Discussion: Is being a musician a desirable pursuit today?

Venue owners who run the pay-to-play scam should all be taken out and shot.

 

I'm in deep agreement with this. But still it seems difficult to find musicians of a like mind - everyone wants to create some "sounds like..." songs and then start "touring" without any real purpose or even awareness of 'alternatives-to-touring' approaches like you suggest - many could go far without the expensive studio and given a basic setup much more attentiveness could be given to creation and tuning (at your leisure) vs. typical studio experiences. But I don't know whether the ability to invest (in an adequate home studio) or capability to utilize is missing for many musicians? Or whether the desire to get in front of people just trumps that.

 

I still love it, and I will until the day I die. I have never thought about it being 'more difficult' than it used to be, because it's always been difficult in one way or another. The biggest turn off to making new music is the lack of interest compared to the wondrous hits that have come before. Oh NOW! I've said too much!!!

 

My son is looking at colleges, music schools specifically, but he's not interested in being a performance major. He'll do either music education or some kind of recording technology with a music background. Some schools offer a BS in recording (with a heavy science load) others a BM (with more music based classes).

 

Is today's music desirable?

 

Certain truth in what you say, however if you're aiming to play your own music most small venues won't touch any band. The band I referred to supported a band who were on a UK tour but they came through the pay to play route.

The age range of these bands is usually 15-20 and I thought child labour was banned!

 

If creating and playing music is your overriding passion in life: Yes. Just realize that you will likely live a lower to middle-class existence your entire professional life. But, at least you have a job that you are passionate about, which is more than probably 95% of people can say.

If you want to be musician so that you can be a "rock star," i.e., live in a mansion, date models, and have a never-ending supply of drugs at your disposal, etc.: No. Those days are long gone, apart from 0.01% of musicians (i.e., the U2s, Coldplays, and Muses of the world).

 

I see plenty of examples and counter-examples in my own life. My niece's husband is a mediocre metal singer. Metal isn't my music, but I've shot more than enough Metal shows that I know the difference between good and bad, and only consideration for the feelings of my niece do I refrain from telling him outright "Dude - Give...It...Up. I am absolutely serious when I tell you I know ten year old kids who can blow you off the stage." He's got tons of persistence, but if the Opportunity Fairy were to appear and give him and his band an opening slot at a Metal festival, he'd still never be any better than mediocre.

My musician friends who are successful, on the other hand, have insane amounts of talent and equally huge amounts of persistence. They are touring the world - just south of the Arctic Circle right now. One of the things they decided early on is that they were never going to only see the insides of clubs, airports and motels - that if they were going to tour the world, they were going to see the world (and it's fish!)

 

Please, don't. The LAST thing this place needs is YET ANOTHER current music bashing thread.

 

I didn't say anything about persistence. I know plenty of people who are in the same boat as your nieces husband.

I said preparedness. That inherently means that you are good at what you do.

You can't make it if you suck. That much is obvious to even the most casual observer.

 

Or another Beatles fan thread...

 

Money for nothing.
Chicks for free.

What's not to like??????

 

I don't know if it's desirable but it sure is fun. I've made money playing music here and there, had the experience of people telling me they enjoyed my playing, etc. but if I was in it for money or gratification I would have quit 20 years ago.

 

One of my personal rules is "If I'm likely to resort to using the "ducking under the chair" emoji - it would probably be best for everyone if I didn't post it in the first place.

 

OK, make that the "second to last" thing.

 

Art is a compromise, I think of people like Gauguin who gave up his family for his art, I could not go there but the greats do.
I often wonder if I wasted what I had by becoming an illustrator to give my kids what I thought was a good life.
When they could have gone hungry, but thought my dad did some great stuff.

 

I did this once. At first I indignantly refused, then I got outvoted by the other 3 members. THEN I went on a musician's forum (early 00's) and complained about it. THEN the promoter saw my post and angrily emailed our bass player!



I learned multiple lessons from that episode, and had to do a lot of apologizing. For one, I learned that forums are public places! That revelation has served me well. I still think it's a dumb idea ... but honestly the audience at that show was awesome and I should have kept my mouth shut.

 

Basically, you got pimp-slapped.

 

Ha! Yep kinda

 

Nobody becomes a performing artist without deriving some important satisfaction from public love or response or applause, even just a dozen people clapping for them at a coffee house -- it's definitely part of the motivation to perform, but few if any performers will ever have anything like "adulation" or "stardom" -- let's face it, the number of people who become performing artists and then achieve 'stardom' at it is miniscule. Nobody become a musician without some kind of drive and motivation to make music itself -- whether its a love of music or joy of making music or something else (like being driven into it by parents or teachers or something). Nobody becomes a musician, or an performing artists, expecting that they're actually going to get rich, even if they dream of the ultimate in success and stardome. And most performing artists aren't.

My guess is that for every performing artist -- in music or in any of the performing arts -- the desires that drive them are a complex and dynamic mix of all of the above that you mention -- love of the craft; some kind of psychological need that's fulfilled by the act of performing and being watched and being applauded; a dream of success; having something they want to express, etc. But I'd say that since few musicians, actors, dancers, and other performing artists ever get rich from performing, and many, probably most, rarely even have stable incomes, stable benefits, etc., if one is going to pursue a performing arts career, both the art and the act of performing better be fulfilling in some way beyond the monetary.

 

As we're discussing the desirability of being a musician, I think it helps if we presume a degree of ability to make it a possible option.

 

What, did I not just say that? Or am I missing something?

 

Having spent more than 20 yrs around the music industry (journalistic capacity, covering a real range minor to major artists) and i'm pretty sure judging by their informal conversations that quite a bit of the time I was earning more for the night than they were. I was slightly embarrassed by the scenario occasionally but hey i want to earn a good living too...sometimes you're up sometimes you're down....

 

Making music is always a worthwhile endeavor. Making music as a vocation is getting extremely difficult...they are two different things. The industry's been pummeled. Parasitic tech giants building businesses off the backs of creators while robbing them blind and conditioning the public that music should be free has literally DESTROYED the end result, that being how you get paid.

It's also affected recording studios and engineering jobs. Lots of recording studios have closed up shop. If album sales aren't really there, then the recording budgets drop. Even recording engineers often struggle and have to get jobs selling music gear to make a living. I know guys who went to school and spent a lot of money on their education to be engineers only to find they have to become salesman to get by. This is not what they had in mind when they forked out tens of thousands of dollars for school.

You now have to explore alternative avenues of income if you want to get paid for your music. Maybe you can whore yourself out to Kit Kat like Chance the Rapper. But will you be able to look at yourself in the mirror? Only you can figure that out for yourself. David Byrne said he could've made a lot more money had he allowed his music to be in advertisements, but he refused out of principle. How strong is your own moral compass? Maybe you can sell t-shirts, but I wouldn't count on that paying your rent. Touring is hit or miss, many tours only barely break even. Licensing your music is still very profitable however.

From a business perspective, the problem in my eyes is very obvious. Namely, giving your music to the very companies that are devaluing your music. Giving your music to a company like Spotify is like any other business giving their product to a competitor to give away to people for free. Spotify is not a band's friend -- they are their competition. How people don't see this is beyond me....Oh, they say it gives them "exposure" they wouldn't have otherwise. Great. How's that working out for you?

Business 101 -- you retain control over your business assets. In this case, your product is your music. Keep that in mind as you pursue a career as a musician.