Klarinet Archive - Posting 000559.txt from 1995/03

From: Fred Jacobowitz <fredj@-----.EDU>
Subj: Re: Accompanists
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 14:03:25 -0500

Chris,
The simple (and, seemingly too obvious) answer to your question
is that you pay your pianist as you would the person who prints up your
programs, fixes your car, etc. They are providing you with a service,
however personal. If they have not ASKED you to collaborate with them
(or vice versa) for the sheer pleasure of it,then it is understood that you
are hiring them, no matter
how rewarding the experience may be for them.
That's a real no-brainer,
so I assume that your real question is more along the lines of, how do
you manage to get the services of a good pianist without going broke in
the process. I have never found a solution to this one. I view
accompanists fees as just one more business expense, which I pay gladly
as I would want to be paid for my time and effort. Furthermore, I write
off the fee on my taxes as a professional expense (yes, the IRS does
accept it) and NEVER try to bargain a pianist down. They, like anyone
else, know what they are worth and dislike working for less.
As for
being able to offer something artistic to them which should make them
only too grateful to offer their services, get real. That doesn't pay for
their groceries. As a professional, I will often do certain
professional jobs over others because I see greater personal and
professional fulfilment in them. Sometimes even for
little or no money. However, I would be shocked and insulted that anyone
would presume that I would stop being a professional (that means, making
my living as a musician) just because they feel that they are such great
artist that I should want to do so or because thay have such a good, worthy
cause, etc. If I want to I will say so but one
should not presume such with one's collaborators. Unfortunately, this
attitude is all-too-prevalent in our society. I am asked all the time to
do "benefits" or to accept less than full payment. No insult to these
people, but art is my PROFESSION, even if I do derive enormous enjoyment
from it. And I view accompanists in EXACTLY the same light.
I hope this has been edifying and I apologize in advance for being an
iconoclast.

On Tue, 21 Mar 1995, Christopher G Zello wrote:

> I am curious to read about other people's business approach to working
> with pianists. As is common, most pianists charge a fee for their
> services. Sometimes hourly, other times a flat fee.
>
> I guess I am addressing these questions to those people who are no longer
> students.
>
> Do you still pay your pianists? And why?
>
> I just feel like there are times when I have something to offer in a
> session which doesn't warrant the pianist receiving money. For example,
> when we are working on a new piece which neither of us knows. We would
> both be starting from "the beginning." Or, if we both have played a piece
> before, then we both have a different interpretation and some type of
> middle ground or single choice will have to be made on both player's
> previous experiences? Then it become a collaboration.
>
> I also realize that you are basically paying a pianist for their
> expertise, years of study, and so forth. But is there a time when money
> will quit being a factor and it will become a collabortion between two
> players? Are these decisions based on where you are in your career and
> where the pianist is?
>
> Maybe I'm totally off base on all this.
>
> The clarinet is just as hard to learn as the piano, in similiar and
> different ways. Payment for services seems to say "I am paying you to do
> as I ask while playing it the best you know how within _my_ framework."
> This is a little harsh.
>
> Any sense at all??
>
> Christopher Zello
> czello@-----.edu
>