The Guardian: the shocking truth about the money bands make on tour.

[Geddyfleaharris]

^^Great post, and I would also say that you don't even have to only go local. I see plenty of incredible acts at smaller clubs that aren't from Toronto. A recent list would include Zombi (Pittsburgh), Musk Ox (Ottawa) and The Messthetics (Washington) and there are plenty more.

Despite all the issues, in many ways, music has never been in a better place...IMO.

I haven't read every post in the thread but it seems to be a range of the "evil music industry" to "lots of great new music" to "back when I started...."

But I agree that in some ways music has never been in a better place.

I started back in the early '80s where cover bands playing a few originals could play six nights a week. But, recording was extremely expensive and there was really no way to get your name out. We used a booking agent and had a bit of a manager. But they basically took their cut and that was that.

Today, the music industry is much more DIY, other than maybe the top 5% of acts. There are so many ways to get your music out there that we did not have access to 40 years ago. But you have to drive people to your sites/music. I think it is great that new bands don't necessarily have to be at the mercy of music execs. I keep reading of relatively unknown bands and artists who are making if not a decent living, at least a decent level of income from being DIY.

Obviously, at some point the DIY bands need some connections if they want to move to national tours.

IMO, the music industry is still just that , an industry but in some ways offers more opportunity now than when I started. The biggest problem with the DIY environment is that there are so many artists/bands doing the same thing you are. Harder to stand out now. But good music will usually eventually be discovered.

Oh touring..... ya, bloody expensive.

 

[jamro217]

there’s PLENTY of “truck drivers…& etc” that die young (& old) from the rock and roll lifestyle. They’re just not famous.

Yes, but not at the same rate.

 

[Marc A Valero]

Yes sir, agree 100%.

The group I'm with plays mostly in a 75 mile radius of our base city, a large town located in Central, Southern Illinois.

We often do jobs in Chicago, St. Louis, Indianapolis and other places that are well out of our 75 mile radius.

It certainly impresses some people when they see on our schedule listings that we're doing such long distance gigs.

Truth is, yes we make considerably more money for distance playing, but once the expenses of the long haul jobs are paid, we haven't made anymore money than if we'd just stayed in our 75 mile radius of our base town.

That was my situation on a smaller scale, play in our hometown area or drive 2 hours to Florida east coast or 2 hours to FL west coast. We also did a lot of gigs in a town an hour away. Now mostly in town. Tomorrow 1 block from my house. There are 5 venues I have played that are within a half a mile of my house. Just doing covers.

 

[KenSmithFan]

I long-ago resigned myself to the fact it's a hobby that almost pays for itself. Same holds true for my wife's art studio.

Riis

Most hobbies don’t give ANY return.

I don’t understand why so many people (not referring to you) seem to think that a music hobby should somehow pay for itself. People spend thousands on golfing, fishing, cycling, camping and a thousand other hobbies without a single thought of making any money, but somehow think you’re being foolish with your money if you spend it on music gear. I know people who spend $50,000 or more on a car who are shocked I would spend a couple of grand on an instrument.

 

[Tom Bomb]

We are at a crossroads.​

​

 

[andare]

Most hobbies don’t give ANY return.

I don’t understand why so many people (not referring to you) seem to think that a music hobby should somehow pay for itself. People spend thousands on golfing, fishing, cycling, camping and a thousand other hobbies without a single thought of making any money, but somehow think you’re being foolish with your money if you spend it on music gear. I know people who spend $50,000 or more on a car who are shocked I would spend a couple of grand on an instrument.

They probably think cars and clothes are necessities whereas musical instruments aren't. Imagine living without playing music. They can't understand that it is a necessity for some of us.

 

[Beamrider]

Slightly off topic, but in topic as well:

The Problem with Music | Steve Albini

RIP, Steve.

 

[Geddyfleaharris]

Most hobbies don’t give ANY return.

I don’t understand why so many people (not referring to you) seem to think that a music hobby should somehow pay for itself. People spend thousands on golfing, fishing, cycling, camping and a thousand other hobbies without a single thought of making any money, but somehow think you’re being foolish with your money if you spend it on music gear. I know people who spend $50,000 or more on a car who are shocked I would spend a couple of grand on an instrument.

I agree with the sentiment of your post. The difference between music and the hobbies you mention is generally music, if you are in a band, is a service being provided to entertain other people. While the hobbies you mention are for your own pleasure. No one is cheering you on at the 4th hole. Or at least not me! But like I said, overall I agree with your sentiment. If I tried to balance off all the money I spend on gear compared to what I earn in a year, then I wouldn't do it. It is my hobby. And there are worse things to spend your money on then music gear.

 

[friskinator]

Slightly off topic, but in topic as well:

The Problem with Music | Steve Albini

RIP, Steve.

It's too bad he didn't get to write a revised version of this for modern purposes.

 

[MNAirHead]

I have toured --- I netted about $20k a year (playing 350 days per year)

recently opened for some prominent touring acts -- my cut was about $225 (had to stand there for about 7 hours between sound check and gig)

-----

I recorded with a known regional act -- dedicated a week to the project.... then paid them $500 for the naming rights.

 

[pepj]

Travel time is max 1hr one way... you can get 'better' gigs going further, but what is better. ?
If I double my travel time, do I double my pay...

After a while..nearer is better. Assuming you don't rely on the money..its just nice.

Consider Nashville is paying $150 for 4 hrs...plus tips.
Could you or would you put up with that?
Day in, day out?
Easier to get a YT channel..?

 

[pepj]

My dad was able to make money playing music in our local area and to buy a house 45 years ago. I don’t see that happening that much anymore here. If it does it’s usually the wife or girlfriend with a straight job doing it.

I think this is true...the scene is not the same although more people are full time in it.
They don't admit to the other half being the main earner though.

 

[Not Insane]

‘The working class can’t afford it’: the shocking truth about the money bands make on tour

I remember an article about 15 years ago about a Seattle band (that I had seen play in clubs) called The Beatniks, and their tour and profit. The bottom line is that for the year, a four piece band grossed about $650k. And when you take away the cost of the road crew, touring, and all the other peripherals, well, they ain't in it for the money. And I've been around the block enough to know that touring is fun for the first few months at the most. Then it becomes a shi**y way to live.

 

[pepj]

No one is paying to see you play golf or fish. If they did, you'd be in a position to charge a fee.

If your band is half reasonable you'll invoice for an hourly rate.
Thats why we get paid...and although its never enough, some venues recognise they will need to pay.
So, despite it being someones hobby, no one is working for free. It just cheapens the whole deal.

 

[Not Insane]

Breaking news: “Musicians still starving to death”

That's why a common refrain when musicians are getting to know each other is, "What's your day job."

I thank God I didn't pick up the bass until I was 44. By then I had a solid career in IT. And now that I'm retired (I'm 70), it's my main hobby. But if I'd gotten into it in my teens, (think 1969), I probably would still be working - probably as a fork lift driver in a warehouse, or something like that. I say that because of my personality type. My guitar player is a respected doctor who started in his teens, but he was able to control it...

 

[Not Insane]

No one is paying to see you play golf or fish. If they did, you'd be in a position to charge a fee.

If your band is half reasonable you'll invoice for an hourly rate.
Thats why we get paid...and although its never enough, some venues recognise they will need to pay.
So, despite it being someones hobby, no one is working for free. It just cheapens the whole deal.

Yep. The bad bands kinda ruin it for the better players. I think I heard it on this site some time ago: Back in the day all you had to do was hang a "live music" sign and people flooded the place. Now, it can actually be a turn off. People have just heard too many really bad cover bands. Frankly, it's a challenge as a musician trying to get into a decent band. There just are not that many people dedicated enough to do the song well. On more than one occasion I've felt like the protagonist in the movie "Rock star" trying to get my band to play better. So many people think that rehearsal is also their personal practice time.

I don't do that any more. It doesn't have to be a "tribute" band. But for crying out loud, when a song as some "signature" licks that makes it famous, you should at least get those parts down solid.

And speaking of practice, as my original bass instructor told me, "Amateurs practice until they get it right. Pros practice until they can't get it wrong."

 

[Neil Folkard]

Let's be honest, the landscape has changed. Most people don't expect to be full time musicians. Many more can't miss what they never had. When I started playing, it was at things like Indie Nights and I never got paid a cent. Now, still playing in all-original bands mind you, I'm thrilled to get $40-$80 a gig and at least covering gas money and a music theory lesson, or two.

 

[Not Insane]

Let's be honest, the landscape has changed. Most people don't expect to be full time musicians. Many more can't miss what they never had. When I started playing, it was at things like Indie Nights and I never got paid a cent. Now, still playing in all-original bands mind you, I'm thrilled to get $40-$80 a gig and at least covering gas money and a music theory lesson, or two.

I was even in a "pay to play" band for a short time when I was in Seattle. Heavy Metal and all originals. I was actually just helping a young guy out. He did get signed, too. He was an exceptional guitar player and his originals were also pretty good, for metal anyway. This was about 20 years ago.

Now he's still doing music, but unless he's teaching guitar or something, there is no way his band is paying him much.

FWIW, my little three piece (we're all over 70) has become the staple of a local place. And even though we're in the middle of rural Kentucky, we're getting $450 a gig. But that's only every six weeks. i.e. we're not in it for the money. As you mention, the money pays the cost to a degree. Also, if they are willing to pay you it shows you are bringing value to people. I believe all human beings want to believe they are of use to others. It's part of our design software. Food, water, sex, and feeling valuable.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

The music business is what I think of as a 90-5-5 industry, similar to other art & performance industries like photography, dance, fashion, book-publishing, etc.

• 90% of the artists lose money
• 5% break even
• 5% make so much money that they pay for the whole industry

If you can support yourself as a gigging musician, you ought to be grateful because you’re in the minority. Oh, and there is only a loose connection at best between talent and income.

For me personally, when I was playing as a full-time professional, whenever I started focusing on the money-making component, the fun would vanish, which would make the music less enjoyable to the listeners, which would create a downward spiral. I realized the way to be content would be to play music for fun and do other things for money.

The good news is, if you’re not depending on the gigs to pay the bills, you can just cut loose and have fun, which creates more fun for everyone! YMMV.

Frankly, there only two viable options for a career in music today that doesn’t rely on incredible serendipity, or incredible talent. One is the symphonic route. The other is the Military music programs (it’s not all about performing Sousa marches). The main difference is in the service your are an employee, and that comes with health care, housing allowance, health care, a pension, and if you stay in long enough to retire, heath care for life. The symphonic route I would assume you are an independent contractor and likely attached to a union local which does provide some limited benefits in some cases.

My son retired out of the Marines (MOS Electric Bass) after 21 years of enlistments. Never missed a paycheck, never had a shortage of gigs, studied and earned his BA in performing arts for $0, and now working on two MBA while on the GI BILL with the monthly stipend in addition to his pension. He’s 39, living out side of Tokyo with his family (wife works for the dept of defense) and does seminars for Vets explaining their benefits.

IMO, in my mind, if you want a career in music performance, or even if you want to go the symphonic route after your initial enlistment, I would highly recommend talking to a recruiter. Keep in mind, there are also reserve units that have band programs on a partime basis too that pay well, but less commitment.

 

[Hurricane Jimmie]

Frankly, there only two viable options for a career in music today that doesn’t rely on incredible serendipity, or incredible talent. One is the symphonic route. The other is the Military music programs (it’s not all about performing Sousa marches). The main difference is in the service your are an employee, and that comes with health care, housing allowance, health care, a pension, and if you stay in long enough to retire, heath care for life. The symphonic route I would assume you are an independent contractor and likely attached to a union local which does provide some limited benefits in some cases.

My son retired out of the Marines (MOS Electric Bass) after 21 years of enlistments. Never missed a paycheck, never had a shortage of gigs, studied and earned his BA in performing arts for $0, and now working on two MBA while on the GI BILL with the monthly stipend in addition to his pension. He’s 39, living out side of Tokyo with his family (wife works for the dept of defense) and does seminars for Vets explaining their benefits.

IMO, in my mind, if you want a career in music performance, or even if you want to go the symphonic route after your initial enlistment, I would highly recommend talking to a recruiter. Keep in mind, there are also reserve units that have band programs on a partime basis too that pay well, but less commitment.

I had a bandmate whose son was a drummer. He was also considering a college Air Force ROTC program. When he found out I was a veteran, he asked me if 1) the Air Force would give him time off to play band gigs or 2) if he'd be allowed to occasionally play in the AF band.
I told him as gently as I could that 1) the military has a mission and accommodating your hobbies isn't part of that agenda and 2) the musicians in every military band are highly trained and skilled musicians.