Thread: Who earns the most?

This is a thread for the discussion of the wages of people working in all music types.
What do you think about the amount of money a pop artist gets as opposed to how much a classical musician gets? What about rock, dance, folk genres? Is the money that's transferred represenable to the quality of music being produced?

Well, for starters, if we paid professional athletes even 1/2 of what they get paid now, there would be alot more money available to pay for arts programs, including orchestras and chamber ensembles.

I heard that Celine Dion is coming to Winnipeg next year (they are already heavily advertising is and it is a year from now!) and tickets are like $200 or something ridiculous like that?!

One thing to factor in: In the pop industry, the artist gets a minute percetage from record sales and the songs are the property of the record company. At least this is the way it has traditionally worked-- thankfully the internet is beginning undermining that old business model. I'm a rock musician myself and the LAST thing I would want is a record deal!

The majority of the income is based on live performances and merchendising, hence the constant touring. Records are just one avenue of media exposure, basically advertising for a band for folks to go to their shows. But in the end its a really crappy deal (I would provide some links on this but I'm at work-- I have a day job! LOL)

I have no idea on specifics, but I imagine pop musicians make more than classical, which is sad. There is more media exposure and hype for pop acts and it grates on my nerves the various "classical music stereotypes" you get in the media-- that doesn't help any.

~ josh

Originally Posted by ChamberNut

Well, for starters, if we paid professional athletes even 1/2 of what they get paid now, there would be alot more money available to pay for arts programs, including orchestras and chamber ensembles.

Amen!

Also, here in the US, sports in school often takes precedence at the expense of the arts (junior high, high school and university). Not sure what it is like in other countries, but quite frankly, I don't think sports (in THIS capacity) has a place in schools.

~ josh

Originally Posted by Edward Elgar

What do you think about the amount of money a pop artist gets as opposed to how much a classical musician gets? What about rock, dance, folk genres? Is the money that's transferred represenable to the quality of music being produced?

In the end it boils down to what the people want, I had a heated discussion with Topaz a while back and my view is that popular has no relevance on the quality of the music.
Even if we just stick to classical, because a piece is very popular does not automatically make it good music, it is subjective. what is interesting is the comparison between the top classical performers pay and the top pop performers pay, perhaps someone can supply figures? I suppose it means that classical, being listened to by 10% of music lovers will not generate any where near as much money

Originally Posted by Andante

In the end it boils down to what the people want, I had a heated discussion with Topaz a while back and my view is that popular has no relevance on the quality of the music.
Even if we just stick to classical, because a piece is very popular does not automatically make it good music, it is subjective.

Oh, I agree-- there is no direct correlation between popularity and quality, in any kind of music.

I think "hype" is a far stronger factor in popular music than in classical though, so the tendency is that substance matters less for many people for popular music. Image is a very important factor in pop music, whereas in classical music this is not really relevant (though record companies have been trying in their marketing). (I'm not saying that group-think is not present in classical circles-- it certainly is, but it is ultimately not relevant to the music).

A rock artist without an "image" is doomed to failure, no matter how talented he or she may be. Classical performers success rarely hinges on that (I do not include basic showmanship or stage persona-- that is a part of performance as well-- a good performance will naturally be done with much confidence).

And so classical music is not exactly "commercially viable" because it lacks "hype." In comparison to "popular music," classical music seems quite dull. The reasons why one goes to a Bach concert and a Nickelback concert are not necessarily always for the same reasons.

I say this as someone who IS a rock musician (though I have some classical training & classical has always been my first love with a passion) and who has gone to classical and rock concerts. There is some really great rock music out there based on musical merits, regardless of its external trappings of "image."

I'm not saying classical is better than popular music or vice versa, but I think the reasons for the wide popularity of "popular music" is for extra-musical reasons. Classical music by comparison seems dull or esoteric at best. But I don't think the solution is for classical performers to compete with popular music performers on those terms ("hype"). Teaching musical literacy and awareness at an early age is an important key.

Just my $0.02.

~ josh

Originally Posted by Edward Elgar

Is the money that's transferred represenable to the quality of music being produced?

I hear Akon's a millionaire.

In other words, no!

This guy, I guess:



I know it was not a wage, but the $72 million payment he got on the sale of Institutional Investor must rank him near the top in the list of wealthiest classical musicians. I'm speaking, of course, about Gilbert Kaplan.


I think Horowitz' estate was of $7 million at the time of his death.

I'm really quite surprised that nobody here has mentioned Leonard Bernstein. Now I have!

Seriously though, wasn't he getting huge amounts of money from his musicals alone? And weren't all his conducting performances almost invariably sold out at obscenely high prices? That in itself would place him near the top, would it not?

And by the way, I don't know if Kaplan would quite count, since all he ever conducts is Mahler's second and the fifth's Adagietto. That's kinda cheating.

How about sports people, Football players getting millions for a few games, compared to engineers and scientists who don’t even get a million for a years work

I've heard that Karajan was eee....

u hu hu!!!

Principal of one of the main orchestras in the US got 3,000,000 a year.

I'm sure Williams gets a fair amount of money also.

crappy versechorus tards earn the most

Andrew (dreck) Lloyd Webber

After a Placedo Domingo, Hose Careras, Pavaroti concert a journalist is waiting outside the dressing rooms.
"Mr. Careras, How are you going to spend the money you made from this concert?" he asks. "I'll buy that yacht I was looking at last week to go on a cruise." he replies.
"And the rest?" adds the jounalist. "I'll give it to charity!" says Hose.
Next out is Domingo. "Mr. Domingo, How are you going to spend the money you made from this concert?" he asks. "I'll buy that ferrari I was looking at last week, I always like a fast car!" he replies.
"And the rest?" adds the jounalist. "I'll give it to charity!" says Pacedo.
Next out is Pavarotti. "Mr. Pavaroti, How are you going to spend the money you made from this concert?" he asks. "I'll buy that summer house I was looking at last week, I sometimes like to get away to the country!" he replies.
"And the rest?" adds the jounalist. "I'll give it to charity!" says Pavaroti.
Almost ready to leave, the journalist sees one of the orchestral musicians packing a trombone into its case. He approaches..
"So you are in the orchestra?" he asks. "Yes, that's right." replies the trombonist. "So, How are you going to spend the money you made from this concert?" asks the jounalist. "I'm going to buy a new pair of bicycle clips!" says the trombonist.
"And the rest?" asks the jounalist. "It's OK, my mum's going to chip in as well!"