Getting too old to make it?

[TeleKitty]

Delbert McClinton is 67 and still going strong. His cruise sells out every year.

[BlueStrat]

 

Delbert McClinton is 67 and still going strong. His cruise sells out every year.

 

 

 

Yup. But he 'made it' 40 years ago....

[Poker99]

I don't even know who the {censored} he is. That must mean he didn't make it.

[ari]

What I like to call "The great corporate backfire" ( basically, the industry trying to change formats several year ago that resulted into easily accessable MP3s and illegal downloads) has done nothing more than level the playing field for everybody - regardless of age. "Making It" is over - in the future, the millionaire rock star is going be few and far between, but rather an enteprising individual with initiative, business sense, and well-versed with the web can easily carve out a little niche for themselves and release music independently without the need for a label behind them telling him/her that they are too old for the industry

 

 

 

Agreed 100%. The current time is a good time for us musicians -- certainly not worse than any previous eras.

 

ari

[VonBonfire]

You all are some negative {censored}ers.......no wonder none of you never "made" it. As though that really meant something.

 

As long as you put heart and soul into what you are doing I don't see how you can't not "make" it.

 

The age stuff is pure bull{censored}. Get off the {censored}in forum and get to work NOW!

[BlueStrat]

You all are some negative {censored}ers.......no wonder none of you never "made" it. As though that really meant something. As long as you put heart and soul into what you are doing I don't see how you can't not "make" it. The age stuff is pure bull{censored}. Get off the {censored}in forum and get to work NOW!

 

{censored} off and {censored} you, you {censored}ing {censored}.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BlueStrat]

 

certainly not worse than any previous eras.

 

 

You can't be serious.

[daddymack]

Agreed 100%. The current time is a good time for us musicians -- certainly not worse than any previous eras. ari

 

I have to wonder on what you base that assumption?

Agreed that the potential opportunity via the internet is unseating the power of labels to control the industry. But at the same time, it increases the amount of competitors, many of who don't even really have a band, as such, and are in no small part technical wizardry, rather than musical skill.

[DevilRaysFan]

 

I have to wonder on what you base that assumption? Agreed that the potential opportunity via the internet is unseating the power of labels to control the industry. But at the same time, it increases the amount of competitors, many of who don't even really have a band, as such, and are in no small part technical wizardry, rather than musical skill.

 

 

 

But thats the key: At the very least, the oppurtunity now exists. Labels and distributors are no longer judge and jury of who gets heard to the world. For some, just having that oppurtunity is reward enough.....better to be a small fish in a huge pond full of other fish of all sizes than to be a fish beached out of water.....No matter how small the odds, the pond at least offers some chance of survival...........

 

 

Also: To say that "technical wizardry" isnt "musical skill" is kind of elitest. There are DJs in band situations and rap acts that can work a turntable with skill, finesse - and 'touch' - like a classical pianist.....and there is a beauty in music programming as well, be it trying to recreate the sound and feel of actual acoustic performances or hard electronica....I can hear the art in a fabulous dark-electro hard-dance or industrial piece by bands such as Frontline Assembly or older Skinny Puppy. There is beauty and elogance in that. Painstaking programming is an art and it has its rewards: Im one of those guys that programs drums in a computer that adds different velocties, slight head-strike variations, multi-layers of one instrument, and I will painstakingly make sure its not a 3-Armed drummer........

[azmyth]

I read this post, and I have to say it made me a little depressed.

I'm 26 years old...

I've been doing music since I was 15.. and your all telling me I'm too old?

I've gotta learn to stop listening to people on message boards..

I also keep forgetting that opinions as we know are like a-holes.. and everyone seems to have one.

I do agree that the majority of artists these days are signed to record labels at a young age.. but..

You don't need a record label anymore. Sure, its the "fastest" way to the top.. but def. not the only way.

The internet has opened up doors that previously were unreachable.

Computers have made it so that aspiring musicians don't have to have a fortune saved to get a recording.

Sure, there are 1000s of crap artists for every 1 good artist out there. But, this has always been there.. you just didn't notice it until now.

Age is just a number and as long as you sell records.. it should matter what that number is.

I'm continuing on with my music career. Any label that doesn't want an artist due to age and not musical skill/selling prowess doesn't deserve them in the first place.

[cherri]

Knowing that at my age I will never "make it" in the commercial sense has freed me up considerably. I write and perform whatever I want to.

It all depends on each persons' definition of "making it". There was a time when having my own karaoke DJ night at the Deersnort Inn was the pinnacle of success for me. My OWN karaoke night!!! That was huge. I felt like I was on top of the world. At the time.

When you stop obsessing on the glorious future, and begin enjoying the ride you're on, it ceases to matter whether or not you "make it". Planning for the future is important. But I see many people who imagine this gravy future, and never map out the steps to get there. They spend their imaginary riches in their mind and don't bother to practice their instrument.

Silly people.

[fuzzball]

You all are some negative {censored}ers.......no wonder none of you never "made" it. As though that really meant something. As long as you put heart and soul into what you are doing I don't see how you can't not "make" it. The age stuff is pure bull{censored}. Get off the {censored}in forum and get to work NOW!

I "made it".

I decided I like to remain less popular and maintain my freedom.

[BlueStrat]

 

I'm 26 years old... I've been doing music since I was 15.. and your all telling me I'm too old?

 

 

I don't think anyone has said that, much less all of us. You read into stuff what you want, I suppose.

 

Personally, I'd never say 26 was too old to make it in the conventional sense. At 36, that's getting pretty iffy. At 46, you're delusional.

 

 

You don't need a record label anymore. Sure, its the "fastest" way to the top.. but def. not the only way. The internet has opened up doors that previously were unreachable.

 

 

You know, I keep hearing this same tired mantra, and every time I ask anyone to back this up, I hear "well....Ani DiFranco did it!" And maybe one or two ther bands that hardly anyone has heard of. The fact is, no DIY internet band has even come remotely close to what signing with a label can do for you, if you get the right label. Maybe there are a few who have made a good showing, but that's still far worse odds than signed bands, given the number of DIY internet bands out there.

 

 

Sure, there are 1000s of crap artists for every 1 good artist out there. But, this has always been there.. you just didn't notice it until now.

 

Precisely, because until now, record companies, for all their faults, at least acted as gatekeepers and weeded out the 95% of {censored} that is being produced today and clogging the system. Today, any schlub with a Squier, 6 months of lessons, and a home PC is now a 'songwriter' and 'recording artist.'

 

My dear old pop told me once that when anyone can do something, it isn't a big deal anymore. He was right. If we as musicians want to know why music is a cheap and nearly valueless commodiy now, all we have to do is look around us. When we kicked down the gates to the castle of the record companies, we though we were getting justice, but all we got was musical anarchy.

 

 

Age is just a number and as long as you sell records.. it should matter what that number is.

 

 

How do you define 'selling records'? A thousand a year? A hundred? One?

 

The sad fact is, I read a statistic last year that said the average sales for a DIY band is 1200 CDs over the entire life of the band, which is usually 2-3 years.

[azmyth]

How do you define 'selling records'? A thousand a year? A hundred? One? The sad fact is, I read a statistic last year that said the average sales for a DIY band is 1200 CDs over the entire life of the band, which is usually 2-3 years.

 

 

1200 cds is pretty low.. my band the last year we were together sold triple that in a single year. Our cd was being distributed by lumberjack, and was available in stores. you can still even get it off smartpunk.com, interpunk.com, amazon.com, even now.. as well as oodles of others that i can't name right now. We promoted the crap out of it, and played shows in support of it. We had already played the van's warped tour twice in a row, (not a battle of the bands.. we were on the tour) and myspace had sponsored a stage both years, so our name was plastered all over the front page of myspace.

 

DIY is out of reach for most people. But so is a major label.. so why not do the one you can most reasonably shoot for. Our bass player went on to play for a reasonably popular screamo band called "From first to last" who was signed to epitaph, and has now moved to suretone records which is a division of some major label.. maybe sony. I'm not sure.

 

its like buying shoes.. its just the name on them that matters.

[Poker99]

DIY era = Easier to make "some" money and get "some" exposure.

[daddymack]

Also: To say that "technical wizardry" isnt "musical skill" is kind of elitest. There are DJs in band situations and rap acts that can work a turntable with skill, finesse - and 'touch' - like a classical pianist.....and there is a beauty in music programming as well, be it trying to recreate the sound and feel of actual acoustic performances or hard electronica....I can hear the art in a fabulous dark-electro hard-dance or industrial piece by bands such as Frontline Assembly or older Skinny Puppy. There is beauty and elogance in that. Painstaking programming is an art and it has its rewards: Im one of those guys that programs drums in a computer that adds different velocties, slight head-strike variations, multi-layers of one instrument, and I will painstakingly make sure its not a 3-Armed drummer........

 

I know this discussion all too well...but there is a difference between someone who takes a piece of music and manipulates it, and someone who creates the music. The first is not a musician, he is a technician; he does not create the music, he basically mucks around with someone else's art. That is not to invalidate that skillset, and not to invalidate the end product...but the ability to create music on the fly, perform live and to perform spontaneously is the art of music, IMHO.

What I was really addressing was the people who can do remarkable things on a computer, piece together amazing work...but can't perform it live without the entire studio basically at their finger tips, or by using pre-recorded material.

Example: We had an outdoor gig a while back, and the power went out. Rather than pack up, we went acoustic and kept the show going as best we could until the power returned, which was over half an hour. Someone running a turntable or looping tracks or using pre-programmed material would have been dead in the water, unless they had the presence of mind to pack a generator for the PA and UPSs for their laptops, etc..

[DevilRaysFan]

What I was really addressing was the people who can do remarkable things on a computer, piece together amazing work...but can't perform it live without the entire studio basically at their finger tips, or by using pre-recorded material. Example: We had an outdoor gig a while back, and the power went out. Rather than pack up, we went acoustic and kept the show going as best we could until the power returned, which was over half an hour. Someone running a turntable or looping tracks or using pre-programmed material would have been dead in the water, unless they had the presence of mind to pack a generator for the PA and UPSs for their laptops, etc..

 

Electronica is a newer modern vernacular art for vernacular times. One must require the newer invention of computer technology in the same way a cellist/violinist or guitarist needs the older invention of strings to operate successfully - after all, a guitar with no strings wont do much, powered or unpowered. A purist attitude trying to negate its legitimacy on the basis of not being able to perform in an unpowered (older art) acoustic format shouldnt be a consideration because of the nature of the beast (newer art/electronica) itself. The parameters of one don't necessarily have to apply to the other: like comparing scuplture to canvas painting

 

Judging it on the basis of not being able to perform in an acoustic format would be like trying to justify that the bicycle is a superior mode of transportation over the automobile because of what would happen to all the cars if all the gas pumps went dry.......

 

Maybe I should start carrying a battery-operated portable keyboard to gigs in case the power goes out. Then I can "Wow!" 'em with my renditions of "Piano Man" and "Bring It On Home" in the middle of my rudely interupted set of Front 242 and Depeche Mode covers

[ari]

You can't be serious.

No, I am serious. At least for me, I think this is the best era to be a musician than any other eras, as far as I know. Obviously I'm not a historian so my perception of the by-gone days may be not accurate.

But my understanding is that before the days of internet and affordable digital gear, there really wasn't a way to 1) make a comfortable living, and 2) make music that you want. Now, I'm not talking about becoming a rock star and having millions. I do think that's possible now, I personally know people who do it. They're savvy businessmen in addition to being a musician, but business is easier to learn than good songwriting, and tools are available for low cost, if not free.

I'll consider myself "made it" when I can ditch my day job and create music that I want for a living.

But if this post is about becoming a rock star, then I'm just posting on a wrong topic. Ignore me.

ari

[strathound]

Wow. Another day, another great thread on HC.

The rift here is easy to understand. The barrier to entry in music used to be a lot higher. Those with natural musical ability lept right over that barrier and found themselves with a charmed life on stage doing what they love and making pretty good money. Those people liked the old days.

Then there's us whippersnappers. When I started playing guitar at 16, there wasn't an Internet. I struggled like @%@. I started playing again at the age of 30 several years ago and things are a lot easier. Just networking with other musicians online has made a huge difference. Add on top of that the gadgets and technology. It's unbelievable how low the bar is now. Shoot, at work on my team, two of us are in a band and at least half own guitars.

As a human being, I want my piece of the damn pie. I'm not apologetic about getting into music. I've slogged through year after year in a @#$ @#$# grey cubical. I've done my time. I want more to life than that.

I may never play guitar like Pat Coast, but I'm sure gonna have a heck of a time trying.

[BlueStrat]

 

But my understanding is that before the days of internet and affordable digital gear, there really wasn't a way to 1) make a comfortable living, and 2) make music that you want.

 

 

To the contrary, lots of guys played music full time when I was in my 20s. My town alone, a small town of 20,000 people where the drinking age was 19, had 6 clubs that had live music 5-6 nights a week. Spokane, WA., 30 miles away, had dozens. The agency I worked out of had about 20 bands on the road full time, all playing 5-6 nights a week 48-50 weeks a year. I did it for 3-1/2 years straight, playing 5 states and 3 Canadian provinces. And that was based out of a small market like Spokane, WA. There were literaly thousands of full time bands in the US and Canada all through the late 60s-mid 80s. And yes, we played what we wanted to-we did covers, but we did the covers we wanted, and we also did about 13 original songs as well. Lots of bands did that. Two bands from my agency, one of them mine, got signed by a startup record company out of central Oregon, along with three bands from some other regional agencies.

 

When we travelled, we made between 1500 and 2200 a week, depending on the gig and how many nights it was. Plus we got motel rooms and usually a meal a day.

 

I don't know any bands today working 6 nights a week getting paid decently with rooms covered unless they're a hotel lounge band. And even those guys are making about the same as we did 25 years ago, which is really about half of what we made in 1980 dollars.

 

Yes, it was harder for bands back then to get gigs, because the good clubs had bands 5-6 nights a week, almost always booked by an agency, which eliminated most local weekend warrior bands because they couldn't play 6 nighst a week and work 5 days. Weekenders played small taverns and parties, but the good clubs were had by traveling pros. As drinking laws got stiffer, costs went up and more entertainment options opened up, clubs cut way back on their entertainment budgets. Once the six night a week gig collapsed, and clubs opened up to locals who would play for less and assume more of the marketing costs that clubs once paid for, it became a bidding war for gigs, with the bands willing to do the most work for the least amount of money getting the gigs.

 

That's kind of where we are today. If you think that's better than it used to be, I don't know what to say, except that maybe you weren't around back then...in which case you wouldn't have any way of knowing if it's better now or not. Which isn't your fault, I'm just sayin'...From where I sit, it's far worse than it used to be. Bar gigs around here pay what they paid in 1978. YMMV.

[BlueStrat]

I may never play guitar like Pat Coast, but I'm sure gonna have a heck of a time trying.

 

Most days, I don't play guitar like Pat....

 

Studios are a wunnerful thing....!

 

 

[DevilRaysFan]

 

To the contrary, lots of guys played music full time when I was in my 20s.

 

 

BIG +10000

 

I'll even go out on a limb and say that it was easier - by far! - to make a living playing music 20+ years ago than it is now............(at least, it was way easier for me back then)

[ari]

To the contrary, lots of guys played music full time when I was in my 20s. My town alone, a small town of 20,000 people where the drinking age was 19, had 6 clubs that had live music 5-6 nights a week. Spokane, WA., 30 miles away, had dozens. The agency I worked out of had about 20 bands on the road full time, all playing 5-6 nights a week 48-50 weeks a year. I did it for 3-1/2 years straight, playing 5 states and 3 Canadian provinces. And that was based out of a small market like Spokane, WA. There were literaly thousands of full time bands in the US and Canada all through the late 60s-mid 80s. And yes, we played what we wanted to-we did covers, but we did the covers we wanted, and we also did about 13 original songs as well. Lots of bands did that. Two bands from my agency, one of them mine, got signed by a startup record company out of central Oregon, along with three bands from some other regional agencies. When we travelled, we made between 1500 and 2200 a week, depending on the gig and how many nights it was. Plus we got motel rooms and usually a meal a day. I don't know any bands today working 6 nights a week getting paid decently with rooms covered unless they're a hotel lounge band. And even those guys are making about the same as we did 25 years ago, which is really about half of what we made in 1980 dollars. Yes, it was harder for bands back then to get gigs, because the good clubs had bands 5-6 nights a week, almost always booked by an agency, which eliminated most local weekend warrior bands because they couldn't play 6 nighst a week and work 5 days. Weekenders played small taverns and parties, but the good clubs were had by traveling pros. As drinking laws got stiffer, costs went up and more entertainment options opened up, clubs cut way back on their entertainment budgets. Once the six night a week gig collapsed, and clubs opened up to locals who would play for less and assume more of the marketing costs that clubs once paid for, it became a bidding war for gigs, with the bands willing to do the most work for the least amount of money getting the gigs. That's kind of where we are today. If you think that's better than it used to be, I don't know what to say, except that maybe you weren't around back then...in which case you wouldn't have any way of knowing if it's better now or not. Which isn't your fault, I'm just sayin'...From where I sit, it's far worse than it used to be. Bar gigs around here pay what they paid in 1978. YMMV.

 

 

Yah, I hear what you're saying -- things are definitely not the same. And it may have been frivolous of me to compare this time with any other time, because like you said, I wasn't here. Or I should've said that the current time is better FOR ME.

 

I myself tried more traditional approach to making a living with music, playing in bars and parties. Well, at first it was fun playing covers in parties -- I did that all throughout college -- but outside school in a regular bar scene, I just didn't fit. Socially. I am just not the kind of person who goes and hangs out in bars, so playing there, I felt out of element -- couldn't really connect with patrons, really couldn't foster any relations with owners and booking agents, none of my friends came to see me because they weren't bar-goers either. Soon I got burned out. I love music, but playing bars and coffeehouses, I didn't.

 

On the other hand, internet has been tremendously successful to me. I produced albums and scored indie films thanks to my net savvyness. And I'm just starting a new phase, now finally back to promoting my own original music -- and I'm very hopeful that in time I can carve out a niche for my music. Hopefully if I do it long and persistent enough, it'll be enough to make a living.

 

So this new world of internet and digital music is absolutely crucial to me. Perhaps if I was born in another time, I would have figured out another way to do it. But I manage to take advantage of what the current time offers, so I'm happy to be doing this now, as opposed to other times I hear of.

 

So you and I are coming from very different places -- perhaps we just have to agree to disagree. I do see where you're coming from -- and we simply have different perspective, different ways we'd like to go about it. The current time is good for one of us and not for the other. Who knows, tomorrow it may be the opposite.

 

ari

[fuzzball]

I think it depends on the person, the goals, and what they are willing to do to achieve them. I believe that we have to change with the times in order to stay active.

[gtrbass]

I think it depends on the person, the goals, and what they are willing to do to achieve them. I believe that we have to change with the times in order to stay active.

 

 

Agreed; however, the reason the music business is in the shape it's in all boils down to one thing: devaluation

 

Acts have devalued themselves into professional extinction through competition. The practice of underbidding has driven the buyer into a complete loss of interest in quality. This has killed the business, more than any commonly referenced recession of club attendance. There are actually more bars today than 20 years ago!

 

The type of entertainment in clubs has shifted from live music, to Dj's, sports bars, martini bars and interactive Karaoke. That's the competition, not other musicians.The key reason? quality Those forms of entertainment provide a better entertainment value for the consumer. They aren't necssarily cheaper to provide than a live act either. It is simply that those other 'distractions' are seen as bringing better attendance value by putting patrons in the seats.

 

Getting back to your quote, how many musicians lament about how they can't get paid to play, but don't put any intelligent effort into being a solid entertainment value?

 

Willingness to meet your goals has nothing to do with bending over and taking it up the a$$ for no money. It has to do with creating a demand and re-valuing the entertainment experience.