When to do Free Gigs and Paid Gigs

[Dr_Watso]

You're right. It's not your responsibility. I just try to do what's right and think of the consequences for the industry as a whole, from the ground up, and the people that love what I do as much as I do and work damn hard to be able to do it.

I guess I just don't see so many "consequences" as others do. If you personally have a superior product that people want to buy, they will buy it from you for that reason, even if a lower quality product of the same can be had for free. I think some folks get a skewed sense of their music's value sometimes, and comparing this work to something way less fun like accounting or customer service is just weird.

How easy is it to download an album for free now? Do you do it? Do you use Spotify? All these things have an impact on the music industry, and there is an industry. It starts small.

I don't tend to download, but I'm not sure what I do is any better from the artist's standpoint. I tend to buy used albums for about a 3rd of the new price, and I don't think the band gets anything of that sale. At the same time, I pay plenty of cash frequently when I can go see a band I like light up the stage.

I still get the odd random call every now and then asking to put a band together for something or other, and we'll discuss it...then I ask about budget and I'll get the classic "Well, we don't really have a budget for the music, it got used on the catering, can you do it for exposure, important industry people there etc etc wank wank" spiel.

I assume you turned them down because you're past that point, and probably someone else grabbed the gig, either because they didn't see it as work, or they thought the exposure was worth it. I don't really see a problem. If they really got someone better for free, then power to them. If they went down a few steps and got someone who hurt the performance, that reflects on them.

I got one not long ago asking for a big band. A full big band for a corporate function. For free. A business owner ringing up another business asking for their service, yet bizarrely expecting that there might be a small chance that it could be done for free, simply because it's music and that stuff happens too much. Maybe they'd heard about a pub band doing their weekly gig for free, as the guy above said he did and when he looked up music performers on the internet, thought he could ask the same. Who knows?

Sure it happens. I think the best thing to do, as we both agree, is let the market work it out. You're selling a service, and getting undercut only really works if the other guy is consistently undercutting and still giving good service. It just doesn't tend to work like that, and I don't really think that even the venues who NEVER pay bands are really hurting anything.

 

[MikeM]

As one who really doesn't care about getting paid, I will say that if there's any money being made off me, I want my cut. But fact is that my band probably only gets out every 2 or 3 months to play bars/taverns/whatever to our friends, family, coworkers, etc, and whoever they bring along. Then there are the other bands sharing the bill and the people they bring in, so we might make 100 bucks (to split) if it's good night with a decent turn out.

But there have also been many occasions where, for whatever reason, not many people show up. One problem many bands face is that the more they try to play out, the smaller their crowds get - because why would somebody come to see you this weekend if they just saw you last weekend, and could just as easily see you next weekend if they feel like it - and since any pay is just a cut of the door, what you go home with dwindles if you're playing out too much. So yeah, sometimes only the sound guy gets paid.

Keep in mind, this is for originals bands, and without guarantees in place (which almost never happens), there's no way to know what you're going to make on any given night. The real work (if you want to call it that) for originals bands doesn't happen on stage anyway; it happens in the practice room where songs are written and rehearsed, and in the studio where they are recorded. There's nothing more satisfying that writing and recording your own material, so yeah, when that's done, damn right we want to play it out in front of the people who tolerated our absences and lent their encouragement.

Also, keep in mind that by the time we score that big $100 payday, it's absolute budget dust compared to what we've already spent for monthly practice space rent, gear maintenance, and studio time - not to mention the countless hours spent in solitary confinement developing the new idea kernels that will brought to the band and hammered into new songs.

Paid bar bands playing covers all night is a totally different animal, and an original band not getting paid is taking nothing away from them. There's no direct competition there. I've never heard of a cover band not getting paid, but then again, I've never heard of one where the time spent rehearsing was more than the time spent playing gigs.

With that distinction aside, I really have no sympathy for someone struggling to play music for a living such that my taking low/no pay gigs is somehow a threat to them. You can lament all you want about having made some supreme sacrifice for your ill-chosen "career path" without any kind of reasonable backup plan for making ends meet, but to say that if I want to call myself a "musician" I need to treat it like a business is total crap. I don't *have* to do anything I don't want to do (business considerations being one of them), and certainly not cos some blow-hard incapable of making sound career choices thinks I somehow owe him a living by staying the hell outta his way.

Hey, you want to come sit in on my day gig and do it for free? By all means, be my guest. But it isn't what many people find leisurely or particularly fun, so I doubt I'd get many takers. I'll wager exactly zero. (engineering for kicks, anyone? .... Bueller? .... Bueller?)

What you do for "work" is what the rest of us do for fun, so I can't help but be thoroughly unimpressed with the lectures about how hard it is to eke out an existence with what amounts to a hobby, and how you're being unscrupulously undercut by others enjoying the same hobby.

You'll get no sympathy from me.

 

[SquadLeader]

No, no, no. You misunderstand.

It's fine if you play music. I don't care. Play away to your hearts content. Just don't do it for free at a place in which it should be paid work.

If you do a weekly gig at a pub for free to a pub full of people, maybe dancing or whatever, you should get paid.

But it's only your skewed perception that "it should be paid work".

Example...I go to a pub, on a railway station in Stalybridge a small town in Lancashire, once a month. The local guitar/banjo group hijack the back room in this place once a month for informal 'jams'. They grab an audience, and of course that audience buys drinks and food.

You're saying the landlord should pay them. They don't WANT to be paid. They just want a room to showcase their talents. That IS their pay.

So what, they stop playing because the landlord doesn't pay them?

You could argue that the landlord is exploiting them. They would argue that they are exploiting the landlord.

Music is a hobby. Your chosen profession is, for probably 99% of the rest of the music playing world, a hobby. Something to be shared with people not for profit.

Respect your opinion, but I think you need to understand that there are two points of view and yours isn't right solely because you chose to turn your hobby into your career. With the utmost of respect to you.

 

[bermuda]

This really drove it home for me. I am definitely on the side of don't work for free or it's synonym, exposure. I'll give em some exposure.

The only exposure those bands get is that they'll work for free.

It's a slippery precedent, and a dangerous slope, all part of the unfortunate 'race to zero'.

 

[SquadLeader]

The only exposure those bands get is that they'll work for free.

It's a slippery precedent, and a dangerous slope, all part of the unfortunate 'race to zero'.

It's how every single unsigned band starts out, certainly in the UK.

No-one comes along and says "hey guys, I see you're a brand new band comprising of 20 year old kids playing original music....if we paid you £200 will you do a gig".

Those kids need to grub around, fight hard, and work to get their name around the circuit. It's harsh, unfair, and a slog, and the vast majority will fail. But that's the reality in 2015 in the UK. It may not be the reality for guys like you, in their 40s (I guess??) who have made a career for themselves starting out in a time period when things were different. But if you were starting out as a 20 year old now, how would you get yourself a name on the circuit IF your motivation was to play in a band (which might not be the case).

I'm not saying it's remotely fair by the way. Of course it's not. But, life's not fair.

I don't think it's a race to zero at all. Some of the more well known bands on the circuit now started out exactly this way. Playing support gigs (which are never paid). Signing themselves to their own labels. Releasing their albums freely and saying "come see us at...." The days of Brian Epstein trawling around dive bars listening to up and coming kids like the Beatles is done. For young, up and coming bands, playing free gigs is their "loss leader". Just like supermarkets give out free merch to get you shopping. It's how they start on the road to marketing their band.

For older bands...it's their hobby. They get paid, great. But they play originals because they love playing. If they want to make careers for themselves, or a decent income, they play covers at functions. Good luck to them. Not for me. I'd rather play originals. And I'd rather play originals unpaid, than play covers for £100 an evening. You may find that hard to believe, but it's a fact. And here's something when talking about the race to the bottom. My unsigned band spent two years playing every gig we could possibly snap up. For free. It's how we became a proper band, playing decent music. We're pretty tight now. And every gig we will play this year is paid. There's a lesson there. I'm convinced of it.

I absolutely respect you professional musicians. But I think sometimes you need to come down from that professional pedestal and try to look at the world through the eyes of people who just love to play for the fun of playing music. And I firmly believe there is a place for both groups.

 

[JustJames]

... If you consider yourself a musician, then think of yourself as a business. What business does work for free? ....

Just about every service business, that's what business.

Photographers, copy writers, designers. I know people who have done all of these who have done work for free to establish a portfolio. If you're a newly established originals band, it may well be the same

Those of us playing covers bands with neither the desire nor the talent necessary to make a living out of it are like the aunts who knit sweaters for their family members for free. Sure, they're displacing sweater manufacturers, but it's not acshly the same product.

 

[DrumEatDrum]

The bigger picture also should take into account that it is some people's profession and that doing any gigs for free can undercut those that literally need to get paid for playing to live. The guys that do it for free because they just enjoy it on the weekend and have other day jobs really do make it incredibly hard on the guys busting a gut out there trying to get paid for what they've spent a lifetime doing.

The more it happens, the worse it gets.

No one ever asks a new, or established, catering business to cater their event for free, just for the exposure, so why does any self respecting musician consider it? You'd literally get laughed at, then sworn at for the insult. Yet, often bands are told they'll only get such and such, but you have to bring this amount of people, do all the promo...blah blah blah. That's happening because of guys willing to play for free.

The amount of trouble I've had with this attitude from venues, and other musicians even is just atrocious. It ruins the entire industry and disrespects all professional musicians that put their time in.

I love music, hence making a career out of it, but playing for free is a big no no.

There are really very, very few situations in which you should play for free, unless it's a charity thing. If you consider yourself a musician, then think of yourself as a business. What business does work for free? If you do it for fun and don't mind playing for free and think it's no harm, then think of all the guys out there that you're undercutting, who need to be paid because it's their job, and making their lives difficult by taking money and work from them. Don't forget, it's not so much them directly, but the venues that don't differentiate between amateur and pro. They'll see some dudes come in and say "Hey, I'll play for free. I don't care. I just wanna do a gig" and then when the next guy expects to get paid, they'll think "Why should I pay them when this other guy happily does it for free? Fair enough, I'll offer them half or just get someone willing to do it for free"

It's a no-brainer.

You're preaching to the choir.

By free gigs, meaning I'm on stage, playing with good friends, playing original (or mostly original) music that I know has limited appeal.

Music isn't just commerce, it's also art.

And when you choose to make art with friends, pay is pushed into the background. And like Mike M said, even when pay is involved, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the costs.

Now, if it's a cover band, or a band that is hired to be the entertainment for the night, of course, pay better be involved.

In Los Angeles, it's not uncommon to see name players who normally make big money paying big stages playing little small bars when they're not out on tour or locked in a studio. I'm sure they get some pay, but it's pretty small compared to their normal fee. So why do they play for a fraction of their normal rate? They get to blow off steam playing different music, they make important business connections, and they get to have fun. You going to tell them they're taking away work from local cover bands by playing at a pay rate beneath them?

 

[philrudd]

I don't get it.

Isn't this just basic economics? Surplus drives down value. There are more bands than there are slots for bands. Period.

We can try to put an absolute value on adding live music to a venue, but it's completely relative: any band will drive off customers just as much as they attract them. No one can absolutely state that a live band, just by virtue of performing, is a definitive plus for a club owner - unless it's proven at the door. And in my opinion, that should be the ONLY arbiter of whether a band gets paid or not. The intrinsic value of a band may be a judgement call, but the number of dollars flowing into that cash box is utterly empirical. Saying 'I should get paid because I DESERVE to get paid' doesn't mean dirt. You deserve to get paid when you've proven that you can make the club owner money.

Plus - and it's particular to our area of artistic expression - most club owners don't see the difference in hiring a band or purchasing a virtual DJ, and most club patrons probably don't either, regardless of what we would want to tell ourselves as musicians. Believe it or not, there are lots of people who just listen to 'music', and the source of that music is secondary. So if it's more financially feasible for a club owner to install a digital jukebox, and his patrons don't seem to give a damn one way or the other, why wouldn't he want to save himself the headache of dealing with live bands pestering him to get paid when they haven't proven to be a draw?

Last month I played at a local club. Got free beer - that's it. Two nights later, another band played the same club for $2000. Are you telling me that by playing for free on Wednesday, I affected the earning power of the band that played Friday? Sure hard to tell...

I made no money because my band didn't draw. The other band made big money because they're virtually guaranteed to pack the place. It's simple cause-and-effect.

Every band I've ever played in that enjoyed any degree of success did it the same way: starting out clawing for gigs, playing often for little or no money, getting recognized, getting talked about, getting respected, then getting desired - which translated into people paying money to see my group.

You make the money when you earn the money. No more complicated than that.

 

[SquadLeader]

Just about every service business, that's what business.

Photographers, copy writers, designers. I know people who have done all of these who have done work for free to establish a portfolio. If you're a newly established originals band, it may well be the same

Those of us playing covers bands with neither the desire nor the talent necessary to make a living out of it are like the aunts who knit sweaters for their family members for free. Sure, they're displacing sweater manufacturers, but it's not acshly the same product.

Spot on.

I work for the largest insurance broking company in the world (Aon). I'm a Lloyds Broker who deals with commercial insurance to businesses.

If we walk into a businesses door to get them to sign a letter saying they will be our next client, what happens when they say "sorry pal, we're already in a deal with another broker which has 8-12-18 months left on the deal" ?

We STILL take the business. We will work for free for that period IF the client is the right one.

 

[BennyT]

Spot on.

I work for the largest insurance broking company in the world (Aon). I'm a Lloyds Broker who deals with commercial insurance to businesses.

If we walk into a businesses door to get them to sign a letter saying they will be our next client, what happens when they say "sorry pal, we're already in a deal with another broker which has 8-12-18 months left on the deal" ?

We STILL take the business. We will work for free for that period IF the client is the right one.

Oh my dear lord....So let me get this straight.

You work for a multimillion dollar international company...or is that multibillion dollar company that charges absolutely disgustingly high prices for your service and make millions in profit in each year, and you're trying to say that doing a small stint for free, when you stand to make an absolute shitload after that period that will more than make up for it, is the same thing we're talking about and your idea of working for free?

Get real champ. You haven't got a clue. That is definitely not working for free. Will you get paid, and that period made up for, because they are the right client, once that period is over? Yes. That's not working for free. That's understanding the long term goal and making big profit off the right client.

Clearly not what is being talked about here and not remotely the same thing. If you did that same work literally for free, without thought of any future money and just for the hell of it, not the faux free you think you're doing, then it would be the same thing.

 

[Hollywood Jim]

Oh my dear lord....So let me get this straight.

You work for a multimillion dollar international company...or is that multibillion dollar company that charges absolutely disgustingly high prices for your service and make millions in profit in each year, and you're trying to say that doing a small stint for free, when you stand to make an absolute shitload after that period that will more than make up for it, is the same thing we're talking about and your idea of working for free?

Get real champ. You haven't got a clue.

No Jazzin, Squadleader has it correct. For example:
If the concert manager/promoter for the Rolling Stones called me up and said, "Hey we need a band tomorrow night to open for the Rolling Stones.
Could you guys play for free?"

Then yeah, we would do it for free. For a little while anyway.........


.

 

[JustJames]

Oh my dear lord....So let me get this straight.

You work for a multimillion dollar international company...or is that multibillion dollar company that charges absolutely disgustingly high prices for your service and make millions in profit in each year, and you're trying to say that doing a small stint for free, when you stand to make an absolute shitload after that period that will more than make up for it, is the same thing we're talking about and your idea of working for free?

Get real champ. You haven't got a clue.

Without the emotive language, references to George Harrison songs and sporting prowess, how exactly do you feel that this is different to a band trying playing gigs for free to establish a relationship with promoters or venue owners?

 

[Larry]

Working for free and never getting money for that gig is totally different than working for someone for free for a while, then cashing in later cha ching. Same thing lawyers do. They take a percentage of the back end. You can't compare the 2 situations. I never had to do free electric work to "get exposure". That said, I totally understand the guys who play free. It's part of the whole unfortunate pie lol. The business is so bad, that I could never be a professional in this climate. I was born too late.

 

[JustJames]

Working for free and never getting money for that gig is totally different than working for someone for free for a while, then cashing in later cha ching. Same thing lawyers do. They take a percentage of the back end. You can't compare the 2 situations.

But isn't that igzackerly what a band that plays for free, for exposure, is doing?

A bar is just about breaking even. A band is looking for a gig.

"OK," says the barman, "you guys can play for free, to get the exposure."

Scenario 1: The band does so, and they suck. Should they have been paid?

Scenario 2: The band is awesome. Word gets around about how awesome they are. Their music cures infertility, melts knicker elastic and summons unicorns from the woods. Crowds flock to the bar. "How about paying us now?" Asks the bandleader (who happens to be the drummer.)

Now shoes have changed foot. If the barman doesn't pay the band, they can and will play elsewhere, taking their crowds and unicorns with them.

It's a business for everybody. Nobody deserves to get shafted, and equally, nobody deserves to get paid just for being there.




Edited to add: My Sweet Lord, get a clue champ....and internet hugs

 

[BennyT]

What you do for "work" is what the rest of us do for fun, so I can't help but be thoroughly unimpressed with the lectures about how hard it is to eke out an existence with what amounts to a hobby, and how you're being unscrupulously undercut by others enjoying the same hobby.

You'll get no sympathy from me.

*sigh* Well, good for you. You really sound like someone I want to know and get sympathy from.

Luckily, I don't have trouble making a living and don't find it hard like you think. I'm not eking out an existence and banging on about it being a hobby for people. There is a hobby aspect to it, like there is for many things, and there is a professional aspect to it too which people seem unwilling or unable to grasp. They intersect quite often in music and one can impact the other at a point.

Let me be remind you because this seems to have taken a turn.

I dont have an issue as most seem to be going on about with young originals bands and that side of things or playing some pub gigs for fun every now and then in your own band. I haven't mentioned that once.

Doing an originals thing for free once a month or whatever I get. It's fun. I've done it. I loved it so much I decided to do it as a career. When you bring in crowds and do well you should get paid. The venue makes a profit off you, so you should get paid. When that's not happening and you're just having fun etc fine.

The post I replied to and have tried to keep bringing up is that of a guy doing a long term weekly pub cover gig to people for free. That should be a paid gig. There is a professional side to playing music, despite what you guys might think. If you give a business a weekly gig for the entertainment of their patrons and they don't pay you, that's really not cool. There are a lot of people who work hard as professional entertainment and make a living doing it and when someone does that type of gig for free, it devalues all of us. It's not hard to understand.

 

[Hollywood Jim]

But isn't that igzackerly what a band that plays for free, for exposure, is doing?
A bar is just about breaking even. A band is looking for a gig.
"OK," says the barman, "you guys can play for free, to get the exposure."
Scenario 1: The band does so, and they suck. Should they have been paid?
Scenario 2: The band is awesome. Word gets around about how awesome they are. Their music cures infertility, melts knicker elastic and summons unicorns from the woods. Crowds flock to the bar. "How about paying us now?" Asks the bandleader (who happens to be the drummer.)
Now shoes have changed foot. If the barman doesn't pay the band, they can and will play elsewhere, taking their crowds and unicorns with them.
It's a business for everybody. Nobody deserves to get shafted, and equally, nobody deserves to get paid just for being there.

This makes a lot a sense.
And just think about being a painter (artist) or sculptor, etc.. Those people do a lot of stuff for free when they are first starting out.


.

 

[BennyT]

No Jazzin, Squadleader has it correct. For example:
If the concert manager/promoter for the Rolling Stones called me up and said, "Hey we need a band tomorrow night to open for the Rolling Stones.
Could you guys play for free?"

Then yeah, we would do it for free. For a little while anyway.........

Read the posts people. Stop bringing up bands starting out and doing one off originals gigs.

By the way, it's not right. That manager is not asking you to work for free. In that example, that would be you guys asking to take someone elses gig for free for the remainder of the current tour, knowing that you'll get a shitload of money that will make up for it ten times over during the next tour.

He didn't say the client asked their business to do it for free. They offered knowing it would turn a profit down the track. That's smart business, which I get. It is not working for free.

 

[Florian]

No Jazzin, Squadleader has it correct. For example:
If the concert manager/promoter for the Rolling Stones called me up and said, "Hey we need a band tomorrow night to open for the Rolling Stones.
Could you guys play for free?"

Then yeah, we would do it for free. For a little while anyway.........


.

We've been asked many times to open for national acts, and I can assure you we got paid, and well. We also got fed and sauced well to boot post-show. If you're good enough to be asked to open, you're getting paid.

F

 

[BennyT]

But it's only your skewed perception that "it should be paid work".

Example...I go to a pub, on a railway station in Stalybridge a small town in Lancashire, once a month. The local guitar/banjo group hijack the back room in this place once a month for informal 'jams'. They grab an audience, and of course that audience buys drinks and food.

You're saying the landlord should pay them. They don't WANT to be paid. They just want a room to showcase their talents. That IS their pay.

So what, they stop playing because the landlord doesn't pay them?

You could argue that the landlord is exploiting them. They would argue that they are exploiting the landlord.

Music is a hobby. Your chosen profession is, for probably 99% of the rest of the music playing world, a hobby. Something to be shared with people not for profit.

Respect your opinion, but I think you need to understand that there are two points of view and yours isn't right solely because you chose to turn your hobby into your career. With the utmost of respect to you.

The music industry is a very old line of work. Trying to say that it basically shouldn't be a professional line of work and that it shouldn't even really be paid is incredibly sad.

People who want to take it further than just a hobby is the reason truly great music exists. Without the professional aspect, the paid line of work you think is skewed and shouldn't happen, would mean that everything from Bach to Miles wouldn't exist.

I understand what you're saying and have gone through it. That doesn't mean it's right. Just because you can play for free and don't care doesn't mean you should. It does depend on more factors, but more thought should go into keeping the performing music industry strong.

 

[BennyT]

With that distinction aside, I really have no sympathy for someone struggling to play music for a living such that my taking low/no pay gigs is somehow a threat to them. You can lament all you want about having made some supreme sacrifice for your ill-chosen "career path" without any kind of reasonable backup plan for making ends meet, but to say that if I want to call myself a "musician" I need to treat it like a business is total crap. I don't *have* to do anything I don't want to do (business considerations being one of them), and certainly not cos some blow-hard incapable of making sound career choices thinks I somehow owe him a living by staying the hell outta his way.

Hahaha wow. I actually missed this part earlier. Blow hard? lol.

First of all, I haven't lamented about what you call my ill chosen career path at all. I love my career, what I do and wouldn't change a thing for the world. My music has given me a great life, a wife who doesn't have to work, a kid, a nice house and no financial worries at all. I haven't said I have trouble meeting ends meet, so why assume? Where you're getting this from is beyond me. The reason I feel passionately is precisely the same reason you'll find everyone who makes a living in the arts/entertainment industry as whole feels no matter where they are. The same reason anyone who loves what they do and recognises problems within their industry. I love music and to be able to play it for a living has made me aware that there are problems within it and it's something I (all of us hopefully) feel passionately about. I have certainly been through what we're talking about as a young man coming up.

As I've said previously however, I'm not saying you are a threat to my career. You're not. At all. You're not my competition and you're entirely missing the point of my earlier posts. I stopped doing that type of work a long, long time ago as a young student and my gripe is not with people taking work away from me literally. I don't need to worry about that anymore. Clear enough for you?

I'm saying that it can create a problem within the industry as a whole that eventually permeates through. It can slowly create a precedent that devalues it from the bottom up. Ok? You aren't taking my gigs. You don't play my gigs, and you are not taking any hard earned money from me with your low/no paying gigs as you say.

I could ignore it because it doesn't actually effect me now. However, it's something I think all musicians from all areas of expertise, experience etc should be aware of and think carefully about. We are all in this together because of a shared passion and it can effect everyone.

By the way, where have I said i'm making a sacrifice? Where are you getting this from exactly? I haven't sacrificed anything. I've been more than happy to give up whatever I might have done otherwise to practice and play. I never even thought that way. I love it, so you've lost me on that one. What you're implying with your response is entirely in your own head.

Neither did I say that if you want to call yourself a musician you need to treat it like a business. What I said was "If you think of yourself as a musician (i.e. a professional or someone trying to make it as such) you should treat it like you would a business. It is, for some of us after all, a business. Whatever you are, I don't care. It wasn't really aimed at you, and thankfully so.