Find Emilie on Facebook

Scrounge on the Farm: The Follow Up

Lounge on the Farm claim I am single-handedly campaigning to slur their good name. They, and some of the young musicians who play at the festival, have exhibited abusive and threatening behaviour towards me both online and in emails.

On a more positive note, musicians and non-musicians alike have been debating online about the issues raised in my blog, some in agreement, and some not, and I will write a follow-up about these debates in the near future. For now, I would like to let you know what has been happening since my original Scrounge on the Farm blog, any progress that has been made and also to reinstate my views as I feel they were not fully represented in the recent Canterbury Times article (purely due to column inch limits!).

Over the years, multiple complaints against this festival have not been properly dealt with. As a local musician I chose to speak out about this on my blog. The original blog was based on genuine conversations and interviews with local musicians and not on here-say. And I hope that Lounge on the Farm accept that these complaints come from multiple sources, are genuine and are not just mine.

I am not a Musician’s Union representative and I am not being paid to represent musicians in this case. I am not ‘bitter’ and I have nothing to gain other than to try and improve working conditions for musicians, something I feel passionately about. I hoped that by highlighting these issues LOTF might put adequate measures into place to improve their local-musician relationships. But at present, they adamantly deny these claims, preferring to label this a ‘single-handed campaign’ against the festival. What is apparent is that it is easier for them to undermine a person than to acknowledge these complaints and move forward and I feel that this has been handled very badly. 

In 2008, I contacted the festival myself and asked to play in what I thought was a great local venture. But this debate is not about bands approaching festivals, young musicians getting a leg-up in the industry, or competitions that offer opportunities to them. Every musician exercises the right to accept or decline whatever deals they want to, be it playing for tickets or playing for exposure, but they should also have an informed idea of whether or not a deal is exploitative as in most cases, performing for free is just that. 

What this debate is about is Lounge on the Farm’s conduct towards local musicians, whether professional or otherwise. And of major concern are multiple reports that in addition to their you say they play competition, the festival are also contacting local bands and asking them to play for free. LOCOG were named and shamed for doing this just last month and in my opinion this is ethically and morally wrong. 

Lounge on the Farm are small but a business all the same. They charge ticket money, sell merchandise and serve alcohol on site. Burger vendors are not giving away free hot dogs and musicians should not have to justify their right to earn a living. ‘We’re doing them a favour’ is a common viewpoint for many, but this is real life, not the X factor, and in this case, Lounge on the Farm have been accused, by many, of the following: 

• Not looking after local bands: inadequate access to the site, difficulty when loading instruments from long-distances due to a lack of parking arrangements for musicians (Health and Safety), lack of refreshments, disorganisation with booking details and festival passes, evasive and rude treatment by organisers and staff. 

• Dishonouring agreed payments: owing monies to bands for agreed fees or expenses and musicians having to chase very hard for monies owed. 

• Lack of transparency in the selection process for ‘you say they play’: musicians have accused the festival of not honouring the prize of a festival performance  when they qualifying for one, and of being evasive and rude towards them.

• Contacting local musicians and asking them to play for free.

It is these accusations, and not my blog, have resulted in the decline of Lounge on the Farms reputation. 

During my communications with Lounge on the Farm, I have offered to post any response they wish to make, verbatim, online. I have also suggested a meeting with three other musicians present to discuss these complaints and come to a resolution for all involved, but they are insistent on meeting me alone which is something I will not do. I have now asked Jack Walsh of Lounge on the Farm if he will accept emailed statements from musicians and participants of the festival in order to convince him that these claims are genuine, and he has agreed to receive your emails. Please share your experiences by emailing jack.walsh@outgoing.co.uk. Alternatively, if you would prefer to remain anonymous, you may email me at em@empeasgood.com, and I will forward your message on your behalf, whilst protecting your identity.

Why are musicians often the expendable party when it comes to being paid fairly for their efforts and time? I doubt Lounge on the Farm’s headline acts would be comfortable if they were aware that local bands were unpaid. And why do so many think music is not a genuine profession where those involved have bills to pay like everyone else? There are only so many opportunities a musician can take. On this issue, Carl Hudson (keyboard player for Professor Green) summarises my thoughts perfectly: ”musicians are not volunteers, the term ‘doing it for experience’ is a half-baked excuse for ripping off people. We are not jesters, expected to play for people for free because ‘we love it’.. We still have bills to pay the same as everybody else.” 

If one musicians is being paid, all should be. And if security, stage crew, sound crew, organisers and famous musicians are being paid, so should the local musicians. But this kind of exploitation is so common, it is seen as normal. 

 *****

“If you don’t have this freedom of the press, then all these little fellows are weaseling around and doing their monkey business and they never get caught”.  ~Harold R. Medina

 

Scrounge on the Farm

As festival season approaches, competitions offering local musicians the chance to perform are on the increase. It might seem harmless enough; a great way to gain exposure and all in all a whole lot of fun, right? But what we need to ask is: why?

Why are prominent festivals who charge big money for big acts eager to recruit little-known bands who can often be seen at the local pub? And do they genuinely want to provide a platform to promote local musicians?

Kent based festival Lounge on the Farm are well known endorsers of the competition method; where most festivals offer one or two performance opportunities to up-and-coming acts, Lounge on the Farm offer six and have even set up glitsy website You Say They Play. Willing participants can register for a band-profile page and are encouraged to ask friends and family to vote for them to play at the festival. But what many don’t realise is that this is less about supporting local talent and more about making money. Why else would they plough money into advertising their competition and designing their glitzy website? Every time a musician asks friends and family to vote for them, they in turn advertise for Lounge on the Farm. Each time they post a band-profile link to their social media sites they do the job of the PR man, for free. And it doesn’t end there. Current Top Rated bands on the site average four members each, totaling 24 possible winners. Should each of those 24 bring one full-paying friend along, at £115 a ticket, the festival make a £2,760 profit. Local bands bring local punters and that’s what I call a highly effective marketing campaign. 

As I said before there is a little more to this than meets the eye; several winning bands from 2010s and 2011s You Say We Play competition were not given their performance opportunity as promised. “It was pre determined”, says one musician. “We were third out of six winning bands and they didn’t let us play. We felt bad explaining this to the people who had taken their time to vote for us and when we questioned LOTF about it they were rude and evasive”. 

But still this isn’t all: over the past six years Lounge on the Farm has become well known for asking local bands to play at their festival, for free. It’s bit of a bad joke amongst the local music community as most of us have experienced rudeness, disorganisation and exploitation at the hands of their team. 

A few days ago, I posted the follow question on facebook: 

I received ten emails from bands and solo musicians. All confirmed that they had been approached by representatives of the festival and asked to perform. But there was a snag. The festival claimed to not have any funds to pay them with. They did however emphasise that taking part would provide them with great exposure and that they would receive free tickets in payment. How very clever: selling the notion that this is a great deal when really they’re taking advantage of you, gaining free advertising from you, saving and therefore making money off of you and basically pimping you for something you should receive anyway. And at £115 a ticket, I’d rather have the cash thank you. Oh, and by the way, are organisers working for free, to showcase their great organisational skills? What about security staff? Cleaning staff? Bar staff? No? Didn’t think so.

Back in 2006 when I was involved with them, it was common knowledge that local musicians were unpaid, myself included. But we were keen to be involved because we were excited at the prospect of a good local music festival, believed in what they were creating and wanted to be a part of it. Sadly, our enthusiasm was short lived. We were not at all well looked after during our involvement and were not thanked for our participation in the festival. I left with a sour taste in my mouth and the feeling that they felt they had done ME a favour, rather than the other way around. 

Over the last six years Lounge on the Farm has grown at a rapid pace. And with their growth one would naturally assume that each and every musician who performed there would be paid. But it seems I am wrong. Of the ten emails I received, two were from musicians who are still owed money from last years festival.

I tried to contact Lounge on the Farm to ask them why they continued their practice of non-payment but they deleted my post from their facebook page. 

However, later in the day I did manage to enter into conversation with co-organiser Jack Walsh. He declined to comment on why local musicians were still owed money from 2011 but did clarify that they could not pay all of the local musicians.

I do get the impression that in the eyes of Lounge on the Farm, the term local musician holds a cheaper currency. Every musician is local to somewhere and locality plays no part in a musicians worth. 

Sometimes musicians chase organisers for gigs, even offering to play for free. And in my opinion, by doing so, musicians devalue themselves and their future earning potential. But this is irrelevant as in this case, it seems Lounge on the Farm are chasing and asking popular local bands to play for free. These bands draw in great audiences and are mostly full time music professionals; how does payment with a free ticket work for those who perform most gig-nights including the Friday, Saturday and Sunday night of the festival? And how is exposure a relevant payment method for those who are already well known? Just how many musicians have benefitted as a direct result of performing at Lounge on the Farm? We all know that real exposure only exists on prime time television but exposure is a word readily bandied around the music industry, designed to tempt any foolhardy young musician. 

Lounge on the Farm have always filled a large percentage of their performance rosta with local bands, mostly unpaid, and enough is enough. The locals are getting vocal and many of Kent’s best won’t touch this one with a barge-pole. It’s a shame really; Lounge on the Farm should make it a priority to build relationships with Kent’s many gifted and diverse musicians and not to alienate them. 

As my friend Paul says, I put it to you Lounge on the Farm that you use and abuse local talent to fill up your performance rosta at no cost so that you can pay more to the well known bands who won’t step out of their front door for less. And at an estimated £1,000,000 turnover on ticket sales alone, how dare you. 

****

Comments will be sent to a moderator before appearing below. Abusive comments will be deleted. 

Mediocre Musician Magazine: Singers Edition

Great Singer? Don’t Audition for a TV Talent Show

Punters often approach me at gigs to lovingly suggest that I should audition for the X Factor. And although I understand that this is their way of saying you’re really good, I laugh it off to cover my disdain at their suggestion. After all, what self-respecting musician would put themselves through a process where they’re pitted against fame-seekers and the downright awful? Not to mention the fact that for many successful applicants, within a year or two they’re doing exactly what they did before. Fickle is fame.

When I heard about The Voice; “a singing competition unlike any other because because it puts vocal ability first”, with judge/coaches Jessie J, Tom Jones, Will.i.am and Danny O’Donoghue, I thought “finally!” But after tonight’s episode, where the strongest singer of the whole show, J Marie Cooper, aged 27, lost out to an inexperienced 17 year old, I’m bitterly disappointed.  The 17 year-old in question, Sophie Griffin, is sweet enough but she was not the stronger vocalist. “So why did she win?” you ask. One guess: she’s 17. “I wouldn’t be where I am without the 17 year old me”, said Will.i.am. as he chose her over J Marie. 

When it comes to TV talent shows like the X Factor, they usually comprise of one Rebecca after another wailing her little heart out in a tuneless manner until a Gemma walks through the door. Gemma sings her heartfelt rendition of Make You Feel My Love and sobs: “I’m doing it for my nan, she died last year”. And as a tear wells up in Cheryl’s eye I should inform you that Granny died of natural causes at the ripe old age of 96 and had a good life. “I’m so glad you came”, says Tulisa. “You know, you really remind me of myself”. Simon is impressed by Gemma’s long tanned legs. “I like you”, he says and winks as he tries to conceal his hard on. “You know, you’re going to be a big star”. When Gemma exits the audition room, her entire family embrace and scream with wild abandon as Don’t Stop Believing kicks in on auto cue. 

The reality is that Gemma is naff. But in a string of crap-ness, she’s the best thing yet. Good musicians wouldn’t be seen dead on these shows which is why the average level of talent is lukewarm at best. Even past winners are, in my opinion, only good wedding singers. It’s not that genuine talent doesn’t walk through the door; it does. But it is often scrapped in favour of a sob story and big tits. Oh, and if you’re a bit weird and are publicly humiliated by judges who assume you’re bad but then discover you have an okay voice, you become a superstar.  

I’m going to say something that will probably upset you all: SUSAN BOYLE IS SHIT. There, I’ve said it. 

So, the latest in TV talent shows; The Voice, had something to prove for me and as I tuned into Stage 1 of the audition process, I was impressed. Aside from a couple of odd choices, the coaches were making sound choices in those they took on and the overall level of ability from contestants was high. But it soon became clear that the televised auditions featured the cream of the crop; brilliant singers, often professional, who had already been pre-auditioned. Were the thousands of other singers who applied for The Voice auditioned blind too? I hoped so. 

This weekend, Stage 2 of the audition process took place with the coaches grouping singers into pairs who then ‘battled’ for a place in the final. As I watched each pair battle-it-out like performing monkeys to songs ill-chosen by the coaches, I felt sad.It was musical-masturbation at best with each singer desperate to win through and singing over the other in the process. It questioned The Voice’s mission statement of putting vocal ability first, but it’s good TV. Right?

Aside from sob-stories, big tits and now youth, another problem with TV Talent Shows is that you can’t be too good. Twice tonight I witnessed great singers (Emmy J and J Marie) thrown by the wayside in favour of the young and out-of-tune. It seems talent judges and coaches are more impressed when you don’t nail it; they certainly get a kick out of the pained facial expressions singers exude when they can’t quite reach those high notes. I can see how The Voice coaches would want to nurture and help the less experienced singers but I do wonder; by ditching the really great ones, are they saving themselves the embarrassment of admitting on television that they don’t know how to help them improve further? 

Every singers talent show needs a proper vocal coach on the judging panel, and correct me if I’m wrong but like The X Factor, Pop Idol and Britain’s Got Talent, The Voice is ill-equipped in this regard. Judge and coach Danny O’Donoghue is a lovely chap and a very experienced songwriter, performer and producer but vocal coach? I don’t think so. The legendary Tom Jones doesn’t know the difference between a third and an octave and Will.i.am? No comment. As for Jessie J, there’s a conundrum; she clearly knows how her voice works but at the age of 24 and with a busy performance schedule singing leaving the BRIT School, has she any experience coaching other singers?

An experienced vocal coach can properly judge a voice’s potential and offer expert advice where non-coaches will listen to a voice as is. Often, excellent singers don’t know how they do it. For me, J Marie’s technique, style, tone and performance tonight was flawless but that’s irrelevant when the judges or so-called coaches aren’t qualified to know a good thing when it slaps them in the face. Want to watch singer who has that extra special something and sings with ease? It’s just not good TV.

***

Em Peasgood is a freelance musician, musical director and writer. She blogs about lifestyle and working as a freelance musician on www.publicemilie.com. 

The Olympics - Musicians Need To Be Paid Too

But musicians are always asked to play for free, aren’t they?

Two weeks after I published the article Why Musicians Shouldn’t Work For Peanuts  it came to light that organisers of the London Olympics and Queen’s Jubilee celebrations had been contacting musicians and asking them to perform unpaid. How ironic when you consider that musicians were initially wetting their lips in anticipation of a summer packed with decently paid celebration gigs. But the general consensus from non-musicians is that we should be delighted for the opportunity and exposure these performances may provide. 

To date an estimated £11billion has been spent on the Olympics including this £19million atrocity, set to ‘greet Olympic visitors’. Despite this, of the 7000 musicians engaged for the opening ceremonies, only 500 are to be paid. 

For the Queen’s Jubilee, 30 horse shit picker-uppers have been gainfully employed whilst organisers are still asking musicians to accept ‘exposure’ in lieu of payment.  Jubilee? Jubifree.

 After reading Andrea Vicari’s response to the Evenings Standard’s  most recent article on the matter, I thought “woe betide the  organiser who phones me with such an offer”.

 But can you believe it? It happened. This morning I received the  call.

 “We have two slots to fill for bands during torch relay  celebrations.  We’re looking for volunteers as we’re only in the position to pay  expenses. Are you interested?” 

 “Well, I am free on those dates but I can’t provide my services free of  charge”.

 “I am aware that this is a tricky situation but it will be a great  opportunity to showcase  your music”. 

 “Will it?” I replied.

 “Excuse me?”

 “Will it be a great opportunity to showcase my music?”

 “Of course. It’s great publicity as well.”

“But I’m a professional musician and I have been earning my living as one for years. And I don’t need exposure because my goal isn’t fame. I’m sorry. No. I’m not sorry… Just out of interest, are you working for free you know… to showcase your organisational skills?”

No comment. 

“And are the technical staff working for free?”  I asked.

“Technical staff will be paid”. 

“Then why aren’t the musicians? You know, the only reason this situation is tricky is because of people like you!” 

“I don’t understand why you’re being so antagonistic. There are other bands that have accepted our offer”. 

“Well, you get what you pay for” I replied and hung up.

Musicians were asked to work for free way before the Olympics bought attention to the matter. Whether it’s a music festival organiser offering valuable exposure, a club owner who wants a free gig in audition for ‘more’ or the charity fundraiser who tugs at your heartstrings (whilst paying all other involved staff), most musicians agonise over whether to say yes, or no. 

What is it about the musician that screams you can have me for free? 

Perhaps people see the musician as a desperate dole-dosser who can’t earn enough to survive. Hazy images of my post-student days where the average day involved 6 hours of shredding, 20 cups of tea, a cheese and pickle sandwich and Neighbours at lunchtime springs to mind. 

Some see musicians as living an enlightened life of priviledge. So enlightened is that life that it doesn’t involve paying bills. Or maybe we’re fame seekers who’ll do anything to perform anywhere. We don’t need paying. We just need exposure so we can get a major record deal and get famous! 

For me, music is my job and I  exist on a fine balance of performing, teaching and leading choirs. I value myself as a musician and do not accept badly paid gigs. But it is difficult and as my friend Brendan says:

“There are no amateur lawyers, or amateur surgeons, but plenty of amateur musicians who’ll do your gig”. 

Amateurs charge less than me and a whole host of music students will perform at clubs for free. But they shoot themselves in the foot as one day, they will need to pay their mortgage. When the club owner moves on to the latest freebie, they realise it’s hard to go from FREE TO FEE. 

As for exposure? That’s a commercial enterprise embodied by Simon Cowell, The X Factor and a steady stream of one-shit-wonders - a soulless enterprise that moves further away from musical reality with each year that passes. 

The recently deceased Levon Helm reportedly said: “just because you play music, it ain’t supposed to make you rich or famous….if you get a shot, if you get on national television, or if you get a record out that somebody can remember, great. That ought to encourage you not to quit, but it don’t mean a whole lot.”

After publishing The 24 Hour Musician and Playing For Peanuts, the biggest response I received was from non-musicians was: “it’s a simple case of supply and demand. You should take what you can get”.  

I strongly believe that it is not vendors that set the value of musicians but musicians themselves. If musicians - be it amateur, part time or student - are flaunting their wares for a nominal fee, vendors will expect them for the same. And if musicians accept badly paid or unpaid bookings, they perpetuate the notion that music comes cheap. As musicians, it is our responsibility to charge a fair fee. If we don’t value ourselves, who will?

“But what is the fair fee?” 

This is the question many musicians who read my blogs have asked and it is a question I don’t know the answer to.  The Musicians Union have a casual rates guide for musicians working the pubs and clubs of London but aside from this the general consensus is one of confusion. Unless you work for one the organisations the MU provides contracts and pay scales for,  you’re out in the cold. 

I feel the only way any musician can stay true to their value is to decide a minimum fee they won’t work for less than and to stick to it. And as for those free gigs? I have a simple mantra I’m not afraid to share with any vendor who asks: if the organisers, security, technical, catering and hospitality staff are going to be paid then so am I.

*****

Em Peasgood is a freelance musician, musical director and writer. She blogs about lifestyle and working as a freelance musician on www.publicemilie.com. 

If you are a musician or hirer and wish to share your thoughts, please comment below. You can use a fake name and email address if you wish to protect your identity. 

For more information about Musicians Rights, please contact (and join) the Musicians Union. 

Freelance Gig Rates - London

Current London Gig Rates guide for freelance / casual gigs from the Musicians Union.

Why Musicians Shouldn’t Work For Peanuts

Music venues are paying less and expecting more from the ever-struggling musician. They want it all; brilliance, pa and lighting, posters, publicity, a ready crowd of family and friends to pack out their venue and what do they want it for? Peanuts. But can you blame them? After all, they’re only trying to get as much as they can for as little as possible and that sounds like standard business practice to me. And some musicians are only too willing to accept a poorly paid gig, or undercut the going rate; in a desperate climate, a £30 gig is better than no gig, right? Wrong. 

I think it’s time to stop blaming music venues and look a little closer to home. 

Musicians who accept poorly paid gigs often begrudge that fact that they’re working for peanuts. Don’t they realise that by doing the gig they’re allowing this to happen and to continue happening? It perpetuates the notion that musicians come cheap. And not only do musicians come cheap, they come fast. The professional musician relies on his music-making income, but there’s a never-ending supply of students, part-timers and hobbyists who’ll do your gig for half the price. As these pocket-money-players colonise UK music venues, the value of the full-time professional decreases; pocket-money-players are usually willing to perform for less be it £20 a head, free beer, experience or for love and by doing so, they are inadvertently making life very difficult for professionals. 

“Please can we play at your venue?”

Student bands often ask venues if they can perform in return for experience but by doing so, they teach venues that music can be sourced for free. I recently witnessed the following conversation between two venue owners: 

Charlie: “I need a band but don’t wanna pay much in case they’re shit”. 

Linus: “I can find you one for free”. 

Charlie: “Really?”

Linus: “Well I can’t guarantee they’ll be any good but there’s this rock band from Kent College who have been asking for a gig. They don’t want paying because they need experience and they’ll bring a crowd”.

If a venue can’t afford a band, it shouldn’t expect one, but this doesn’t matter when there are plenty of student bands willing to fill a venues pocket. Some may even pay a venue to play or agree to sell a fixed number of tickets in advance. Is the music market about supply and demand or closer to demand and supply?  

The student musicians’ short term experience-gaining solution eventually becomes a long term problem as one day, they will want to be paid. But now, venues know there’s a steady stream of student bands who will play for peanuts, and there you have it; you have shot yourself in the foot…. What are you going to do now? Tell other students to charge for debut performances? Tell them they are making it difficult for themselves when they want to become a professional later on? For there will always be a newer and younger bands who need experience too. 

“But I don’t want to be a professional. I just do it for fun and maybe a bit of pocket money”. 

If this is the case, why don’t you go to an open mic night or a jam session? They are designed for musicians from all levels of the profession and are crying out for people to become involved. You usually sign up for a few songs and there’s none of the pressure of a live gig either because you don’t have to take your own gear and you can perform what the hell you like without worrying about pleasing the audience. It’s also a great way to meet new musicians you might otherwise not have met and all in all have a great night out.

Whether you’re a beginner or part timer, by performing for peanuts you’re putting professional musicians out of work. It’s not good for the music industry and it is essentially putting to sleep a long standing and deserved line of work. 

As swathes of musicians inundate music venues - twice as many as available gigs - it is important to realise that sometimes they’re good and sometimes they aren’t. Unfortunately Joe public can’t differentiate between the two; it’s all the same to him. But I hear many professionals complaining about bad bands who are gigging and earning more money than them. Usually, I agree; it’s disappointing that charlatans exist who can put little work in and earn more than the ‘proper’ musician but this is life. And what is ‘proper’ anyway?

Anyone has the right to play music to earn cash, regardless of ability and experience as we are in a free market and music is subjective. But there is a responsibility that comes with charging a fee and all musicians should be aware that by undercutting the going-rate, or working for free, they are affecting the profession of music.

Unfortunately, many music venues don’t understand the hours of practise time involved or the expense of being a musician. All they do know is what they learn. If you ask a venue for opportunities to play, a venue learns that they are doing you a favour when they offer a gig. If you work for greatly reduced rates of say £30 per musician, a venue learns that £120 for a four-piece band is fair. It’s not uncommon for venues to offer bands unpaid gigs in return for exposure. But when did a venue get the idea that a gig provides great exposure? When desperate musicians started begging them for opportunities.

That’s when. If over the last 12 years I had worked in return for exposure at each of my 3 - 5 weekly gigs I’d be more famous than the Queen of England, and homeless. 

“But I love the music so much, I just want to play”. 

Then play. But try where possible to not charge so little you devalue other musicians. The free and competitive market place is polluted by musicians who do this.

I once received a business card through my letterbox advertising 40-minute piano lessons for £5. I was so surprised I phoned the number on the card. 

Me: “Hi there. I’m enquiring about your lessons. Can I ask, what kind of experience do you have?”

Him: “Well, my Dad is xxx xxxx”.

Me: “But what experience do YOU have?”

Him: “Well my Dad toured a lot and is quite famous and he taught me everything I know.”

Me: “No offense, but you aren’t you Dad. What experience do you have?”

Him: “….”

Me: “The reason I ask is because I’m really surprised by the price you’re charging. I’m a professional musician and I teach piano. I’m very experienced and I charge £26 per hour because this is the going rate in Whitstable. You’re really undercutting me. People will think I’m overcharging when I’m not. You’re devaluing what I do. Why?”

Him: “I want to be competitive”. 

Many musicians and non-musicians alike say the market decides your worth, it’s swings and roundabouts, supply and demand. Yes, there is a recession but if you ask any seasoned pro it has never been any different. Back in the 70’s things were the same only then - according to my sources - a good musician was valued more highly, paid better and working regularly. But music will always be seen as a luxury and as I said before, there is always someone willing to do your gig for less.  

As a musician, have you ever stopped and asked: “who decides what musicians are worth?” If you did, you might be surprised to find that the answer is “musicians do”. But I don’t think musicians are really aware of this. If they were, they would perhaps think twice about charging too little or working in return for a beer.

If you have ever been to Denmark Street in London you will know that it is lined with music shop after music shop. You can go into the first and ask what they are charging for a guitar case. “It’s £200”, they answer. You decide to leave and enter the shop next door: “this case is £200 next door, can you do any better?” “How about £190?” they offer. You leave and enter the shop next door. “This case is £190 next door, can you do any better?” And the cycle continues with each shop offering less and less until once again, you enter the first. “I can’t offer less than £100”, they say, “but I’ll throw in a free set of strings”. 

Musicians undercut and undercut because they are desperate for a gig, desperate to play and passionate about their music be it original or functional. But if we continue in this manner, there will come a time where £10 a gig is average.

There is currently no fair-wage regulator for small-medium music venues to sign up to. The Musicians Union have made some attempts but they can only be enforced if you are a member and are mostly ignored by the musicians themselves. 

Perhaps music students need a termly lesson in self worth to nip this in the bud? But how to we educate part-time musicians? This is a complex and difficult issue, but one thing I can be certain of is this: it is up to the musician to stop playing for peanuts. Whether you are a student, a part timer, a full timer or an amateur, do you really want to drive 60 miles to play Mustang Sally to an audience that doesn’t know the difference between good and bad at a pub that pays £30 each? Of course not. If a venue pays poorly, don’t play there. It’s time to get some pride and self respect and you can start by setting a minimum fee that you won’t work for less than and sticking to it. Musicians need to set the precedent for fair gig rates and they need do it now. Let’s hope that by doing so others will follow suit. 

If you are a musician or hirer and wish to share your thoughts, please comment below. It will accept a fake name and email address if you wish to conserve your identity.

Em Peasgood is a freelance musician, musical director and writer. She blogs about lifestyle, relationships and working as a freelancer on www.publicemilie.com. 

For more information about Musicians Rights visit http://www.musiciansunion.org.uk/

What Not To Put On Your Album Cover

So, you’ve recorded an album of your own material. You’ve done the studio time, struggled over which takes to keep, edited it all together and sent it off to John Smith in The Isle Of Wight for digital mastering. All that’s left is the fun part: the album art and as a freelance musician it is now time to design your own. 

You are no doubt familiar with spending months at a time learning whole new skill-sets for a variety of non-musical tasks. This is something every freelance musician must do in order to conserve our limited funds and stay in the game. In the process of designing my own album cover, I have so far spent two days researching other musicians choices online. Most were designed by professional designers for big record labels and I am loathe to comment on those that were designed by musicians themselves; we have it hard enough. But I am sure that some mega famous ego-laden musicians go against the advice of their album artist: “why don’t you incorporate a photograph me standing behind a palm tree naked so my manhood is covered; it’s sexy AND funny right?” 

So what can you put on your album cover that truly reflects you are as an artiste? That shows your you-ness, essence and soul? For they all need to come through whilst remaining informative, cool and a bit sexy. 

To be honest, I still don’t have a clue what mine will look like but I do know what it won’t:

NUDITY (partial or full)

You want to be taken seriously as a musician but one photo shows you looking like Frank Zappa on a gormless day and in the other there is mushroomy flower that looks suspiciously like the head of a penis. 

You are beautiful, no matter what they say but this is too much, even for mature minded adults.

Flowers 

Flowers are harmless enough when used in the right context. Here, they look like a crazed offering.

Heino and Joyce: androgynous way before America’s Next Top Model taught us what the hell that meant.

Animals

Animals have no place in album art and Heino is a serial offender.

Shit

Nothing says I’m The Shit more than positioning your head there. Or actually having one.

Children

Want to tell the world you are kindhearted and child-friendly? Don’t give her a freaky balloon. 

…or suggest that teenage girls give great head.

Ugly Children

If you have to use them, at least pick the cute ones.

Creepy Photos

Axe murderer? Death row inmate? Licker?

Crazy Preachy Religious Shite

www.publicemilie.com

The 24 Hour Musician: Rights, Respect and Exploitation

For fun, this afternoon I googled Why are musicians so expensive? And as expected, there were no relevant results. I retyped Why are plumbers so expensive? and clicked search. A barrage of related sites appeared with suggestions ranging from high overheads and high demand to it’s a highly-skilled job. High, high and more high.

The reason I embarked on my little google-a-thon was because I wanted to highlight the training and earning disparity between plumbers and musicians. One would sensibly assume vocations that require a lengthy and high standard of training inevitably pay more in the long run. But no vocation disproves this more than that of the humble musician. And no vocation highlights the disparity more than that of the plumber. 

Did you know that you can train to become a plumber in as little as two years? One website even quotes: “you can practice as a plumber with minimal qualifications”, yet plumbers charge on average £50 - £100 for the first hour and £50 for each subsequent hour. Training to be a musician, however, is a whole different playing field, taking on average, 10 - 15 years of private study and often longer if you factor in music college and / or performing experience. It is one of the longest apprenticeships known for any vocation; longer than that of a teacher, dentist, vet, pilot and even, doctor. Musicians train in a subject whose basic foundation isn’t taught well, if at all, on the national curriculum; encouraging a class of 14 year-olds to play Frère Jacques with one finger and teaching us that o = 4 beats, does not count.

            Professional musicians surpass the barriers most reach when learning a musical instrument. They persevere and study to a high level; often taking examinations, diplomas and music degrees, practising their instrument for eight hours or more each day and gigging 5 nights a week to learn on-the-job. Musicians pay their dues, attending numerous jam sessions to network and meet other players, setting up projects, taking risks. And studying music is expensive too; on average, musical training costs £20K, plus any college and university fees, not to mention maintaining your instrument. The professional musician exists on a fine balance of projects, gigs, tours, party bands and teaching, often working upwards of 70 hours a week. But despite their rigorous effort, discipline and long hours, musicians are lucky to receive £50 a gig, or £25 per hour for offering private music tuition.

When you compare the musicians apprenticeship to that of the plumber, why are musicians paid so little? And sometimes, not at all? 

The sad reality is this: musicians are exploited very openly and in many ways. As a musician myself, it is wearing thin. I had hoped that I could present this information for you in organised sections titled ‘pay’ and ‘venues’ but, each aspect of the working musicians life is intertwined, so I present to you a semi-organised bursting forth of facts, experiences and possible causes for musical exploitation. 

Payments and Venues and Everything Else 

Musicians are often nervous about asking for payment, especially for smaller gigs in pubs and bars. For these gigs, it is impossible to ask the landlord or promoter to sign a contract specifying your fee; they just won’t. A pub landlord once refused to pay my band more than £20 per head. “It wasn’t busy enough”, he said, “where were all your fans?” He did eventually pay our agreed fee of £50 each, but only when I threatened to contact the Musician’s Union. 

            It is not uncommon for bands to go home with empty pockets. In the States, many venues operate a PAY TO PLAY system; a practice that either involves a band paying the venue money to host their gig, or the band bringing in a minimum amount of punters in return for a fee. PAY TO PLAY is sadly, starting to creep into the British music scene. And British venues are expecting more and more from musicians; not only do they expect us to be a brilliant, they also expect us to be promoter, marketer and ticket seller. This attitude largely comes from the idea that they are doing us a favour by giving us a gig.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, function bands are often booked for lucrative award ceremonies, weddings and parties at a reasonable rate of pay and with a signed contact. But they are often told: ‘we’ll pay you cash, after the gig”. Why are musicians expected to work in good faith? My mobile phone provider won’t give me the new iphone 4 without first performing a credit check. Function bands, however, are expected to work for a full day with no guarantee of pay at the end of it. And on the subject of wedding bookings, why do the bride and groom expect to hire a band of six musicians for less than they are willing to pay one photographer? Since when are six worth less than one?

Musicians constantly justify their rate of pay. And they shouldn’t.

Many musicians make ends meet by taking on private music students. But when students cancel lessons at short notice, or forget to show up, they do not expect to pay for the musicians time. They will gladly pay their dentist or driving school for a missed appointment whereas with an individual musician, there is always the hustle. Because music is their hobby, I fear they assume it is mine.

I think one of the reasons musicians are afforded so little respect comes from the way people view music; music is a beautiful thing, an art form, an amazing rite of self expression. And because of this, many think of a musicians life as one of privilege. 

             “You’re doing what you love”, they say.And yes, they are right. I love being a musician. But it is not easy and the journey here was not easy either. In many ways, being a musician is a sacrifice, with most musicians struggling to make ends meet. 

A huge part of the musicians struggle is caused by the attitude of others. 

Music is one of the worlds biggest hobbies: there aren’t many households that don’t have a guitar in the corner. And that is great. It really is. But with the dawn of instant fame, every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks they can do it and earn a living from it. For the professional, it is hard to explain that although music is a passion which started as a hobby, it is also a job. 

             Whenever X Factor season comes around, I am inundated with fresh singing students who want one pre-audition lesson. “I don’t need more than one lesson”, they say. “I can already sing”. I shrug, take their money and offer as much advice as they will take. And I am yet to discover a genuinely talented singer. I have taught many students who think that learning to sing or to play an instrument is easy, but are not willing to put any work in. They want a quick fix and I call it EGO. 

I don’t think I can be a doctor. I am not anywhere near arrogant enough. But with music, arrogance is rife. 

A culture of ‘instant-fame’ (insta-fame) is ruining the music industry. It has taken the art form of music, stripped it of any musical depth and spun a quick buck. “Think of yourself as a brand”, young musicians are advised. And this brand is seen as more important than the music. Think Simon Cowell, Pop Idol, X Factor; all churning out one ‘shit’ wonders. 

             It is no wonder that people expect musicians to play for free. “They are lucky to be doing what they love”, promoters think as they persuade us to perform at their venue, in return for‘exposure’. 

Most of the musicians I know couldn’t care less about fame; they want to bring their music to others and they want to work. After all, they have paid their dues and put the time in; they have every right to work. But one thing that is increasingly harder to come by are legitimate jobs. There are only a few music job websites out there and the two biggest are Star Now and UK Music Jobs. Amazingly, both charge a fee. Not only do venues operate PAY-TO-PLAY, job sites expect musicians to PAY TO WORK. These websites know that in the dawn of insta-fame, there are a lot of desperate people who want an ‘IN’ to the music industry but don’t have the networking connections professional musicians have. These people are willing to pay for this information and genuine musicians suffer at the hands of this kind of exploitation. A few years ago, I joined Star Now and found it to be full of so-called industry types, scouting for insta-fame girl-bands. UK Music Jobs was no better. I never received a call back from any of the jobs I applied for and I wouldn’t advise any musician to join these sites. 

             If you are a female musician, it is even harder. I have first hand experience of being turned down for vocal work because I am over the age of 25. A good friend of mine who plays in the pit orchestra for west end shows was recently fired and told:  

“You’re too old now. We need fresh totty”. 

Did it matter than she attended music college on a full scholarship and has worked solidly ever since? No. 

I used to know a young woman who was a dental nurse. When we first met she asked: “so, what do you do?” “I’m a musician”, I replied. “Is that all?”She asked, incredulous to the possibility that anyone could earn a living from music. 

It wasn’t her fault she felt this way; the only musicians she knew had taken a music course at the local college and promptly signed on the dole. They didn’t want to learn to read music or try performing new genres so that they might earn a living as a session player and they couldn’t see the point in developing their aural skills so they might compose or teach. They were too cool for that. “Who needs notation when you’re in a metal band?” They wanted ego and fame but still couldn’t play 12 bar in B. A plague of these muso-types inhabit local pubs and bars, charging only £20 plus a beer per head and living with mummy and daddy. 

It is becoming increasingly difficult for musicians to earn a living from music. Every year a few more of my musician friends get a 9-5 job to subsidise living. My own partner, an extremely talented jazz pianist, is now working for a software development company. But I refuse to follow his stead and instead lead 3 choirs, teach 20 private students, host jam sessions and write articles. I rarely gig anymore because I refuse to accept bookings that involve a fee of less than £100 per head and I won’t accept pressure from venues to bring my fans along. As Dave Goldberg said in his Open Letter To LA Club Owners: “the goal is to build a fan base of the venue” and not a quick fix solution like the bands family and friends. Despite my 70-hour working week, I am grateful to continue working within the realm of music and I am sad for my musician friends who continue to work so hard for so little.

When people want to book me and my band for less than our worth I say this: “why don’t you find out what it would cost to hire six plumbers on a Friday night? We’ll do it for half. Do make sure you tell them that they have to drive for 80 miles, set up four hours before they are required, perform songs for two hours in front of people who might puke in their toolbox or try to steal their spanner and then drive home again without overnight accommodation, and usually, without a good meal”. They usually hang up the phone but it is my little revolution and it will hopefully stop clients from making unrealistic requests of other bands.

            Ironically, I know two musicians who recently re-trained as plumbers. It didn’t take too long. 

The composer John Adams has an interesting theory on why musicians in American are afforded such distrust and lack of respect. His theory could easily be true of the United Kingdom,  whereas in other cultures, musicians are often revered.

            “There’s a fundamental distrust of artists in this country and it goes back to our puritan background and the fact that this country was settled by two types of people; they were either religious zealots - who believed any form of entertainment suggested involvement with witchcraft - or they were mercantile explorers; people that were coming here to make a quick buck. And that has carried on for centuries. And today if you tell someone that you’re a poet or you write music they often will smile and say: “that’s wonderful. And what do you do for a living?””

I do think that a part of the problem is the musician. In the sea of musical exploitation and negativity, the musician has been brainwashed into believing they deserve to be treated poorly in exchange for the perceived cool and privileged lifestyle they lead. Musicians often accept poor pay and conditions as ‘the norm’ but I can’t think of any non-art based vocation where it is acceptable to be underpaid, or work for free. Musicians deserve to be paid for any musical service they provide at a rate that reflects their level of training and skill. 

So, what are you, the musician going to do about this? Are you going to demand fair pay and reasonable working conditions or are you going to play it cool?

* Names and information about peoples mentioned have been changed to protect their identity. 

** If you are a musician or hirer and wish to share your thoughts, please comment below. It will accept a fake name and email address if you wish to conserve your identity.

Em Peasgood is a freelance musician, musical director and writer. She blogs about lifestyle, relationships and working as a freelancer on www.publicemilie.com. 

For more information about Musicians Rights visit http://www.musiciansunion.org.uk/