There are a lot of musicians and bands who play for a very small wage, a beer, or nothing at all. Generally, this group — of which I am part —is made up of young people and those with relatively little performing experience. For us, access to an audience is invaluable; it’s a chance to hone our performing chops and get some exposure, plus it’s super fun. I’ve played at restaurants and bars for no more than that access, and I was happy to do it.
But this group of young and hopeful musicians doesn’t really reflect the performing community as a whole. Not all performers are weekend musicians, and not all performers have other sources of income, like parental or governmental support. There are those who survive entirely upon money earned playing music — and I’m not talking about the ones who make it.
I know a 57 year-old guy who performs nearly every night of the week. He’s in something like 4 bands and often sits in with others. His sole money-maker is his bass. Somehow, the gigs at bars, restaurants, wineries, county fairs, and charity events sustain a reasonably comfortable lifestyle; nothing extravagant, but he’s got a trailer to call his own and some pretty awesome guitars — which isn’t bad, considering.
Musicians’ wages, compared to others’, suck. Nearly every time I play music, I end up earning less than $8 per hour, tips included. I’ve never had to make a living playing music, and didn’t give my low wage much thought until I played a few gigs with that 57 year-old bassist.
For him, money earned playing music is dinner — a thing he needs. For me and others like me, money earned playing music is usually blown on something like a celebratory six-pack — it’s a bonus.
Young, aspiring musicians and bands find value in the opportunity to perform for an audience. Our attitude toward material payment is shaped by this perspective; we’ll play for cheap. But low-balling the value of our service carries repercussions.
The monetary value of musical performance, like any good or service, is determined by market competition. Typically, if one band is willing to play for free while another asks to be compensated, the former will get the gig. (Of course, this is assuming that the good or service is the same, which is a bit tricky in terms of musical performance.) I mean, this is the same principle that has made WalMart the largest corporation in the world: People want to pay less.
Without the means to draw a line, like a powerful union or laws, each performing musician plays a role in determining the wage of his peer. When one agrees to play a gig for a really small sum, this has bearing on the value of musical performance itself and the entire performing community, including those musicians who need gig-money to live.
Blame is hard to pin. I wouldn’t fault the aspiring musician or band, hoping to gain exposure — there really is a lot of value in gaining access to an audience. I wouldn’t fault the venues and bookers, either — they’re making totally natural business decisions. But it sucks that a single group within a community–-in this case, the young, aspiring performers — should make it harder for somebody like a 57 year-old veteran musician to earn a reasonable wage for his already undercompensated service.
I haven’t thought up a solution yet, but until I do, I’m demanding at least three tequila shots the next time I play.