I should specify: P.R.O., as in performing rights organization.

Dave, I don’t think the PROs make more money one way or the other, they just pocket some of the fees and distribute the rest to the publishers they represent for the public performance of their works. Live or recorded, it’s all the same.

Which brings up the first problem with this argument (I’m going to play Devil’s Advocate for a minute).

I’m pretty sure the PRO fees aren’t just for playing recorded music, but also the live performance of published songs. A club that hires a cover band, or a jazz trio playing standards, has to pay PRO fees as well.

I’ve played a few places that bill themselves as having “Live Original Music”, and noticed they never had the ASCAP/BMI stickers on their door. I think they were trying to get through a loophole and not pay fees. They didn’t pay the band either.

Also, club owners probably don’t like paying the PRO fees, and wouldn’t be happy about increased rates. If there was a discount for hiring musicians, they’d still probably try to pay the musicians as little as possible, not pass their savings onto the bands’ pockets.

Finally, it’s easy for us (the musicians) to walk into a place and think that live music would make it better. But live music creates some obstacles. A band takes up space, not just physically, but sonically. Booking is also a headache and you have to pay somebody to filter through all the crap to find the right band. I could continue, but I don’t want to give people ammo to not hire me!

I think some people understand that great, live music is a valuable asset, but most don’t. If you can’t prove that you help them make more money on the nights you play, it’s hard to argue that they should pay you more.

Nick, I think you make an excellent point that upscale restaurants and wine bars could bring more ambiance and atmosphere to their venue with live music. And another advantage a band has over the CD player is that the band may bring in friends/family/fans that eat and drink. I think restaurant managers likely go with the path of least resistance however, as there are a lot more things to coordinate with getting a band to play at a restaurant compared to putting in a CD. Perhaps if a venue has already signed a year long contract with Sirius, they may view paying a band as ‘paying for their music twice’.

These points notwithstanding, the better you can demonstrate your music’s value to the venue, the more likely you can get in the door and get paid what you want. The ability to demonstrate your tangible value is the key to having the leverage you’d like to start calling the shots. I know I’m stating the obvious and preaching to the converted, but it comes down to having a draw. The more a band can act like a business and get people in the door, the better off everyone is- the more likely you’ll get well paying gigs, the happier the venue is, if you play a good show the audience goes home happy and wants to see you perform again (repeat customers if you will). If you’re unable to bring in more business for the venue, the restaurant manager won’t care how much more atmosphere your music adds.

Lance
http://www.lancevallis.com

Very interesting points all around.

I understand that there’s a single fee for whatever the medium is that’s performing the copyrighted songs, and I definitely agree that no venue would be on board to pay more for rights. But that’s the reason I suggest it; if the playing field is leveled, say, $500 for a live band (perhaps the royalties are included) vs. $500 for a night of recorded music royalties, more places would be more apt to pay for musicians. Of course, that would cut majorly into profits, and many venues just don’t gross that amount. That does seem a bit much, though, when the numbers are sitting right there in my face.

ASCAP or BMI definitely are for the composers more than the performers, but the way I see it, an idea like this would stand for the organizations and composers to still make more money in gross.

Venues do not like PROs. As a matter of fact, I came across this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/magazine/08music-t.html?pagewanted=all

Venues do not like to have to pay for music, and many don’t believe they should. Cam, I have noticed many venues that want original music only. It is because they don’t want to pay royalty fees. There’s a venue here in Orlando that wants jazz, but doesn’t want standards so they don’t need to pay ASCAP. The musicians get around it by not allowing vocalists, and the owner’s clueless. But still, I subbed there once, and was paid $30 for the night. I couldn’t believe these musicians keep their Wednesdays booked weekly for that kind of bread.

As for paying musicians, we’ve all heard the stories, but in my hometown, if you think you’re worth more than $30 a night, you get laughed out of the venue. There was even an extremely wealthy restaurant owner that dropped his jaw at the request of $100/man, and said “that’s like paying $25 per hour!”

In the long run, most businesses would rather pay even a $100 blanket fee for royalties per night rather than $400 for a four-piece group plus said royalties. And the difficult thing around Florida (and probably most right-to-work states) is you’re battling retirees and teenagers that will all play for peanuts. Doesn’t matter how you sound if everyone’s drunk. That’s at least what the owners here seem to think.

Joe, you make a good point, but I’ve been playing original music (my own or as a sideman in somebody else’s project) and none of us have ever seen performance royalties. The fees clubs pay to PROs are blanket licenses, and I have no idea how much of that money makes it to composers.

We’re getting a little off track here, but you’re right to say that the PRO system might be part of the problem.

In order to even begin properly distributing royalties that come from the fees charged to clubs or performance halls, the songs performed have to be reported. In college, I remember a woman in the office of the school of music telling me that they send copies of recital programs to the PROs.

Also, a world famous choir performed one of my friend’s songs on their last tour, and the programs were reported to the PROs so she actually received performance royalties for her composition. If some indie rock band covered her song on their tour of the nation’s greatest bars ever to serve cans of PBR, she wouldn’t see a penny even though all those bars paid their PRO fees.

In other words, even if every club paid for music via PRO fees, it doesn’t mean that money is going to the right composers, nevermind that performance royalties don’t equal fair compensation for performing musicians.

Cameron,

When you sign up with BMI Live, you report the songs you played yourself. There’s even “an app for that.” I’m sure the other PROs are similar. I’ve seen people report that they are very happy with the results.