Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

5 Reasons Musicians Should Stop Doing Gigs For $100


Recommended Posts

Yes "times change" aptly applies. To quote Bruce Springsteen:

 

"Now Main Street's whitewashed windows and vacant stores

Seems like there ain't nobody wants to come down here no more

They're closing down the textile mill across the railroad tracks

Foreman says these jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back to your hometown"

Boards: Kurzweil SP-6, Roland FA-08, VR-09, DeepMind 12

Modules: Korg Radias, Roland D-05, Bk7-m & Sonic Cell

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

... I was reacting a bit to the "sons of bitches" comment.

Too harsh you think? Well... perhaps, but consider this. In New York, taxicabs are a way of life, whereas in Los Angeles they have been a license to steal for quite some time. I live in the South Bay, which is a short hop to LAX - I can see it from here. For years I traveled almost constantly on business, and the average fare one way - not counting tip and airport fees - was between $45 and $55. Along came Uber, providing the same - or arguably better - service for $8 - $10. Somebody was price gouging... Pet peeve of mine.

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.

-Mark Twain

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my time behind the wheel for Uber and Lyft, particularly right after the (expensive) divorce. For a long time you could feel feel the palpable hatred from the cab drivers you would pass. I would think, "It's not my fault these guys came up with a better business model. The barrier to entry is pretty low, just drive Uber." Now the two models are starting to merge, and in many markets, if you call an Uber, a taxi will show up (as Uber).

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In St. Louis, it's not like places like NY or Chicago where cabs are lined up at the airport or your hotel waiting to pick you up, or that you're able to hail one on the street. You have to call one of the cab companies and have one dispatched. You may be waiting a pretty long time, if one ever shows up at all.....sometimes they don't. So then Uber comes to town and the taxi cab commission tries to block them out. Initially, if you wanted to get picked up at the airport, you had to put your location somewhere on the other side of the highway and then call the driver and tell them you were actually at the airport. So not only don't they pick you up, they want to make sure nobody else can pick you up either. They eventually came to an agreement by adding a fee to airport pickups so that it costs as much as a cab.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uber was not a "Better business model". The people that created Uber avoided the costs that cab companies pay by setting themselves up as a "Technology" company, not a cab company. I know a man whose family owns what started out as a "delivery/messenger" service. There wasn't enough paying customers that need just those services, so they added a few cabs to provide a service to the local region which was needed. They added more Cabs as the business grew. The state government regulates transportation companies, whereas Uber drivers are independent drivers that use their own vehicle, pay their own insurance, and vehicle maintenance. Cab companies provide the cabs, pay the insurance and maintenance, pay liability insurance, have a building to house their vehicles. They require their drivers to pass a background check, take a drug test, and run a check with the state to review their driving record, They don't hire people with poor driving records.

 

So, Uber can charge less than a cab company, because of the above differences in who pays what, and its primarily a part time business. I find that college students in my area use Uber because its cheaper.

 

Being a fossil that I am, when I need a ride, I call the Cab company. I am willing to pay more for their service. Their drivers are sober, professional, and have passed all the requirements of the cab company, so I know its a "Safe" ride. A cab shows up for me when I call it, I pay them, and they go on their way, If I had a daughter I would not let her take Uber, especially if she was away from home going to school and on her own. Its not as safe as a state registered cab company.

 

There have been rapes reported by Uber drivers, I'm sure you've heard about it. The risk of using Uber is great, Yep, its cheaper. But, you get what you pay for.

 

 

Mike T.

Yamaha Motif ES8, Alesis Ion, Prophet 5 Rev 3.2, 1979 Rhodes Mark 1 Suitcase 73 Piano, Arp Odyssey Md III, Roland R-70 Drum Machine, Digitech Vocalist Live Pro. Roland Boss Chorus Ensemble CE-1.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to nudge back a bit...Uber drivers undergo yearly background checks, yearly driving record checks, and yearly vehicle inspections.

 

While the occasional sociopath might slip through the system, drivers are in far greater danger at the hands of their thousands of unscreened passengers, than passengers are at the hands of a rare bad-apple driver.

 

The credit-card requirement does tend to do a little weeding out, and you never have to worry about the dine-and-dash model of rider. Plus, it's VERY hard for a driver to milk you out of any substantial funds, and you have recourse you wouldn't have with a taxi ride.

 

And finally...as someone who grew up in NY, I had to chuckle a bit at the "sober and professional" part. Cab drivers were not typically the best-groomed or most hygienic members of the working class...

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The world does not owe you a living, especially if you"re in the creative arts â music, art, writing, acting, dance, filmmaking, photography, etc. Just because you have a degree and/or years of experience and have practiced 10,000 hours to master your craft, you are not guaranteed a living practicing it. Expecting that to be so is part of the reason for your failure to make a living at it.

 

Making a living from your art is partially dependent on your talent, ability, and skill. It"s also partially dependent of your marketing ability and business acumen. If others sell their work for less than what you require to make a living and you blame them for your failure to make a living, you"re blaming others for your own limitations as an artist â in talent, technical ability, presentation, promotion, business.

 

If all other practitioners of your creative art refused to sell their work for less than what you deem fair or correct, the result would not be that you will sell your work for what you deem fair or correct, the result will be all those others not selling any work at all. If all musicians would refuse to play for $100 (or less), the result would be that the vast majority of musicians would not have any gigs at all.

 

We all know very talented people in the creative arts who are not successful in making a living at their art. We also know people who are not very good who somehow end up successfully making a living, even becoming celebrities. Some of this is luck, being in the right place at the right time. Only a very small percentage of people in the creative arts are able to make a living at it. This is true in music, art, writing, acting, etc. Most of us have to be content with doing what we do for the sake of doing the art itself, not for the big bucks and paying a mortgage on a house.

 

The fact that most people in the creative arts do not make a living at it is not because some people are selling their work for less than what you think they should. It"s in the nature of the creative arts. Stop blaming other people for your lack of well-paid gigs. Take responsibility for your own success, or lack thereof.

These are only my opinions, not supported by any actual knowledge, experience, or expertise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All about choice and what you value. To me DJ'd weddings with no band I had to go to were like comparing vinyl to leather.

Places like brewpubs or restaurants that charge high prices for a beer/food I'll only support when live music is presented.

Face it, what gets pushed daily down our throats are sports via tv news daily whether your team sucks or is good.

Those tickets prices only go up. I lost interest in sports. Can't relate to what they're paid.

For the steady solo Fri/Sat gig I play, if the tips don't make it worth doing I'll look elsewhere. But they got 2 guys lined up to take my place if I do.

The problem to me is you need an audience to really improve your playing for the feedback you get.

So what's your options. Open your own place, rent a place, Youtube, or busk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Tom Posted, there are more entertainment options than ever. There are Sports Bars, smaller clubs will offer 'free Juke Box Night", and, they can control the volume. There are several generations of younger people that grew up going to clubs being entertained by DJ"s playing canned music.

 

snip----

 

Back in the 70"s I worked with a guitar player in a duo that played at the Resorts in the Pocono Mountains during ski season. A Duo that wasn"t too loud, could sing and play 'Country Rock' to city people went over big time. They wanted to let it rip on weekends with 'foot stomping' music and have some fun. There was less work during the warm weather months, but we were still getting gigs on weekends in the Poconos, and played some local clubs in my home town once we got established.

 

The key factors were we could sing and play together well, we weren"t too loud, and we worked the crowd and tried to entertain them. Songs we didn"t know that got a lot of requests we learned. As a duo we couldn"t play everything, but our little duo worked.

 

The area where I have been living the last 30 years is completely different than what were the Pocono Mountains. I live close to a College Town, which means city people that listen to DJ"s, and the crap they spin. A completely different generation of people that did not grow up with live music. What live music that is available are solo guitarists that play happy hour and get paid from the cover charge at the door. Take it or leave it.

 

Mike T.

 

I did pretty much the same thing in the 90's. Worked with a jazz/pop/standards singer and she had the uncanny ability to sound very much like the artist who was known for the song. We did a lot of Anita Baker, Linda Ronstadt standards, Broadway etc. Our appeal was for the same reasons you had success. We weren't overly loud, played the high end restaurants and appealed to all ages. I'm not sure this same formula would work these days as things seem much different in the lounge circuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Partial quote by Maskofinsects:

 

"And finally...as someone who grew up in NY, I had to chuckle a bit at the "sober and professional" part. Cab drivers were not typically the best-groomed or most hygienic members of the working class..."

 

The experience of people that live in metropolitan areas compared to small town American is completely different. You can go ahead and laugh, but the joke is on you. City life? No thank you.

 

 

Mike T.

Yamaha Motif ES8, Alesis Ion, Prophet 5 Rev 3.2, 1979 Rhodes Mark 1 Suitcase 73 Piano, Arp Odyssey Md III, Roland R-70 Drum Machine, Digitech Vocalist Live Pro. Roland Boss Chorus Ensemble CE-1.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This same thing is talked about on other musician forums â Sax On The Web, Cover Band Central on Facebook, others. My concern is that these discussions sometimes have some false assumption, such as 1) the cause of your low pay is that other musicians are playing for low pay and 2) if all musicians refused to play for low pay, then at least some musicians would get higher-paid gigs. I don't think either of those assumptions is true.

 

The determinants of gig pay are multiple, starting with the venue's economics, how many people your band can bring in, and extending all the way to how the music biz is structured, how people listen to music now, who buys music, how people buy music, who goes to see live music, the expectation that music is free, and a host of other issues. Consider DJ's being thought of as live music and getting paid as much or more as live bands. Even if musicians got together and refused to play for $100 (or less), I don't think it would have any effect on those many other variables.

 

The successful musicians I have known (the ones who made a living at it) either did something much more in music than perform or teach or tour â they write and produce and arrange music, make commercials, are recording or sound engineers, sell gear or software or work for companies that make or sell musical stuff â or they live close to the poverty line. The few people making a good living from playing music are either stars or very in-demand studio players. Some may be in one or more highly-paid regionally known or corporate bands in markets that support that level of pay. Many of the "successful musicians" are highly skilled players who work hard at their craft and do their best to make popular and commercial music and be entertaining with well-produced shows. That's the only secret to success (and more-than-$100-gigs) that I know. That, and lots of luck.

These are only my opinions, not supported by any actual knowledge, experience, or expertise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cover article in this Sunday's SF Chronicle entertainment magazine is about an all-women DJ crew. They apparently work all the time, are "stars", win world DJ competitions, and some of them have an upcoming show with a $20 cover charge. https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/music/peaches-crew-celebrates-10-years-of-women-behind-the-turntable#

 

These are only my opinions, not supported by any actual knowledge, experience, or expertise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll only do the fun ones...

 Find 660 of my jazz piano arrangements of standards for educational purposes and tutorials at www.Patreon.com/HarryLikas Harry was the Technical Editor of Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book" and helped develop "The Jazz Piano Book."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cover article in this Sunday's SF Chronicle entertainment magazine is about an all-women DJ crew. They apparently work all the time, are "stars", win world DJ competitions, and some of them have an upcoming show with a $20 cover charge. https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/music/peaches-crew-celebrates-10-years-of-women-behind-the-turntable#

Some of those DJ's make in a night, what I try to make in a year. No exaggeration.

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people who are not trying to make a living in music owe an obligation to people who are trying to make a living in music? And does that obligation include foregoing one's own playing opportunities?

 

I think there's a visceral, superficial sense in which we think the answer should be "yes." But the idea doesn't stand up under careful thought.

 

Let's take me and my hypothetical friend Bob as examples. I play "professionally" in the sense that I'm paid for it, but if you took away all my gig money it wouldn't make an significant difference in my financial situation. I might have to eat out less often, but I won't be hungry.

 

What about Bob? Let's say he's a trained musician who reads, sings, arranges, and takes a wide variety of gigs. Let's call him Bob-1. Bob-1 does the things most musicians need to do to make a living. In that case, Bob-1 and I are really not competing for the same gigs. The question is mostly moot because Bob-1 and I might overlap for 1% at most of Bob-1's potential gigs.

 

Now let's say Bob is closer to what I am. We'll call him Bob-2. We might both be candidates to sub for a top-forty gig. Bob-2 can do it better and more easily than me, but the band only wants to pay $100, whereas Bob-2 normally asks $200 for a gig like that. Should I call the band and say "sorry, I'd like to do it, but Bob is more deserving so I'll step aside." Or should we just let the band "get what they pay for"?

 

Bob-2 probably has more overlap with Bob-1 than I do, but Bob-2 can't make a living doing a dozen $200 gigs a month, so he also is a bartender, or drives an Uber, or whatever . . . In other words, he's like a lot of musicians who are on the cusp of being able to get by on music money alone, but are not in a practical sense "making a living playing music." It's their aspiration, and it might be within reach, but it's not a reality.

 

If you think I owe an obligation to Bob-2, then you have to explain why. Is it because there's not enough bands playing top forty gigs, so I have to make it easier for that to happen? That seems like a weak argument. Is it because, if Bob-2 doesn't have to bartend or Uber on the side he might be able to step up to the next level and compete with Bob-1? I just don't see a strong argument here.

 

Now consider Bob-3. Bob-3 wants more than anything else to be making a living playing music. But he's not super-talented, and in fact I'm a far better keyboard player than he is. Should I be stepping aside for him as well? The music won't be as good, but the gig will be going to someone who is really trying to make a living at it, whereas I am not.

 

Does Bob-3 owe an obligation to Bob-2? Does Bob-2 owe an obligation to Bob-1?

 

In conclusion, I think while the idea has visceral, superficial appeal, trying to think it through just leads to a conceptual muddle. I couldn't put it into practice even if I wanted to.

 

 

 

I see what you are saying but people have the right to be mad if people are playing for free or exposure.

"Danny, ci manchi a tutti. La E-Street Band non e' la stessa senza di te. Riposa in pace, fratello"

 

 

noblevibes.com

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you are saying but people have the right to be mad if people are playing for free or exposure.
That's an odd comment. I suppose it's true that people have a right to be mad about anything they want. But if you have a right to be mad at me for playing for free or for anything else my band does or doesn't do, then I have the right to be mad at you for whatever you do or say as a musician. I have the right to be mad at you for telling me not to play for free. Being mad at each other for having different points of view doesn't get us anywhere, it just gets us mad at each other. What's the point?

 

These are only my opinions, not supported by any actual knowledge, experience, or expertise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I see what you are saying but people have the right to be mad if people are playing for free or exposure.

 

Not if it's charity or volunteer work though! But people can get mad about anything.

 

Yamaha: Motif XF8, MODX7, YS200, CVP-305, CLP-130, YPG-235, PSR-295, PSS-470 | Roland: Fantom 7, JV-1000

Kurzweil: PC3-76, PC4 (88) | Hammond: SK Pro 73 | Korg: Triton LE 76, N1R, X5DR | Emu: Proteus/1 | Casio: CT-370 | Novation: Launchkey 37 MK3 | Technics: WSA1R

Former: Emu Proformance Plus & Mo'Phatt, Korg Krome 61, Roland Fantom XR & JV-1010, Yamaha MX61, Behringer CAT

Assorted electric & acoustic guitars and electric basses | Roland TD-17 KVX | Alesis SamplePad Pro | Assorted organs, accordions, other instruments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you love playing and it is beyond quantifiable (which is probably the case for most of you that play out regularly), playing out is probably the least lucrative thing you could do with your time, and I'm talking about opportunity cost.

 

If your per hour take, counting transport to and from, amortized gear cost and practice time, is less than your day job, why are you doing it? I think this is where the arts and other freelance trades have a different set of requirements. And that's the issue. The "I just love playing out" person and the professional musician are competing on the same field. It was the same thing when I was doing freelance photography, freelance web design, etc, etc. So I'm not quite sure that the original video has clearly made that distinction...he's conflating two things.

"For instance" is not proof.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...