CRAZY perspective I got from a long-time DJ last night

[Pilgrim]

To the OP, worry about your band and let the rest of us worry about ours. My primary occupation pays the bills and gig $$ buys gig toys. $100 per gig for me to play some tunes and have fun is a good deal.

Agreed. As the old joke goes, "We already agreed on what you are, now we're just haggling about price."

I seldom make $100 per night, but my band is mostly retirees and we're in it as a hobby and a way to play in public. We play a mix of classic country, 50's and 60's oldies, and we often play for city agencies at Senior Centers and dances for disabled young people. Not everyone would want those gigs.

Every band situation is different. Every market is different too. We'll make our judgments about appropriate fees, you are welcome to make yours.

 

[SaucyJackBass]

I laugh at this thread.

You want $1,000 a night to play someone else's songs almost as good as they can but not as good as the CD the DJ spins?

Get back in the shed, write some material, and try and promote your artistic creation. Original artists play for door all the time. Why? We are trying to build a following for our creation. Not hoping someone will pay me ot for one more rendition of Simple Man. You get paid based on how much entertainment you can bring. And if someone wants to get on stage for $50 to entertain the crowd with Rockin In The Free World, then that is their choice.

If you are worth $1,000, then someone will pay you that.

 

[hbarcat]

A few more observations:

1) Most bands playing the local circuit for $400 - $800 per gig are screwing the government by not reporting their income and paying taxes on it. The bottom line is, even part time musicians with a day job should treat their gigging band as a genuine business, provided they're actually earning a profit every quarter, albeit a modest profit. I don't have sympathy for bands who feel entitled to a net profit of hundreds of dollars for every gig they play, yet consider it unreasonable to keep an accurate account of their revenues and expenses and report them as required by law.

2) It was suggested that musicians guilds are useful to keep pay from being unacceptably low. Fine idea, but for that to work, the guild must insist that its members adhere to strict professional standards. And that leaves a very large pool of hack bands who won't be up to those standards. Plus a lot of good bands who will resent being told what to do and refuse to join.

3) Like any other skilled profession, the way to get paid well is to develop and maintain a good reputation.

 

[bass12]

From my perspective here in Montreal, the bar scene has become a hobbiest's scene. People rarely expect the kind of band performances that were more common back in the day - and bar owners don't want to pay for professional-level bands. Even the bar bands comprising pro-level musicians tend not to be as good as what was previously on offer because musicians no longer want to invest the time and effort when all they have to do is show up and run through the same tired set-lists that every bar band in town draws from (and get paid the same amount that musicians were getting paid fifty years ago). As for DJs, I haven't seen them losing out to bands in the way described by the OP so that might be a regional trend. Last month I played at Montreal's annual automobile trade show. They used to hire around fifteen bands to be set up at various locations around the venue. Last year the number of bands was down to five or six. This year there were only three bands. Who picked up the slack? DJs.

 

[J-Mags]

Anyways, back to the DJ's gripe - why would I hire a DJ when I can run this 24x7 for $26.95 / month including licensing fees for my business?

Pandora for Business - Only $26.95 a month!

Same reason you'd hire a band when you could hire a DJ for less.

 

[two fingers]

IME musicians who think they suck are rare and (aside from myself) they're always actually pretty good.

What about the ones who actually suck? I guess they think they're amazing.

 

[J-Mags]

A few more observations:

1) Most bands playing the local circuit for $400 - $800 per gig are screwing the government by not reporting their income and paying taxes on it. The bottom line is, even part time musicians with a day job should treat their gigging band as a genuine business, provided they're actually earning a profit every quarter, albeit a modest profit. I don't have sympathy for bands who feel entitled to a net profit of hundreds of dollars for every gig they play, yet consider it unreasonable to keep an accurate account of their revenues and expenses and report them as required by law.

2) It was suggested that musicians guilds are useful to keep pay from being unacceptably low. Fine idea, but for that to work, the guild must insist that its members adhere to strict professional standards. And that leaves a very large pool of hack bands who won't be up to those standards. Plus a lot of good bands who will resent being told what to do and refuse to join.

3) Like any other skilled profession, the way to get paid well is to develop and maintain a good reputation.

I am rabidly pro-union, but musicians unions are problematic because you can't have a bureaucracy determining what art is. When Rock n' Roll was first invented, musicians unions upholding "standards" were dead set against it. A lot of the early rock artists couldn't play in New York or other big cities.

A lot of people on this site seem to think that there's an interchangeable cover band universe, where players are distinguished by quality and professionalism rather than style or artistic license. But even if you unionized that, you'd still have to compete with DJs, people playing originals, etc., unless you wanted a bunch of old hacks bureaucratizing all forms of fun, which is how NY used to be.

What about the ones who actually suck? I guess they think they're amazing.

I think you've answered your own question.

 

[neo 7]

I still want to see your band. Not to bash, just curious.

I would also like to see your band.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Touched a nerve, obviously.

It got much worse after my simple question.

 

[RustyAxe]

So ... the combined wisdom of TB ... the consensus is ...

 

[Brad Johnson]

Being a musician at all - especially full time professional - is kind of self indulgent. It’s not like you’re putting out fires, doing surgery, or inventing a solution to world hunger, you’re making pretty sounds come out of a box. 99% of the population can’t tell the difference between your pretty sounds and the next bass player’s sounds, and most of them don’t even know there’s a bass player in the room.

But whatever...

The level of self-disdain on TB is monumental.

 

[hbarcat]

I am rabidly pro-union, but musicians unions are problematic because you can't have a bureaucracy determining what art is. When Rock n' Roll was first invented, musicians unions upholding "standards" were dead set against it. A lot of the early rock artists couldn't play in New York or other big cities.

That's an excellent point. It's relatively easy to set standards for workers unions (electrical, plumbing, service work, etc) because there are solid reasons for health, safety, and quality to set specific standards that everyone can agree on. Artists are a different type of worker.

I can imagine the chaos that would be created if a musicians guild insisted that its members always perform sober - no drugs or alcohol. Such a rule is a given when working construction.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Clearly, that's not what I said. Obviously, there are musicians who are really, really talented and skilled, and the level of talent and skill is widely varied across all musicians. There are professional triangle players - *that* is the definition of specialized. What I'd said was that "being a musician" - including all of those varied levels of talent and skill and differences in instrumentation - is far less specialized across society than being a surgeon. Those guys can get any gig they want, and even have waiting lists. Same with bridge builders. If you like, you can include virtuosos.

Hack musicians are certainly in far greater supply than even the least talented and skilled general practitioner doctor working in a walk-in clinic in rural anywhere. Musicians are everywhere.

Which really doesn't explain why so many many non-musicians wish they had musical ability... and no, I don't think most people have it, unless clapping on the wrong beat counts as a skill.

 

[Father Gino]

Musicians are not, never have, and never will be as needed, necessary, or useful to society as doctors, mechanics, Cooks, garbage collectors, etc.

Same would be true of athletes, phones and TVs. Yet these industries generate obscene amounts of money. Same is true of most things really, short of food & water. Society (driven by marketers) sets the worth of everything. Music seems to be an intrinsic human need and was with us long before the concept of money.

 

[EdO.]

IMO, songwriting is where the real talent lies.
You just have to watch YouTube to see 8 year olds that can play circles around many of us!

The real money in the music business is definitely in songwriting, period. If you can write a catchy melody and a few hooks you're in the right vein. If you can't figure out how to make it connect with an audience though it's still just masturbatory.

*sigh* I'm not really in a business. I don't need a dime from music. In fact, I blow more on gear than I ever make these days. Thus, I'm not "bitter" because I can't "make a living" playing music. That doesn't change the point. Live music venues (in MY area) are drying up because most local bands suck.
Just because you can manage to sucker your 35 closest friends and coworkers into coming out to see you, that doesn't mean you aren't hurting things in the long run by being a horrible $300 band.
If your band isn't horrible, I'm not talking to you. But, almost every $300 band I've ever seen/heard, THOUGHT they were amazing. Oh they are anything but.

For quality bands (the ones who get that you play what the audience wants to hear/dance too, know to dress appropriately, know not to blow peoples ears out, know how to keep whoever is hiring them happy, know how to play their instruments AND how to do it in an ensemble setting etc) there is plenty of work and the money is still pretty decent. Maybe not make-a-living-at-it decent but enough to justify the time and expense put into it. Basically you just gotta have your $hit together. So many just simply don't have a clue...

Anyhow, one restaurant I have gone to see some of the better local bands would run DJ style music during the bands 25 min breaks. That’s when you’d see dance floor packed with the horny suburban MILFs.

Which if you're paying any attention at all should begin to give you a clue. As to what kind of music people frequenting that venue (at least) want to hear. Both from the bands playing there and what the DJ is playing as well. Take the hint.

But let me ask you, what are you going to provide that will increase his bottom line? Are you prepared to increase his bottom line to the point where he has no choice buy to hire you? If so, please explain your plan because there are a whole lot of members here that are looking for that solution, including me.

Answered above.

The bottom line, a band is business and needs to be handled as such. And like any other business, you’d better understand your market, and your how to sell your product. If you sell services to a business, you’d better be either making that business money, or saving them money. If you can’t do that, you are not worth it. If you are selling to the corporate event/ wedding market, you’d best be playing very commercial covers with as much glitz as you can muster, or starve.

There's another hint right there. Well stated.

 

[BassAndReeds]

Same would be true of athletes, phones and TVs. Yet these industries generate obscene amounts of money. Same is true of most things really, short of food & water. Society (driven by marketers) sets the worth of everything. Music seems to be an intrinsic human need and was with us long before the concept of money.

And how much do AAA baseball players make? Seems to me there’s a lot of people paying to be in sports leagues, some of those players are really good. They just do it because they love the sport.

And how much are Jay Z and Beyoncé worth? Probably more than most sports players

But I think you fail to grasp the conversation we’re having on this thread

 

[3Liter]

T

Which if you're paying any attention at all should begin to give you a clue. As to what kind of music people frequenting that venue (at least) want to hear. Both from the bands playing there and what the DJ is playing as well. Take the hint.

Oh I get it all right. They aren't dancing to the Tom Petty covers.

 

[Father Gino]

The particular post I'm responding to says musicians are mere accessories compared to doctors and lawyers and etc. My response is first that music itself is important for everyone, and second that great musicians provide certain intangibles to civilization. I don't recall "pedestrian" being part of it.

Wait a minute Bunkeroo. I thought you were an entertainer and popular music was on par with pro wrestling? Does the WWE provide certain intangibles to civilization?

Probably.

God help us all

 

[Father Gino]

And how much are Jay Z and Beyoncé worth?

Nothing at all to me. But that’s part of the point.

But I think you fail to grasp the conversation we’re having on this thread

Which conversation would that be? There are quite a few here

 

[BassAndReeds]

Nothing at all to me. But that’s part of the point.



Which conversation would that be? There are quite a few here

This thread is about bands that don’t play for a lot of money. Let’s try to stay on topic a little bit