Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass CSO ON STRIKE!
- Thread starter koricancowboy
- Start date
This makes me honestly sad and infuriated at the same time. I once respected the CSO, but seeing them on strike because of their economic situation? Really? The average salary of $173 K was not enough?
I remember seeing them in 2006 on a school trip all the way from Georgia; they played Pictures at an Exhibition and Tchaikovsky's violin concerto with Joshua Bell, and it was one of the most amazing concert's I'd ever seen and likely what made me become a serious orchestral musician. I've had nothing but respect for them for decades and now, all of it feels like it just dissipated before me.
Maybe it's more complicated than I'm making it out to be, but this is inexcusable. In one article they mention all of the would-have-been concert goers saying how sad they were that they couldn't see the concert, some coming all the way from Iowa. THAT, above all else, saddens me the most. When has playing in an orchestra ever been about the money, or the name, or the prestige? What it should be about is what it has always needed to be about: making music for the audience to enjoy. When orchestra members forget that, they have forgotten what makes them musicians. The music is not about us, the music is about the music, plain and simple.
I'm sorry for this semi-long rant, but I had to get it out. I've lost all respect and hope for what was once the greatest symphony in the country, and one of the greatest in the world. This is, indeed, a sad day.
I remember seeing them in 2006 on a school trip all the way from Georgia; they played Pictures at an Exhibition and Tchaikovsky's violin concerto with Joshua Bell, and it was one of the most amazing concert's I'd ever seen and likely what made me become a serious orchestral musician. I've had nothing but respect for them for decades and now, all of it feels like it just dissipated before me.
Maybe it's more complicated than I'm making it out to be, but this is inexcusable. In one article they mention all of the would-have-been concert goers saying how sad they were that they couldn't see the concert, some coming all the way from Iowa. THAT, above all else, saddens me the most. When has playing in an orchestra ever been about the money, or the name, or the prestige? What it should be about is what it has always needed to be about: making music for the audience to enjoy. When orchestra members forget that, they have forgotten what makes them musicians. The music is not about us, the music is about the music, plain and simple.
I'm sorry for this semi-long rant, but I had to get it out. I've lost all respect and hope for what was once the greatest symphony in the country, and one of the greatest in the world. This is, indeed, a sad day.
That's funny. When the basketball players association went on strike, I didn't blame the players or Derek Fisher the player's rep. The CSO is the cream of the crop. Why shouldn't they be able to bargain for the best price- benefits included. Since when should music be free. $173,000? So what. Great athletes garner 10 times that. Why not?
EDIT- Kobe Bryant Los Angeles Lakers $25.2 million per year divided by $173,000 = 145 times......sorry my Math without a calculator sucks.
I maintain that it still shouldn't be about money. And is that really too little, honestly? For $173K a year, I'd play every concert as if it were my last! But I don't have a six figure income and live that kinda life style so what do I know? Maybe I'm an ignorant peasant.
Comparing orchestras to professional athletes is not a good comparison anyway, as they draw in more money for more reasons than popularity alone. Endorsements, trading cards, video games, movies, these are things symphony musicians don't have and likely never will. Also when NBA athletes go on strike it's even more pathetic; 7-8 figure income on strike? Yeah ok.
Stick_Player
Inactive
- Nov 13, 2009
- 4,149
- 937
- Disclosures
- Endorser: Plants vs. Zombies Pea Shooters
Kobe brings in way more butts to fill vastly more seats. Add on the the TV revenue.
The CSO cannot be compared to the Lakers.
However, if the CSO believes that they should get paid more, then they should do whatever it takes to find out if they are really worth it.
The CSO cannot be compared to the Lakers.
However, if the CSO believes that they should get paid more, then they should do whatever it takes to find out if they are really worth it.
I think that the high pay and benefits are a huge reason why they play as well as they do. I've seen the Stones who get paid way more play a far less impressive concert. High levels of musicianship are akin to skill set requires to be a surgeon or engineer who, for the most part make vastly more. The CSO is the top of the pops. If you want that level of performance you can't expect it for anything less than what it's worth, a lot. Knowing a lot of the folks in the orchestra I will say it is not plush or easy work. They earn every penny. If the board wants to go back on their word than I say strike! I stand with the musicians always. It might behoove those who are angered to reexamine the history of musicians pre and post union. Maybe the history of labor in general.
Yeah...
I'm sure the negotiations are pretty complicated and probably there's only half the story in the article. I think I know why athletes make so much money. I never worry about jazz trios at clubs, but when I'm going to see a big band for the same price ticket, I worry about those guys sometimes.
I just think it would have been classy if they had played that one show. Maybe it was too late to call all the ticketholders, sure. But, you know, they're there, you're there, why not? We all like music? Someone had pointed out that they had played a free concert recently, so of course the musicians had no moral problem with playing for free. The strike was supposed to be last-minute, so it's not like they all had made hot dates for that night because they knew ahead of time that they'd strike anyway, RIGHT??
Like, it would have been cool if they said "Okay, we'll play tonight 'cause this is some last minute crap, but it's on y'all to cancel the rest of the week in a dignified manner that will reflect well on both our parties and make everyone appreciate that we're truly trying to come to an agreement and that this is just part of the process." Grownups understand things like that.
I'm in the Editor's Guild. I'm kind of a kneejerk anti-union person, though, I admit. I feel that my work distinguishes me and that collective bargaining in my situation creates a kind of friction. My feeling is that unions basically amount to price-fixing, which is illegal for AMD and Intel to do, but I guess it's okay for workers. But people have a right to assemble. In many historical situations, I suppose it's been a great idea. EDIT: And many current, non-historical situations too! I had reordered some of my sentences when initially posting and it muddled my point.
I have my theoretical moral ideals, but sometimes life is a little messier than that. Just like on Star Trek!
I love thinking about this kind of stuff. It's sad that people have blanket modes of thought about things. The comments on the article that make dumb comparisons to the teachers' strike in Chicago are sad.
I'm sure the negotiations are pretty complicated and probably there's only half the story in the article. I think I know why athletes make so much money. I never worry about jazz trios at clubs, but when I'm going to see a big band for the same price ticket, I worry about those guys sometimes.
I just think it would have been classy if they had played that one show. Maybe it was too late to call all the ticketholders, sure. But, you know, they're there, you're there, why not? We all like music? Someone had pointed out that they had played a free concert recently, so of course the musicians had no moral problem with playing for free. The strike was supposed to be last-minute, so it's not like they all had made hot dates for that night because they knew ahead of time that they'd strike anyway, RIGHT??
Like, it would have been cool if they said "Okay, we'll play tonight 'cause this is some last minute crap, but it's on y'all to cancel the rest of the week in a dignified manner that will reflect well on both our parties and make everyone appreciate that we're truly trying to come to an agreement and that this is just part of the process." Grownups understand things like that.
I'm in the Editor's Guild. I'm kind of a kneejerk anti-union person, though, I admit. I feel that my work distinguishes me and that collective bargaining in my situation creates a kind of friction. My feeling is that unions basically amount to price-fixing, which is illegal for AMD and Intel to do, but I guess it's okay for workers. But people have a right to assemble. In many historical situations, I suppose it's been a great idea. EDIT: And many current, non-historical situations too! I had reordered some of my sentences when initially posting and it muddled my point.
I have my theoretical moral ideals, but sometimes life is a little messier than that. Just like on Star Trek!
I love thinking about this kind of stuff. It's sad that people have blanket modes of thought about things. The comments on the article that make dumb comparisons to the teachers' strike in Chicago are sad.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0B6HBAue2sNMUV4cmV6eDFXVzg/edit
Remember that those compensation figures include the players with titled chairs-it is much more than what most of the players are getting. (think about concertmaster pay!) Also, they had already played a couple concerts past their contract's expiration in good faith.
Remember that those compensation figures include the players with titled chairs-it is much more than what most of the players are getting. (think about concertmaster pay!) Also, they had already played a couple concerts past their contract's expiration in good faith.
Industrial relations disputes are incredibly complex and bring in all sorts of legal and economic issues that are specific to the parties involved, and we don't know the details at all. You also have to remember that these musicians do this for a living; it's not just a well-paid hobby for them.
I'm not a big fan of most unions, but I imagine there would need to be some pretty concerning issues to convince an entire orchestra to go on strike.
I'm not a big fan of most unions, but I imagine there would need to be some pretty concerning issues to convince an entire orchestra to go on strike.
I do agree that the musicians deserve the best pay and benefits they can possibly get, and I'm glad they fought for it, but I don't think they handled it well. They didn't have to blow off the concert to get what they wanted. They put money before the audience.
Invalid Link Removed
Good read on classical musicians striking. Makes a good point about the flaws of the typical orchestra business model.
Good read on classical musicians striking. Makes a good point about the flaws of the typical orchestra business model.
I like Reason's articles, forgot all about them after having my fill of politics 4 years ago!
Yeah, the way the money works is what keeps string music "classical". If these organizations had to dissolve and you had these musicians hit the streets, what would happen? They'd probably make it up w/ volume (not the decibel kind), I guess. Maybe then we'd see some wacky **** go down. Nobody likes change, though. I wouldn't delight in musicians losing their benefits or whatever. But shoot, look at the jazz world.
Yeah, the way the money works is what keeps string music "classical". If these organizations had to dissolve and you had these musicians hit the streets, what would happen? They'd probably make it up w/ volume (not the decibel kind), I guess. Maybe then we'd see some wacky **** go down. Nobody likes change, though. I wouldn't delight in musicians losing their benefits or whatever. But shoot, look at the jazz world.
Just a big important thing about the NBA comparison, that was the owners locking out the players so they could get more of the revenue and press reset on some contacts they signed. This is also the case with the NHL now.
