• 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.

Separating the pros from the amateurs; a list

#101
Mike Sorr said:
I think it depends on what kind of music you play. If you're doing avant-garde jazz you're audience is likely to be a little more sophisticated. If you play bars and dance clubs chances are your audience wants to drink and dance and thinks a high hat is something you wear on your head after you smoke pot. An audience that has ears that work will be able to tell when a band is really, really bad...but the band would have to be exceptionally awful. I've seen lots of bands that get a great reception that I would classify as crap. If the singer is singing the correct vocal line, the band is in tune and the music sounds sort of like the way it does on the radio, that's usually good enough.
Click to expand...
Very true, I've seen plenty of power-trios covering 9/10 piece band tunes, missing all the important hooks etc, with nobody knowing the form, drummer picking feels at random, and people still come up and say the band was great.

Ok.... so I've occasionally been IN said power trios (if you say YES to any gig which pays well, you win some, you lose some ;) )

I would not consider the other people in that trio (or the members of other such groups I've seen) pro - and I wouldn't expect them to get any substantial bookings outside of dive bars/pubs.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that while they get paid, they're not pro. A pro is adaptable, someone you wouldn't hesitate to book as a session guy or a teacher (as mentioned above). Either that, or, they're crap but they DO play massive venues constantly (i.e., they're in a super famous rock band, the success of which wasn't dependent on their skill). Which leads me back to: Pros do it for a living. Not just get paid, but get paid enough that they don't have to do anything else.

I hope this doesn't offend anybody who does do other stuff in their life! I would consider myself pro, but I have a day job (somewhat music related... distantly). But, I have lived solely off music, and I think a pro is someone who has (or at least feasibly could) "do" music for a living (incl. teaching, production, writing as well as playing).
 
#102
Moley13 said:
....I hope this doesn't offend anybody who does do other stuff in their life! I would consider myself pro, but I have a day job (somewhat music related... distantly). But, I have lived solely off music, and I think a pro is someone who has (or at least feasibly could) "do" music for a living (incl. teaching, production, writing as well as playing).
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this. Pro is an attitude and mindset that leads you to getting paid. To me being "pro" does not mean being famous. It does mean being "in demand". There are way to many people in this day that are famous, but not pros. OR, they are pros at schmoozing and making connections, but not at the craft they supposedly are a part of.
 
#105
The thing that always stands out to me as unprofessional behavior (no matter who does it) is lengthy soundchecking (in the absence of an actual sound guy asking you to play while he sets EQ or levels), warming up, and noodling on stage. Especially between songs, but also before or after (?!) the set. Practice at home, people. If you can't figure out whether your rig is ready to go in ten seconds of your amp being audible, you either don't know your rig, or you're doing something wrong.
 
#107
The word "Professional" really has nothing to do with money. What it means is a person who knows how to perform all the activities the profession demands. In all professions, there are behavioral expectations over and above the skill of the trade.
To be a professional means to adhere to, promote, and enhance the standard of the profession.
Some professionals make money practicing their profession; others must use other skills to earn money or supplement the money they earn from their profession. I think the best example in the music profession is symphony orchestra members. Even the best orchestras pay so little that the members must do other things to earn a living. Some with teach music. Some will gig with other types of groups. Others may work completely outside the profession for their income. So, I don't think money is the measure of a professional.
 
#108
As defining. profesinal as someone "who gets paid for playing" is not the reality.
The defing reality is "someone who gets invited back, or recommended to another to get paid again"...... anyone can get paid for doing a job once, but repeats.......lets say the word gets around either way....good or bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whousedtoplay
#109
In my view, a "professional" is one who can be hired, even sight unseen, and be expected to do the job without needing close supervision. The person who hires a professional might not be a musician themselves, or even know what to ask for. The same is true for most people if they call an electrician or plumber. Of course in a band, you have to take direction because it's a group effort, but you take care of every aspect of your own job so that the client doesn't have to spend their time thinking about it.

Most of my work is in jazz groups. The bandleaders who hire me don't ask what gear I have, if I can read, whether I know the jazz repertoire, etc. There's a widely shared, but unwritten, set of expectations. I'm expected to ask the right questions, so I can decide how much amplification I need, etc.

I have some expectations of professional bands too, namely that they will hire other professionals, provide accurate details about the gig, and not waste my time with unnecessary or poorly managed rehearsals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moley13, Whousedtoplay and Fergie Fulton
#111
fdeck said:
In my view, a "professional" is one who can be hired, even sight unseen, and be expected to do the job without needing close supervision. The person who hires a professional might not be a musician themselves, or even know what to ask for. The same is true for most people if they call an electrician or plumber. Of course in a band, you have to take direction because it's a group effort, but you take care of every aspect of your own job so that the client doesn't have to spend their time thinking about it.

Most of my work is in jazz groups. The bandleaders who hire me don't ask what gear I have, if I can read, whether I know the jazz repertoire, etc. There's a widely shared, but unwritten, set of expectations. I'm expected to ask the right questions, so I can decide how much amplification I need, etc.

I have some expectations of professional bands too, namely that they will hire other professionals, provide accurate details about the gig, and not waste my time with unnecessary or poorly managed rehearsals.
Click to expand...
That's easily the best one so far (other than perhaps "don't be a douche"), both the first sentence alone (a "professional" is one who can be hired, even sight unseen, and be expected to do the job without needing close supervision) and the follow up.

Liked, QFT, and blabbed about ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fun Size Nick
#112
Moley13 said:
Very true, I've seen plenty of power-trios covering 9/10 piece band tunes, missing all the important hooks etc, with nobody knowing the form, drummer picking feels at random, and people still come up and say the band was great.

Ok.... so I've occasionally been IN said power trios (if you say YES to any gig which pays well, you win some, you lose some ;) )

I would not consider the other people in that trio (or the members of other such groups I've seen) pro - and I wouldn't expect them to get any substantial bookings outside of dive bars/pubs.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that while they get paid, they're not pro. A pro is adaptable, someone you wouldn't hesitate to book as a session guy or a teacher (as mentioned above). Either that, or, they're crap but they DO play massive venues constantly (i.e., they're in a super famous rock band, the success of which wasn't dependent on their skill). Which leads me back to: Pros do it for a living. Not just get paid, but get paid enough that they don't have to do anything else.

I hope this doesn't offend anybody who does do other stuff in their life! I would consider myself pro, but I have a day job (somewhat music related... distantly). But, I have lived solely off music, and I think a pro is someone who has (or at least feasibly could) "do" music for a living (incl. teaching, production, writing as well as playing).
Click to expand...

I don't know why this should offend anyone. I work a day job, therefore I am not a pro player. Am I trying to become a player of that quality needed to be a pro? I guess I am. I think I am. I think its a motivation; a goal to make me practice more, and practice smarter. I play out enough to learn some of the things that can be expected. If I got lucky, and suddenly we were in high demand, or if I answered ads, put ads, tried to play in more groups or styles; any of these things COULD potentially lead to my being a pro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jd-ns
#115
Moley13 said:
What if you answer "I play bass, and Trumpet, and teach those, and compose, arrange, record, and produce, because I probably couldn't get by just with bass"

Still a Pro?

I challenge your simplification.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are saying here. Is it that you don't make a living playing bass, but you do consider yourself a professional bass player just because you happen to play sometimes?
 
#116
JimmyM said:
Maybe you should just show up with a shovel, then ;)

Don't know how it is on your gigs, but on my gigs, audiences are pretty smart, and while not everyone out there knows the difference between a bass and a guitar, there are plenty who do. And they may not be able to tell what notes you're playing, but they can darn sure tell when you sound and play like crap!
Click to expand...
Shovel+Bass+Guitar.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: JimmyM
#117
matthewbrown said:
I'm a semi-pro bassist who is fairly well schooled in music theory and studied with some really good teachers. A recent experience had me thinking about how a bassist who plays in an "amateurish" fashion is different than a bassist who plays like a professional. So I made a list, and welcome comments and additions.
Amateur players will likely
  • Play more notes than necessary
  • Not take into account what the singer or the rest of the band might be doing
  • Change register for no reason
  • not put what is best for the song ahead of everything else
  • fail to articulate notes in order to enhance the time feel
  • execute rhythmically inaccurate lines and fail to lock in with the other players
Click to expand...
There is so much on this I don't agree with...not going to even try to start. Most of the other posters have covered it, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squidtastic
#118
jd-ns said:
Not sure what you are saying here. Is it that you don't make a living playing bass, but you do consider yourself a professional bass player just because you happen to play sometimes?
Click to expand...
No, my point was that a lot, if not all, professionals diversify, and do much more than just "play bass".

The less complex version:
"what do you do for a living"
"I'm a professional MUSICIAN".
 
  • Like
Reactions: theduke1
#119
Moley13 said:
No, my point was that a lot, if not all, professionals diversify, and do much more than just "play bass".

The less complex version:
"what do you do for a living"
"I'm a professional MUSICIAN".
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone would argue that 'professional musician' fits for you since you do various music-related jobs to make a living. 'Professional bass player' however, doesn't (which was my original point) in the same way that someone who makes their living landscaping (professional landscaper) doesn't go around claiming to be a professional hole-digger when in reality it is only one of numerous jobs they do.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back