• 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.

What Constitutes a Professional Musician?

What Constitutes a Professional Musician?

  • Earns a reasonable portion of their income from music (maybe 20 to 30 % at some point in life)

    Votes: 110 40.4%
  • Posesses the skills that other professionals would consider a professional level

    Votes: 43 15.8%
  • All the other stuff. Exp: punctual, courteous, committed, etc... but lacking the other two mentioned

    Votes: 10 3.7%
  • None of the above

    Votes: 70 25.7%
  • Cheesecake

    Votes: 39 14.3%

  • Total voters
    272
Anybody who spends more time on stage than on Talk Bass.
Anybody who has NEVER measured their string spacing.
Anybody who has never noticed if a bass is heavy or light.
Anybody who has had some of their backstage meal caked onto the back of their neck for 4 gigs or more.
Anybody who judges their BEST EVER gig by how many stairs at the load in.
Awesome. My vote for 1st place. 40 years playing and I learned this year that nut width is a thing. String spacing. Geez. Think Elton John complains about key spaceing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LBS-bass
There's a shade of truth to that. Even before Covid, many people I consider 'pro's' had salaried day jobs. These were musicians who wrote music, released albums, warmed up national acts at music fests, things like that.
Agreed. I'd argue that it's a spectrum - most professional musicians that I've known have cobbled together income from a variety of sources - particularly involving teaching. At what point is someone a 'professional music teacher' instead of a 'professional musician'?

This also depends greatly on the market that you work in too - I have in the past worked in a city where music work was plentiful in the summer, but very quiet over the cooler months. You'd do several high $$ corporate gigs a week for a few months, then when things were leaner, you'd fill your time (and wallet) with teaching or some other casual work. The nature of this business isn't the same everywhere in the world, or even within one country.

Also, frankly, who cares if the tax authorities only have space for one occupation on the form? Plenty of people (ESPECIALLY low-income earners) work multiple jobs and have done so for decades/centuries/milennia. If bureaucracies don't recognise that reality, that's their problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elkkid2
Agreed. I'd argue that it's a spectrum - most professional musicians that I've known have cobbled together income from a variety of sources - particularly involving teaching. At what point is someone a 'professional music teacher' instead of a 'professional musician'?

This also depends greatly on the market that you work in too - I have in the past worked in a city where music work was plentiful in the summer, but very quiet over the cooler months. You'd do several high $$ corporate gigs a week for a few months, then when things were leaner, you'd fill your time (and wallet) with teaching or some other casual work. The nature of this business isn't the same everywhere in the world, or even within one country.

Also, frankly, who cares if the tax authorities only have space for one occupation on the form? Plenty of people (ESPECIALLY low-income earners) work multiple jobs and have done so for decades/centuries/milennia. If bureaucracies don't recognise that reality, that's their problem.
There is space for more than one. Sure, the 1040 will have a line for W-2 income, but pay for music will typically involve 1099s and a Schedule C.
 
How about a cruise ship band? Church band? Not all professional musicians sell tickets and tour on a bus from town to town to play on a different stage every night. You really put your foot in your mouth there.

Did you quote the wrong person? For the record, all the folk you talk about are, like music teachers, professional musicians.
 
According to Miriam's Dictionary:

Professional
adjective
following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain: a professional builder.

So, if this person is pursuing it for gain (a couple of low paying gigs a month)... they can claim to be a professional and, technically, they're right.

It's just like the term musician. I hold the belief that if you don't understand music (you can't discuss how it works without an instrument in your hands), you aren't a musician. You may be a player of the highest esteem, but I still can't consider you a musician. I am vilified, hated, shunned, demeaned, demonized, threatened with bodily harm (not kidding), kicked from forums etc... for holding this belief. Because the common nomenclature is anybody who has ever played a note on an instrument is a musician. That kid who got home, 5 minutes ago, with a $25 bass from the pawn shop, calls themselves a musician and I'm not allowed to disagree.

Everybody wants their title. They don't want to do the work to earn it. That's the society we live in. Don't question it or you can literally be killed these days.
 
It's a blurry line, but I have always considered myself to be on the "semi-pro" side of it, even during the years when I regularly worked over 100 gigs per.

Did I do my job in a professional manner? I think so. Certainly tried to. Showed up on time. Kept maps (before GPS), a full tank of gas, jumper cables and a snow shovel in the car. Had gear that worked and spares of everything. Knew my parts. Tried not to step on other people's parts (too often). Had a whole shelf full of black clothes.

But I have known many professional musicians; people whose profession is music. I can keep up with many of them musically; some kick my ass without hardly trying. But mainly, they lead a different life with different pressures and responsibilities than I do. I would feel presumptuous to lump a guy like me in with them.
 
Curious what people think about this one. I usually consider a "professional" of any kind, including music, to be someone that makes a reasonable portion of their living from the profession itself (either in the past or present). Might only be 20 to 30 percent of their income (maybe more), but still a decent percentage of total income, and enough to pay their own bills.

I know a person that regularly claims to be a professional musician, and has moderate skills as a singer-songwriter, but makes very little money doing it (1 or 2 low paying gigs a month), and is only somewhat known in our area, but definitely not beyond our small town. I have no plans to burst his bubble, this just got me wondering what other people view as a professional musician.

Peace
If the amount of money you make as a musician is the only indication of whether or not you’re a “professional” then the number of “professional” musicians was drastically reduced with the introduction of COVID-19. I think it’s a combination of skill level, desire and tax return. If you have professional skills and you desire to use those skills, then most likely it will be reflected by the amount of income tied to those skills/desires. I’ve been playing for 30+ years and I love it. Making music has always been a big part of my life, but it’s not my primary source of income....nor do I want it to be, especially now that I’ve seen how fragile the music industry is these days. I have a family including a special needs son that I have to provide for and let’s face it out of ALL the musicians in the world, the percentage of those that can provide for a family with income from music alone is very low.
 
I played in some Chicago Blues Bands for 20 years, recorded 6 CDs, put in about 300,000 miles touring in N America and Europe, played a lot of very large festivals, and paid taxes on the pitiful amount of money I made as a musician. Never considered myself as anything more than a semi-pro at best. I was married, had a daughter and made more money as a handyman than I ever did as a musician. Now that I’m done playing and I’ve had time to think about it, I’m not sure I really even should have called myself semi-pro. For what it’s worth
Curious what people think about this one. I usually consider a "professional" of any kind, including music, to be someone that makes a reasonable portion of their living from the profession itself (either in the past or present). Might only be 20 to 30 percent of their income (maybe more), but still a decent percentage of total income, and enough to pay their own bills.

I know a person that regularly claims to be a professional musician, and has moderate skills as a singer-songwriter, but makes very little money doing it (1 or 2 low paying gigs a month), and is only somewhat known in our area, but definitely not beyond our small town. I have no plans to burst his bubble, this just got me wondering what other people view as a professional musician.

Peace
 
The short answer?
Right now it’s anyone who’s unemployed.
And I’m somewhat serious. The “real” musicians are staying away from the “playing for tips to 10 people” gigs that are available due to covid restrictions. It’s not worth the effort and possible exposure to debase yourself for a few dollars.
 
My take on this thread is to be a professional is to earn at least some level of income from whatever it is you have been contracted to perform, by reason of your unique and/or certified skills or education. That said, there are professionals, by the above definition, who fail miserably to exhibit professionalism, whether by reason of sloppy insouciance or other unwelcome and sometimes illegal behaviours. Many who lack credentials or a complete set of skills required for a specific job, are talented, hard working self learners happy to acquire whatever skills required.
Additionally, a generalized strong work ethic almost invariably gets the job done. And him/her invited back. That, in my opinion, is professionalism.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. I'd argue that it's a spectrum - most professional musicians that I've known have cobbled together income from a variety of sources - particularly involving teaching. At what point is someone a 'professional music teacher' instead of a 'professional musician'?

My dad is a case in point. From about 1958 to 1966 he was a professional by any definition--played trumpet first with Stan Kenton, doing three albums and spending months on the road, and then for about 5 years in the pit on Broadway in big shows like Bye Bye Birdie and How to Succeed in Business, as well as doing arranging gigs on the side for the Tonight Show and other clients. He was making enough to support a family of four, though not opulently. Then, around 1966, we moved further away from the city, and he decided that the commute was getting onerous and he was tired of not getting to see his kids grow up. So he quit Broadway and became a music teacher. From that point on, he continued to play weekend club gigs in the Poconos and so forth--but being a musician from that point on probably never amounted to more than maybe 20% of his income in a busy year.

So was he a professional musician until 1966, and then not a professional musician anymore after that? Seems kind of absurd to me. I think you are a professional if you have a track record of successful performance at a level that you could make a living at if you were doing it full-time. Being a professional does not hinge on whether, at any given moment, you are or aren't doing it full-time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fun Size Nick

Latest posts