Sunday, January 15, 2012

What's The Point


By the time I was 14 years old I had studied the guitar seven years and was playing at church dances in and around New York City. I played in a few different bands, and because my repertoire was limited, I would bring music with me till I could memorize the songs that were needed. Sometimes the leader of the group would bring the music. The most important thing was that I was playing my guitar in front of an audience. That need became a very significant part of my life. As a beginner performer, there were many times I played for no pay. I needed the experience. I got my union card when I was 15 years old and for all intensive purposes I was a professional musician. A year later I was backing up 50’s type singing groups at rock and roll shows and getting paid. At eighteen I was a full-time musician but a year before while still in high school, I started playing in nightclubs. I’d work till three or four in the morning then go home and sleep two or three hours and then go to school. I did this two or three times a month, but I did work every weekend. I was like most young people who had a part-time job to earn money, except my part time job was being a musician. Through my earnings I was able to buy the things I needed to sustain myself as a musician: new guitar & amp, strings, picks, a tuxedo, guitar lessons and eventually a car.

When I graduated from high school. I went to college but my heart was into playing. I dropped out of college and started working as a full-time musician, which meant I had to get a cabaret license; during the 50’s and up to 1967 in order to work in New York City nightclubs, a cabaret license was a requirement. You couldn’t get a license until you were finger printed to see if you were convicted or arrested for any crime. Of course I wasn’t, but many great artists, such as Chet Baker, Thelonious Monk, Charlie Parker and Billie Holiday had their cabaret licenses suspended because of drug charges, and Lenny Bruce for his reputed obscenity.

I remember sitting on a bench filling out the application and sitting next to me was a face I recognized, but couldn’t place. He was very congenial and we spent our time waiting and talking. I finally said, “ You look so familiar, have we met before?” I introduced myself and he put out his hand and said “I’m Maynard Ferguson”. I practically fainted. I’d seen Maynard play many times at Birdland - my home away from home. A few minutes later he was called up to the window, finished, smiled and said goodbye. To me that was a great experience meeting someone who contributed to jazz. Up until I was fifteen, my heroes were athletes, but that all changed when I started listening to Jazz and hanging out at Birdland.

In the fifties, Birdland had a ‘peanut gallery,’ which meant anyone under eighteen could sit in the back of the club, have soda and watch the greatest Jazz musicians in the world perform. There were always two acts on the bill. My heroes and teachers were Johnny Smith, Dizzy Gillespie, JJ Johnson, Horace Silver, The Jazz Messengers, Miles Davis with John Coltrane, and the list goes on and on. Every time I discovered someone new I would buy their records and they would become part of a long list of influences and heroes. I didn’t know or care about their personal lives. All I knew is they were great players and I wanted to do what they could do and that desire is still with me to this day.

In the late fifties, early sixties, musicians were paid $25-$50 dollars a night in bars and lounges. Of course the famous musicians were paid much more, but I am talking about your everyday working musician. In those days, musicians were put into categories:
1. Studio Musicians- recordings, jingles etc.
2. High End Club Date Players - with big-name band leaders who played parties and social functions for the rich
3. Club Date Musicians - Weddings, Engagement Parties, Barmitzvahs etc.
4. Show Musicians - Playing for Big Name Acts at Night Clubs
5. Broadway Show Musicians
6. Jazz Musicians
7. Latin Musicians
8. Bar and Lounge Players
9. Classical Musicians - Free-lance and Orchestra.

The highest paid musicians were the Studio, Broadway and Classical Musicians. The lowest were the Latin, Lounge and Jazz Musicians. The point is, everyone got paid. It was during that time, that I was a regular working musician. I worked in all the above categories except the Classical and Latin fields. I was so busy, I kept myself working and three other guitar players busy too.

Along came the mid-seventies. Electronic synthesizers had taken the place of many musicians. Studio musicians ended up playing for Broadway shows. When the synthesizers invaded theatre music, those musicians ended up playing weddings. Then came the disc jockeys replacing live music with recorded music at weddings. They put those musicians out of work. The big show bands that backed up famous acts at hotels in New York City had stopped in the early seventies and the Catskills show bands were gone by the late eighties and the musicians union was just about broken. Non-union musicians could play anywhere and the bandleaders did not worry about paying scale to their players. That also meant health and pension benefits went out the window. At the same time, studio and Theatre musicians who most likely started off as Big Band or Jazz musicians, but needed to make a living ended up in the studios or playing in the pit for Broadway shows. They still had a need to play Jazz and in order to satisfy that need, and since they didn’t need the money, they would play in bars and restaurants for no pay. (The beginning of the end)

There was a rise of Jazz Departments in Colleges and Universities throughout the USA. In the past, Jazz Study was unheard of in colleges except for a few. All of a sudden, every school in America had a Jazz Program offering degrees in performance. I personally think that these programs were created so that jazz musicians could work. Every kid who dreamed he could be the next Coltrane or Miles Davis, enrolled in these schools and graduated with a degree.

What this meant is - a lot of kids with degrees could play a lot of scales and understood all the modes and all the theory associated with jazz and if they were lucky enough to have good teachers, they could play some Jazz. They weren’t experienced Jazz players, but the potential was there. The problem was and still is, where do they go to get this experience and did their schools teach them how to survive as musicians? The answer is a decidedly, No! The school advisers and teachers did give them some advice: if you want to get the experience you need, go to New York where there is great music& energy, and eventually if you’re lucky, you will make it.

WRONG!

The worst part of this advice is, these kids think if they come to New York they’ll take the town by storm. They were ‘so successful’ in college - everyone told them how great they were, they assume by coming to the Big Apple, they’ll meet lots of musicians, which they do, but they think there is so much work, they’ll immediately find work. But they find at least another hundred players as good, if not, better - and most of them are out of work and barely surviving. They all have part-time or ‘day jobs’ and are living with roommates. The roommates are usually musicians and all of them have a need to play. In order to fill that need, they play at make- shift jam sessions or after-hours at some club. But playing at sessions with other musicians doesn’t fulfill their need to perform in front of an audience or help them make a living at their chosen craft.

So what do they do? The same thing that the studio players did years earlier, they play in bars and restaurants for no pay or a pass-the-hat situation, which means after the set someone goes from table to table with a hat, (or basket, bucket,) hoping the customers will donate money for the musicians. Sometimes the musicians themselves would go around with the hat. All of this in the hope they can satisfy their need to perform and be heard or even ‘be discovered’ while earning a few dollars to pay for the subway ride home.

Passing the hat does amazing things for your ego and sense of self worth. You fool yourself into believing that you are contributing to the Jazz effort and at least your music is being heard. Some musicians get so depressed they quit with a sense of failure. They get ‘normal jobs’ and live a life filled with frustration and unhappiness.

Then there’s the ‘artist’. This is a person who has ‘hung in there’ for years and has developed a style of playing he/she can call his own. No one sounds like them and they are the future of Jazz. The problem is no one cares - or at least very little – or is willing to pay these great artisans of improvisation. Another problem is because the music is advanced, where can they play? If you are not a proficient grant writer, your chances of winning a grant are null and the gigs you want to create never happen.

If you are a well-known player there are only a few places in New York City where you can perform. But how many in New York are known players? Being a ‘star’ doesn’t necessarily make you a great musician, some are not very good, but a ‘star’ is well- known and can draw an audience. That’s why they make the big bucks and because they ask for big salaries, the clubs are asking for a lot of money from the public to see one set.

You try to get an agent or manager and even though they recognize your artistry and like your music, you have to ‘make it’ before they will handle you. It is a never-ending cycle.

There are only a few super-stars in improvised music. But the highest paid star is probably Cecil Taylor. Most people, except for the so-called ‘in crowd’ know who he is but very few, except for some musicians, understand his music. He is well paid and greatly appreciated overseas more than here in the States.

During the sixties and throughout the country, began the end of jazz as a popular music except for Fusion, a combination of Jazz and Rock. Some jazz musicians hated this music and I personally think it was created to try and bring in young people. Miles Davis was the leader of the pack with his recording of “Bitches Brew”. Miles was forever changing and if the young supported Rock ‘n’ Roll, why not have them support Fusion too? It certainly made Chic Corea, John McLaughlin, Larry Coryell, Keith Jarrett and more major stars. But Rock ‘n’ Roll had taken over the airwaves, and Fusion didn’t last very long. It is still around, and in the last twenty years, jazz has wears many hats: Swing, Be-bop, Modern, Post Be-bop, West Coast Jazz, Gypsy Jazz, Fusion, Latin Jazz, Smooth-Jazz, Third Stream, Free-Jazz, Improvised Music etc. In the late sixties, early seventies, Free Jazz musicians in New York City reverted to playing in lofts. People would come in and pay a few dollars, sit on pillows, couches or on the floor, and listen to free jazz, which was considered angry and far out.

After a while as the decline of jazz continued, and the rise of rock, disco, & pop music kept growing, the loft scene slowly disappeared. Many of the loft players went to Europe to work and live where Jazz was and has always been looked on as the highest form of art and was honored and respected there.

In the mid-eighties with the emergence of Wynton Marsalis, jazz began to slowly re-emerge and become popular again. Because of Wynton and many like him the public began to be more enlightened and appreciative of jazz. There also started what I call a separatism that has become very divisive and has worked against the jazz community.

Coming up as a young jazz player, I watched black and white musicians working together. There was camaraderie among them. If you played jazz and were really good, you were accepted, no matter what color you were. I played along side some of the greatest jazz musicians in the world and it didn’t matter what my color was, but in the last twenty years that has changed. Instead of working together to keep a unity between jazz musicians, there has become a divide that has hurt the jazz community. There’s a segment of musician out there who tells us what jazz is and ‘should be’ and that it shouldn’t be called jazz anymore. The word jazz brings with it tones of racism and bigotry. Many of the jazz giants such as Max Roach, Duke Ellington, Monk and many more hated the word ‘jazz’, but despite their efforts to change it, the name stayed the same. It seem every 20-30 years the same issue comes to the forefront. Now they claim they want the name changed to BAM in hopes the new name would reign in a missing black audience.

I firmly believe you're not going to bring back Black audiences to Jazz by changing its'name to BAM or whatever you want to call it. I think the best way is education. Since Jazz is and has been American Classical Music for over seventy years, it needs to be part of the curriculum in grade schools, even pre-schools. All of us should be working towards this goal. There are many teaching artist working in the public school systems throughout the USA. We need to encourage them to teach and use Jazz as part of their program. We need to get school boards and legislators to encourage teachers to teach about jazz in their music appreciation programs and if there aren't any music appreciation programs, start them. Don't wait for Black Appreciation Month to let kids know who Duke Ellington was. One week and one name out of one month a year doesn't cut it.

I was a teaching artist in the NYC public schools from 1995-2001. I taught Literacy through song writing. I started with the Blues and moved on till I got to Jazz. The kids not only learned to appreciate and enjoy the music, some of them actually learned to scat sing.

What is confusing is, if you hate the word so much, then don’t accept teaching positions in College Jazz programs or perform in Jazz Concerts or Jazz Clubs. If it is expected that clubs like The Blue Note Jazz Club will change to The Blue Note BAM Club or the Sedona Jazz Festival will change its’ name to The Sedona BAM Festival-it will never happen. Clubs and Jazz Festivals throughout the World have spent tons of money promoting and paying artists to perform Jazz, after all these years it won’t change.

As jazz emerged again, along came the old and new improvisers. But there was no place to play except the Knitting Factory, and a few other places, which were door gigs (same as pass the hat except patrons paid at the door). Eventually more performance spaces emerged. Along with the performance spaces came the bar gigs which were also door gigs. The prices at some of these door gigs were dictated by the cubs and sometimes by the musicians. Some places called them donations. If you wanted to perform, these were the conditions you had to deal with. The problem is, you must provide the audience or you will not make any money. That means before you play, you have to promote the gig. Promoting the gig will cost you money. If you intend to treat your musicians with some dignity, you pay them out of your own pocket and you keep whatever is made at the door. Ninety-eight percent of the time you will loose money especially if the venue wants a guarantee. That means they get a cut, whether there is money to be made or not. You also shouldn’t book a gig three nights in a row at different venues or even one per week. You want as many people to come to your gig so it is best to have one gig. You can’t expect your friends, family and fans to show up three times in a week. You’re lucky if they come once a month.

With the advance of technology and recording equipment, many musicians whom a Major Record Company couldn’t sign or Independent Label began to self-produce. Putting out one CD a year, which was and still is, very expensive. But they could recoup their expenses at gigs. Many musicians take door gigs because they can sell their CD’s - but with the dawning of digital downloads, very few people buy CDs. If you do or don’t have an audience, and can’t sell CDs, what’s the point?

Most radio stations and reviewers require CDs. They haven’t kept up with the technology that is now available. I understand that change is hard, but it must be dealt with in order to help artists. If you, as and independent artist, only put out digital downloads, you are still required to send them CD’s with art work, liner notes in other words the whole package in order to get radio play and reviews. So it will cost you some money and the chance of recouping your investment is not good. All and all, these are impossible situations. Some magazines (even though they won’t admit it) will not review your CD, unless you advertise with them. Radio station directors decide whom they will give radio play to. To be fair radio stations and jazz journalists are overwhelmed with music and it is impossible to give everyone a chance, but review and play the same people over and over again doesn’t seem fair. In essence your career may be in their hands. If you are part of the new improvisers scene, your music will only be played on college radio stations. At least the college music directors are opened minded to new music and some of them accept digital downloads, which isn’t the case for the commercial jazz stations.

A few months ago at a performance venue in New York City, an argument over money ensued between the leader of the group and one of the managers. It became violent and the manager punched the musician in the eye. The musician wore glasses. He ended up in the hospital getting stitches and is lucky he is not blind. Word spread throughout the musical community and many musicians have banned that venue. This was beyond unforgivable. This is no way to treat artists and musicians. Needless to say no one I know has worked there again.

What has happened to us, that our need has outmoded our dignity? It’s time to stop playing door gigs and passing the hat. Stop playing for nothing and stop playing. You may say if we stop, someone will come along and play anyway. They won’t play if there are hordes of musicians outside of these gigs carrying signs that say Pay or We Don’t Play. Ask the customers going into the bar/restaurant if they would work for nothing. It may be considered harassment, but something has to be done! If this happens at every venue in New York and Brooklyn and then spread throughout the USA and Europe, it just might make a difference. If we can’t get that grant that will pay us, then go find another way or don’t play. Somehow we have to get back the respect that we as artists have lost. You wouldn’t call and electrician or plumber to fix something for you for no pay and if you did, would they show up? They have a service that requires pay. We as musicians have a service that requires pay too!

“But I play for the love of it”
Well play for the love of it at home if need be and let the musicians who need the money get paid.

I know we say to ourselves, what about all the hours of studying and practicing I’ve done, or the two hundred thousand dollar education I got, isn’t it worth something? Yes it is, so why play for nothing? Some musicians want the reputation, but that rep won’t put food on the table. Remember the venue you are playing in is making money, but you’re not and the only reason they are making money is because of you.

In our neediness to play and perform, we have lost sight of who and what we are and most of all we have lost our self-worth. Throughout the world, and especially in the USA, greed has been the dominant force adding to the decline of civilization. In this weakened economy the rents for all these venues are high and getting higher all the time. In order to sustain, the clubs and performance venues must charge more, but charging more does not mean ‘don’t pay the musicians’. As the prices go up, the amount of work goes down.

You can blame Wall Street, Politicians, anyone you like, but the truth is we have to blame ourselves. It is unbelievable to me that clubs and venues throughout the city and Brooklyn, not only don’t pay their musicians, but they are booked seven nights a week with non paying performances and because musicians are clamoring to play (I would say work, but playing for no pay is charity), these venues are booked six months in advance, There is something definitely wrong with this equation.

Until we regain our self-worth, nothing will change and nothing will change till we change!

22 comments:

  1. You and I and all of the other geezers in the jazz idiom have witnessed a multitude of changes since our "salad days." On one hand, I view the controversy surrounding "jazz" and BAM" as a sign of vitality in our music. On the other hand, I don't have much use for labels of any kind, mostly because one can find elements of almost every genre in every kind of worthwhile modern music. Of course the operative word here is "worthwhile," a term so subjective that it, too, tends to be a meaningless label. Whatever you want to call it, jazz belongs to all who are attracted to it as a player or as a listener. Let's hope that the good stuff survives the bad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. PART ONE
    The game has been lost in regard to the non-paying clubs and the abundance of musicians clamoring to play in them. This wasn't a sudden death but a slow decline that's been taking place for many decades due to many factors but primarily aided and abetted by the musicians themselves. Now, there is no middle class in the music world and the pyramid describes the scenario - sound familiar? the 1% versus all the rest.

    It's disheartening to imagine turning it around when the understanding is simply not there nor is the vision on the surface. There's no unification - on the surface. The challenge many of the greedy are taking up is how to figure out a way to feed off the dead carcass with so many that are trying to resuscitate the jazz corpse to validate their own existence. Just look at nature to see how the jackals operate.

    It is interesting to observe the association taking place with artistic worth and a door gig. The notion that "being visible" is tantamount to good business practice is insanity, it's ludicrous, it's laughable, it's unconscionable. In any other business, not getting paid for your work or your product wouldn't make you a charity because you would get funding somewhere. It would make you either a saint or nuts. That not being the acceptable case, it translates however that you or your product are worthless. Why is this so hard to see, why the denial, why choose delusion? What is fascinating is that musicians who do the door gigs have sold themselves a bill of goods because somehow enmeshed in their psyche, in their ego is the notion that having this visibility validates their worth as a player - your name is out there, you're playing and the audience has no idea you're working for bubka. They hype themselves up so much that even they believe it.

    Many of us have done the door gigs in order to parlay them into something else, like a paying gig or some kickback from the club, but in most cases, that never materializes.

    As the independent musician tries to solve the puzzle, all of it gets tangled up with what is now called, self promotion and/or marketing. So, the musician who only had an aptitude and "eye" to play music now must become an entrepreneur, a small business owner, and dedicate most of his time to promoting himself and his music and in learning and developing new skills. Very time consuming, while you're not getting piad, and what if you are not good at it? Had you wanted to be a business exec in the first place, you wouldn't have gotten into the arts, right? Well, think again, it is a two-headed profession at the very least now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is a very comprehensive analysis of the decline of gigs for musicians.

    It is also a very thorough account of the decline of jazz as a means for musicians to earn a living. I'm not sure I agree with your suggested remedy --striking the venues where jazz can be played. But, your article should certainly stimulate discussion. It is a sad state of affairs.

    You might want to submit the article to professional music publications. However, it needs a little editing for spelling and grammatic errors, which I can help you with if you wish to pursue it further.

    ReplyDelete
  4. CLOSING COMMENT PART TWO
    And having said all of that, let us not forget about the music predators, those that charge the musician out-the-arse for services such as promotion, management, PR (oftentimes, too often, not delivering quality services, and sometimes, just not delivering period) and this is also too often a prerequisite to getting on a label, it's madness. Some independent labels offer distribution and marketing but you must pay to be on the label for their services, albeit less than if you were to go it alone supposedly and then there is the"prestige" of being on someone else's label and making someone else's dream happen, but it is truly all about money - there are many, many, artists out there who are funding their own careers and that's what it's about, not whether or not they are artistically deserving, but then again, it's not for me to say...it's a money game, so bottom line, you may as well invest in yourself. All things considered, what have you got to lose? The big money opportunities are there forthe big names and those who can afford to pay the tab to promote and create the image of talent and success where the two are nowadays mutually exclusive.

    And that's where it's at today, in a changing world, strange new landscape, and shrinking niche market. In my humble opinion, it cannot be turned around, it must be recreated. Just as in everything else, we cannot return to yesteryear...back in the day....is just a romantic nostalgic notion that perhaps should never come again.So when you DON'T see some of the best musicians alive today being advertised as playing here or there, don't think they've given up or stopped playing, or are not creating, or are no longer vital. One thing you can take to the only bank that matters, is that the music can't be stopped by the greedy possessors and parasites. These artists have values and integrity and are taking a stand against what is happening in today's "marketplace" by not supporting it and not playing into it. That's where the work is being done, in the trenches, that's where the changes are occurring and if you take some time to research (and I don't mean research and restore) the music is alive and well and artists are collaborating and finding many ingenious ways of being able to function as artists in this crazy economy and getting their music heard.

    Nora McCarthy

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks Thom. You are absolutely right.
    Dom

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks Nora..you are absolutely right.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks Joan,

    I think the internet has taken over and many people are reading this. I am getting emails from all the world.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Excellent blog! Thanks for sharing.
    Basic financial principles (i.e., supply and demand") suggest that jazz musicians may never be paid what they deserve until their audiences become larger and more demanding.
    As Phil Woods' so eloquently states (in a master class that was on TV the other night), indiviuals need to be "cultured". While Phil's comments were directed towards musicians, they also apply to audiences. While I admire both the musicians and club owners for their committment to good music, the financial health of the jazz community is completely depedendent upon cultured audiences. As Nat Hentoff states in his recent Jazz Times column (Final Chorus, February 2012), public jazz education is essential to sustaining jazz audiences. In the meantime, I believe the jazz community's efforts should be focused more on venues that do not host live jazz (e.g., expensive restaurants). I still cannot believe that anyone would pay more than $20 for a dinner without demanding decent live music. Doesn't this bother anyone else?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dom did a great job of describing the descending arc the path of ALL professional musicians ( let alone the creative segment -improvising jazz players and composers ) have watched occur over the past 50 or so years. I started out playing professionally when I was a sophomore in high school by dint of many hours of shedding and the generous guidance provided by older mentors. ( Unfortunately this mentor system /one on one education has devolved due to the ever growing lack of places to play. )

    Furthermore, I consider myself quite luck to have managed to find myself admitted to the ranks of the
    stidio level players ( and arranger /composers ) at a fairly early age and was even more fortunate to remain in this part of the business for close to 45 years. The downside to this was most of the music I was dealing with was NOT jazz based -However it did pay well and provided me with a decent AFM pension to augment my social security upon retirement. Again , I consider myself myself quite fortunate in that I could finally return to my first love , jazz, ...as a fulfilling "hobby" in my so called retirement days.

    Here again I find myself running into many of the problems Dom has brought up. It costs money to make recordings and I'm a firm believer that even though I'm dealing with music that should be enjoyable to professional jazz players, they STILL deserve to be paid for their efforts -just as the studio and engineers are.

    Also, I have the old fashioned notion that live gigs should be paid affairs -NOT door gigs or pass -the- hat deals. Needles to say, my band doesn't work too often. when a potential employer calls me for a festival gig and I mention the cost will be a floor of $4K plus travel and lodging, I often get the response "hell ..I could get a DJ for that much ! "

    Nevertheless, I still feel my musical life has been quite fortunate overall, and I fear for the loss of opportunities facing the younger very talented group of jazz players in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I had to revise some text so I now repost....I think what you are saying Dom is very cogent, insightful and to the point. Part of the malaise impacting the jazz community undoubtedly has to do with the economic disaster that has befallen us. As you mention, musicians at large have been severely impacted by the collapse of what used to be various means of livelihood. In a large view, creative artists of all kinds are suffering from both technological dominance, overproduction of potential artists, and a shift away from a "share the wealth" attitude on the part of those with money to spend or invest at all levels. Writers find often enough that their only outlet now is in the write-for-no-pay mediums (such as these blogs) that are found on the internet especially. The glut of graduates with music degrees in jazz is paralleled by a greatly increased number of credentialed visual artists with MFA's, to take another example, in situations where there is no corresponding expansion in the economic opportunities available, but rather a shrinking. Compounding that is a trend in our culture at large where many people no longer feel they should pay for creative/ informational product and the devices that convey that content, be it recorded music, live music, writing, or any other number of goods and services deemed by our culture "non-essential." Places like WalMart teach us that electronic goods and other commodities can be had for almost nothing--and we as a whole ignore that both productive labor and retail help receive starvation wages in order to keep the profits at a high level and the price to the consumer as low as possible. In many ways then what's happening in jazz is happening in virtually all aspects of American society. The concept of fairness is giving way to a corporate and individual selfishness that ramifies across all enterprises and discourse. I think that some of the actions you recommend could in the long term be beneficial. But I do not see much changing drastically until cultural ethics get renewed attention via education and a mass awakening of conscience. Until people realize that expecting everything around them to be theirs for little to no effort or expense eventually will turn around to deprive them of their means of existence as well. . . until people change their habitual outlook from universal exploitation to one of responsible community outreach, I see little changing. Culture and society must be changed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks Don. Your is clearly the "voice" of experience and a helpful one at that. In a nutshell we as musicians must "DEMAND" equitable pay. Door gigs and passing the hat are a road to nowhere. They will get you nowhere and ultimately you will have to get a day job unless you come from a wealthy family (which is not my situation at all). I see the problem as being one of too many YOUNG musicians needing to play and willing to play for free; an uneducated audience and an uneducated and less than interested club owner. Although times are hard and will only get tougher at the same time music will become more necessary for our spiritual sanity. So what can we do? Perhaps we need to reevaluate and re-define our goals and methods of attaining them. There is an audience out there but we have to find them, nurture them and develop them. There is power in numbers. Start an organization - co-lead a band so you can split the costs; investigate different parts of the globe. If your music is sincere, powerful and truthful there is an audience for you, but you have to find it. They will not find you. Stay optimistic!!!! Don't play for free unless you get something back that is worth more than money!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. YOUR ARTICLE WAS PERFECT AND REMINED ME OF MY LIFE IN MUSIC. I GREW UP IN THE 50'S . MY BEST FRIEND AND I USED TO GO TO BIRDLAND ALL THE TIME WHEN WE WERE 14. WE SAW ALL THE GREAT JAZZ MUSICIANS SITTING IN THE PEANUT GALLERY EXCEPT BIRD.WE FOLLOWED COLTRANE'S CARRER FROM THE BEGINING WITH MILES THROUGH THE CLASSIC QUARTET. BEFORE I WAS SIXTEEN I SAW A DRUMMER IN A MOVIE THEATHER WINDOW PLAYING HIS GRETCH SET TO GENE KRUPA'S RECORD OF LOVER. HE WAS PROMOTING HIS DRUM SCHOOL WHICH WAS A FEW BLOCKS FROM WHERE I LIVED IN THE BRONX. I TOOK A LESSON A WEEK AND HE TURNED ME ON TO ART BLAKEY(I HAD LOVED GENE KRUPA BEFORE AND STILL DO), BUT HE TAUGHT ME ALL ABOUT THE MUSIC BUSINESS AND HOW TO PLAY THE BEATS TO PLAY A JOB WITH A BAND, BESIDES READING. HIS NAME IS SAM ULANO AND THOSE WERE GREAT DAYS.HE GOT ME MY FIRST SUMMER JOB IN THE CATSKILLS WHERE ALL THE MUSICIANS IN THE BAND WENT TO MUSIC AND ART HIGH SCHOOL, SO I LATER MET SOME OF THE BEST YOUNG PLAYERS IN NEW YORK. BARRY ROGERS THE GREAT TROMBONE PLAYER GOT ME INTO THIS MIXED BAND AND WE PLAYED ALL OVER HARLEM. BOB PORCELLI WAS IN THAT BAND AND MARTY SHELLER WHO BECAME A FAMOUS LATIN ARRANGER. THEY WERE ON MONGO SANTMARIA'S RECORD OF WATERMELON MAN. ABOUT BAM, WE WERE ALL TOGETHER BLACK AND WHITE PLAYING THESE GIG'S UNTIL MALCOX X CAME ON THE SCENE AND THEN SOME OF OUR BLACK FRIENDS WOULD NOT PLAY WITH US. I LATER WORKED WITH DUKE JORDAN'S TRIO AND PLAYED FOR CHRIS CONNOR. WHEN ROCK AND ROLL CAME IN I HAD TO LEARN IT TO WORK AND ENDED UP BEING THE ORIGINAL DRUMMER IN "HAIR". ROCK AND ROLL JUST ABOUT WIPED OUT JAZZ IN THE 60'S. WHILE I WAS PLAYING THE SHOW THE COMPOSER CONDUCTER GALT McDERMONT SAID"DON'T PLAY THAT LICK IT SOUNDS TO JAZZY" THE BASS PLAYER AND I WENT TO SEE LEE MORGAN AND FELT WE WERE NOT PLAYING THE REAL MUSIC WE LOVED. I WORKED FOR YEARS IN THE CATSKILL HOTEL SHOW BANDS.THE LAST HOTEL I WORKED IN WAS KUTHERS COUNTRY CLUB FOR 30 YEARS. IN THE BEGINING 70'S WE WORKED ALL THE TIME PLAYING SOME BIG ACTS. THE DISC JOCKEYS HAD ALREADY REPLACED MUSICIANS ON CLUB DATES. IN THE LATE 80'S BUSINESS BECAME BAD AND WE WERE LAID OFF MOST OF THE WINTER. ON NEW YEAR'S EVE THEY STARTED TO HIRE A DISC JOCKEY WITH ALL THE BELLS AND WHISTLES FOR THE BIG CROWD AND WE PLAYED IN A SMALL ROOM FOR THE SENIORS. IN THE EARLY YEARS WE HAD A TEN PEICE BAND AND IT WAS A BIG DEAL THE JOB ENDED ABOUT 6 YEARS AGO WITH NO 2 WEEK NOTICE AND NO MONEY. I GOT SO DEPRESSED AND WAS ADDICTED TO SLEEPING PILLS BECAUSE OF A PHYSICAL ILLNESS. MY SON HAD TO BRING ME OUT TO CALIFORNIA TO SAVE MY LIFE AND I LIVE AT A MANAGED CARE HOME IN GLENDALE. I PRACTICE, SINCE HE BROUGHT MY DRUMS OUT AND PLAY WITH A GOOD KEYBOARD PLAYER EVERY OTHER MONTH HERE THAT THE ACTIVITIES DIRECTOR BRINGS IN. I AM THANFUL FOR ALL THE GREAT JAZZ MUSICIANS I SAW AND PLAYED WITH AND SORRY THE WAY THE BUSINESS CHANGED, BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT GOES.. YOUR RIGHT ON AND KEEP SWINGING.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Part of the problem are these over-educated jazz snobs who only play for their egos and not what the paying public want to here.

    Leave the harmonic analysis, modes and other BS to the collegiate jazz labs and get a"real world" clue. A lot of the paying gigs don't require you to analyze a "mixolydian" scale or know how to play "Giant Steps" in 12 different keys. What a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thank you all. I truly appreciate your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I agree with pretty much everything you say here. And in some cases, it's not a matter of "no" pay, but certainly very "low" pay. I don't know that striking the venues will help though. My perception is that the fact that they pay so little (or nothing at all) is a pretty good indicator that the simply don't value having live music. Striking or picketing a venue may be effective (ie. it may discourage musicians from playing at a venue, or may discourage customers from going there and spending money) but what will the ultimate outcome be? In most cases, my guess is that the place will just stop having music and become yet another sports bar or whatever.

    It seems like a no-win situation.

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Leonard, Please, please, please! Don't type with your caps lock on :-) (it's impossible to read and kind of obnoxious).

    ReplyDelete
  18. This excellent blog was sent to me by the one and only Bub Zulu, a Canadian westcoast legend among those who really know guitar. Bub and I had a duo a long time ago and still work together for fun. Fun might be the best thing left to work for, as Vancouver suffers the same economic downloading as anywhere. Our finest jazz musicians are fortunate, I suppose, to have a bit more than one decent place to play, but it's all pretty much for chicken feed.
    It seems to me the problem, and a bit of a solution, lies in accepting that the state of the world is so much bigger than the state of live music, or jazz itself. During times of better peace and a bit more 'plenty', music flourishes. It could be said that music is flourishing now, if you were able to add all the downloads, MP3s and other forums for music that are probably being listened to at this moment.
    But taste! Aye, there's the rub. With the advent of so much available, and so much of it at no price, the average listener or someone just catching on to a world of music at their fingertips, often relies on friends for what they "should" be listening to. Can this attitude be fixed? Probably not. But, perhaps over time, the average listener will get bored with the crap that is in such profusion and begin to discern the great players and great songs.
    Unless we're okay with music becoming one more "religion", with all those obstinate "trad" rules and trappings, let's not forget that the music that's being written now is at least as good as that from the past, although we all have favorites that led us down the musical path back in the day, as they say. Keep the faith!

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am proud to have been a "professional musician" for over 20 years. It's when I started being an "artist" that the money problems started.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good Points!
    However organized groups or unions of some type it jazz have not proved very effective in jazz history.
    They start out with hope but soon fall apart as members begin to take what they can get at any price they can get it in addition there are almost more players
    than listeners. Jazz serves as a commodity for schmoozing to smooching few people in clubs or concerts go primary to listen they want to hear what they know
    to validate the familiar bookers' and producers know this and with the exception of "names" who they have to "pay"and in effect suck out the finances on many gigs
    the reality it if a producer or promoter can't get X-Y or Z, they will get A-B or C it makes really no difference cause its not about listening its about filling seats.

    It is not about defining statement.
    It is not about "art" it is about a commercial commodity and it has always been that way
    appreciation of art is if ever a fact of the future
    as individual all we can do is try to support the statements of freshness or the future
    be it soprano summit or the willem breuker kollitive
    artists must be their own collective as a record producer and promoter of tours and festivals i refuse
    to book an artist for nothing or next to nothing
    but at a scale thats reasonable if on no other basis than time of labor but what bothers me is when you pay a musician and the next day they go record for nothing
    but yet I understand it as well.

    I don't mind losing money because because of what I gain--like reading a good book or if you buy a piece of art that continues to give you pleasure
    is it loosing money. It's a big and many faceted subject
    for musicians and producers choose your roll
    be happy cause your not going to change things
    Robert D Rusch --cimp records

    ReplyDelete
  21. I was sorry to read this, because I think it is all true. But there is more -- the business aspect.

    FYI, even Ellington's band in its heyday is said to have barely broke even on performances, but made money on record sales and licensing fees.

    Most venues (not schools, but for-profit entities) are like anyone in business -- they will take something for nothing if they can make the demand successfully. And that is easy to do in music nowadays.

    Why? Because the promoter wants an entertainment product that drives revenue. A salesman can't sell a new tool into a hardware store just because it's intrinsically "good." (Might attract attention, but that may be the extent of it.) Customers must be willing to pay for it.

    If customers aren't willing to pay for your music, it is unsaleable. There is a LOT of that, especially in what passes for jazz -- lacking melody, structure, meaning, etc. On the other hand, a musician who can fill seats -- when the music and the performer's image touches enough people in the right way -- can demand to be paid for a performance.

    Finding the right venues, playing the music that people are willing to pay for -- musicians think only rarely of this crucial aspect of the business side of things. And even then, it is just like any business. A tough ramp up and careful attention to maintaining it over time...

    Richie

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for Posting.