# piano player in orchestras



## h1478971 (Dec 6, 2009)

are piano players in orchestras paid the same salary as other regular players even though they hardly play? It's not fair for the violinists who have to be there at every concert if that is the case.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

h1478971 said:


> are piano players in orchestras paid the same salary as other regular players even though they hardly play? It's not fair for the violinists who have to be there at every concert if that is the case.


No idea, and I've always had the same curiosity. Like some percussion players who spend a whole symphony just sitting there, and then produce a couple of sounds in the fourth and last movement, and that's it. They can't possibly make the same money as a first violin, can they? I believe that salaries in orchestras most likely vary widely with the prominence of the musician. But let's hope that some professional musicians will post on this thread and will satisfy your curiosity and mine.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

You guys have a point but there are also plenty of works like piano concertos and percussion solo pieces that could be played throughout a season to even things out. If percussionists got payed so much less it could be problematic, because then one would think this may lead to a shortage in that specific area. I think there will always be a lot of piano players because of its strength as a compositonal instrument. 

I've honestly thought it would be hard to be a percussionist in many pieces and just stand there for so long only to hit a few sparse notes with exact precision. Where other instruments can really open up in a piece. These are just my thoughts though, I dont know the answer to the OP's question either.


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

I believe that most professional orchestras have some musicians that are on call to play only as needed, and are only payed for the concerts they actually play in.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

This topic could go in a number of interesting directions- let me address some of them...

First of all (with regard to an orchestral 'piano player')- most large professional orchestras have someone who fills this role as a full-time position. It, of course, is beyond argument that they play less frequently than high and middle strings (to cite a couple of sections). However- keep in mind the following-

An orchestral keyboardist will be expected to be proficient not only in piano, but also in organ (think of the big chord at the end of that famous theme at the start of R. Strauss' _Also Sprach Zarathustra_), Celesta, and also Clavichord & Harpsichord in pre-Classical pieces this side of concertante works. Bear in mind that string players have some measure of 'upward-mobility,' too. If you're good enough, you can be Associate Principal of the 2nd violins (a pay bump), Principal of the 2nds, Assistant Concertmaster, Associate Concertmaster, Principal Viola, Concertmaster. If you're a orchestral keyboardist, you better reconcile yourself to blooming where you're planted, 'cause there ain't nowhere else for you to go (unless you leave your employer).

To pursue this a little further, I'll exercise proxy for my wife (who was at one time an orchestral Trombonist) and relay to you some of her thoughts concerning whether she thought it was unfair for someone who played as infrequently as she did to receive consideration similar to someone on the middle desk of the violas (for instance). To begin with, the very fact that she played less often made things more uninteresting than they would be for someone who played more frequently. Secondly, there are some brass-entrances (including famous ones like the 4th movement of Beethoven's 5th) where you have to go from complete rest zero to *ff* or *fff* power in a split-second- and they have no parallels in the nature of the demand, either in the strings OR the woodwinds. [Closest analog I can think of is Brünnhilde's awakening in _Siegfried_]. Finally, there's the sheer mathematics of the number of openings. If you're the 18th-best violinist in your chosen region, you have a chance of having a lucrative full-time job with a professional orchestra. If you're the 18th best Trombonist, however, you could well be playing for peanuts in kitchy Big-Band-Tribute ensembles at Senior Citizen Centers, trying to get better- or lucky- or both, so that your life will one day look less like the life depicted in the opening scene of Puccini's _La Bohème_.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

SuperTonic said:


> I believe that most professional orchestras have some musicians that are on call to play only as needed, and are only payed for the concerts they actually play in.


You are right.
At least that's how it works in our local orchestra... they hire a pianist when it's needed.


----------



## Aksel (Dec 3, 2010)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> To pursue this a little further, I'll exercise proxy for my wife *(who was at one time an orchestral Trombonist)* and relay to you some of her thoughts concerning whether she thought it was unfair for someone who played as infrequently as she did to receive consideration similar to someone on the middle desk of the violas (for instance).


Your wife is awesome. That is all.

Ok, then. That wasn't all.
I think I very much agree (although I'm not a professional trombonist, I have played in _some_ orchestras, at least) with your wife. The thing is, that playing trombone in an orchestra is demanding. I would say just about equally so to playing the viola, for instance. Generally, when we play, we have large ff-fff passages that have to be played after 150 or more bars of rest (I played one of those today. Oh, what fun). Going from nothing to 100% in a flash is not easy, especially when you haven't played for, like, 10 minutes.
It's not about how many notes you play (says the one who played a total of about 30 bars in an 8 minute piece today).

And just to contribute to the topic itself: I think that a pianist should be hired in an orchestra if the core repertoire of the orchestra requires pianos. If it doesn't I don't see any problem with hiring a pianist.


----------



## dmg (Sep 13, 2009)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> If you're the 18th best Trombonist, however, you could well be playing for peanuts in kitchy Big-Band-Tribute ensembles at Senior Citizen Centers, trying to get better- or lucky- or both, so that your life will one day look less like the life depicted in the opening scene of Puccini's La Bohème.


Or, you would have to be willing to travel to places where you're better than the 18th best. A friend of mine recently got a job in a symphony orchestra, but he had to move from prosperous Dallas/Fort Worth to Jackson, Mississippi. Prior to that, he was working various full time normal jobs with his 5-piece trombone choir on the side.


----------



## Aksel (Dec 3, 2010)

dmg said:


> Or, you would have to be willing to travel to places where you're better than the 18th best. A friend of mine recently got a job in a symphony orchestra, but he had to move from prosperous Dallas/Fort Worth to Jackson, Mississippi. Prior to that, he was working various full time normal jobs with his 5-piece trombone choir on the side.


Yes, you can always move, but that isn't the point. There are three trombone in a symphony orchestra, but there are ten times more violins. So it's "easier" (although it isn't, as there are many more violinists than trombonists in the world) for a violinist to get a job in a symphony orchestra than it is for a trombonist.


----------



## dmg (Sep 13, 2009)

I know; I'm actually agreeing with you and your point - I'm just giving another example of why it sucks.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

h1478971 said:


> are piano players in orchestras paid the same salary as other regular players even though they hardly play? It's not fair for the violinists who have to be there at every concert if that is the case.


You can't pay musicians 'by the note'. Otherwise violinists would all be millionaires, wouldn't they? No matter how long a percussionist (or orchestral pianist) is sitting there counting rests, they are still THERE, unable to earn money from another source. Therefore, they are paid the same as any other musician. In fact, orchestral pianists are always accounted for a 'principal' players. Most string players are 'rank and file' or, at best, 'sub-principals', meaning the pianist will be paid MORE than the poor violins who hardly ever stop playing.

And yes, keyboard players are usually hired-in as and when required, although some of the largest orchestras have a permanent principal keyboardist or pianist.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Delicious Manager, I have another question for you if you dont mind.

The RCO has two official concertmasters who usually lead the concerts and are also listed as concertmasters on the site.

However occasionally a different violinist takes the concertmasters place for a few weeks and leads any concerts/rehearsals in that time. 

Would this be solely due to an absence on the part of the two 'official' concertmasters?


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

It would be an unusual occurance for BOTH concertmasters to be off at the same time. However, I suppose illness and other normal human circumstances can come into play occasionally. I checked on the Concertgebouw Orchestra's website for a listed 'assistant' or 'associate concertmaster', but found none of the other violinists in the first violin section so named.

I can only assume it wold be unusual circumstances that led to the eventuality you describe. The only other circumstance I could think of would be if either of the current concertmasters was about to leave the orchestra and they were 'trialling' potential replacements.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Thanks a lot for your insight, could be anything I suppose - ill keep my eyes open for news


----------

