• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Double Bass Peacock Blows off Costello...

So you have been playing a while, right? You are not a beginner, that is for sure. You have no artistic demands?
No parameters for working conditions?
Even when I worked at gas stations the guy who'd been there the longest didn't have to clean the bathrooms anymore.
Call it what you want it - it is how the world works. Call me in 30 years and tell me how you are still willing to do anything asked of you on any gig and work under any conditions!

Hooray!!! Page 13!!!

Damon, I get what you are saying. I have thoughout this thread. And yes, I do have conditions. For sure. However... If I was playing a gig and somebody came to sing a song for the leader for their b'day, regardless of style, I'd do it and not bat an eye. Not a big deal.

If an older cat that had paid his dues, regardless of talent level, was scraping to make ends meet you better bet he'd play a pop tune or two.

Funny how money makes the world go around. People gotta eat.
 
I have listened to both GP and EC. I assume GP did fufill his contractual obligations. I only want to comment about the artistic status of both of them: I believe that while there are a lot of great bass players in this world (albeit there is only one GP, as there is only one me, or you), great songwriters are much more rare. EC is a phenomenon of quality, productivity, and versatility, from his early punk-ish records to his more recent ballet (scored and orchestrated by EC himself, unlike the classical forays of most other pop musicians). I believe that in 50 years, many of his songs will be standards, and that while GP may still be listened to, EC's contribution to music will be more complete and enduring.
 
IAnyway, you "working" guys are the ones down his decision and want to talk about professionalism and the work place - ever heard of senoirity?
You, know you get to a certain place and you just don't have to do certain things.
Steve Jobs doesn't have to take out the trash, GP doesn't have to play with EC, when EC needs a sax solo he shells out for Lee Konitz.
It is not a pedestal, it is the fact that they paid whatever dues it takes to get there, now they do what they want.

Well this isn't in relation to the Peacock/Costello issue but all that banana oil about professionalism and such I was spewing before is for real. Seniority only goes so far and while a guy like Peacock is well known among jazz bassists and slightly less known among jazz musicians, he isn't a household name with the general public. Yeah, the Jarrett Trio makes scads of dough but dollars to donuts, the lion's share is going to Keith, who is, in fact, a household name or at least as much of one as a jazz musician not named Marsalis can be. I would be willing to bet that among most non-musicians who've seen the Jarrett Trio, Peacock is just that guy playing bass for Keith if they remember his name at all. That's a shame but probably accurate.

Given that, he most likely isn't exactly rolling in dough. I don't know what kind of a deal he has with ECM and Jarrett so he might have some stake in Jarrett Trio CD sales but I kind of doubt it. Most of those kinds of recordings are play for pay and they are all done under Keith's name and I don't recall, with the exception of the improvised pieces creditted to the group, a single Gary Peacock original on any of the discs (although I might be wrong) to generate royalty income. His own CD sales aren't very good so he probably isn't getting much in royaties from ECM. My guess is he makes a comfortable but not exceptional living and he survives by gigging.

The upshot is he very probably has to take the gigs just like any other high level musician. I'm sure that the Iridium paid him what they paid any other NYC bassist for that night. No more, no less and if it was over $200, I'd be surprised. He probably does better on the Jarrett tours. I'm sure he's pulling down $4-5000 a week on those but how long do they last? 6-8 weeks per year? And not every year at that. Good bread (and a great gig) but still not enough to buy a Ferrari and stay at five star hotels.

Any scenario I can think of, he does ok but not great. Ultimately, the reality of the "artist" isn't quite as romantic as it can, at first, appear.

Again, none of this is in relation to Costello thing. I'm certain that was all due to the bungling of the management of the Iridium.

mark
 
I have a couple of friends who know Gary and used to play with him long ago. After he joined Keith's trio, they inevitably asked him what it was like playing with Keith and Jack (expecting some lofty idyllic response). Instead, it was; "Pretty f***in' great!"

Always kind of dug him for that.

I suppose it's a stretch to call Annette Peacock a pop star. I'm not sure exactly what she is.
 
If this has been mentioned already through this forum please forgive me . I can remember the making of Costello's "King of America" featuring country musicians and some of the studio artist of another Elvis' and I can remember comments from some artists from country genre ripping on him as if "he had to be head to toe devoted to the musical genre or it wasn't going to be accepted by country music contemporaries ".. He moves in and out of different musical genres so much he probably has drawn resentment along the way . True legendary jazz artists - play it 24 /7 and some may resent a self -appointed jack of all trades artist like EC telling them what to play or even sharing the stage with the guy who sang RadioRadio.
Who knows and when all is said and done -who cares ?
 
So you have been playing a while, right? You are not a beginner, that is for sure. You have no artistic demands?
No parameters for working conditions?
Even when I worked at gas stations the guy who'd been there the longest didn't have to clean the bathrooms anymore.
Call it what you want it - it is how the world works. Call me in 30 years and tell me how you are still willing to do anything asked of you on any gig and work under any conditions!

You take the gig offered or you don't. There are plenty of conditions I set. I won't take an outside gig unless I'm under cover. I won't play in front of a fireplace or directly in front of a heating duct. I'll sometimes take gigs with musicians well below me if only to see what I can do in that situation. Usually though, I'll pass on those gigs. But generally playing is playing. Some gigs are better than others but that's the way it goes. I get offered gigs backing singer songwriters and I'll sometimes take them if they are good. It takes a whole different skill set to play those gigs and it's nice to flex those muscles every now and then. But I won't take them if they interfere with the jazz gigs because that is what I have to play to stay sane. Those gigs feed my soul. I won't take show gigs or pit orchestra gigs and I very very rarely take wedding gigs unless I know one of the people getting married or they just want some background jazz. I've found that as long as you play quietly, you can play just about anything you want in those situations. As a bassist, I actually prefer to play quietly anyway so that isn't much of a compromise.

With one saxophonist I play with, he frequently invites the lousiest sad sack singers up to sit in for a tune or two. I hate it but I'm not going to not take the gig because I might have to play a couple of choruses Satin (Satan?) Doll in Eb. The people usually like it. If the people like it, they come out. They come out and we get invited back. Amazing how commerce works. The rest of the gig is usually great. Small compromise, big payoff. A couple of choruses of Satan Doll and I get to play mid-60's Shorter tunes the rest of the night. The system seems to be working because he gets lots of gigs and I'm on just about all of them.

mark
 
Even when I worked at gas stations the guy who'd been there the longest didn't have to clean the bathrooms anymore.
Call it what you want it - it is how the world works. Call me in 30 years and tell me how you are still willing to do anything asked of you on any gig and work under any conditions!

Don't you think arguing your lofty ideals with the plebes is really beneath you?.....most of us are probably too dumb or don't have nearly the experience you do to really get the fundamental truths of your diatribes. Your ability to so consistently talk down to people is a rare gift.
 
The upshot is he very probably has to take the gigs just like any other high level musician. I'm sure that the Iridium paid him what they paid any other NYC bassist for that night. No more, no less and if it was over $200, I'd be surprised. He probably does better on the Jarrett tours. I'm sure he's pulling down $4-5000 a week on those but how long do they last? 6-8 weeks per year? And not every year at that. Good bread (and a great gig) but still not enough to buy a Ferrari and stay at five star hotels.

Any scenario I can think of, he does ok but not great. Ultimately, the reality of the "artist" isn't quite as romantic as it can, at first, appear.

The Jarrett trio gets $60,000-75,000 a gig. Not a week, a gig. Cecil Taylor play at the Irridium, his fees are extremely high so I doubt we are talking about $200 a man for an all star quartet.
 
The Jarrett trio gets $60,000-75,000 a gig. Not a week, a gig.

And do you honestly think that KJ splits that $60,000-75,000 evenly with his band mates.
After expenses (which can be sustantial . . . hotel, food, transpotation, manager's percentage, booking agent's percentage, etc.), I would be fairly certain that KJ keeps AT LEAST 80% of what's left for him, leaving maybe 10% of net for each of the other two players - probably in the range of $1500-2000 each, per night.

IMHO and experience . . .
 
And do you honestly think that KJ splits that $60,000-75,000 evenly with his band mates.
After expenses (which can be sustantial . . . hotel, food, transpotation, manager's percentage, booking agent's percentage, etc.), I would be fairly certain that KJ keeps AT LEAST 80% of what's left for him, leaving maybe 10% of net for each of the other two players - probably in the range of $1500-2000 each, per night.

IMHO and experience . . .

- That fee I heard was the artists fee, after expenses. I heard from someone in the office who booked them. I could see Keith taking more, but not that much more. Peacock is the first one to assemble that trio, they have been together for years in an equally billed trio. I'd say they are getting upwards of $15,000 a piece.
 
Don't you think arguing your lofty ideals with the plebes is really beneath you?.....most of us are probably too dumb or don't have nearly the experience you do to really get the fundamental truths of your diatribes. Your ability to so consistently talk down to people is a rare gift.

No, because I really respect everyone here. My two obsessions improvised music for music sake and being a total geek for the bass sometimes clash as in this thread.
But I still really respect bassists who do all kinds of work, especially when they play really well. I went and saw Herman's Hermits at the county fair with my dad last month, I really enjoyed seeing the bass player play that stuff with such skill and precision.

As for the birthday, it was a few weeks prior. So if Peacock and Konitz are tight, he would have already got him a gift.
 
- That fee I heard was the artists fee, after expenses. I heard from someone in the office who booked them. I could see Keith taking more, but not that much more. Peacock is the first one to assemble that trio, they have been together for years in an equally billed trio. I'd say they are getting upwards of $15,000 a piece.

Very unlikely.

And they aren't equally billed. It's Keith Jarrett and two guys he plays with a lot. If Keith weren't in it, they be charging $1,500-2,000 per gig for out of town gigs and driving there in a minivan. If Gary wasn't in the band, musicians would notice but just about no one else would. Do you really think they are splitting the take equally? Seriously. Even Jack is expendable. One of the albums released has Paul Motian playing drums. Keith is the draw and unless his agent/manager is an idiot, Keith gets the big money. That's way it works.

Personally, I really wish it were otherwise but that's the reality of being a jazz musician. Even an important, innovative one.

mark
 
- That fee I heard was the artists fee, after expenses. I heard from someone in the office who booked them. I could see Keith taking more, but not that much more. Peacock is the first one to assemble that trio, they have been together for years in an equally billed trio. I'd say they are getting upwards of $15,000 a piece.

I was in contact with Ray Brown shortly before he passed to get his trio up to central Oregon. His fee was $10,500. Total for all 3 of them. Straight from the horses mouth.
 
And they aren't equally billed. It's Keith Jarrett and two guys he plays with a lot...Keith is the draw and unless his agent/manager is an idiot, Keith gets the big money. That's way it works.

VERY true.

They are billed variously as the Keith Jarrett Trio and/or as Keith Jarrett, Gary Peacock, Jack DeJohnette.

It's NEVER Gary Peacock, Jack DeJohnette, Keith Jarrett . . .
OR Gary Peacock, Keith Jarrett, Jack DeJohnette . . .
OR Jack DeJohnette, Keith Jarrett, Gary Peacock . . .
OR Jack DeJohnette, Gary Peacock, Keith Jarrett.


Edit: I've also seen "Keith Jarrett's Standards Trio" now.
 
I think that now that we know exactly who said what, what each of their motives were and how much each of them gets paid for the gig (since we're insiders) that the proper people have almost been shamed out of the music business and Gary Peacock is almost vindicated and recognized as the demiGod that he is. Let's keep going, or in Simpson parlance:

Bart: Are we there yet?
Homer: Juuusst a little further.
Bart: Are we there yet?
Homer: Juuusst a little further.
Bart: Are we there yet?
Homer: Juuusst a little further.
Bart: Are we there yet?
Homer: Juuusst a little further.
Bart: Are we there yet?
Homer: Juuusst a little further.
Bart: Are we there yet?
Homer: DOH!