Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Is LA still a good place to be for music?
View Single Post
Old 6th October 2008   #63
mbradzick
Lives for gear
 
mbradzick's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Pacific Ocean
Posts: 1,405

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by clarkcontrol View Post
I would move to Austin in a second if one could make any money as a musician. Lots of low-balling hippies apparently keep the prices so low (trying to make that big break!) that pro level guys can't charge what they're worth.

I live in Dallas, and it's the best environment for music business in the state.

I have friends in NY and they say the 'art' music scene in NYC (mostly jazz music) is better than LA. In LA, music is more 'business' mostly because of its proximity to Hollywood. For instance, if I wanted to do big tours as a sideman I should move to LA or Nashville.

Curious, because someone here mentioned that it is exactly the opposite.

My reasons for mentioning this have to do with hearing that there is a pay-to-play thing in the LA venues (once again, somewhat contrary to other comments on this thread). I wish I had more concrete examples, but I am thinking seriously of moving to NYC for the jazz/live scene.

So, please, I want to hear more! Let me know what you think!

Clark
Silverlake/Los Feliz/Echo Park is definitely the "hip" scene, flooded with Indie bands, but tons and tons of bands still frock to Sunset where it's definitely pay-to-play. You gotta buy tickets to your own show then sell them to your friends and fans. It's obsurd, considering how much they charge for drinks.

I interned for a buddy who was house engineer at the Roxy, and the bands I saw there on a regular were shit shit shit. I mean, embarrasingly unoriginal and bad musicians.
mbradzick is offline   Reply With Quote