# Who earns the most?



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

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?


----------



## ChamberNut (Jan 30, 2007)

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?!


----------



## Ephemerid (Nov 30, 2007)

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


----------



## Ephemerid (Nov 30, 2007)

ChamberNut said:


> 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


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2007)

Edward Elgar said:


> 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


----------



## Ephemerid (Nov 30, 2007)

Andante said:


> 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


----------



## Conservationist (Apr 5, 2007)

Edward Elgar said:


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


I hear Akon's a millionaire.

In other words, no!


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6 (Dec 7, 2007)

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.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

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.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2008)

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


----------



## tutto (Apr 11, 2007)

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

u hu hu!!!


----------



## Yagan Kiely (Feb 6, 2008)

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.


----------



## natas (Jun 29, 2008)

crappy versechorus tards earn the most


----------



## shsherm (Jan 24, 2008)

Andrew (dreck) Lloyd Webber


----------



## PostMinimalist (May 14, 2008)

*Apocryphal tale*

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!"


----------



## Guest (Jun 30, 2008)

*I found this on the web:*
Levine was top-paid conductor in US 2005/6 with US$3.5m

Kurt Masur, then conductor of the New York Philharmonic, drew a salary of $1.51 million (U.S.).

The following which I thought would be of general interest was taken from the web site of U.S. Department of Labour, Bureau of Labour Statistics http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos095.htm updated Dec 2007

Median hourly earnings of wage-and-salary musicians and singers were $19.73 in May 2006. The middle 50 percent earned between $10.81 and $36.55. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $7.08, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $57.37. Median hourly earnings were $23.37 in performing arts companies and $13.57 in religious organizations. Annual earnings data for musicians and singers were not available because of the wide variation in the number of hours worked by musicians and singers and the short-term nature of many jobs. It is rare for musicians and singers to have guaranteed employment that exceeds 3 to 6 months.
Median annual earnings of salaried music directors and composers were $39,750 in May 2006. The middle 50 percent earned between $23,660 and $60,350. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $15,210, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $110,850.

_The thing to bear in mind is that only a few have full time employment_


----------



## Mr. Terrible (Oct 17, 2008)

Most classical musicians interpret the work of composers.
Composers, assuming their agents are hip, make all the money.
This is why the Dark Side always want to have their OWN songs on their records.

Performance royalties are not huge.

Mind you I don`t suppose Vanessa Mae and Nigel Kennedy complain about their appearance money.

Depends if you are doing it for fun fame or fortune.


----------



## PostMinimalist (May 14, 2008)

Mr. Terrible said:


> Most classical musicians interpret the work of composers.
> Composers, assuming their agents are hip, make all the money.
> This is why the Dark Side always want to have their OWN songs on their records.
> 
> ...


I am a professional composer without an agent and probably not so hip. I make most of my meagre earnings arranging songs for concerts and writing video game scores and occasional record sales (never enough after the download revolution). 
Are you trying to say that composers make all the money in this business?
Maybe a tiny percentage right at the very top do but their numbers pale in comparison to the myriad of rank and file like myself.
The salaries of Vanessa Mae and Nigel Kennedy etc. are not representative of the average musician and we would do well to keep in mind the back desk of the violas in the Mainz Chamber Orchestra or the 3rd trumpet in say the BBC Welsh SO when we talk about 'real' musicians and their salaries. 
FC


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2008)

post-minimalist said:


> The salaries of Vanessa Mae and Nigel Kennedy etc. are not representative of the average musician and we would do well to keep in mind the back desk of the violas in the Mainz Chamber Orchestra or the 3rd trumpet in say the BBC Welsh SO when we talk about 'real' musicians and their salaries.
> FC


That is what I said in my last post, at those pay rates it is not the best job in the world


----------



## PostMinimalist (May 14, 2008)

Back in the seventies my music teacher said - You might not get rich in the music business but there is a chance you'll be happy!
Confucious says- find a job you love and you'll never have to work a day in your life!


----------



## Mr. Terrible (Oct 17, 2008)

ANd yo might try getting an agent. Or maybe doing library work as well?

A long term project but one that can pay of well in the long run. I have several chums who make a very comfortable living JUST from library stuff.

And arranging as you already know does not pay a whole lot.


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2008)

post-minimalist said:


> Confucious says- find a job you love and you'll never have to work a day in your life!


Ah ha but what pays the bills? in the real world you need *MONEY* but as you get older it can become less important, for various reasons


----------



## PostMinimalist (May 14, 2008)

Andante said:


> Ah ha but what pays the bills? in the real world you need *MONEY* but as you get older it can become less important, for various reasons


Nobody likes having to explain confucious becuase it leaves a stigma of stupidity in various places - but.
The Idea is you get ajob which pays you money but you don't see it as 'work' because you love it. 
Clear now, Grasshopper?


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2008)

post-minimalist said:


> Nobody likes having to explain confucious becuase it leaves a stigma of stupidity in various places - but.
> The Idea is you get ajob which pays you money but you don't see it as 'work' because you love it.
> Clear now, Grasshopper?


_*My My* Mr Bunny_ you are a tad touchy eh, Yes, I understood it  it was not really all that taxing on the mind, it is commonly referred to as "a labour of love" *Clear now Brer Rabbit*


----------



## PostMinimalist (May 14, 2008)

No. A labour of love is something you don't get paid for but you do it because you love it. You get paid for doing music as a pro but you don't see it as work because you love it so much! 
Those feindish Chinese proverbs!


----------



## Guest (Nov 14, 2008)

*Not quite right Bunny*, A labour of love is also something that pays so little that you have to be an idiot,or enjoy doing it so much that payment is irrelevant


----------



## neofite (Feb 19, 2017)

In case you missed this, here is an excellent new WSJ article "Twilight of the Rock Gods," along with some good comments, about earnings of today's most popular musicians: https://www.wsj.com/articles/twilight-of-the-rock-gods-1490439609


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

In my opinion in most trades the people that have a vision and purpose in their lives and do real work, have knowledge and craftmanship, are exploited by those that don't. The first group is busy with their passion and creates, the latter wouldn't know how to find anything worthwhile in themselves and are just mediocre people without purpose of their own so they have all the time in the world to become 'middle men': managers, people in legal and finance, marketeers, advertizing people, communication people etc. They are parasites sucking the live out of creative people that hardly earn a buck while they themselves are getting payed big sums for their dishonest jobs. I don't mind them getting payed for what they do but what they do is completely dependant on the people with substance and purpose, so they should get payed less instead of more. 

There is something severely wrong with the way we organize society's use of talents. I've seen it happening around me all my life. I've seen almost all highly intelligent and unique persons that were around me in my youth fail in society or become part of the class of severely underpayed people. People that only stood out because of their mediocrity when I was young now mostly seem to be executive so and so.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Ephemerid said:


> 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


just ran across this 10 year old thread but I need to weigh in.

Both arts and sport are terribly undervalued in the educational institutions of the USA.

I think Europe really misses the mark when it comes to sport but I don't know much about how it works there.

I will say, that art does not get short changed at the expense of sport as suggested in the quote.

I often find myself miffed at the lack of understanding people have in the importance of sport in a child's development.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

A L Webber worth over $1.3 Billion USD.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Wasn't Karajan's estate valued at something like $500m when he died? And that was almost 30 years ago.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

chill782002 said:


> Wasn't Karajan's estate valued at something like $500m when he died? And that was almost 30 years ago.


And still a best selling artist, his wife doing ( very) well.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I read a few years back that the two top-earning classical music performers were Von Karajan and Bernstein. At that time, they had both already been dead for years.


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

I saw a documentary on Joe Cocker last night. He came out right in the end but this documentary also is a showcase for the exploitation of talented (young) artists that have the wrong management, only interested in short term profit. It has a lot in common with slave labour.


----------

