Should I refuse this kind of gig?

[Gerax]

OK, so here's the scenario:

I've been contacted for a gig: the client asked me to record a live concert of his tango quartet (piano, fiddle, double bass, accordion) and asked how much that's going to cost. After being answered the necessary question (how many players, duration of the gig, recording time for additional editing, setup and strike down times, any issues with the location...and the likes) I presented him the supposed cost, specifying that the recording will be multitracked and that only a rough mix would be available at the end of the gig for them to listen to. An additional day of editing/mixing would be necessary for a finished master.

He comes up to me in an email saying that they only need the multitrack files and that the pianist is going to be having fun by editing and mixing the concert by himself, being an "enthusiast amateur" about recording.

I havent confirmed the gig yet, but I' really tempted to refuse it. It's not the fact that I'm only hired to record the gig, it's the fact that they are professional musicians and don't want to fork out the money for a professionally edited and mixed record...and they are doing it by themselves in an amateurish way. I'm afraid this is going to be even worse as we go on...musicians buying a computer and a 100€ recording interface and lower the quality of our job...are all over the place.
I'm tempted to tell them to buy some other 10k worth of recording equipment and do it by themselves, or record all but the piano, as "I'm an amateurish piano player and can do it by myself with MIDI just for fun"...

I know we provide a service and that's it, but I think this is starting to be ridiculous, don't you think?

What's you take on this?

[7rojo7]

Take the gig!
I've been part of many like this.

[PlugHead]

IME,

If they pay you your card rate to multi-track the gig, and you provide them a ref. (stereo) master, then - what's the issue?

So long as they pay for your time on the session, as well as xfer time to offload the multi-track files, your end is done. Just make sure that you are NOT credited with anything other than tracking credits if the mix is 'amateur' and doesn't pass the muster (in your opinion).

Simple. Easy.

My .02 c

[DanDan]

Take the gig. Charge for the recording. A charge that is reasonable and takes account of the hire charge for the recording machine. But itemise this charge to keep it visible and separate from the other costs.
It is difficult to put a number on this charge. It is really only a matter of plugging in one extra machine, and adjusting some gains. I have been caught out by this. A musician asked for a gig to be multi-track recorded, in addition to the live sound mix. I was being paid by the festival, so couldn't really charge them for this private extra. Bottom line, not paid, plus an embarrassing conversation with the muso. I believe it is best to have a clear policy. Write it down, even just for you own viewing. Then whenever the R word comes up, you trot out the policy line.
There is no insult intended by musos in these cases. They don't think these things through and they simply do not have a loyalty gene. After all, when the recording industry, record companies, studios, went into decline, the first thing musos did was fire us engineers. The kept the lawyers, but fired their friends......
DD

[mixedupsteve]

Originally Posted by 7rojo7

Take the gig!
I've been part of many like this.

Agreed. I always make sure that they understand that the results depend on both the recording and the mixdown.

[slaphappygarry]

Take it.

Same principle as booking a studio for a day and taking away the data to sort out yourself.

G

[Corran]

I like these gigs - just think, you are in and out and don't have to worry about working on it later. Furthermore, most of the times that I do this, the "amateur mixing guy" never even finishes the mix so it's like it never even happened anyway.

[joelpatterson]

Really-- do it, take the money, and run.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Corran

I like these gigs - just think, you are in and out and don't have to worry about working on it later. Furthermore, most of the times that I do this, the "amateur mixing guy" never even finishes the mix so it's like it never even happened anyway.

Maybe he'll make such a hash of it that they come back to you later.

So I would add in an optional charge to keep the multi-track masters (so much per month, say, or a fee to keep them for 6-months), otherwise you will erase them when you pass them over to them.

Make this clear, so if they don't want you to keep them they have no come-back.

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by John Willett

...

Make this clear, so if they don't want you to keep them they have no come-back.

Yeah, well... this might be "front-loading" your approach with a whiff of superiorityism?

No one is going to, at the time, realize they're incompetent to mix their own show-- or want to admit it-- so I'd hang onto the multi-tracks pro bono, and let them THEMSELVES have the grim realization as they struggle and fail and turn back to you in desperation.

[Lenzo]

Unless you have a better offer, you'll be home wishing that you had taken the check. As long as you're paid well for your time, what they do with their product afterwards isn't your problem. And it may come down to the fact that they can't get a good mix and will call you later to finish it. At which time you quote a rate that is a little higher than you originally quoted...
L.

[WVUtubadude]

I do stuff like this all the time.

[chadly]

Handing off the tracks at the end of the day? It's like a great date without the morning after!!! Do it!

Funny enough, many of the times I've done this they come back to me later. No biggie either way IMO. I'd echo the others: keep a copy of the multitracks. Tell 'em that you'll keep a copy for a few months.

[Gerax]

Thanx everybody for the reply.

In a way I was kind of sure about the answer I'd gotten here. My post was written more in a moment of grief...

My fee for the recording date is somewhat adequate, and most certainly I'd take the gig and live with it. What I really can't stand is that I'm not doing a part of a professional job where some other pro is handling the rest of the process: I've done that and I'm OK with it; it's standard practice. This is different in that a professional musician with some cheap gear is going to handle my tracks and think he can do it by himself in a professional manner. This kind of subtracts value to the job we've spent years and years (and money) to master. Kind of like I'm an amateurish piano player and offer my services for free because I bought myself a baby grand or worse yet a Clavinova...
On a side note, editing and mixing of the live gigs I record is where I usually make the most money out of this kind of jobs...so loosing money to an amateur makes me kind of uncomfortable if you get me...

[GZsound]

I would take the gig and give them what they want.

Keep the multitrack files and tell them that if their efforts turn out to be less than satisfactory, you will do the mixing and mastering for them later.

Keep the client.

Frequently I get the raw tracks for mixing after someone else records them. It's pretty standard.

The bottom line is to do a good job and keep the client for any future sessions.

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by Gerax

I know we provide a service and that's it, but I think this is starting to be ridiculous, don't you think?

What's you take on this?

Well, to use a common U.S. sports analogy, when a (U.S.) football team is close enough to the goal and has an opportunity to kick a realitively easy field goal (for 3 points) or take the risk and try for a touchdown (and thus 6 points), many sports fans will tell you: "always take the (easy) points".

I know the feeling, especially if you have some artistic vision of how the mx is to be performed - it can be tough to let go of that idea.

I don't know who else said it, but they are right - request that you NOT be credited if the final mix sounds awful. We all like to have not only input but also control over how we craft out work, but sometimes it's helpful to remember the jobs where you are essentially a recordist with an option to engineer / produce later.

Take the money, make sure the credit / non-credit issue is addressed, and record the gig. At the very least you can take pride in a job well-done (knowing the seeds of a great mix are there) as well as some quick cash.

[Stepwise Sound]

On a side note, editing and mixing of the live gigs I record is where I usually make the most money out of this kind of jobs

The key is that you are charging enough for your time for the on-location thing -- the hauling of equipment, the chance that something may break, the break-down, setup, break-down and setup it may take if you're disassembling and reassembling your studio.

I try to charge an "on-location fee" to cover this sort of thing.

As for the nature of having someone who doesn't know what they're doing mix it -- fine -- if they really are not good perhaps you will get hired again to mix it.

[LX3]

Whether they're good at is or not, the reality is everyone wants to mix their own music. Understandably. Look at it from their point of view, they're paying money for a recording and don't get to do the fun bit themselves?

Whether I could do a better mix or not is not really the issue. As a service provider, it's my job to give my clients what they want.

In any case, because "everyone can mix", and studio rates are in the toilet, the location recording phase is usually better paid than the mix phase. Plus mixing is time-consuming, and very easily over-runs. I'm careful these days which projects I offer to mix, and in what time-frame, as it's easy to get yourself over-booked.

I agree with everyone else. I'd track the group to the highest technical standard you can, hand the multitracks over and move on.

[Sonic Nomad]

Do the recording and give them what they want.

If you feel you can mix better than them, then spend a little of your spare time mixing one of the songs and send them part of your mix. They may come back and ask you to do the rest. Who knows.

[soundbarnfool]

Nobody's asking you to be the producer, right? Think of it as a location sound gig.

Inglewood SoundBarn

[boojum]

This is all good advice, and wise. Better to have something with the possibility of something more than have nothing with the possibility of same. If they like the pull they will be back for more. And they might well wonder if you can mix better than their piano man. If someone else takes the gig they will be wondering if he can mix better than their piano man.

[ohmoka]

Originally Posted by Gerax

I'm tempted to tell them to buy some other 10k worth of recording equipment and do it by themselves, or record all but the piano, as "I'm an amateurish piano player and can do it by myself with MIDI just for fun"...

Funny stuff!
Please do it and tell us what they say!


It is annoying they are messing you around but .... get the money (In advance if possible) and do the job!

[therecordinghous]

Turn them down and then send them to me...

[Gerax]

OK, just to set this straight and clear as it looks like some of the replys are kind of missing the point: I never said I wanted artistic control over the gig. I just provide a service and I do it the best I can be it recording, editing or mixing; I'm really annoyed by the fact that the only reason they are doing it by themselves is that even though they're pro musicians they don't feel necessary to spend money on the editing/mixing done by a pro, and most certainly would've even recorded it by themselves if they had the gear (but that's more specialized and costly than buying a PC and Reaper).
I can't stand an amateur leaking into my job and taking it away from people who do this for a living, but I guess I'll have to live with that.
That said...I just wanted to understand how far away from reason Iwas with my grief driven thoughts...

Thanx for bringing me back to myself.

[DannyL]

I have done more than a few albums where the client took the files home and mixed them. One particular client is a joy to work with: incredible musician, great arranger, lovely human being, funny and professional. It would make no difference to me how he mixed it as the recording sessions were so pleasant, and well paid. He always sends me multiple copies of the finished records and they are always great.

So ask the following questions of your clients: What sample rate do they want? Bit depth? File format? Any other specific needs?

Musicians are generally capable of mixing their own material, if it was recorded well. The reason they want to may be economic: if you want to take days and days to perfect a mix, it will only cost you your time if you do it at home. Not so hard to understand, really. So take the job, give them your absolute best effort, hand them the material and ask them for a copy when the disc is finished. Don't worry about it, if you did your best, you will know it. Hand them a well documented, well recorded project.

Best regards;
Danny

Originally Posted by Gerax

OK, just to set this straight and clear as it looks like some of the replys are kind of missing the point: I never said I wanted artistic control over the gig. I just provide a service and I do it the best I can be it recording, editing or mixing; I'm really annoyed by the fact that the only reason they are doing it by themselves is that even though they're pro musicians they don't feel necessary to spend money on the editing/mixing done by a pro, and most certainly would've even recorded it by themselves if they had the gear (but that's more specialized and costly than buying a PC and Reaper).
I can't stand an amateur leaking into my job and taking it away from people who do this for a living, but I guess I'll have to live with that.
That said...I just wanted to understand how far away from reason Iwas with my grief driven thoughts...

Thanx for bringing me back to myself.

[fifthcircle]

Do the gig. Hand the files over with a smile. Don't charge less for just the tracking. If you do a good job, even under poor mix circumstances, they'll get a decent product. If they decide that they are in over their heads, then they'll call you back.

While it may be frustrating at times, this kind of thing happens *all* the time.

--Ben

[DistortingJack]

I know many amateurs who can mix better than many professionals. You don't know if getting an amazing sound is a priority for him, and to be honest, it's often not.

I would take the gig, be very friendly and pro, but as part of the deal, I would make the customer listen to a mix of mine in the same vein of music as theirs. "You can sound like this". If he wants to sound like that, he knows he'll have to pay, he'll know what he's missing. If he doesn't, or prefers the sound he gets from his friend, then he simply does not require your services, end of story. If you're good enough and the guy has got the money, he will pay.

[DanDan]

Well we were all amateurs at some point eh?
Also many of us play music sometimes. These lines of distinction are long gone, if they ever existed. Was Les Paul an amateur or a pro making hits on home-made record cutters in this garage?
I sympathise. In the recording world, it is very disappointing to be involved at the start, say tracking, then find someone else gets the mix job. The nice bit! Similarly handing over to Mastering is a bit miffing if you have been through the whole process, i.e. tracking and mix. We just have to rationalise this. We provide services, clients hire that. Charge for the work. Do it well. The next guy in line will notice.
DD

[pan]

What will you quote them for the multitrack recording only?

[Gerax]

I sent them a quote that comprised the recording date (one day even though it actually will be less as they have acces to the hall in the late afternoon for some additional takes and the gig that should start at 9 pm lasts about 1 hour, maybe a little more) and a full day of editing and mixing. So if they just want the tracking I'll charge them half of what I quoted. Usually that kind of gigs don't involve too much gear to be lugged around and my usual mobile rig will be more than fine; in the end it's just an acoustic quartet like I've done many other times.