Computer Audio vs Analogue

[Paul R]

He mentioned that many musicians in his experience, even those working for well known artists, needed second jobs, i.e., music did not provide a living wage. As for a 40 hour week - is there a venue you know of paying musicians to do 8 hours of shows per day for 5 days each week, and do you know of a musician with that level of endurance?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well, this is a few years old, and shows the detrimental effect of the depression, but still, a pretty solid starting point. Not many will get rich, but mostly, this beats working at McDonalds.

 

https://www.berklee.edu/sites/default/files/2010_Music-Salary_Guide.pdf

[bluesman]

Not many will get rich, but mostly, this beats working at McDonalds.

Being able to make a living doing what you love beats pretty much anything else, Paul. Many musicians my age (OK, there aren't many anythings my age, but you know what I mean...) are somewhat bitter that they worked all their lives, put kids through college, paid mortgages etc and have little in retirement savings to show for it. But that's true for most of us, regardless of how we spent our productive years - and I tell my friends exactly that when they bitch and moan about it.

 

BTW, the other thing that differentiates a working musician from everyone else who plays an instrument is the need to have multiple instruments to meet the demands of the day. For 20+ years, I had between 15 and 20 guitars plus 5 or more amplifiers and multiple speaker cabinets. Backing a jazz vocalist by myself called for a good 7-string archtop and an amp with lots of clean headroom and solid bass. Weddings and Bar Mitzvahs required a versatile solid body or thin semi and an amp that would scream on the rock tunes but be mellow enough on the swing stuff. Pretending to be Freddie Green in a big band requires an archtop with action so high that the guitar's virtually useless for anything else. I've been hired to play lap steel, resonator, dreadnaught, parlor, 12 string etc etc etc. If you don't have the sound the producer or band leader wants, you don't get called again. And I've never derived my entire income from music alone. Last night I made $25 playing the Rusty Nail in Ardmore PA and blew $5 of that on beer. In for a penny, in for a pound.

 

You also need to remember that many fine musicians continue to study with teachers and mentors for their entire lives, which also costs a lot of money. This doesn't call for pity or sympathy - it's just a set of facts with which most people are not familiar. And it may help explain why many don't have good audio systems.

[Audio_ELF]

He mentioned that many musicians in his experience, even those working for well known artists, needed second jobs, i.e., music did not provide a living wage. As for a 40 hour week - is there a venue you know of paying musicians to do 8 hours of shows per day for 5 days each week, and do you know of a musician with that level of endurance?

Second jobs which also involve their passion of music - be that selling instruments or teaching the next generation. That sounds like part of being a musician to me.

 

A musician, if they're going to be any good, must spend a great deal of unpaid time, continually honing their craft. Unlike other jobs, a player can't just show up for a gig and start performing. The good ones are constantly practicing their craft in the time between gigs.

A large range of jobs involve this. If you are in IT; you often spend a lot of your free time learning about new technologies, self training, spending your own money on hardware and software which will benefit those paying your wages.

 

I look at it this way: If the artist can't afford to create their art, I lose. I want them to be well remunerated for all they give to me and to others for whom music (and all art) is important.

Paid at a reasonable level - yes. Paid beyond average - no. Maybe I am unreasonable ... but like playing sports (for which I also have distaste for the high levels of renumeration given to the few) I see being a "pure" musician (that would be the performance aspect) as at least partially a hobby - employment yes but one you do because of a love for performing and that you would do regardless of the renumeration.

 

I love you dearly, Eloise - but you gotta be kidding.

David ... I'm not going to defend my comments ... but they were specifically in response to your comment that

It's appalling how little most professional musicians make and how hard they have to work to earn a living. Most play in multiple groups and teach. Many also work in music stores or other "day gigs".

(and specifically the use of the word appalling) as if those of use who just enjoy music are not working hard.

 

Eloise

[Audio_ELF]

This doesn't call for pity or sympathy - it's just a set of facts with which most people are not familiar. And it may help explain why many don't have good audio systems.

I don't think anyone considers all musicians as well off as Bono or Sir Simon Rattle ... but being paid doing a job you love (even if that payment is relatively low) beats almost any other job.

[duartisimo1979]

hi guys, interesting read.

 

One thing, though: how does vinyl compare to master tape? has anyone here had a chance to directly compare them?

[Jud]

I love you dearly, Eloise - but you gotta be kidding. All I said is that most musicians, even those in name bands and orchestras (like the Philadelphia Orchestra, with which I'm more than a bit familiar) don't make enough for them to justify to themselves spending major money on an audio system. Part of the reason is that most professional musicians can "hear" what we want to hear in the music through systems of less than stellar specification. But I assure you that it's a matter of cost for many. The impression given in a post above that musicians don't care about their systems leaves out the qualifier - they don't care enough to spend $10k+, even though they'd certainly be happy to have them.

 

Remember that they have to buy, insure and maintain some pretty expensive instruments, and that's where their money goes first. I don't have to remind you of the value and cost of a fine violin, but you may not realize that even the lowly saxophone is a 5 figure exercise. Price a good trumpet or flute. A Benedetto or D'Angelico guitar can run $35k+, and even a Dumble amplifier runs $10k. When you make less than $100k / year, there's little room in the budget for that plus high end audio. Sure it's deductible, but that's only a discount equal to the marginal tax bracket - it's not free.

 

I'm not asking for pity for musicians - I agree with you completely. But the concept that musicians don't care about their audio systems (along with the suggestion that they don't know how to listen) is simply not valid. Work is good for the soul - and you can't play the blues without suffering.......

 

Best regards -

 

David

 

I recently ran across a news article on the Philly's salaries. Non-"name" players (second chair cello, that sort of thing) were making $130-150k. I'll look for it, but you can probably Google it.

 

Edit: This is of course a unionized labor force (thus not having to negotiate salaries individually) working for one of the 4 or 5 premier orchestras in the US. These salaries don't hold a candle to what the 400 or 500 premier football players, doctors, lawyers, or for that matter, plumbers and electricians in the country are making. And we are talking about a cultural showpiece in a major city for which corporations and wealthy individuals will happily donate, not rock, blues or jazz musicians working the bar and bar mitzvah circuit.

[Audio_ELF]

I recently ran across a news article on the Philly's salaries. Non-"name" players (second chair cello, that sort of thing) were making $130-150k. I'll look for it, but you can probably Google it.

And are you considering $130-150k a good salary or not?

 

Related I just found this -- http://www.theguardian.com/music/tomserviceblog/2014/jun/26/orchestra-salaries-higher-in-america-than-uk

[bdiament]

hi guys, interesting read.

 

One thing, though: how does vinyl compare to master tape? has anyone here had a chance to directly compare them?

 

Hi duartisimo1979,

 

Yes, over the years, I've compared a good many finished recordings, in various formats including vinyl, to the masters from which they were created.

Your question is not unrelated to comparing the format with the input signal (which may be a master tape, or a live mic feed, etc.), which I wrote about in post #8 in this thread.

 

Vinyl can capture a good deal of what is on the master tape but to my ears, the two still sound slightly different. Of course, very much of this depends on the playback setup for the vinyl -- cartridge, turntable, phono preamp, cabling, etc.

 

What gets closer than vinyl (quite easily, to my ears) is the lacquer which is the first step in production of the vinyl disc. The lacquer created in the mastering room is actually more true to its input than any tape in my experience. (This is why direct-to-disc has its adherents.) Only problem with a lacquer is it degrades very quickly.

 

Of course, I would also say the same is true of the finished vinyl as well as the master tape itself. I've long said that what one hears in the first three of so playbacks of any of these, is different -- more transparent -- than what one hears in subsequent playbacks. (This is one reason why bands like Pink Floyd would record their basic tracks and then do all their overdubs to a copy of the tape containing the basic tracks. By avoiding the repeated playings required to add the overdubbed parts, they preserve the freshness and "crispness" of the original recording. When it comes time to mix to stereo, two multitrack machines are synchronized, one playing the original basic tracks and the other playing the tape with the overdubbed tracks.)

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

[bdiament]

I recently ran across a news article on the Philly's salaries. Non-"name" players (second chair cello, that sort of thing) were making $130-150k. I'll look for it, but you can probably Google it.

 

Edit: This is of course a unionized labor force (thus not having to negotiate salaries individually) working for one of the 4 or 5 premier orchestras in the US. These salaries don't hold a candle to what the 400 or 500 premier football players, doctors, lawyers, or for that matter, plumbers and electricians in the country are making. And we are talking about a cultural showpiece in a major city for which corporations and wealthy individuals will happily donate, not rock, blues or jazz musicians working the bar and bar mitzvah circuit.

 

Hi Jud,

 

Indeed.

A jazz player I know once told me a story. I'll try to relate it as well as memory allows.

 

St. Peter is standing at the gates of Heaven, interviewing new arrivals. He asks the first person how much money he made annually. The response was "$250,000". "What did you do?", asked Peter. "I was a medical doctor." Peter waves him in through the gates.

The next person steps up and Peter asks him how much his annual income was. The man says "$90,000." When asked his profession, he told Peter he was an electrical engineer. Peter waved him in through the gates.

As the third person approached, Peter asked him about his annual income and he responded "$15,000."

Peter said, "Oh, what instrument did you play?"

 

 

Badaboom!

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

[duartisimo1979]

ok thanks bdiament!

 

glad i got to learn something new today; not very knowledgable about tech stuff, but i am cleaning house and considering for the first time buying into the whole vinyl thing (have some vinyl only recordings gathering dust) and this info is very helpful, as i have been happy with my EAC rips and HD tracks downloads for years.

 

Your comments about vinyl and master tape playback seems to imply that at around the 3rd spin noise starts building up; would i be wrong to asume that a very carefully set up all-digital environment would yield a cleaner signal overall for a longer time?

[Jud]

And are you considering $130-150k a good salary or not?

 

 

Absolutely. But as I noted, this level of remuneration is quite likely less than that paid to the top few hundred people in the country for work that doesn't have nearly the prestige - plumbing, carpentry, etc. So it's easy enough to look at this any way you choose - a lot compared to the average Joe, not so much compared to the elite in other professions or trades.

[Audio_ELF]

Absolutely. But as I noted, this level of remuneration is quite likely less than that paid to the top few hundred people in the country for work that doesn't have nearly the prestige - plumbing, carpentry, etc. So it's easy enough to look at this any way you choose - a lot compared to the average Joe, not so much compared to the elite in other professions or trades.

I don't have in depth knowledge ... But suggesting that the top plumbers, carpenters etc are earning that much seams at odds to information I have been finding from googling (Average Salaries - Job Descriptions - Annual Job Salaries | PayScale). And $100-130k would be a high average for IT salaries even.

 

You also said that was the salary for second chair cello, etc so they aren't the "top" performers who presumably earn more.

 

I'm not suggesting that it's an excessive pay but musicians are luckier than many.

[bdiament]

...Your comments about vinyl and master tape playback seems to imply that at around the 3rd spin noise starts building up; would i be wrong to asume that a very carefully set up all-digital environment would yield a cleaner signal overall for a longer time?

 

Hi diartisimo1979,

 

It isn't noise that I hear. It is the top end (i.e., the treble) that isn't the same after the first three playings. It is as though what was pin-sharp focus has lost a bit of the precision.

 

I've not heard a similar phenomenon with digital files, though of course, with some very important exceptions, I find the drop to most (though certainly not all) digital a more severe loss. ;-} (Just my own perspective, of course.)

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

[Jud]

I don't have in depth knowledge ... But suggesting that the top plumbers, carpenters etc are earning that much seams at odds to information I have been finding from googling (Average Salaries - Job Descriptions - Annual Job Salaries | PayScale). And $100-130k would be a high average for IT salaries even.

 

You also said that was the salary for second chair cello, etc so they aren't the "top" performers who presumably earn more.

 

I'm not suggesting that it's an excessive pay but musicians are luckier than many.

 

Careful. You're looking at *median* salary information. There you'd be comparing to the great run of musicians on the bar and bar mitzvah circuits.

 

When I said these people are among the 400 or 500 top performers nationwide, that is a relatively simple mental calculation. They are members of the best 4 or 5 classical orchestras, by reputation and remuneration; and let's say, using round numbers, that these orchestras have 100 musicians each. Similarly, the best 400 or 500 football players in the US are not limited to the all-stars (there are ~25 players who make First Team All Pro), but even the middle-of-the-road starters on NFL teams are quite well paid. So the fair comparison would not be to the pay of the *average* plumber, but to the pay of the 400 or 500 top plumbers in the country.

[Jud]

Musician or Singer Salary (United States)

 

Plumber Salary (United States)

 

On the second page, click the "Show Annual Salary" link to compare.

 

- Plumber median annual salary: $48,576

 

- Musician or singer median annual salary: $39,279

 

Edit:

 

- 2014 US poverty level, family of four: $23,850

[Audio_ELF]

Careful. You're looking at *median* salary information. There you'd be comparing to the great run of musicians on the bar and bar mitzvah circuits.

 

When I said these people are among the 400 or 500 top performers nationwide, that is a relatively simple mental calculation. They are members of the best 4 or 5 classical orchestras, by reputation and remuneration; and let's say, using round numbers, that these orchestras have 100 musicians each. [...] So the fair comparison would not be to the pay of the *average* plumber, but to the pay of the 400 or 500 top plumbers in the country.

I think to be FAIR you would have to compare the percentages rather than absolute numbers Jud... These are the top 4-500 out of a profession of perhaps 20-40,000 (?) full time musicians (rather than those who earn some money from performing separate from a full time job) compared with 400,000 plumbers (Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters : Occupational Outlook Handbook : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). So you should compare those 400 to the top 4,000 plumbers.

 

I agree that a lot of musicians earn a lot less. But your figures are not convincing me that orchestras don't pay their members well.

 

PS/Edit: such comparisons only go so far because one problem is that "plumber" is a narrowly defined profession to look at earning vs "musician" which as you comment includes the guys earning $200 for a party as well as the large orchestras and the every day session musicians.

[Jud]

Musician or Singer Salary (United States)

 

Plumber Salary (United States)

 

On the second page, click the "Show Annual Salary" link to compare.

 

- Plumber median annual salary: $48,576

 

- Musician or singer median annual salary: $39,279

 

Edit:

 

- 2014 US poverty level, family of four: $23,850

 

Further edit:

 

- 2011-12 average annual tuition, fees, room and board at a 4-year college in the US: $23,066

[Audio_ELF]

Musician or Singer Salary (United States)

 

Plumber Salary (United States)

 

On the second page, click the "Show Annual Salary" link to compare.

 

- Plumber median annual salary: $48,576

 

- Musician or singer median annual salary: $39,279

 

Edit:

 

- 2014 US poverty level, family of four: $23,850

Of course this -- http://www1.salary.com/WARNER-MUSIC-GROUP-CORP-Executive-Salaries.html -- is the real problem in the music industry...

 

Name/Title Total Cash Equity Other Total Compensation

Stephen Cooper

CEO $2,570,000 $8,805,205 $0 $11,375,205

Cameron Strang

Chairman and CEO, Warner/Chappell Music $2,464,965 $5,429,877 $7,500 $7,902,342

Brian Roberts

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer $687,585 $1,115,326 $7,500 $1,810,411

Mark Ansorge

Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Chief Compliance Officer $480,100 $851,170 $7,500 $1,338,770

Rob S. Wiesenthal

Chief Operating Officer/Corporate $1,622,615 $587,014 $0 $2,209,629

[Jud]

I think to be FAIR you would have to compare the percentages rather than absolute numbers Jud... These are the top 4-500 out of a profession of perhaps 20-40,000 (?) full time musicians (rather than those who earn some money from performing separate from a full time job) compared with 400,000 plumbers (Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters : Occupational Outlook Handbook : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). So you should compare those 400 to the top 4,000 plumbers.

 

I agree that a lot of musicians earn a lot less. But your figures are not convincing me that orchestras don't pay their members well.

 

Looking at the reference you gave, Eloise, it shows the median annual salary for musicians and singers (i.e., same number making less as making more) to be a little less than 1 2/3 times the national poverty level for the average family. That's less than plumbers, whose median (comparing like for like from your reference) is a bit over double the national poverty level. It is certainly not enough to send a child to college without substantial aid, and at this salary level we're talking about cutting back on groceries if you want to start buying audio equipment. This is definitely not the lot of top orchestra players, but as I noted it's not the lot of top plumbers (or top anything) either.

[Jud]

Of course this -- WARNER MUSIC GROUP CORP. Executive Salaries & Other Compensation | Salary.com -- is the real problem in the music industry...

 

Name/Title Total Cash Equity Other Total Compensation

Stephen Cooper

CEO $2,570,000 $8,805,205 $0 $11,375,205

Cameron Strang

Chairman and CEO, Warner/Chappell Music $2,464,965 $5,429,877 $7,500 $7,902,342

Brian Roberts

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer $687,585 $1,115,326 $7,500 $1,810,411

Mark Ansorge

Executive Vice President, Human Resources and Chief Compliance Officer $480,100 $851,170 $7,500 $1,338,770

Rob S. Wiesenthal

Chief Operating Officer/Corporate $1,622,615 $587,014 $0 $2,209,629

 

No no, the problem is teh piracy!

 

That said, I don't begrudge anyone making money if they bring value. Of course the music industry isn't doing that well....

[Audio_ELF]

I'm not sure we are completely disagreeing Jud... I will however repost the PS from the earlier post...

PS/Edit: such comparisons only go so far because one problem is that "plumber" is a narrowly defined profession to look at earning vs "musician" which as you comment includes the guys earning $200 for a party as well as the large orchestras and the every day session musicians.

[bluesman]

David ... I'm not going to defend my comments ... but they were specifically in response to your comment that "It's appalling how little most professional musicians make and how hard they have to work to earn a living. Most play in multiple groups and teach. Many also work in music stores or other "day gigs"." (and specifically the use of the word appalling) as if those of use who just enjoy music are not working hard.

Hmmm. Perhaps I should have added the preface, "Given how important they are to so many people, how much better they make life for so many people, and how little most people know about their working lives".......

 

I feel the same way about teachers (who hold the future of our world in their hands), police (who protect us and enforce many of the laws that keep us civilized), firepeople (who protect and save our property and lives) etc. Musicians and other artists make the world a more pleasant and thoughtful place for everyone. Police, firepeople and many teachers face threat of bodily harm daily. And (as Nombedes observes), many local and regional musicians have neither insurance nor savings and are often at the mercy of charity when stricken by illness, injury, or the ravages of time and a hard life. Paying people millions to throw a ball through a hoop while paying the people who inspire, teach and protect our kids half what a plumber makes is appalling to me, even though they can all afford to eat and keep a roof over their heads.

 

I've played for a well known blues band from Louisiana for about 20 years. They spend most of their year abroad now (sadly without me - I'm not dedicated enough to live without my day gig) because they're given so much more respect and paid so much better in Europe and Asia than they are here. With 10 CDs and a full touring schedule, the leader's in the Louisiana Blues Hall of Fame and a WC Handy award winner. I've stayed in the fleabag motels provided by the venues when on the road with him, and seen firsthand how poorly we were treated by many US club owners. In Europe, the promoters pay far better and provide comfortable lodging, all meals, and a van at each stop on the tour.

 

Yes, it's great to make a living doing what you love. Yes, most musicians I know consider themselves lucky. And yes, most musicians do know what both a performance and a good recording of same sound like - that's why there are so many disputes between them and their record companies about releasing albums they don't like. A wonderful Brooklyn bluesman named Michael Hill says it very well in one of the classic lines in all of music: "maybe someday our heroes will get paid while they're alive".

[Audio_ELF]

David ... At the end of the day I think a musician *should* be paid about the same as a sports man is paid... But I think a lot of sports men should be paid a hell of a lot less than they are paid. All in all paid as an "ordinary" but skilled person should be.

 

Music is important for life; but it is hardly a life or death situation. Perhaps also my view is biased by the difference in remuneration provided to "essential" careers in our respective countries.

 

I shan't start on your comment "many local and regional musicians have neither insurance nor savings and are often at the mercy of charity when stricken by illness, injury, or the ravages of time and a hard life" as that reply would be completely off topic instead of the 3/4 of the way off topic :-) but suffice to say that I think that is a disgusting situation for musicians or anyone to find themselves in, in what is supposed to be civilised western society...

 

Hmmm. Perhaps I should have added the preface, "Given how important they are to so many people, how much better they make life for so many people, and how little most people know about their working lives".......

 

I feel the same way about teachers (who hold the future of our world in their hands), police (who protect us and enforce many of the laws that keep us civilized), firepeople (who protect and save our property and lives) etc. Musicians and other artists make the world a more pleasant and thoughtful place for everyone. Police, firepeople and many teachers face threat of bodily harm daily. And (as Nombedes observes), many local and regional musicians have neither insurance nor savings and are often at the mercy of charity when stricken by illness, injury, or the ravages of time and a hard life. Paying people millions to throw a ball through a hoop while paying the people who inspire, teach and protect our kids half what a plumber makes is appalling to me, even though they can all afford to eat and keep a roof over their heads.

 

I've played for a well known blues band from Louisiana for about 20 years. They spend most of their year abroad now (sadly without me - I'm not dedicated enough to live without my day gig) because they're given so much more respect and paid so much better in Europe and Asia than they are here. With 10 CDs and a full touring schedule, the leader's in the Louisiana Blues Hall of Fame and a WC Handy award winner. I've stayed in the fleabag motels provided by the venues when on the road with him, and seen firsthand how poorly we were treated by many US club owners. In Europe, the promoters pay far better and provide comfortable lodging, all meals, and a van at each stop on the tour.

 

Yes, it's great to make a living doing what you love. Yes, most musicians I know consider themselves lucky. And yes, most musicians do know what both a performance and a good recording of same sound like - that's why there are so many disputes between them and their record companies about releasing albums they don't like. A wonderful Brooklyn bluesman named Michael Hill says it very well in one of the classic lines in all of music: "maybe someday our heroes will get paid while they're alive".

[NOMBEDES]

He mentioned that many musicians in his experience, even those working for well known artists, needed second jobs, i.e., music did not provide a living wage. As for a 40 hour week - is there a venue you know of paying musicians to do 8 hours of shows per day for 5 days each week, and do you know of a musician with that level of endurance?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Errr.....The BEATLES, (et al) Hamburg, Germany. Sometimes more that 8hrs, If I recall correctly. I doubt that this is still the case, as a lot of low end German beer has passed under the Brueke since the early 1960s.

[bluesman]

I recently ran across a news article on the Philly's salaries. Non-"name" players (second chair cello, that sort of thing) were making $130-150k.

Here's a quote from the last round of contract negotiations for the Philadelphia Orchestra:

 

"A recent snapshot of labor negotiations reported that one recent proposal would cut salaries 20 percent - from the base minimum of a scheduled March 21 raise to $131,000 down to $104,000. The article further stated that the base salary figure was deceptive, since so many musicians over the years have been paid additional income by the orchestra - for example, for media activity and a "string bonus." Additionally, titled players earn more (concertmaster, associates, principals and co-principals)." And from the Philadelphia Inquirer comes this summary of the top salaries for that group:

 

David Kim, concertmaster: $402,561

David Bilger, principal trumpeter: $296,204

Jeffery Khaner, principal flutist: $278,238

Riccardo Morales, principal clarinetist: $268,465

Richard Woodhams, principal oboist: $278,577

Jennifer Montone, principal hornist: $256,440

 

Not too shabby! Now I feel kinda bad about settling for $25 for last night's gig - next time I'll hold out for free beer.

 

I'll try to find out what kind of audio systems they have and report back. FWIW and as I recall, when I moved to Philly in 1968, Eugene Ormandy had Tandberg tape and a Thorens TT with Martin speakers powered by Mac (the real Mac).....