Shhhh.... Touring musician pay

[niacin]

9 hours ago, ksoper said:

I replied to a friend's Facebook post featuring this video recently.  The thing that jumped out at me is that the money that the vlogger quoted is identical to what was being paid 20 years ago when I was out there.  That's truly scary.  

30 years ago

[jazzpiano88]

8 minutes ago, niacin said:

9 hours ago, ksoper said:

I replied to a friend's Facebook post featuring this video recently.  The thing that jumped out at me is that the money that the vlogger quoted is identical to what was being paid 20 years ago when I was out there.  That's truly scary.  

30 years ago

 

Yeah same here.  90's we made $500 a piece for weddings and more for corporate functions.  But we were mostly a weekend band with everyone having day jobs.   I would assume full time bands would have been making double or triple that. 

 

Back then $500 went pretty far.    Now it buys two weeks of groceries for the family or a cash recharge for the kid in college.

[niacin]

This, 38-minute mark, Sting's manager explains why Branford Marsalis, the finest saxophone player of his generation, can't get a raise.  You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but it is the reality of the market economy.

 

 

[ProfD]

12 hours ago, niacin said:

This, 38-minute mark, Sting's manager explains why Branford Marsalis, the finest saxophone player of his generation, can't get a raise.  You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but it is the reality of the market economy.

That clip should be recommended viewing for every artist and musician. Reality.😎

[Baldwin Funster]

15 minutes ago, ProfD said:

That clip should be recommended viewing for every artist and musician. Reality.😎

There are longer term considerations that main artists don't recognize until it's too late. Bowie lost Ronson over money. To me he lost a big chunk of his bowieness. I'm sure we all can mourn the break up of our favorite acts because the main guy didn't pay his band enough to keep them devoted. The consequences don't appear until the next album but the loss is real. Back to the OT, yeah a hired sideman for a tour can be replaced without the artist losing his overall sound so his value is limited.  But when the band has chemistry, you never know what you're going to lose by replacing someone.

[ProfD]

14 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:

There are longer term considerations that main artists don't recognize until it's too late.

Maybe so from an artistic perspective. We care about it as musicians.

 

The music business is about making as much money as possible in the moment.

 

14 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:

But when the band has chemistry, you never know what you're going to lose by replacing someone.

For one reason or several, it is a risk that has been been taken many times over because it's a business.

 

OTOH, a guy like Dave Grohl (Nirvana & Foo Fighters) has been through it a couple of times and hasn't missed a beat.😎

[nadroj]

14 hours ago, niacin said:

This, 38-minute mark, Sting's manager explains why Branford Marsalis, the finest saxophone player of his generation, can't get a raise.  You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but it is the reality of the market economy.

 

 

Video blocked in the UK for some strange reason. Anyone able to summarise?

[ProfD]

8 minutes ago, nadroj said:

Video blocked in the UK for some strange reason. Anyone able to summarise?

Fans buy tickets to see the artist.

 

If an individual musician can't make the show or is replaced but the artist is there, fans aren't going to demand a refund. 

 

However, if the artist i.e. star of the show can't make it but the band is ready to go, fans will expect a refund.😎

[AnotherScott]

59 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:

There are longer term considerations that main artists don't recognize until it's too late. Bowie lost Ronson over money. To me he lost a big chunk of his bowieness. I'm sure we all can mourn the break up of our favorite acts because the main guy didn't pay his band enough to keep them devoted. The consequences don't appear until the next album but the loss is real. Back to the OT, yeah a hired sideman for a tour can be replaced without the artist losing his overall sound so his value is limited.  But when the band has chemistry, you never know what you're going to lose by replacing someone.

 

Right. If it's a "band member" who is also largely responsible for the recorded parts (and possibly contributing to the arrangement in other ways), the loss can be very significant. But if we're talking about essentially a "hired gun" to tour and reproduce what someone else did on the recording (or even if he is encouraged to put his own spin on it), he's pretty expendable. Unless maybe he was a major contributor to a live album that became a massive hit, or something like that...

[HammondDave]

34 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Right. If it's a "band member" who is also largely responsible for the recorded parts (and possibly contributing to the arrangement in other ways), the loss can be very significant. But if we're talking about essentially a "hired gun" to tour and reproduce what someone else did on the recording (or even if he is encouraged to put his own spin on it), he's pretty expendable. Unless maybe he was a major contributor to a live album that became a massive hit, or something like that...

I can even argue against that. Take Liberty DeVito, for instance. He more than just about anyone else in Billy Joel’s original band contributed to the sound of the original music and the performance dynamic of Billy Joel’s tours. However, after Billy fired Liberty, people did not stop paying $$$$ to see Billy Joel.  
 

 

[AnotherScott]

15 minutes ago, HammondDave said:

37 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

Right. If it's a "band member" who is also largely responsible for the recorded parts (and possibly contributing to the arrangement in other ways), the loss can be very significant. But if we're talking about essentially a "hired gun" to tour and reproduce what someone else did on the recording (or even if he is encouraged to put his own spin on it), he's pretty expendable. Unless maybe he was a major contributor to a live album that became a massive hit, or something like that...

I can even argue against that. Take Liberty DeVito, for instance. He more than just about anyone else in Billy Joel’s original band contributed to the sound of the original drum parts and the performance dynamic of Billy Joel’s tours. However, when Billy fired Liberty, people did not stop going to see Billy Joel.  

 

When I said "the loss can be very significant," I meant significant to future recorded output. It was a response to Baldwins' Bowie/Ronson analogy, i.e. "the consequences don't appear until the next album."  Which doesn't mean the "new" version of the band couldn't have as much success (or more), but depending on what that players' contributions had been, it can at least end up being noticeably different. 

 

But yeah, as a rule, the only name that matters when it comes to ticket sales is the one on the marquee.

[jazzpiano88]

19 hours ago, ProfD said:

OTOH, a guy like Dave Grohl (Nirvana & Foo Fighters) has been through it a couple of times and hasn't missed a beat.😎

 

That's lightning striking twice.   The probability is approximately 1e-12 x 1e-12 = 1e-24.    And that doesn't even take into account that he's a drummer playing a guitar and singing.   That's another 1e-4  1e-3 and 1e-5  factors of unlikeliness.

 

So it's a probability of 1e-37.    Someone like him will never happen again until after the next extinction. 

[mcgoo]

8 hours ago, jazzpiano88 said:

... he's an unskilled drummer... 

 

??? I'm not a huge fan per se, but wow, that strikes me as just plain wrong. 

[jazzpiano88]

1 hour ago, mcgoo said:

?? I'm not a huge fan per se, but wow, that strikes me as just plain wrong. 

Yeah, too harsh.  Fixed.  

[jazzpiano88]

18 hours ago, HammondDave said:

Take Liberty DeVito, for instance. He more than just about anyone else in Billy Joel’s original band contributed to the sound of the original music and the performance dynamic of Billy Joel’s tours. However, after Billy fired Liberty, people did not stop paying $$$$ to see Billy Joel.  

It’s interesting both Billy and Elton had this deal where they scrapped the original band after a period of success.  I know Elton eventually went back with the original cats.  Not sure about Billy.  I think Liberty came back at some point for some period.  

[cphollis]

21 hours ago, ProfD said:

Fans buy tickets to see the artist.

 

If an individual musician can't make the show or is replaced but the artist is there, fans aren't going to demand a refund. 

 

However, if the artist i.e. star of the show can't make it but the band is ready to go, fans will expect a refund.😎

The same concept exists in the business world, where it's called the "golden rule" -- the guy with the gold gets to make the rules.

[ProfD]

5 hours ago, jazzpiano88 said:

...they scrapped the original band after a period of success.

It's been very common in Jazz.

 

Miles Davis cycled through many of the greatest musicians to ever play instruments.

 

Herbie Hancock still cycles through musicians.😎

[stoken6]

37 minutes ago, ProfD said:

It's been very common in Jazz.

 

Miles Davis cycled through many of the greatest musicians to ever play instruments.

 

Herbie Hancock still cycles through musicians.😎

Steely Dan famously cycled through musicians on a single album.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[Docbop]

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

It's been very common in Jazz.

 

Miles Davis cycled through many of the greatest musicians to ever play instruments.

 

Herbie Hancock still cycles through musicians.😎

 

Miles and Herbie both would find young musicians to get new fresh ideas to keep moving forward.     

[Baldwin Funster]

Ritchie Blackmore (essentially cycled out Dio).

Dio(reneged on a money sharing agreement and lost all or most of the first Dio lineup).

David Coverdale ( Similar to Dios situation I believe).

[Reezekeys]

2 hours ago, stoken6 said:

Steely Dan famously cycled through musicians on a single album.

 

Steely Dan famously cycled through musicians on a single song!

[jazzpiano88]

2 hours ago, Reezekeys said:

Steely Dan famously cycled through musicians on a single song!

 

The Michael Omartian interview recounts this phenomenon.    When they would cycle through bands on a single song, Omar was the common musician on piano that they would keep.   He joked to Walter and Donald,  "Maybe I'm the problem".    Walter and Donald didn't get the joke and deadpanned,  "Nah".     

 

In fact, what they were doing was cycling through bands in search of their ideal drum track, discarding all of the other players tracks during the process.    You would think they would just cycle the drummer, but they had some preconception of how the combinations worked to bring whole new bands.

 

Then there's that famous video of choosing the Peg guitar soloist.   Not sure if Jay Graydon was part of the rotating band or not.   Finding that solo seemed to be an orthogonal project, but maybe not.

[Docbop]

Back in the 70's when the record industry was making more money than they knew what to do with it because very common for producers to get huge budgets and they'd cut records with multiple groups of musicians.   Could be they were taking a cue from the Beach Boys who started cutting tracks juggling musicians why a song like Good Vibration took six month to cut and I think back then a million dollars to make the one song. Motown once in Los Angeles started using cutting with multiple groups of players.   Richard Perry who was a big dog producer do it and lots of different guitar player doing the solo.  Perry was nuts that was before computer anything in record and he would average 40 edits per song.  Watch the tape deck when Perry was mixing the tape looked like tiger stripes streaming by.    So Steely Dan continued doing the same they were big and ABC Records was giving BIG budgets to record with.  So if the record company is going to give you the money why not trying making a tune with multiple combo of musicians.   

 

Okay story time....

So that was back when I worked at one studio, but I lived close to The Village Recorder and a couple good friends of mine were engineers  there so I'd hang at the Village at night in their sessions when I could, to learn what I could and run errands for them.   Well that was when Steely Dan was recording at the Village a lot and at night usually Gary Katz and Roger Nichols would be finishing up from the days Dan sessions listening and so on.    Well Steely Dan was finished up mixing their latest album and Bob Dylan started recording his Planet Waves album and my friends were engineering it.   Well Dylan's sessions were very closed, if he was around I couldn't go into the control room to hang, so I kick back in the corner of the reception area across from studio and listen to Dylan record thru the wall.   The second night Gary Katz comes down to the reception area sits in a chair by the studio wall and is listening to Dylan record because he was a big Dylan fan.   Then I noticed over the next week Katz is in the reception area like me listening to Dylan through the wall.   So I mention it to my friends and they tell me Katz is booking Steely Dan studio time so he can hangout at the Village and listen to Dylan record.   That ABC Records is paying for the studio time thinking Katz is doing something for Dan.  LOL    Yes, the money was flowing back in the 70's. 

[My Keys And Me Are Vintage]

This topic is binge-worthy reading! For myself and likely many others that never experienced road life or the business aspects of that life, I find this topic fascinating. Thank you, all you grey-hairs, for these wonderful stories. 

[ProfD]

11 hours ago, Docbop said:

Back in the 70's when the record industry was making more money than they knew what to do with it because very common for producers to get huge budgets and they'd cut records with multiple groups of musicians.   

 

So if the record company is going to give you the money why not trying making a tune with multiple combo of musicians.

Right.

 

The practice went well beyond the 1970s too.

 

The part record companies were not so upfront about was that all of those expenses were being charged back to the recording artists. 

 

Only a handful of artists were actually successful enough to recoup the money spent on their projects.  

 

Over time, some artists and musicians actually took the time to learn how the music business works. 

 

Unfortunately, too many folks in the arts prefer to remain clueless when it comes to how money is really made.😎

[Docbop]

48 minutes ago, ProfD said:

Right.

 

The practice went well beyond the 1970s too.

 

The part record companies were not so upfront about was that all of those expenses were being charged back to the recording artists. 

 

Only a handful of artists were actually successful enough to recoup the money spent on their projects.  

 

Over time, some artists and musicians actually took the time to learn how the music business works. 

 

Unfortunately, too many folks in the arts prefer to remain clueless when it comes to how money is really made.😎

 

One of the bands I roadied for back then  Ace and their producer figured that out and they actually made money from their first album.  They spent a lot of time planning out the songs they were going to record, approximate time length they want, and arrangement.   Then with their producer spent a lot time rehearsing playing the songs as they wanted them to be on the album.   Once everything musically was in place then they went into the studio, recorded, overdubs, and mixed the album in about one week.  One week was crazy fast back then.    The songs flowed and sounded better being played versus edited together and it paid off for them keeping the recording costs to a minimum.    When I worked at my buddies reheard studio the band PIL block booked our big room brought in white boards and with their producer went through a similar process spending there time on pre-production instead of recording studio time.   The only thing that cost them was a lot time in the rehearsal studio because they wouldn't show up until the afternoon and first thing on their todo list was "where shall we eat lunch",  then order and have it delivered.  Then slowly get into working on the tunes for the album, but that's a rock stars lifestyle.  

[D. Gauss]

On 5/8/2024 at 12:13 PM, Baldwin Funster said:

 Bowie lost Ronson over money. To me he lost a big chunk of his bowieness. I'm sure we all can mourn the break up of our favorite acts because the main guy didn't pay his band enough to keep them devoted.  

 

I think that WAS his "Bowieness."  Notoriously cheap he was.  Jagger and Jimi Page, too for that matter.  Most everyone knows the $300 per Bowie gig offered to Stevie Ray story, but there's others, the recording of 1974's "David Live" being a good example.  Bowie was going to pay the band members $75 bucks each or something as scale compensation for the gig being recorded.  The band (which included David Sanborn) revolted and refused to go onstage and do the gig/recording unless Bowie gave them each 5K.

[AnotherScott]

9 minutes ago, D. Gauss said:

Most everyone knows the $300 per Bowie gig offered to Stevie Ray story

worth keeping in mind that that's the equivalent of about $1k per gig today. And he did about 100 concerts in 1983, so it was equivalent to about $100k pay for the year.

 

anyway, the full story (unless someone says otherwise!) is at https://www.guitarworld.com/features/thirty-years-after-texas-flood-guitar-world-celebrates-phenomenal-rise-stevie-ray-vaughan

[D. Gauss]

30 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

worth keeping in mind that that's the equivalent of about $1k per gig today. And he did about 100 concerts in 1983, so it was equivalent to about $100k pay for the year.

 

 

 

Also worth keeping in mind that SRV was already signed to CBS and the 1st album finished at that time.  Offering him $300 per show vs. what he could make with his own band could make per show , (admittedly prob not that much more, but prob 220+ shows/year), plus denying him the previously promised opener slot on the tour, plus placing a gag order on any SRV related promotion, was all-in-all not a good offer. 

 

Funny sidenote:  Bowie's camp also didn't want SRV to use his vintage Fender Vibroverbs and Super reverbs (important ingredient to his sound).  They cited them as being "old and raggety-ass," and that he should play through something brand new and modern.

[AnotherScott]

21 minutes ago, D. Gauss said:

plus denying him the previously promised opener slot on the tour, plus placing a gag order on any SRV related promotion

yeah, I think those were probably the real killers. The pay wasn't bad. It's what everyone else was getting, and at the time, srv was not yet SRV.