My Mailbox Blue - Taj Mahal 

The Queen is dead - The Smiths 

3 minutes ago, MacDaddy said:

Are you suggesting rich and successful bands can only write about being rich and successful?

Nope I’m saying what motivates and inspires you at 50 will be a bit different than what motivates and inspires you at 20. Record companies and fans to an extent may also make demands that an artist should not change or try new ideas.

3 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

No. 

Not sure if your being sarcastic or not. Of course it doesn’t matter what I like. I was only trying to illustrate that good music finds an audience. I feel for artists that get pigeon holed and are expected to conform to type throughout their career.
Hard to have any musical integrity if your expected to churn out stuff year after year that may no longer be reflective of your current life experience.

Teenage kicks - undertones

I’m glad you live way up North. Could someone please buy this before I get silly ideas for a road trip. Lovely bass and a bit of a bargain IMO.

1 hour ago, Bassassin said:

Top Twenty was the Woolies brand

I think The Cure’s first couple of albums were recorded with a pickup from a Top Twenty guitar. The record company apparently refused to let him use the guitar so he bought a Fender and swapped the pickups out.