CJH

Sure, and on the day LeBron James retires, the Cavs won't fold either. But no one will deny that he was/is a unique talent.

Maybe the answer is for Symphony Orchestras to go for-profit and start getting some sponsorships. I'm sure Nike could make a killer tuxedo (swoosh and all), and frankly, Phil Smith would look great on a wheaties box.

half joking.

NickD

My heart doesn't bleed for the heavy hitter players in major orchestras. Certainly, some folks get paid more, but thse folks get to play, JUST play, no students or other gigs, and make a decent full time living ($223,000 might be underpaid by some standards, but compared to the general population, Phil Smith is making out like a bandit).

If these guys want to also take on students, play a few outside recording sessions, or do some outside clinics and concerts, they can make even more money.

As a total free-lancer, I scuffle for evey gig and every dollar. I have no front office of managers drumming up business for me. Phil Smith can go home and practice to his hearts content. I have to do that, PLUS round up gigs, take care of health care and retirement, take care of collecting from errant contractors, etc. On top of that I, at the moment, need to teach to make ends meet. Smith might teach, but at $223,000, he sure doesn't HAVE to.

I love the major symphonies. These legendary musicians, like Phil Smith, deserve every penny they get. Should they get more, like basketball players? It's a matter of the market place.

Granted, I chose to be a free-lancer instead of pursuing a symphony career when I was a kid (hindsight 20/20). However, when I read articles like this, I can't get all worked up. Certainly, I don't want to see orchestras struggle and disappear. That would be like the canary in a coal mine for society. However, I think it's all a matter of perspective. From my point of view I see guys like Phil Smith as pampered, deservedly so, but pampered nonetheless.

Just MHO, and definitely biased.

Nick

__________________

NickD
"Free Online Lessons in Extreme Trumpet Playing"
http://www.nickdrozdoff.com
http://www.newyorktrumpetcompany.com/
http://www.myspace.com/nickdrozdoff

Manny Laureano

I also believe this is an apples/oranges isue when you go comparing a government subsidized (up to a certain point) art form and professional sports. It's a bit of a red herring to throw that into the mix.

Orchestral musicians since they first got paid for playing an instrument have not been the highest paid non-entrepenurial members of society.

We players have our outlined jobs and we get paid relative to cost of living in our respective areas. Orchestral musicians have only ever admited that to each other but when it comes to negotiating, we go to a pure numbers-driven philosophy. So, while someone may have a large number for a salary you have to consider how expensive it is to live there, how much time it takes to get to work because you have to live in another state in order to find the kind of housing you want, tax rates... there are many things to consider.

Now, on the subject of managers getting the big bucks, well, that's relative, too. If the manager is hauling in lots of money but you notice that the big tours are being lined up, the houses are full or close to it, the board is functioning effectively, and your conditions for work are respectful and pleasant, well, the manager's doing his job. If everything about the gig stinks and you and your colleagues are uniformly unhappy theer's a problem. You then have an overpaid stuffed suit soaking up income.

Figuring out how much something is worth is tricky. That's why I'm not a fan of government subsidies for arts organizations. They inflate the value societally. You really don't find out what you're providing or not providing until the funds are cut or eliminated. I believe in feeding a need not creating one just so you can receive a paycheck.

We've had our ups and downs here in the Great Whte North just like anywhere else. We're working to erase a deficit and it's going well, just as planned. The houses are sold well and the music director is a good guy to work for. I stay in first class hotels on tour and play with world-class soloists. My hall is the envy of many. Our Youth concerts are excellent in spurring the interest of the future generations. So, I'm saying it would be grand to make a million bucks a year for what I do but what is of prime concern to me is the health of our organization, proper working conditions befitting an orchestra of this quality, and a sense of the future and that we'll always be a part of it.

You can't compare our education costs to doctors and lawyers because they go to school far longer than we do ON THE AVERAGE to prepare for their jobs. However, if you're a string player you can easily make up that cost if you buy a fine instrument costing $100,000 or more. Unless you buy a bunch of Monette trumpets you're not going to come anywhere close to that. You're also not going to put in the 5 and 6 hour practice days string players do either as regularly as they do, let's be honest. So, given that, shall we pay string players 3 to 4 times as much as brass players? No, of course not. No matter how tired a string player is, she can always reach over and hit a high C.

That's why I think this is a very tricky subject.

Incidentally, how many of you have managed a professional orchestra with a budget of $30,000,000 or over? I'm just curious. If you have, maybe you could give some examples of what a typical work week is like.

ML

robertwhite

This is a pretty interesting discussion. I think there's two parts that are getting confused though:

1. Non-profits are not really at the mercy of "the marketplace". They require stewardship for what they offer (art, music, after-school programs, etc.) from people in the community who care about it. Ticket sales are also an important component, but they are not what "makes or breaks" the orchestra, and ultimately arent' what determines salaries. Here in Charlotte, we do what seems to me a rather good job selling tickets to stuff (compared to other cities I've lived in). But we struggle due to the difficulties of building and managing an endowment - something this bunch does NOT do as well as other orchestras.

2. There IS indeed a perception that musicians are overpaid, regardless of how much they make. Here in Charlotte, our base pay is about $35,000. Yet we have board members who are frank in their assertions that we make far too much. There are many people who think it's not a "real" job.

Blair Tindall is someone greatly embittered by her own experiences in her musical career. She naturally posts articles that reinforce her views that the orchestra is a dying dinosaur that needs to be put out of its misery. To pin the blame on "overpaid" principals of the top orchestras is a sad attempt to shift the focus from the real challenges facing these organizations. Those challenges are the same here in Charlotte, in New York, wherever.

uatrmpt

How large is the "knowledgeable public" that Phil Smith performs to? Compare that to LeBron. Their salaries are commensurate with their position within their craft in relation to the value that society places on that craft. If we took the value that people placed on live music during the early 1900's, and brought John Philip Sousa and that value into today's economic times, Sousa probably would be making out like an athlete does. But it just ain't so.

__________________
--Matt--

drtrump

I disagree whole-heartedly about Lebron James having a unique talent discernable to the public eye. You are absolutely incorrect about the number of people out there that can play the way Phil Smith plays. Are there numerous talented NBA players like Iverson, Shaq, Wade, etc that can fill Lebron's shoes. Sure...but the point is that they all get paid quite a bit, too. Its like saying that someone on the bench could do just as good of a job as Lebron in comparsion to someone making finals in auditions could play in Phil's chair. Both are extremely "acceptable" to the public eye. I think there are some people that could do Phil's job great, but no one can do it quite like he can. That's why so many people recognize him as possibly one of the greatest trumpet players of our time. Hence the arguement that he is underpaid without question or hesitation. Anyone not into basketball could easily argue that Lebron has no more talent than the next guy on my team. Same for concert go-ers about Phil. To say that the public eye is what determines salaries is futile and has no basis whatsoever in this situation.

Mark

ADziuk

I think they are talking about how hard they have to work for their pay, not how much the organization they work for brings in. Of course we live in a capitalist society so that argument can go both ways........

__________________
"Everyone should carefully observe which way his heart draws him, and then choose that way with all his strength."

Fudleysmith

I think that my argument was misunderstood. I never said, and never intended to say that there are more than 100 people that can play exactly the way that Phil Smith plays.

My point is that John Q. Public - who buys subscriptions, tickets, sponserships, etc... - is not paying for a NYP ticket to see Phil Smith in action in the same way that an NBA, NFL, or MLB fan is buying a ticket to see a favorite sports star in action.

As long as the brass section doesn't make any major gaffes, the median concertgoer will be satisfied that their money was well spent.

Peer review is much more stringent than what the general public will, or could, recognize, and peer groups make audition selections. The general public couldn't judge between to top 100 orchestral trumpet players any better than I could score Olympic diving competitions.

Don't let our arcane knowledge of our prefered instrument skew our realistic view of commercial enterprise limitations.

P.S. I will be attending Phil Smith's masterclass at the Coast Guard Academy (in New London CT) on June 3rd.

__________________
Fudleysmith

Conn V1 Rose brass bell
GR 65M #1bb

Conn V1 Flugel (Satin Silver)
GR 65FD

Conn 8DRS
Lawson S670/P10G 705

manofjazz

Guys,
I'm a senior in high school and have just finished a semester of economics.

What you guys are questioning is simple economic value of positions in society.

I will simply pose this premise and let you meditate on it.

Q:What is a product or service worth?
A:Whatever the consumer will pay for it

So, let's say that it's a Dallas Symphony Concert. Well, I pay 75 dollars and sit mid-auditorium in the seats.

What's your issue with this? I've read every post and you are simply saying that you can compare CEOs or baseball players to Professional, virtuosic musicians?

Manny is correct in saying this is an "Apples/Oranges" comparison. Let's think for a moment. Lawyers protect and serve the rights of the people in society. Doctors save the lives of the people in the society. Accountants protect the money of those in the society.

What do musicians do? What service do they provide?
They provide the society with abstract representation of authentic aesthetically beautiful sounds. Nothing more, nothing less.

I respect what those in the New York Philharmonic do. But, that doesn't mean I ever have to question their worth. You pay what you've always wanted to pay. I seriously doubt you went to the ticket booth and said "Hey, could you raise my ticket price about $2000!"

So, in conclusion, don't say that their salaries are too little unless you are willing to personally pay, by means of ticket price or fundraiser, for a higher salary of those you have such high admiration for.

Thanks for reading.

__________________
International Series French Besson
GR MS 66

"At some point in your life, your words gotta mean something" - Umpa

robertwhite

Manofjazz, congrats on finishing HS economics. I don't think your points are exactly what's being argued here, though. The author of the article which spawned this thread is trying to say that conductors, soloists, and PRINCIPAL PLAYERS are part of the economic troubles orchestras are facing. What some of the posters here are taking issue with is that last assertion.

I think most of us who play professionally look at the compensation for conductors, executive directors, and soloists and feel that it's a bit out of whack. The principals making huge overscale, though, like Phil Smith, are not the norm, and could hardly be faulted generally as a symbol of mismanagement.

I think a lot of the confusion in this discussion has stemmed from people not reading the article, and bringing several other issues into it. Let's stay on topic people! (just kidding).