When to do Free Gigs and Paid Gigs

Seems that a sub should expect to get paid unless it is an opportunity to significantly help you meet your musical goals.
 
You guys might appreciate this one:

We got paid for a charity show a few weeks ago when we expected not to. The venue/organizer insisted after our set! I put my portion right back in the donation pile, but it was still cool to see the venue stick up for us like that and give us some door money even though it wasn't agreed.

Best compliment you can ever receive.
Same with us a few weeks back...peanuts...but it means a hell of a lot more than just the value of the money handed over.
 
It depends somewhat on the player, what constitutes a gig, and the type of gig it is. In other words, each situation is different.

There's only one 'gig' I'm asked to do for free, and that's the Elvis Birthday Bash in L.A. each January. But, that's the nature of the event. It's as much a party as anything else, each artist does 2 songs (this year it was only one) and quality backline is provided.

I don't otherwise accept free gigs that should qualify for pay, and I never apologize for turning them down. It's been a while since I've been in a "project band" and didn't expect to make anything.

I may volunteer for, or it is incumbent upon me to do a special event, but that's on my terms, not being at the mercy of someone who isn't able to pay but still wants to 'hire' me.

As a full-time musician, it's important to maintain value for the services I bring to a group that thinks highly enough of me to ask in the first place. It's partly a matter of principle, but ultimately, it's about my livelihood.

Bermuda
 
Big +1 for this, though for me, #3 is a distant third. I've known too many people who got hung up on the money angle to the point where it seemed like their only driver. Even if my band gets paid $100, which is much higher than average, that still isn't squat in the grand scheme of things, so I've taken to the idea that it's all charity work.

Taking money (and all the weirdness that surrounds it) right out of the equation makes playing in a band so much more enjoyable. I know I'm in the minority here, but that's what works for me.

I do agree.

When I was young, and I was doing gigs for cash, I would watch some of the guys around me. A guy would say "I got a $50 gig, but someone offered me a $75 gig, so I gotta find a sub for the $50 gig, and oh wait, I jus got a call for a $100 gig, so I gotta find a sub for the $75 gig..."
To me, it seemed like a dog chasing it's tail, where does it lead? Which gig is best for your long term career and not just for the short term?

So I decided money would not be the main factor.

As I said, I've done gigs just for the cash that weren't all that enjoyable, while some of my fondest memories on stage are gigs where I was on stage with friends, playing music where neither money nor trying to be popular were an objective.
 
Free - never. A reduced fee, yes, but never free.
Free = jam nights

F
 
I find it odd that ours is the only occupation or endeavor where the people that do the hiring actually expect it free in a lot of cases. I can certainly understand how it got to be this way. It says a lot about the endeavor itself, in that it's so enjoyable, that people are happy to do it free. It's probably the only thing in the world, besides sex, that people will line up to do for free. It actually works out that it costs money to play.... in gas and other expendable items, when we are not compensated.

It's unprecedented.
Now that I said that, someone will come along and disprove that statement.
But you have to admit, playing free is a special circumstance that runs counter to just about everything else in life, economically speaking.

We got snowed out of a gig last week. We were told before we left for the gig. Should we have gotten paid?
 
I agree with the vast amount of folks on here. I attend blues jams for free. I play at church for free (I consider it a way of tithing). I play charity events for free.

Anything else, I would like some compensation. It hasn't got to be much. Last week I agreed to accompany a singer/songwriter at a local ski lodge, where a local microbrewery was doing a special event. The pay was $40 only. But the singer and I really have fun together, it's less than 5 miles from my house, it was just hand percussion... I did it. On top of my $40, I got a free meal ($25 value) and a 22 oz. bottle of their newest beer (approx. $5). So not bad.
 
Not all Drummers are professional drummers. Some of us play for fun. I play in a pub most Friday's for free. I have tremendous freedom because I am not obliged to be available every Friday. This to me is worth more than what I could get paid. Quite possibly I am taking work away from drummers that gets paid. But if I am, they have to up their act.
 
I think jornthedrummer has the right approach.

This forum is interesting because it has such a cross-section of players, from guys just starting out to guys who drum for a living. And that means that there is no one answer.

If you are somebody who earns (or intends to earn) at least some of your income from drumming, then you need to avoid signalling that your drumming has zero monetary value.

But for those of us who do this purely for fun, the calculus is different. My initial thought was that I will happily play for free, but only as long as I am not being used in somebody else's money making venture. But even that isn't necessarily true because I can see situations where the entrepreneur's costs and risks are high, and rewards low, where I would play for free for the simple reason that for me, the joy of playing is something of a reward.

It's not just in drumming where this asymmetry applies. Yesterday saw the final of the Cricket World Cup. (To gain some vague understanding, American viewers can substitute "Baseball" for "Cricket" and "World Series" for "World Cup" (although crucially, the Cricket World Cup is not restricted to countries in one continent).) Over 90,000 spectators attended, there were broadcast rights, and players are paid handsomely. My 11 year old son plays cricket, although not at World Cup levels of skill. If he demanded to be paid to play he'd be laughed off the pitch (ground/turf/diamond/court/field).
 
It wouldn't matter how much they "up their act" if they're not willing to work for nothing and that's what the pub owner is used to paying to those who will take it.

Exactly. The amateurs and pros are in this together, to the extent that the person doing the hiring doesn't differentiate. that cheapens it for the pros - no matter how excellent they are - and makes it all the more difficult for the weekend warriors playing for fun to ever make any money should they decide to.

Unlike YouTube channels where people mercilessly give away someone else's music for free, live performance is still physical, and has value, as long as the players simply say so.

Can a bunch of bad players doing obscure covers command any real money? Probably not, there are levels of professionalism and suitability for a certain gig that will dictate what the band can ask for. Some club bands will make $75 or 100, some will make $500. But nobody should be doing a gig that would normally pay, for free. It sets an unfortunate precedent that will come back to bite the same players when they decide to try their hand at making money with their music.

Just ask any of the hopeful bands out there what their prospects are for selling their music. Heck, ask an established band how their sales are doing! One thing is for sure though, a band may not sell many of their songs, but if they're popular enough to perform in front of a crowd, they can still charge for that. Let's keep it that way.

Bermuda
 
I always try to look at the big picture.

I'd done plenty of paid gigs where I wasn't happy, and not-paid gigs that were an awesome time.

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.
 
Not all Drummers are professional drummers. Some of us play for fun. I play in a pub most Friday's for free. I have tremendous freedom because I am not obliged to be available every Friday. This to me is worth more than what I could get paid. Quite possibly I am taking work away from drummers that gets paid. But if I am, they have to up their act.

That is precisely the attitude that makes it difficult. If you play in a pub, to people, for entertainment, you should get paid. If not for yourself, damn well have some respect for those who come behind you and have to deal with venues and people who now have a mindset that it's work that can be done for free and so they shouldn't necessarily need to pay.

You're just cheapening and disrespecting working musicians and guys that need to get paid to live by not giving a shit and saying they have to 'up their act'. It has nothing to do with it. You do it for free, so they won't pay someone expecting $150 or whatever each, no matter how great the difference is. As Bermuda said, it sets a precedent.

The work you do during the day, what would you say to people if guys started walking in off the street and doing your job for free just because they had some free time on their hands and wanted to do it for a bit of fun? It makes your job harder, there's less work, and now your employers start expecting you to do it cheaper or for free....How do you react?

It might not matter to you, but when it's your livelihood and business, it matters.
 
It wouldn't matter how much they "up their act" if they're not willing to work for nothing and that's what the pub owner is used to paying to those who will take it.

Then that's just the wrong venue for a professional musician who needs to earn. They should look elsewhere for the gig.

Genuinely I believe there is room for both.
 
That is precisely the attitude that makes it difficult. If you play in a pub, to people, for entertainment, you should get paid. If not for yourself, damn well have some respect for those who come behind you and have to deal with venues and people who now have a mindset that it's work that can be done for free and so they shouldn't necessarily need to pay.

You're just cheapening and disrespecting working musicians and guys that need to get paid to live by not giving a shit and saying they have to 'up their act'. It has nothing to do with it. You do it for free, so they won't pay someone expecting $150 or whatever each, no matter how great the difference is. As Bermuda said, it sets a precedent.

The work you do during the day, what would you say to people if guys started walking in off the street and doing your job for free just because they had some free time on their hands and wanted to do it for a bit of fun? It makes your job harder, there's less work, and now your employers start expecting you to do it cheaper or for free....How do you react?

It might not matter to you, but when it's your livelihood and business, it matters.

Price to be paid for doing a job which is also an enjoyable hobby for some unfortunately. Your comparison with 'normal' work is flawed. Playing music isn't 'normal' work (or maybe 'conventional' would be a better word?), even though a professional musician would say it is (ie. to them).

You expect to be paid for doing something that some people genuinely find really enjoyable and would probably pay to do. Good luck in your chosen career path, but don't be so judgemental towards people who decided at some point in life to get a 'sensible' job and do the music thing for pleasure.

It's the dream job...to get paid for playing music. But, the problem you are rallying against here is the flip side of that coin.
 
That is precisely the attitude that makes it difficult. If you play in a pub, to people, for entertainment, you should get paid. If not for yourself, damn well have some respect for those who come behind you and have to deal with venues and people who now have a mindset that it's work that can be done for free and so they shouldn't necessarily need to pay.

You're just cheapening and disrespecting working musicians and guys that need to get paid to live by not giving a shit and saying they have to 'up their act'. It has nothing to do with it. You do it for free, so they won't pay someone expecting $150 or whatever each, no matter how great the difference is. As Bermuda said, it sets a precedent.

The work you do during the day, what would you say to people if guys started walking in off the street and doing your job for free just because they had some free time on their hands and wanted to do it for a bit of fun? It makes your job harder, there's less work, and now your employers start expecting you to do it cheaper or for free....How do you react?

It might not matter to you, but when it's your livelihood and business, it matters.

If you were offering a better product that got the venue more money from the show, I doubt they'd go with the free guys. If I want to play for free in a bar because I think it's fun, it's really, really not my responsibility to look out for the other musicians who want to get paid, but are somehow not getting the gig even though my un-professional self who doesn't even get paid is the competition.

In a free market, this kind of thing will tend to work itself out. Mind you, it doesn't always work out to everyone's benefit... Thing is, the only person who really needs to worry about that is the venue owner who stands to make or lose money by owning the place where musicians can play to a crowd.

I mean, we don't really think that there are tons of bands playing the same venues every week for free, right? It's usually more of a one-off thing, and sometimes new bands need to get out there while they don't really have much to compete with the established bands.
 
Price to be paid for doing a job which is also an enjoyable hobby for some unfortunately. Your comparison with 'normal' work is flawed. Playing music isn't 'normal' work (or maybe 'conventional' would be a better word?), even though a professional musician would say it is (ie. to them).

You expect to be paid for doing something that some people genuinely find really enjoyable and would probably pay to do. Good luck in your chosen career path, but don't be so judgemental towards people who decided at some point in life to get a 'sensible' job and do the music thing for pleasure.

It's the dream job...to get paid for playing music. But, the problem you are rallying against here is the flip side of that coin.

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.
 
The work you do during the day, what would you say to people if guys started walking in off the street and doing your job for free just because they had some free time on their hands and wanted to do it for a bit of fun? It makes your job harder, there's less work, and now your employers start expecting you to do it cheaper or for free....How do you react?

It might not matter to you, but when it's your livelihood and business, it matters.

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.
 
If you were offering a better product that got the venue more money from the show, I doubt they'd go with the free guys. If I want to play for free in a bar because I think it's fun, it's really, really not my responsibility to look out for the other musicians who want to get paid, but are somehow not getting the gig even though my un-professional self who doesn't even get paid is the competition.

In a free market, this kind of thing will tend to work itself out. Mind you, it doesn't always work out to everyone's benefit... Thing is, the only person who really needs to worry about that is the venue owner who stands to make or lose money by owning the place where musicians can play to a crowd.

I mean, we don't really think that there are tons of bands playing the same venues every week for free, right? It's usually more of a one-off thing, and sometimes new bands need to get out there while they don't really have much to compete with the established bands.

Hehehe...Well, first off, I don't really play pubs and it's not about going with the 'free guys' vs myself as you say. What you bring up is not my issue with this at all, so that doesn't enter the equation. Very different areas and very different levels and types of gig, yet it's all in the same industry, which is performance as a whole. Amateurs and pros are in this one together and one can impact the other. It has to take root somewhere, and that somewhere is from the ground up.

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.

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.

Anyway, you're right. I don't have people willing to work for free as 'competition'. That's not my gig and hasn't been since I was struggling as a young music student, taking whatever work I could get, including cover gigs and I still remember it well and the trouble I had with venues, bands etc. That's also not my point. This isn't me vs you. That's not an issue. It's what that creates overall. It seeps throughout an industry over time. It starts somewhere. 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 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?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top