I realise this is possibly a contentious subject and there will be different views. Hopefully, I won't start any more heated arguments here but I'd be interested to hear what you all think about such matters.
It was a comment on another site which got me thinking about this subject again. Reference was made to a certain bar in Inverness which pays £50 each to two session hosts. Another poster commented, albeit tongue in cheek, that £50 for sitting in a warm pub playing tunes all night wasn't such a bad deal. In some ways, this is true and many of us are quite happy do this for no payment at all. Or are we?
Of course, there's a lot more to this. There's also the question of regular commitment, transport costs etc and unless the two hosts are prepared to play continously on their own all night (-which they may wish to do but then it's more like a gig and certainly much harder work ) they also have to depend on the good will of other musicians who turn up and join them on the night. Now, if these musicians are regular attenders or, perhaps, even invited along, the hosts *may* feel obliged to share out the cash and/or buy the other players a drink each. Obviously, the £50 doesn't go quite so far in such circumstances.
For instance, and maybe MG will confirm this, in most Sandy Bells sessions any musician who contributes something significant towards the proceedings will get a free drink or maybe two. I believe the practice is that all (or most) of the modest fee is used for this purpose. Again, MG will correct me if I'm wrong. So, this is quite a good system(in my opinion) and encourages other musicians to get involved and creates a better atmosphere.
In some other venues, however, I've seen some sessions (supposedly open) which consist of only the session hosts. Now, this might be because of a shortage of musicians in the area, lack of interest, or (Dare I suggest?) that the hosts wish to keep all the cash for themselves. If it is the latter(I'm not criticising them as it is their prerogative), then you can't really expect musicians to turn up and support such a session on a regular basis, although I/you/we might wish to visit them on a casual basis.
To conclude here, I believe that the management of a pub *should* provide cash if they wish to be guaranteed a good session/music within their premises. However, I don't feel that hosts should necessarily have to rely on this as income. For a start, it doesn't amount to much and, unless they just wish to play all night as duo or trio, they will *probably* have to spread some of it around.
The other scenario is where nobody gets paid at all. Such arrangements can be a "hit or a miss", however, and are unlikely to attract the better musicians unless they are "passing by". Yet, they can still be a worthwhile and an enjoyable experience for those taking part.
Anyway, I'm sure there will be lots of different views on this subject and much of these will be formed through your own (local) experiences. What do you all think about this?
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
A local musician used to go round the pubs and offer to host sessions for a fee - he then did flyers and phoned musicians to try and ensure a decent turnout. Sometimes he used to pick musicians up on the way - the problem was that quite often he'd drink too much and be unable to take them home again. On several occasions he paid me petrol money to take home some of the musicans he'd brought with him!!
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
The payment means that there will always be a session on that given night. It guarantees that someone will be there, so you can go along knowing that there will be music. As an example, there is a pub in Co Antrim famous for traditional music, but I haven't heard a note played in it for the 19 years I have been living close to it. The owner will not pay, so attendance can be sketchy.
Most of the regulars who join us are well to do, rich, types, although I have been known to buy the very odd round.
My colleagues are tight fisted and keep all the money to themselves.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
There is one open (monthly) session in my area of California, I waited all month to attend and whence the day arrived there was only I and a bouzouki player so we watched football and waited. I would be glad for a core group to receive a tippance.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Here in RI, the custom is for the publican to pay a modest fee to an experienced musician who leads the session, with everyone else usually getting at least a drink or two for free, sometimes free or discounted food.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I hadn't really thought about this much, but recently I was part of a small group of people that started a session (only one so far) at a local pub. The musician who sent out the original announcement/invitation noted that the owners might consider paying the session leader(s) a percentage of the takings, depending on how much business they get as a result.
Now, obviously, it's too soon to say how long this might last, how many people -- musicians and onlookers -- will attend regularly, etc., and how many among the regulars would even be interested in serving as "session leader." But the possibility that there might be some pay involved did get me thinking about the duties, responsibilities, expectations of and for a session leader -- as well as how these are determined and who determines them.
At least some of it, of course, is negotiated with the management: Show up at this time, get started at that time -- even if it's just a couple of you -- and finish x hours later. But it seems like there's a lot of other variables that you have to work out with the other attendees. Are you supposed to be an active, hands-on type of leader, who picks out a musician and says "OK, Joe, give us a reel" or prompts singers in the crowd to belt one out? Are you expected to be The Enforcer, and gently, or not-so-gently, nudge the nuisances (those who play out of tune, in wrong keys, poor rhythm, etc.)?
Now, here's a hypothetical question: Given the choice between paying a session leader or management agreeing to give participating musicians drinks on the house, what would you pick?
Or, what if management took whatever money it might pay a session leader and instead used the funds to present, say, occasional concerts at the pub (which might include some of the session regulars or special guests)?
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
The benefit of paying session "leaders" to host a session is that there is always music on at the advertised time.
The disadvantage is that you can end up with the same (bored) musicians playing the same tunes every week just because they've committed to be there every week... It could also end up as being a cheap gig for the venue (the main risk with "the McEwan Sessions" going in Scotland, I believe...).
Have been to sessions where you get a drink ticket if/when you join in, something I personally found great. That way you get people showing up because they want to play and not for the money. And the venue is still showing appreciation to the musicians.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I've been in both situations and strangely enough prefer not to get paid. Apart from what Jennie says, and I agree with her, there's the fact that no-paid players who turn up might get a bit resentful, and end up not coming back, so thus leaving just the core (paid) group.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
You can get around this by either sharing the cash or making sure that the other players get a free drink. Of course, neither yourself nor anyone else should feel obliged to do this and non "core"(especially one off visitors) musicians shouldn't expect it. There's always the consideration of whether the other players deserve an equal share or, in some cases(where they shouldn't be encouraged for various reasons), anything at all.
Anyway, I don't expect anything when I just visit a session, although a free pint is a nice gesture.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
The duties of a session leader has been a subject that has been coming up in conversation a lot recently. Having run (unpaid) a session for many years, I know how tough it is to always make sure that someone is there, that the session keeps to your standard (whatever it may be), dealing with the session's latest soap opera, that everything's covered.
I really have no problems whatsoever with a session leader or leaders getting paid and anyone else showing up as they want to not getting paid. Free drinks are nice, but as the wife of a former club/bar owner, I can understand a publican not wanting to do that.
I have to say, my favorite sessions are ones that are full of people who have run their own sessions elsewhere, because they tend to be the sessions where everything is run in a relaxed, easygoing, supportive manner and no one worries about stuff like this.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I think session pay definitely serves a purpose. My comments are in relation to sessions I've been involved with here in SF. The first one was the "no pay - free drinks" arrangement back in the mid 80s. That was great and lasted a good year and a half but it eventually fizzled out because you couldn't rely on strong players to be there and you might end up waiting by yourself for the tunes and free drink to begin. The hastle of getting there became too high a wager against the possibility that no one would show up.
The other session is still continuing to this day, but first I'll give you a little history. The pub had a successful run of a volunteer session (generous free drink type) because the likes of Kevin Keegan, Joe Cooley and all of the hippy bluegrass musicians that discovered Kevin and Joe who had built the session around that. It was a cultural phenomenon and it lasted for around 10 or 15 years but eventually petered out after the loss of both Kevin and Joe and for the same reasons the other session I mentioned did. After some other sessions that featured paid hosts started to crop up around town the owner, (who truly loves ITM,) wanted to restore the session in his establishment and he approached myself and my cohorts to receive compensation for hosting it. Up until then I too was down the street at the other session, but the pay succeeded in pulling me away and starting one up in his pub. This continued for 10 years until I got tired of hosting sessions every Sunday and wanted to go to sessions with different hosts – or just stay home and watch TV or something I wanted to. I suggested to the owner that he make the offer to different hosts on different Sundays and Tuesdays. Now the sessions are great with lots of variables to keep it interesting. A lot of different people get to have their turn calling the shots and collecting the cash at the end of the night. None of the strong players feel resentful and we support each other's sessions. The benefit for me (besides hosting a few of the sessions myself with my pals,) is that I have a decent session to go to twice a week.
The pay isn't that much, but it's enough to get people to commit to showing up. Visiting musicians are happy because they know that if they bother to get there a core group of strong players will be in the pub. If the publican didn't offer this pay then the consistency and reliability of the session would be lost. The session has been running non-stop for nearly 20 years since it almost died out in the late 80s. I'd say the payment for session hosts in this case definitely served a worthy purpose.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Well, I'm most likely going to start one up at the Cushion, early next year. I specifically said John the Gov, no wages, just some free drinks. BTW, all I'll do is "facilitate" till it takes off. I'm fairly optimistic that it will take off as well as it's quite near Central London. Part of my rationale is that as there will hopefully be a constant stream of good musicians passing through London, I'd have a bliddy cheek taking money while they got nothing!
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I really don't mind the session host being paid and every other musicians who are there getting nothing for their efforts. The session host has to make the commitment to be there at the venue at a certain time every week to stay for as long as it takes and to be seen to earn what ever he gets. Whereas somebody unpaid like me can turn upwhen and when ever he feels like it, and do as little and as much as he feels like to contribute that night.
What bugs me though when I go to the bar for a drink and i'm 5p short the landlady insists on me handing it over! The tight fisted sod .
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Well I know that when Linda and I run our session we work our butts off. I also had to buy a $700 sound system to accomodate the owner's request that it reaches the other two back rooms. I hate miked sessions but we rotate them around. I know I have to haul the system, get there an hour early, set up, play often an hour longer than we were supposed to and with no breaks....but we love playing once we're up and running. Then we get to break it down and I break my back getting it out of my car alone after midnight. I love the music so I am not really complaining.
As session runners, we commit to be there no matter how bad the weather. It shouldn't be my job but I also advertise it on radio and email people and put it in the local paper. And I am the one who gets yelled at if there were not enough people drinking at the bar. Seriously, I can bring out a table of 12 eating and drinking, but since they were not physically sitting at the bar drinking, it doesn't count that they spent $600 and came because of my email.I hear it''s dead the nights we are not there. But again....we love the music, we love that our friends come out when they can, it is very out of the way, but many times it's just us two and a drummer who lives down the road, and basically we put on a gig for them those nights.
I know to others it looks like we just show up and have fun, and we do, but we also have to work really hard for the place. The musicians who come get pitchers of beer, and we tip the waiter and bartender out of our pay at the end of the night, we at first put a tip cup out for them, but then decided since we're getting paid we'd kick in $10 a piece for the staff tip. Now they want to cut out the beer, so I guess we will buy a pitcher ourselves for the table in the future.
I go to sessions where I am not running it, again for the love of the music.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Familiarity breeds contempt.
I prefer to flit between a number of sessions, adding my tenpen'worth to keep new ideas going around a wider area. It means I can also fill other sessions in as to where is worth going, so smaller sessions get more visitors.
You learn more when you are one of the small fishes in a session - although admittedly, raw talent can learn something from you if you are a large fish.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
We have other friends who get paid to run other sessions, we generally go to all of each others' session to support them and have a good time. The thing I find though is that the sessions that do pay, they expect a hybrid of a session and a gig. At least at ours they do. And we work hard to think out whether it's time for a song etc. or more jigs, reels whatever. Though we don't have to control it much at all as to the direction it takes, it usually flows. We make sure everyone starts tunes in turn and no one feels left out. The one thing I hate is if there is a lag in the music or we start talking rather than playing we get the hairy eyeball from the owner. We just can't take a break, everyone else surely can play, then go hang at the bar, talk to friends etc. but we are not allowed! So it's a relief to be at someone else's session a lot of the time. Unfortunately we need the extra bit of cash these days so continue on with it and are grateful to have it....except for those times we're ready to walk out for being yelled at over not bringing out the drinkers!
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I prefer the session we attend where everyone gets a share of the session leader's money at the end of the night. But that's only because the session leader is so generous and is also extremely talented enough to attract good musicians anyway. Still, gas money can add up these days, and we have some distance to travel to enjoy any session...
My next favorite session is the one which offers complimentary good pizza for all who attend, but the real reason also is because of the talent that shows up there anyway.
My least favorite session in our area, which I haven't attended for years, is the one which expects the musicians to contribute cash to a pot - supposedly for the establishment! Having to pay to play is not my idea of a win-win situation.
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Obviously, the size of the town/city, the culture, the makeup of the people/musicians in the area and the pubs are a factor in how well a situation works. We are very lucky in that the pub we play gives us free drinks (as many as we want the whole time) and their business at that time (4p-7p) is largely due to our presence. We then charge $1 at the door which goes to the "hosts" (I don't get paid so I'm not sure just who gets the money), but it's a pretty good lump sum divided among about 3 or so. We always have at least 2 fiddles, flute, whistle, banjo, guitar and bodhran and sometimes many more of these. The leaders call the sets, so we know which tunes we are playing and we are always invited to offer sets of our own, but the music is continual. We take a break in the middle. So we're kinda like a band and kinda like a session and it's open and we love it when out of town friends and strangers drop in. I've been to many sessions around the US and in the EU, but this ranks up there with the best of 'em.
Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I realise this is possibly a contentious subject and there will be different views. Hopefully, I won't start any more heated arguments here but I'd be interested to hear what you all think about such matters.
It was a comment on another site which got me thinking about this subject again. Reference was made to a certain bar in Inverness which pays £50 each to two session hosts. Another poster commented, albeit tongue in cheek, that £50 for sitting in a warm pub playing tunes all night wasn't such a bad deal. In some ways, this is true and many of us are quite happy do this for no payment at all. Or are we?
Of course, there's a lot more to this. There's also the question of regular commitment, transport costs etc and unless the two hosts are prepared to play continously on their own all night (-which they may wish to do but then it's more like a gig and certainly much harder work ) they also have to depend on the good will of other musicians who turn up and join them on the night. Now, if these musicians are regular attenders or, perhaps, even invited along, the hosts *may* feel obliged to share out the cash and/or buy the other players a drink each. Obviously, the £50 doesn't go quite so far in such circumstances.
For instance, and maybe MG will confirm this, in most Sandy Bells sessions any musician who contributes something significant towards the proceedings will get a free drink or maybe two. I believe the practice is that all (or most) of the modest fee is used for this purpose. Again, MG will correct me if I'm wrong. So, this is quite a good system(in my opinion) and encourages other musicians to get involved and creates a better atmosphere.
In some other venues, however, I've seen some sessions (supposedly open) which consist of only the session hosts. Now, this might be because of a shortage of musicians in the area, lack of interest, or (Dare I suggest?) that the hosts wish to keep all the cash for themselves. If it is the latter(I'm not criticising them as it is their prerogative), then you can't really expect musicians to turn up and support such a session on a regular basis, although I/you/we might wish to visit them on a casual basis.
To conclude here, I believe that the management of a pub *should* provide cash if they wish to be guaranteed a good session/music within their premises. However, I don't feel that hosts should necessarily have to rely on this as income. For a start, it doesn't amount to much and, unless they just wish to play all night as duo or trio, they will *probably* have to spread some of it around.
The other scenario is where nobody gets paid at all. Such arrangements can be a "hit or a miss", however, and are unlikely to attract the better musicians unless they are "passing by". Yet, they can still be a worthwhile and an enjoyable experience for those taking part.
Anyway, I'm sure there will be lots of different views on this subject and much of these will be formed through your own (local) experiences. What do you all think about this?
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by Johnny Jay
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
A local musician used to go round the pubs and offer to host sessions for a fee - he then did flyers and phoned musicians to try and ensure a decent turnout. Sometimes he used to pick musicians up on the way - the problem was that quite often he'd drink too much and be unable to take them home again. On several occasions he paid me petrol money to take home some of the musicans he'd brought with him!!
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by Tarrantella
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
The payment means that there will always be a session on that given night. It guarantees that someone will be there, so you can go along knowing that there will be music. As an example, there is a pub in Co Antrim famous for traditional music, but I haven't heard a note played in it for the 19 years I have been living close to it. The owner will not pay, so attendance can be sketchy.
Most of the regulars who join us are well to do, rich, types, although I have been known to buy the very odd round.
My colleagues are tight fisted and keep all the money to themselves.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
There is one open (monthly) session in my area of California, I waited all month to attend and whence the day arrived there was only I and a bouzouki player so we watched football and waited. I would be glad for a core group to receive a tippance.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by pick&bow
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Here in RI, the custom is for the publican to pay a modest fee to an experienced musician who leads the session, with everyone else usually getting at least a drink or two for free, sometimes free or discounted food.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by AlBrown
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I hadn't really thought about this much, but recently I was part of a small group of people that started a session (only one so far) at a local pub. The musician who sent out the original announcement/invitation noted that the owners might consider paying the session leader(s) a percentage of the takings, depending on how much business they get as a result.
Now, obviously, it's too soon to say how long this might last, how many people -- musicians and onlookers -- will attend regularly, etc., and how many among the regulars would even be interested in serving as "session leader." But the possibility that there might be some pay involved did get me thinking about the duties, responsibilities, expectations of and for a session leader -- as well as how these are determined and who determines them.
At least some of it, of course, is negotiated with the management: Show up at this time, get started at that time -- even if it's just a couple of you -- and finish x hours later. But it seems like there's a lot of other variables that you have to work out with the other attendees. Are you supposed to be an active, hands-on type of leader, who picks out a musician and says "OK, Joe, give us a reel" or prompts singers in the crowd to belt one out? Are you expected to be The Enforcer, and gently, or not-so-gently, nudge the nuisances (those who play out of tune, in wrong keys, poor rhythm, etc.)?
Now, here's a hypothetical question: Given the choice between paying a session leader or management agreeing to give participating musicians drinks on the house, what would you pick?
Or, what if management took whatever money it might pay a session leader and instead used the funds to present, say, occasional concerts at the pub (which might include some of the session regulars or special guests)?
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by sts
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
The benefit of paying session "leaders" to host a session is that there is always music on at the advertised time.
The disadvantage is that you can end up with the same (bored) musicians playing the same tunes every week just because they've committed to be there every week... It could also end up as being a cheap gig for the venue (the main risk with "the McEwan Sessions" going in Scotland, I believe...).
Have been to sessions where you get a drink ticket if/when you join in, something I personally found great. That way you get people showing up because they want to play and not for the money. And the venue is still showing appreciation to the musicians.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by jennie
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I've been in both situations and strangely enough prefer not to get paid. Apart from what Jennie says, and I agree with her, there's the fact that no-paid players who turn up might get a bit resentful, and end up not coming back, so thus leaving just the core (paid) group.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by Rudall the time
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
You can get around this by either sharing the cash or making sure that the other players get a free drink. Of course, neither yourself nor anyone else should feel obliged to do this and non "core"(especially one off visitors) musicians shouldn't expect it. There's always the consideration of whether the other players deserve an equal share or, in some cases(where they shouldn't be encouraged for various reasons), anything at all.
Anyway, I don't expect anything when I just visit a session, although a free pint is a nice gesture.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by Johnny Jay
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
The duties of a session leader has been a subject that has been coming up in conversation a lot recently. Having run (unpaid) a session for many years, I know how tough it is to always make sure that someone is there, that the session keeps to your standard (whatever it may be), dealing with the session's latest soap opera, that everything's covered.
I really have no problems whatsoever with a session leader or leaders getting paid and anyone else showing up as they want to not getting paid. Free drinks are nice, but as the wife of a former club/bar owner, I can understand a publican not wanting to do that.
I have to say, my favorite sessions are ones that are full of people who have run their own sessions elsewhere, because they tend to be the sessions where everything is run in a relaxed, easygoing, supportive manner and no one worries about stuff like this.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by Zina Lee
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I think session pay definitely serves a purpose. My comments are in relation to sessions I've been involved with here in SF. The first one was the "no pay - free drinks" arrangement back in the mid 80s. That was great and lasted a good year and a half but it eventually fizzled out because you couldn't rely on strong players to be there and you might end up waiting by yourself for the tunes and free drink to begin. The hastle of getting there became too high a wager against the possibility that no one would show up.
The other session is still continuing to this day, but first I'll give you a little history. The pub had a successful run of a volunteer session (generous free drink type) because the likes of Kevin Keegan, Joe Cooley and all of the hippy bluegrass musicians that discovered Kevin and Joe who had built the session around that. It was a cultural phenomenon and it lasted for around 10 or 15 years but eventually petered out after the loss of both Kevin and Joe and for the same reasons the other session I mentioned did. After some other sessions that featured paid hosts started to crop up around town the owner, (who truly loves ITM,) wanted to restore the session in his establishment and he approached myself and my cohorts to receive compensation for hosting it. Up until then I too was down the street at the other session, but the pay succeeded in pulling me away and starting one up in his pub. This continued for 10 years until I got tired of hosting sessions every Sunday and wanted to go to sessions with different hosts – or just stay home and watch TV or something I wanted to. I suggested to the owner that he make the offer to different hosts on different Sundays and Tuesdays. Now the sessions are great with lots of variables to keep it interesting. A lot of different people get to have their turn calling the shots and collecting the cash at the end of the night. None of the strong players feel resentful and we support each other's sessions. The benefit for me (besides hosting a few of the sessions myself with my pals,) is that I have a decent session to go to twice a week.
The pay isn't that much, but it's enough to get people to commit to showing up. Visiting musicians are happy because they know that if they bother to get there a core group of strong players will be in the pub. If the publican didn't offer this pay then the consistency and reliability of the session would be lost. The session has been running non-stop for nearly 20 years since it almost died out in the late 80s. I'd say the payment for session hosts in this case definitely served a worthy purpose.
# Posted on December 5th 2005 by Phantom Button
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Well, I'm most likely going to start one up at the Cushion, early next year. I specifically said John the Gov, no wages, just some free drinks. BTW, all I'll do is "facilitate" till it takes off. I'm fairly optimistic that it will take off as well as it's quite near Central London. Part of my rationale is that as there will hopefully be a constant stream of good musicians passing through London, I'd have a bliddy cheek taking money while they got nothing!
# Posted on December 6th 2005 by Rudall the time
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I'll get there at some point Danny, if there's a chance of a free beer. - it's not just yer good musicians that stream through London
# Posted on December 6th 2005 by Ottery
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I really don't mind the session host being paid and every other musicians who are there getting nothing for their efforts. The session host has to make the commitment to be there at the venue at a certain time every week to stay for as long as it takes and to be seen to earn what ever he gets. Whereas somebody unpaid like me can turn upwhen and when ever he feels like it, and do as little and as much as he feels like to contribute that night.
What bugs me though when I go to the bar for a drink and i'm 5p short the landlady insists on me handing it over! The tight fisted sod .
# Posted on December 6th 2005 by Justintime
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Well I know that when Linda and I run our session we work our butts off. I also had to buy a $700 sound system to accomodate the owner's request that it reaches the other two back rooms. I hate miked sessions but we rotate them around. I know I have to haul the system, get there an hour early, set up, play often an hour longer than we were supposed to and with no breaks....but we love playing once we're up and running. Then we get to break it down and I break my back getting it out of my car alone after midnight. I love the music so I am not really complaining.
As session runners, we commit to be there no matter how bad the weather. It shouldn't be my job but I also advertise it on radio and email people and put it in the local paper. And I am the one who gets yelled at if there were not enough people drinking at the bar. Seriously, I can bring out a table of 12 eating and drinking, but since they were not physically sitting at the bar drinking, it doesn't count that they spent $600 and came because of my email.I hear it''s dead the nights we are not there. But again....we love the music, we love that our friends come out when they can, it is very out of the way, but many times it's just us two and a drummer who lives down the road, and basically we put on a gig for them those nights.
I know to others it looks like we just show up and have fun, and we do, but we also have to work really hard for the place. The musicians who come get pitchers of beer, and we tip the waiter and bartender out of our pay at the end of the night, we at first put a tip cup out for them, but then decided since we're getting paid we'd kick in $10 a piece for the staff tip. Now they want to cut out the beer, so I guess we will buy a pitcher ourselves for the table in the future.
I go to sessions where I am not running it, again for the love of the music.
# Posted on December 6th 2005 by irisnevins
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Familiarity breeds contempt.
I prefer to flit between a number of sessions, adding my tenpen'worth to keep new ideas going around a wider area. It means I can also fill other sessions in as to where is worth going, so smaller sessions get more visitors.
You learn more when you are one of the small fishes in a session - although admittedly, raw talent can learn something from you if you are a large fish.
# Posted on December 6th 2005 by geoffwright
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
We have other friends who get paid to run other sessions, we generally go to all of each others' session to support them and have a good time. The thing I find though is that the sessions that do pay, they expect a hybrid of a session and a gig. At least at ours they do. And we work hard to think out whether it's time for a song etc. or more jigs, reels whatever. Though we don't have to control it much at all as to the direction it takes, it usually flows. We make sure everyone starts tunes in turn and no one feels left out. The one thing I hate is if there is a lag in the music or we start talking rather than playing we get the hairy eyeball from the owner. We just can't take a break, everyone else surely can play, then go hang at the bar, talk to friends etc. but we are not allowed! So it's a relief to be at someone else's session a lot of the time. Unfortunately we need the extra bit of cash these days so continue on with it and are grateful to have it....except for those times we're ready to walk out for being yelled at over not bringing out the drinkers!
# Posted on December 7th 2005 by irisnevins
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
I prefer the session we attend where everyone gets a share of the session leader's money at the end of the night. But that's only because the session leader is so generous and is also extremely talented enough to attract good musicians anyway. Still, gas money can add up these days, and we have some distance to travel to enjoy any session...
My next favorite session is the one which offers complimentary good pizza for all who attend, but the real reason also is because of the talent that shows up there anyway.
My least favorite session in our area, which I haven't attended for years, is the one which expects the musicians to contribute cash to a pot - supposedly for the establishment! Having to pay to play is not my idea of a win-win situation.
# Posted on December 9th 2005 by vonnieestes
Re: Payment for session hosts. What is its purpose?
Obviously, the size of the town/city, the culture, the makeup of the people/musicians in the area and the pubs are a factor in how well a situation works. We are very lucky in that the pub we play gives us free drinks (as many as we want the whole time) and their business at that time (4p-7p) is largely due to our presence. We then charge $1 at the door which goes to the "hosts" (I don't get paid so I'm not sure just who gets the money), but it's a pretty good lump sum divided among about 3 or so. We always have at least 2 fiddles, flute, whistle, banjo, guitar and bodhran and sometimes many more of these. The leaders call the sets, so we know which tunes we are playing and we are always invited to offer sets of our own, but the music is continual. We take a break in the middle. So we're kinda like a band and kinda like a session and it's open and we love it when out of town friends and strangers drop in. I've been to many sessions around the US and in the EU, but this ranks up there with the best of 'em.
# Posted on December 12th 2005 by banjobabe