ok, i've been lagging on my posting to the blog.. the holidays are still going in my world, with just a few gigs and lots of free time to spend around the house. it's great. there's time to think and plan for 2005 too. the boring side of things is that I have to do a bunch of year-end accounting and junk like that, but otherwise i am pretty much on vacation...
As part of of my year-end, I authored a DVD of the entire "aware" dance project; I compiled the performances and the rehearsal footage from this past year and organized it in iMovie to make a great DVD archive of the work. I'm going to do this for the cc+mo work too... if anyone is really interested, I can probably make a few extra copies (email me), otherwise, just stay tuned to the website for more downloads.
one cool thing from this holiday season has been the re-acquaintance with an old music-friend, Ashley Newall. We ran into each other at a holiday party, and we hadn't played together since 1999. he's a singer/songwriter in the truest sense of the word, and has been diligently writing and recording for at least 15 years. I started doing gigs and sessions for him back in my teens. Anyway, he's emailed me an mp3 of a studio track we did in 1999, and it sounds pretty good. I even played "sheryl crow" style bongos (I remember that was the "producer" comment during the tracking). I'll try and get it up on the website. While checking out his website I stumbled upon this mp3 that is available at CBC, it is really old, and Ashley has presented it as a "comedy" song (I honestly don't remember it being approached as a comic thing when we did it, but perhaps in hindsight it was, or should be viewed as), anyway it's here: http://zed.cbc.ca/go?~tabbedContent~tab=Groups%20Tab&user=JeanLenin&CONTENT_ID=94776&type=acquisitionCMS&set=contentPage&c=contentPage&page=content Ashley has called himself "Jean Lenin" on this recording...
anyway, stay tuned, hopefully lots to come in 2005. music music music!
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
In surf around some drum-forums on the net. One of the more interesting ones is located at the website of session drummer and teacher Billy Ward, www.billyward.com It's probably the most interesting because it's host is an active participant in the discussions, and he presents himself as a very humble, intelligent, and humour-filled guy. Anyway, I usually just lurk there, but I posted these two posts (there were replies, but I won't include them) because I've been wrestling with some career issues and was curious if other drummers could relate (turns out they could)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the $100 gig.... an economics discussion :)
hi everyone,
i'm out of lurk-mode to pose a query to the group:
for those that are doing this for a living (myself included), or even part-time; what would you say the average gig pays?
for me, living in Toronto, the magic number is $100. These gigs are usually club/restaurant gigs playing covers (i play primarily jazz and r&b), and last about 3 sets over 4 hours or less... playing showcases with original artists can also hover in around that number, but not as often...
wedding gigs are another story, but those can vary widely, and are very much seasonal.. what I am talking about is the stuff a working drummer has to rely on 52weeks out of the year to keep the bills paid...
with the exception of orchestra pit for the big-budget musicals (lion king, etc.) and the toronto symphony the musician's union is a non-entity up here.. i would say at least 70% of most working players' gugs are non-union, and 100% of mine are.
so, essentially, by the time the average gig is done, after basic travel expenses (gas, maybe a quick bite to eat), you're left with $100 or less. Now, between all the of gigs, a bit of teaching, and some other stuff (i am guest artist with the school board, which is $27/hour, and I usually do about 3 or 4 hours in a day... after taxes and expenses, again I'm around $100/day), the magic number is still $100 for most gigs I do.
Here's the issue: from the anecdotal evidence I've casually collected from older players (I'm only 30, and have been semi-pro since I was 15, pro since I was 20) is that that $100 figure has been in place for at least 15 years, or more, and the average gig pays LESS than what it did 20 years ago.
so, how is it that the price of beer in the bars we play in can triple over 20 years and the price of music stays the same or drops?
I'm not really looking for why this has happened, more why we let it happen?
It's a bad business model, and a recipe for disaster. When I've had a good year financially, it's because I worked more hours, not because the gigs paid better than the previous year.
So, are we just so committed to playing for a living that we'll play for less and less each year? I'm excluding the realm of major tours or sessions because frankly, those are issues that may only be relevant or possible for those willing to re-locate to NY, LA or Nashville and play the lottery of the major-label music business. I'm talking about selling your skills in an average market to average clients. I am sure most of us are in that situation.
Ultimately, I feel lucky to do what I do: I play the drums and make my living from it. But the economic model as represented by the $100 gig suggests that the older I get the harder the work will be for less money (that's the vibe I get from the older players I work with)....
any thoughts?
chris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"the $100 gig" - a path to creative burnout?
thanks for the replies to my little post,
I'm not looking for personal advice, but I thought I'd shed a little more light on what drove my original post.
Billy mentioned that "we don't run this as a business" (meaning our careers), and it's so true. Many of us direct our music careers from our creative hearts, and in the process direct ourselves straight into business with people who's careers are directed from an entirely other place ("greed" would be too harsh a word, but when placed in contrast with the simplicity and purity of self-expression, "business-minded" actions can seem so callous). Furthermore, as another post mentioned, often the best paying gigs are playing music that is creatively negative or at best, neutral.
I'm not complaining. The marketplace (people buying live music) will always move towards the average, and that means we'll often play music that is less than satisfying to us. That's a fact of doing business, right?
So, most of us (save for the lucky few who's creative vision turns them a profit) do the gigs to our professional best, get paid, go home and pay the bills, and then whatever money may be left, we invest into our creative efforts (studio time, gear, money-losing tours of our original work, etc.).
I have currently reached a decision-point in my career. I don't have the best gigs by any stretch, but I certainly don't have the worst (I am aware that other musicians would be happy to get to my level of busy-ness and finance). But, it seems apparent (and other posts concur) that I will be working harder for less money (relatively) into the future as long as the "$100 gig" persists.
My concern is that this negative cycle will drill its way down to my creative work; as costs-of-living rise and drive me to do more and more $100 gigs there will be both less time and funds available to finance the creative work I am driven to do. The gradual reduction in true creative output will no doubt take it's toll on my skills as a drummer.
So, another poster's joke about how he must be a worse player now than when he started (because he's making less money per gig) can actually become a truth.
Where I'm at is that I am looking at plans to pre-empt this creative burnout. Ideally it would be pre-empted by moving up to a higher gig-bracket (but as we know that can always be at best, temporary); but more likely it will be a re-evaluation of what I personally require to fuel my creativity. Do I have to exclusively sell my drumming for a living to still consider drumming my main activity? The notion of slogging through less-than-ideal gigs for progressively less money is a helluva creative burden to justify this notion of being a "pro".
My feeling right now is that the creative heart is fueled by time (no pun intended, drummers ). We need to buy ourselves time to reflect, be inspired, and then mold these inspirations into music. That time can be found in a variety of ways: Arts-endowment or government grants, record company advances, prolonged state or federal incarceration (just kidding), or "outside financing" (be it from your own non-musical activities, or the generosity of others). So, I am trying to settle upon the ideal (and possible) way of maximizing this creative time. This way may include getting out of the world of the "$100 gig", and that's how this thread started.
thanks again for replying and contributing!
chris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the $100 gig.... an economics discussion :)
hi everyone,
i'm out of lurk-mode to pose a query to the group:
for those that are doing this for a living (myself included), or even part-time; what would you say the average gig pays?
for me, living in Toronto, the magic number is $100. These gigs are usually club/restaurant gigs playing covers (i play primarily jazz and r&b), and last about 3 sets over 4 hours or less... playing showcases with original artists can also hover in around that number, but not as often...
wedding gigs are another story, but those can vary widely, and are very much seasonal.. what I am talking about is the stuff a working drummer has to rely on 52weeks out of the year to keep the bills paid...
with the exception of orchestra pit for the big-budget musicals (lion king, etc.) and the toronto symphony the musician's union is a non-entity up here.. i would say at least 70% of most working players' gugs are non-union, and 100% of mine are.
so, essentially, by the time the average gig is done, after basic travel expenses (gas, maybe a quick bite to eat), you're left with $100 or less. Now, between all the of gigs, a bit of teaching, and some other stuff (i am guest artist with the school board, which is $27/hour, and I usually do about 3 or 4 hours in a day... after taxes and expenses, again I'm around $100/day), the magic number is still $100 for most gigs I do.
Here's the issue: from the anecdotal evidence I've casually collected from older players (I'm only 30, and have been semi-pro since I was 15, pro since I was 20) is that that $100 figure has been in place for at least 15 years, or more, and the average gig pays LESS than what it did 20 years ago.
so, how is it that the price of beer in the bars we play in can triple over 20 years and the price of music stays the same or drops?
I'm not really looking for why this has happened, more why we let it happen?
It's a bad business model, and a recipe for disaster. When I've had a good year financially, it's because I worked more hours, not because the gigs paid better than the previous year.
So, are we just so committed to playing for a living that we'll play for less and less each year? I'm excluding the realm of major tours or sessions because frankly, those are issues that may only be relevant or possible for those willing to re-locate to NY, LA or Nashville and play the lottery of the major-label music business. I'm talking about selling your skills in an average market to average clients. I am sure most of us are in that situation.
Ultimately, I feel lucky to do what I do: I play the drums and make my living from it. But the economic model as represented by the $100 gig suggests that the older I get the harder the work will be for less money (that's the vibe I get from the older players I work with)....
any thoughts?
chris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"the $100 gig" - a path to creative burnout?
thanks for the replies to my little post,
I'm not looking for personal advice, but I thought I'd shed a little more light on what drove my original post.
Billy mentioned that "we don't run this as a business" (meaning our careers), and it's so true. Many of us direct our music careers from our creative hearts, and in the process direct ourselves straight into business with people who's careers are directed from an entirely other place ("greed" would be too harsh a word, but when placed in contrast with the simplicity and purity of self-expression, "business-minded" actions can seem so callous). Furthermore, as another post mentioned, often the best paying gigs are playing music that is creatively negative or at best, neutral.
I'm not complaining. The marketplace (people buying live music) will always move towards the average, and that means we'll often play music that is less than satisfying to us. That's a fact of doing business, right?
So, most of us (save for the lucky few who's creative vision turns them a profit) do the gigs to our professional best, get paid, go home and pay the bills, and then whatever money may be left, we invest into our creative efforts (studio time, gear, money-losing tours of our original work, etc.).
I have currently reached a decision-point in my career. I don't have the best gigs by any stretch, but I certainly don't have the worst (I am aware that other musicians would be happy to get to my level of busy-ness and finance). But, it seems apparent (and other posts concur) that I will be working harder for less money (relatively) into the future as long as the "$100 gig" persists.
My concern is that this negative cycle will drill its way down to my creative work; as costs-of-living rise and drive me to do more and more $100 gigs there will be both less time and funds available to finance the creative work I am driven to do. The gradual reduction in true creative output will no doubt take it's toll on my skills as a drummer.
So, another poster's joke about how he must be a worse player now than when he started (because he's making less money per gig) can actually become a truth.
Where I'm at is that I am looking at plans to pre-empt this creative burnout. Ideally it would be pre-empted by moving up to a higher gig-bracket (but as we know that can always be at best, temporary); but more likely it will be a re-evaluation of what I personally require to fuel my creativity. Do I have to exclusively sell my drumming for a living to still consider drumming my main activity? The notion of slogging through less-than-ideal gigs for progressively less money is a helluva creative burden to justify this notion of being a "pro".
My feeling right now is that the creative heart is fueled by time (no pun intended, drummers ). We need to buy ourselves time to reflect, be inspired, and then mold these inspirations into music. That time can be found in a variety of ways: Arts-endowment or government grants, record company advances, prolonged state or federal incarceration (just kidding), or "outside financing" (be it from your own non-musical activities, or the generosity of others). So, I am trying to settle upon the ideal (and possible) way of maximizing this creative time. This way may include getting out of the world of the "$100 gig", and that's how this thread started.
thanks again for replying and contributing!
chris
Saturday, December 04, 2004
...been more than a week since the gig, and I've yet to mention it significantly. well, I haven't really looked at the DV of it (with the exception of the opening piece, "aware" with Arwyn), so I'll go on my experiences that evening...
the week leading up to the gig was stressful. I wasn't convinced that the material I had selected to play with michael and darryl was at 100% readiness. That could have been helped by more rehearsals, but that costs money and time; I didn't have the former, and they didn't have the latter. Nonetheless, it sounded good, and would be fine, but it didn't sound sparkling enough that the anxiety about it wouldn't dwell in my brain before and during the gig itself.
All in all, the gig felt good to play, and from some reports in the audience, sounded pretty decent too. "mathematics" (a tune of mine) was the only true train wreck; things got started without a count-off from me (due to poor staging whereupon I had placed Darryl directly in my sightline to MO). Anyway, it was too fast, and I tried to slow it down, now too slow, then Darryl couldn't come in properly, YIKES!!!!! it finally worked its way around to where it was supposed to be but that was just before the end... (sigh). a few folks still commented on how it was nice to hear that song (maybe the song itself is strong enough melodically to withstand such abuse, I hope so).
Basically, this gig was my last "creative" effort of 2004. The rest of the year will be spent doing cc3 and Hot Buttered Soul gigs, finishing up my residency work for the school board, and doing some teaching. With any luck, I'll get into Kevin Cooke's studio and finish move2 as well...
The current creative calendar for 2005 is TBA. I am keen to go in another direction. The cc+mo duo made a great record and played two interesting concerts in its 1st year of life. I am not sure where to take it next; perhaps, like so many other projects, it will hibernate until there is demand (either personal or external) to revive it. (i.e. if a promoter was willing to put on the concert and offer me a fee for our performance--the year's creative activities ended up well into the "red" for me).
we'll see...
the week leading up to the gig was stressful. I wasn't convinced that the material I had selected to play with michael and darryl was at 100% readiness. That could have been helped by more rehearsals, but that costs money and time; I didn't have the former, and they didn't have the latter. Nonetheless, it sounded good, and would be fine, but it didn't sound sparkling enough that the anxiety about it wouldn't dwell in my brain before and during the gig itself.
All in all, the gig felt good to play, and from some reports in the audience, sounded pretty decent too. "mathematics" (a tune of mine) was the only true train wreck; things got started without a count-off from me (due to poor staging whereupon I had placed Darryl directly in my sightline to MO). Anyway, it was too fast, and I tried to slow it down, now too slow, then Darryl couldn't come in properly, YIKES!!!!! it finally worked its way around to where it was supposed to be but that was just before the end... (sigh). a few folks still commented on how it was nice to hear that song (maybe the song itself is strong enough melodically to withstand such abuse, I hope so).
Basically, this gig was my last "creative" effort of 2004. The rest of the year will be spent doing cc3 and Hot Buttered Soul gigs, finishing up my residency work for the school board, and doing some teaching. With any luck, I'll get into Kevin Cooke's studio and finish move2 as well...
The current creative calendar for 2005 is TBA. I am keen to go in another direction. The cc+mo duo made a great record and played two interesting concerts in its 1st year of life. I am not sure where to take it next; perhaps, like so many other projects, it will hibernate until there is demand (either personal or external) to revive it. (i.e. if a promoter was willing to put on the concert and offer me a fee for our performance--the year's creative activities ended up well into the "red" for me).
we'll see...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)