Economics of Jazz Performance [Archive]

John Doheny

Sep 18, 2002, 06:28 AM

Now that I've gotten over my little fit(resubmitted the check, it cleared) I'd like to seriously address the question of why jazz is so under-regarded in this culture.Certainly it comes as no surprise that mainstream North American culture ignores our music, but even the avante garde,all those black clothed hipsters at the Atom Egoyan film openings for instance, have no use for jazz. They're all listening to the Hives or "Afro-Celtic" elevator music or something.
I have a theory that this is related to the continuing infantilization of western culture.Live art in all it's forms is suffering because of it's unpredictability.Children like predictability and consistancy, it makes them feel secure. Adults, on the other hand, SHOULD be comfortable with the ever-changing nature of the world, but we increasingly demand that the same musical fairy tales be told to us in exactly the same way, over and over again.It's like the culture is stuck in a kind of arrested adolescence, concerned exclusively with image(what's "cool") rather than substance, and spectacle(the BIG rock show,or "riverdance" and such)rather than the communality of event that live art and music provide.I published an article in the West Ender last June(it's posted on my web site<www.Johndoheny.com> click on where it says"West Ender" under "Journalism" on the menu bar)in which I suggested that jazz had a marketing and image problem, and if we all acted more like punk rockers and trashed a hotel room or two we might attract larger audiences.I thought I was being pretty clever, but I've decided the problem is much more serious than that. What's happening to jazz, and live music in general, is part of a larger trend of alienation in the culture, one in which we spend more and more time communing with television and computer screens than with our fellow human beings.Is it just me, or does anyone else feel slightly diminished as a person everytime they deal with a bank machine instead of a bank teller?

Morgan Childs

Sep 20, 2002, 07:16 AM

Yes yes.... All true and good points. However, it's a question of relevance. Nobody deserves recognition for being a painter, poet, musician... what have you. Jazz musicians get pianos up our asses when people don't "appreciate what we can do." Recognition is earned by being a relevant artist-- finding a way to speak to EVERY person listening, not just the people that know something about jazz, or play it. That's just boring. Personally, I think there IS a lot of relevance out there (especially in Vancouver). So my beef is with the politics of the thing where the government is saying "people can't dance in here" or "you have to order food" and stupid shit like that so that IF people go out, they don't have fun because of all these rules, and they sure as hell aren't going to hear a band (let alone a JAZZ BAND) because the club can't afford to hire one.

My beef is also with the union around here. I can't see one single reason for joining the union, because frankly, I don't think they do anything for musicians my age around here. This may be an unpopular opinion: let me explain. I'm not anti-union. I'm actually very PRO-union. It's just that I don't see the Vancouver Musicians Union protecting the interests of many people around here. I'm having to take more and more gigs for less and less money, because if I don't take them, then somebody else will undercut me, because THEY CAN. There is nobody out there enforcing a scale for musicians in this town. Not even for BIG SHOWS! I played a huge show at the PNE that didn't even pay CLOSE to scale. I HAD to take the gig, because I couldn't afford NOT to, because if I turned it down, then somebody else would have taken it, and I'd have lost money on the deal.

Any thoughts? All my friends my age (20) in Toronto have their cards. They've had them for years, because they CAN'T PLAY without them. That's my understanding of it. We all should be getting paid three times what most of us are getting on club dates.

John Doheny

Sep 20, 2002, 06:07 PM

Sounds like we're making the same point from different ends of the problem. My argument is that if people spent, on live music, even half of what they spend on videos and cable tv and and video games( which are for the most part just aids to further alienation anyway)that the money would BE there to pay musicians a decent wage.If people were clambouring to spend bucks to hear good live jazz, club owners would be fools not to hire us.If there were bucks to be made presenting Morgan Childs,you'd have no trouble getting your price, believe me. But the union isn't in a position to create demand.There has to be some major changes in the culture at large to do that, and frankly I don't see any evidence that's going to be happening anytime soon.For the most part folks seem happy to stay home in front of the idiot box.
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say the union isn't doing anything for musicians"your age". I suspect that you think that there's some clique of us old dudes out here who are getting all the union bennies.It's really much simpler than that. When I approach someone, or they approach me, about a gig, I quote 'em my price. With some few exceptions(i.e. the Cellar, the Slipper before it burnt down,etc.) it's always union scale or better, depending on what I think the market will bear. If it's too much for the client , then I politely tell them that they can't afford me. If they want to go with somebody cheaper, I tell them, that's their right, but the guy probably won't play that good, and he probably won't conduct himself like a professional in other ways as well. Hey! you get what you pay for.The union doesn't have the power to go around enforcing its rules on people who aren't members.They've got us to beat on. That's one of MY complaints about the AFofM, that they sometimes place themselves in adversarial positions with their own members.But you know that old cliche is true, an organization is only as strong as it's members. If you want to humiliate yourself by working for chump change, there's nothing they can do to YOU either.Me, I don't need the bread THAT bad, I've got a couple teaching gigs(see my first post in this string)
p.s. I was a member of local 149 for a for a few years in the late 80s. It's better, but not by much.

John Doheny

Sep 20, 2002, 06:42 PM

p.p.s.Yes I heartily agree that the liquor laws in this town suck. But we live in a democracy(sort of) and if there was broad popular support for change there, change would happen.But the fact is that the jazz scene in towns with looser liquor laws , like Seattle(my home town) isn't that much better.I spend time in New Orleans every year, and the atmosphere there IS much, much, much better. There's a lot more work for musicians of all kinds, and people are really into going out. But they still balk at cover charges over about 5 bucks,and the money, on a gig per gig basis, is no better than here, and often worse. The up side is more work and a lower cost of living.So most players get by by keeping what they call a high "GPD"(gigs per day) ratio.A room like the Funky Butt on North Rampart, for instance, is a door gig, just like the Cellar.But they turn the house over or collect another cover with each set, and the town is full of tourists who want to hear music( unlike here, where they come to shop and ski)so on a good night you can walk out of there with 200 bucks.A union room like Snug Harbor pays about $80 a night, but that's a tough gig to score if your last name isn't Marsalis.And then there's tons of ratty neighborhood bars, street parades, gambling ships(former Vancouverite Brian Ogilvie used to work one of those with the Dukes of Dixieland)straight ahead jazz at Snug Harbor, Sweet Lorraine's,Vaughn's Lounge,Storyville(sometimes) low dollar gigs.But I gotta admit, it's a great town for music, and people really appreciate musicians there.i'm going to be doing a masters in jazz history at Tulane in '03 down there and I might not come back.

Morgan Childs

Sep 22, 2002, 12:15 PM

John, the thing I don't understand is that, culturally, the situation is not that much different here than in Toronto. Tonnes of great musicians, some places to play, a lot of people spending a lot of money on entertainment that makes them dumber. The only difference is, is that if a musician takes a gig at a coffehouse, there's a scale for that. The point about having a less-pro guy undercut you is well taken, but if we lived in a place where the less-pro guy was NOT allowed to undercut, and would not even be considered for the job, then we'd all make more money, no?

And I don't think there's a bunch of old guys taking all the union deals.... oh wait, actually, I do! I bet Dal's gig at the PNE was scale... the musicians in his band wouldn't work for less. I had to settle, because there's no system set up to protect my interests. I hope this doesn't sound like I'm whining needlessly, but numerous older musicians told me of the days when the PNE was a CASH COW-- every show was scale and there was tonnes of work, so I spent a lot of time thinking about that as I slogged away 4 shows a day for less money then it should have been. The lighting guys, the sound guys--- all union contracts!!! Where was mine? The point is-- there's tonnes of great young musicians in this town too, and we're out there busting our asses trying to get a 50 dollar gig at Nevermind or the Jupiter (when those rooms could afford to pay twice what they do).... and the same cats are getting the few gigs in town that ARE union (Like CBC or whatever...) Why is it like this? When did the union get so weak? My understanding of it is that it's NOT LIKE THIS IN OTHER PLACES!!! There is a scale for clubs-- the money is there, but we're not getting a piece. I'm still trying to figure out how this works, because I'm going to make my living doing this, and if Vancouver won't pay, I'll move elsewhere. Any thoughts?

John Doheny

Sep 22, 2002, 10:19 PM

Re:"my understanding of it is it's NOT LIKE THIS IN OTHER PLACES". If there are places like that , I've never been there. If there was a "coffee house scale " at local 149 in Toronto I was unaware of it. Maybe things are different now, I was there from about 1987-90.The only places I remember that paid scale or better were George's Spaghetti House and some of the lounges in the big hotels.The "legendary" Grossman's Tavern was paying the same 50 bucks a night that it was when I first went to Toronto in 1972.I had a house gig for about 6 months at the Yorkville Bar and Grill that paid $100 a night, and that seemed to be about standard in those days, but that wasn't a union room.I played tons of non union gigs (I'm not proud of this, but like you I "had" to. I needed the money)and I don't remember a single instance of a 149 official coming around trying to "enforce" a scale rate.I think part of the reason we seem to be posting at cross purposes is we both keep using the term "union". The AFofM is not a union, it's an association, it does not have the powers a union has. And even a "real" union , like the construction union, finds it very difficult to keep from getting undercut by people who'll work cheaper.
I think what we're talking about here is the concept of what a professional musician is , and the notion that he or she should be paid a wage commmensurate with other professionals.Of course I agree with this notion, but it brings us back to my original point, which is that the culture simply does not value what we do. There's not enough people out there who give a damn about jazz, or live music in general. They don't need us , buddy. Even if there was some union thug who'd go down to Jupiter and strong-arm the owners, their reaction would be "screw you, pal. We'll play tapes."I played in the band in the"At the Hop" show at Playland in 1986.We took the gig,which paid about $360 a week for six 45 minute shows a day, because it was steady, we needed the money and we could sub it out anytime anything better came along. One day we looked out in the audience and there was the business agent from local 145 staring back at us.We were given the choice of either quitting the gig or being expelled from the union, forfeiting all accumulated pension benefits( remember what I said about the adversarial position the union sometimes adopts with it's members?). Playland threatened to sue us for breach of contract if we quit. After several weeks of tense negotiations,with us caught in the middle, local 145 and Playland management worked out an "Amusement Park Scale".It's still on the books, but it means dick-all. We were the last band to work the Crystal Palace Theater. They use tapes now.
I'm sorry if I sound cynical about this. The fact is, I love being a musician. I've never seriously considered anything else. But trying to make a life in music doing nothing but performing...when I got to be about 35,it just started making me crazy.I got tired of putting up with all the bullshit we're talking about.When I talk to guys a generation or so older than me, like George Ursan and the late Fraser Macpherson( I was one of his students 1976-78)they made a nice living, and considered themselves middle-class professionals.But those days are gone, I think. If you're very, very, very good and ridiculously lucky...good luck to you. I just find that I'm a much happier guy if I'm not depending on the vagueries of live entertainment to pay my rent,and there are many aspects of teaching that I enjoy.
You said something in your post(I just scrolled down and reviewed it ) about guys not being "allowed" to undercut in Toronto. If there has been some sort of new development in this area I'd like to know about it. If local 149 has figured out some kind of legal mechanism to make that possible perhaps it can be applied here as well. I think a lot of folks in local 145 ( like maybe the WHOLE MEMBERSHIP) would be interestd in seriously pressuring the local to adopt something like that.
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)

Morgan Childs

Sep 23, 2002, 07:10 AM

Damn.... you got me. I have no idea. I've never been to Toronto, and the knowledge I have on this is anecdotal, from friends who are my age, and who have their union cards out there. Maybe there's just more oppourtunity for young musicians out there. The buisness about "Coffee House Scale" comes from Ihor Kukurudza, in a conversation we had one time about this sort of thing. Maybe he was talking about somewhere else, and since he's from TO, I put that together in my own mind.

I guess I was going a little utopian there, thinking about the way it should ideally be. I do believe that most places in town (dumb liqour laws and all) COULD pay more, but don't because they can get away with hiring (lesser) other musicians. I think people would give us more of their time and money if they had more oppourtunities to see us play. This would, in turn, foster a scene that would challenge musicians to keep coming up with new shit to keep people interested (this still happens, don't get me wrong-- but think of the level if it happened EVERYWHERE, all the time, not just at the Cellar).

John Doheny

Sep 24, 2002, 09:17 AM

sounds like Kansas City in 1935. Sounds like paradise. Yeah , right on , the best jazz has always come out of scenes like that.Nobody would be happier than me to see it happen here. But folks have been talking about this sort of thing since I was YOUR age , and probably long before that, about the great potential for a jazz renaissance in Vancouver. This town's been pregnant a long time bro.Folks are always talking about the "world class players" and " enthusiastic audiences" in Vancouver, usually around jazz festival time, then they all go back to sleep for another year.
Take a drive by Sonar, or any of those other disco joints to see where the prime demographic is spending their disposable income.Imagine how much money THOSE joints would have to spend on a live band, say a burning 10 piece salsa outfit (maybe Grupo Jazz Tumbao?).But it wouldn't fly. Those people like the canned stuff better.Live bands take the focus away from THEM.We live in a culture of narcissism.At the risk of sounding like an old fud(what the hell. I AM an old fud)a HUGE change has taken place in MY lifetime. Up until about 1976 (the start of what the union referred to at the time as the "disco crisis")if you'd tried to convince people it was hip to go hear some twerp play records, they would have LAUGHED IN YOUR FACE!You mean the club's too cheap to hire a BAND! Screw THAT!In 1988 I played with an R&B band Monday and Tuesday nights in a club in Oakville Ontario( the OPP used to pull us over every night on the way home and frisk us 'cause all the guys in the band but me were black, but that's another story). The dance floor would be packed until we started to play, then they'd look around, confused( what's that little teeny sound? And who are those guys over there in the corner and what are those funny things they're holding?)and then go sit down and drink until we finished and the club cranked up the tunes again.We had a pretty decent PA set-up , but it couldn't compete with the 5 billion watt job the club was running.I think I knew right then the end was near.
So here we are in the 21st century, and this is the way things are, and what are we to do?Keep on keepin on ,I guess.I think, to paraphrase Art Farmer, these circumstances show you how much you REALLY wanna play.If you love to play, and you're having fun doing it, then it's just a matter of logistics. Phil Belanger and I were talking about this on a(union) gig recently, and he said," when it comes to money, you draw a line in the sand. And as you get older it gets to be very few exceptions that will make you cross that line".Of course Dal Richards guys won't work for less than scale.He quotes the PNE a price, and that's his price, take it or leave it. But the thing is, YOU GOTTA BE WILLING TO LOSE THE GIG! If they sense they can get you for less , you've had it. If you're so desperate that you'll take 50 bucks, THEY"LL PAY YOU FIFTY BUCKS!And the union, well I've got my share of complaints about them,but when you're dealing with a big corporation like the PNE or a hotel chain or something, if you're on your own with no organization to back you up , you're screwed.I almost got hooped on a wedding gig about 10 years ago(the bride changed her mind about having a band) and man, I haven't done a SINGLE ONE of those without a union contract since. 'Cause you know what? You're right, the caterers , the sound guy, they've all got contracts too. And the only reason the client could have for not signing that paper is he wants to keep the door open in case he wants to screw you later on.
But it still seems to me the issue here is so much bigger than all this minutae. I think it's about live stuff versus canned stuff, really, has been for a long time.Those guys who're telling you about the PNE being a cash cow, they're talking about a time when audiences wouldn't accept anything less than a live band.That's it . Times change , and not always for the better(unless you're a DJ)
You know one of the things I love about New Orleans? Every once in a while, somebody will try to open a "Dance Club" with DJ's and shit, and they always go bankrupt.Culture in New Orleans still includes live music.
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)

Morgan Childs

Sep 24, 2002, 09:51 AM

It's true that the mindnumbinly dull music played in these joints is here to stay. There's too many people listening to it, too many people buying, too many companies selling it. I've BEEN to Sonor. It's boring as hell, and I'll take issue with anyone that says that that lifestyle or culture is exciting or interesting or innovative. That shit is as old and dull as it gets. Dancing the night away, stoned out of your mind on E or whatever the designer drug of the moment is. Work at Starbucks or Earls to make enough money to buy the right clothes to go to these places--- it's fucking sad. That's my generation, and I feel apologetic about it, because people believe that living that way is a culture in itself, and it's just not.
DJ culture changed everything. Not only that the DJ has supplanted musicians in 99 perecent of places that people go, but everything. Musically, they've actually added some very, very valid and valuable asthetitics to music. Hip hop and Drum And Bass are two types of electronic music that I can name that have had a MAJOR impact on not only popular music, but improv/jazz scene as well. It's just that there's so many BORING DJ's out there. The whole scene is just stagnant, and for some reason, DJ's are STILL like gods in some of these clubs. Soon the job of a DJ will be done by a laptop, and then we'll be worshipping a COMPUTER instead of a HUMAN even!!! Is this de-evolution or what?
That being said, I think musicians are starting to do insane things with computers. Incredibly interesting things that I wish I could do, actually. Did you catch Bugge Wesseltoft's set at the VIJF "meet and greet" at the Commodore? It was SICK! The musicians were insanely good, and Bugge would lay down crazy loops from his G4, then they'd play beats or free overtop of it.... very cool stuff.

I guess I'm lucky in the sense that I can take advantage of some of this technology, and I'm happy to play in a number of styles and instrumentations. I think there has to be a balance out there-- right now, too many DJ's lacking an artistic purpose, not enough truly interesting electronic music getting played in these clubs. Certainly not very much electro/acoustic cross genrefying. Chris Gestrin comes to mind as somebody who is combining some of the lessons learned from Electronic music/DJs with the athsetics of acoustic jazz.... have you heard his latest, "Stillpoint?" That's the future... Brad Meldhau's latest (now out in canada! YAY!) "Largo" has that feeling too. The second track "You're Vibing Me" is a masterpiece in mimicing electric textures with acoustic instruments/mixing techniques. Very very very cool stuff.

John Doheny

Sep 25, 2002, 11:21 AM

Yeah I did catch Bugge Wesseltoft, the players were hellacious. I did find the actual sound of the music somewhat contrived, but that's just me. Maybe I'm still uncomfortable with the esthetic and need some time to really hear it.But it kinda reminded me of seeing Michael Brecker play the EWI about 1987,it was some weird sounds, but when you have musicians of that calibre you know there's gonna be some MUSIC happening, regardless of the instrumentation.
I try not to be too concerned about issues of where the "future of jazz" is and all that, at least regarding my own playing.I'm pretty sure Chris Gestrin and Brad Meldhau aren't thinking that way either, they're just playing what they hear, and what feels good to them.One aspect of the times we're living in that I initially thought offered a ray of hope was the way young people now can instantly access ALL of the world of recorded music via the computer. I mean I met some guys when I was subbing as band director at Kits Secondary a couple years ago who were into like the Meters and Tower of Power.They knew all those tunes like "Cissy Strut" and "What Is Hip".They got them all on Napster.But that ecclecticism doesn't seem to translate into people going OUT OF THE HOUSE to hear all sorts of live music. It's like the very availability of it makes it meaningless; when you can have it all, all the time, it ceases to have value. Music used to be a sweet treat. Now it's like turning on a tap( I'm talking about the canned stuff here).
Anyway, these days I'm just trying to play things I like and feel some affinity with.That's bound to be different than the things Chris plays, because we're 20 something years apart and he grew up in a much different world than I did,with different kinds of experiences forming his musical personality.
I'm gonna have to cut this post short(by my standards anyway) I've got a gig at the Cellar tomorrow night and I've written some extremely difficult music for it.Might be a good idea for me to actually learn how to play it before the performance. I look forward to Chris Gestrin's first appearance at Sonar http://vancouverjazz.com/ubb//smile.gif
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)

saxman

Nov 2, 2002, 07:42 PM

Enjoyed reading your posts, It has been a while since I've been to this forum, returned recently to post a thing about the Mainstream Carbaret. You guys said so much it is hard to pick out one thing, or to find a common thread to comment on. I will say that I am a hack and I love jazz. My username belies the fact that I am probably a poser, though I was around Toronto the same time as John (Windsor mostly) and experienced some great jazz. I do computer stuff, though recently laid off, to pay the rent.

My 2 cents: I've often wondered what the form, or what the evolution that music would take with the advent of worldwide connectedness. People can download albums for free. I do it regularly, and I admit it, though it is my dirty non-secret. We could get into the arguments for or against (that would be another post, one that probably has been done to death here and everywhere), but my theory is this - that once people can get music for free, they will look for live musical entertainment more than before. Or, it will find them.

For example, my SO and I were on 4th today, not a regular hangout I might add. Went into Hell's Kitchen because it was the only place that didn't have a huge lineup of people trying to get in (subject of yet another post about trendy food locations in Vancouver - mentioned only because I experienced the same thing last night on a restaurant on Broadway). Well, we sat down and were served up an excellent breakfast, seated in front of a nifty stage, where some young musicians were setting up. By the time we were fed, these guys were laying down a cool groove and improvising with some effects like echo/delay (trumpet and guitar) that would probably make a jazz purist puke. But me, and hopefully other open minded people who beleive in the true spirit of jazz, I thought it was great. That relates to the comment about DJ's using laptops - they already are doing it - I was at a M-Audio seminar a few weeks ago and they bill it as the evolution of the studio - supposedly Tom Scott records this way - with a laptop. It's pretty mind blowing when you consider pretty anyone with a PC and good mic can make tunes for the world to hear. 'Course they may not be good jazz tunes, but it depends on what you think is jazz.
Getting back to the Mainstrean, the meeting I was at, some people defined jazz as "dixiland", or "swing" as in '30s dance hall swing.

My guess is that the average person out there thinks of jazz as something that should be listened to seriously. Maybe it's the pigeonhole. When I play blues, or R&B, sometimes I think of it as jazz, but I am careful, depending on the audience who I may be trying to get out to listen/see/experience/enjoy/dance etc., that they know what the purpose of the music is.
DJ music is for people to dance to. A funk band leader told me he made sure he had "two turntables and a microphone" set up front a centre so that if people peered in for a better look, they would think there was a DJ and before you know it, the place would be packed - dancing to a funk band, thinking it was a DJ with a backup!

People, this is the entertainment BUSINESS. If it is art, you are not going to make money unless you cater to, or give a reason for real people to pay real money to hear your stuff. If it is not art, or you don't enjoy doing it, you may as well just give up and work somewhere else.

As far as the unions go, I have heard many things about the association and to me it never made any sense. I could probably become a member tomorrow - that does not mean I am any good or deserve to make the same as Dal (comparison may be sarcastic, not sure yet).

Anyhoo, I love good music, call it what you want. I think there IS a future for live music, and have heard from others in the "BIZ" that people want more that just tunes by some DJ - they want to be entertained. Maybe there should be nude jazz or something to turn things on its ear. But that would be disgusting, remdinds me of the Jack Handy saying about nude opera - when they hit the high notes you can really see it in the testicles.

OK I'm stopping now.

------------------
*********
I BLOW
*********
tenor, that is

John Doheny

Nov 3, 2002, 12:34 PM

Hi Frank,
You raise quite a number of issues. Let's see how many I can respond to before I run out of steam.
I really have to disagree with you about the notion of greater accessability of canned music leading to an increased desire for live music.My experience as a professional musician over the last 30 years, using the extremely pragmatic measuring stick of actual MONEY IN MY POCKET, has been exactly the opposite.What I'm saying is that as recorded music becomes more and more ubiquitous(and it's virtually inescapable now. They even play it through speakers ON THE STREET in Kerrisdale at Christmas)
people cease to make a distinction between recorded music and real music. If you ask them how often they listen to music, and they say "all the time", and you ask them what the last concert or gig they went to was, they just look at you funny.I teach as a sub sometimes in the public school system and let me tell you it is not at all unusual to encounter students who have NEVER seen live music outside of a school assembly!They don't seem to understand that it's two different things. It's like someone who thinks he doesn't need to go to the grand canyon because he's seen the video.
As to the union-Dal Richards reference,you seem to be suggesting that you don't deserve to be in the same professional association as ,say, Ross Taggart. I would point out that there are a lot of architects out there who probably don't think of themselves as being in the same league as Bing Thom,yet they are still members of the same association of professional architects. I've met some sad public school teachers in my time, and some great ones, but most of them are happy to be members of the B.C. College of Teachers.
I'm glad somebody brought up the art versus entertainment conundrum, because it seems to me that this is at the very center of what jazz is. Phil Woods once said that jazz was "where art and entertainment meet" and I think I have to agree with him.Anyone who thinks these two things can't co-exist never saw Dizzy Gillespie work a crowd, and I think it's safe to say that he was a guy who rarely went too long without a gig. Dizzy really understood that serious art music did not preclude smiles and fun, and that people can be very accepting of quite difficult music if you "include them in" rather than patronize them and go into a huff about what a bunch of philistines they are if they don't get it.If you've ever seen me work you'll know that I usually manage to get a laugh or three out of the audience, not because I aspire to be a professional comedian(I've met some who struck me as being the unhappiest people on earth)but because I genuinely enjoy relating to people from the bandstand, and including them in the process. Now, please God, if I could just have Dizzy's chops ,too.
A few years ago I decided to pull back a bit from the pursuance of club work. I'm still happy to play in a bar, but a lot of my effort these days has gone into getting corporate stuff, weddings, private functions etc.I could have approached this with the attitude that whatever kind of music you want,rock, country, ethnic etc. I can supply it. If I can't play it myself I'll send somebody who can and take 15% for booking the job.A guy like Mark Hasselbach, for instance, has built himself a very nice business this way.But instead what I wound up doing was listing myself in the "Wedding Directory" as "light jazz" (so they know I'm not gonna do my "Tribute to Albert Ayler" thing at their wedding)and then send potential clients a demo (I do this through my web-site now) of the same Rogers&Hart-Jerome Kern-Vernon Duke repertoire that I'd been playing at places like the Blue Note, only now my price is always union scale or better.So I get to have fun AND get paid. Sure, I have to wear a tuxedo,but my wife thinks I look pretty sharp in one.
Still the sad reality seems to be that there's less and less live entertainment of any kind from one year to the next. I still find it odd to the point of weird that anybody actually thinks a guy who plays records in a nightclub is an "artiste",but my view is fast becoming that of an old crank.I'm starting to understand why old people are sometimes crabby,it's because they've seen enormous change in their lifetimes, and not all of it for the better.
Regarding the nude jazz thing,how's this for an idea? I'll get naked in front of the hot jazz club and scare people INTO the joint.
John D.
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)

saxman

Nov 3, 2002, 07:30 PM

Good idea John, it just might work! Never been tried, far as I know. Speaking of the joint, took my wife this past Friday and she said it was like going into the bingo hall on seniors night. It's going to be a tough slog getting fresh people in, I'm afraid.

Thanks for the feedback, you've got me beat in terms of experience in the field. I'm a bit out of my league, so I gratefully defer to the soldiers in the trenches so to speak. I can't deny that I definitly dont go out as much as I used to, mainly due to ticket prices, also because I'm no longer single. I guess the theory that bands would tour more if they could not longer make money selling CDs was just a theory, at least for now. The theory is probably also part of the justification for downloading MP3s - thinking that it would encourage musicians to go on the road.

Technology has given certain shortcuts to musical notoriety, shall we say, to people who probably would not have become involved in the music business. Some stuff I can't bear to listen to, and my tastes are quite varied. I can say the same for some forms of jazz or some particular artists. But that's okay and it doesn't mean you're getting old or crabby.

I'm trying to think on a Sunday night and nothing is coming. I'm thinking of Beck's Midnight Vultures album, and how he seems to have been able to create music that mixes several forms of, whatever you want to call it, stuff, and still remain "successful" - whatever that means. On the other hand, without reading from the jacket liner, Metalwood's last album The Recline, was billed as having some cross-over with a DJ etc., yet all I could hear was some slight sampling and album scratching with some noodling in the background. I'm sure someone could explain it to me, but it's just personal perception and taste, and to me it didn't really work. The straight ahead stuff - authentic? - sounded more genuine. Yet what Beck did on his album seemed genuine too.

The topic of this thread is economics of jazz performance. Like ethical government, I'm doubtful that it ever really existed, except for the few chosen ones. The rest must languish until they are bought or sold. Hey, that political metaphor works pretty good!

SfumatoPants

Nov 13, 2002, 12:16 PM

I have to get in on this... My background is in Visual Art, but many artists from different fields seem to have similar problems. There are always those who know the way things must be done and those who just do it anyway they can. Worrying about maintaining the integrity of your artform just tightens up your sphincter and your work suffers. Vancouver, in general seesm to suffer from this problem, and I feel that it really inhibits the diversity of creative practice in this town. Now, I'm not to crazy about DJ's, but I have heard some very interesting stuff. I'm not a Jazz expert either, but I know as a starved patron that I'm largely not getting what I want in Vancouver. The Jazz scene here seems largely donimated by middle aged, and older, folks, preaching to themselves. I am usually one of the youngest people I see at various venues around town. The problem as I see it is basically martketing. If you want to attract new audiences you have to take your music to them on their own terms, don't speak to them in your already established ways. Just because its different doesn't make it bad, and compromise is the first rule of survival. I have seen that there is a huge hunger for Jazz in this city, but the local representatives aren't approaching younger audiences in any significant way. I even believe that there is room for more dedicated venues. Look to the success of such bands as St. Germain. It may be geared for the club scene, but their success hints at a greater desire for Jazz by a growing group of urban young people. Thet are growing and discovering, and if they don't get more to hook them in, they'll just toss it on the pile. I wind up in Yokyo about once a year for various reasons, sometimes I take a holiday there just to go to jazz clubs (as I did fro 10 days this past February). Tokyo has an exciting Jazz scene because it engages the tastes of the youger crowd. Clubs are teaming with late 20 and early 30's types, mixed in with the more experienced folks. The reason for it is the way local clubs have given voice to younger musicians experimenting (and making mistakes) in non-traditional ways. I have to say that the most exciting Jazz I have heard anywhere is in Tokyo, but the point is, these 20 somethings have a way into the music that will keep them coming back for life!

Morgan Childs

Nov 14, 2002, 12:50 PM

Thanks Bri. I actually wrote a response that was too long and disorganized. That pretty much said it all. The people that are most interested these days in breaking down the barriers and redifining the athstetics of improvised music ARE in fact, the same people interested in WHY the "old guys" are so unbelievably good. When I see my older mentors play, I am always blown away at the depth of their expression, and how it speaks to ME, even though I am also interested in making music that sounds very different then that. St. Germain? Give me a breaaaak....

John Doheny

Nov 14, 2002, 04:32 PM

Right on Morgan!What you say carries so much more weight than it would coming from me,"middle aged and older" guy that I am.It's nice to know there's youngbloods out there who aren't interested in being pandered to by corporate generated youth culture.
Whether you dig Wynton Marsalis as a player or not,he said something pretty hip on Ken Burns jazz documentary,something to the effect that"you have to approach great art on it's terms,not yours."Fact is ,when I was 20 years old and listening to Miles and Coltrane and Ellington,I didn't need them patronizing me by putting on a pair of bell-bottoms and a head band.(in contemporary terms,maybe Oliver Gannon should get some phat pants and a couple turntables).I dug these guys not because they were like me but because I wanted to be like THEM.I felt they were inviting me into a grown up world where substance mattered,not artifice and "marketing".The very thing that attracted me to jazz was that,unlike a lot of "groovy" emerging capitalists(guys for whom the counterculture was available strictly over the counter)the music never felt it had to insult my intelligence to get my attention.

John Doheny

Nov 14, 2002, 04:38 PM

Yipes! Here I am am so impressed with the airtight,pithy impact of my post,and I just remembered that the first time I ever saw Oliver Gannon play(1971,with Pacific Salt,opening for Miles Davis)he was wearing...bellbottoms.

Nimish

Nov 14, 2002, 09:43 PM

Earlier Chris Tarry was talking about the diffrence between the way musicians listen to music compared to everyone else and as a developing musician I have started to notice it.

A regular person is listening to music because they like the groove, feel, sound, beat or whatever other reason you want to stick in there, they simply love the music.
A musician has all those and one more. The ever critical ear that is always trying to learn. Musicians can never listen to the music just for the sheer pleasure, if there is a sax lick, drum beat, bass line or whatever that you like then you just <i>have</i> to learn it. (I know all you pros have lists of stuff you transcribed) The more you work on music the more you can hear in others playing and the more you take away from it.

This becomes a factor when you get someone like Coltrane. Bob, who has a tin ear or no sence of rythm may not understand what is going on melodically or rhythmically and thus would not like there music. There are many Bobs out there. On the other hand there is Bill who took piano lessons as a child and played sax in the highschool stage band. His ears and rhythm are better than Bobs. He likes Coltrane ,however, sometimes is still a bit much for him.

All listeners fall somewhere around here. Musicians are always checking out the real 'groovy' music because there ears are better and they can hear the of weird chord substitutions are polyrythms (or at least they want to). Regular people who are not trying to become better musicians just want to hear something they understand.

I belive bands like St. Germain just fill the gap between the Christina Aguleras and Metalwoods out there.

(It is late, I am tired and must end now so I can wake up for school so I apoligize in advance if what I wrote is actually a bunch of irrelivant jibberish.)

Nimish

Nov 14, 2002, 09:46 PM

whoa, and sorry about the grammatical errors.

SfumatoPants

Nov 15, 2002, 09:49 AM

Great Discussion... Like I said, I am approaching "practice" from my experience as a visual artist. Not surprisingly I found that there was no way to make a living by doing only the art that I wanted to make, so after a lot of painful contortions I wound up producing art for commercial enterprise. What I discovered, after having "compromised", was that my "high art" background informed my commercial work in surprising and satisfying ways. My work presented me with new challenges, I had to learn new ways of seeing, new ways of problem solving, I have found this painful rediscovery a very positive growth process. Once I became open to it, "compromising" actually made my work better. Integrity is not a balck and white issue, this is the point I wished to make. I think those that are truly great at what they do have the ability to speak to many audiences, refusing to allow themselves to be limited by the established conventions of any one group.

As for "Miles and Coltrane and Ellington", yeah, these guys are masters, but to many younger "regular people", this is the music that gets played in yupies SUV's. It is over the counter counterculture. This doesn't diminish the music in any way, in fact the world is better off for it. Who will be the masters of the future? Can't say because we are sitting in the middle of it... but I do know that measuring the present with the yardstick of the past won't help, thankfully culture must change, always recreating itself.

I think that it is important to offer people a way into an art form. If you hit them over the head with their own ignorance they're just going to head for the door. Any reasonable person would. This isn't going to help the future of the Jazz scene anywhere.

... St. Germain, yeah whatever... how about Herbie Hancocks's Future 2 Future...

John Doheny

Dec 8, 2002, 08:32 AM

It's interesting how you started out as an artist aspiring to non-commercial work,then got into the commercial stuff.I did it the other way around.My first professional gigs were in strip clubs playing Rhythm and Blues for the dancers.In those days I had no aspirations to create art,I just liked to play the saxophone, and the fact that I could make a living doing it(this was 1972...boy have things changed since then,live music-wise)plus I got my drinks half price and got to play music in a room with beautiful,naked women literally right under my nose 6 nights a week,7 sets a night,I mean Wow! Ya gotta love that.So I guess my path into what I'm doing now might have been just a bit different than somebody like,say, John Anzai who I believe is on record as saying there's no way he'd ever put on a f#$&ing suit and play bossa novas for money(glad I'm not his landlord).But in those days I saw myself as a professional musician,a craftsman not an artist.I think that's an honorable thing to be,and it grieves me greatly that we now live in a culture that values this not at all.Even as recently as 30 years ago,when I first started playing professionally,things were different.
But the title of this string is "Economics of Jazz Performance",and I think there are a lot of misconceptions floating around amongst non-musicians about how that works.The fact is ,I know of NOBODY in this city who makes a good living playing straight ahead jazz.If they don't have a day job or a teaching gig,then they're out there jobbing commercial gigs with swing and funk bands, and a lot of people do all those things.You mentioned your "high art" work informing your more commercial things,well I often see it the other way around.In a previous post about Dave Say,for instance,I said that one of the reasons I loved his playing so much was that it reflects ALL of the many,many different kinds of gigs he's constantly playing.Some guy recently wrote a letter to the New York Times criticizing Brandford Marsalis for playing with rock bands,stating that a great player like Coltrane would never" compromise" himself in such a manner.Too bad we can't put the cat in a time machine and send him back to 1951 so he can see 'Trane walking the bar with Rhythm and Blues bands.Coltrane brought all that to the table,and THAT'S what made him great.
Jazz musicians in Vancouver,and everywhere for that matter,are not into turning their noses up at a paying gig.My view is that any work you do with a horn in your hand is honorable work and I think that's pretty much the majority opinion around here.A gig like,say,Ron Rutherford's Preservation of Swing Orchestra is about as far away from straight ahead jazz as you can get but I've sat down in the saxophone section and looked over and the guy next to me is Saul Berson or Dylan Cramer or Dave Say.I look back in the trumpets and there's Robin Shire.Go down to Bar None and check out guys like Dave Say and Brad Turner tearing it up with Soulstream.
I think your analogy breaks down at a certain point though.My wife does commercial art.She's also doing a solo print show at a gallery in New Orleans next spring,but I don't think she'll be putting any window display art in it,even though that stuff may be more commercially viable.Translating that into what I do, if I'm going to go to the trouble and expense of producing a CD(and for most of us it is an expense.There's not a lot of big labels out there underwriting recording costs for straight ahead jazz)I'm not going to include any of the Otis Redding tunes I played last week with the Soul Demons at the Pan Pacific,even though I thoroughly enjoyed playing them and the record might sell better.That record is my personal statement and I'm not going to compromise it.I'll do my best to market it and I'll use every means at my disposal to show people a way into my music,but I'm not going to dumb it down for them.As a listener,I find that sort of thing insulting and I assume that my potential audience doesn't want to be talked down to either.Now I think Herbie Hancock does stuff like Future 2 Future because it's fun.I'd love to have those kind of kicks in the studio but the fact is I don't have Herbie's record company in my corner to underwrite my recreation.I love that kind of stuff,but I don't have the time or the money to persue it.
As for "regular younger people's" perception of Miles and Coltrane as music being played in "Yuppies' SUV's",well, I think that comes under the heading of unreasonable prejudice.People that closed minded probably wouldn't dig my stuff anyway.
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)

Yodi

Dec 9, 2002, 10:25 AM

Heres something to think about. Diversify or suffer the consequences. You all chose to be musicians(Jazz or otherwise) and this carreer choice, by the sounds of it, is just not working out financially. Obviously led by passion, and not common sense and thorough investigation into this vocation, you have been left complaining about unions, club owners, and your financial position. Why dont you buy yourself a club and see what it is like to deal with musicians...view it from thier angle. The world and humans in general are an ever evolving situation, and there is no way that this is going to change for anything especially music of any sorts. Times have, and will continue to change, whether its for the better or the worse, well who really knows...thats a matter of opinion. If you decide that playing music is how you are going to survive you need to diversify. This means producing canned music, maybe getting a set of turntables. Whether you like it or not this is the reality you have created for yourselves and if the financial rewards of your career and your financial concept of living are not congruent then you need to do some soulsearching and find what else might be able to supplement your income. If this is not an acceptable option for you then you will just have to lie in the bed that you have made for yourselves. Todays musical situation is not yesterdays situation...survival of the fittest. Please dont be so ignorant as to diminish in anyway anyone elses music whether it be electronic, sampled or any other hybrid of anything else, club music or not. That is just the attitude I would expect a starving musician to have. Why dont you create this mind numbing music yourselves and market it so that you will have the neccesary income to "shed" all your other desired skills.
Playing music, or developing any other art medium for that matter, is a highly trend sensitive career. If you get old in your thinking you will fail...end of story. The majority of people dont want to hear jazz any more. Thats reality (notice I said majority...not all people) and if by chance they do hear it they dont want to hear you modulate to the dotted qaurter for 10 minutes either. I love canned music and I also happen to love playing and listening to Jazz, But I also realized that I love developing software. So, in conclusion, Perception is completly subjective, and no one has a right to diminish any other form of music(which is really only a vibration travelling through the air and being translated by the timpanic membrane in to a sound which the brain then processes into something more meaningful). Who can really say what is right and wrong when you think of it that way...is your vibration better than the one that the one the Sonar produces. Well I'll tell you what, the Sonar makes a better living with thiers. I wonder if the line up outside the door every friday night says anything about what poeple really want...(at least the ones willing to spend money on music). I am sorry if this comes across harsh but I have heard this argument so many times, as well as wrestling with it personally, that I cant help but voice my opinion. That is what this forum is for I hope.

John Doheny

Dec 9, 2002, 11:41 AM

I think you're a very lucky person in that your vocation (software development/computer stuff) is in an area that happens to be paying big bucks right now.Wish I was in that situation,but what I like to do is play the saxophone so getting a couple of turntables or sitting in a studio pasting samples together doesn't hold any appeal for me.In my previous post I mentioned a few things that instrumentalists do to keep body and soul together,like jobbing gigs etc. but I didn't go into the sorts of things you're talking about.There's plenty of folks who do that though.Marc Baril,who used to play guitar in my quartet at Murphy's Pub,now creates music for video games at Radical Entertainment in Yaletown and of course there's guys like Pat Caird and Graham Coleman who write and create music for movies and television and I understand Chris Gestrin makes a buck or two with club type stuff.To do that stuff well though you gotta have a passion for it, it can't be just a day job,so the challenge for instrumentalists like me is to find ways to market our skills for money.This is all quite seperate ,however ,from the personal statements I make with my own music.Nobody does that kind of stuff with the expectation of big bucks.This isn't POP MUSIC fer chrissakes!
I probably am being unreasonable in my dumping on DJs and electronica and such,but it's reflexive,and a hard habit to break.I've been in too many situations where some clown in a pair of tuxedo pants and a red bow tie with a stack of CDs was getting paid the same bread JUST FOR HIM as all 3 guys in my trio who have spent maybe 75 or so collective years mastering their instruments.I know I'm being difficult in wishing something like that could get as much respect and attention as, say,who's doing who in Angele Yanor's "Lucky Strike" column,but I'm a cranky 49 year old man.Please forgive me.
Yes I know the world is always changing,age makes you MORE aware of that,not less.And believe it or not ,it isn't necessary to adopt contemporary devices or instrumentation to reflect that in your music.A couple of years ago I saw the Hugh Fraser Quintet open for the Legends of the Bandstand at the Vogue Theater.Both bands were playing in a straight ahead style,but Hugh's bunch sounded COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! How could it be otherwise,they were all 25-30 years younger than the Legends. Same vocabulary,different story.It's like saying Jack Kerouac reads the same as William Faulkner because they're both writing in English.
And what's up with this "trend sensitive" stuff.Sheesh!"Yoo Hoo! Brahms. Nodody's writing symphonies anymore.That's so 5 minutes ago".Great art transcends it's time period.If all I wanted to do was make money,I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time with music.It's not ABOUT money,y'all.Of course the owners of Sonar make more money than me.Velveeta sells more than Stilton too.That,in a sense,is at the very center of what's wrong with the world we live in.Because jazz and turntables and electronica aside,the real issue is that we live in a culture that pays far too much attention to meaningless,superficial bullshit and cheap self-involved thrills,and not nearly enough to the important stuff.
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)

p.s.I'm getting fed up with people constantly using the word "old" as a pejorative.The next time it happens I'm a beat you young whippersnappers senseless with my crutch.

John Doheny

Dec 9, 2002, 12:09 PM

p.s. In reviewing your post I just realized that you(and others)may have misconstrued what I mean by "canned music".The term does not refer to any particular genre ,but simply means ANY recorded music.Corey plays "canned" jazz between sets at the Cellar.I use the term simply to point out that the experience of being present at the creation of the music,of being a part of the communal experience of this so very HUMAN event,is a vastly different thing than listenening to the pale (recorded) shadow of an event that took place in a recording studio months or years previously.Also ,one thing is not a substitute for the other,but a DIFFERENT thing.This is nowhere more apparent than in the club musics you refer to, which are really a producers,not a musicians,medium.Having played on my share of overdubbed,constructed pop projects,I suppose I should have realized that it was only a matter of time before actual musicians were eliminated from the equation.
I suppose a good analogy,for sample based stuff anyway,would be collage in the visual arts.The intense hostility and suspicion with which instrumentalists sometimes regard the sample guys could be liked to great old-school oil painters suspicion that the collage cats couldn't draw a bowl of fruit with a pencil.

Yodi

Dec 9, 2002, 12:49 PM

Well I commend you for your pursuit of personal passion. I also know through reading your other bulletins that you are a very diverse musician...so please dont take me personally. I am with you, and there is nothing that I would like to see more than a musical utopia arise wherby I could play music full time and accomplish all my financial goals. I am simply trying to play the devils advocate here.
Unfortunatly I dont see a way that you would be able to simply market whatever your specific musical passion may be (Jazz in one of its many forms) and make a living that would surpass that of social assistance. I know that many guys in town have managed to do this (with a teaching supplement)...and maybe some without(very few I imagine). A musician must seriously diversify.
In response to you stating I was implying that music using contemporary devices was the equivalent of Jack Kerouac and William Faulkner being the same read because they both happen to written in English. I am not at all disputing a voice or personality in all music...if it was created by someaone than it will always have a unique characteristic, even if it was sampled in some way or created with turntables.
As for the trend sensitive thing...sheesh we all know that music is completly trend sensitive believe it or not...including trend setters(Brahms, Miles, ect.) and poeple who emulate thier style and develop into thier own. Yes, even you are guilty, as we all are, of utilizing this valuable learning tool.
Great art does transcend time,I agree. I also know that if you attach a million dollar price tag to a substandard peice of art and place it a a prestigous art Gallery that someone will buy it and proclaim its greatness. Maybe we should wait thirty years and see then whether or not electronica will be reviewed as a groundbreaking art movement. No one understands greatness untill we have a new frame of reference anyway...any studied musician knows this, We have seen infinite examples of this in our own musical history...right. If you read a Jazz History book you will see the trends laid out right before your eyes...open to the table of contents. Ragtime, New Orleans, Dixieland, Chicago, Swing, Bebop, Cool, Hard, Free...ect. They all added something to a very eclectic style, but they all were trends...or more nicely...Stages of Development. So ya I guess you could say that "Ragtime is so 100 years ago".
So if it is not about the money then whats the point of this thread. All that I have been reading is alot of points about the lack of money in music performance. So I think that this thread IS all about the money. Otherwise it is about art appreciation. So I dont believe that anything that is being produced today is "meaningless superficial bullshit", except for the attitudes directed towards what someone else might be doing musically that seems to be more marketable and profitable.
This is of course only my opinion and I do have a great respect for all forms of music, and for all the musicians that contribute to this site.

John Doheny

Dec 9, 2002, 01:30 PM

Well yeah! Economics of JAZZ performance.Not economics of "whatever style the most people are willing to pay for at this exact moment".Cause quite frankly,by the time I get my fingers around whatever's trendy right now it's gonna already be passe.I remember that all too well from when I actually made all my money playing, I mean yipes you've no sooner put together an "Urban Cowboy" type band than you've gotta tear that apart and get a crew cut and start playing Ska(1981)which had already been around the track once before in 1962 in Britain.Then you've no sooner learned how to play a decent version of "One Step Beyond" than you're blindsided by Haircut 100 and a Flock of Seagull's and Banana-freakin-Rama.
My version of the Economics of Jazz Performance means "how can we get paid for what we do", not "how can we do something that pays".

Morgan Childs

Dec 9, 2002, 01:46 PM

See Yodi, the problem I have is with people that pull out this ridiculous statement that other people are somehow not "allowed" to place value judgements on other people's music, according to their knowledge and experience. Of course I can. I can say that a Mahler Symphony or "Miles Smiles" is worth more, is more important and contributes to a more valuable and intelligent way of life and living then the latest Christina Aguilera CD. I can also say that musicians that have spent years mastering their craft and creating live art are more important to the vitality of a music and arts scene ina given city than the people that go out to pay for and consume "canned" music. That's a simple fact, and the only people who don't want to admit it are people that are too lazy to seek out music made by real musicians, and learn how to appreciate something that takes a little thought and intelligence to understand.

I don't care if I come off as elitist. The truth is, I'm not. I've played enough gigs from every style of music you can imagine to know that it's impossible to be an elitist or a purist and survive. But when it comes to placing a value judgement on certain musics, I AM allowed to say "that is valuable, and that is not valuable", or "that is less valuable", and I have the historic and musical knowledge to back my position up.

So before you jump to the defense of the musically ignorant, you have to understand that the musicians that write on these boards are trying to figure out a way we can do what we love and contribute to an intelligent and humanistic society. Sometimes, unfourtunatly, you have to attack certain things that contravene that, and for me, there is a line where something is and is not valuable.

[This message has been edited by Morgan Childs (edited December 09, 2002).]

Yodi

Dec 9, 2002, 02:16 PM

well Morgan if you deduced that I took away anyones right to put value on anyones music you were dead wrong. You should read my OPINION once again(this time don't skim it).
I have also played enough gigs of varying description to have a valid opinion. So hopefully I as well can be as lucky as you and be considered one of "the musicians" that write on this page.
I also have a VERY broad knowledge base to back up all my opinions(believe it or not you are not the only one to have read some history.)
In conclusion congratulations Morgan on having a differing opinion, which is that and only that. It must feel good to be able to speak for the musical community, which I remind you I am part of.

Yodi

Dec 9, 2002, 02:44 PM

Sorry John. If you dont want to do something that pays than, unfortunatly, you will have to try to get payed doing what you do. Which sounds like "Jazz Performance".
The oppurtunities seem dismal.

Yodi

Dec 9, 2002, 02:50 PM

P.S.
I know that it is easy to say "hey I dont know this guy...his opinion isn't valid". This is just basic human psycology. Try to think past this initial reaction. Maybe that is why I am remaining anonomous. You must always strive for an open mind and consider the other side of the picture.

Mel

Dec 9, 2002, 08:27 PM

To quote John, “My version of the Economics of Jazz Performance means ‘how can we get paid for what we do...”

I think there is a way. Here’s the big question: Is it possible to play music that you find artistically satisfying WITH a vocalist? I don’t mean a canary but a musician. (If your answer is, “No, what I do does NOT involve a vocalist,” read no further. For you this would only answer “how can we do something that pays?”.)

Confession. I am a singer. I know a lot of instrumentalists who hate to admit it, but, listeners are open to some very challenging improvised music if it somehow involves the human voice. From the days if Duke Ellington to Kenny Wheeler to Andy Milne...

Morgan Childs

Dec 9, 2002, 10:45 PM

Speak for the musical community? Hardly. My opinions are my own, and I can find as many people who I respect who would disagree with me as I could those who agree with me. The one thing I CAN say is that at least I have the gumption to put my name on what I write, so anyone who has a problem with it can take it up with ME, not some anonymous pseudonym. See, I don't respect the fact that you come on here with a "jazz is dead, get with the times or die" attitude. In order for the music to survive, you have to believe in what you do and be content that not everyone is going to like it, or understand it. BUT, I know when I play, I am trying to find ways to connect to people whether they know what I'm doing or not. I'm not saying I can do it yet, but that's what I am conciously trying to do when I get out there and get the (honor) to play creative music. I believe that I can do that without pandering to the lowest common denominator. That's all.

PS: Read some history? It's more than that. I'm not (just) some kind of blowhard music student or no-playing bullshit asshole. I have a spiritual and family connection to this music that runs deeper than most people would take the time to understand.

John Doheny

Dec 10, 2002, 06:05 AM

Hi Melody. I don't know if you remember,but we actually played a job together a couple years back.It was a Dal Richards gig that he'd farmed out to Peter Dent,a wedding at Bridges on Granville Island.The guests were all some kind of Dutch fundamentalist missionaries who didn't drink and made endless speeches about bringing Jesus to the heathens.I've been clean and sober for 11 years now but they were so excruciatingly boring I actually ALMOST missed narcotics.

In answer to your question,well yeah.Of course.I love working with singers.I think instrumentalists are at their best when they are most like singers...that feeling of "singing" through the horn,of the direct transfer of the melody heard in the mind to it's realization in the world...man,that's the shit.I sometimes wish,though,that there was a word to distinguish the real "musician" singers (and I would certainly put you in this category)from the hordes of musically illiterate narcsissists out there giving the profession a bad name.Mr. Morgan Childs and I actually met for the first time a few months back on a particular ongoing gig which sports a neverending supply of these little horrors (with,it must be said,the occasional gem).Where do they all come from anyway.

You seem to be suggesting that the inclusion of vocals on a particular project constitutes a "way in" for audiences.I agree.I released my first CD as a leader recently and it contains 2 vocals by my good friend Colleen Savage.While I definitely think this enhances the album's marketability it was not a calculating or premeditated move on my part.In the fall of 2001 we were in the midst of recording the thing,and I was also playing a gig at the Pan Pacific with Colleen and Stan Taylor and Paul Rushka and Roy Sluyter.Colleen and I realized that we'd met for the first time 25 years ago that month,as students in the fledgling Jazz and Commercial Music program at VCC.I asked her if she'd like to commemorate the occasion by coming down to the studio and singing a couple,and she did that.

When working with singers of this calibre I don't really make the distinction.Colleen's book has amazing stuff in it like Monk's "Ask Me Now" and Strayhorn's "Something to Live For",stuff that would be too harmonically advanced for the "I Sounded Great in the Shower" set,who tend to stick to "Don't Get Around Much Anymore" and "Fever" (oh God,not AGAIN).I remember once doing "I Love Paris" with a certain musically illiterate singer who shall remain nameless.She'd obviously cribbed it off a record like a trained seal,and had no understanding of the song's harmonic structure.At some point she must have lost track of the alternating Major-Parallel minor road map,and started singing the minor key melody over the Major key portion of the tune.This kind of Schoenbergian dissonance is something musician-singers spend hours practicing(think back to that McGill recital of Pierrot Lunaire)but was effortless for her because she was so absolutely NOT LISTENING!

Now that I think of it,this is precisely why I don't have much interest in music "production" (Hi Yodi).I just love playing with people too much.That ongoing dialogue that's always happening(or SHOULD be) in small band jazz is dope to me.I can't imagine spending my days reacting to some pre-recorded thing that can't react back (well maybe if the bread was right).

But I digress.Yes I think singing is swell.Say,are you looking for people to collaborate with on a specific project? Give me a call.As long as you don't wanna do "Fever" (well maybe for double scale).
www.Johndoheny.com (http://www.Johndoheny.com)