On Amateurs & Professionals - Page 2

Marcus Johnson · #21 03-08-2005, 09:56 AM

Guess I'm a pro, 'cuz my tax returns say so. I try to act like one.

Sam, in answer to your question in post #5, it doesn't mean squat to me if I find out someone has a day gig. I just finished about three weeks of gigs with a guitar player who shows up once a year and sits in with my duo. I think he sells nutritional supplements for a living, or something. He plays better than a lot of guys who are fulltimers. He has a blast when he plays, no angst whatsoever. Great guy, I'd play with him anytime.

I guess most of the people I play with are fulltime pros, but really, it doesn't usually occur to me to ask, and it's really none of my business.

Ed Fuqua · #22 03-09-2005, 01:04 PM

a) If you're a full-time player, what does it mean to you when you find out someone is not? It sort of doesn't come up, but only sort of. At Peter Karl's NYE party I ran into and got to play with ANdy Middleton, who's a killer tenro player (and plays good piano for a tenor player). We had a great time playing, so we talked about how to do it some more. But I work a day job and Andy is moving from full time player to university teacher/player so we don't have any overlap in time that would be open for a session. So for me, if there's a gig I could call him for, I will cause I dug playing with him. But I'm gonna call him after I go through the list of guys with whom I play with regularly. And he'll do the same for me.

b) If you're a part-time player how much of your playing is with full-time players? Have you felt left out for being a part-timer? The majority of "part time" players I know are all killer musicians, the rest are good to very good musicians. So are the "full time" players. The thing that's hard is that if you are playing "full time", in NYC that means AT LEAST a gig a night (or you aren't making your nut)if not 2 or 3 gigs in a day. So those guys tend to have sessions and rehearsals during the day. Us PT guys, who teach or work a day job during the day can only do sessions or rehearsals at night. So, much of the time, never the mane shall tweet.
The other thing I would say is that, given a choice between providing employment to a bassist who you personally like and whose playing you like who makes their living from playing music and a bassist who you personally like and whose playing you like but who has a day job, well you see where I'm going. Also, you gotta 6 week tour of Japan, do you take a guy who doesn't have to arrange for vacation time or the guy who can not only make that tour but the 3 weeks on the west coast when you get back? Do you use the guy for the recording that can make any and all supporting tour gigs or the one that can't get more than two weeks off from their day gig? Etcetera. It's about availablity, about supporting those who are REALLY scuffling and have committed themselves to just playing.

On the flip side, I get called to do a lot of jazz gigs that somebody is subbing out cause they got a higher paying club date or pit band gig or whatever. You get a lot of guys in the "downtown" side of the music who work more day gigs, cause that's all they want to play and there are even fewer 'out' gigs than jazz gigs.

But I side with YOKO and, as i said in the bailed thread, this whole idea of being a "jazz impostor" is lame. I can only assume that you're being called to do jazz gigs cause there's not another bassist in driving distance.

As this relates to SAM'L's questions, in the midst of the tune part time or full time doesn't matter. What matters is - are they communicating WITH ME? Are they able to convey something personal and real? Are we having a conversation or are they just going through the motions? Do they have something to say? Are they listening? Are they playing with intent? THAT'S what matters, not how many gigs they have or whether or not they get paid.

The definition of professional does state that it is the mere act of receiving financial remuneration in exchange for a service. But the secondary definition is performing a task or service "with the characteristics conforming to the technical standards" of that task or service. Playing an improvised walking line for a given harmony is the technical standard that a jazz bassist must meet.

Scooperman · #23 03-09-2005, 04:37 PM

There's another angle here that hasn't yet been addressed in this thread (or maybe I just missed it), which is attitude.

I know people who posses serious music skills and knowledge, who make the majority of their income from music in one way or another, but whom I still wouldn't consider to be a professional because their approach to the gig isn't what I would hold to be professional.

Everybody encounters gigs that are difficult, whether the difficulties are musical in nature or (more likely) are caused by the conditions surrounding the gig. The professional handles these situations from the perspective of somebody who feels that they have a job to do and attempt to do the job in a manner that will get the job done with as little friction and as much enjoyment for all concerned as possible.

Sometimes professionalism can interfere with Art. Or vice versa. In the Jazz world, there are numerous of examples of musicians of the very highest caliber, geniuses even, who have acted extremely unprofessionally on the gig.

Charles Mingus is one of my favorite bassists, a great artist and a true giant, but there's no way I'd hire him to play a Bar Mitzvah!

I think professionalism is best understood from a business perspective - A club owner will care that the band will do what it's contracted to do, a sideman will care that the leader will pay him what he promised and he will fulfill whatever obligations a leader has to a band, etc.

Whether or not you make a living from playing does count, however. Certainly if your livelihood depends on others hiring you, then you probably will adopt a more professional attitude or at the very least be concerned about appearing to be professional.

From the point of view of artistic relevance and achievement, professionalism is really a red herring. And the money part of being a professional is even more irrelevant in that regard. Charles Ives literally never made a dime from his music and yet I doubt that I could name 10 American composers more influential than he.

By the way, I’m positive that neither Mingus or Ives would hire me!

anonymous0726 · #24 03-09-2005, 09:41 PM

The original question was 'Full-time v. Part-time'. But your points are good on the other topic.

The club smiles of you make him a ****load of dough, otherwise he doesn't feel compelled to hire you back, generally. If it's a restaurant gig, if the room is full and nobody complains, then you're in pretty good shape.

brianrost · #25 03-10-2005, 07:46 AM

My answer to b) would pretty much echo Ed's above, basically I get "left out" as soon as scheduling gets messy. Even something as trivial as being unable to drop by someone's apartment during the day to jam on tunes costs me gigs to guys who are free to do that.

I've been squeezed out of a few really sweet band lineups over the years once the decision to go full-time is made by the leader.

It's a drag, but that's the way it goes.

Ed Fuqua · #26 03-11-2005, 02:47 PM

Just to touch on a few things that I missed the first time through.

1. "that animal" - well, as loathe as I am to admit it, Bruce does kinda have a point. There are far more cats in the Ray Parker/Mike McGuirk -to-just bought a DB side of the equation than there are RP/MM-to-on 800 records/touring with Jim Hall or Sonny Rollins kind of player. I mean, I'm sitting at my desk at the day gig typing. I'm sure that Peter Washington (and that sort of player) has more things to do than get involved in something like this. Although, SAM'L has said that there are a number of heavy, playing the world with everybody kind of players that lurk and or surf through.

2. "pro-level players" - well OK. I don't care how many gigs somebody has been paid for, I'm not going to consider them a "pro level player" if they can't cut the mustard. Rob, I could never send you on a gig to sub for me, but I could sub for you without, I'm willing to wager, even opening the book. Money doesn't matter in this instance, only the ability to perform. Could I sub for Peter Washington? I could certainly acquit myself on the gig, I have the skill sets to do that. But am I going to be able to communicate on as deep a level as the guys that play with PW are accustomed to?
Well, in all honesty, no. I could hold my own, but that's about it.

So, instead of amateur and professional, why not think of serious or not-serious musician. If you're serious about playing, then you do what it takes to get deeper into teh music. If you're not, you don't. It doesn't say ANYTHING about what level you're at, there can be beginners who are more serious about their art than I am right now. But those who can hear, recognize each other on the stand or at the session. You can tell who's working and who's shucking. And THAT'S the thing that seperates the mensch from the goys, not are you saying something deep but are you at least SAYING SOMETHING.

Jim Hall may not call me for a gig, but the only time I played with him we were at least playing TOGETHER.

abaguer · #27 03-14-2005, 04:38 AM

I'm still playing Disco Infernal.

In NYC it doesn't matter to me one bit who is part time or full time because there are LOADS OF GREAT PLAYERS in this town plying their craft every night somehwere and it doesn't matter a bit whether they are getting paid $25-50 or $300-350 for the gig.

For the last 13 years I've averaged 150-180 dates a year. When 80-120 were club dates, I was a full time musician along with part time teaching. When club dates were more like 50 a year I worked part time outside music to supplement my income.

These days what's important to me is to keep up a lot of gigging dates so if there's only 50 club dates, then I'm off to Europe and Canada on short tours to keep the ball rolling (that's the good thing about working part time); if I can make the bread and the gigs here, then I do that.

What's important to me at this stage is how much time I'm spending with my instrument and music. That becomes more important to me the older I get. How much time I spend doing it. It doesn't matter if it's in a reh room, living room, concert hall or wedding factory. The important thing is to keep playing.

Bruce Lindfield · #28 03-14-2005, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Fuqua

Just to touch on a few things that I missed the first time through.

1. "that animal" - well, as loathe as I am to admit it, Bruce does kinda have a point. There are far more cats in the Ray Parker/Mike McGuirk -to-just bought a DB side of the equation than there are RP/MM-to-on 800 records/touring with Jim Hall or Sonny Rollins kind of player. I mean, I'm sitting at my desk at the day gig typing. I'm sure that Peter Washington (and that sort of player) has more things to do than get involved in something like this. Although, SAM'L has said that there are a number of heavy, playing the world with everybody kind of players that lurk and or surf through.
.

Yes - I've met at least 30 (probably more) great UK Jazz DB players and it would be nice to have even one of them, appear on TB - they all seem to be interested in passing on their knowledge/experience and like chatting to other players (of all levels) or Jazz fans...etc.

They just don't ever get to sit in front of a PC , as far as I can make out..?

There was a 3-part BBC TV documentary series on recently, called Jazz Britannia - about UK Jazz and it was interesting to have that local perspective - so it's always going to be the case that a Jazz scene is going to be compared to the US, so it would be nice to have discussions which compare what it's like to be a pro Jazz player in the UK compared with the same thing in the US?

brianrost · #29 03-14-2005, 10:22 AM

I've seen a number of famous pro players pop up on net forums out of curiosity only to be run off in a matter of days by yahoos.

The tales of various Jeff Berlin and Carol Kaye flamefests are still talked about.

Bruce Lindfield · #30 03-14-2005, 10:49 AM

Well most Jazz DB pros are hardly... "famous" ....

As I said, I could name about 30 from the UK, but I doubt that anybody apart from the tiny minority who make up : "UK Jazz Fans" would have any idea who they were!!

And even then, probably only in relation to playing with a slightly less obscure Alto or Tenor Sax player!!