 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: stevesklar
Date: 2007-02-05 15:51
Some of the small bars around here do. Unless your band helps them hit a certain revenue. It's a good way for the unknowns to get some stage time .. kinda what the article talks about - the club not wanting to take a risk.
but, to answer your question. Nope. and Yes. I'd pay (only a small nominal fee) as I think it would be fun. But i wouldn't do it over several weeks or months.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2007-02-05 16:30
I guess this was inevitable. Over the decades the trend has gone from decent pay gradually down to no pay; and now the trend curve continues right through zero into the 'negative pay' zone where the performer has to pay out of pocket to do a gig. Isn't music a wonderful business? Glad I got an engineering degree instead.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2007-02-05 16:56
I know this has happened in the club scene a lot. a DJ might have to pay a certain amount, or make a deal with the owner saying that they get to keep the first x amount of dollars taken at the door and the dj would get anything beyond that (while the club/bar owner keeps all drink profit as well). I guess it seems feasable for some bars to be asking this. A little greedy if you ask me, (unless they've had a rash of performers that actually drive customers AWAY. Then I can understand).
As for me, nah. I play for fun. I don't think I'd ever pay to play.
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Carol Dutcher
Date: 2007-02-05 18:50
An interesting question. I play for free with the jammers at three different jazz clubs here in the Bay Area. But I pay membership dues to belong to the clubs, I spend money on my horn, money for new music, so in a way I am paying to play. The enjoyment I get from this is well worth it, and to see smiles in the audience is also well worth it. Once in awhile a paying gig comes along, so it all works out somehow.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2007-02-05 19:09
When I was in highschool our jazz group was offered to play somewhere but we had to buy all the tickets in advance and we had to sell them if we wanted to earn anything (or rather, not lose)...... We never did this concert. That was the only time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2007-02-05 21:57
I would "pay" to be allowed to sit in with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, the US Marine Band or maybe to play at Carneigie Hall NYC (or similar venues). But to pay for a local club--been there, done that (for scale or free) enough. I just don't feel the excitment or need for that, anymore. I've got plenty of trust fund gigs and a steady paying symphony job to keep me busy.
And from Nov through April, I curl twice a week and at some weekend bonspiels. There's actually some "life" outside of clarinetting.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mk
Date: 2007-02-06 01:19
its disgraceful....can't believe the union allows this kind of nonsense...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Terry Stibal
Date: 2007-02-06 01:55
Well, in all fairness, just what is the union going to do? In a closed shop state, if the union has the workplace organized (a big if), they will have a CBA in place that will prevent it. Trouble is that few workplaces in the musical world are organized, simply because few pay enough to make it worth their while.
For every one of us who pays for pay, there are probably three who do it "for the door" or less. True, many are the three chords and a capo guitar crowd who are desperate for a venue, any venue. But, there they are and they will work for nothing. Such is life.
In an open shop state like Texas, it's much, much worse. Here, the union has no "exclusivity", and anyone working for an organization where there is a CBA in place can get all of the benefits of union membership (save the pension) without any of the costs.
So, down here, the customary comment from prospective clients is often along the lines of "You'll get good exposure" and "I just can't afford to book you for scale" (when they are pushing seven to ten dollar mixed drinks to the crowd all the while. When I get this kind of stuff thrown my way, I politely explain that I've got the same sort of fixed costs that they have with their business, and suggest that they might do better with a school group.
The Performance Fund does offer some work, but looking at it from a practical standpoint, the good years are about over. Plus, from a leader's standpoint, booking something through the cumbersome Performance Fund process is almost more trouble than it's worth.
Finally, as live music providers, we are competing not only against similar providers, we are also up against broadcast and recorded media. Each medium has some disadvantages, but both have one great advantage over us: they're free (if not legally, practically).
Put another way, my biggest competition is often not another musical group (I welcome that kind of competition), but rather the chocolate fountain that a bride's parents can get if they forego live music and hire a DJ instead. You really have to sell the sizzle (including getting your vocalists involved up front in the booking process) to overcome something as trendy as those cascades of ganache. In effect, we fight trendy with our own brand of trendy.
Nothing like regular business, and not something I'd want to pursue as a primary occupation. But, I've got the luxury of being able to take it or leave it. Do it as a full time career, and things might not go that well.
Put another way, don't ever plan on making a car, much less a house, payment by playing for the door...
leader of Houston's Sounds Of The South Dance Orchestra
info@sotsdo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RodRubber
Date: 2007-02-06 03:50
just look at the pay as the cover, if ur band does a good job of marketing, you'll make money. Lets not blame people for trying to make some money, or at worst, keep their money. Club owners are clearly not philanthropists, but why should they be?
Also, if these bands want to get their stuff out there, or these combos want to be heard by whomever, they need to do whatever it takes to get it done. Clearly, an investment needs to be made in publicity.
A club owner would be a fool to pay people, when they can easily make money by "letting" people play on off nights or whatever. If you are trying to get your name around town, you gotta just buck up and do whatever it takes.
I really doubt that unions get involved in this type of stuff by the way.
Post Edited (2007-02-06 04:54)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Max S-D
Date: 2007-02-06 04:51
I've heard about this in rock clubs before. I know some mid-sized places in San Francisco won't book you unless you can either guarantee that a certain number of people will come, usually around 40 or 50 to be a supporting act, 80-100 to headline a weeknight and 200-250 to headline a weekend. It kind of seems like a logical extension of this then, that if you have the money but can't guarantee a crowd, you could "pay to play" on a weeknight by offering to pay for what the club calculates as the profits of the first 80-100 people up front, then keeping any money made at the door.
It's not very nice, but it's business.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
