The Session >> Discussions >> Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Comments
Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I am not the only person who sees this as an issue in ITM.
We all love the music , many of us would love to play the music as a full or even regularly part time, as a job , a few are skilled/lucky/hard working enough/ have the talent and technique to be good enough to do so( note I am in no way a member of this latter group ) . Yet of this latter group many great musicians try and fail to make a living from the music . Is this because they are not professional enough?
To illustrate this I should mention a couple of examples.
my gf a couple of years ago went to some workshops in Ireland with one of her musical heroes . 5 x 2 hour workshops over 100 euros . Fair enough price there were 12 in the class. Yet this person only turned up only twice on time and by the third day was turning up drunk My gf will not take a workshop with this person again The same person complains bitterly how difficult it is to make ends meet as a musician.
Also bands turning up drunk for gigs , without an agreed list to play , with out instruments , slagging off other professional musicians in public I could go on and I am sure many of you have other similar stories .
Does this drive people away from ITM?
Should we reject the idea of professionals in ITM and all be amateurs and just play for ourselves ?
Or can we have an agreed definition of professional that goes beyond being just paid.
I don’t know but would be interested in what people think
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think that there is a vast gap between having the talent to be recognised as a great musician, and having the character to be able to cope with the many stresses and strains of being a professional performer.
You could look through the names in almost any category of performing artists, past and present, and pick out a percentage, quite a large percentage, of people who just didn't have that inner something that enabled them to cope with these stresses and maintain an inner core of commitment and dedication to being a consistent performer.
And sometimes it is these inner demons that drive people NOT to maintain this commitment that makes them all the more likeable as people.
After all, who have you got who has always maintained their standards of performance through all their career ? Bruce Forsyth ?
But yes, I do understand your complaint. But all these people are also human, however that may irk.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I doubt it is just Irish trad players who behave unprofessionally -- plenty of drunk eedjits in other genres of music, probably more by virtue of the fact that the population of rock or punk musicians is greater than Irish/Scottish trad musicians. I know a lot of people who play in bands and who take it seriously, show up on time, etc., so I don't think the behaviour you describe is characteristic of traditional musicians.
Anyway, if people can make a living out of it, more power to them. Obviously not everyone wants to make it their livelihood but if you want to and are good enough and lucky enough, awesome. I have mates who are full time professional musicians and others who want to keep the music fun and feel that if it becomes their job, it would cease being fun.
If I could support myself playing Irish music (without selling my soul and playing New Age sh*te just to pay the rent), I'd be doing that rather than this bloody PhD.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I've seen a number of such things, but as others say - it's not just the Irish trad. But I'd rather think about it as an ethics thing.
Regardless whether I play for money or not, when I am requested to play for others and agree to that I feel obliged to deliver something of value to them, otherwise I would feel like cheating someone or being unrespectful. This is also why I might be the only one here who does not share your dream - if I earned money by playing full time Irish trad, I'd need to know that this is exactly what people expect from me. So in time I'd need to shift towards world music and folk pop. I'll stick with the amateur option, thank you.
It is true that I've seen that mostly with Irish "groups" coming to Poland for gigs, but this is rather symptomatic for gig organizers, who were inviting trouble themselves - without any proper knowledge about the music they took the bands that cost them the least- i.e., usually some half-dead former hippies on a conditional leave from a rehab that play untuned guitars and sing popular Irish ballads and drink songs (usually the same verse over half-hour). They quite rightfully expect that no matter what the quality of music is, when you put up posters for "Irish supergroup straight from Dublin, the City of Molly Malone!", you'll draw a considerable tone-deaf audience, who will enjoy it anyway. This is business, you know.
"Should we reject the idea of professionals in ITM and all be amateurs and just play for ourselves ?"
Who would care if we reject it or not? And why reject it? As for me, I'm fine with whatever choice people make for themselves. Until they tread on my toes. In such case, the justice is swift and unforgiving.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I've been lucky enough to be a professional musician (as a guitarist) ie: My complete source of income was provided through gigging, but not in traditional music.
In my experience, professionalism and success based on it has a lot to do with attitude rather than skill. If you treat the job with respect, work in a reliable, ethical manner, you will soon be identified by the venues and promoters you work with as someone who can get the job done. On the whole, they are interested in business, and will pick a reliable band or musician over a better one who's a bit flaky. You don't need to be the greatest player on the planet to make a living at it, but it will require a healthy does of good humour, hard work and humility.
There is also a massive amount of sacrifice involved. On the whole, being a professional musician doesn't carry a great deal of money with it, when compared with other jobs. To maximise your ability to get work, you have to be prepared to travel country (or continent) wide, early starts, late finishes. You need to be extremely diplomatic (on those occasions where you might see the venue owner and you disagreeing about plugging a 20k sound rig into a 13 amp wall socket). I don't remember spending a Christmas with my family those years when I was working, as it's the period that gets the mortgage paid. In fact the period of mid October through to early Jan would normally give two days off, Christmas Day, and possibly one other. The rest were spent doing Halloween/Christmas staff do and hotel gigs, including Christmas Eve. Typically the journey home for Christmas Day was not feasible, after you'd finished at 3am somewhere.
I wouldn't swap the experience I gained it's served me very well in other things that I do, but I don't think I could be a full time gigging musician again.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think you are right about success as a professional musician not really being about how good a musician you are. It is about how good a small businessman you are. That's what people just don't get. Most working musicians aren't famous. Its just like being a plumber or a roofer. If you're late, do a lousey job, show up drunk, use shoddy materials...you don't get called back. Its the same for a bandleader.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
+half-dead former hippies on a conditional leave from a rehab that play untuned guitars and sing popular Irish ballads and drink songs (usually the same verse over half-hour)+
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
At first sight of the title to this thread, I thought "Oh yeah... Here we go with the ol' can o'worms". Glad to read I was wrong.
I couldn't agree more with Nate Ryan.
For the last (nearly) ten years, I've played professionally in various bands, and wouldn't trade the experiences for anything in the world.
It turns out that a friend and neighbour of mine is in fact a plumber, running his own little business out of our hamlet; one day we compared notes on the practical applications of our respective activities, and found that we had more in common than we might have expected at first.
I'm not famous, my skill level is very intermediate, and I don't go out of my way to publicise my presence or availability to be hired any more than anyone else, yet people still call in regularily enough to keep me in work.
It's already more than what I'd bargained for from the onset, and I'm quite happy with that.
As for professionalism and being paid, doing my "job" as best I can (quality needs no boasting), and only asking enough to keep my wife and I going until the next gig seems like an honest M.O. to me.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
A performance venue will book what they can make money on. Cat Power (in the rock world) and the Pogues (in the rock/trad world) are two examples, out of many, of acts whose concerts have been notoriously variable due to substance issues - fortunately both Shane and Chan are dealing with those much better these days - but still had no lack of bookings because their fans would buy tickets. The fact that the show might not go on, or might be a disaster, due to an inebriated star seems only to have helped ticket sales, at least for some period of time. There's a certain mystique in the tortured artist, and it still sells. Professionalism is of limited utility here, as compared to star power. (for the front-man/woman, that is - the bass player still has to play in tune and on time, and not be noticed: that is, be a professional)
The opposite is true for the potted-plant gigs. For the staff gigs, the weddings, the corporate functions and civic affairs, I have to agree with Ciaran - the safe and sane will get more steady work than the brilliant and unreliable, and here a reputation for professionalism is worth ten times as much as brilliant playing and showmanship.
This, by the way, may explain why so many mediocre bands continue to exist. They turn up on time and don't play too loud, so they get booked again.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Much of this music is centered in pubs and other drinking establishment. And let's not forget that Ireland is notorious for its people's propensity to drink. I'm absolutely shocked that a musician from such a background would even consider drinking! And no doubt this was at some sort of festival, where drinking and partying *never* occur.
That being said, being a great player does not in any way define the rest of his or her character.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
What happened to Bazouki Dave's girlfriend is disgraceful. I hope that the tutor was not paid.
Ciaran Bradley makes some excellent points re the life of a professional. It is a tough grind. I have known some quite successful professionals who, being delighted at the opportunity to make a living doing what they loved, cut bad deals for themselves by dint of business inexperience.
Professionals really need to maximise earning power while successful & fit - public taste is transient, and the touring life, as noted is tough. Keeping it up for more than a few years needs a lot of physical stamina.
The tolerance of drunkenness in & around ITM is unfortunate - cf Bazouki Dave's girlfriend's experience. I would hazard that I am not alone in having known more than a few talented musicians for whom excessive indulgence was not good, for them or for the people around them. Some were destroyed altogether.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I am often shocked at what people think is appropriate when they are paid to provide a performance. I have seen people arrive late, assume the venue provides the sound system, scratch together a couple of friends and call it a group, even though it is obvious that they have not practiced together recently nor prepared a set list, wander aimlessly through a mishmash of tunes and or songs without any pacing or structure, not to mention the drinking and drug abuse mentioned above. A little looseness is OK, but I have seen some pretty embarassing stuff in my time, when the problems pile up to the point where it overwhelms the music. When you are playing for fun in a session, you don't have these obligations, but when you put yourself out for hire you are expected to behave like a professional. And no whining about not being paid enough, you are a musician for pity's sake, not a brain surgeon.
That being said, if you are too structured, you lose the art of what you are doing, the challenge is to balance the order and chaos, the yin and yang. In the group I am a member of, I am the structure person, always worrying about logistics, plans, communications, time, etc. The others help balance me out, and keep it fun!
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I love a pint as well as the next man, but turning up drunk or getting drunk at paid gigs is a 'non starter'....I suffered it silently from fellow musicians from all kinds of musical genres over the decades. I even gritted my teeth while the idiot friends boasted "He plays better when he's drunk". He doesn't...he thinks he does, but he plays like a twit. Thankfully I don't come up against it much nowadays, but if I did I would have no compunction of 'slinging my hook' and leave them stewing in their own juice. Name and shame that would now be my motto.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think it comes down to: if you're hired and don't muck it up, it's probably because the attitude is more of an "wow, I'm getting to play these tunes tonight and getting paid sure is a plus" compared to "money, money, money,......"
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think it's down to communication - and I've been both a hirer and provider of live music. I've been pretty stressed out by suppliers in the past who don't communicate well. As a musician I do my best to get a good amount of money (and that amount varies with different types of client) but once engaged, I see my job as providing the music but also to keep the client informed and solve any problems (within reason) which arise on the day. For me the difference between being "paid to play" and professional is about the other things you do (others have put it very well above) - and perhaps it's easier to take an example of the plumber. A plumber might do the job competently (not necessarily brilliantly) but what I see as professionalism is about being very clear about the billing, timescales, clearing up and all the other things you absolutely expect of a professional when you buy a "service". Translated into our field, it might be things like emailing a link to a printable poster that the venue can fill in, getting in touch the day before to finalise any last-minute changes the client may need, giving them some promotion of their event on your website. It's the essence of good customer service - the things that are valued hugely by clients, are very often free or cheap for you to do. They make it much more likely you will get a gig again, and all you have to do is make sure you do them!
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
So to answer Bouzouki Dave's final question, my suggestions are:
Check in a couple of times before the event (say a month before / a day before - as you think appropriate)
Find out what clients would find useful (ie publicity, downloads etc) - and do at least that.
Turn up as agreed and play well!
Don't talk about other musicians or other client
Behave as if this is the first of many bookings (because even one-off clients may well recommend you to others)
Contact the client after the event to thank them for booking you and use the time to have a conversation about other potential bookings (this is a great source of business, but again use your judgement).
Be very clear about payment
Be interested in their event and in what else is happening during that event.
Most of this is non-musical and the least you should do!!
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I'm a bit late here, but this subject line strikes a nerve with me. I guess I was educated in a more old-fashioned meaning of the word "professional" as opposed to the modern bastardization (it seems even the dictionary disagrees with me). So I suppose what follows is only my opinion, or personal gripe, but hopefully will contribute something... *ahem*
Being a professional has NOTHING to do with:
-How much money you make at a given task.
-How nice, punctual, polite, or well-dressed you are about it.
Being a professional has EVERYTHING to do with:
-Having specialized knowledge and training far and above what the layman can understand.
-Applying that knowledge honestly for the benefit of society, and without profit motive.
Please, please, please don't call yourself a professional musician in the same line you admit to having only "intermediate skills." And please don't claim that you don't even need good skills but that it is all about being "a good small businessman." Businessmen are concerned with profit. There is really no such thing as a "business professional."
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Albrown
Surely it's fairly usual for the venue to provide the sound system? I always do check if there is one, but have never been told I have to bring the system myself! I think that's pretty standard.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Interesting point of view silver bow. And eminently valid for a time that probably ended about a century ago where men of independent means could dedicate their lives to whatever they wanted. Or maybe StarTrek where wages were a thing of the past.
Unfortunately now though, "professional" merely means how you pay the mortgage. And as we find our selves andwiched in between 19th century philanthropy and 23rd century fiction, we are often exposed to hopeless musicians who pay their mortgages via nothing more than subterfuge and being well organised.
Pulling wool over peoples ears, it seems, has become a profession unto itself.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
The word "professional" has become another one of those garbage-bin words like "god", "love" "like" etc etc. in modern usage it is drawing an ever-widening circle around a vague patch of meaning that can be anything depending on who says it and who hears it.
I imagine there is still some idea that a professional at any given discipline practices the discipline as his/her main source of income. Many would argue that one must be a "professor" to be a professional.
The whole underlying concept of the word seems to imply that there is some separation between who you are and what you get paid for. Sad really.
I will say one thing. In the years that I made my main living by playing music, there was only one yardstick for who was considered "professional" and who was not. That yardstick is "The Show Must Go On". This is the rule of show-business, not musicianship. If entertainment relys on a musical performance, then it might be pertinent to those who's life has music at its core.
Bazouki Dave, I think your question lays with the notion of the word "professionalism". It is best to apprehend the whole before struggling with artificial separators like "professionalism".
If the life has music, it will find it's place, paid for or not. Once done, the deed will be described by those who didn't. That noise is the best music the non-creative can make - best not get distracted by it.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Silver bow,
As an advocate of playing music *professionally*, I don't yet find myself in opposition with your statements.
Although;
If I COULD live without money, I certainly wouldn't ask for any.
Being nice, punctual, polite or well-dressed seems like simply being a normaly constituted human being.
In my experience, you can't bluff specialised knowledge and training in any of the arts domains (except perhaps in contemporary painting).
Then, applying this honestly for the benefit of society without profit motive doesn't mean you have to do it at a loss either.
Relative to the people who populate this forum, I will not evaluate my level as being anything other than "intermediate", on the basis that I've never played with any of you.
A contrario, however, when compared to the layman, my level of understanding and practise of music in general terms is indeed considered (by other musicians that don't play ITM) to be high enough to command some respect.
Finally, the analogy of the "small businessman" is only useful if it's understood as part of the work that goes around the music (I spend as much time doing paperwork as I do at practise), which is just as necessary for gigs to run smoothly. Indeed NOT the kind of economic aberrations that have become the world's stock exchanges and the proceedings therein. I tend to keep a precarious balance between my losses and operational costs, net profits being strictly OUT of the equation.
As my wife says to me when I'm blue,"Don't worry, you're good enough, and it beats flipping burgers".
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I concede we are struggling for a definition of professional - so I suggest it's something that depends on context.
There are plenty of times when I play for the fun of it, with people, or in a pub, or for free, and the relationship and the music are hugely rewarding - in fact, I'd say that money can't come even close to buying that sort of experience and it's a rare and special thing we're privileged to be part of.
But I think a professional relationship is different, and is more akin to most people's everyday experiences. We have professional relationships everywhere. If I go to a supermarket, I'm paying for the means to get a wide variety of things I can't provide for myself - it's not a friendly relationship, but a professional one. I see my needs as "buying food", but the supermarket sees my needs differently because doesn't just offer "the products" - otherwise they'd just have a big pile of them in the middle of the floor and it would be unclear how to pay for any of it (until they stopped me on the way out of the store!). The fact they bother to present things in a certain way, adds value for them (ie more sales) and to me (ie choice about what to buy and how long to spend in the store). Successful supermarkets spend a lot of time researching that relationship for sound commercial reasons. It works for them and for me - I see that as a professional relationship, which I'd define as something with a clear customer and supplier involved.
Maybe that's not a perfect example, as I'm just satisfying a need, not "buying an experience". However, it has some parallels. If a musician only thinks the customer wants "music" and that it's only about how excellent the music is, then taken to extremes, that extreme inward focus can lead to some of the appalling behaviour described by Bouzouki Dave in his original post - and ultimately sabotages the relationship. Which is why I think a professional relationship is different and goes beyond the music (however excellent that might be).
You could argue that a professional relationship makes the music less "joyful" (and I'd agree!) but if we are aware of what clients want and do those additional things that I mentioned a few posts ago, it can still be very satisfying and successful.
Perhaps it's possible to do both - to have a paid session in a pub where everyone is very clear that they're paying a bunch of people to have a really great time and go away with money in their pockets, and that others will enjoy being on the periphery of that. Don't know - that could be the best of both worlds but I highly doubt it's possible.
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Mark In my experience that is the norm in Ireland. Far from being a an impossibility!
IMO
''Being a professional has EVERYTHING to do with:
-Having specialized knowledge and training far and above what the layman can understand.
-Applying that knowledge honestly for the benefit of society.''
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Well if you are over Im sure we can arrange a harp centred session. I find my Spanish Guitar blends well with the harp, and mandolin can also work IMO. in the right hands of course.
and the second point was simply cut and paste from silver bow, so credit where credit is due.
That was funny yesterday when you downloaded my tune, I converted it in Audacity and they have a huge list of genres, I laughed as I saw the 'porn groove' But promptly forgot. What do you reckon to the tune? strange eh? Most of my stuff is' trad' but the odd piece is in a strange timing or scales. I have a few in 10/8 as well., written for the GHB but playable on most instruments.
There was a classical/ folk/ baroque festival a couple of years ago and a few of my tunes were played by a Young and immensely talented English Violinist. Funny because I gave those tunes to an acquaintance in Marroco and they ended up back in Kerry!
Professionalism in my book, is turning up early, doing your best, and staying sober. Its also the hours and years, decades of assiduous practice that means when you do get hired, you do a good job and get called back.
Regarding 'amusing the patrons', well that happens or it doesnt and is of little real concern to me. Ive always played the music I like, not what others want. I never learnt any commercial cover song, out side of the traditional repertoire. [that I didnt really enjoy listening to and playing.] fortunately the patrons are normally amused. I think the only big gaffe I made was singing Hiroshima Nagasaki Russian roulette to a German Audience. went down a storm
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Mark, Some good points there, although I am not sure that the pure enjoyment of an unpaid musical gathering can ever be truly merged with a paid performance. I used to think that the secret of life was to get someone to pay you to do something that you would do for free because you love it. But as I get older, I think that money more often than not tends to suck the joy out of any endeavor.
suesinger, from my experience, availability of sound systems is about 50/50, with venues that offer music more often, of course more apt to have the sound systems.
My post pointed out the many things that a lack of discipline can do to erode the quality of a professional performance. Too many people think that musical ability is enough to carry the day, and that is not the case. Of course, as others, have correctly pointed out, without a certain amount of musical ability, no amount of discipline will turn the event into a successful performance.
Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I am not the only person who sees this as an issue in ITM.
We all love the music , many of us would love to play the music as a full or even regularly part time, as a job , a few are skilled/lucky/hard working enough/ have the talent and technique to be good enough to do so( note I am in no way a member of this latter group ) . Yet of this latter group many great musicians try and fail to make a living from the music . Is this because they are not professional enough?
To illustrate this I should mention a couple of examples.
my gf a couple of years ago went to some workshops in Ireland with one of her musical heroes . 5 x 2 hour workshops over 100 euros . Fair enough price there were 12 in the class. Yet this person only turned up only twice on time and by the third day was turning up drunk My gf will not take a workshop with this person again The same person complains bitterly how difficult it is to make ends meet as a musician.
Also bands turning up drunk for gigs , without an agreed list to play , with out instruments , slagging off other professional musicians in public I could go on and I am sure many of you have other similar stories .
Does this drive people away from ITM?
Should we reject the idea of professionals in ITM and all be amateurs and just play for ourselves ?
Or can we have an agreed definition of professional that goes beyond being just paid.
I don’t know but would be interested in what people think
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by bazouki dave
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think that there is a vast gap between having the talent to be recognised as a great musician, and having the character to be able to cope with the many stresses and strains of being a professional performer.
You could look through the names in almost any category of performing artists, past and present, and pick out a percentage, quite a large percentage, of people who just didn't have that inner something that enabled them to cope with these stresses and maintain an inner core of commitment and dedication to being a consistent performer.
And sometimes it is these inner demons that drive people NOT to maintain this commitment that makes them all the more likeable as people.
After all, who have you got who has always maintained their standards of performance through all their career ? Bruce Forsyth ?
But yes, I do understand your complaint. But all these people are also human, however that may irk.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I doubt it is just Irish trad players who behave unprofessionally -- plenty of drunk eedjits in other genres of music, probably more by virtue of the fact that the population of rock or punk musicians is greater than Irish/Scottish trad musicians. I know a lot of people who play in bands and who take it seriously, show up on time, etc., so I don't think the behaviour you describe is characteristic of traditional musicians.
Anyway, if people can make a living out of it, more power to them. Obviously not everyone wants to make it their livelihood but if you want to and are good enough and lucky enough, awesome. I have mates who are full time professional musicians and others who want to keep the music fun and feel that if it becomes their job, it would cease being fun.
If I could support myself playing Irish music (without selling my soul and playing New Age sh*te just to pay the rent), I'd be doing that rather than this bloody PhD.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by TheSilverSpear
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I've seen a number of such things, but as others say - it's not just the Irish trad. But I'd rather think about it as an ethics thing.
Regardless whether I play for money or not, when I am requested to play for others and agree to that I feel obliged to deliver something of value to them, otherwise I would feel like cheating someone or being unrespectful. This is also why I might be the only one here who does not share your dream - if I earned money by playing full time Irish trad, I'd need to know that this is exactly what people expect from me. So in time I'd need to shift towards world music and folk pop. I'll stick with the amateur option, thank you.
It is true that I've seen that mostly with Irish "groups" coming to Poland for gigs, but this is rather symptomatic for gig organizers, who were inviting trouble themselves - without any proper knowledge about the music they took the bands that cost them the least- i.e., usually some half-dead former hippies on a conditional leave from a rehab that play untuned guitars and sing popular Irish ballads and drink songs (usually the same verse over half-hour). They quite rightfully expect that no matter what the quality of music is, when you put up posters for "Irish supergroup straight from Dublin, the City of Molly Malone!", you'll draw a considerable tone-deaf audience, who will enjoy it anyway. This is business, you know.
"Should we reject the idea of professionals in ITM and all be amateurs and just play for ourselves ?"
Who would care if we reject it or not? And why reject it? As for me, I'm fine with whatever choice people make for themselves. Until they tread on my toes. In such case, the justice is swift and unforgiving.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by EastPole
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I've been lucky enough to be a professional musician (as a guitarist) ie: My complete source of income was provided through gigging, but not in traditional music.
In my experience, professionalism and success based on it has a lot to do with attitude rather than skill. If you treat the job with respect, work in a reliable, ethical manner, you will soon be identified by the venues and promoters you work with as someone who can get the job done. On the whole, they are interested in business, and will pick a reliable band or musician over a better one who's a bit flaky. You don't need to be the greatest player on the planet to make a living at it, but it will require a healthy does of good humour, hard work and humility.
There is also a massive amount of sacrifice involved. On the whole, being a professional musician doesn't carry a great deal of money with it, when compared with other jobs. To maximise your ability to get work, you have to be prepared to travel country (or continent) wide, early starts, late finishes. You need to be extremely diplomatic (on those occasions where you might see the venue owner and you disagreeing about plugging a 20k sound rig into a 13 amp wall socket). I don't remember spending a Christmas with my family those years when I was working, as it's the period that gets the mortgage paid. In fact the period of mid October through to early Jan would normally give two days off, Christmas Day, and possibly one other. The rest were spent doing Halloween/Christmas staff do and hotel gigs, including Christmas Eve. Typically the journey home for Christmas Day was not feasible, after you'd finished at 3am somewhere.
I wouldn't swap the experience I gained it's served me very well in other things that I do, but I don't think I could be a full time gigging musician again.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by ciaranbradley
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think you are right about success as a professional musician not really being about how good a musician you are. It is about how good a small businessman you are. That's what people just don't get. Most working musicians aren't famous. Its just like being a plumber or a roofer. If you're late, do a lousey job, show up drunk, use shoddy materials...you don't get called back. Its the same for a bandleader.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by Nate Ryan
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
+half-dead former hippies on a conditional leave from a rehab that play untuned guitars and sing popular Irish ballads and drink songs (usually the same verse over half-hour)+
brilliant!
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by Bren
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Indeed, Bren, and East Pole - sounds like Mr Smoketoomuch from the Monty Python travel agent sketch.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by RockyRoader
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
At first sight of the title to this thread, I thought "Oh yeah... Here we go with the ol' can o'worms". Glad to read I was wrong.
I couldn't agree more with Nate Ryan.
For the last (nearly) ten years, I've played professionally in various bands, and wouldn't trade the experiences for anything in the world.
It turns out that a friend and neighbour of mine is in fact a plumber, running his own little business out of our hamlet; one day we compared notes on the practical applications of our respective activities, and found that we had more in common than we might have expected at first.
I'm not famous, my skill level is very intermediate, and I don't go out of my way to publicise my presence or availability to be hired any more than anyone else, yet people still call in regularily enough to keep me in work.
It's already more than what I'd bargained for from the onset, and I'm quite happy with that.
As for professionalism and being paid, doing my "job" as best I can (quality needs no boasting), and only asking enough to keep my wife and I going until the next gig seems like an honest M.O. to me.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by Fanning
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
A performance venue will book what they can make money on. Cat Power (in the rock world) and the Pogues (in the rock/trad world) are two examples, out of many, of acts whose concerts have been notoriously variable due to substance issues - fortunately both Shane and Chan are dealing with those much better these days - but still had no lack of bookings because their fans would buy tickets. The fact that the show might not go on, or might be a disaster, due to an inebriated star seems only to have helped ticket sales, at least for some period of time. There's a certain mystique in the tortured artist, and it still sells. Professionalism is of limited utility here, as compared to star power. (for the front-man/woman, that is - the bass player still has to play in tune and on time, and not be noticed: that is, be a professional)
The opposite is true for the potted-plant gigs. For the staff gigs, the weddings, the corporate functions and civic affairs, I have to agree with Ciaran - the safe and sane will get more steady work than the brilliant and unreliable, and here a reputation for professionalism is worth ten times as much as brilliant playing and showmanship.
This, by the way, may explain why so many mediocre bands continue to exist. They turn up on time and don't play too loud, so they get booked again.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Much of this music is centered in pubs and other drinking establishment. And let's not forget that Ireland is notorious for its people's propensity to drink. I'm absolutely shocked that a musician from such a background would even consider drinking! And no doubt this was at some sort of festival, where drinking and partying *never* occur.
That being said, being a great player does not in any way define the rest of his or her character.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by awildman
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
What happened to Bazouki Dave's girlfriend is disgraceful. I hope that the tutor was not paid.
Ciaran Bradley makes some excellent points re the life of a professional. It is a tough grind. I have known some quite successful professionals who, being delighted at the opportunity to make a living doing what they loved, cut bad deals for themselves by dint of business inexperience.
Professionals really need to maximise earning power while successful & fit - public taste is transient, and the touring life, as noted is tough. Keeping it up for more than a few years needs a lot of physical stamina.
The tolerance of drunkenness in & around ITM is unfortunate - cf Bazouki Dave's girlfriend's experience. I would hazard that I am not alone in having known more than a few talented musicians for whom excessive indulgence was not good, for them or for the people around them. Some were destroyed altogether.
# Posted on July 24th 2009 by Sean Lead Liath
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I am often shocked at what people think is appropriate when they are paid to provide a performance. I have seen people arrive late, assume the venue provides the sound system, scratch together a couple of friends and call it a group, even though it is obvious that they have not practiced together recently nor prepared a set list, wander aimlessly through a mishmash of tunes and or songs without any pacing or structure, not to mention the drinking and drug abuse mentioned above. A little looseness is OK, but I have seen some pretty embarassing stuff in my time, when the problems pile up to the point where it overwhelms the music. When you are playing for fun in a session, you don't have these obligations, but when you put yourself out for hire you are expected to behave like a professional. And no whining about not being paid enough, you are a musician for pity's sake, not a brain surgeon.
That being said, if you are too structured, you lose the art of what you are doing, the challenge is to balance the order and chaos, the yin and yang. In the group I am a member of, I am the structure person, always worrying about logistics, plans, communications, time, etc. The others help balance me out, and keep it fun!
# Posted on July 25th 2009 by AlBrown
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I love a pint as well as the next man, but turning up drunk or getting drunk at paid gigs is a 'non starter'....I suffered it silently from fellow musicians from all kinds of musical genres over the decades. I even gritted my teeth while the idiot friends boasted "He plays better when he's drunk". He doesn't...he thinks he does, but he plays like a twit. Thankfully I don't come up against it much nowadays, but if I did I would have no compunction of 'slinging my hook' and leave them stewing in their own juice. Name and shame that would now be my motto.
# Posted on July 25th 2009 by Free Reed
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think it comes down to: if you're hired and don't muck it up, it's probably because the attitude is more of an "wow, I'm getting to play these tunes tonight and getting paid sure is a plus" compared to "money, money, money,......"
# Posted on July 25th 2009 by Fiddlechick7
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I think it's down to communication - and I've been both a hirer and provider of live music. I've been pretty stressed out by suppliers in the past who don't communicate well. As a musician I do my best to get a good amount of money (and that amount varies with different types of client) but once engaged, I see my job as providing the music but also to keep the client informed and solve any problems (within reason) which arise on the day. For me the difference between being "paid to play" and professional is about the other things you do (others have put it very well above) - and perhaps it's easier to take an example of the plumber. A plumber might do the job competently (not necessarily brilliantly) but what I see as professionalism is about being very clear about the billing, timescales, clearing up and all the other things you absolutely expect of a professional when you buy a "service". Translated into our field, it might be things like emailing a link to a printable poster that the venue can fill in, getting in touch the day before to finalise any last-minute changes the client may need, giving them some promotion of their event on your website. It's the essence of good customer service - the things that are valued hugely by clients, are very often free or cheap for you to do. They make it much more likely you will get a gig again, and all you have to do is make sure you do them!
# Posted on July 25th 2009 by Mark Harmer
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
So to answer Bouzouki Dave's final question, my suggestions are:
Check in a couple of times before the event (say a month before / a day before - as you think appropriate)
Find out what clients would find useful (ie publicity, downloads etc) - and do at least that.
Turn up as agreed and play well!
Don't talk about other musicians or other client
Behave as if this is the first of many bookings (because even one-off clients may well recommend you to others)
Contact the client after the event to thank them for booking you and use the time to have a conversation about other potential bookings (this is a great source of business, but again use your judgement).
Be very clear about payment
Be interested in their event and in what else is happening during that event.
Most of this is non-musical and the least you should do!!
# Posted on July 25th 2009 by Mark Harmer
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
sorry - that should say "Don't talk about other musicians or other clients". Either negatively or positively!
# Posted on July 25th 2009 by Mark Harmer
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I'm a bit late here, but this subject line strikes a nerve with me. I guess I was educated in a more old-fashioned meaning of the word "professional" as opposed to the modern bastardization (it seems even the dictionary disagrees with me). So I suppose what follows is only my opinion, or personal gripe, but hopefully will contribute something... *ahem*
Being a professional has NOTHING to do with:
-How much money you make at a given task.
-How nice, punctual, polite, or well-dressed you are about it.
Being a professional has EVERYTHING to do with:
-Having specialized knowledge and training far and above what the layman can understand.
-Applying that knowledge honestly for the benefit of society, and without profit motive.
Please, please, please don't call yourself a professional musician in the same line you admit to having only "intermediate skills." And please don't claim that you don't even need good skills but that it is all about being "a good small businessman." Businessmen are concerned with profit. There is really no such thing as a "business professional."
End of rant.
# Posted on July 26th 2009 by polkageist
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Albrown
Surely it's fairly usual for the venue to provide the sound system? I always do check if there is one, but have never been told I have to bring the system myself! I think that's pretty standard.
# Posted on July 26th 2009 by suesinger
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Interesting point of view silver bow. And eminently valid for a time that probably ended about a century ago where men of independent means could dedicate their lives to whatever they wanted. Or maybe StarTrek where wages were a thing of the past.
Unfortunately now though, "professional" merely means how you pay the mortgage. And as we find our selves andwiched in between 19th century philanthropy and 23rd century fiction, we are often exposed to hopeless musicians who pay their mortgages via nothing more than subterfuge and being well organised.
Pulling wool over peoples ears, it seems, has become a profession unto itself.
# Posted on July 26th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
The word "professional" has become another one of those garbage-bin words like "god", "love" "like" etc etc. in modern usage it is drawing an ever-widening circle around a vague patch of meaning that can be anything depending on who says it and who hears it.
I imagine there is still some idea that a professional at any given discipline practices the discipline as his/her main source of income. Many would argue that one must be a "professor" to be a professional.
The whole underlying concept of the word seems to imply that there is some separation between who you are and what you get paid for. Sad really.
I will say one thing. In the years that I made my main living by playing music, there was only one yardstick for who was considered "professional" and who was not. That yardstick is "The Show Must Go On". This is the rule of show-business, not musicianship. If entertainment relys on a musical performance, then it might be pertinent to those who's life has music at its core.
Bazouki Dave, I think your question lays with the notion of the word "professionalism". It is best to apprehend the whole before struggling with artificial separators like "professionalism".
If the life has music, it will find it's place, paid for or not. Once done, the deed will be described by those who didn't. That noise is the best music the non-creative can make - best not get distracted by it.
# Posted on July 27th 2009 by Mozle
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Silver bow,
As an advocate of playing music *professionally*, I don't yet find myself in opposition with your statements.
Although;
If I COULD live without money, I certainly wouldn't ask for any.
Being nice, punctual, polite or well-dressed seems like simply being a normaly constituted human being.
In my experience, you can't bluff specialised knowledge and training in any of the arts domains (except perhaps in contemporary painting).
Then, applying this honestly for the benefit of society without profit motive doesn't mean you have to do it at a loss either.
Relative to the people who populate this forum, I will not evaluate my level as being anything other than "intermediate", on the basis that I've never played with any of you.
A contrario, however, when compared to the layman, my level of understanding and practise of music in general terms is indeed considered (by other musicians that don't play ITM) to be high enough to command some respect.
Finally, the analogy of the "small businessman" is only useful if it's understood as part of the work that goes around the music (I spend as much time doing paperwork as I do at practise), which is just as necessary for gigs to run smoothly. Indeed NOT the kind of economic aberrations that have become the world's stock exchanges and the proceedings therein. I tend to keep a precarious balance between my losses and operational costs, net profits being strictly OUT of the equation.
As my wife says to me when I'm blue,"Don't worry, you're good enough, and it beats flipping burgers".
# Posted on July 27th 2009 by Fanning
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
I concede we are struggling for a definition of professional - so I suggest it's something that depends on context.
There are plenty of times when I play for the fun of it, with people, or in a pub, or for free, and the relationship and the music are hugely rewarding - in fact, I'd say that money can't come even close to buying that sort of experience and it's a rare and special thing we're privileged to be part of.
But I think a professional relationship is different, and is more akin to most people's everyday experiences. We have professional relationships everywhere. If I go to a supermarket, I'm paying for the means to get a wide variety of things I can't provide for myself - it's not a friendly relationship, but a professional one. I see my needs as "buying food", but the supermarket sees my needs differently because doesn't just offer "the products" - otherwise they'd just have a big pile of them in the middle of the floor and it would be unclear how to pay for any of it (until they stopped me on the way out of the store!). The fact they bother to present things in a certain way, adds value for them (ie more sales) and to me (ie choice about what to buy and how long to spend in the store). Successful supermarkets spend a lot of time researching that relationship for sound commercial reasons. It works for them and for me - I see that as a professional relationship, which I'd define as something with a clear customer and supplier involved.
Maybe that's not a perfect example, as I'm just satisfying a need, not "buying an experience". However, it has some parallels. If a musician only thinks the customer wants "music" and that it's only about how excellent the music is, then taken to extremes, that extreme inward focus can lead to some of the appalling behaviour described by Bouzouki Dave in his original post - and ultimately sabotages the relationship. Which is why I think a professional relationship is different and goes beyond the music (however excellent that might be).
You could argue that a professional relationship makes the music less "joyful" (and I'd agree!) but if we are aware of what clients want and do those additional things that I mentioned a few posts ago, it can still be very satisfying and successful.
Perhaps it's possible to do both - to have a paid session in a pub where everyone is very clear that they're paying a bunch of people to have a really great time and go away with money in their pockets, and that others will enjoy being on the periphery of that. Don't know - that could be the best of both worlds but I highly doubt it's possible.
# Posted on July 27th 2009 by Mark Harmer
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Mark In my experience that is the norm in Ireland. Far from being a an impossibility!
IMO
''Being a professional has EVERYTHING to do with:
-Having specialized knowledge and training far and above what the layman can understand.
-Applying that knowledge honestly for the benefit of society.''
# Posted on July 27th 2009 by the wicked hacker
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Love that last point - and re the first point, I'm obviously in the wrong place!! Sounds fab...
# Posted on July 27th 2009 by Mark Harmer
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Well if you are over Im sure we can arrange a harp centred session. I find my Spanish Guitar blends well with the harp, and mandolin can also work IMO. in the right hands of course.
and the second point was simply cut and paste from silver bow, so credit where credit is due.
That was funny yesterday when you downloaded my tune, I converted it in Audacity and they have a huge list of genres, I laughed as I saw the 'porn groove' But promptly forgot. What do you reckon to the tune? strange eh? Most of my stuff is' trad' but the odd piece is in a strange timing or scales. I have a few in 10/8 as well., written for the GHB but playable on most instruments.
There was a classical/ folk/ baroque festival a couple of years ago and a few of my tunes were played by a Young and immensely talented English Violinist. Funny because I gave those tunes to an acquaintance in Marroco and they ended up back in Kerry!
Professionalism in my book, is turning up early, doing your best, and staying sober. Its also the hours and years, decades of assiduous practice that means when you do get hired, you do a good job and get called back.
Regarding 'amusing the patrons', well that happens or it doesnt and is of little real concern to me. Ive always played the music I like, not what others want. I never learnt any commercial cover song, out side of the traditional repertoire. [that I didnt really enjoy listening to and playing.] fortunately the patrons are normally amused. I think the only big gaffe I made was singing Hiroshima Nagasaki Russian roulette to a German Audience. went down a storm
# Posted on July 27th 2009 by the wicked hacker
Re: Professionalism vs being paid to play . What’s the difference ?
Mark, Some good points there, although I am not sure that the pure enjoyment of an unpaid musical gathering can ever be truly merged with a paid performance. I used to think that the secret of life was to get someone to pay you to do something that you would do for free because you love it. But as I get older, I think that money more often than not tends to suck the joy out of any endeavor.
suesinger, from my experience, availability of sound systems is about 50/50, with venues that offer music more often, of course more apt to have the sound systems.
My post pointed out the many things that a lack of discipline can do to erode the quality of a professional performance. Too many people think that musical ability is enough to carry the day, and that is not the case. Of course, as others, have correctly pointed out, without a certain amount of musical ability, no amount of discipline will turn the event into a successful performance.
# Posted on July 28th 2009 by AlBrown