Equitable Pay for Horn Section

[MikeBass]

12 - year professional on various horns here:

there are three very important things to consider :

1) while I can understand the prorate sentiment, the fact is the most gigs are pay-for-day, rather than an hourly wage. The fact is that these guys are giving up a whole night for a gig.

2) I think it's a big problem that you have not discussed it with the horn players. and despite what someone else said, it is a big deal for you to call in horn players for a cameo/ moonlighting gig, expect them to deliver and give up the whole night, which often does include learning songs that you're not familiar with and possibly making charts and then still assume that for some reason they deserve less than you. especially considering the bass players play the least notes of anyone, hopefully

3) unless you're making an insane amount of more money on big gigs, it's insulting that you wouldn't break them off evenly for a few hundred dollars split eight ways

there is zero chance I would accept this as a gig. Ill accept whatever my cut is from bandleaders, because its THEIR show, but if we're talking about performing a set for $60 on instruments as taxing as brass are, while the core, invested members who played easier instruments, and didn't have to cram to learn the set, make over a hundred, then I would definetly suggest they either suck it or find midi horns

Really?!?!?
Standing on stage playing non-stop with 9+ pounds of wood strapped around your neck, than load out (not to mention load in) a rig thats gonna be at least one trip (I'll bet at least 3) and more than likely north of 60 pounds.....hell, maybe I should have stuck with playing flute,clarinet and sax....
And lets not talk if you have to double on upright.....

Again, this is a BUSINESS.
Treat it as such.
If they are willing to play for a given amount- then that IS fair. Regardless of what else everyone else is making.
Problem is, most don't understand this.

If they don't like the terms, then they don't have to accept the gig. Seems pretty easy.
If they take it, and then get pissed that they didn't get what someone else got- well, then IMO they are not very professional. THEY accepted the agreement.

 

[jnuts1]

I'm with you mike, there is no way the other members play MORE than bass. well maybe drums but those are not notes Eddododo.

what I find insulting is that you think bass or the core is the easy instrument, I have never seen a bassist sit down & have a smoke or a beer or walk away during a song. now I have seen quite a few horns do it. how hard is it to blow a solo for 2 minutes & then go back to chilling on stage? not very

 

[electracoyote]

I once played with a country band where no one got paid except the steel guitar player. The rest of the gig money went toward the studio.

Why only the steel guitar player?

Because we literally would have been half a band without him. Our sound and authenticity would have suffered tremendously.

I agree, you have to weigh this out and come to a fair agreement in the minds of all parties. But when you go comparing notes played, songs played, ounces of sweat produced, net pounds lifted, etc., at the expense of time put into the gig (which by all accounts is pretty much equal) this becomes a slippery slope.

You could ask your horns to show up for load in and stay for load out. Or ask them to chime in with some background harmonies.

I'm playing guitar and keys in my current main band, and on a number of keyboard songs, I can honestly say, I'm not working very hard at all. I'm literally one-handing it. On the AC/DC songs, I'm playing guitar parts I teach to my begginer students. Should I have my pay docked for that? I don't think so.

 

[eddododo]

Lets remember youre talking to a bassist..

I get thatt bass isnt easy (though electric bass is alot easier to hold for a gig than brass. It just is... ) but my point is that just because YOU view it as an easy night doesnt mean it is.

and for whatever you think the subtractive burden is of playing for less time or whatever is more than made up by having to cram and learn somebody else's songs that you're much less familiar with.

I play bass, I play stand up bass I bring both to gigs, just like many horn players bring more than one horn to a gig. let me tell you I don't feel any less exhausted at the end of the night, especially considering the most horn players were raised in high school band, and more than carry their own weight with the equipment..

And keep in mind my point was not that it was unfair to pay them less, only that it should be a fair amount; if you're not makingall- that-much money they shouldn't get dirt just because you somehow think they contributed less. you get paid by the venue to perform not to load in not to practice not even to play a bunch of notes. if the horns are so crucial to the performance at large then you don't think that they should be more fairly compensated than half, then I hope you don't ever need a legitimate horn player in your career.


This mentality, or at least the more extremely capitalistic representations, are why bassists and guitarists are becoming as irrelevant a novelty as horn and string players are; why pay ANYONE when you can have a producer just sample the 10 seconds of any instrument that people want to hear... disenfranchising horn players, or ANY musicians, by trying to figure out how little you can pay them leads to the degradation of our craft; anybody who thinks that bass is immune by somehow being essential, compared to the keyed/sub-bass sound of taste, are foolish

and I retain an important point for the context of my argument: this is a young, small-named band hiring its peers in a community to perform, not a label cutting you a check for an hour of session work. we're talking about their scene; any couple-of-hundred dollar-split-8-ways gig is NOT a cut-throat bottomline business venture, it is an investment of time and ego to passion. If you expect some trained, passionate musicians to come to support and complete YOUR OWN PASSIONATE VISION, but you somehow do not respect those same people who complete your vision enough to give them a reasonable cut for their investment in your dream, then your sense of entitlement is a little... something. They do not even need equal pay; they are temps, outside hires; you get to negotiate what they make. but to say that at this level of performance that guys who give up their whole night to play for a band do not deserve a relevant amount of money.. Ill pass

 

[jeffbrown]

My original reply to the op was in assumption that the horn section was also involved in set and strike, just like everybody else in the band. If they're "white glovers," then whatever you arrange to pay them is what they get.

LOL re don't encourage the tenor player.

When all is said and done, horns are just as much musicians as bass players. Their time is just as valuable. If you want "equal" time for them playing, why not, as some else posted, work up arrangements to use them more? Or have them, as another suggested, double on voice, percussion etc? As a former horn player, I'd rather play than not. As for notes-per-cubic-minute, I also played in a big band (Basie, Ellington, etc.) and we played 4 45 minute sets per gig. It was work, but man oh man, it was FUN!

 

[fdeck]

I'm a sideman, and a string player. As a bassist, I get paid for the notes that I don't play.

In my view the simplest thing is to pay sidemen the going rate for sidemen. Sometimes that will be less than what the band makes, sometimes more.

If it turns out that being a sideman is so much easier and more profitable than belonging to a band, more people will become sidemen, and the pay scales will equalize.

Trying to quibble over who is doing more work, or suffering more, or who is at fault, is pointless. A mediocre string player has 8 years of private classical lessons under their belt, and practices continuously in order to maintain their chops.

In the 1940's, wind players earned pretty good money because every dance band needed 15 wind players. Most of those players have been squeezed out of the music business by trends in popular music. We are now at the point where gigs are so few and far between that only a small handful of players can maintain their chops at a level where they are capable of doing freelance work. Those players know their value, and if you try to squeeze any further, you're going to get what you pay for.

With all of that said, I tend to take an equal cut when it's a low profile gig and I know that there isn't a lot of money. I also chip in with setup and load-out whenever possible. As far as what you get for your money when you hire me, part of it is knowing that you will be taken care of without having to think about it at all, in between when I accept the gig, and when the first note gets played.

 

[icecycle66]

Hmm, since horn players frequently cause me to turn away from paying to see a band, you could make them pay you.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

I agree. Musicians are not paid by the note or by the song (this sounds like that National Lampoon "Mr. Rogers" skit).

People should be paid for the time they have set aside and devoted to being in the venue. It's not their fault they are not needed on every song. That doesn't change the fact they have to invest just as much time as everyone else (schleping gear aside).

But that's the thing. When you consider schlepping gear in and out of a bar you're typically looking at anywhere between an additional 1-4 hours worth of work. And heck, and at more prestigious venues you tend to have to load in sometimes as much as 5-7 hours before down beat. There's definitely a time difference no matter how you cut it.

As to the person asking about singers, IME, they help with the PA and everyone elses gear. Plus they're the only member that tends to have to do real work between songs (banter, sell merch, inform people who we are and where our next gig is, etc...), so they definitely pull their weight.

 

[electracoyote]

As to the person asking about singers, IME, they help with the PA and everyone elses gear. Plus they're the only member that tends to have to do real work between songs (banter, sell merch, inform people who we are and where our next gig is, etc...), so they definitely pull their weight.

Not sure how many female singers you've worked with, and not to sound sexist, but they don't normally do all that much schlepping, or carry anything all that heavy. But I wholeheartedly agree they do make up for it with the extra responsibility they have for fronting the band and being the voice and face of the band, so we always let them off the hook with load in and out.

 

[bluesbass99]

Thanks for the input to all. Some of it was very interesting and helpful. The horn section will be handled more as a contract job in the future. I say this for a couple of reasons. Our primary source of revenue is still from clubs. Since most of us depend upon this money to live on, it forces us to keep overhead low. So, we could never ask them to join our band on a full-time basis and receive the same pay. If that happened, I would be looking for replacements for virtually everyone else. Secondly, the horn section we have apparently view themselves as contractors, too. They usually show up right before the set they are to play in, leave as soon as the show is over, and do not participate in generating any business, nor help with load-in, load-out, etc. I'm cool with that arrangement, and I think they are, too. No complaints on my part. They are fine musicians, but on those gigs where I can afford to pay them more (e.g., weddings), they get just a little less than what we get. It all comes down to an economic consideration to me. Thanks again for the input to all.

 

[eddododo]

Thanks for the input to all. Some of it was very interesting and helpful. The horn section will be handled more as a contract job in the future. I say this for a couple of reasons. Our primary source of revenue is still from clubs. Since most of us depend upon this money to live on, it forces us to keep overhead low. So, we could never ask them to join our band on a full-time basis and receive the same pay. If that happened, I would be looking for replacements for virtually everyone else. Secondly, the horn section we have apparently view themselves as contractors, too. They usually show up right before the set they are to play in, leave as soon as the show is over, and do not participate in generating any business, nor help with load-in, load-out, etc. I'm cool with that arrangement, and I think they are, too. No complaints on my part. They are fine musicians, but on those gigs where I can afford to pay them more (e.g., weddings), they get just a little less than what we get. It all comes down to an economic consideration to me. Thanks again for the input to all.

solid approach, sorry for ranting!

 

[warnergt]

Offer them what you think is fair.
If they take it, then it's a square deal.

+1 There should be no expectation to get paid the same as
anybody else. All jobs are not equal. You get paid what you
agree to.

I love horns. I wish more bands had them. I'd love to be in a
band with horns. But, when they're only playing half the tunes,
I don't see how they can have any expectation to get the same
pay unless they have some other way to justify it (booking,
PA, ability to draw a crowd, etc.)

It sounds to me like this is a bit of an experiment to see how
well the horns work. When you go from a 5-piece to an
8-piece, you'll quickly find that you're getting less take-home
pay. If you were forced to split the pay evenly, you might
find that you were happier without the horn section. A horn
section demanding equal pay may result with a horn section
receiving no pay.

 

[mellowinman]

Not sure how many female singers you've worked with, and not to sound sexist, but they don't normally do all that much schlepping, or carry anything all that heavy. But I wholeheartedly agree they do make up for it with the extra responsibility they have for fronting the band and being the voice and face of the band, so we always let them off the hook with load in and out.

Last gig we played, my wife and I loaded the truck, unloaded the truck, and did most of the work carrying all the gear up and down two flights of stairs.

The drummer used a handicapped elevator that was slow as molasses, and the lead guitar player was late because of a rugby match, and then couldn't help much on the load out because "someone cleated him."

I have never worked with a female player or singer who didn't do at least twice as much as the other band members.

Nor would I.

 

[two fingers]

Yep. They are contractors, not band members. Make them an offer for every penny you can afford to pay without pissing off the rest of the band. They can take it or leave it. You just have to be prepared for what to do if they turn it down. Have you had anyone threaten to not hire you if you don't show up with horns? If not, why bother? (And don't get me wrong. I love a good horn section and have played in bands with them several times.)

All I'm saying is that it sounds like you really can't afford a horn section. So either quit hiring them or possibly get a keys player to come on those gigs where you really need "horns" and have him/her cover the horns on keys. Of course, it's not the same. But as long as you play the right songs, most audience members couldn't care less if you have "real" horns or not. I know of a band around here that gets TEN GRAND for some weddings. They do horns on keys, or if the keys guy is covering piano they play to tracks. There's not a horn in sight but there are even sax solos and Tower of Power type horn stabs coming from thin air. Did I mention they make up to TEN GRAND to play weddings? I filled in for them once and made well over a grand myself.

The point is you're sweating this way to hard. Offer them a dollar amount. If they turn it down, find a keys guy for those gigs where you "have to" have horns. Nobody cares.

 

[MartinG1957]

The point is you're sweating this way to hard. Offer them a dollar amount. If they turn it down, find a keys guy for those gigs where you "have to" have horns. Nobody cares.

Yeah, while your at it get him to play the bass parts as well and save more money.... And why not ask him to bring his drum machine too, more savings..... In fact why bother with musicians at all, they can all be replaced by a guy with a laptop.....

 

[EastCoastThump]

Yeah, while your at it get him to play the bass parts as well and save more money.... And why not ask him to bring his drum machine too, more savings..... In fact why bother with musicians at all, they can all be replaced by a guy with a laptop.....

Philosophically, I agree with you. But the OP's question was half ethics and half economics.

As a business matter, I agree w/ twofingers that *some* GB bands make bank covering parts on keys or playing to tracks. For other bands, though, having horns is a selling point. (Of course, that holds for GB bands, but not for bar bands. IME, the best I can hope for with a profitable bar band is to have a utility player who can play some brass. The only bar bands I ever played in that had a full horn section all the time weren't financially viable--even in the 80s.)

IME, it's not that unusual for a GB gig to pay more overall if you show up w/ a live horn section, even if the BL has a keyboard player who could have faked those parts for the gig. Talking with booking agents, the difference in the fee you can command seems to be based less on the clients' musical discernment than on the booking agent's ability to sell the idea that the band with live horns is a more upscale product.

 

[electracoyote]

I have never worked with a female player or singer who didn't do at least twice as much as the other band members.

Lucky you. Not my experience.

 

[Pacman]

I have never worked with a female player or singer who didn't do at least twice as much as the other band members.

Nor would I.

There we go again, agreeing and ****.

 

[jive1]

As a business matter, I agree w/ twofingers that *some* GB bands make bank covering parts on keys or playing to tracks. For other bands, though, having horns is a selling point. (Of course, that holds for GB bands, but not for bar bands. IME, the best I can hope for with a profitable bar band is to have a utility player who can play some brass. The only bar bands I ever played in that had a full horn section all the time weren't financially viable--even in the 80s.)

For my Ska/Swing band the horns are essential, and core to the band. It is our main selling point that differentiates us from other bands. The horns are also the main soloists which would be hard to replicate with a keyboard. In order to maintain some level of profitability, we still kept the band as a 5 piece with only 2 horn players. Oddly, I have found that even though a trombone and tenor sax are in the same range, they sound very full when played together.

 

[Factor88]

Lucky you. Not my experience.

Nor mine. But since generally in the 4 band's I have been in with female vocalists they were the main reason we worked as steady as we did and I would gladly trade what would equate to maybe 15 minutes quicker set up tear down for the time they spend smoozing the club owners for more gigs and a raise. Hey, do that, and I'll lift an extra amp or two. Ain't no big thing.