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.
I just got fired because I wouldn't Play for Free
- Thread starter Jimi Cleek
- Start date
- Jun 19, 2004
- 4,782
- 83
- 42
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist, Schroeder Cabinets
Actually, in my experience, it's easier to get work as a bassist. Everybody and their brother plays guitar (I play guitar, too), but good bassists are worth their weight in gold... in theory 
Back to topic, though...
This is very true. I see this especially in my local market, Columbia, Missouri, where we have 1) the University of Missouri, enrollment ~30,000, and 2) two other, smaller schools. There are dozens and dozens of bands around here that form and break up on a per-gig basis, and are happy to play for free. We have several smaller clubs around here that max out at ~60 people, so the ability to draw 100 is not something that they care about. Similarly, they don't care about earning a bad reputation by paying nothing (or even going back on their word, charging bands for things providing the soundguy and providing the doorguy, cuts to bartenders, etc), because next week there will be a brand-new band willing to play for free, all over again.
Few things annoy me more than when I run into local "musicians" who say things like, "I just love playing," "I don't care about getting paid," "Music should be free," etc. They undercut working bands and then nobody gets paid. Eventually, working musicians move on to other jobs or other cities, so they can actually pay their bills, and what you have left is a bunch of college and high-school students who are, frankly, not very good.
In my opinion, this is similar to the problem with music piracy. When the money goes away, the quality eventually goes down, because people in the profession can't work for free forever. When music "fans" steal music, the labels start hurting, stock prices drop, and investors pull out. Next thing you know, it's budget cuts all around, starting with everything except the big sellers: hip-hop and pop. Then comes the freeze on signing new artists, and eventually promotional and production budget cuts for current artists. Albums get shelved and artists get dropped and go back to their day jobs.
In the meantime, you have a bunch of "home-studio owners" (college kids with Garageband and a Firebox in their dorm rooms) making their own MP3s and giving them away, reinforcing the idea that "music should be free." These are the same guys that gig for free, of course. And the spiral continues.
Bottom line, nothing is free. When money changes hands, it goes somewhere. If you are playing a "free" show, which brings in an audience, who buys liquor, that is money changing hands. If that money is not going to you, that means the bar owner is keeping it.
I can't think of any other profession where everyday people think there's nothing wrong with working for free. Imagine that you are a plumber, and you are competing with 20 or 30 other plumbers in your town. You all charge about the same rates, more or less. Okay, now imagine that suddenly, there are 200 or 300 other plumbers in town that are just so happy that someone would even think to call them for a job, that they say, "You don't have to pay me; I do this for the love it of." How much longer do you think you could keep charging for your services?
When you gig for free (if you are a cover band), you are one of those 2-300 plumbers. Us 20 or 30 working plumbers will get jobs at Home Depot instead, or maybe move away. What will you have then? Two or 300 really crappy (haha) plumbers.
This whole thing is just silly. If you are a cover band, you are providing a service. Charge a fair price and don't play for free. If you suck, don't play out! Decide if this is a hobby or a job. If it's a hobby, play in your garage. If it's a job, charge.
None of this applies to original bands. If you are in an original band, take every gig you can get (as long as you can cover your gas, etc). Don't turn down a gig unless you have a higher-paying gig already booked.
My 2 (or 10) cents,
Back to topic, though...
This is very true. I see this especially in my local market, Columbia, Missouri, where we have 1) the University of Missouri, enrollment ~30,000, and 2) two other, smaller schools. There are dozens and dozens of bands around here that form and break up on a per-gig basis, and are happy to play for free. We have several smaller clubs around here that max out at ~60 people, so the ability to draw 100 is not something that they care about. Similarly, they don't care about earning a bad reputation by paying nothing (or even going back on their word, charging bands for things providing the soundguy and providing the doorguy, cuts to bartenders, etc), because next week there will be a brand-new band willing to play for free, all over again.
Few things annoy me more than when I run into local "musicians" who say things like, "I just love playing," "I don't care about getting paid," "Music should be free," etc. They undercut working bands and then nobody gets paid. Eventually, working musicians move on to other jobs or other cities, so they can actually pay their bills, and what you have left is a bunch of college and high-school students who are, frankly, not very good.
In my opinion, this is similar to the problem with music piracy. When the money goes away, the quality eventually goes down, because people in the profession can't work for free forever. When music "fans" steal music, the labels start hurting, stock prices drop, and investors pull out. Next thing you know, it's budget cuts all around, starting with everything except the big sellers: hip-hop and pop. Then comes the freeze on signing new artists, and eventually promotional and production budget cuts for current artists. Albums get shelved and artists get dropped and go back to their day jobs.
In the meantime, you have a bunch of "home-studio owners" (college kids with Garageband and a Firebox in their dorm rooms) making their own MP3s and giving them away, reinforcing the idea that "music should be free." These are the same guys that gig for free, of course. And the spiral continues.
Bottom line, nothing is free. When money changes hands, it goes somewhere. If you are playing a "free" show, which brings in an audience, who buys liquor, that is money changing hands. If that money is not going to you, that means the bar owner is keeping it.
I can't think of any other profession where everyday people think there's nothing wrong with working for free. Imagine that you are a plumber, and you are competing with 20 or 30 other plumbers in your town. You all charge about the same rates, more or less. Okay, now imagine that suddenly, there are 200 or 300 other plumbers in town that are just so happy that someone would even think to call them for a job, that they say, "You don't have to pay me; I do this for the love it of." How much longer do you think you could keep charging for your services?
When you gig for free (if you are a cover band), you are one of those 2-300 plumbers. Us 20 or 30 working plumbers will get jobs at Home Depot instead, or maybe move away. What will you have then? Two or 300 really crappy (haha) plumbers.
This whole thing is just silly. If you are a cover band, you are providing a service. Charge a fair price and don't play for free. If you suck, don't play out! Decide if this is a hobby or a job. If it's a hobby, play in your garage. If it's a job, charge.
None of this applies to original bands. If you are in an original band, take every gig you can get (as long as you can cover your gas, etc). Don't turn down a gig unless you have a higher-paying gig already booked.
My 2 (or 10) cents,
I agree with most on this matter. I've played professionally- that is, made my living in cover bands- since 1995 and I'm 32 years old, so the vast majority of my adult life. I am also the father of 3, with one more on the way (we just found out yesterday that one snuck in under the radar). That said, I definately charge for a cover gig, and don't invest time in original projects unless they already have good national interest (which doesn't happen very often). I'll pitch a freebee set (as in 1 hour or less set) every once in a while for important auditions, but for a 2-3 set night I haven't played for free since I was 16 years old, and don't plan ever to do so. One must factor countless hours of woodshedding per week (if you're a pro I certainly hope you shed), time to learn songs, practice time, equipment budget, car, gas, drive time to gigs and time worked at the gig not to mention putting up PA and lights if you do that kind've thing, tear down and drive home every night-- this stuff adds up. And a good practicing bassist is an invaluable commodity on any music scene I've ever been on. We earn every dime they pay us and then some. Safe to say, we are worth our salt, and I feel we should hold ourselves that way. Of course, there's a fine line between confidence and cockiness, but you get what I'm saying and I don't mean it cocky for a second.
dont you think that those that feel they should be paid for their time and effort ARE above the 'average musician'? i presume average musician in this context refers to those that work a non music related day job and play in the evenings and weekends....
you wouldnt expect a plumber to work for free, just for the heck of it? sure if its for a mate, but he wouldnt join a group of plumbers and go around doing what he could be paid for for free, and going unappriciated for his efforts....
- Jun 19, 2004
- 4,782
- 83
- 42
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist, Schroeder Cabinets
And Peter, that's the way it ought to be. That's the way it is with virtually every other business... if you're a mechanic, your family gets free tune-ups; if you're a plumber, your family gets free service calls; if you're a musician, your family gets free wedding receptions.
By the way, your avatar is really cool. What is that?
By the way, your avatar is really cool. What is that?
Depends WHY you are playing.
If you are like me and play music for a living, treat it like a business. Free performances? I would never work for free.
In the band I'm in, we even get paid for auditions. Anything else is jerking off.
On the FLIP side, if you are just playing in the band for fun and have a day job, you have the right to play for free. It still isn't cool, but I suppose it's tolerable.
If you are like me and play music for a living, treat it like a business. Free performances? I would never work for free.
In the band I'm in, we even get paid for auditions. Anything else is jerking off.
On the FLIP side, if you are just playing in the band for fun and have a day job, you have the right to play for free. It still isn't cool, but I suppose it's tolerable.
I play bass for free. But, I expect to be paid for hauling my gear to a club, setting up, and breaking down, and keeping people in the bar drinking.
Word. ('sup monkee?)
Bands that play cover bar gigs for free or under a reasonable fee (~$100 per player per night) are scabs.
If you want to undervalue yourself and the work you have done to be good enough to play, as well as the amount of cash you have invested in your gear and transportation, please do it at home, and let those of us with enough common sense to get what we are worth for the time we invest get that return on investment.
As for this attitude:
"on one hand, i dont like people who wont play music for free. they tend to think they are above the "average musician"."
Well, no, I don't think I am above the average musician, however I do think that if you will put all the effort into becoming an average musician, and will play for no return on your investment, you are BELOW average as both a musician and as a person - you should value your time and effort, and if you don't then you don't value yourself.
FWIW, I've done both all-original gigs and cover gigs, as some here will remember, I've toured a bit and played in several countries with a well-known Latin artist. I totally understand that if you have an un-signed original act, you need to make sacrifices to get heard, but once you're "known", even local original acts should always be fairly compensated for their time.
I'd think I'd better find a way to compete.
I find the idea of an intrinsic "correct" value hilarious... Music
like all other services and products is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.
The shop down the street being able and willing to sell a widget at half my shops price is no different - either I compete on price, I compete on "features" (warranty, reliability, looks, etc.), or I don't compete and go out of business.
This idea that the music business shouldn't work under the exact
same sort of supply-demand structure as every other business endeavor is goofy. Adam Smiths "invisible hand" smacks around musicians just the same as it does widget makers and dry cleaners.
--
aborgman
Some guys play music, other guys play golf.
Professional musicians get paid to play music.
Professional golfers get paid to play golf.
An amateur golfer might win a little tournament every now and then and make a few bucks - but for him to say he'd only play golf if he's getting paid would be silly.
That's how I feel about music. I'm not a pro. It's not about money. I'd play "cooler" venues for less money any day of the week without any regret. I have NO expectations of ever making money to cover "my investment" in gear and things.
If you are a pro - then it is about money. If your not a pro, it's not.
IMHO
Professional musicians get paid to play music.
Professional golfers get paid to play golf.
An amateur golfer might win a little tournament every now and then and make a few bucks - but for him to say he'd only play golf if he's getting paid would be silly.
That's how I feel about music. I'm not a pro. It's not about money. I'd play "cooler" venues for less money any day of the week without any regret. I have NO expectations of ever making money to cover "my investment" in gear and things.
If you are a pro - then it is about money. If your not a pro, it's not.
IMHO
Matt, no disrespect, but if you're not by your own definition "pro", then please do not book gigs in clubs that the rest of us do, as when the "hobby" band shows up in the circuit it kills the pay scale for those of us that rely on that income (like I do).
I think you should never undervalue yourself, no matter how you see it - if you take the time to learn the instrument, learn the tunes, get the gear to play the gig, spend the time driving to and from rehearsals and at rehearsals to be able to accurately perform the tunes, spend the time and gas money to get to and from the gig itself, all so the club owner can make a huge profit and you get nothing, you are a fool, IMO.
Never forget, no matter how cool the venue, you are there to sell drinks if you are playing a club gig. The venue is indeed making money, you are a portion of why they are, and you deserve to be compensated fairly for this.
If someone is happy not recieving that compensation, they are sticking a knife in the back of every other musician in that area.
So you bring 250 people to every municipal golf course you play to watch you hit off the first tee, then they all buy munchies, burgers, dogs, soda's, beer & go rent carts following you through the entire round. You do this every Fri, Sat & Sun for an entire month, wiping out the clubhouse of every scrap of food & drink. At the end of the month you sidle up to the club manager & suggest, "You really don't need to bring that Nike Tour through here next month & mess up a good thing, Jim, good buddy. We'll be here for ya!"
Congrats. He cancels the Nike Tour and you still get to pay to play. Your friends spent the same amount of money on an amateur when they could have seen a pro. The club owner high-fives ya, tells you how much better you're getting and then hops in his 'Vette laughing all the way to the bank. Again, congrats.
When something has no value it is considered worthless.
This is true. My main source of income comes from a non music related company that operates at the top end of the market and does very well. There are plenty of other companies in the same business offering the same 'service' and 'product' or at least claim to but quite frankly some are not in the same league.
However . . . even these companies do not give away their service. And the specific issue that this thread is dealing with is playing music for free. At least that's where it started. You stated that music is worth whatever people are willing to pay. This is absolutely true and there is the problem. If people give it away why would anyone pay for it.
Why buy the milk if you can get the cow for free. (or something like that). And at the risk of offending anyone -If you pay peanuts you might get monkeys.
NOTE: I don't consider myself a pro nor am I a hobbyist either. But I very much appreciate the additional revenue. I work hard to prepare for a gig and do the best I can for myself and the person that hired me.
Here are a couple scenarios:
#1 -
Free band increases alcohol sales $200.
Band you pay $300 increases alcohol sales $1000.
Why would anyone pay it? Because they see the profit motive.
#2 -
Free band increases alcohol sales $200.
Band you pay $300 increases alcohol sales $400.
Why would anyone pay it? They won't.
The problem comes in when the more expensive band (or non-free band) can't bring in enough extra money.
That is the problem of the band charging more (or just charging) - either they need to promote better, or they need to play in different venues. It's a bands job to show the venue that they are worth the extra money.
If that same bar could get Grey Goose prices out of well-stock Vodka because the patrons can't tell the difference - they're business stupid if they don't do it, and there is no reason for the well-stock vodka distributor to feel bad about it.
--
aborgman
at the risk of throwing more fuel on the fire... what I consider worse than those who'll play for free are those who'll pay to play...
Because I don't depend on playing music for a living, I'm not too hung up on the money - as long as there is some money.
+1...
yes, at the very least, I would be expecting to cover my petrol, get a few drinks on the house and maybe a meal thrown in as well.
No problem Gard - I think that staying out of those clubs will kind of take care of itself anyway.
Seriously, I'm sorry to clutter the thread with an opinion that was based completely on ignorance. The truth is, while I started playing bass about 6 years ago, I'm just now in a band that I believe will get out and play some shows soon. As you can see, I am completely ignorant in regards to these matters.
At any rate, the situation that I was picturing while typing my post was something that my band has talked about and what I was picturing the OP and his former band not seeing eye to eye on.
A situation where the band has a choice of booking "gig A" or "gig B".
In this situation, "gig A" might be more fun - headliner instead of opener, favorite neighborhood party bar, freedom to play anything you want, whatever the band is into - but not much pay.
Maybe "gig B" pays more, but it's not an ideal time, or you won't get nearly as much time on stage, or they insist you play music which is not your favorite.
If you're in it for the money, you go with gig B. If you're in it for the fun, you go with gig A.
I believe that there is a school of thought among some musicians that we all need to decide if we're in for the money, or for fun and act accordingly.
I would never suggest that hobby bands go trying to book gigs in the major clubs - the ones that the big boys play and get paid at, but offer to play for free or for next to nothing.
I just think it's okay for a group of guys in their 30's and 40's, none of whom are hard up for money, to choose gigs based on anything but the money.
If a new band member joins such a band, and he's all about the money, it's not a good fit for anybody. Nobody is right or wrong.
