Sax on the Web Forum banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

·
Forum Contributor 2016, Distinguished SOTW Member
Joined
·
13,319 Posts
This is a hypothetical question directed at those of you out there who do or did make a living primarily as a performer, whether as a leader, sideman, studio musician, or anything like that. I'm just wondering if any of you made the choice early on to take gigs in a kind of genre/band/environment that wouldn't have been your first choice, and then had it take off to the point where you felt like it would be a risk pursuing your preferred style of music. For example a hardcore jazzer who started taking pop/rock gigs as a sideman and then was very successful at that to the point where they no longer felt they could make it in the jazz scene (insert whatever genres you want). Does that kind of thing happen often? Is it a problem or are you just happy to be making money playing music? Do you have time for your own stuff on the side? I'm just trying to get a feel for what people's experiences have been, since not everyone has a career where they totally call the shots about what kind of music they play.

A related question - at what point in your career do you turn down gigs simply because you don't like the kind of music you are asked to play (or is there even such a point)?

hope this makes sense haha[rolleyes]
I don't think playing different kinds of music gets in the way of other genres in any way. It's really up to the player. Brecker did his think but he also played gigs with Carly Simon, Paul Simon and many other pop singers. Bob Reynolds did his own thing but played gigs with John Mayer. Jeff Coffin does his own thing but played and toured with Dave Matthews. I think Bob Sheppard and Chris Potter have done gigs and maybe tours with Steely Dan. Most of the sax players I knew in the Boston area would play with whatever GB band they could get gigs with every weekend but play jazz gigs in between when they could book them. You do what you have to to pay the bills I think.
 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
Top