De-valuing live music...

[OldGit]

Semi-pro Vs Amateur: the difference is not about how much you get paid, it's about how well you do the job.

[peted]

I'll play some gigs for cost of fuel/drinks because my playing is a hobby. My main income is my day job. Why is that wrong?

If you're main source of income is from playing music, then you've got that time 9-5 Monday to Friday when I'm doing my regular job to:

* Promote your act so you've got a bigger following and more likely to get booked than me
* Practice so you are a better musician than me
* Augment your gigging income by offering lessons, or working in recording studios etc.

You can't blame me for de-valuing music. The entry-bar is actually quite low to be a musician. It's fun work, so you can't really expect to be paid very much for it - especially if you only do the fun bits like playing gigs.

Edited July 14, 2008 by peted

[Adrenochrome]

Pretty much all the semi-pro bands I know won't undercut other bands even if they don't need the money. There is a fair amount of solidarity between the bands in the Yorkshire area. I think this also applies the full-timers but I hardly know any in person.

[Jase]

[quote name='Cantdosleepy' post='238940' date='Jul 14 2008, 08:39 AM']Couldn't agree more, Jase. What we need is some kind of licencing system. I can't believe that just anybody can buy an instrument and start having fun with music. Don't these people realise that mediocre cover bands want to be paid more money????? The nerve of these people with 'guitars' forming 'bands'.

But we need some kind of authority who has the power to decide who is allowed to play music. Who could have the moral authority to stop our fair venues being 'littered' with bands, driving down the vital expenses of Mustang-Sally-playing pub rockers? Perhaps you, Jase, could be our arbiter of taste?[/quote]

Thank you very much, I shall start by building "fun venues"

[Cantdosleepy]

Will there be a ball pit? Please, say there will be a ball pit.


Helter skelters?


Ice cream factory?


Paper hats on birthdays?

[Adrenochrome]

[quote name='Cantdosleepy' post='238981' date='Jul 14 2008, 10:41 AM']Will there be a ball pit? Please, say there will be a ball pit.


Helter skelters?


Ice cream factory?


Paper hats on birthdays?[/quote]

Has to have balloons as well or I'm not going.

[Jase]

[quote name='Cantdosleepy' post='238981' date='Jul 14 2008, 09:41 AM']Will there be a ball pit? Please, say there will be a ball pit.


Helter skelters?


Ice cream factory?


Paper hats on birthdays?[/quote]

[Dubs]

[quote name='Mikey D' post='238818' date='Jul 13 2008, 10:45 PM']I have obviously done my fair share of gigs as favours, for a burger, for stupid money considering distance etc but recently I've just been thinking why sell yourself short. As said, I'm not going to go out for less than I think I should, if I get the gigs great, if I don't, nobodys time is wasted. I feel that I have a value for what i bring to the music, thats why we put all the graft into be as "good" as we can be. Maybe as I said earlier the other bands/musicians etc put their value lower for whatever reasons, but in general, I'm not sure its good overall. Although as it has been said, the work (at what level you want to play/pay) is out there if you want to get it. And of course, I won't be playig at the establishment that made me type the original post.[/quote]

I think that’s a valid perspective, and a very poignant one for a lot of people in the industry. One of my lectures at Uni always told me to never sell myself short because that does more damage than good for myself as well as others in the industry because it puts a lower price on my skills and puts people in the mindset that they can hire professionals at cheap rates. He made the point that it’s better to do a one off gigs/mixes/masters/recording sessions etc for free (but to make the point that it’s a one off) than to accept a small payment, because you’re then selling yourself at that lower price so people will expect to be able to book you at that price again…if you get what I mean – I’m terrible at explaining myself sometimes.

Basically everyone has their price, if you’re not offered what you’re worth then walk away from it, don’t accept a lower fee. That’s the advice I’ve received, and seems like pretty sound advice to me. It’s people accepting low fees that’s ultimately causing bar managers/promoters/venues to hire cheaper and cheaper acts to get the punters through the doors. As has been said before – if you’re worth a respectable fee then don’t accept a low fee or don’t work with tight-fisted venues.

[jakenewmanbass]

I can understand the thinking of 'music being de-valued' and having been a pro for a shade under 20 yrs I've been party to plenty of "bloody semi-pros" conversations with colleagues.
My own take on it is that people moan in their workplace whether or not there is an actual issue of whatever nature. I don't think that semi pro outfits do any harm to the scene, as pros can expect to be judged by the standards of their output, this will keep them in work, semi pro outfits rarely can compete for quality and commercial expedience and on that basis pros who are good enough will have whatever work is out there.

The notion that there is an erosion of work opportunities specifically for pro players by semi pro players says more about the standard of players that call themselves pro, and about the plethora of colleges churning out "arts" grads who don't stand a chance in the high skill, high demand workplace of the professional musician, than it does about some idea that semi pros are "lowering the bar"

It can be tough to make a living from playing (although really good bass players always seem to work)
There are other factors in the industry that have eroded work opportunities for players and this will put a squeeze on the margins for pros who now have to consider work they would have sniffed at 20 yrs ago.

Finally, I feel the atmosphere of the original question is a little mean spirited and while I feel for young guys trying to make a start as a pro I feel compelled to say that in my mind music is not the exclusive preserve of pro players, it's for people of all shapes, sizes, colours and standards to enjoy. That is what is so great about music and I think if anything the question in hand is in danger of eroding just that, the joy in music. Do yourself a favour, keep the joy don't give in to the grumbling, quality of life is much more important than the difference between 50 and 100 quid for a little gig.

[Maxcat]

+1 to Jakesbass. At last we come to the common denominator. Music is supposed to be fun. Fun for those experiencing it and fun for those producing it. Whilst I feel for the originals out there trying to make it/maintain it, we cant forget that music is all things to all men and in this age of the State telling us with increasing regularity what to do, what to say or not say, how to feel and how to act, to limit a musicians enjoyment by implying that the music that he loves playing is somehow devalued by the fact that he plays covers and not originals is at the least unkind.(self edited) and at worst [u]another[/u] example of uncalled for censorship.The local music scene is made up of both covers and original bands, and long may that continue. Im off to do a dub bassline to Spiderman now. A cover, but not as we know it!

[molan]

Another +1 to Jakesbass.

What a well written, reasoned & thoughtful response

See, takes a 'seasoned' pro to really know his stuff

[BigBeefChief]

Jakebass isn't a pro. He just likes to claim he is.

I've seem him down Tonbridge Market flogging lighters: 3 for a pound.

I wouldn't mind but their faulty and leak as soon as you get them home.

[MananaMan]

[quote name='OldGit' post='238961' date='Jul 14 2008, 10:13 AM']The 300 people packing the party band gig on a Friday and Saturday and bopping to Mustang Sally are not necessarily going to come out on a Tuesday to the same venue to watch a band playing originals they have never heard before, no matter how good they are (because, of course, [b]they will have no idea how good they are unless someone tells them[/b].)
A covers band playing Mustang Sally or a tribute band is a safe option, they know what they will get, even if they have never heard of the band.[/quote]

I think the main thrust of my point got lost t in a swathe of vitriol...

Its the section in bold that is, to my mind, the most important thing here. There are enough quality bands, even enough quality original bands (possibly...), to fill all the venues in the country every night. The reason they aren't booked is that most promoters seem to run about booking anything they can that looks and sounds like whatever's popular at the moment to cash in on current trends. This is because British people seem to be petrified of music they've not heard of before.

For example, I worked as Promotions Manager for the venue I worked at, I could book five weeks straight of top quality acts that were as diverse as they were excellent to watch in both performance and quality of song writing - regardless of genre - and have no more than thirty people turn up, but book some bland talentless pricks that have the right designer and haircuts to be in NME / Radio 1 that week and I've got queues running round the block...

I can't help but think that covers bands that play the pub and club circuit (I'm not doubting the value of covers bands for weddings / corporate do's - the right thing for the right place) are the live band equivalent of Walkabout - churning out lowest common denominator stuff that totally devalues the "traditional boozer" that is originals bands - some of them might well be slightly dingy and scary, but they all have their own charm. If these things didn't exist then the public would still hanker after live music, and they'd be happy to go and investigate whatever is out there.

Or maybe I'm just an optimist.

[Count Bassy]

The problem seems to arise from the fact that music (& I suppose performing arts in general) is one of the few areas that is a profession to some while is a great hobby to others.

The pro needs to work for a decent fee to eram a living, and I can understand them occassionally getting frustrated when they see themselves being undercut by ameteurs. As several have said however there is a big difference between a pro and an ametuer, so how often are the pro and the ameteur truley in direct competion? I suppose the argument is that the ameteur bands going out for low fees generally drags the whole market down.

On the other hand, most ameteurs beyond a certain age have no illusions of ever becoming a pro, but many still want to feel the buzz of performing to an audience. These are not pro's and cannot command a professional level fee. For many of these people the choice is to go out cheap or not to go out at all, and they shouldn't really be criticised for choosing the former.
Even those ametuers wanting to become pro's have to start somewhere, and I'm sure many of the pros have done cheap gigs when they were trying to get established.

[bass_ferret]

I think there is a bit of crossed wires going on here. The OP and his sympathisers are not pro's like jake who do recording/pit/shows etc to put a roof over their faimilies heads and food on the table, but are trying to make a go of a band/ensemble playing original music. This can be a full time job with the old driving round the country in a beat up transit stereotype, for f*** all money but hey, they are young, free and single.

The problem with this is if you dont get signed or move up the food chain gigs wise you can soon get really pissed off. And the thing is a lot of the medium sized venues are booking a lot of tribute acts rather than original bands. Even second division signed bands that were always looking for local support have lost out to this phenomena.

I dont think the Legions and WMC's that I play in have ever had much of a market for originals bands.

[Mikey D]

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about originals vs covers.

I'm also not saying people shouldn't play, my main point was about putting a value on what you do. I feel some people under value it and as such people who book it feel obliged to get it for that amount all the time, or ideally even cheaper.

Maybe I came across as a bit negative in my original post, but was really quite annoyed (not a mood I am in that often).

As stated, you don't have to go out for an amount you don't feel is worth it. Other aspects of the gig may outweight the actually cash amount being offered.

Maybe I should have phrased my question.point differently, but some good comments have come up on this thread.

[markytbass]

[quote]QUOTE (markytbass @ Jul 13 2008, 11:13 PM)
The thing that amazes me is that one venue charges £13 to get in then 2 weeks later you can see the same band in the same town for £5.


It's band's responsibility to avoid that happening.
If you want to bring a whole load of mates/followers to an "important" gig to impress a booker, agent, whatever, and that gig charges money on the door then manage things so that you don't play the same town for a few weeks either side of that gig, and certainly not for free.[/quote]

I probably didn't make my point very clear, It was late and I was ready to hit the sack. I don't think the bands get a bad deal at the venues in question but at £13 each I think the punters do. The venue in question is renowned for charging high entrance fee's and as a punter the more money I spend getting in the less I have to spend on ale. £13 for a covers band is too much in my opinion, I saw The Bluetones last November and The Buzzcocks last month (well the two remaining members) for less than a tenner each.

I think some bands (originals and covers) expect too much too soon, take the last originals band I gigged with for example, they were a bit over ambitious and the guitarist booked us a couple of giggs (just us no one else). We ended up playing to two empty house's and due to a contract that he signed we owed them at the end of the night. We would have been better off doing support slots for free.

[Rich]

[quote name='OldGit' post='238849' date='Jul 13 2008, 11:41 PM']I play for free sometimes too, I even shell out to drive 200 miles to play for free if the craic or cause is right 'cos I love playing. Originals, covers, jam sessions, guest spots, whatever
The fees I earn from the band (after tax and expenses) just off set the costs of doing charity and free gigs and it's not my main source of income.[/quote]Hear hear, ditto, +1, and so on. I'm in a band of 13 so it has to be a substantial payday to cover more than my diesel and strings, but I'll do it every time because I love playing.
That's all the "justification" you're going to get from me, "moral" or otherwise.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='239392' date='Jul 14 2008, 06:31 PM']Jakebass isn't a pro. He just likes to claim he is.

I've seem him down Tonbridge Market flogging lighters: 3 for a pound.

I wouldn't mind but their faulty and leak as soon as you get them home.[/quote]

Um er no er that was er my um er twin brother er.... yeah that was it it was him, not me, no guv not me. er er er yeah



*[size=1]sh*t[/size]*

Edited July 14, 2008 by jakesbass

[jakenewmanbass]

Seriously though folks, thanks for the kind comments.

[Paul Cooke]

[quote name='blamelouis' post='238956' date='Jul 14 2008, 10:08 AM']Theres a band where i live undercutting everybody charging £30 a man !
And they arent kids they've been playing a few years![/quote]

that's just "criminal"... you need to send Big Vinny round to re-educate them...

[pete.young]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='239392' date='Jul 14 2008, 06:31 PM']Jakebass isn't a pro. He just likes to claim he is.

I've seem him down Tonbridge Market flogging lighters: 3 for a pound.

I wouldn't mind but their faulty and leak as soon as you get them home.[/quote]
Sheer class. BBC, don't ever change.

The trouble is that it's all very well having principles, but the market will decide, and the people running the venues are in an amazingly strong position.

I think the decline is gradual. My grandfather was a pro musician in the BBC Symphony Orchestra, and those dudes made good money because they were in demand. Now everything's a commodity, people expect to get their music for nothing and it's filtering down to the live music scene. Ultimately we're all going to end up as folk musicians, playing what we want to play. After all, if there's no money, what incentive is there to compromise on what you want to play?

[inyabass]

Let's face it. In the music biz, there is a huge divide between the top artists/bands and the rest. I have a mate who plays bass with a named artist. He makes £1500 for practicing and £3000-£4000 for doing a gig. Compare that to semi-pros who make £100 a gig or less sometimes. Live music at that level will always mostly be a labour of love and it's something that you just have to live with I'm afraid.

[ARGH]

I just wish there was more cash,I see the crowds,I see the draw,and some tightwads wont dip their hands in and pay another 20 quid.

[Mikey D]

[quote name='inyabass' post='239597' date='Jul 14 2008, 10:38 PM']Let's face it. In the music biz, there is a huge divide between the top artists/bands and the rest. I have a mate who plays bass with a named artist. He makes £1500 for practicing and £3000-£4000 for doing a gig. Compare that to semi-pros who make £100 a gig or less sometimes. Live music at that level will always mostly be a labour of love and it's something that you just have to live with I'm afraid.[/quote]

Does he ever need a dep!?