Making a Living with the L1® - Revision history

ST: ST moved page Making a Living with the L1Â® to Making a Living with the L1®

2017-03-26T22:37:38Z

ST moved page Making a Living with the L1Â® to Making a Living with the L1®

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:37, 26 March 2017
(No difference)

ST at 17:11, 17 May 2014

2014-05-17T17:11:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:11, 17 May 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Editorial}}		{{Editorial
			\|Author = [[Cliff Henricksen: L1 Inventor\|Cliff Henricksen: L1 Inventor]]
			\|discussion page = [http://bose.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1506041054/m/4440014176 discussion in the Bose Message Board]

			}}
	'''Making a Living With the L1'''		'''Making a Living With the L1'''
	by Cliff Henricksen		by Cliff Henricksen

ST: Making a Living with the L1™ moved to Making a Living with the L1®: ®

2008-03-12T10:20:13Z

Making a Living with the L1™ moved to Making a Living with the L1®: ®

← Older revision	Revision as of 10:20, 12 March 2008
(No difference)

ST: Making a Living with the L1 moved to Making a Living with the L1™: Added ™ to the L1 designation

2007-03-04T20:34:19Z

Making a Living with the L1 moved to Making a Living with the L1™: Added ™ to the L1 designation

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:34, 4 March 2007
(No difference)

ST: {{Editorial}}

2007-03-03T23:47:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 3 March 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Editorial}}
	'''Making a Living With the L1'''		'''Making a Living With the L1'''
	by Cliff Henricksen		by Cliff Henricksen
Line 102:		Line 103:
	However, like all problems, there is a solution. Identifying the problem is often the biggest step. The rest is merely work.		However, like all problems, there is a solution. Identifying the problem is often the biggest step. The rest is merely work.
	[[Category:Performance]]		[[Category:Performance]]
			[[Category:Editorial]]

ST: Category:Performance

2006-11-21T17:23:17Z

Category:Performance

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:23, 21 November 2006
Line 101:		Line 101:

	However, like all problems, there is a solution. Identifying the problem is often the biggest step. The rest is merely work.		However, like all problems, there is a solution. Identifying the problem is often the biggest step. The rest is merely work.
			[[Category:Performance]]

Clifford at 15:14, 9 November 2006

2006-11-09T15:14:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:14, 9 November 2006
Line 4:		Line 4:
	==Introduction==		==Introduction==

	When I was a full-time musician playing in restaurants and clubs in the early 1970's, I and everyone else doing the same were making $50-$100 a night playing in bands, 4 or 5 piece. I also played in a rock and roll duo with a big PA, singing drummer who occasionally played left-hand Rhodes bass. It was a musical circus, sounded good and we made even more money than most individually. My musical colleagues all nod in agreement to this level of income figure. It is a very good indication that live music is dramatically devalued since 1972. This makes me very sad, and it is indeed a "sad situation". The music is devalued, but not the musical instruments, the equipment,the transportation costs, clothing or anything else. That's all gone up. But we are still in a time warp on pay.		When I was a full-time musician playing in restaurants and clubs in the early 1970's, I and everyone else doing the same were making $50-$100 a night playing in bands, 4 or 5 piece. I also played in a rock and roll duo with a big PA, singing drummer who occasionally played left-hand Rhodes bass. It was a musical circus, sounded good and we made even more money than most individually. My musical colleagues all nod in agreement to this level of income figure. It is a very good indication that live music performance is dramatically devalued (by its customers) since 1972. This makes me very sad, and it is indeed a "sad situation". The music performance is devalued, but not the musical instruments, the equipment,the transportation costs, clothing or anything else. That's all gone up. But we are still in a time warp on pay.

	Today, club gigs pay about the same and the better or perhaps more "connected" players (the ones with long-time local connections) might get $200. Party, wedding, bar mitzvah, corporate and the like gigs will pay more, but they always have. Such gigs require production rivalling big pop concerts (including costumes, sets and big sound systems), a wide variety of musical styles and typically require pro-level performers who often are required to travel extensively. On these shows, original music is basically out of the question. In general, it's rare that a musician in 2006 can make a respectable living simply by performing music in local venues. You must have other work. It seems that inflation has passed most musicians by, indicating that the services of musicians have declined steadily since the 1970's. Why would this be? Here are some possible reasons:		Today, club gigs pay about the same and the better or perhaps more "connected" players (the ones with long-time local connections) might get $200. Party, wedding, bar mitzvah, corporate and the like gigs will pay more, but they always have. Such gigs require production rivalling big pop concerts (including costumes, sets and big sound systems), a wide variety of musical styles and typically require pro-level performers who often are required to travel extensively. On these shows, original music is basically out of the question. In general, it's rare that a musician in 2006 can make a respectable living simply by performing music in local venues. You must have other work. It seems that inflation has passed most musicians by, indicating that the services of musicians have declined steadily since the 1970's. Why would this be? Here are some possible reasons:

Clifford at 15:06, 9 November 2006

2006-11-09T15:06:10Z

Show changes

Clifford: I think I've taken this section up to identifying the problem and tools to use. Now I have to come up with a strategy for all musicians, including myself.

2006-11-09T14:31:23Z

I think I've taken this section up to identifying the problem and tools to use. Now I have to come up with a strategy for all musicians, including myself.

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:31, 9 November 2006
Line 13:		Line 13:
	# Triple system amplification tends to make all bands sound similar, so that any artistic excellence is lost in sonic clutter created by this. Thus, a "great" band can't really demonstrate their excellence. The triple system tends to make all bands playing in small to medium venues sound alike (blurry) and thus it seems to lump all bands as "mediochre" or "annoying" because of excessive levels and chaotic fidelity presented.		# Triple system amplification tends to make all bands sound similar, so that any artistic excellence is lost in sonic clutter created by this. Thus, a "great" band can't really demonstrate their excellence. The triple system tends to make all bands playing in small to medium venues sound alike (blurry) and thus it seems to lump all bands as "mediochre" or "annoying" because of excessive levels and chaotic fidelity presented.
	# Most musicians today seem to have other employment, because they can't support themselves playing. This contributes to wages going down.		# Most musicians today seem to have other employment, because they can't support themselves playing. This contributes to wages going down.
	# The American Federation of Musicians was once a powerful force in helping musicians achieve an honorable wage. Today it is almost ~~nonexistant~~, other than for very high-profile work such as Broadway plays, symphony orchestras, some casino gigs and movie film score work. I may even be wrong about this.		# The American Federation of Musicians was once a powerful force in helping musicians achieve an honorable wage. Today it is almost nonexistent, other than for very high-profile work such as Broadway plays, symphony orchestras, some casino gigs and movie film score work. I may even be wrong about this.
	# Bands playing original compositions seem to be doomed to a life of scraping for gigs that pay nothing, unless they have some kind of recording that is distributed by legitimate means (a "record label", whatever this means in 2006). Popular bands playing popular music will occasionally trick an audience by inserting their original into a set. But if it is announced ("...and here's one of our original tunes..."), the audience mostly gets glassy-eyed and bored.		# Bands playing original compositions seem to be doomed to a life of scraping for gigs that pay nothing, unless they have some kind of recording that is distributed by legitimate means (a "record label", whatever this means in 2006). Popular bands playing popular music will occasionally trick an audience by inserting their original into a set. But if it is announced ("...and here's one of our original tunes..."), the audience mostly gets glassy-eyed and bored.
	# Bands "creating" (or attempting to create) original music have a zillion different "music composition" software packages to choose from, many with prefabricated song "templates" in common song formats (A/B/A/B/C/A/B, ETC), or with sampled drum (and other instrument) loops. And so, budding artists or complete bands will use these to "create" new songs by playing them and possibly shouting or screaming lyrics without melody over the chord changes. My opinion is that this is not only a severe limitation on songwriting, it tends to be not-songwriting or discourage the creation of a real song. The great, enduring songs we all love and can sing to ourselves (from Bessy Smith to Sinatra, Ellington, the Beatles, Pearl Jam, Van Halen, Outkast, ...), I believe, started with either a story to tell or with a melody, not with a fully-produced, full-production music track that you insert your-lyric-here into. My children, some of them musicians but all of them music lovers and appreciators, complain that modern music isn't melodic or satisfying in many ways. And so, they seem to prefer music from the '60's thru the '80's. I think that instant gratification afforded by instant-songwriting packages has imposed a severe restriction on new songwriters, including a deep spiritual one. New music is the lifeblood of the musical community. Not everyone can compose, or, better, not everyone does compose, but the musical community needs new music to stay inspired and fresh, including for their audiences. I think that modern musical technologies in the form of equipment and software has spawned an unprecedentedly large community of musicians who seem to enjoy instant "success" without "doing the work". And so, I think this has given the difficult craft of songwriting ("originals") a bad name and a black eye. It's not to be trusted any more.		# Bands "creating" (or attempting to create) original music have a zillion different "music composition" software packages to choose from, many with prefabricated song "templates" in common song formats (A/B/A/B/C/A/B, ETC), or with sampled drum (and other instrument) loops. And so, budding artists or complete bands will use these to "create" new songs by playing them and possibly shouting or screaming lyrics without melody over the chord changes. My opinion is that this is not only a severe limitation on songwriting, it tends to be not-songwriting or discourage the creation of a real song. The great, enduring songs we all love and can sing to ourselves (from Bessy Smith to Sinatra, Ellington, the Beatles, Pearl Jam, Van Halen, Outkast, ...), I believe, started with either a story to tell or with a melody, not with a fully-produced, full-production music track that you insert your-lyric-here into. My children, some of them musicians but all of them music lovers and appreciators, complain that modern music isn't melodic or satisfying in many ways. And so, they seem to prefer music from the '60's thru the '80's. I think that instant gratification afforded by instant-songwriting packages has imposed a severe restriction on new songwriters, including a deep spiritual one. New music is the lifeblood of the musical community. Not everyone can compose, or, better, not everyone does compose, but the musical community needs new music to stay inspired and fresh, including for their audiences. I think that modern musical technologies in the form of equipment and software has spawned an unprecedentedly large community of musicians who seem to enjoy instant "success" without "doing the work". And so, I think this has given the difficult craft of songwriting ("originals") a bad name and a black eye. It's not to be trusted any more.

			Of course, this is dangerous ground here. "Art" in general is often thought of as an unassailable topic, especially within the artistic community. I mean, who (including the author) is to say what's good and bad art, what's the best way to make it and so forth. Critics think they know, but artists often keep a distance from such opinions. Also, a colleague reading this said it borders on Old Fartism. Like "when I was your age, sonny, we made REAL music with sticks, leaves and a wire recorder". Beyond all this, I think that prepackaged compositions are like paint-by-numbers. You end up with something, but by nature you were severely limited in your choices. I think the best art is that which starts from scratch. Doing so, it gives the artist an infinite set of possibilities to craft their work from. If you're a piano player, you're limited right off the bat, as opposed to if you could compose for any combination of instruments. I didn't want this to make music-by-numbers users feel like they were bad people, merely to point out the limitations imposed by such methods. And, agreed, you have to start somewhere. Also, your early composition will not be good ones. I think you get better the more you try and the more you write. Music by numbers might be a great way to learn, like with training wheels. I wrote some songs using "Drum Drops" records that had the typical pop-tune format and was actually happy. One of those tunes still exists on my made-the-cut list.

	On the other hand, here are what I believe are facts about live music:		On the other hand, here are what I believe are facts about live music:
Line 92:		Line 94:
	Most musicians, in America anyway, play in 50-200 seat performing arts centers, restaurants and night clubs for money. Church musicians, I think, are not paid. They volunteer, but nevertheless play in similar venues. So, it's the vast number of musicians in the first category that I am addressing. I believe that this is the overwhelming majority of musicians playing for money in America.		Most musicians, in America anyway, play in 50-200 seat performing arts centers, restaurants and night clubs for money. Church musicians, I think, are not paid. They volunteer, but nevertheless play in similar venues. So, it's the vast number of musicians in the first category that I am addressing. I believe that this is the overwhelming majority of musicians playing for money in America.

	How do you rise above simply accepting the current wage scale for most players? I guess, as I write this (it's just coming out as you see it), you first have to decide that it's unacceptable. This might mean turning down gigs because the pay is disrespectful. Remember; you ought to be getting paid at least $500 for a show, or you're not making enough to keep up with inflation.		How do you rise above simply accepting the current wage scale for most players? I guess, as I write this (it's just coming out as you see it), you first have to decide that it's unacceptable. This might mean turning down gigs because the pay is disrespectful. Remember; you ought to be getting paid at least $500 for a show, or you're not making enough to keep up with inflation. I'm stopping to think about all this, peparing to go on. I myself have a pretty bad business sense as a musician, so it's a pretty demanding load on my brain right now. However, like all problems, there is a solution. Identifying the problem is often the biggest step. The rest is merely work.

Clifford at 21:54, 8 November 2006

2006-11-08T21:54:38Z

Show changes