Entertainer Archive
Thread: Setting Minimum Gig Hire Requirements
The issue is me being hired specifically as a Master Dancer for a party or a wedding, and then arriving at the gig to find that half of the rest of the entertainers are barely out of Novice. What this does is severely crimp what the musicians and dancers can do as part of their routine, it has created hard feelings on the part of the lower level entertainers and in MY opinion anyway it doesn't give the party throwers their money's worth.
The last two gigs that have hired me have paid me some significant credits (5+ figures here). At one (no names, because I'm not posting this to embarrass anyone at all, and I appreciated the chance to dance) there was ONE master musician and one who was high enough to play ballad. The master musician had to leave, taking with him a large part of the band's potency. The rest of the musicians were still playing SW3 and did not even have bandfill or Ballad! On at least 3 occasions they didn't even know how to change music together so that everyone was on the same song.
This had a trickle-down effect: Due to the limited selection of music, and the fact that we had at least 4 or 5 competent dancers (3 of us were masters) who were trying to coordinate our dances with the music being played, it not only limited the band, it limited the visual impact of the dancing group and, IMO, lowered the quality of the product we delivered to our employers.
Now for the caveats: I know all too well the tedious XP grind that goes with working your way up the ranks. I'm ALL for giving lower level entertainers every opportunity to raise their skills and make some money in the process, within certain pragmatic and ethical limits.
But if you wanted to hire the Philharmonic orchestra, would you let Joe's Garage Band tag along for the ride? If your entertainment skills aren't even past the 1st box of your novice level, do you feel comfortable taking someone's money (which makes you technically "professional") knowing you can't give them everything they might expect?
I can't really blame any entertainer who gloms onto the chance to perform at a paid gig. What I do question, however, is why someone paying large credits for a performance group wouldn't demand the very best skills to maximize their event? Is it a case of just not knowing the difference between bandfill and no bandfill? (Bandfill's only Music 2, is it unreasonable to expect musicians to not hire out until they have it?)
Please don't think I'm being sour grapes. My concern is that Entertainers are already walking a fine line in the game with our image as AFK-Macroer-lamers, even though most of us don't deserve that image. My chosen method of overcoming that image is to put on such a good show that the audience goes away saying "Wow, those guys were GOOD!". Nothing - not even a 5-figure paycheck - can quite match that feeling.
Dancers are a limited part of the entertainment image. Music speaks louder and is more identifiable for most players -- and from my own experience, I know the sound of a well-organized band of master musicians who know how to stagger their entries and flourish together is a thing of amazement. I just wish there was a way to get that point across to people looking to hire performers. And, to a lesser extent, to my fellow entertainers who may not have considered this issue before.
Heretofore, if I'm asked to dance, I think I'm going to ask who the musicians are and what their skill level is. I don't insist on dancing with master musicians any more than I insist on dancing with Master Dancers. But there ought to be a minimum skill level in order to deliver a product that is worth paying for. Wouldn't you think?
Bandfill and the 'box - More or less a requirement for any performing band. If you don't have anyone who can play it yet, I'd stay stick in the cantina. Out of the lower songs, folk is really the only one that can sound decent without the drums, at least in my opinion.
Garage band vs. megastars - I think it's definitely reliant upon the initiative of the person doing the hiring to make sure they're getting the level of ability they want. And if they aren't sure, find a master musician or dancer to help figure things out. Better yet, hire a band rather than a collection of individual entertainers.
I've had the pleasure of knowing several of the members of FX on Bria, playing with them in the cantina as we worked our way up, and even tagging along at a few of their gigs. When I needed to hire a band, I knew exactly where to turn. Not only did they get the party going without needing direction, but when any song was requested they switched over easily and with a smile. They have both masters and novices but they work with it without breaking a sweat. It was to me a textbook experience of how a band ought to work. Worth much more than we were able to pay them.
Still, I think garage bands ought to be available too, at a much lower fee. There ought to be a whole range of performances you can get, depending on how much you want to pay.
Lastly, if you're an individual being offered a gig, it's certainly well within your rights to find out before accepting what the skill level of the other performers will be. If I was in such a position that's what I'd do, more than likely.
- Vaadu Vun, Master Dancer / Master Entertainer / Composer, Bria
No matter how much I want to disagree with Sinda for reasons I'll state below, I have to admit that her argument carries some wieght where money is involved. If someone hires a band of musicians and dancers to provide entertainment at a party, they should get their money's worth.
In the real world, nicely paid gigs would probably only work with famous or up and coming bands or set-up an auditions process. Nobody would require each musician to produce a musical or arts degrees The employer would have to like what the band does. Since we can't record and watch performances in SWG, we're pretty much limited to word of mouth. Auditions would work too but it's usually hard enough to get performers there for one night. Forget about unpaid auditions.
I don't think a set skill requirement is needed. I've seen bands of mixed levels work very nicely together. What you need is some cohesion. High level musicians/dancers who take a bit of time to make sure everybody is on the same wavelength before the performance and want to take some responsibility on making it run smoothly. On the lower level end of the group, the musicians need to accept to sit out some parts of the show to let the higher level musicians perform at their best. They need to swallow their pride for the good of the show. As for dancers, they could either sit out parts of the performance or settle in a neutral dance on the sides of the stage in a kind of support performance for the main dancers.
It seems to me, and that's an important factor,that some master musicians and dancers will just turn up at a gig without having met their employer first, havingprepared anythingor having inquired as to whom will be performing with them and expect to have a good show magically happen.
Both the performers and audience then become disappointed when things are not going as well as they could. Anybody who has been in pick-up hunting groups should be able to predict that this formula is going to fail more than succeed for entertainment troupes too.
I guess that what I'm trying to say is that I see Sinda's point. People who pay for entertainment should get good entertainment. If they get burned by bad gigs, they might not organise gigs anymore. And if they want some guarantee at quality, word of mouth and established bands are probably a good way to go (whatever the skill levels inside that band).
An elitist "What skill level are you?" approach is not necessarily required on the entertainer side though. Why prevent young performers from experiencing one of the best parts of the profession when actually taking some time to do the homework and prepare the performance could give everyone a satisfying role to play?
Just my thoughts, as a musician who does not have bandfill yet. 
Wendelius