Dear Mr Bitter Liberty - Pls dont devalue local musicians!!
- Thread starter bigtokes2003
- Start date
stillwater
New member
where's bitterliberty, why isn't he saying something?
is he hiding bitterly, from his liberty to shine some light?... :lol:
oops, forgive me if i sounded crap, i was just trying to be poetic...
guess i failed bitterly
is he hiding bitterly, from his liberty to shine some light?... :lol:
oops, forgive me if i sounded crap, i was just trying to be poetic...
guess i failed bitterly
HeartRockSingapore
New member
Newbie said:
Let's put it this way, if I can go watch a band for free at one gig, will I still go watch them at a paid one? I am not talking about die hard followings that go wherever the band goes, and certainly if we bang on die hard fellas, the scene will die hard. We need to expand beyond the usual few hundred die hardies.
Mind you, there are those who simply do not believe in paying to watch gigs. Yet they are great supporters who would attend any free gigs and give the bands their loudest cheer. The bands need such people as well.
Free gigs are there to help build up a following, ppl who grow to love their music. The belief is gigging at such place is prestigious.
Paid gigs are there to recognize that the bands have made it.
If it is possible, (I know it's gonna be a bit sticky here) I wouldn't want to put bands with good following on my free gigs for the same reason. And bands must not overexpose themselves...over supply equals devaluation.
I guess we still need free gigs because there are just too many new and unheard of bands, and these are the vulnerable ones. But having said that, many of these bands do not want to play on free gigs thinking that it will cheapen them, so they quietly pay the orgnizers in cash or in kind to get to play at pubs and drinking places.
There are many orgs including HRS out there flagging in the name of local scene, and it takes a seasoned man to smell what the fish is inside its pocket. Each has its own agenda, just how much of it does not give a damn to musicians.
super_punk
New member
i think it's fair to say that most bands starting out are happy to have A gig. i myself at this point do not really care whether i'm paid for a gig.
Oi! we should stop having threads like these which whack and hammer a single individual for a comment said. although this one turned out to be intelligent talk, we should really not accuse people like BitterLiberty of doing something so drastic as devaluing musicians purely on grounds of comments made in other threads.
Remember a certain thread named "DON'T CORK MR.SUPER_PUNK!!!"?
Oi! we should stop having threads like these which whack and hammer a single individual for a comment said. although this one turned out to be intelligent talk, we should really not accuse people like BitterLiberty of doing something so drastic as devaluing musicians purely on grounds of comments made in other threads.
Remember a certain thread named "DON'T CORK MR.SUPER_PUNK!!!"?
For a band that is starting out, why should they be paid??? the organiser has given them an oppurtunity to perform and in return they get experience on stage and move on..Until they get to a stage where they are a more experience outfit who plays not for themselves but for the crowd then it make sense to pay them..
that should be the way..all the resta nd just plain nonsense and thsoe organisers who are wasting time doing gigs but only having 10 - 40 people and utter rubbish....the organisers should do a more quality filled gig rather then having a gig with an audience of just 10 to 40 people.....that is what is killing our scene....
that should be the way..all the resta nd just plain nonsense and thsoe organisers who are wasting time doing gigs but only having 10 - 40 people and utter rubbish....the organisers should do a more quality filled gig rather then having a gig with an audience of just 10 to 40 people.....that is what is killing our scene....
HeyHoLetsGo
New member
OK, let’s take a good look at the live music industry here.
1) If the gig is sponsored by a for-profit organizer, by all means the bands should be compensated with cash, even if it’s only reimbursement for their transportation costs. The band has performed a valuable and legitimate service. But to ask the organizer for a sum that also covers jamming studio fees is not appropriate, since you would jam for fun anyway, whether you have a gig or not. It’s your choice to finance your own creative efforts in that way. If, however, the gig is a charity event, it is generally understood that all participating parties are donating their services and talents so that the charity can benefit from the proceeds.
2) It is unfair to demand that if an event organizer or pub operator profits, than so must the bands. It has been suggested that event organization requires little effort. Possibly. But the real issue here is risk. An event organizer or pub operator is taking a risk, investing money for something that may or may not work out. If the night is a bust, the band walks away with a vow to practice harder next time. Meanwhile the organizer could be out of a job or the pub operator could find it hard to break even. This is why for-profit situations seem unfair to bands on the surface. It’s not about exploitation, these guys take real risks with real money and real professional reputations.
3) It’s not exactly correct to compare indie bands with show bands. Indie bands are players who get together when it suits them, play the kind of music they love, and gig when they feel they have their crap together. Musicians in show bands rehearse and play gigs even when sick or tired or both, and play songs most of them would rather not play, and smile while doing it. If the pub owner wants to hear Hotel California every night, how many indie bands are willing to learn how to play it? Cover bands do it to put food on the table. Indie bands do it for fun.
4) As for promotion and advertising, it is everybody's job to promote gigs. The event organizer has to promote his event, the pub owner has to promote his pub and the band has to let their fans and friends know when and where they're gigging. The more bases covered, the better the turnout all around. However, to think that you should only play in a venue where there is a ready crowd assumes that the crowd would even be interested in what you have to play. Get a gig in a big live music club and see how many people want to hear Hotel California.
The indie music industry in Singapore is in its very early stages. Everybody has to struggle to get anywhere – bands, organizers, fans – everybody has to stick their neck out if the scene is ever going to “happen.” It’s always healthy to question what’s going on and to address important issues, but too much negativity is counterproductive. It’s better to think constructively. We have many enthusiasts and many talents, but no scene. It’s not just a question of why is it like that, but what can we all do to change it together?
Later.
1) If the gig is sponsored by a for-profit organizer, by all means the bands should be compensated with cash, even if it’s only reimbursement for their transportation costs. The band has performed a valuable and legitimate service. But to ask the organizer for a sum that also covers jamming studio fees is not appropriate, since you would jam for fun anyway, whether you have a gig or not. It’s your choice to finance your own creative efforts in that way. If, however, the gig is a charity event, it is generally understood that all participating parties are donating their services and talents so that the charity can benefit from the proceeds.
2) It is unfair to demand that if an event organizer or pub operator profits, than so must the bands. It has been suggested that event organization requires little effort. Possibly. But the real issue here is risk. An event organizer or pub operator is taking a risk, investing money for something that may or may not work out. If the night is a bust, the band walks away with a vow to practice harder next time. Meanwhile the organizer could be out of a job or the pub operator could find it hard to break even. This is why for-profit situations seem unfair to bands on the surface. It’s not about exploitation, these guys take real risks with real money and real professional reputations.
3) It’s not exactly correct to compare indie bands with show bands. Indie bands are players who get together when it suits them, play the kind of music they love, and gig when they feel they have their crap together. Musicians in show bands rehearse and play gigs even when sick or tired or both, and play songs most of them would rather not play, and smile while doing it. If the pub owner wants to hear Hotel California every night, how many indie bands are willing to learn how to play it? Cover bands do it to put food on the table. Indie bands do it for fun.
4) As for promotion and advertising, it is everybody's job to promote gigs. The event organizer has to promote his event, the pub owner has to promote his pub and the band has to let their fans and friends know when and where they're gigging. The more bases covered, the better the turnout all around. However, to think that you should only play in a venue where there is a ready crowd assumes that the crowd would even be interested in what you have to play. Get a gig in a big live music club and see how many people want to hear Hotel California.
The indie music industry in Singapore is in its very early stages. Everybody has to struggle to get anywhere – bands, organizers, fans – everybody has to stick their neck out if the scene is ever going to “happen.” It’s always healthy to question what’s going on and to address important issues, but too much negativity is counterproductive. It’s better to think constructively. We have many enthusiasts and many talents, but no scene. It’s not just a question of why is it like that, but what can we all do to change it together?
Later.
Hi HeyHo,
if you've been following the posts, we ARE doing something constructive about (other than bitching about how lousy the local scene is):
I'm picking up the threads and translating these into something more tangible. Here are the suggestions:
1. Set up a musicians' union of sorts to represent bands that deserve to be paid. Bands at all levels can be represented, and tiered accordingly. Hence it will be also easier to have a menu of charges for each band's appearance.
2. Get bands to recognise that gig organisers aren't charity organisations either; so there's an urgent need for all parties (bands, organisers, equipment renters, fans, facilities owners etc) to work towards a win-win situation. What does this involve? Charging for entry, revenue-sharing models, selling tickets, etc. Details to be worked out between all parties before the gig is even staged.
3. Are we all in it for the money? Yes and no. However, what we ALL agree on is that we aren't in it to be exploited, whichever camp you hail from. So we need to lay the ground rules for that.
So what's next? If we have the gusto and foresight, we'd set up one union for musos, and another for gig organisers, and have representatives from each side hold bilateral discussions that cover off a whole year's activities. And we can move these into a greater collective to leverage for use of public stages, pubs etc.
Maybe Mr. Heartrock has already gotten the ball rolling, and maybe Mr. Aging Youth has done the same. Maybe even Mr. rottenramone has done the same. What we need is to have a constructive meeting of minds, a constructive agenda, a collective agreement, and presto! we can move on.
In fact, we SHOULD move on.
Shall we use the coming Softie gathering at Earshot to effect this movement? (and hopefully not divert the original objective of the gathering, that is)
if you've been following the posts, we ARE doing something constructive about (other than bitching about how lousy the local scene is):
I'm picking up the threads and translating these into something more tangible. Here are the suggestions:
1. Set up a musicians' union of sorts to represent bands that deserve to be paid. Bands at all levels can be represented, and tiered accordingly. Hence it will be also easier to have a menu of charges for each band's appearance.
2. Get bands to recognise that gig organisers aren't charity organisations either; so there's an urgent need for all parties (bands, organisers, equipment renters, fans, facilities owners etc) to work towards a win-win situation. What does this involve? Charging for entry, revenue-sharing models, selling tickets, etc. Details to be worked out between all parties before the gig is even staged.
3. Are we all in it for the money? Yes and no. However, what we ALL agree on is that we aren't in it to be exploited, whichever camp you hail from. So we need to lay the ground rules for that.
So what's next? If we have the gusto and foresight, we'd set up one union for musos, and another for gig organisers, and have representatives from each side hold bilateral discussions that cover off a whole year's activities. And we can move these into a greater collective to leverage for use of public stages, pubs etc.
Maybe Mr. Heartrock has already gotten the ball rolling, and maybe Mr. Aging Youth has done the same. Maybe even Mr. rottenramone has done the same. What we need is to have a constructive meeting of minds, a constructive agenda, a collective agreement, and presto! we can move on.
In fact, we SHOULD move on.
Shall we use the coming Softie gathering at Earshot to effect this movement? (and hopefully not divert the original objective of the gathering, that is)
penta-tonic
New member
i guess maybe some of u need to get off ur ass to start organising gigs n realising tt maybe its shit tt the organisers might have to cover some of the funds out of their own pocket money but then wat would u guys know anyway? most of u havent eventried to organise a gig before. if bands wanna get paid they ought to be good enough which most arent no offence to the good bands out there. furthermore most gigs require the bands to sell tickets dats all. u mean u dont have to do your own damned part to raise awareness and publicity for your own damned band? organisers already do their part by providing a good location to strut your stuff so in all fairness do your part and quit whining. personally for me ive done both gigs and organised gigs. on the musician side im not concerned abt the income cash cos music is most important to me. i dont do it for the sake of money. this effectively weeds out the cash hungry pple rather than those who just do it for the love of music.
First, if it is so difficult to organise, then dont organise. Nobody asked these people to organsie gigs.
Second, Singapore bands are not cash hungry, like you, they are in it for the music. I mean how much do local bands get paid, if any??? Peanuts! So to say they cash hungry and help to weed these from those are downright unfair lah.
I will say this again - any organisers who dont pay bands is simply silly, cos its as good as taking advantage of them. Let me put across this analogy, I once had to organise this company event which involve a big shot artist drawing something on stage lah. We cant afford to pay as per his usual rate. He on the otherhand said we dont have to pay anything! He willingly do it for free! However my boss told me, said NO, we cannot let him do for free cos its as good as taking our local talents for granted. So we paid him an honorarium of $2,000. As such any oranisers, even gig organisers have to be responsible. Respect the talents. Pay them when its due even if they are willing to play for free. Pay what you can afford. Its a recognition for the bands' efforts. It is the very basic of good principals.
Another time I read this article about a girl in LA. She loves to do massages and she will do it for free. She managed to get into this celebrity cirlce and she will do massages for celebrities. One day after a massage, the particular celebrity asked her how much, She said, its OK, i dont charge, i do it for the love of it! The guy looked at her and said "You must be kidding, look as long as you dont charge, people will not take your SKILLS seriously", and he insisted in paying her.
A lot of this debate about organisers not paying is not about bands demanding payment but as to why organisers dont pay. So dont put the wrong spotlight on the local bands ya - who have all these while put up with less than savoury organisers out to make a profit for themselves in the name of promoting the local scene.
Second, Singapore bands are not cash hungry, like you, they are in it for the music. I mean how much do local bands get paid, if any??? Peanuts! So to say they cash hungry and help to weed these from those are downright unfair lah.
I will say this again - any organisers who dont pay bands is simply silly, cos its as good as taking advantage of them. Let me put across this analogy, I once had to organise this company event which involve a big shot artist drawing something on stage lah. We cant afford to pay as per his usual rate. He on the otherhand said we dont have to pay anything! He willingly do it for free! However my boss told me, said NO, we cannot let him do for free cos its as good as taking our local talents for granted. So we paid him an honorarium of $2,000. As such any oranisers, even gig organisers have to be responsible. Respect the talents. Pay them when its due even if they are willing to play for free. Pay what you can afford. Its a recognition for the bands' efforts. It is the very basic of good principals.
Another time I read this article about a girl in LA. She loves to do massages and she will do it for free. She managed to get into this celebrity cirlce and she will do massages for celebrities. One day after a massage, the particular celebrity asked her how much, She said, its OK, i dont charge, i do it for the love of it! The guy looked at her and said "You must be kidding, look as long as you dont charge, people will not take your SKILLS seriously", and he insisted in paying her.
A lot of this debate about organisers not paying is not about bands demanding payment but as to why organisers dont pay. So dont put the wrong spotlight on the local bands ya - who have all these while put up with less than savoury organisers out to make a profit for themselves in the name of promoting the local scene.
bernardgoh
New member
i guess different people think differently. IMOH, i really think if the music scene is going to a way that all bands must be paid, it would also means lesser gigs, smaller gigs... screw up sound equipment due to cost cutting from the organiser because they need to pay the musicians. can't find venues that is cheap enuff.... lots and lots of stuff. Money make things goes round.
I don't understand why people always think gigs organiser is the profitter??? as what i see, most of the gigs organisers is actually the loser. they only gain friendship and stuff like that.
and lastly, what i can't stand on some local bands is they always think they're so good and when i talk to them, they think they're some rock stars or something. not listening to advise and play hard to get. then when you tell them, sorry, we can't have what you wanted so we can't engage you for the show due to budget... then they start to complain that we're not doing our parts and stuff like that. i mean if there's no budget, there wouldn't be any budget..... just ask anyone who organises gigs before how it like. as what i know, they need to pay for the venues, equipments, sercurity, advertisment etc..... and if there's any problem like spoiled equipment or fighting, they get themself into trouble but the bands just walk away quietly like it doesn't concern them. anyway, if one gigs organiser is gone, they always can get another one. still ..... everything is type in one go with my truth feeling. i know many people would not agreed with it but still, that's what i think lor.
I don't understand why people always think gigs organiser is the profitter??? as what i see, most of the gigs organisers is actually the loser. they only gain friendship and stuff like that.
and lastly, what i can't stand on some local bands is they always think they're so good and when i talk to them, they think they're some rock stars or something. not listening to advise and play hard to get. then when you tell them, sorry, we can't have what you wanted so we can't engage you for the show due to budget... then they start to complain that we're not doing our parts and stuff like that. i mean if there's no budget, there wouldn't be any budget..... just ask anyone who organises gigs before how it like. as what i know, they need to pay for the venues, equipments, sercurity, advertisment etc..... and if there's any problem like spoiled equipment or fighting, they get themself into trouble but the bands just walk away quietly like it doesn't concern them. anyway, if one gigs organiser is gone, they always can get another one.
still ..... everything is type in one go with my truth feeling. i know many people would not agreed with it but still, that's what i think lor. 3notesAbar
New member
Talk is Cheap la.
MichaelAngelo
New member
di mana beetleliberty? is he "EXTREMELY BUSY" again? please come and say something beetleliberty, after so much being said, we'd like to hear your say on these things against you!
khai_stereotype
New member
as
if talk is cheap.
and evryone doesnt want to be cheap.
imagine a world of no speechs...
think before you speak bro/
if talk is cheap.
and evryone doesnt want to be cheap.
imagine a world of no speechs...
think before you speak bro/
3notesAbar
New member
3notesAbar said:
HeartRockSingapore said:
We know what everybody wants. Its just whether its possible to get it. A union sounds like a good first step, but they must also look at the cost and quality of making a gig, while pleasing all parties. Its a tough job, but someone's gotta do it eventually.
3notesAbar
New member
Re: as
heh.
khai_stereotype said:
heh.
super_punk
New member
MichaelAngelo said:
this is what i'm talking about. let's stop chasing and whacking this individual and focus on the issue at hand.
bigtokes2003
New member
Re: as
dude, i think the point of that statement is that talk is cheap if it isnt followed by action.
khai_stereotype said:
dude, i think the point of that statement is that talk is cheap if it isnt followed by action.
I have organised a gig with my old band before, and with the right connections and the right supporters, the entire gig didn't cost us more than $50 to prepare for.
The gig lasted 3 whole hours and there was only my band on the stage the whole night. Quite a bargain you might say, but it really WAS that simple.
Right Vaiyen? *winks* :wink:
The gig lasted 3 whole hours and there was only my band on the stage the whole night. Quite a bargain you might say, but it really WAS that simple.
Right Vaiyen? *winks* :wink:
Hey,
Am curious about what Azaro [sp?] said much earlier on about having to fulfil several clauses in order to secure a performance slot in the gig organised by bitterliberty. What were these clauses exactly? Were they the same as the ones bigtokes is against?
Also, has anyone else personally experienced a case where organisers have asked you to pay a fee in order to perform? Or any other requirements you felt were unreasonable?
(Nothing against gig organisers, btw. I hope to get a clearer picture of what's going on, and whether it's something everybody really needs to be aware of. Any gig organisers care to share their experiences with unreasonable bands?)
Am curious about what Azaro [sp?] said much earlier on about having to fulfil several clauses in order to secure a performance slot in the gig organised by bitterliberty. What were these clauses exactly? Were they the same as the ones bigtokes is against?
Also, has anyone else personally experienced a case where organisers have asked you to pay a fee in order to perform? Or any other requirements you felt were unreasonable?
(Nothing against gig organisers, btw. I hope to get a clearer picture of what's going on, and whether it's something everybody really needs to be aware of. Any gig organisers care to share their experiences with unreasonable bands?)
HeyHoLetsGo
New member
Hi Azaro,
I understand what you're saying, but I think what you propose sounds better on paper. Who exactly will be the people who will decide which bands "deserve" to get paid, and who exactly will decide which categories the bands fall into and how much they will be paid correspondingly? I don't think anyone is really qualified to make blanket judgements about all of the bands currently playing the scene or hoping to get into it. I know I wouldn't want that job.
Unions - once you create a union, you've created An Establishment.
OK, now, IMHO, and I know I'm gonna get hell for this. But in Singapore we always look to The Establishment to make everything nice, to make everything fair. Anytime we fall we run to The Establishment to help us back up again. But you see where that got us? Even now, The Establishment is asking us to be more creative, more entrepreneurial and to not depend on them so much. In wanting a union, aren't we basically saying we want a nice big brother to come in and make sure everything turns out fair? Then what happens to our musical creativity? It gets bogged down in union regulations, government intervention, widespread taxation and the inherent politics of organized groups. Is that what we really need? What would that do to our desire to push ourselves and this local music scene to make it grow into something to be proud of - we've got a long way to go, but I see a lot of promise. And what about musicians who try to venture beyond Singapore's shores after a lifetime of union protection, only to find that indie musicians elsewhere don't have the same protection - they have all had to take their lumps. Then how can our musicians even have a chance to compete?
I think this debate is awesome and I think it's a really positive thing to bring all these issues out into the light of day, shake them out and get everybody all riled up. We need to be hungry.
Now, shut up n play yer guitar. (thanks, Zappa)
I understand what you're saying, but I think what you propose sounds better on paper. Who exactly will be the people who will decide which bands "deserve" to get paid, and who exactly will decide which categories the bands fall into and how much they will be paid correspondingly? I don't think anyone is really qualified to make blanket judgements about all of the bands currently playing the scene or hoping to get into it. I know I wouldn't want that job.
Unions - once you create a union, you've created An Establishment.
OK, now, IMHO, and I know I'm gonna get hell for this. But in Singapore we always look to The Establishment to make everything nice, to make everything fair. Anytime we fall we run to The Establishment to help us back up again. But you see where that got us? Even now, The Establishment is asking us to be more creative, more entrepreneurial and to not depend on them so much. In wanting a union, aren't we basically saying we want a nice big brother to come in and make sure everything turns out fair? Then what happens to our musical creativity? It gets bogged down in union regulations, government intervention, widespread taxation and the inherent politics of organized groups. Is that what we really need? What would that do to our desire to push ourselves and this local music scene to make it grow into something to be proud of - we've got a long way to go, but I see a lot of promise. And what about musicians who try to venture beyond Singapore's shores after a lifetime of union protection, only to find that indie musicians elsewhere don't have the same protection - they have all had to take their lumps. Then how can our musicians even have a chance to compete?
I think this debate is awesome and I think it's a really positive thing to bring all these issues out into the light of day, shake them out and get everybody all riled up. We need to be hungry.
Now, shut up n play yer guitar. (thanks, Zappa)