My answer is not as simple as some may think it should be.

If I played everything the audiences wanted, I'd make more money and work a littler more.

I still do about 1/2 my work as a single in upscale restaurants.

BORING!

I'm happiest backing others and playing straight ahead jazz.

When you commit to jazz around here, in "horse" country, you automatically cut the number of club and restaurant jobs by 2/3rds. And you cut the money in half, at least.

Playing jazz-oriented "one-nighters" involves a lot more work, equipment, moving and, frankly, the music is more of a challenge...which I like.

I use upscale jobs to "fish" for day business clients (films, print, research, photography, etc.). The average new client I sign up is good for $100,000.00 or more business a year.

If it weren't for this nightly "fishing" expedition, I probably wouldn't play clubs and restaurants at all. I'd stick with Jazz arts groups, State government jobs, film score work...the kind of jobs where you convince the audience/customer that it's cool to hire you, even though they don't understand the music or even like it very much (LOL).


Understand, I'm certainly not advocating this approach for anyone else. But I do wonder, how do the ones of us who play out resolve the "us or them" situation?

On the one hand, a pure entertainer would be glad to play anything the audiences request. A hard nosed purist would refuse to play some materials and spend their lives bitching about "dumb" audiences and others who they feel have "sold out", get all the jobs and make all the money.

There are clubs/venues I won't play and material I won't play. I can do that now, but there was a day (college) when I had to play anything that would pay a buck.

What about you?


Russ (picky old dude) Lay