Apparently…..it isn’t a job

[tegs07]

8 minutes ago, EBS_freak said:

Screw asking musicians to play for a decent money. It's nothing but a hobby.

 

What I want to know is, despite all these "hobbyist" gardeners, why can't I find anybody to sort out my back lawn.

 

Raging.

I mess about with a bit of gardening and plumbing. I’m about as good as I am at playing the bass. I could charge you money to do it? Or you may just go to a check-a-trade website and find someone qualified, with experience and good reviews.

Pretty much all the musos I know making a living have booking agents and get work via word of mouth in much the same way. All of them started off playing pubs, school events, community type things for free or low pay at some stage in their careers.

 

I don’t think it’s as clear cut as being made out. There needs to be provision for all stages of a musician’s career.

Edited October 14, 2022 by tegs07

[EBS_freak]

Funnily enough, this week, I've had an agency contact me about doing a carnival 3 and a half hours way. 7 piece band. Fee? Free.

 

I politely declined. The band would be heavily in debt for petrol costs for the 7 hours round trip for starters before we'd even played a note.

 

Interesting enough, I went to the carnival page, and there they are, no surprise, asking for donations to fund it. I found it interesting that the ask for anybody freebies, musicians are the first to target. I wonder if they paid to go through an agency to avoid the onslaught from the bands.

[tegs07]

3 minutes ago, EBS_freak said:

Funnily enough, this week, I've had an agency contact me about doing a carnival 3 and a half hours way. 7 piece band. Fee? Free.

 

I politely declined. The band would be heavily in debt for petrol costs for the 7 hours round trip for starters before we'd even played a note.

 

Interesting enough, I went to the carnival page, and there they are, no surprise, asking for donations to fund it. I found it interesting that the ask for anybody freebies, musicians are the first to target. I wonder if they paid to go through an agency to avoid the onslaught from the bands.

I don’t blame you. If you are at a stage in your career where you can charge for your services why do it for free?

 

I doubt that event has any accomplished artists  playing and people will see that reflected in the lineup and ticket price.

[Tim2291]

7 minutes ago, tegs07 said:

I mess about with a bit of gardening and plumbing. I’m about as good as I am at playing the bass. I could charge you money to do it? Or you may just go to a check-a-trade website and find someone qualified, with experience and good reviews.

Pretty much all the musos I know making a living have booking agents and get work via word of mouth in much the same way. All of them started off playing pubs, school events, community type things for free or low pay at some stage in their careers.

 

I don’t think it’s as clear cut as being made out. There needs to be provision for all stages of a musician’s career.

You mentioned in a previous post that you wouldn't pay to go and see a local band... How are they supposed to move forward with their career if people can't be bothered to go and see them? A local gig is what, £5 a ticket? You may see some awful music, but you may also see something spectacular! Even the Beatles started as a local band! As @EBS_freak has pointed out above though, we are targeted at all levels to play for "free" and "exposure" so we aren't really talking about the just starting out local bands here. I stand by it, if the promoter wants them to play they should be paid. If they are trying to get exposure, go to open mic nights etc.

[tegs07]

4 minutes ago, Tim2291 said:

You mentioned in a previous post that you wouldn't pay to go and see a local band... How are they supposed to move forward with their career if people can't be bothered to go and see them? A local gig is what, £5 a ticket? You may see some awful music, but you may also see something spectacular! Even the Beatles started as a local band! As @EBS_freak has pointed out above though, we are targeted at all levels to play for "free" and "exposure" so we aren't really talking about the just starting out local bands here. I stand by it, if the promoter wants them to play they should be paid. If they are trying to get exposure, go to open mic nights etc.

I did pay for years as a teenager.

Most artists were average, some sloppy and some downright abysmal. Very occasionally there was a gem.

Im in my 50s now and still support live music but rarely want to go out and find bands. I don’t have the time. Often it’s bands I have heard on Spotify or at a festival on some lowly stage that I pay to see when playing locally.

Edited October 14, 2022 by tegs07

[EBS_freak]

I used to watch a lot of originals bands whilst at Uni. Even caught Coldplay before they were. a blip on anybody's radar. Really enjoyed their stuff and even then, you could see they had the potential to go places. This was pre them releasing Parachutes... and for me, when Coldplay sounded the best (that first album is a pure gem)... before they became the stadium anthem band that they are now.

 

Grassroots music is defo on the decline, which is a real big shame. People (as in the wider public) don't want to hear new music it would seem. It seems to be largely dictated by what the radio deems suitable to play you. (or what they've been paid to play you).

 

I used to sit on Pandora for hours on end, getting introduced to new artists too.

 

  

[Nicko]

21 minutes ago, tegs07 said:

I don’t blame you. If you are at a stage in your career where you can charge for your services why do it for free?

I've done a few freebies for charity, and in the same way worked at a museum for a few years for free.  Some things are worth doing even if you don't get paid for it. 

[EBS_freak]

1 minute ago, Nicko said:

I've done a few freebies for charity, and in the same way worked at a museum for a few years for free.  Some things are worth doing even if you don't get paid for it. 

Indeed. I've worked for numerous charities in a work capacity as well as a musical capacity. There's some things that I would entertain.

 

I think a lot of it comes down to what player you are in the game. A hobbyist, a semi-pro or a pro musician. The first in the list is the most likely to do it for free... and the quality of bands from such players can range from pants to amazing. Semi-pro depends upon your situation... and who you are in a band with. A semi-pro musician may play with pro-musicians. So whilst a semi-pro musician may be up for freebies now and again, they aren't likely to remain popular with their pro counterparts.

 

Careful though, there's loads of folk out there who's only source of income is through music - and they'll hate you for "devaluing" their services by taking on low ball or free gigs. But then again, fair's fair. If you are going to chose a profession where there's a market for hobbyists, there's a risk. And despite what pros proclaim - a hobbyist can be just as good as a pro. In fact, a hobbyist may even provide a better service than a pro musician that treats a performance as "just another gig, just another paycheck".

[Crusoe]

45 minutes ago, EBS_freak said:

I used to watch a lot of originals bands whilst at Uni. Even caught Coldplay before they were. a blip on anybody's radar. Really enjoyed their stuff and even then, you could see they had the potential to go places. This was pre them releasing Parachutes... and for me, when Coldplay sounded the best (that first album is a pure gem)... before they became the stadium anthem band that they are now.

 

Grassroots music is defo on the decline, which is a real big shame. People (as in the wider public) don't want to hear new music it would seem. It seems to be largely dictated by what the radio deems suitable to play you. (or what they've been paid to play you).

 

I used to sit on Pandora for hours on end, getting introduced to new artists too.

 

  

I think interest in albums is on the decline. From what I see, people will hear a track on Spotify and add it to a playlist, maybe download and pay for that one song, but don't buy an album. My daughter is 13 and doesn't have any favourite bands as such but will listen to stuff on Spotify. When I was 13 I was buying albums Like Appetite for Destruction, Seven Son of a Seventh Son, No rest for the Wicked...

[BigRedX]

3 minutes ago, Crusoe said:

I think interest in albums is on the decline. From what I see, people will hear a track on Spotify and add it to a playlist, maybe download and pay for that one song, but don't buy an album. My daughter is 13 and doesn't have any favourite bands as such but will listen to stuff on Spotify. When I was 13 I was buying albums Like Appetite for Destruction, Seven Son of a Seventh Son, No rest for the Wicked...

 

One of my bands has made the decision that each song we record will be released individually as a single. Maybe once we have released enough for an album we'll do a one as a physical release (either on vinyl or CD). We have found that this approach has worked much better in terms of growing our fan base, and also it turns out that our most popular song to date was one that had it been an album track would most likely have been tucked away half-way through "side two" where it would have been mostly ignored.

[Tim2291]

9 minutes ago, Crusoe said:

I think interest in albums is on the decline. From what I see, people will hear a track on Spotify and add it to a playlist, maybe download and pay for that one song, but don't buy an album. My daughter is 13 and doesn't have any favourite bands as such but will listen to stuff on Spotify. When I was 13 I was buying albums Like Appetite for Destruction, Seven Son of a Seventh Son, No rest for the Wicked...

Spotify is a necessary evil, if they hadn't done it someone else would. But bands make barely any money from the music any more which is partly why merchandise and ticket prices have become so expensive! I think the artists get around 0.0035p per play but obviously please correct me if I'm wrong! If a track is played 1 million times... the band gets £3500 which may just about cover recording costs!

[BigRedX]

2 minutes ago, Tim2291 said:

Spotify is a necessary evil, if they hadn't done it someone else would. But bands make barely any money from the music any more which is partly why merchandise and ticket prices have become so expensive! I think the artists get around 0.0035p per play but obviously please correct me if I'm wrong! If a track is played 1 million times... the band gets £3500 which may just about cover recording costs!

 

Artists make little money from Spotify because they have signed contracts that gives their record label the lion's share of the royalties.

 

I've just checked my Spotify payments and I'm generally making about 0.5p per stream, but then as a member of a band without a record deal I'm only getting a fraction of the plays.

[EBS_freak]

54 minutes ago, Crusoe said:

I think interest in albums is on the decline. From what I see, people will hear a track on Spotify and add it to a playlist, maybe download and pay for that one song, but don't buy an album. My daughter is 13 and doesn't have any favourite bands as such but will listen to stuff on Spotify. When I was 13 I was buying albums Like Appetite for Destruction, Seven Son of a Seventh Son, No rest for the Wicked...

You're right. If you can make your song stick on Tiktok, that's how you make your song a success nowadays.