Play for free ...

[Simon DS]

If I lived alone on a desert island, I think I'd much rather hear a friend play badly than pay someone who is good to play.
...maybe.

[Bertram Henze]

If I lived alone on a desert island, I think I'd much rather hear a friend play badly than pay someone who is good to play.
...maybe.

...Johnny Depp???

[Bren]

It's a miracle that anyone gets paid at all these music-saturated days, especially for doing something that they enjoy doing for free anyway. And the audience knows that.

There was a brief window in time, maybe 50s through 70s, when there was a huge appetite for live music and not that many people who could play it convincingly.

That moment is long gone.

The demographic bulge has moved on into old age , (many of them picking up some playing skills along the way).

The young can even get a college degree in bluegrass or traditional Irish or Scottish playing, not to mention the plethora of teaching aids available now which simplify the of learning styles that were like mystifying black arts back in the day.

So you have a shrinking market saturated with an over-supply of competent musicians.

I'm fortunate to be get a regular gigs with a ceilidh band, which is not only enjoyable, but mainly plays weddings and big events so pays OK (more than the sums I've seen mentioned in this thread). But it wouldn't keep me in any sort of a lifestyle. And a lot of weddings just go for a DJ or conventional covers band, even in North Scotland.

[billkilpatrick]

It's a miracle that anyone gets paid at all these music-saturated days, especially for doing something that they enjoy doing for free anyway. And the audience knows that.

There was a brief window in time, maybe 50s through 70s, when there was a huge appetite for live music and not that many people who could play it convincingly.

That moment is long gone.

The demographic bulge has moved on into old age , (many of them picking up some playing skills along the way).

The young can even get a college degree in bluegrass or traditional Irish or Scottish playing, not to mention the plethora of teaching aids available now which simplify the of learning styles that were like mystifying black arts back in the day.

So you have a shrinking market saturated with an over-supply of competent musicians.

I'm fortunate to be get a regular gigs with a ceilidh band, which is not only enjoyable, but mainly plays weddings and big events so pays OK (more than the sums I've seen mentioned in this thread). But it wouldn't keep me in any sort of a lifestyle. And a lot of weddings just go for a DJ or conventional covers band, even in North Scotland.

I was told - and no reason to doubt - that the only live, acoustic musicians who can make a decent living are pipers … and they only have to play two tunes: "Amazing Grace" for funerals and "Scotland the Brave" for knees-ups.

[Bertram Henze]

So you have a shrinking market saturated with an over-supply of competent musicians.

...plus, the market is not really picky about the "competent" part (correct intonation seems to be all out of fashion with singers).

But that situation is not new. Apart from the Classical genre, where they have an organised quality image, music has always been a street thing, and the streets are electronically virtual today.

[Frankdolin]

I do envy professional musicians ability to manage to still love what they do. for me money changes everything. People expect, demand, and otherwise think that giving you a couple lousy bucks gives them power over you and how/what you perform. By playing for free I reserve the primadona right to pack up my mandolin and go. That has never happened, except I did play a night of electric guitar blues in a Chinese restaurant once after the manager made a big deal of telling us NO BLUES. The crowd went crazy for it and he was powerless to stop us.

[Bren]

Bill - pipers are also often hired to play at weddings in Scotland . It's common for guests to arrive and be greeted by a piper in full regalia playing. So they'd need at least one other tune, and most of course would be bored stiff and have a big repertoire, so they play quite a variety.

Bertram - I'm not sure "competence" is the most valuable thing. That's why I put "convincing" which I think is more important. Don''t get me started on amplified buskers, which forces buskers to spread themselves thinner but still adds to the general cacophony I referred to by "music--saturated".

[Ausdoerrt]

I do envy professional musicians ability to manage to still love what they do. for me money changes everything. People expect, demand, and otherwise think that giving you a couple lousy bucks gives them power over you and how/what you perform. By playing for free I reserve the primadona right to pack up my mandolin and go.

Interestingly, my experience is just the opposite. It seems like the amount of respect you get is proportional to what you're paid. If you're playing for free, the manager tends to communicate as if it's the band that owes THEM for the 'privilege' of playing at their place, rather than them profiting off a free gig. The relationship is usually clearer and more professional when there's money involved. Maybe it's just a difference in mentality, dunno.

I also do love my day job, so maybe I'm just the odd one out, heh.

That has never happened, except I did play a night of electric guitar blues in a Chinese restaurant once after the manager made a big deal of telling us NO BLUES. The crowd went crazy for it and he was powerless to stop us.

That is legitimately hilarious

[Bren]

That is true Ausdoerrt - they are more likely to interfere with people who play for nothing. Having said that, I love playing in pub sessions. When they're good, they're the best.

[allenhopkins]

I don't want to live in a world where good artists can't make a living with their talent. But I also don't want to live in a world where people who are already gainfully employed can't pursue their artistic side publicly without being hated by the "professionals". How do we resolve the two? Surely this world is big enough for everyone to pursue their artistic side, either for profit or for the love of the art form, without stepping on each others' toes. I'm going to keep playing my music in public for free, or for free drinks/tips. And I'll continue to envy those who can make a living from their passion.

1. I don't make a living from music, never have. As a retiree with a pension, I supplement it by playing about 175-200 small-potatoes gigs per year, two-thirds of which are for seniors in different venues -- residences, recreation centers, social clubs. So my "professional" qualifications are quite diluted; if I go a month with only two or three gigs, I don't have to max out my credit card or apply for SNAP benefits.

2. I also don't begrudge anyone who wants to play for free, as I also do fairly frequently. There are jams, Celtic sessions, open mics, neighborhood festivals and block parties, farmers' markets, house parties and many other such venues where people are welcome to come in and play gratis. I've been regularly attending a weekly folk club sing-around for 45+ years now, where I kick a couple buxx into the kitty to help pay for the room, and take my turn in the "song circle" (besides noodling along behind others' songs).

3. What I do begrudge, a bit, is when the venue operator is making money off musicians' willingness to "pursue their artistic side publicly." Not blaming the performers, but a little unhappy with the club owner or promoter who charges admission, sells drinks and food, and doesn't share any of the revenue with the musicians who attract his clientele. Even a "tip jar" would alleviate that situation. I've driven 150 miles 'round trip to play in a small-town cafe, where the tips yielded me less than $50, because I liked the place and I liked its owner. Besides, he gave me a really nice dinner as well.

I'm doing a "tip jar" gig this Friday in Waterloo NY, the "home of Memorial Day," where they're expecting a bit of a crowd. We'll see how it goes. But yesterday and today, it was seniors' programs where the activities director agreed to a modest stipend. There's a line between cheerfully sharing our talents, and being exploited for profit, and I want to stay on the good side of that line.

[Ausdoerrt]

That is true Ausdoerrt - they are more likely to interfere with people who play for nothing. Having said that, I love playing in pub sessions. When they're good, they're the best.

I don't consider pub sessions, jams and the like to be 'gigs' per se - usually it's just musicians gathering at will to have fun together. In other words, if you don't show up, the event will still happen as planned.

It's the playing of an actual arranged performance for free - and the attempts by some managers to get musicians to play such gigs for free citing 'exposure' or whatever other BS they can come up with - that rubs me the wrong way. I mean, at least cover the band's expenses, otherwise it's just profiting at the musicians' cost.

[NursingDaBlues]

Please understand, I am not trying to change anybody’s opinion or the way they conduct their affairs. Your point of view is your point of view. But the position I’ve held since the late ‘60s is simple: if someone wants to hire me to perform, I do not play for free; I do not reduce my rate. There will always be someone – in any given profession – who will do a job for less. That’s fine. Folks just have to decide if they can walk away with their professionalism intact or succumb to a bidding war. But if more performers held their ground and said the price is the price, we’d all have better footing in establishing a firm rate for performing. And the term “Professional Musician” would actually carry some weight.

Further, it’s a fact of life, many venue owners/managers and event organizers say that they can get their son or nephew or neighbor to play for a lot less; that they are doing you a favor to pay a small percentage of what you’re asking because they’re providing you with exposure; or that they don’t bring in enough to pay the going rate. To this I say: if entertainment is an important or critical part of their business or event then they need to step up to the plate.

I’ve never been a full-time professional musician. But I have known, and continue to know, many who are. I maintain a very high respect for their profession and their occupation of choice. While part-time musicians usually have a day job that pays their bills and use music as a means for extra cash or a way to feed an ego, a full time professional depends on the gig to support himself and his family. I will not take a gig away from a professional simply on the merit that I will accept less than what I’m worth for my service.

[Folkmusician.com]

I would love Allen's situation. To me, this is the ideal musical life.

Speaking of tips...

I did a video of a concert in a park. This is one of those summer things they do every other weekend. They pay next to nothing, but it is legitimately not for profit (nothing is sold, everyone but the band is a volunteer ). The band initially turned it down, because it is a small town (under 1000 people) that was out of the way. As it turns out, they get a good paying gig that has them driving by this place on the way home and they will even be rolling through at the right time to stop and setup. Show is agreed upon.

The band will be carrying minimal gear. While discussing what to do, it is decided to make a production out of it. There had been plans to record a show like this for a while, so what the heck! A sound company is hired (band's expense), an additional soundman is brought in to do a live recording, and we are doing video. I believe we had a 7 person crew in addition to the band.

We roll into this tiny town and there is pretty much no one anywhere to be seen. Everything is setup, and still virtually no one around. We are doing sound check in a virtually empty park! I guess we won't be getting any crowd shots! haha

Anyway... people start to filter in with a good portion of them bringing food. It turns into a huge potluck and the park is filled with people. The audience is great and we had to empty out the tip jar several times due to it overflowing. We made it back to Reno very late and stopped at a diner before heading home. This was the first time the tips were counted. This part was shocking. One dollar bills were in the minority. A good portion of the bills were twenties. It was a significant amount of money.

It was quite emotional really. There are still places where people genuinely appreciate and support music. Granted, it is becoming rare.

[Randi Gormley]

artists of any kind often are faced with the same request. My friends who are photographers get asked to take photos for free or exposure; fine artists or designers are asked to design or paint stuff for free or exposure; writers, too, are asked to help edit or write something for free to help out a friend or submit stories to magazines for exposure ... as so many say, you can die of exposure. so it's a universal complaint.

The world has a way around artists in a way it doesn't seem to have around other professions. A lot of the step dancers these days use recordings for both performance and competition -- they seem a little nonplussed if asked to dance with live musicians; any computer can supply clip art and photoshop and everybody has a smart phone or portable camera. I guess a lot of people figure if they can do something even half-way decently, then what an expert does isn't worth the money. Think of the way people talk about school and teachers, or all the people (myself included) who attempt home improvement. I sometimes think it's a rare person indeed who values an expert except as a last resort.

[Ancient]

I understand that because there are less good paying gigs that a lot of musicians are going back to doing in home concerts.

[catmandu2]

artists of any kind often are faced with the same request. My friends who are photographers get asked to take photos for free or exposure; fine artists or designers are asked to design or paint stuff for free or exposure; writers, too, are asked to help edit or write something for free to help out a friend or submit stories to magazines for exposure ... as so many say, you can die of exposure. so it's a universal complaint.

The world has a way around artists in a way it doesn't seem to have around other professions. A lot of the step dancers these days use recordings for both performance and competition -- they seem a little nonplussed if asked to dance with live musicians; any computer can supply clip art and photoshop and everybody has a smart phone or portable camera. I guess a lot of people figure if they can do something even half-way decently, then what an expert does isn't worth the money. Think of the way people talk about school and teachers, or all the people (myself included) who attempt home improvement. I sometimes think it's a rare person indeed who values an expert except as a last resort.

Quite so. It's an issue performers, artisans, craftpersons or anyone providing a service should consider and resolve (in whatever manner found most appropriate). There are many methods and choices of participation (or establishment) in economy. As mentioned above, exploitation should not be permitted anywhere, anytime. Personally, having sensitivity wrt issues, I'm vigilant against this and recommend for everyone (not just regarding music).

Local dance performers often use recordings - they rehearse and are typically reliant on the comfort of totally predictable music (tempo, etc). And so on..

Like wilderness and other forms of experience and phenomena, live music performance entails some degree of investment among patrons. Recognition is often readily given, but some will not realize the value - in its myriad forms - but think only in terms of 'profit.' Those who would seek to 'hire' a performer without the recognition do not understand the importance of fair trade. Whenever I encounter these would-be patrons, I politely decline merely on grounds of principle.

*The prevalence of amateur music-making however presents complications: easy vehicle for exploitation by venues, as well as fomenting expectation among some players to be compensated perhaps beyond a reasonable expectation. Here, I think it helps to make some distinction among types of music-making and public interaction: 'playing, performing, entertaining,' etc.

[Bertram Henze]

I sometimes think it's a rare person indeed who values an expert except as a last resort.

I always wonder how restaurants still survive, what with all the cooking on TV which should have made everybody a respectable chef by now.

Somehow you have to harvest that "last resort", such as by being a doctor or a psychiatrist, or you do a combination like creating the need for a last resort and then provide it (be a fireman with a lighter in his pocket) or the Sweeney Todd business model.

But none of that can possibly help you with music due to its free-flowing nature. It's like selling the wind.

[T Wayne]

I tend to divide this into three categories:

Playing = no pay
Performing = some pay
Entertaining = good pay

Our Friday night parking lot jam brings out a lawn chair audience of anywhere from 10 - 50. No one expects compensation (although one regular listener knitted me an afghan). I often see musicians "performing" songs at venues and that is all. They have not invested the time and effort to put together a set list that flows (often pausing to reflect "what should I / we play next?), they interact very little with the audience and are doing nothing or very little to help the event owner keep the customers there and spending money, donating our whatever the "ask" might be. Finally, there are what I call entertainers - the ones that put it all together and create a high value and enjoyable evening for the listeners - they get the bucks!

Each of the three has a place and can be rewarding.

Yes, our's is an art but there is a business in there somewhere for someone. It might be the club owner or the non-profit raising funds for a meaningful cause but someone expects to gain benefit and thus the quality of the performance is related.

I have a performer / friend who started out working clubs for little or no pay but he entertained. As the owners began to notice the difference in revenue on the nights he played they began requesting him more and he could command a better price. Thirty-five years later he still books every night he chooses to and makes a decent living.

Like most things, I get out of music what I put into it.

[billkilpatrick]

... There's a line between cheerfully sharing our talents, and being exploited for profit, and I want to stay on the good side of that line.

Exactly - shouldn't be a logic too hard for impresarios, big and small, to accept.

[Folkmusician.com]

I often see musicians "performing" songs at venues and that is all. They have not invested the time and effort to put together a set list that flows (often pausing to reflect "what should I / we play next?), they interact very little with the audience and are doing nothing or very little to help the event owner keep the customers there and spending money, donating our whatever the "ask" might be. Finally, there are what I call entertainers - the ones that put it all together and create a high value and enjoyable evening for the listeners - they get the bucks!

That is a great explanation and I 100% agree! Simply being a good musician is not enough.

[mugbucket]

I'm still working on an angle to where I can get folks to pay me to stop playing.

[Bertram Henze]

...Finally, there are what I call entertainers - the ones that put it all together and create a high value and enjoyable evening for the listeners - they get the bucks!

Thanks for making me understand why I am a session player. A free beer is the introvert's riches.

[Folkmusician.com]

I'm still working on an angle to where I can get folks to pay me to stop playing.

I am a natural at that, although they often just throw tomatoes!

[Tobin]

3. What I do begrudge, a bit, is when the venue operator is making money off musicians' willingness to "pursue their artistic side publicly." Not blaming the performers, but a little unhappy with the club owner or promoter who charges admission, sells drinks and food, and doesn't share any of the revenue with the musicians who attract his clientele. Even a "tip jar" would alleviate that situation. I've driven 150 miles 'round trip to play in a small-town cafe, where the tips yielded me less than $50, because I liked the place and I liked its owner. Besides, he gave me a really nice dinner as well.

I do agree that a venue owner should, at the very least, offer these musicians free drinks or food, etc. A tip jar goes a long way for keeping the musicians pleased as well. But I don't necessarily begrudge business owners for not doing this, in certain situations. And I guess it really depends on the type of venue it is, as well as the musical talent they want to attract.

If, say, a business owner were to offer a standard cut of drink sales to the musicians, it really complicates their business model. They have to consider the tax liability of paying the musicians, as well as insurance liability for them being "employees" or "contract labor" or whatever category they could fall under. Not that this is an insurmountable obstacle, but it is something that a small mom & pop joint may want to avoid. It's less of a legal/financial headache to compensate the players by other means.

But more importantly, I would think that the business owners would want to be very careful in how they compensate or reward musicians for playing in their establishment so that they can easily control the content and quality. Put yourself in the shoes of a small business owner who has a roadside ice house. If you discreetly give free drinks to the bluegrass jam group that plays there on Friday nights, everyone is happy. But if you have a policy where they get a percentage of drink sales, and then the word gets out, you can have all kinds of people showing up expecting to get paid for their free (and crappy) music. I'm thinking of teenagers and the college crowd who want to come in and play their self-written ballads, or whatever weird stuff they do. It can quickly turn into a headache trying to shoo away the folks who think they're going to get a few bucks from a public gig in your establishment.

It's easy for musicians to think of business owners as "them", as if they are members of some sort of evil group who profit off the backs of others while they sit in piles of money and rub their hands together with evil grins on their faces. But the truth is, small business owners struggle just as much (if not more, in many cases) as musicians. The vast majority of them would like to create an inviting atmosphere where their customers can enjoy quaint local music, and they wouldn't mind providing reasonable compensation to the musicians.

[Tom C]

When I went to Edmonton on a business trip about 10years ago, I was reading an article on how big a music scene there used to be there. But club owners started hiring lousy talent because they played cheap or free and brought in friends. Due to this the quality of the music went down.
If a place gets bluegrass band to play for free, and for some unforeseen, unexplainable reason, there were people there who never heard bluegrass, changes are they will not get a real representation of the music compared to a more accomplished band that would not play for free.