The value of a musician

[cosmic gumbo]

Carry on, my....

[sgosnell]

The crowd is there to eat, drink, and be merry, not to listen to a guitar player. As long as they do that, and spend their money, the gig is secure.

[Spook410]

Maybe it's my age but my ego is not bruised when the audience is focused on each other rather than my dazzling (ahem) talent. The only time I'm disappointed is when they are on their phones instead of paying attention to each other.

[joelf]

The only time I'm disappointed is when they are on their phones instead of paying attention to each other.

Funny and clever----but the digital daze drives me donuts. It's a serious worldwide illness, and has not only made people ignorant, lazy and atomized, but cut into our incomes significantly (OK, I'll confine it to my income). I've reached the point of acceptance, so as not to go totally 'round the bend---but I'm never gonna like it.

I have a solo concert coming up in April, in an intimate space. Last time I was there as audience people were texting and generally couldn't put the toys down during the entire performances (3 different groups). I'm going to politely ask that we 'experience this together and really connect, so please, for this small amount of time keep your phones in your pockets'. It's a lot to ask in this culture, but all you can do is ask---and it's all in the way you do ask. I want them on my side, so I won't offend...

[Patlotch]

they are on their phones instead of paying attention to each other.

It's still great, isn't it? With headphones closed, you can listen to Wes Montgomery without being disturbed by the guitarist on stage. You can even imagine he's Wes Montgomery. Yes, you, Spook410, you are Wes Mongomery for them!

[sgosnell]

A lot of people use their phones to make videos of the performer. Lots of those videos end up on YouTube. Think before you open your mouth too widely.

[joelf]

A lot of people use their phones to make videos of the performer. Lots of those videos end up on YouTube. Think before you open your mouth too widely.

In case that was directed at what I wrote: I don't feature ending up on youtube b/c they don't pay---except in 'exposure'. Just my opinion, but a strong one I try to live by...

[pauln]

I'm going to politely ask that we 'experience this together and really connect, so please, for this small amount of time keep your phones in your pockets'. It's a lot to ask in this culture, but all you can do is ask---and it's all in the way you do ask. I want them on my side, so I won't offend...

There is an old way of setting the foundation for what you wish to accomplish - the highest authority in the house speaks, the audience is primed with expectation, the habit of applause is established, and they hear your name twice. If there is a connection to be made through your playing, that's as good as it gets.

May I suggest the tried and true traditional method? Ask the owner/manager of the place for a brief professional introduction by the house before you begin your show by entering the stage/corner/wherever to stand next to you, drawing everyone's attention, and then announcing something like,

"Ladies and gentlemen, your attention please. Tonight the [insert name of the intimate space here] has the pleasure of presenting you a special evening with the [insert appropriate superlatives here] [insert your name here]."

He/she claps to initiate a round of applause, smiling brightly, then gesturing broadly to give you the stage/floor... saying loudly over the applause...

"A warm welcome for [insert your name here]!"

...as he/she withdraws back to attend business.

[ragman1]

there are koffee-restaurants in France, in Paris suburbs and the places of holiday, which schedule concert evenings that are cheap but paid. I played in places like this, but there were regular consumers too. It is true that they were not there for the music. Anyway, I considered that the error was on my part, and I decided to stop, considering that there was no solution

Ah, I see. If they were performance evenings then that's fair enough, maybe with a little subdued conversation somewhere, which would be fine. I mean, one can't ORDER the audience to shut up!

But I know where one can get an attentive audience... the street. If an act is putting on a good show people will definitely stop and watch quietly - and hopefully donate money at the end. There might be a bit of traffic noise and other signs of life but that's usually okay. Actually, it's easier to relax and play if there's some non-intrusive background sound.

But I suppose some performers do get very intense and take themselves rather too seriously... Que peut-on dire?

[ragman1]

A lot of people use their phones to make videos of the performer. Lots of those videos end up on YouTube. Think before you open your mouth too widely.

Generally two kinds of performers end up on You Tube - brilliant ones and idiots :-)

[Patlotch]

But I know where one can get an attentive audience... the street.

if I have a project today, it is the only one, the street, the parks... the only places where I would feel both free and perhaps listened to by some passerby, I say acoustic not to impose my noise either, and leave their chance to the birds

[Marinero]

Funny and clever----but the digital daze drives me donuts. It's a serious worldwide illness, and has not only made people ignorant, lazy and atomized, but cut into our incomes significantly (OK, I'll confine it to my income). I've reached the point of acceptance, so as not to go totally 'round the bend---but I'm never gonna like it.

I have a solo concert coming up in April, in an intimate space. Last time I was there as audience people were texting and generally couldn't put the toys down during the entire performances (3 different groups). I'm going to politely ask that we 'experience this together and really connect, so please, for this small amount of time keep your phones in your pockets'. It's a lot to ask in this culture, but all you can do is ask---and it's all in the way you do ask. I want them on my side, so I won't offend...

Hi, J,
Years ago, I was on a fly fishing trip in Northern Michigan and stopped into a little country store for some coffee. Hanging on the wall with other "souvenirs" was a plaque I bought and hung in my office for over 30 years. It read:

Never try to teach a pig to sing . . .
It's a waste of time . . .
And annoys the pig.

Good playing . . . Marinero

[joelf]

Generally two kinds of performers end up on You Tube - brilliant ones and idiots :-)

And too often w/o permission...

[Cunamara]

To get around this lack of paying gigs, my band (not jazz) has put on our own shows for a few years now. We hire a theatre, do the promo, etc. and generally have a fun gig, give people a good night out, and - to get back on thread - usually make some money. Doing this is always an option for anyone who wants to get paid for playing their own music and is confident there's a market for what they're doing (if there isn't a market for what you're doing, then sorry, why would you expect to get paid?). You can set the ticket price at whatever level you believe will bring in enough people to cover the theatre / promo / stewards / bar-staff / ticket-office / sound man / light man etc. It's a lot of work to organise, though, and with every passing year, I must confess it gets harder to find the enthusiasm to do all the non-music elements.

Derek, I think you make a lot of good points and one in particular: making money playing music or via any other art form takes a lot of non-art work. A friend of mine is a jazz vocalist who makes an actual living at it between gigs, record sales and some arts grants. Her husband is an excellent pianist, so that helps as he is her usual accompanist. We were discussing this and she was of the opinion that she puts in 2-3 times as many hours off-stage dealing with booking, marketing, etc., as she does actually making music. She will rent venues at times, but mostly books clubs, etc. Travel (e.g., to New York, etc.) is also necessary. There are a lot of musicians who somehow think that gigs and money will magically appear if they get their chops together. For a few that occasionally works, but not for most. As for getting paid to play music at all, your point about the market is also on point. The market for jazz is small and not generous with the dollars.

[44lombard]

Related question: where are we going to be in 50 years? Has technology and the decline of musicians' unions pretty much played out, and we'll have the same basic situation for local live musicians? Or will things be significantly better or worse? Have we reached a terminal state, a la the plumbing profession?

It's interesting to think that the threat of amateur musicians and what we might today call "the Spotify subscription threat" were seen 80-90 years ago, leading to both the rise of musicians unions and the two recording bans of the 1940s. James Petrillo was right, but it's hard to imagine a 21st century full of 18-piece "territory bands" (would there be a whole section in the band of laptop musicians?)

[joelf]

....what we might today call "the Spotify subscription threat"...

By that do you mean that Spotify and similar services discourage people from going out to hear live music, that they pay artists so pitifully---or both?

(I haven't bothered putting anything on Spotify b/c to me getting paid decently trumps getting exposed. I know this may be a minority opinion, and to each his own)...

[Alter]

To me the streaming thing looks a lot like the way the record industry was, when still in its early days. Extremely exploitative of recording artists and musicians. Eventually musicians gained a more fair profit percentage, but it took decades. Same hopefully will happen with streaming. From its current, musician ripoff stage (which however largely displaced illegal downloading and file sharing), to a more just model. However, today and in the near future, recorded music is a free thing, with almost no compensation to the artist. Watch for free on youtube, listen for -almost- free on streaming platforms. Noone buys actual media at the moment, cds or vinyl (Of course some still do, but its a gravely shrinking market).

[joelf]

Noone buys actual media at the moment, cds or vinyl (Of course some still do, but its a gravely shrinking market).

Oi Vay. I have 2 CDs for sale and will keep making them til I have nothing to say. Guess I'll have to go with streaming. You lose cover art, liner notes, song lists---but at least maybe you survive and sell. We may hate change, but there's no option other than to adapt.

(Actually, I'm looking into going vinyl, b/c I hear that this niche market is growing, not shrinking. Going with a small indie label doing the right thing is in keeping with my values. And maybe I'm naive, but I'm hoping? people seeking the vinyl experience will also be receptive to what I do)...

[44lombard]

By that do you mean that Spotify and similar services discourage people from going out to hear live music, that they pay artists so pitifully---or both?

Actually I was thinking of something much more basic...just the threat of recorded music (and sometimes DJs) as a way to provide needed atmosphere in restaurants, at weddings, and so forth.

The 1940s musicians' strikes were about securing fair royalties, says wikipedia, so they weren't exactly against the existence of recorded music, but I think the background was "things are changing, records are filling a hole that live music used to fill, and we need to get our fair share of the revenue, because we are going to be taking a hit in some ways."

It was the dawn of the winner-take-all music biz model that we have now. Securing record royalties probably didn't do much for most of the local musicians who never played on record dates, but the strikes seem connected to that shift in power from the orchestra leader to the record company. The shift from plentiful (if still low-paid) band and combo gigs to the era of few paying gigs for the many and Live Nation area tours for the very lucky few.

[joelf]

Actually I was thinking of something much more basic...just the threat of recorded music (and sometimes DJs) as a way to provide needed atmosphere in restaurants, at weddings, and so forth.

The 1940s musicians' strikes were about securing fair royalties, says wikipedia, so they weren't exactly against the existence of recorded music, but I think the background was "things are changing, records are filling a hole that live music used to fill, and we need to get our fair share of the revenue, because we are going to be taking a hit in some ways."

It was the dawn of the winner-take-all music biz model that we have now. Securing record royalties probably didn't do much for most of the local musicians who never played on record dates, but the strikes seem connected to that shift in power from the orchestra leader to the record company. The shift from plentiful (if still low-paid) band and combo gigs to the era of few paying gigs for the many and Live Nation area tours for the very lucky few.

Good answer. Move to the head of the class (;

Seriously, the more things change the more they stay the same...

[joelf]

BTW, don't kid yourselves: this streaming thing has done to DJs what Lyft has done to local car services.

I guess adapt or perish (after you get rolled over)...

[sgosnell]

If you do anything in public now, whether it's making music or anything else, you should expect to have a video made of it, and that video to be posted on social media at the very least. It's inevitable. When I flew an EMS helicopter, I knew I had better do everything right on every takeoff and landing, because there would always be several, if not dozens, of people with their phones in video mode, recording everything I did. Nobody asked permission, and nobody will ask permission to make a video of your guitar performance. Fighting that is more difficult than fighting city hall, or tilting at windmills. You will not win.

[pcsanwald]

(Actually, I'm looking into going vinyl, b/c I hear that this niche market is growing, not shrinking. Going with a small indie label doing the right thing is in keeping with my values. And maybe I'm naive, but I'm hoping? people seeking the vinyl experience will also be receptive to what I do)...

I went with vinyl for my album for this reason. My reasoning: in addition to being a jazz musician, I'm a huge jazz fan. I go to concerts/gigs all the time, buy music, etc. I expect most people that are going to buy my album are also this way, they are big fans.

I know no one, not one person, that buys CDs that does anything other than rip them, and throw them away. If I buy a CD at a gig (which I try to do whenever possible because I want to support this music), I rip it, and throw it away. I play with a fair amount of younger players and I've never met one that owns a CD player. I've met quite a few who own record players and are into vinyl.

The problem is, vinyl is more of an investment, way more than CDs so it's risky. Obviously you can charge more, I've never had anyone blink at paying $20, and I always say at shows "if you can't afford $20, come talk to me and we'll work it out". Everyone always just pays $20. People who still want to buy music are just not that price sensitive in my experience, in the US.

The only argument I've ever heard for making a CD in 2020 is that the jazz radio industry still works off CDs. I just made the personal decision not to worry about that, and not do any traditional jazz radio promotion. Maybe I missed out on a sweet record deal or tons of sales, but, I'll just have to live with that uncertainty. It doesn't keep me up at night.

[John A.]

I went with vinyl for my album for this reason. My reasoning: in addition to being a jazz musician, I'm a huge jazz fan. I go to concerts/gigs all the time, buy music, etc. I expect most people that are going to buy my album are also this way, they are big fans.

I know no one, not one person, that buys CDs that does anything other than rip them, and throw them away. If I buy a CD at a gig (which I try to do whenever possible because I want to support this music), I rip it, and throw it away. I play with a fair amount of younger players and I've never met one that owns a CD player. I've met quite a few who own record players and are into vinyl.

The problem is, vinyl is more of an investment, way more than CDs so it's risky. Obviously you can charge more, I've never had anyone blink at paying $20, and I always say at shows "if you can't afford $20, come talk to me and we'll work it out". Everyone always just pays $20. People who still want to buy music are just not that price sensitive in my experience, in the US.

The only argument I've ever heard for making a CD in 2020 is that the jazz radio industry still works off CDs. I just made the personal decision not to worry about that, and not do any traditional jazz radio promotion. Maybe I missed out on a sweet record deal or tons of sales, but, I'll just have to live with that uncertainty. It doesn't keep me up at night.

I rip, but never throw away CD's. I do throw away the jewel boxes, though, and keep the CDs in a binders with CD sleeves. I've had crashes and mysterious data losses with digital versions of things, and CD's are an excellent backup. Each binder holds ~200 CD's. I have a few, alphabetized and with room for more CDs in each one. Takes up a couple of shelves in the bookcase, rather than an entire wall in the living room.

John

[mr. beaumont]

I rip, but never throw away CD's. I do throw away the jewel boxes, though, and keep the CDs in a binders with CD sleeves. I've had crashes and mysterious data losses with digital versions of things, and CD's are an excellent backup. Each binder holds ~200 CD's. I have a few, alphabetized and with room for more CDs in each one. Takes up a couple of shelves in the bookcase, rather than an entire wall in the living room.

John

I really need to do this. I have about 5,000 CD's still in my basement...they take up a LOT of space.