Re: Looping venue help

["Krispen Hartung" <khartung@cableone.net>]

...on the topic of playing for free. I love these topics!  Too bad I can't 
take credit or instigating it. :)

Maybe we should set the context appropriately here and explain that this 
is 
not a black and white issue. Genre, context, venue, personal philosophy on 
economics and politics, among other things have a lot to do with it.  Two 
local examples come to mind:

1) A traditional jazz gig at a prominent restaurant, down town Boise (or 
any 
gig for a popular form of music)
2) The Boise Experimental Music Festival (or any festival for the creative 
or avant-garde arts)

For 1), I played at the venue for 1.5 years, every Monday night (which is 
a 
decent run time for this type of gig), and was paid $50 a night, plus free 
drinks and dinner (estimated value of $75 at this venue), total $125 a 
person for 3 45-min sets.  This is a very typical rate for this type of 
gig 
here, at restaurants. Private gigs will pay a lot more, between $100 and 
$500 a person. And of course, duos will get paid more per person and 
quartets just because of the math.   In this case, local musicians would 
get 
very irritated if someone like me (who doesn't even need to get paid to 
play 
music to make a living) came in and undercut a them for 40% of the pay. 
Not 
only would it irritate them, but it would be considered unethical by many. 
Many local musicians play for a living, and so maintaining competitive 
rates 
is vital to them putting food on the table and supporting their families. 
In 
fact, in this light, I don't even feel right taking these gigs from folks 
who play for a living.  I should have donated by fee to my bass player and 
percussionist, who did play for a living, rather than spending it on more 
looping toys. Wow, I guess I'm an egoist/hedonist afterall. :)  This is 
why 
I don't mind not playing these gigs anymore, and now when I get calls for 
private jazz gigs, I pass them on to guys who need them.

So, in a sense I sort of agree with whoever said that when you play for 
free, you are taking a gig away from someone who plays for a living. You 
could take it even further and say that when you play for fee, but don't 
really need the money, you are doing that same. It all depends on your 
political and socio-economic philosophy I suppose. One could also just as 
easily take a socio-economic Darwinist approach and say it's just survival 
of the fittest, in this case, who is shrewd, smart, or good enough to get 
the gigs, regardless of whether they play for fee or free, or whether they 
even need the money. Who he hell cares? It's dog eat dog...let the best 
band 
win, however you construe "best".  We have to be careful with the moral 
high 
road here, because all of us probably do something, in varying degrees, 
that 
results in getting compensation or a benefit that we really don't need in 
the extreme sense, which could benefit someone else more.  So, I don't 
really know. In the end, all I can stand by is my belief that this comes 
down to your own personal philosophy on the value of playing, economics, 
politics, etc.  I am in no position to say that any viewpoint is right or 
wrong here, only that I would not feel good playing for free or fee, when 
I 
don't need the money and I'm taking the opportunity away from someone who 
does it for living. That's just my personal feeling, not a dictate or 
principle.

For 2), the festival, I have 22 out of state performers and 8 local 
performers. The average cost per performer to attend this festival 
(excluding those who get their own financial support, grants, etc) is 
$650, 
times 22 is $14,300. If I am lucky, after festival expenses, I can give 
everyone $50, meaning that out of state performers are not just playing 
for 
free, but they are paying on average of $600 a person to play. And of 
course, I go in the hole personally anywhere between $1000 to $5000, 
depending on what I am buying for the festival.  In this case, paying for 
free/fee doesn't appear to be a problem, because this is not the type of 
event or music that is inherently designed to be profit generating, and so 
musicians are basically glad just to be able to play in such a nice venue 
amongst so many of their peers. The community benefits, socialization, 
cross-pollination, etc, seem to overshadow the financial negatives.  Do I 
feel bad about orchestrating a festival where people pay to play? No. They 
do it voluntarily and make the trade-offs themselves in terms of value, 
benefits, etc.

Kris