A Study of the Worklife of Jazz Musicians
by the Research Center for Arts and Culture under a cooperative agreement
with the National Endowment for the Arts and the San Francisco Study Center
\
Volume
NEA Research Division Report #43
Respondent Driven Sampling: Survey Results
NATIONAL
ENDOWMENT
FOR THE ARTS
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries
http://archive.org/details/changingbeatstud03jeff
Changing the Beat
A Study of the Worklife of Jazz Musicians
VOLUME III:
RESPONDENT-DRIVEN SAMPLING
A Study by Joan Jeffri
*»
.SGR^
NATIONAL
ENDOWMENT
FOR THE ARTS
*c3£7<*
TZqac
NEA Research Division Report #43
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
SPONSORS AND FUNDERS
Dr. Billy Taylor, Chairman
The National Endowment for the Arts
The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
David Baker
Alvin Batiste
The Grammy Foundation
Jessie Bermudez
Tom Carter
American Federation of Musicians
Geraldine DeHass
Jon Faddis
American Federation of Musicians Local 802
Delfayeo Marsalis
Dan Morgenstern
New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Foundation
Jimmy Owens
Patrice Rushen
The Nathan Cummings Foundation
Project Director:
Joan Jeffri, Director, Research Center for Arts and Culture
Teachers College Columbia University
Consultants:
Dr. Douglas Heckathorn, Cornell University
Dr. Robert Greenblatt
Project coordinators:
Adina Williams
Phillip Harvey
Project researchers:
Judith Hellman
Janine Okmin
Data consultants:
Oscar Torres
Judith Rosenstein
City Coordinators:
Detroit
Dr. Bernard Brock
Dr. David Magidson
Center for the Study of Art and Public Policy
Wayne State University
New Orleans
Philip Dobard, Director
Graduate Program in Arts Administration
University of New Orleans
New York
Dr. Martin Mueller, Director
Jazz and Contemporary Music Program
New School University
San Francisco
Dr. Dee Spencer. Director of Education
SF Jazz Organization
San Francisco State University
Library of Congress info here from Executive Summary
Cover:
Copyright of Photo
n
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Purpose 1
Findings 2
Survey Background and Method 3
Organization of Report 4
Chapter I. Demographics 5
Chapter II. Employment and Income 1 1
Chapter III. Other Issues 21
Chapter IV. Social Networks 48
Chapter V. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations 62
Appendices 68
A. Metropolitan Areas Used in the Study 68
B. Metropolitan Areas Context 69
C. Distribution of Responses 77
D. Using the Capture-Recapture Method to Estimate
the Number of Jazz Musicians 140
E. Resource Directory 142
in
IV
Introduction
Purpose
Deemed a national treasure by the United States
Congress, jazz is a unique American art form, and its
musicians, the keepers and producers of this
treasure, are recognized the world over as America's
cultural ambassadors. Yet artists who make a living
as jazz musicians face numerous challenges. Despite
high-profile projects and activities, such as Jazz at
Lincoln Center's Essentially Ellington high school
band competition, the Monterey and other jazz
festivals, or the Jazz documentary by Ken Burns, jazz
music does not reach as vast an audience as other
music forms, making it challenging to maintain and
continue this treasure.
Recognizing the importance of jazz and its
artists, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)
in 2000 commissioned a study of jazz musicians in
four U.S. metropolitan areas — Detroit, New Orleans,
New York, and San Francisco. The statistical
information gathered in the study will be used to
help devise strategic ways to further the work of jazz
artists. These four cities were chosen for their
geographic diversity and their historical and current
relationships with jazz. The NEA had two purposes:
• To understand the environment for jazz in
each of the study cities by documenting both the
jazz artists and their resources and support systems.
• To develop a detailed needs assessment from
jazz artists themselves by collecting data
documenting their professional lives and most
pressing needs.
This study provided an opportunity to examine
the working lives of jazz musicians in a systematic
way and to produce quantitative and qualitative
information about the jazz community, the
professional lives of jazz musicians, and jazz's place
in the music industry.
Jazz musician and educator Dr. Billy Taylor
formed and chaired an advisory board to guide the
project as it developed. The study also created a
focus group of artists, managers, and educators, and
numerous jazz practitioners generously gave their
time to help advise this project. The study was
conducted in two parts: a survey of musicians
belonging to the American Federation of Musicians
(AFM) and a Respondent-Driven Sampling (RDS)
survey of jazz musicians. This volume focuses on the
RDS survey of jazz musicians in three cities. The
results of the AFM survey can be found in Volume
II, which focuses on jazz musicians in all four study
cities.
This study aims to support the continuing
growth and development of jazz and the musicians
who create it. Jazz musicians as a group, however, do
not constitute an easy subject for formal study.
Indeed, the word "jazz" itself proves difficult to
define. "It cannot safely be categorized as folk,
popular or art music," states the New Grove
Dictionary of Jazz, "though it shares aspects of all
three." This study relied on the musicians themselves
to indicate that they played jazz music.
To study jazz musicians, it is important to
understand the idiosyncratic nature of the music. As
A.B. Spellman indicated in his introduction to the
NEA publication, American Jazz Masters Fellowships
1982-2002, jazz was "built on the discipline of
collective improvisation... which allowed for
maximum expression of the individual within the
context of the group." The group, however, is often
an ever-changing one. Unlike classical music, with
orchestral members staying together for decades, or
even rock, where more often than not musicians
make their music as a group, jazz musicians often
look for jams or gigs as individuals rather than in
groups. Indeed, a jazz group like the Modern Jazz
Quartet is remarkable for its longevity as much as its
music.
Working as an individual musician can be more
trying financially, in many ways, than working as a
group. This seems especially true in a musical form
that, while critically acclaimed as a national treasure,
does not sell many tickets or CDs. In fact, jazz
accounts for only four percent of annual recording
sales in the United States. It can be even more
difficult for emerging jazz artists to make a living
with their music; reissues of classic jazz recordings
have consistently outsold all but the most popular
contemporary jazz artists. Even that amount is
somewhat inflated by the inclusion of pop artists in
the jazz category.
Institutional support for jazz exists but is small.
A few state and regional arts agencies and some
nonprofit foundations offer grants to individual
musicians, but often at low amounts; in this study,
of the musicians who received grants, more than 90
percent received $5,000 or less. The Lila Wallace-
Readers Digest Fund and the Doris Duke Charitable
Foundation have shored up institutions and
endowments of jazz presenters, created networks in
the jazz community, and provided venues for jazz
performance. The National Endowment for the Arts
has assisted these organizations with some of their
programs — such as the joint program with the Doris
Duke Charitable Foundation called JazzNet, which
furthers jazz creation, presentation, and education
with 14 regional jazz presenters. This program
ended in 1996, when Congress prohibited awarding
direct grants to individual artists, except for creative
writing and honorary awards in the folk and
traditional arts and jazz. The honorary award in
jazz, the American Jazz Masters Fellowship,
specifically sponsors jazz musicians who are
established and have achieved mastery of their art.
Emerging artists have little access to such support.
The data obtained through this study are crucial
to a better understanding of the environment in
which jazz musicians operate. By presenting a clearer
picture of the working life of the jazz artist, this
study will help the NEA develop and fund programs
that address the concerns and challenges jazz
musicians face in creating and playing their music.
Musicians' Response
The total of 733 responses yielded 300 in San
Francisco, 264 in New York, 1 10 in New Orleans and
59 in Detroit. The Detroit figures were too small to
analyze here, but a companion volume (Volume II)
reports on a parallel survey of 1,963 jazz musicians
in the musicians union in all four metro areas. Also,
in Volume I, the Executive Summary, only three
cities are analyzed: New Orleans, New York and San
Francisco.
Findings
-> The top instruments played by jazz musicians are piano/keyboard, drums, bass and voice.
-> 51.5 percent of the respondents earned their major income as musicians in the last 12 months and
for 70 percent, this income came from work as a jazz musician in 2000.
-> While 92.1 percent of the respondents played jazz for money during the last 12 months, 91.2 of the
respondents earned $40,000 or less as a musician in 2001. No one earned over $100,000.
-* 63 percent have more than one job, 24 percent of those as music teachers.
-> 79.5 percent play 10 different musical jobs per month and 41.2 percent play with more than four
different groups
-> 37.5 percent have a college degree and another 18.3 percent have a graduate degree.
-> 27.7 percent like the exposure from people downloading their music from the Internet; 24 percent
think they should be paid for this.
-> 69.9 percent of these respondents do not belong to the AFM; 19.4 percent of this group belonged at
a previous time.
-> 80.8 percent received music-related training in the city or region where they now reside. The highest
was New York (83.1 percent)
-> 63.3 percent have health or medical coverage; this is lower than the national average of 87 percent.
-> 33.3 percent have life insurance with a high of 43.9 percent in New York.
-> 43 percent have retirement plans with a high of 47.6 percent in New Orleans.
-> 73.1 percent are satisfied or very satisfied with their music at this point, but only 52.5 percent feel
their career aspirations have been realized.
-> 80.2 percent are male; 59.8 percent are white; 27.8 percent are black.
SURVEY BACKGROUND AND
METHOD
How to identify jazz musicians?
There are a wide variety of interpretations as to
what constitutes a jazz artist. Stanley Crouch in
"Blues to Be Constitutional" defined jazz artists this
way:
No matter what class or sex or religion or race or
shape or height, if you can cut the mustard you should
be up there playing or singing or having your
compositions performed. (In O'Meally, R., The Jazz
Cadence of American Culture, 164-5.)
Researchers who study artists, as much as they
might enjoy it, would be hard pressed to locate and
identify them by the criterion of cutting the
mustard. And indeed, as Paul Berliner tells us in
Thinking in Jazz:
Art worlds consist not only of their most seasoned
and single-minded members, but of a large support
system made up of individuals with different interests
and varying degrees of talent and knowledge, (p. 7)
Normally, independent studies of artists rely on
information from the U.S. Census or organizational
lists. The census, while it provides systematic
information over time, has limitations on the ways it
defines artists and, thus, is often not useful for the
arts community. Neither the census nor the Current
Population Survey (Bureau of Labor Statistics) can
provide any breakdown of the broad category of
"musicians and composers."
Organizational lists were seen as unrealistic for
the most part, since large numbers of jazz musicians
do not tend to join organizations. AdditionaDy, jazz
musicians perform substantial work in the for-profit
sector, perhaps more than the non-profit sector, for
organizations not often willing or able to generate
lists of artists.
With the help of a focus group of jazz artists,
educators and managers, we created this set of
definitional criteria:
Do you consider yourself a jazz musician?
Did you earn more than 50 percent of your
personal income in the last six months as a jazz
musician or in jazz-related activities?
Have you been engaged in your art/jazz more
than 50 percent of the time during the last year?
Have you performed in/with a jazz band at least
10 times in the last year?
Have you performed with or without a jazz
band for pay at least 10 times during the last year?
Have you produced a documented body of work
(documented output = performances, compositions,
collaborations, arrangements, recordings) that is
considered (self or externally) jazz?
We also asked several different definitional
questions in the body of the survey.
We used a method called respondent-driven
sampling (RDS), which was created by sociologist
Douglas Heckathorn from Cornell University to
identify hard-to-find populations. Our study sample
was composed of 733 musicians in Detroit, New
Orleans, New York and San Francisco. This method
requires a high contact pattern among participants,
and offered a modest financial incentive for jazz
musicians to recruit each other for personal, one-to-
one interviews. City coordinators and their staff in
the four study cities spent eight months interviewing
jazz musicians, recording their answers onto
questionnaires, and entering the data into a
specially-created computer program. Both the
questions and the survey design allowed us to learn
about the network patterns of jazz musicians and
answer questions about their social relationships
with each other.
Respondent Driven Sampling
Respondent driven Sampling (RDS) is a new
form of chain-referral sampling developed to
overcome the biases traditionally associated with
this method. It has also served as the recruitment
mechanism for an intervention that targets active
injection drug users for HIV prevention and
services, and has been adapted to a variety of other
populations including young gay Latinos in Chicago
and Vietnam draft dodgers in Canada. This is the
first time it has been used for artists. Perhaps the
greatest benefit of this method is that instead of
reaching only the most visible, vocal, loudest artists,
RDS gets deep into the community, like the
spreading roots of a tree.
Also, RDS, by following the pattern of coupon
redemption, can discover the networking aspects of
jazz musicians — who hangs out with whom, and
whether they do so by musical type, geography,
training, family dynasties, etc. Finally, for the first
time in artist surveys, using the capture-recapture
statistical analysis, we have been able to answer the
question "How many artists?" in three of the four
study cities. (See Appendix for the capture-recapture
method used to achieve this.)
RDS is a method based on peer recruitment. In
each of the four metropolitan areas. (See Appendix
for metro areas), a city coordinator began the study
by inviting six to eight jazz musicians to help start
the project. These musicians were well-connected in
the community, not necessarily famous or very
visible, but with many contacts since RDS depends
on a high contact pattern of the subjects studied.
Each of these musicians was interviewed in person
with questions on an identification sheet which
included the selection criteria mentioned above,
followed by a 116-question questionnaire. The
interviews took place in a friendly environment
sometimes donated by a jazz venue (in New York,
interviews were held at Sam Ash Music; in San
Francisco at SF JAZZ; in Detroit and New Orleans,
at university facilities). Following the interview, each
of these six to eight "seeds" was given four coupons
with which to recruit additional jazz musicians.
Three coupons (colored green) could be used for
any jazz musician; one of the four coupons (pink)
was to be used only for a female jazz musician. (We
took this approach because we were concerned that
too few women would be represented in the study.
Any skewing was accounted for in statistical
weighting when the data were analyzed.
Interestingly, in New York, an organization called
International Women in Jazz took advantage of this
opportunity and championed the study and its
recruitment efforts.)
We paid the initial "seeds" a modest $10 and for
each coupon the seed gave out, another $15 each
time one of the four coupons was redeemed. Any
single jazz musician had the possibility to earn a
total of $70. This limit on both coupons and
payment incentives was to avoid over- representing
one particular group of musicians to the exclusion
of others. This incentive had two purposes: first, to
recruit other musicians and, second, as an
indication to the subjects that their time and their
stories were valued.
Traditionally in RDS studies, it takes only four
"waves" of coupons to reach deep into the
community. In this study, we found some behavior
unique to jazz musicians and to each community.
First, our assumption that jazz musicians have a
high contact pattern because they "hang out
together" is only partially true — they DO hang out
together, but as the data show, it is often by musical
style that they do so. This pattern was also revealed
in a study from the mid-1990s in France called, Les
Musiciens de Jazz en France by Philippe Coulangeon
(L'Harmattan), which showed that both geography
and differences in style tended to separate French
jazz musicians.
Second, the "lone wolf" syndrome often adopted
by jazz musicians makes them somewhat leery of
collaboration since it is such a hard scramble for
their next gig. Some of our city coordinators were
extremely inventive in this regard — going to jazz
clubs, festivals and events, speaking about the study
at jazz gatherings, instrument and record stores, at
jazz schools and programs — and were vigilant at
reminding subjects about interview appointments,
rescheduling people who had out-of-town gigs, etc.
Third, some reacted negatively to the small payment
incentives. Fourth, coupons were sometimes lost or
forgotten, often despite the best intentions of the
musicians. But perhaps the most interesting finding
was the musicians' deep desire to tell their stories
and to be heard.
Organization of Report
The report is organized in five sections,
presenting findings on demographics, employment
and income, a variety of professional issues, and
social networks. It also contains a summary, with
conclusions and recommendations. Appendices
include definitions and contexts for each metro area
studied, a distribution of responses, the respondent
identification form, an explanation of the method
used to estimate the number of jazz musicians and a
directory of resources for jazz musicians in each
metro area.
Chapter I. Demographics
Gender, Age, Race
Eighty percent of jazz musicians are male and
20 percent are female. The m4ean total age is 43; the
median is 42. New York musicians are a little older:
46 is the mean and 47 the median. Surprisingly, in
New Orleans 73 percent of the jazz musicians are
white.
The racial breakdown for jazz musicians in the
three cities is 60 percent white, 28 percent black, 3
percent Latino and 3 percent Asian. In New Orleans,
the findings are a bit surprising with 73 percent
white, 23 percent black, 3 percent Asian and no
Latino jazz musicians in this study. In New York, 55
percent are white, 33 percent are black, 3 percent
Latino and 1 percent Asian; and in San Francisco, 59
percent are white, 25 percent are black, 3 percent are
Latino and 4 percent are Asian.
When age is broken out by groups, both the 25-
34 age group and the 45-54 age group seem to
account for about half the musicians in total,
corresponding mostly to Gen-X-ers and Baby
Where did you first get inspired by music?
Boomers.
Forty-two percent are single; 26 percent are
married. In San Francisco over half (51 percent) are
single.
Education
To help us follow the early musical development
of survey respondents, a number of questions
regarding their early education and training were
asked. When asked where they were first inspired by
music, 37 percent of total musicians said they
received their initial inspiration at home. This
reached a high of 47 percent for New York
musicians. Forty-one percent of the total
respondents received most of their encouragement
from their families. This was true of 35 percent in
New York, possibly indicating the commonality of
extended families. While 38 percent of the total
respondents received encouragement from other
musicians, 50 percent of New Orleans area
musicians did.
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
Church
Percent
106%
182%
5.4%
124%
Number
71
20
14
37
Community center
Percent
03%
00%
00%
0.7%
Number
2
0
0
2
Festival
Percent
1fl%
27%
08%
"20%
Number
11
3
2
6
Rim
Percent
03%
27%
00%
10%
Number
6
3
0
3
Friends
Percent
9.7%
118%
38%
14.1%
Number
65
13
10
42
Home
Percent
37.1%
29.1%
47.1%
312%
The confidence level for this survey is 95 percent with a 5 percent margin of error. Figures do not necessarily add up to 100
percent due to multiple answers and don't know/refused. In the New Orleans metro area, the majority of respondents resided
in Orleans Parish; in Detroit in Wayne and Oakland Counties does this apply to this volume?; in San Francisco, San Francisco
and Alameda counties, followed by San Mateo, Contra Costa and San Mateo Counties; and in the New York Metro area, New
York County (includes Manhattan) and Kings County (includes Brooklyn). (See Appendix C)
**Please refer to Appendix C for the distribution of responses in New Orleans, New York and San Francisco.
Number
248
32
123
93
Internet
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
Live performance
Percent
61%
6.4%
61%
6.0%
Number
41
7
16
18
Private music teacher
Percent
21%
18%
1.1%
30%
Number
14
2
3
9
Rado
Percent
79%
73%
73%
8.7%
Number
53
8
19
26
Recordings
Percent
75%
6.4%
92%
6.4%
Number
50
7
24
19
Relatives
Percent
3,0%
36%
08%
4.7%
Number
20
4
2
14
School
Percent
75%
82%
7.7%
6.7%
Number
49
9
20
20
Television
Percent
09%
0.0%
15%
0.7%
Number
6
0
4
2
Workshop
Percent
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
Nurber
1
0
1
0
Other
Percent
4.8%
18%
88%
23%
Number
32
2
23
7
Mssing
5
0
3
2
total # of respondents who answered the question
669
110
261
298
What experiences provided you with early encouragement for your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
apprenticeship/internship
Percent
31%
27%
08%
53%
Number
21
3
2
16
Award
Percent
5.6%
127%
19%
63%
Number
38
14
5
19
critical review
Percent
39%
55%
1.1%
5.7%
Number
26
6
3
17
family attention
Percent
41.1%
45.5%
34.8%
45.0%
Number
277
50
92
135
financial support
Percent
33%
3.6%
0.4%
5.7%
Number
22
4
1
17
influence of other musicians' work
Percent
37.5%
50.0%
216%
47.0%
Number
253
55
57
141
my music was recorded
Percent
31%
55%
0.4%
4.7%
Number
21
6
1
14
Mentor
Percent
123%
182%
3:0%
183%
Number
83
20
8
55
peer approval
Percent
27.0%
29.1%
14.8%
37.0%
Number
182
32
39
111
playing in the streets
Percent
89%
73%
38%
14.0%
Number
60
8
10
42
public performance
Percent
228%
355%
27%
36.0%
Number
154
39
7
108
sale of my music
Percent
25%
4.5%
0.0%
4.0%
Number
17
5
0
12
teacher(s)
Percent
30.9%
42.7%
121%
43.0%
Number
208
47
32
129
winning competitions(s)
Percent
7.1%
155%
08%
9.7%
Number
48
17
2
29
Other
Percent
175%
9.1%
26.1%
130%
Number
118
10
69
39
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
Teaching and mentoring are different aspects of
a musician's education. The major motivation for
aggregate musicians who teach or have taught music
over the course of their career is the importance of
passing on their knowledge and experiences. Fifty
percent of artists recognized that mentoring is very
important to their own artistic development.
If you taught music or currently teach music during your career, what was your major motivation for
teaching?
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
earring money
Percent
24.8%
327%
186%
27.3%
Number
167
36
49
82
bve to teach
Percent
20.8%
191%
129%
28.3%
Number
140
21
34
85
importance of passing on my knowledge and
experiences
Percent
252%
29.1%
24.2%
24.7%
Number
170
32
64
74
importance of leaving a legacy
Percent
3.4%
3.6%
0.0%
63%
Number
23
4
0
19
benefits (hearth insurance, etc.)
Percent
15>/o
27%
08%
1.7%
Number
10
3
2
5
facilities for making music
Percent
18%
27%
03%
23%
Number
12
3
2
7
staying in touch with people and ideas
Percent
83%
173%
42%
100%
Number
60
19
tl
30
Other
Percent
14.8%
55%
30.3%
4.7%
Njrber
100
6
80
14
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
3CO
If you have been a mentor to another musician or artist, how important is mentoring to your ongoing
artistic development?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
very important
Percent
49.7%
52.4%
47.3%
51.4%
NjTfcer
245
44
107
94
somewhat important
Percent
112%
190%
7.1%
126%
Njrber
55
16
16
23
Important
Percent
20.1%
155%
252%
158%
Mrrter
99
13
57
29
not important
Percent
28%
4.8%
22%
27%
Umber
14
4
5
5
Meanin^ess
Percent
08%
12%
0.4%
1.1%
NuTter
4
1
1
2
I have never been a mentor
Percent
15.4%
7.1%
17.7%
16.4%
Nurber
76
6
40
30
fvfesrtj
181
26
38
117
total # of respondents who answered the question
493
84
226
183
Respondents from the three cities combined and
the New Orleans area showed a good amount of
differentiation in the experiences that helped
prepare them for their work in the arts. New
Orleans-area artists had more community-based arts
experience than total musicians (22 percent to 18
percent) and included more musicians who were
self-taught (55 percent to 38 percent).
A large percentage of artists learned from
listening to music (75 percent total) and performing
(69 percent total).
Respondents from the three cities combined
showed a good amount of differentiation in the
experiences that helped prepare them for their work
in the arts. San Francisco area artists had more
community-based arts experience than aggregate
musicians (29 percent to 18 percent) and included
more musicians who were self-taught (51 percent to
38 percent).
What other experiences have you had in preparation for your work in the arts?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
alternative schooling experience
Percent
120%
191%
53%
153%
Number
81
21
14
46
attending performances
Percent
61.1%
72.7%
47.0%
693%
Njrber
412
80
124
208
conrnunity-based arts experience
Percent
17.7%
213%
27%
293%
NLnter
119
24
7
88
experience as a mentor
Percent
123%
20.9%
38%
167%
Umber
83
23
10
50
8
experience as an apprentice
Percent
228%
25.5%
205%
24.0%
Number
154
28
54
72
jazz workshop, clinic, master class
Percent
415%
527%
273%
50.0%
Number
280
58
72
150
listening to muse
Percent
75.1%
89.1%
665%
77.7%
Mrrber
506
98
175
233
Performing
Percent
68.7%
882%
48.9%
79.0%
Number
463
97
129
237
rehearsal band
Percent
33.7%
42.7%
11.7%
49.7%
Number
227
47
31
149
self-taught
Percent
38.0%
54.5%
163%
510%
Number
256
60
43
153
Other
Percent
168%
55%
36.0%
4.0%
Number
113
6
95
12
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
Formal Education
Thirty-four percent of total musicians have
Please indicate your highest level of formal education
some college; 38 percent have a college degree; an
additional 18 percent of the total respondents have a
graduate degree.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
i elementary school, through grade 8
Percent
0.0%
00%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
some high school
Percent
2.4%
18%
1S%
31%
Number
16
2
5
9
1 2th grade, but did not graduate
Percent
0.6%
0.0%
0.4%
10%
Number
4
0
1
3
12th grade, got GED
Percent
1.4%
4.6%
0.4%
10%
Number
9
5
1
3
1 2th grade, graduated from high school
Percent
53%
4.6%
42%
6.4%
Nurber
35
5
11
19
somecolege
Percent
335%
39.4%
302%
342%
Number
223
43
79
101
college degree
Percent
375%
26.6%
42.0%
37.6%
Number
250
29
110
111
graduate degree
Percent
183%
22.9%
210%
142%
Nurber
122
25
55
42
Mssrg
8
1
2
5
total # of respondents who answered this question
666
109
262
295
Additional Educational Experiences
Nineteen percent of the musicians from the
three cities combined had conservatory or
professional school training that did not grant a
degree. This was very high in New York at 29
percent. Sixty-two percent of all jazz musicians
studied with private teachers, again highest in New
York at 73 percent.
Did you receive technical or professional training in the arts?
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
in conservatory or professional school not granting a
degree
Percent
19.4%
127%
292%
133%
Nurrter
131
14
77
40
certificate program in the arts
Percent
63%
145%
38%
67%
Nurrter
46
16
10
20
private teachers
Percent
620%
61 a%
73.1%
523%
MiTter
418
68
193
157
did not receive technical or professional training in
the arts
Percent
163%
ai%
72%
273%
Njrter
111
10
19
82
other
Percent
104%
73%
102%
11.7%
Mrrter
70
8
27
35
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
10
Chapter II. Employment and Income
EMPLOYMENT
To assess the employment situation of jazz
musicians, a number of questions were asked to
clarify the nature of their working habits. At present,
28 percent of all musicians are employed full-time in
the music business, 27 percent are employed full-
time as freelancers in the music business, and 13
At present, what is your employment situation?
percent are part-time freelancers in the music
business. For New Orleans-area musicians, 66
percent are employed full-time in the music
business, and only 1 7 percent are employed full time
in New York.
Respondents play a mean of 10 different musical
jobs a month; in San Francisco the mean is seven
jobs a month.
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
1 am empbyed full time in the music business
Percent
28.0%
65.5%
170%
24.0%
Nurrber
189
72
45
72
1 am empbyed full-time NOT in the music business
Percent
131%
4.5%
63%
21.7%
Nurrber
88
5
18
65
1 am empbyed part-time in the muse business
Percent
62%
27%
15%
11.7%
Number
42
3
4
35
1 am empbyed full-time as a freelancer in the musb
busress
Percent
27.3%
30.0%
49.6%
67%
Nurrber
184
33
131
20
1 am empbyed part-time as a freelancer in the musb
busress
Percent
128%
3.6%
123%
160%
Nurrber
86
4
34
48
lam unemployed
Percent
52%
0.0%
13%
100%
Nurrber
35
0
5
30
1 am retired
Percent
33%
18%
23%
4.7%
Nurrber
22
2
6
14
other (other]_
Percent
11fJP/o
27%
106%
143%
Number
74
3
28
43
Mbstq
total # of respondents who answered this question
(including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
Note: These percentages add up to more than 100 percent, indicating that some respondents gave multiple
answers, possibly selecting "other" as well as a defined category.
Sixty- three percent of the total musicians have
more than one job. For New York musicians, the
figure is 80 percent; for San Francisco, 54 percent.
For the majority of musicians, music teacher was the
most cited secondary job (24 percent in New
Orleans, 35 percent in New York and only 15 percent
in San Francisco).
There seems to be a greater synergy between
music and outside employment in New Orleans and
New York. Of the total musicians who are currently
working more than one job, 55 percent believe that
their alternate employment and their music
11
reinforce each other. In comparison, 73 percent of
New Orleans-area musicians, and 66 percent of New
York musicians and only 37 percent of San Francisco
musicians feel that their employment reinforces
their music. Forty-four percent of San Francisco
musicians, 30 percent of New Yorkers and only 18
percent in New Orleans feel that their other
employment pays to support their music.
If you have other employment, which one of the following statements best describes your feelings about
the relationship between your music and your other employment at this point in your career?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
My other employment pays to support my music
Percent
34.1%
182%
30.1%
43.7%
Number
129
8
55
66
My other employment and my music reinforce each
other
Percent
553%
72.7%
661%
37.1%
Nurber
209
32
121
56
My other employment and my music have no relation
tDeachother
Percent
10j6%
91%
33%
192%
Number
40
4
7
29
Mssrig
296
66
81
149
total # of respondents who answered this question
378
44
183
151
Thirty-three percent of all musicians and 48
percent of New York-area musicians spend over 40
hours a week on their music or music-related
activities. Thirty-nine percent of the total musicians
spend between 10 or fewer hours per week on their
supplementary employment.
Approximately how many hours per week do you spend on your music or music-related activities
(including performing, looking for work, marketing etc.)
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
0-10 hours per week
Percent
109%
75%
3.4%
18.4%
Umber
67
8
8
51
11 -20 hours per week
Percent
160%
178%
86%
21.7%
Number
99
19
20
60
21 -30 hours per week
Percent
182%
159%
133%
231%
Number
112
V
31
64
31 -40 hours per week
Percent
21.7%
23.4%
27.0%
166%
Number
134
25
63
46
over 40 hours per week
Percent
332%
355%
47.6%
202%
Number
205
38
111
56
Mssrig
57
3
31
23
total # of respondents who answered this question
617
107
233
277
INCOME
Fifty-two percent of all jazz musician
respondents earned their major income in the last
12 months as musicians, 24 percent in non-music
related occupations, another 1 1 percent as music
teachers and 7 percent as jazz teachers. A high of 83
percent of the New Orleans- area musicians earned
their major income in the last 12 months as
musicians. Fifty-six percent of the New York-area
musicians earned their major income in the last 12
months as musicians, 19 percent in non-music
related occupations, 8 percent as music teachers, and
7 percent as jazz teachers.
12
Thirty-six percent of the San Francisco-area
musicians earned their major income in the last 12
months as musicians, 36 percent in non-music
related occupations, 13 percent as music teachers,
and 7 percent as jazz teachers.
In a late- 1990s study of 400 jazz musicians in
the Netherlands (a place often invoked for its
government subsidy of artists) researcher Teunis
IJdens found the main sources of income were
performing (35 percent) and teaching (25 percent).
Other work as a musician, including composing,
made up almost 10 percent of total income, and
other non-musical work accounted for 15 percent.
Only one out often jazz musicians can make a
living out of performing, teaching, and composing jazz
and improvised music. Almost half of them can make
a living as a musician (jazz and other music) while
other (non-musical) sources of income are required by
well over 50 percent of the musicians. ( "Scattered and
Skewed, Artistic Work Between Market and
Organization," p. 225).
From which occupation did you earn your major income in the last 12 months?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
Musician
Percent
515%
827%
564%
35.7%
Number
347
91
149
107
music teacher
Percent
11.1%
13B%
8.0%
13D%
Number
75
15
21
39
jazz teacher
Percent
65%
45%
6.8%
7.0%
Number
44
5
18
21
arts manager or administrator
Percent
1C%
0.0%
0B%
1.7%
Number
7
0
2
5
other music-related occupation
Percent
75%
4.5%
37%
83%
Number
53
5
23
25
non-music related occupation
Percent
24.2%
36%
189%
363%
Number
163
4
50
109
: Other
Percent
10.7%
64%
53%
170%
Number
72
7
14
51
Msshg
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
'300
The extremes of income from music are evident:
as noted above, 52 percent of all musicians and 56
percent of New York-area musicians earned their
major income in the last 12 months as musicians.
Nine percent of all jazz musicians and 1 1
percent of New York-area jazz musicians earned over
$40,000 from their work as musicians in 2000.
Fourteen percent of all musicians and 8 percent of
New York-area jazz musicians earned $500 or less as
musicians in 2000.
I am going to read a list of income ranges. Please let me know when I get to the category that describes your
total income as an individual from all sources in 2000 before taxes, including your work as a musician.
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
$0- $500
Percent
7.7%
20%
4.9%
125%
Number
45
2
12
32
$501 -$3000
Percent
11.7%
5.0%
123%
137%
Number
70
5
30
35
13
$3001 -$7000
Percent
252%
29.0%
23.4%
255%
Number
151
29
57
65
$7001 -$12,000
Percent
20.0%
26.0%
20.9%
169%
Number
120
26
51
43
$12,001 -$20,000
Percent
127%
170%
16.4%
75%
Number
76
17
40
19
$20,001 -$40,000
Percent
95%
110%
9.4%
9.0%
Number
57
11
23
23
$40,001 -$60,000
Percent
62%
60%
53%
7.1%
Number
37
6
13
18
$60,001 -$80,000
Percent
7.0%
4.0%
7.4%
78%
Number
42
4
18
20
$80,001 -$100,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
more than $100,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
Mm
$16,269
$15,833
$16,660
$16,066
Medan
$9,501
$9,501
$9,501
$5,001
Mssrg
75
10
20
45
total # of respondents who answered this question
599
100
244
255
Only nine percent of all jazz artists earned over
$40,000 in total income as musicians, with a low of
six percent in San Francisco.
I am going to read a list of income ranges. Please let me know when I get to the category that describes your
total income from work as a musician from all sources for 2000 before taxes.
-
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
$0-$500
Percent
138%
19%
7.9%
24.1%
Number
85
2
20
63
$501 -$3000
Percent
160%
58%
123%
23.8%
Number
99
6
31
62
$3001 -$7000
Percent
139%
29%
142%
180%
Number
86
3
36
47
$7001 -$12,000
Percent
130%
136%
150%
10.7%
Number
80
14
38
28
$12,001 -$20,000
Percent
14.7%
252%
17.4%
8.0%
Number
91
26
44
21
$20,001 -$40,000
Percent
198%
40.8%
225%
88%
Number
122
42
57
23
$40,001 -$60,000
Percent
55%
78%
7.1%
31%
IMjTber
34
8
18
8
14
$60,001 -$80,000
Percent
32%
19%
3.6%
3.4%
Number
20
2
9
9
$80,001 -$100,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
i more than $100,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
Ivtei
$15,560
$23,059
$17,962
$10,273
Madan
$9,501
$30,001
$16,001
$5,001
Mssrg
57
7
11
39
total # of respondents who answered this question
617
103
253
261
For 70 percent of all and 81 percent of New
York-area musicians, musician income came from
work AS jazz musicians, in other words, not playing
weddings, bar mitzvahs and all the other musical
jobs jazz musicians do to survive.
This was true of 78 percent of New Orleans-area
musicians, 56 percent of San Francisco musicians.
What percentage of this income came from your work as a jazz musician in 2000?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
mean
70
78
81
56
Marian
90
98
100
50
std.dev.
35
30
30
38
Mre
100
100
100
100
valid cases
587
104
247
236
Mssing
87
6
17
64
Respondents play a mean of 10 different musical
jobs a month; in New Orleans the mean is 17 jobs a
month.
Just over half of the RDS and union musicians
earned their major income in the last 12
months as musicians (see Volume II). Forty-
three percent of union jazz musicians and 28
percent of RDS musicians are employed full-
time in the music business. And 5 percent or
less of both groups are unemployed.
For 63 percent of all musicians and 89 percent
of New Orleans area musicians, the income earned
from their work as jazz musicians covered their
music-related costs. For over three-quarters of all
musicians, costs of music-related supplies,
equipment, capital improvements, publicity and
marketing, travel and cartage, recording and
management costs, and instrument insurance are
under $2,500.
The information below includes findings from
our union survey (AFM) on jazz and non-jazz
musicians, our RDS survey, and the NEA's 1990
census figures for musicians and composers (the
census does not separate these or distinguish
between types of music.)
15
In the RDS study, the mean total household gross income in 2000 before taxes for
aggregate jazz musicians is $24,504, the median is $9,501. For New Orleans-area
musicians the mean is $23,589 and the median is $16,001.
The mean total income as an individual from ALL sources including work as a musician
in 2000 before taxes for aggregate musicians is $16,269, the median is $9,501. For New
Orleans-area musicians the mean is $15,833, the median is $9,501.
In the AFM study, the mean total household gross income in 2000 before taxes for jazz
musicians is $63,496; the median is $70,000. For non-jazz musicians the mean is
$70,493 and the median is $70,000.
The mean total income as an individual from ALL sources including work as a musician
in 2000 before taxes for jazz musicians is $49,847; the median is $50,000. For non-jazz
musicians the mean is $50,894 and the median is $50,000.
According to the 1990 census as reported by the National Endowment for the Arts, the
median earnings for all musicians and composers was $22,988 for men and $18,653 for
women. Median household income was $36,653.
In the RDS study the mean income as an individual from work AS A MUSICIAN in
2000 before taxes for aggregate jazz musicians is $15,560; the median is $9,501. For New
Orleans area musicians the mean is $23,059; the median is $17,692.
The mean AFM income as an individual from work AS A MUSICIAN in 2000 before
taxes for jazz musicians is $33,486; the median is $30,000. For non-jazz musicians the
mean is $36,516 and the median is $30,000.
Eighteen percent of aggregate and only 10
percent of New Orleans-area musicians earned over
$60,000 in total gross household income in 2000; no
musicians from any group earned over $100,000.
Conversely, 4 percent of aggregate musicians and 2
percent of New Orleans area musicians earned $500
or less.
I am going to read a list of income ranges. Please let me know when I get to the category that describes your
total household gross income in 2000 before taxes.
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
$0- $500
Percent
4.3%
21%
50%
4.6%
Urrber
25
2
12
11
$501 -$3000
Percent
83%
21%
83%
10.4%
Nrrter
43
2
21
25
$3001 -$7000
Percent
225%
219%
213%
24.1%
NiTber
130
21
51
58
$7001 -$12,000
Percent
151%
17.7%
133%
158%
Nurber
87
17
32
38
$12,001- $20,000
Percent
133%
198%
14.6%
95%
Urrber
77
19
35
23
$20,001 -$40,000
Percent
10j6%
135%
83%
112%
16
Number
61
13
21
27
$40,001 -$60,000
Percent
ao%
125%
75%
66%
Number
45
12
18
16
$60,001 -$80,000
Percent
173%
104%
208%
178%
Number
103
10
50
43
$80,001 -$100,000
Percent
00%
00%
Oj0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
more than $100,000
Percent
00%
00%
0.0%
0O%
Number
0
0
0
0
Ivtei
$24,504
$23,589
$25,787
$23,592
Ivtefan
$9,501
$16,001
$16,001
$9,501
Mssrg_
97
14
24
59
total # of respondents win answered this question
577
96
240
241
Thirty-two percent of total area respondents
applied for a grant as a jazz or aspiring musician; the
highest percentage of applicants came from New
York with 57 percent. Nine percent or 62 jazz artists
received grants from the National Endowment for
the Arts. Forty-six of these artists came from the
New York metro area. None received foundation
grants and 2 percent received state agency grants in
2000.
If you received grants or fellowships as a jazz or aspiring musician, from what sources did you receive them?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
I never received
Percent
365%
418%
20.1%
49.0%
Number
246
45
53
147
National Endowment for the Arts
Percent
92%
18%
17.4%
4.7%
Number
62
2
45
14
other federal agency (specify agency)
Percent
10%
00%
15%
10%
Number
7
0
4
3
regional agency (specify agency)
Percent
10%
0.0%
1.1%
13%
Number
7
0
3
4
state agency (specify agency)
Percent
4.3%
18%
61%
3.7%
Number
29
2
16
11
local agency (specify agency)
Percent
27%
09%
4.5%
1.7%
Number
18
1
12
5
foundation (specify foundation)
Percent
38%
00%
53%
27%
Number
22
0
14
8
educational institution (specify
institution)
Percent
7.7%
73%
11.7%
4.3%
Number
52
8
31
13
corporate sponsor (specify sponsor)
Percent
10%
00%
19%
0.7%
Number
7
0
5
2
Other
Percent
73%
00%
16.7%
13%
17
Number
49
1
44
4
MSSITCJ
428
64
211
153
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
Almost all jazz musicians received under $5,000
from music-related grants or fellowships, royalties or
residuals, public assistance (welfare) and/or
unemployment benefits in the year 2000. Of those
who applied for grants or fellowships, 3 percent
received between $25,001 and $50,000. Almost all
jazz musicians received under $5,000 from music
royalties or residuals, public assistance (welfare)
and/or unemployment benefits in the year 2000.
How much did you receive in 2000 before taxes in each of the following areas?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
music-related grants
a $0- $5,000
Percent
94.8%
932%
93.7%
962%
Number
452
55
192
205
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
15%
0.0%
20%
1.4%
Number
7
0
4
3
C$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
21%
3.4%
29%
09%
Number
10
2
6
2
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
15%
3.4%
15%
09%
Number
7
2
3
2
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Nurber
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
02%
0.0%
0.0%
05%
Number
1
0
0
1
mam
3,412
4,195
3,549
3,063
medan
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
music-related fellowships
a $0- $5,000
Percent
96.7%
94.5%
95.9%
981%
Number
441
52
187
202
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
1.1%
0.0%
26%
0.0%
Number
5
0
5
0
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
15%
86%
10%
15%
Number
7
2
2
3
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
0.7%
18%
05%
05%
Number
3
1
1
1
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Mrrber
0
0
0
0
18
f over $75,000
Percent
OjOP/o
0.0%
03%
03%
Number
0
0
0
0
rreai
3,015
3,682
2,962
2,888
medan
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
music royalties/residuals
a $0- $5,000
Percent
96.0%
94.0%
95.9%
96.6%
Nurrber
453
63
189
201
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
28%
60%
20%
2.4%
Number
13
4
4
5
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
1.1%
0.0%
15%
13%
Number
5
0
3
2
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
02%
00%
05%
00%
Number
1
0
1
0
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
0.0%
03%
03%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
mem
2371
2,799
3,008
2,764
medan
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
public assistance (welfare)
a $0- $5,000
Percent
98.0%
100.0%
97.4%
98.0%
Number
437
53
186
198
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
18%
0.0%
21%
20%
Number
8
0
4
4
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
02%
0.0%
05%
03%
Number
1
0
1
0
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
03%
0.0%
00%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
00%
03%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
03%
03%
Number
0
0
0
0
mem
2,623
2,500
2,683
2,599
medan
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
unemployment benefits
a $0- $5,000
Percent
993%
961%
995%
995%
Number
446
53
191
202
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
0.4%
19%
05%
05%
Number
2
1
1
1
19
C$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
02%
0jCP/o
0.0%
00%
Mjrber
1
0
0
0
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
,0.0%
Njrber
0
0
0
0
e $50.001 -$75,000
Percent
00%
00%
0.0%
00%
Nurber
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
0.0%
O0%
ao%
0j0%
Nirrber
0
0
0
0
mean
2,556
2,593
2526
2,525
medan
2,500
2,500
2500
2,500
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
20
Chapter III. Other Issues
PROFESSIONALISM
Selection Criteria
As described earlier, the musicians interviewed
for this study were asked to select one or more of the
following criteria to define their status as jazz
musicians. These include self-definition, a
marketplace definition (getting paid), the extent of
jazz work performed, engagement with jazz, and the
production of a documented body of work. The
criteria were determined from work with a focus
group of jazz representatives.
1. Do you consider yourself a jazz musician?
2. Did you earn more than 50 percent of your
personal income in the last six months as a
jazz musician or in jazz-related activities?
3. Have you been engaged in your art/jazz more
than 50 percent of the time during the last
year?
4. Have you performed in/with a jazz band at
least 10 times during the last year?
5. Have you performed with or without a jazz
band for pay at least 10 times during the last
year?
6. Have you produced a documented body of
work that is considered (self or externally)
jazz? (documented output = performances,
compositions, collaborations, arrangements,
recordings)
As is well known in the field itself, there are
musicians who are uncomfortable with calling
themselves "professional," musicians who do not
play or define themselves solely by jazz, musicians
who refuse to acknowledge the term "jazz." And
some musicians were uncomfortable being asked to
refer to themselves in these ways.
In a review of a book called Academic Instincts
(Times Literary Supplement, May 25, 2001, p. 24).
Author Marjorie Garber is quoted as saying,
Not only are (the terms "amateur" and
"professional") mutually interconnected. Part of
their power comes from the disavowal of the close
affinity between them. ...If, at the beginning of
any discipline's self-definition, it undertakes to
Ninety-nine percent of all jazz artists play or sing jazz music.
Ninety-five percent of aggregate respondents and 92 percent in San Francisco, consider
themselves jazz musicians.
Fifty-three percent of the total jazz artists earned more than 50 percent of their personal
income in the last six months as jazz musicians or in jazz-related activities. There was a
low of 35 percent in San Francisco and a high of 92 percent in New Orleans.
Forty-eight percent of all respondents, 92 percent of New Orleans musicians and only 19
percent of New York jazz musicians were engaged in their art/jazz more than 50 percent
of the time during the last year.
Fifty- three percent of all musicians — and 98 percent of New Orleans, 17 percent of New
York and 67 percent of San Francisco musicians performed in/with a jazz band at least
10 times during the last year.
Forty-two percent of aggregate respondents; 95 percent of New Orleans and only 2
percent of New York and 58 percent of San Francisco musicians performed with or
without a jazz band for pay at least 10 times during the last year.
Forty-six percent all and 98 percent of New Orleans musicians, but only 10 percent of
New York and 57 percent of San Francisco musicians have produced a documented body
of work that is considered jazz.
21
distinguish itself from another, "false," version of
itself, that difference is always going to come hack
to haunt it....
The changing, sometimes multi-layered,
meaning of the word "professional" gives us no
common definition for the arts. Indeed, the root of
the word amateur is "to love" and most jazz
musicians would probably agree they play jazz, first
and foremost, because they love it.
Whether jazz musicians consider themselves
professional or not, they are included in this study
since 99.2 percent of them play or sing jazz music.
Using the selection criteria listed above, the
following statistics help characterize the professional
lives of jazz musicians.
Due to the targeted nature of the RDS study,
most of the musicians surveyed have established a
history of performing jazz music. While 99 percent
of all musicians play or sing jazz music, of the
musicians who have never played or sung jazz
music, 37 percent play classical music and 63
percent play or sing other kinds of music.
Do you ever play or sing jazz music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Yes
Percent
992%
100.0%
100.0%
9813%
NjTfcer
638
109
243
286
No
Percent
08%
0.0%
0j0P/o
1.7%
Nutter
5
0
0
5
Msshg
31
1
21
9
total # of respondents who answered this question
643
109
243
291
If no, do you play or sing any other kind of music?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Classical
Percent
37.0%
333%
46.2%
333%
Number
17
4
6
7
other (please specify)
Percent
63.0%
66.7%
53.8%
66.7%
Nurrber
29
8
7
14
Mssrtj
628
98
251
279
total # of respondents who answered the question
46
12
13
21
In fact, only 81 percent consider themselves
professional jazz musicians, with a high of 96
percent in New York.
Do you consider yourself a professional jazz musician?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
81.4%
93.6%
95.7%
655%
Nurrber
513
103
220
190
no
Percent
186%
6.4%
4.3%
34.5%
Number
117
7
10
100
44
0
34
10
mssrig
total # of respondents who answered the
question
630
110
230
290
22
In addition to the selection criteria, we asked the
musicians which were the top three reasons they
considered themselves professional jazz musicians.
Among all first choices, in New York and New
Orleans, making a living as a jazz musician was the
top choice; in San Francisco it was inner drive. In
New Orleans, making a living was also the second
choice, while New York and San Francisco focused
on peer recognition, which also became the highest
third choice for all.
If yes, of these statements, which do you consider the three most important reasons as they apply to you?
Choice 1
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
I make my living as a musician
Percent
32.3%
40.8%
39.9%
20.8%
Number
172
40
87
45
I receive some income tan my work as a musician
Percent
122%
0.0%
1Q1%
199%
Number
65
0
22
43
I intend to make my Irving as a musician
Percent
6.0%
4.1%
18%
11.1%
Number
32
4
4
24
I belong to a musicians' association
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
I belong to a musicians' union or guild
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
I have been formally educated in music
Percent
26%
20%
18%
87%
Number
14
2
4
8
I am recognized by my peers as an musician
Percent
11.1%
14.3%
87%
120%
Number
59
14
19
26
I consider myself to be a musician
Percent
6.6%
92%
78%
42%
Number
35
9
17
9
I spend a considerable amount of lime working as a
musician
Percent
1.7%
10%
28%
0.9%
Number
9
1
6
2
1 have a special talent
Percent
4.5%
61%
32%
51%
Number
24
6
7
t
1 have an inner drive to make music
Percent
160%
21.4%
88%
213%
Number
85
2t
18
46
1 receive some public recognition for my music
Percent
23%
0.0%
5.5%
00%
Number
12
0
12
0
Other
Percent
4.7%
10%
10.1%
0.9%
Number
25
1
22
2
Msshg
142
12
45
84
total # of respondents who answered the question
532
98
218
216
Choice 2
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
1 make my fiving as a musician
Percent
105%
188%
11.1%
62%
Number
54
18
23
13
23
1 receive some hoome from my wok as a musician
Percent
72%
115%
4.3%
81%
Number
37
11
9
17
1 intend to make my IK/hg as a musician
Percent
53%
52%
3.4%
72%
NUrber
27
5
7
15
1 belong to a musicians' association
Percent
12%
31%
00%
1.4%
htirber
6
3
0
3
1 belong to a musicians' union or guild
Percent
20%
63%
10%
1D%
Number
10
6
2
2
1 have been formally educated in music
Percent
82%
10.4%
4.8%
105%
Number
42
10
10
22
1 am recognized by my peers as an musician
Percent
252%
125%
285%
275%
Number
129
12
59
58
1 consider myself to be a musician
Percent
119%
52%
58%
21.1%
Number
a
5
12
44
1 spend a considerable amount of time working as a
muscian
Percent
45%
52%
3.4%
53%
Number
23
5
7
11
1 have a special talent
Percent
55%
83%
63%
33%
Number
28
8
13
7
1 have an inner drive to make music
Percent
85%
135%
9.7%
53%
NjTter
44
13
20
11
1 receive some pubfc recognition for my music
Percent
4.7%
Oj0%
9.7%
19%
Number
24
0
20
4
Other
Percent
53%
0:0%
121%
1C%
Number
27
0
25
2
fvfesrx)
162
14
57
91
total # of respondents who answered the question
512
96
207
209
Choice 3
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
Sen
Francisco
1 make my IK/hg as a musician
Percent
6.4%
93%
62%
5.4%
Number
32
9
12
11
I receive some hcome from my woik as a musician
Percent
35%
21%
21%
59%
Number
18
2
4
12
1 rtend to make my living as a musician
Percent
52%
52%
31%
73%
Number
26
5
6
15
1 belong to a musicians' association
Percent
05%
05%
00%
15%
Number
3
0
0
3
1 belong to a musicians' union or guild
Percent
32%
72%
15%
29%
Number
16
7
3
6
1 have been formally educated in music
Percent
d7%
103%
55%
107%
Number
43
10
11
22
24
1 am recognized by my peers as an musician
Percent
215%
26.8%
24.1%
166%
Nurrber
107
26
47
34
1 consider myself to be a musician
Percent
acp/o
72%
82%
83%
Nurrber
40
7
16
17
1 spend a considerable amount of tme working as a
musician
Percent
56%
82%
51%
4.9%
Nurrber
28
8
10
10
1 have a special talent
Percent
4.8%
62%
4.6%
4.4%
Nurrber
24
6
9
9
1 have an inner drive to make music
Percent
14.7%
52%
103%
23.4%
Nurrber
73
5
20
48
1 receive some public recognition for my music
Percent
99%
72%
16.4%
4.9%
Nurrber
49
7
32
10
Other
Percent
76%
52%
128%
39%
Nurrber
38
5
25
8
Mssrtj
177
13
69
95
total # of respondents who answered the question
497
97
195
205
Ninety-two percent of the aggregate jazz
respondents and 100 percent of the New Orleans
respondents played jazz for money in the six months
prior to the survey. The average number of jobs per
month for New Orleans musicians totaled 17, which
was higher than the aggregate average of 10 jobs a
month. Of these musicians, 41 percent of the artists
from the three test cities combined and 64 percent
of the New Orleans-area musicians play with four or
more different groups. Eighty percent of all
respondents regularly play with a specific group of
musicians.
Have you played jazz for money during the last 12 months?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Male
Percent
802%
83.6%
73.7%
84.5%
Nurrber
534
92
191
251
Female
Percent
198%
16.4%
26.3%
155%
Nurrber
132
18
68
46
Mssrg
8
0
5
3
total # of respondents who answered this question
666
110
259
297
If you currently play with a group, how many different groups do you play with?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
None
Percent
87%
6.4%
8.4%
99%
Nurrber
53
7
20
26
One
Percent
116%
37%
13.4%
133%
Nurrber
71
4
32
35
Two
Percent
160%
6.4%
176%
186%
Nurrber
98
7
42
49
25
Three
Percent
22.4%
193%
255%
20.9%
Nurrber
137
21
61
55
four or more
Percent
412%
642%
35.1%
373%
Nurber
252
70
84
98
63
1
25
37
msshg
total # of respondents who answered this question
611
103
239
263
Do you work regularly with a specific group of musicians?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
795%
89.1%
76.8%
783%
Number
524
98
199
227
no
Percent
205%
109%
232%
21.7%
Nurber
135
12
60
63
mssrig
15
0
5
10
total # of respondents who answered the question
659
110
259
290
Approximately how many different musical jobs do you play a month?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
rrean
10
17
9
7
rrBdan
8
16
7
5
std.dev.
8
9
7
6
rrrxe
20
20
4
2
valid cases
620
109
250
261
missrig
54
1
14
39
Thirty-three percent (and 48 percent in New
York) spend over 40 hours a week on music or
music-related activities, including performing,
looking for work, and marketing. Seventy-three
percent (and 88 percent in New York) spend over 20
hours a week on this.
Jazz musicians spend an average of three hours
Over a third of jazz musicians spend over 40
hours per week on music-related activities.
Almost half of New York musicians spend this
same time.
a week practicing and five hours a week writing
music.
About how many hours per day do you spend practicing music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
rrem
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
iifcttai
std.dev.
4
3
4
5
rroce
2
2
2
2
vaid cases
590
103
209
278
84
7
55
22
mssncj
26
How many hours per week do you spend writing music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
rrem
5
6
6
4
3
3
4
2
(TBCfan
std.dev.
7
10
7
6
mrfe
0
0
2
0
vafd cases
503
89
159
255
nisshq
171
21
105
45
The study queried musicians on what guided
their decision to make music. The most popular
factor that prompted respondents from the three
cities combined and the New Orleans area to pursue
music was an inner drive to make music. Twenty-
nine percent of musicians chose this as their most
important factor.
If you were to isolate the one most important factor prompting you to pursue music, what would it be?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
diversion from daily routine
Percent
1.7%
19%
16%
18%
Number
11
2
4
5
family tradition
Percent
4.7%
8.4%
4.0%
39%
Number
30
9
10
11
higher calling/sense of purpose
Percent
151%
159%
79%
21.4%
Number
97
17
20
60
inner drive to make music
Percent
28.9%
383%
190%
342%
Number
185
41
48
96
lifestyle
Percent
16%
09%
32%
0.4%
Number
10
1
8
1
bve of the process
Percent
64%
4.7%
4.0%
93%
Number
41
5
10
26
personal expression
Percent
84%
103%
79%
82%
Number
54
11
20
23
problem solving
Percent
05%
0.0%
12%
09%
Number
3
0
3
0
recognition of my special talent
Percent
4.8%
3.7%
67%
36%
Number
31
4
17
10
source of great personal satisfaction
Percent
129%
112%
15.4%
11.4%
Number
83
12
39
32
source of income
Percent
05%
09%
12%
06%
Number
3
0
3
0
other
Percent
137%
4.7%
281%
43%
Number
88
5
71
12
rrissrig
33
3
11
19
total # of respondents who answered the question
641
107
253
281
27
Recognition and Grants and
Fellowships
For 43 percent of all jazz musicians, their first
professional recognition was their first paid job. This
was considerably lower in New York (32 percent).
Seventeen percent chose to fill in the blank for
"other" to this question and responses varied from "I
passed an audition" to high school and community
recognition, festivals, writing a song for a major
artist, scholarships, recommendations from teachers,
joining the musicians union, to "just playing."
The percentages of respondents in New Orleans
and San Francisco feel generally that their talent has
been recognized locally (46 percent total; 67 percent
in New Orleans, 57 percent in San Francisco), while
those in New Orleans and New York feel their talent
has been recognized internationally (35 percent
aggregate; 52 percent in New Orleans and 50 percent
in New York).
Through what venue did your first professional recognition occur?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
award or honor
Percent
75%
120%
32%
96%
Number
46
13
8
25
feature article
Percent
58%
65%
7.7%
36%
Number
36
7
19
10
first paid job
Percent
42.7%
54.6%
315%
48.5%
Number
263
59
78
126
grant
Percent
05%
0.0%
0.4%
06%
Number
3
0
1
2
job with a known band
Percent
iao%
130%
9.7%
162%
Number
80
14
24
42
played with a major artist
Percent
105%
56%
17.7%
65%
Number
67
6
44
17
winning a competition
Percent
2.4%
28%
06%
36%
Nmber
15
3
2
10
other (please specify)
Percent
172%
56%
29.0%
106%
Number
106
6
72
28
58
2
16
40
mssirg
total # of respondents who answered this question
616
103
248
260
Has your talent been recognized. . .
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
locally
Percent
46.3%
676%
25.0%
576%
Nrrber
312
74
66
172
nationally
Percent
191%
41.8%
178%
120%
Number
129
46
47
36
internationally
Percent
356%
516%
49.6%
' 167%
Mrrber
238
57
131
50
talent not recognized
Percent
96%
27%
61%
157%
28
Nurber
66
3
16
47
other (please specify)
Percent
55%
00%
11.4%
23%
Mrrber
37
0
30
7
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
Almost three quarters of all jazz musicians are
satisfied or very satisfied with their music at this
How satisfied are you with your music at this point?
point.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
very satisfied
Percent
161%
19.4%
163%
145%
Mrrber
102
21
39
42
satisfied
Percent
57.0%
593%
56.7%
563%
Nurber
350
64
136
160
dissatisfied
Percent
242%
19.4%
242%
261%
Nurber
153
2!
58
74
very dissatisfied
Percent
27%
19%
23%
28%
Mrrber
V
2
7
8
rrissrig
42
2
24
16
total # of respondents who answered this question
632
106
240
284
Copyright Protection and Airplay
Questions about protecting one's work through
copyright, having adequate representation, and
being affiliated with a union, a performing rights
society, or a jazz-related organization elicited mixed
responses.
Sixty-two percent of the respondents hold
copyright in some artistic work of their own
creation (compositions, books, etc) and 22 percent
of them have given their copyright to a recording
company. Thirty percent of all the musicians have
had their work recorded by a professional recording
company (27 percent for New Orleans area
musicians and 43 for New York musicians), but New
Orleans musicians show a greater propensity to
record their own work. Sixty-four percent of New
Orleans-area musicians have recorded their own
work, a full 8 percentage points more than aggregate
musicians, 56 percent of whom have done so.
Do you hold a copyright in some artistic work of your own creation?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
602%
60.7%
73.0%
47.6%
Mrrber
388
65
192
131
no
Percent
375%
37.4%
24.7%
49.8%
Nurrber
242
40
65
137
dontknow
Percent
23%
19%
23%
25%
15
2
6
7
mssrrj
29
3
1
25
total # of respondents who answered this question
645
107
263
275
29
Have you ever given your copyright to a recording company?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
221%
24.1%
25.9%
173%
Number
114
21
57
36
ro
Percent
74.0%
75.9%
682%
79.3%
Number
331
66
150
165
dontknow
Percent
35%
0.0%
53%
3.4%
Number
20
0
13
7
rrissrg
159
23
44
92
total # of respondents who answered this question
515
87
220
208
Has your work ever been recorded?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes, by me
Percent
56.4%
64.2%
46.3%
62.9%
Number
359
68
118
173
yes, by a professional recording company
Percent
29.7%
27.4%
42.7%
185%
Number
189
29
109
51
ro
Percent
102%
75%
63%
14.9%
Number
65
8
16
41
other (please specify)
Percent
3.6%
09%
4.7%
36%
Number
23
1
12
10
nissrg
38
4
9
25
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
636
106
255
275
For 70 percent of aggregate jazz musicians and
82 percent of New Orleans-area jazz musicians, their
music has received airplay. Almost no one paid to
get airplay and 19 percent of all musicians had help
from a promotional person. The musicians'
comments offered us insight into this, explaining
many different routes to airplay including:
Has your music received airplay?
radio stations featuring local artists, some of
which contact the artists
college radio stations
work with orchestras, chamber music groups
playing on different artists' records, in movies,
commercials, theater companies
record companies, advertising agencies
live performance broadcasts
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
70.4%
82.4%
822%
55.0%
Number
450
89
208
153
no
Percent
29.6%
17.6%
173%
45.0%
Number
189
19
45
125
30
missing
35
2
11
22
total # of respondents who answered this question
639
108
253
278
If yes, how did you get this airplay?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
had help from a promotional person
Percent
19.4%
34.5%
11.4%
2lJC%
Nurber
131
38
30
63
sent recordings out myself
Percent
19.7%
27.3%
189%
17.7%
NlLrrber
133
30
50
53
paid to get airplay
Percent
2.4%
4.5%
15%
23%
Njrber
16
5
4
7
knew some of the disc jockeys
Percent
181%
33.6%
136%
163%
Number
122
37
36
49
knew producer
Percent
85%
14.5%
42%
106%
Number
57
16
11
30
other
Percent
27.3%
16.4%
47.3%
137%
Number
184
18
125
41
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
Forty-seven percent of all jazz musicians and a
high of 64 percent of New Orleans-area jazz
musicians have played music that was broadcast over
the Internet. Sixteen percent of the total and 10
percent New Orleans-area jazz musicians object
when their music is downloaded without payment —
much lower than the 53 percent of union jazz
musicians — and 24 percent of all respondents think
they should be paid for this. Twenty-eight percent of
all respondents say they do not mind their music
being downloaded and 28 percent like the exposure.
Have you played music that was broadcast over the Internet?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
47.2%
63.6%
542%
342%
Number
296
68
136
92
no
Percent
402%
ia7%
34.7%
53.9%
Number
252
20
87
145
dont know
Percent
126%
178%
112%
119%
Nurber
79
19
28
32
47
3
13
31
rnssJTg
total # of respondents who answered this question
627
107
251
269
31
If yes, how do you feel about people downloading this music without paying for your work?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Idonotnind
Percent
iai%
25.0%
95%
227%
Nurber
75
22
16
37
like the exposure
Percent
27.7%
273%
235%
313%
Nurber
115
24
39
52
object
Percent
1&6%
102%
293%
7.4%
Nurber
69
9
48
12
think 1 should be paid
Percent
24.1%
227%
323%
166%
Nurber
100
20
53
27
nooprion
Percent
133%
145%
4.9%
215%
Nurber
56
13
8
35
259
22
100
137
nissix)
total # of respondents who answered
this question (including refusals & dont
knows)
415
88
164
163
Only 24 percent of jazz musicians and 13
percent of the San Francisco-area respondents have
steady managers, agents or representatives for their
work. Of those who stated that they had
representation, half identified themselves as their
primary representatives.
Do you currently have a steady manager, agent or representative for your work?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
235%
33.0%
31j0%
129%
Number
152
36
80
36
no
Percent
765%
67.0%
69.0%
87.1%
Nurber
494
73
178
243
nissrig
28
1
6
21
total # of respondents who answered this question
646
109
258
279
Thirty percent of aggregate and 51 percent of
New Orleans, 40 percent of New York, and 13
percent of San Francisco-area respondents belong to
the American Federation of Musicians. (Louisiana is
a right-to-work state.) Of the respondents who are
not currently AFM members, 29 percent of all and
43 percent of New Orleans-area jazz musicians
previously belonged to the union. Reasons for not
joining the AFM varied: 15 percent of total
respondents believe that belonging to the union will
not increase their work opportunities, while 17
percent feel that the AFM does not represent the
interests of jazz musicians. Additionally, 89 percent
do not belong to any other union.
Forty- three percent of all jazz musicians are
members of a performing rights society (ASCAP,
BMI, SESAC). Seventeen percent of the respondents
from the three cities combined are members of a
jazz-related organization such as the International
Association of Jazz Education.
32
Do you belong to the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) union?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
30.1%
51.4%
39.9%
13j0%
N/rber
197
55
106
37
no
Percent
69.9%
43.6%
60.1%
87.0%
Nurter
458
52
153
243
19
3
1
15
missing
total # of respondents who answered this
question
655
107
263
285
If no, did you belong at a previous time?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
29.4%
42.6%
40.4%
193%
Muter
121
20
59
42
no
Percent
70.6%
57.4%
59.6%
80.7%
Number
290
27
87
176
rrisshg
263
63
118
82
total # of respondents who answered this question
411
47
145
218
If you do not belong to the AFM, why not?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
does not represent the interests of jazz
rrusaans
vaid%
17.4%
155%
23.9%
123%
frequency
117
17
63
37
does not provide enough benefits
vaid%
122%
127%
155%
90%
frequency
82
14
41
27
too expensive
vab%
91%
82%
91%
93%
frequency
61
9
24
28
too difficult to join
vafd%
16%
09%
0.4%
30%
frequency
11
1
1
9
will not help me get work
vafd%
145%
20.9%
7j6%
183%
frequency
98
23
20
55
will prevent me from getting work
vab%
21%
3.6%
1.1%
23%
frequency
14
4
3
7
all of the above
vaU%
6.4%
91%
08%
103%
frequency
43
10
2
31
other
vab%
24.3%
91%
25.4%
29.0%
frequency
164
10
67
87
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
33
Forty-six percent of all musicians use electronic
media in the creation of their music, 49 percent use
this media in the production of their music and 64
percent use the Internet, with 33 percent using the
Internet to do research, and 27 percent using it to
promote their music.
Do you use electronic media in the creation of your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
45.7%
44.9%
442%
47.3%
Nurrber
295
48
115
132
no
Percent
54.3%
551%
558%
527%
Nurrber
351
59
145
147
rrissrg
28
3
4
21
total # of respondents who answered this question
646
107
260
279
Do you use electronic media in the production of your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
49.4%
53.8%
333%
615%
Number
307
55
83
168
no
Percent
40.4%
42.3%
518%
293%
Njrrber
251
44
127
80
mssrig
52
6
19
27
total # of respondents who answered this question
622
104
245
273
Do you use the Internet for your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
63.7%
552%
86.9%
46.6%
Urrber
362
53
192
117
no
Percent
363%
44.8%
131%
53.4%
Njrber
206
43
29
134
mssrig
106
14
43
49
total # of respondents who answered this question
558
96
221
251
How do you use it?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
to communicate with people in the industry
Percent
49.0%
39.1%
76.9%
28.0%
Njrrber
330
43
203
84
to compose music
Percent
6.7%
82%
45%
80%
Nurrber
45
9
12
24
tocopy music
Percent
95%
173%
3j0%
123%
Number
64
19
8
37
to disseminate music
Percent
7.4%
100%
4.5%
9.0%
34
Nurrber
50
11
12
27
to listen to music
Percent
20.9%
23.6%
19.7%
210%
Number
141
26
52
63
to promote music
Percent
273%
255%
41.3%
157%
Nurrber
184
28
109
47
todo research
Percent
32.6%
32.7%
36.4%
29.3%
Nurrber
220
36
96
88
to sell music
Percent
153%
23.6%
20.5%
90%
Nurrber
107
26
54
27
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
Retirement, Life and Health Coverage
For routine health care 23 percent of the total
respondents go to private physicians, 33 percent go
Where do you go to obtain routine health care?
to an HMO. Roughly one-third of all respondents
have received injuries from occupational hazards in
their music-related work (for example, carpal tunnel
syndrome, hearing problems, etc.).
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
private physician
Percent
23.0%
255%
22.3%
22.7%
Number
155
28
59
68
HMO (health maintenance organization) or PPO
Percent
331%
26.4%
28.0%
40.0%
Nurrber
223
29
74
120
clinic
Percent
73%
155%
5.7%
7.0%
Nurrber
53
17
15
21
hospital outpatient department
Percent
3.6%
18%
3.4%
4.3%
Nurrber
24
2
9
13
emergency room
Percent
22%
27%
0.4%
3.7%
Nurrber
15
3
1
11
I do not obtain routine health care
Percent
252%
20.9%
27.3%
25.0%
Nurrber
170
23
72
75
arts-related medical facility (please specify)
Percent
42%
155%
23%
1.7%
Number
28
17
6
5
other
Percent
73%
4.5%
91%
6.7%
Nurrber
49
5
24
20
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
35
Have occupational hazards in your music-related work caused you any injuries?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
vaid%
313>/o
37.4%
36.4%
24.8%
frequency
200
40
91
69
no
vaid%
685%
626%
63.6%
752%
Frequency
435
67
159
209
39
3
14
22
msshg
total # of respondents who answered this question
635
107
250
278
Sixty-three percent of the musicians have some
health or medical coverage, 43 percent of them
receive insurance from an HMO, 16 percent from a
PPO, 13 percent from a personal policy through a
private insurance company (some respondents have
more than one type of coverage). This compares to
1999 figures cited by the New York Times on
September 29, 2000 (p. A16) citing 84.5 percent of
Americans with health insurance (The change in the
Do you have health or medical coverage?
economy has undoubtedly brought this figure,
which was climbing, down again).
Nine percent of all jazz musicians have disability
coverage for loss of income; 1 1 percent have some
other group insurance policy and 13 percent have
some other kind of health insurance. These include:
Medicare, the military, national health care from
other countries, and the American Association of
Retired Persons.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
633%
583%
58.7%
692%
Mrrter
398
63
142
193
no
Percent
36.7%
41.7%
413%
30.8%
Nurber
231
45
100
86
45
2
22
21
rrisshg
total # of respondents who answered this question
629
108
242
279
If yes, which type do you have?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
hMO
Percent
43.1%
42.9%
353%
492%
Number
175
27
53
95
PPO
Percent
160%
175%
37%
212%
Number
65
11
13
41
personal policy through private insurance company
Percent
131%
127%
167%
10.4%
Number
53
8
25
20
disability coverage for loss of income
Percent
00%
00%
00%
0.0%
Nurber
0
0
0
0
group insurance policy through arts'arts service
orgamzation
Percent
4.4%
79%
4.0%
36%
Number
18
5
6
7
other group insurance policy
Percent
76%
79%
ao%
73%
36
Number
31
5
12
14
other
Percent
158%
11.1%
273%
83%
Number
64
7
41
16
msshg
268
47
114
107
total # of respondents who answered this question
(including refusals & don't knows)
406
63
150
193
Forty percent of the respondents obtained their
health coverage themselves. Nine percent coverage
through their mates. Thirty-six percent obtained this
How was this health coverage obtained?
coverage through their employers. Only 4 percent
obtained their coverage through their musicians'
union.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
40.3%
54.1%
42.7%
34.1%
Mrrber
145
33
50
62
mate
Percent
89%
82%
6j0%
110%
Number
32
5
7
20
employer
Percent
361%
262%
34.2%
40.7%
Number
130
16
40
74
mymusicians, union
Percent
42%
16%
6.0%
38%
Number
15
1
7
7
mate's union or employer
Percent
6.4%
66%
11.1%
33%
Number
23
4
13
6
private company
Percent
42%
33%
00%
7.1%
Number
15
2
0
13
rrissho.
314
49
147
118
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & don't knows)
frequency
360
61
117
182
The chart below represents the answers to the
questions, "Who pays for this insurance and what
percentage do they pay?" Please note that since there
is obviously a combination of payment sources,
figures do not always add up to 100 percent.
WHO PAYS
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
Self
25%
28%
24%
26%
Mate
3%
5%
2%
4%
Employer
16%
11%
14%
19%
Musicians' union
2%
1%
4%
1%
Mate's union or employer
3%
1%
6%
1%
Private company
1%
0%
.4%
1%
Arts/arts service
organization
0%
0%
0%
1%
Other
6%
5%
10%
4%
37
PERCENTAGE THEY PAY
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
Self
78%
80%
83%
74%
Mate
65%
54%
54%
73%
Employer
86%
81%
90%
85%
Musician's union
74%
80%
73%
75%
Mate's union or employer
96%
100%
100%
73%
Private company
97%
0%
100%
96%
Arts/arts service
organization
100%
0%
0%
100%
Other
95%
100%
96%
93%
These charts tell us that approximately a quarter
of all jazz musicians pay for their health insurance
mostly themselves with under one-fifth getting
payments from their employers. Fewer than two
percent receive payment for health insurance by the
musicians' union. For the small percentage for
whom the union does pay, it covers about three-
quarters of the cost. By contrast, in the Research
Center for Arts and Culture study Information on
Artists, actors received some payment for health
insurance from the Actors' Equity Association.
A September 2001 report by the Urban Institute
(http://www.urbaninstitute.org/) "Workers Without
Health Insurance: Who Are They and How Can
Do you have life insurance?
Policy Reach Them?," reports that, of the 16 million
uninsured workers in the United States, those most
likely to lack health insurance include workers in
small firms, low- wage earners, part-time workers
and those employed for a short tenure. Many
musicians fit into these categories.
Thirty- three percent of all respondents have life
insurance. Sixty-one percent obtained it themselves;
for 25 percent, life insurance was obtained through
employers and for 3 percent, they obtained it
through their musicians' union. Seventy percent pay
for this life insurance themselves; for 21 percent,
employers help pay for this, and, for 2 percent, of
their musicians' union does.
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
333%
43.9%
31.8%
30.6%
Number
213
47
83
83
no
Percent
66.7%
56.1%
682%
69.4%
Urrber
426
60
178
188
35
3
3
29
msshg
How was this insurance obtained?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
613%
813%
672%
46.0%
Number
122
39
43
40
mate
Percent
4.0%
21%
0.0%
80%
Number
8
1
0
7
employer
Percent
25.1%
63%
23.4%
36.8%
Nurber
50
3
15
32
my musicians' union
Percent
25%
0.0%
4.7%
23%
Nirrber
5
0
3
2
mate's union or employer
Percent
30%
42%
4.7%
1.1%
38
Number
6
2
3
1
private oompany
Percent
4.0%
63%
00%
5.7%
Number
8
3
0
5
rrisang
475
62
200
213
total # of respondents who answered this question
199
48
64
87
Forty-three percent of aggregate have at least
one retirement plan. Twenty- two percent obtained it
themselves; 8 percent obtained this through the
Do you have at least one retirement plan?
musicians' union; an employer pays for 23 percent;
and the musicians' union pays for 8 percent.
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
43.0%
47.6%
44.0%
40.4%
Number
272
49
113
110
no
Percent
57.0%
52.4%
56.0%
59.6%
NLmber
360
54
144
162
msshg
42
7
7
28
total # of respondents who answered this question
632
103
257
272
If yes, how was the retirement plan obtained?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
213%
22.7%
265%
167%
Nurber
145
25
70
50
employer
Percent
159%
145%
98%
21.7%
Number
107
16
26
65
! my irusicians' union
Percent
75%
16.4%
95%
33%
Number
53
18
25
10
arts/arts service organization (specify
organization)
Percent
0.6%
0.0%
0.4%
10%
Number
4
0
1
3
other
Percent
25%
27%
27%
23%
Number
17
3
7
7
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
Who pays for this retirement plan?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
63.6%
792%
63.4%
55.9%
Number
171
38
71
62
mate
Percent
26%
21%
09%
4.6%
Nurber
7
1
1
5
employer
Percent
23.4%
10.4%
179%
34.9%
Number
63
5
20
38
39
my musaans' union
Percent
78%
85%
152%
00%
Number
21
4
17
0
arts service organization (specify organization)
Percent
00%
0.0%
00%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
other
Percent
26%
0.0%
27%
37%
Nirter
7
0
3
4
mssrg
405
62
152
191
total # of respondents who answered this question
269
48
112
109
Migration and Touring
As in all other studies of the Research Center,
artists seem to have a greater allegiance to their
homesites, especially in relation to training. With an
even higher response than the RCAC's other studies,
81 percent of the jazz survey respondents (compared
to 62 percent in our other studies) received music-
related training in the area or region.
How many years have you lived in the country of your current residence?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
under 1 year
Percent
00%
00%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
2-3 years
Percent
12%
18%
12%
10%
Number
8
2
3
3
4-5 years
Percent
1.4%
18%
08%
1.7%
Number
9
2
2
5
6-10 years
Percent
2.4%
37%
23%
21%
Number
16
4
6
6
more than 10 years
Percent
942%
89.9%
955%
94.4%
Number
616
98
248
270
mai
3
17
5
73
iTBda'i
2
16
5
100
rnssrtj
20
1
5
14
total # of respondents who answered this question
654
109
259
286
Did you receive any music-related training in this city or region?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
80B%
738%
831%
81.4%
Number
514
79
207
228
no
Percent
192%
262%
169%
186%
Number
122
28
42
52
38
3
15
20
mssrg
total # of respondents who answered this question
636
107
249
280
40
Musicians are famous for touring, and these
respondents are no exception, with almost a third
(33 percent) working or performing away from their
main residences between one and five times in the
previous 12 months.
Approximately how many times during the last 12 months did you work or perform away from home?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
zero
Percent
14.6%
75%
76%
25.6%
Number
79
8
17
54
1-5 times
Percent
328%
355%
233%
412%
Number
177
38
52
87
6-1 5 times
Percent
219%
20.8%
265%
175%
Number
118
22
59
37
16-30 times
Percent
14.6%
132%
215%
ai%
Number
79
14
48
17
over 30 times
Percent
161%
226%
21.1%
76%
Number
87
24
47
16
missing
134
4
41
89
total # of respondents who answered this question
540
106
223
211
Jazz Styles and Instruments
While the piano and the drums are the
instruments of choice for the aggregate respondents,
the bass and the guitar are most popular in the New
Orleans area. In New York, piano, voice and
saxophone are the top choices, and in San Francisco,
What is your primary instrument?
piano, drums and bass.
Jazz musicians play in many styles and our
respondents are no exception. In New Orleans, the
ones mentioned most frequently are traditional,
swing, rhythm and blues, and bop; in New York,
traditional, avant-garde, free jazz and bop; in San
Francisco, bop, traditional, Latin, swing and blues.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Alto sax
Percent
61%
4.5%
72%
5.7%
Number
41
5
19
17
Banjo
Percent
0.7%
36%
0.0%
03%
Number
5
4
0
1
i Baritonesax
Percent
0.6%
1ff/o
0.4%
03%
Number
4
2
1
1
Bass
Percent
11.4%
136%
110%
110%
Number
77
15
29
33
Bass clarinet
Percent
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
00%
Number
1
0
1
0
Celb
Percent
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
1
0
1
0
Clarinet
Percent
19%
55%
19%
0.7%
Number
13
6
5
2
Cornet
Percent
09%
36%
00%
0.7%
41
Number
6
4
0
2
Drums
Percent
123%
109%
110%
143%
Number
84
12
29
43
Effects ( washboard, whistles, etc.)
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
' 0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
Rugelhorn
Percent
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
10%
Number
3
0
0
3
Flute
Percent
ie%
0.0%
27%
13%
Number
ti
0
7
4
Guitar
Percent
ai%
118%
4.9%
11.7%
Number
61
13
13
35
Harmonica
Percent
03%
09%
0.0%
03%
Number
2
1
0
1
Percussion
Percent
13%
09%
15%
13%
Number
9
1
4
4
Piano/ keyboard
Percent
14.4%
109%
152%
150%
Number
97
12
40
45
Saxophone
Percent
11.1%
91%
125%
1Q7%
Number
75
10
33
32
Trombone
Percent
4.5%
18%
4.9%
50%
Number
30
2
13
15
Trumpet
Percent
63%
73%
61%
73%
Number
45
8
16
22
Tuba
Percent
03%
0.0%
0.4%
03%
Number
2
0
1
1
Vbraphone
Percent
0.1%
00%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
1
0
1
0
Violin
Percent
12%
18%
1.1%
10%
Number
8
2
3
3
Voice
Percent
113%
100%
14.4%
9.0%
Number
76
ti
38
27
Xylophone
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
other (please specify)
Percent
31%
18%
38%
30%
Number
21
2
10
9
0
0
0
0
msshg
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
Future Goals and Qualities needed for
a Career in Jazz
Musicians were asked about the three most
important qualities someone needs who wishes to
pursue a career in jazz. While talent (22 percent for
all; 38 percent in New Orleans) was the most
important quality for being a jazz musician, a
number of the respondents chose the 'Other'
category. Although the responses musicians gave in
the 'Other" category for questions about both
qualities and goals were much like the choices
42
presented to them in the questionnaire, clearly this
was a question where they did not wish to be placed
in pre-determined categories. Some of their
comments for the most important quality for being
a jazz musician were: Creativity, drive, musicality,
faith, confidence, punctuality, appearance,
dedication, versatility, Overall Good Attitude.
In your opinion, what are the three most important qualities someone needs who wishes to pursue a career
in jazz?
Choice 1
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
business sawy
Percent
108%
7.1%
4.8%
169%
Number
62
7
10
45
axnectbns
Percent
73>/o
61%
05%
135%
Number
43
6
1
36
curiosity
Percent
33%
3.0%
05%
5.6%
Number
19
3
1
15
energy
Percent
35%
51%
05%
52%
Number
20
5
1
14
intelligence
Percent
31%
51%
0.0%
4.9%
Number
18
5
0
13
luck
Percent
03%
10%
0.0%
0.4%
Number
2
1
0
1
perception
Percent
1.4%
10%
0O%
26%
Number
8
1
0
7
performing ability
Percent
122%,
192%
4.8%
15.4%
Number
70
19
10
41
physical stamina
Percent
1.4%
0.0%
1.4%
19%
Number
8
0
3
5
talent
Percent
222%
38.4%
110%
251%
Number
128
33
23
67
technique
Percent
10%
20%
05%
1.1%
Number
6
2
1
3
other
Percent
333%
121%
762%
75%
Number
192
12
160
20
missing
98
11
54
33
total # of respondents who answered this question
576
99
210
267
Choice 2
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
business sawy
Percent
7.7%
121%
92%
4.9%
Number
42
12
17
13
cxxnecfons
Percent
91%
121%
1.1%
137%
43
Number
50
12
2
36
curiosity
Percent
20%
10%
16%
27%
Number
11
1
3
7
energy
Percent
5.7%
30%
1.1%
93%
Number
31
3
2
26
intelligence
Percent
7.1%
101%
16%
93%
Number
39
10
3
26
luck
Percent
4.4%
30%
1.1%
72%
Number
24
3
2
19
perception
Percent
22%
4.0%
05%
27%
Number
12
4
1
7
performing ability
Percent
143%
253%
4.3%
17.1%
Number
78
25
8
45
physical stamina
Percent
1flP/o
00%
1.1%
27%
Number
9
0
2
7
talent
Percent
157%
212%
70%
193%
Number
86
2
13
52
technique
Percent
4.4%
51%
05%
6B%
Number
24
5
1
18
other
Percent
255%
30%
70.8%
27%
Number
141
3
131
7
127
11
79
37
mssrg
total # of respondents who answered this question
547
99
185
263
Choice 3
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
business sawy
Percent
113%
124%
122%
10.4%
Number
57
12
18
27
connections
Percent
72%
4.1%
4.1%
100%
Number
36
4
6
26
curiosity
Percent
24%
21%
1.4%
31%
Number
12
2
2
8
energy
Percent
53%
82%
0.7%
7.7%
Number
29
8
1
20
intelligence
Percent
50%
72%
0.7%
66%
Number
25
7
1
17
luck
Percent
7.6%
103%
4.8%
81%
Mmber
38
10
7
2
perception
Percent
3.4%
93%
00%
31%
Number
V
9
0
8
performing ability
Percent
113%
165%
5.4%
127%
44
Number
57
16
8
33
physical stamina
Percent
26%
4.1%
00%
35%
Number
13
4
0
9
talent
Percent
15Sy0
155%
109%
181%
Nurrber
78
15
0
47
technique
Percent
56%
72%
0.0%
ai%
Number
28
7
16
21
other
Percent
225%
31%
59.9%
85%
Number
113
3
88
22
rnssrrg
171
13
117
41
total # of respondents who answered this question
503
97
147
259
Reaching a higher level of artistic expression/
achievement (27 percent) was the most important
goal for the next five years,.
What are your three most important goals for the next five years as a musician?
Choice 1
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
develop artistic competence
Percent
118%
119%
15%
198%
Number
67
12
3
52
get a record deal
Percent
105%
59%
175%
6S%
Nurrber
60
6
36
18
lead my own groups
Percent
91%
79%
9.7%
91%
Number
52
8
20
24
make a living from my music
Percent
112%
14.9%
68%
133%
Number
64
15
14
35
make money from my muse
Percent
35%
30%
3.4%
38%
Nurrber
20
3
7
10
obtain critical reviews
Percent
05%
0.0%
0.0%
1.1%
Nurrber
3
0
0
3
participate in major concerts
Percent
4.0%
30%
58%
30%
Nurrber
23
3
12
8
play with well-known groups
Percent
23%
20%
2.4%
23%
Number
13
2
5
6
reach higher level of artistic expression/
achievement
Percent
26.8%
46.5%
126%
30.4%
Nurrber
153
47
26
80
spend more time on music
Percent
4.0%
3.0%
3.4%
4.9%
Nurrber
23
3
7
13
win recognition/award
Percent
12%
10%
29%
0.0%
Nurrber
7
1
6
0
45
other
Percent
14.9%
10%
34.0%
53%
Nirber
85
1
70
14
mssrg
104
9
58
37
total # of respondents who answered this question
570
101
206
263
Choice 2
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
develop artistic competence
Percent
62%
7.1%
28%
81%
Mrrber
33
7
5
2
get a record deal
Percent
7.1%
51%
124%
4.3%
Njrber
33
5
22
11
lead my own groups
Percent
92%
1Q1%
62%
105%
Number
49
10
11
28
make a Iving from my music
Percent
107%
11.1%
8.4%
120%
Number
57
11
15
31
make money from my_musc
Percent
4.9%
30%
39%
62%
Nurber
26
3
7
16
obtain critical reviews
Percent
21%,
4.0%
1.7%
16%
NLrrber
11
4
3
4
participate in major concerts
Percent
65%
121%
56%
58%
Number
37
2
10
15
play with well-known groups
Percent
73%
91%
5.6%
85%
Njrber
42
9
10
23
reach higher level ofartjstjc-
Percent
191%
182%
8.4%
26.7%
Number
102
18
15
69
spend more fme on muse
Percent
93%
162%
1.1%
124%
Njmber
50
16
2
32
win recognifonaward
Percent
28%
20%
4.5%
15%
Number
15
2
8
5
other
Percent
14.0%
20%
393%
12%
Mrrber
75
2
70
3
139
11
86
42
mSETD
total # of respondents who answered this question
535
99
178
258
Choice 3
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
develop artistic competence
Percent
4.3%
63%
1.4%
53%
Nurber
2
6
2
13
get a record deal
Percent
68%
8.4%
78%
57%
Nurber
33
8
11
14
lead my own groups
Percent
72%
63%
9.7%
61%
Number
35
6
14
15
46
make a living from my music
Percent
8.7%
8.4%
7.6%
9.4%
Number
42
8
11
23
irate money from my muse
Percent
6.0%
63%
5.6%
61%
Number
29
6
8
15
obtain critical reviews
Percent
08%
21%
0.0%
03%
Number
4
2
0
2
participate in major concerts
Percent
8.7%
63%
132%
69%
Number
42
6
19
17
play with well-known groups
Percent
89%
126%
5.6%
9.4%
Number
43
12
8
23
reach higher level of artistic
expressbrVachievernent
Percent
136%
116%
69%
18.4%
Number
66
11
10
45
spend more time on music
Percent
13.4%
137%
69%
17.1%
Number
65
13
10
42
win recognition/award
Percent
79%
105%
35%
9.4%
Number
38
10
5
23
other
Percent
136%
7.4%
319%
53%
Number
66
7
46
13
rrissrt)
190
15
120
55
total # of respondents who answered this question
484
95
144
245
47
Chapter IV. Social Networks of Jazz Musicians
BY DOUGLAS D. HECKATHORN
AND JOAN JEFFRI
Social Networks of Jazz Musicians
The structure of a community is defined by
affiliation patterns — that is, the social relationships
that link members of the community. These
relationships vary in strength, from the
extraordinarily strong bonds within families to the
weaker links connecting friends and acquaintances.
In combination, these relationships define the
community's social network. Such relationships are
reciprocal: your family members consider you a
family member, and your friends and acquaintances
consider you a friend or acquaintance. Merely
knowing about people, such as Hollywood
celebrities or political personalities, does not make
them a part of the social network, however. Rather,
social networks are created by the social
relationships that bind together families and
communities.
Social relationships serve as conduits through
which resources flow. These take many forms, from
assistance when help is needed to the exchange of
pleasantries during informal interaction. For policy
makers as well as scholars and observers, one
indication of the resources potentially available to an
individual is the number of others to whom that
individual is linked. This defines the size of the
individual's personal network, and it serves as an
indicator of social status. An indication of the
cohesiveness of a community is the density of social
ties within that network. The mean personal
network size of community members also serves as
an indicator of social capital.
Social relationships can be structured in many
different ways. Some communities are divided into
independent and isolated racial or ethnic groups. In
Robert Putnam's terms, these are communities based
on bonding social capital — that is, group solidarity
based on dense within-group social ties. Other
communities are more integrated, with abundant
cross-group ties — in Putnam's terms, communities
with bridging social capital. These structural features
are important for understanding community
dynamics. For example, when cross-group ties are
sparse, the potential for conflict is great. Inequality
also affects affiliation patterns. Some communities
are highly stratified, with most interactions
occurring among those of equal income, social
status, and education. Others are more egalitarian,
with abundant cross-status ties. Therefore, social
networks may both reflect patterns of social
inequality and determine the manner in which it is
structured.
.Some social ties are based on similarity. This
tendency of similar persons to form social bonds
was described by Galton more than a century ago
and is termed homophily. Other bonds are based not
on similarity but on difference. This is heterophily.
Though opposites, homophily and heterophily can
coexist. For example, musicians may form bonds
based on the style of music in which they both
specialize (homophily) while also forming groups
with musicians who play different instruments
(heterophily). Studying affiliation patterns provides
a means for understanding both social
differentiation (i.e., separate but equal) and social
inequality (i.e., separate and unequal).
This chapter focuses on affiliation patterns
revealed by our study of jazz musicians in two
metropolitan areas, New York City and San
Francisco. The study initially included New Orleans
and Detroit as well, but owing to delays in the
beginning of the study, less data on network
structures were gathered from those two cities. The
aims were to determine the organizing principles of
the community of jazz musicians, including an
assessment of the extent to which these differ from
those of other social groups.
Creating an Appropriate Study Sample
The Respondent-Driven Sampling Method
This is the first time respondent-driven
sampling (RDS) has been used to study artists. The
recognition of this sampling method's potential as a
means for studying artists grew out of a symposium
supported by the Princeton University Center for
48
Arts and Cultural Policy, the Columbia University
Teachers College Research Center for Arts and
Culture, and the National Endowment for the Arts
Research Division. Previously, the RDS method had
been used to study "hidden populations," so-called
because 1 ) no list of population members is
available from which samples can be drawn, making
the size, location, and boundaries of the population
unknown, 2) members have privacy concerns and
create informal networks that outsiders find hard to
penetrate, and 3) the population is small relative to
the general population. (Please see Poetics 28(4),
"Finding the Beat: Using Respondent-Driven
Sampling to Study Jazz Musicians," by Douglas
Heckathorn and Joan Jeffri, for more detail). For
nearly a decade RDS has been used as part of AIDS-
prevention projects to find injection drug users and
other groups at risk of HIV infection. The initial
applications were in several small cities in
Connecticut. Its use has now expanded to most
major U.S. cities, as well as Amsterdam, Marseilles,
Russia, Vietnam, Thailand, and China. RDS has also
been employed to study other groups, including
Vietnam War-era draft resisters who left the United
States for Canada and urban Native Americans. The
advantages of the RDS method become apparent
when it is compared with the more traditional ways
hidden populations have been studied.
General population surveys: A very large sample
would be required to ensure that even a small
number of jazz musicians were included. For
example, based on population estimates calculated
as part of this project (see the appendix), in San
Francisco more than 350 individuals would have to
be contacted to locate one jazz musician, and in
New York more than 550 would have to be
contacted. General population surveys are also
unable to reach those with unstable living
arrangements (several families living in one
apartment even though one name appears on the
lease, for example). Finally, data from the U.S.
Census are limited and do not separate jazz
musicians from other types of musicians or
composers.
Location sampling: Identifying locations where
members of the desired population can be found
and then deploying interviewers requires that the
population cluster in large, public places. For a
group such as jazz musicians, this precludes a
representative sample, because not all jazz musicians
attend jazz clubs and festivals.
Institutional samples: Using institutions such as
artists' unions is the traditional method for studying
artist populations. However, jazz musicians lack a
consistent institutional affiliation. In New York fewer
than one-quarter of jazz musicians are members of
the American Federation of Musicians (AFM), and
in San Francisco the figure is less than 10 percent.
Furthermore, the two groups are significantly
different. Compared with nonunion members,
union members have substantially higher incomes
(51 percent more income in New York, 17.2 percent
more in San Francisco), are much older (6.6 years
older in New York, 10.3 years older in San
Francisco), and have higher levels of professional
activity. Therefore, a sample drawn from union
members would overrepresent the most experienced
and accomplished members of the jazz musician
community at the expense of those who are
beginning their careers or whose work has received
less recognition.
Chain-referral sampling: A small number of
initial subjects, called seeds, are identified and asked
to refer researchers to other members of the
population; the sample expands during subsequent
referrals or recruitment waves. This has traditionally
been viewed as a form of convenience sampling
about which no claims of representativeness can be
made because the initial subjects from a hidden
population cannot be selected randomly, and other
biases are added as the sample expands from wave to
wave. For example, individuals who know many
other people (i.e., those with larger networks) tend
to be oversampled because the number of
recruitment paths leading to them is greater.
The perception of chain-referral methods
changed with the advent of a new class of sampling
methods termed adaptive/link-tracing designs.
Whereas in traditional approaches, the sampling
plan is fixed before sampling begins, in adaptive
sampling, the plan changes as information
accumulates during the sampling process. These
approaches are more computationally demanding
than traditional methods, but they are also generally
more efficient, especially for sampling clustered
populations.
Respondent-driven sampling is a form of chain
referral sampling that extends this emerging body of
49
theory. RDS was designed using a statistical theory
of the chain-referral sampling process to restructure
this process to eliminate biases resulting from the
choice of initial subjects, and to weight the sample
to compensate for the effects of differences in
network sizes and other remaining sources of bias.
In this way, RDS produces statistically valid
estimates of population size and network
characteristics from samples of hidden populations,
including estimates of the variability of these
estimates. (Please see Social Problems 49,
"Respondent-Driven Sampling II: Deriving
Statistically Valid Population Estimates from
Samples of Hidden Populations," by Douglas
Heckathorn for a description of the procedures
employed for calculating estimates of population
size and homophily.)
Figure 1:
Recruitment Network for jazz musicians in New York.
^7^^.
BF
)\1
16
at- i
6
BF2
OM
18
WM
16
BM
16
BM
4
/ ; 1 1 zs \,
F BM fth \F OF BM WM BF
3 9 25 « . , I' 16
zr// /i\\
7A\ ^m\ 7V\
AM
\ t-
18
WM
19
1
,\\1
VM
ZTX3
UM
19
Z3V
^
m
KEY
Primary Instrument
13 gunar
F a'lo sa*
14 narmonica
Race "Ethnicity
^ banjo
ib percussion
\i Damone sax
lb piano / Keyooaro
B Black
4 bass
17 saxophone
H Hispantc
b oass ciannet
18"Trombone
c := z
^y TrJmpe!
i clannei
20 tuba
Gender
B cornet
iii viDrapnone
M Male
a drums
■£d. violin
h hemate
11 flugelhom
24 xylophone
12 flute
25 other
WF
WM
16
VM
\
Figure 1 shows the largest single recruitment
chain from our study of New York jazz musicians. It
began when a black female bass player recruited a
white female keyboard player, a white female singer,
and a female alto saxophone player of "other" race
or ethnicity. Over the course of 10 waves, the chain
expanded from the single seed to include more than
100 respondents. As is apparent, this chain
penetrated deeply into the New York jazz musician
network. It also has considerable geographic range:
the seed lived near Times Square, the first-wave
recruits were separated by 3.5 miles, and the distance
increased to 40 miles for wave two and 55 miles for
wave three. Thus distant parts of the metropolitan
area were reached after only a few waves.
Conditions for RDS
For RDS to work effectively, the population
under study must be linked by a contact pattern:
members of the community under study must know
one another. Jazz musicians fulfill this requirement
because they generally perform together and develop
their skills working together, so even those who do
50
not join unions or attend jazz festivals are
nonetheless linked to the jazz musician community
through their relationships with other musicians.
The RDS method requires enlisting the help of
the musicians themselves and therefore involves
them directly in the study. Since the method is based
on a peer-referral system, motivating peer
recruitment is critical. In this study each jazz
musician who was interviewed was given four
coupons to pass along to fellow jazz musicians
whom she recruited for interviews; the recruiter was
given $10 for being interviewed, plus $15 each for
up to four recruits who showed up to be
interviewed.
Advantages of RDS
In addition to targeting a more representative
group of jazz musicians than traditional methods
allow, RDS is a community-based method that
requires jazz musicians to refer one another. This
prevents the sample from becoming filled with the
most marketable, famous, or visible jazz musicians
or only those who join particular organizations.
A comparison of the findings of jazz musicians
in the RDS study with those of the AFM union
study revealed major differences. For example, as
noted above, the income of union jazz musicians is
vastly different from that of musicians in the RDS
sample. This information has policy implications
and can help the jazz community decide where to
invest future attention and resources.
The RDS method allows us to analyze the social
networks of jazz musicians — that is, who hangs out
with whom, including the degree to which this
depends on ethnicity, musical style, or other factors.
Also, by using a method of analysis based on
capture-recapture in comparing the AFM and RDS
responses, we have been able to project the actual
size of the jazz universe in three of the study cities.
The AFM union survey told us what proportion of
union members were jazz musicians in each city.
Combined with information on the total number of
union members in each city (New Orleans = 1,014,
New York = 10,499; San Francisco = 2,217), this
allowed us to estimate the number of union
members who were jazz musicians. Finally, the RDS
survey told us what proportion of all jazz musicians
in each city were union members. We then
calculated the estimated size of the jazz universe in
these cities as follows:
New Orleans = 1,723 jazz musicians .
New York = 33,003 jazz musicians
San Francisco = 18,733 jazz musicians
These numbers tell us that a large proportion of
jazz musicians are not members of the union and
reinforces the appropriateness of using the RDS
method to locate these musicians (see appendix).
Implementation Issues and Challenges
To begin to understand the differences as
well as the commonalities among jazz musician
communities, we initiated the study in four
metropolitan areas: New York, San Francisco, New
Orleans, and Detroit. City coordinators were chosen
in each city to run the project locally. Six to eight
well-connected jazz musicians — the seeds — were
invited to start the process by being interviewed.
During the interviews they were told in detail about
the project and enlisted to distribute four coupons.
Because we were concerned that not enough
female jazz musicians would be recruited, three
coupons could be given to any jazz musician, but
one had to be given only to a female jazz musician.
(Any skewing was accounted for statistically after the
data were analyzed.)
Delay in timetable: Because of procedures in the
government, the timetable for the study was delayed
by several months, putting some of our city
coordinators at a disadvantage. Detroit, in particular,
had already hired its staff yet could not start on
time, so when the study began, some resources were
depleted. The September 1 1 disaster caused further
delays. These factors substantially reduced the
resources and time available for the study.
Contact pattern and use of coupons: In most RDS
studies done to date, it takes only four waves of
recruitment to reach deep into the community.
When the community lacks cohesion, however,
recruitment chains have difficulty crossing group
boundaries; so more waves may be required. This
was a special problem in Detroit, where jazz venues
have been declining for a number of years; the jazz
community is locally strong but very fragmented
into jazz old-timers, established jazz artists, women
jazz artists, and young emerging jazz artists.
Although some people might appear in more than
51
one category, there was little communication among
the four groups, and jazz musicians neglected to
pass out coupons, especially across groups.
Scheduling Interviews: Given the demands on .
musicians' time, scheduling interviews proved
challenging. Some city coordinators enlisted the help
of jazz musicians in "talking up" the study. In San
Francisco, the city coordinator found that many
individuals needed further explanation about how
studies are conducted and the rationale for the RDS
method, so she hired jazz artists as public relations
representatives to go out into the jazz community
and promote the study. She and her staff also
promoted the study personally at jazz clubs, bars,
and festivals. In New York, several presentations
were made to jazz groups to inform them of the
study and ask for their help. We found that
community acceptance was important for a peer-
recruitment method to be effective.
In each city, an interview venue was chosen that
would be accessible to jazz musicians, but in all
cities (and especially Detroit), musicians often lived
as much as one or even two hours away. Often,
transportation was a problem. Although
interviewers were flexible and went to locations
where jazz musicians congregate, this was more
difficult in Detroit, where there are fewer such
locations; weather, poor transportation, and a
difficult economy were further complications. In
addition, musicians would book appointments for
interviews and then cancel three, four, even five
times, or simply not show up, despite phone call
reminders from city coordinators. Therefore, jazz
musicians are a population for which arranging
face-to-face interviews is especially challenging.
Incentives: The financial incentives were
extremely modest. For his own interview and the
redeemed coupons of musicians he recruited, a jazz
musician could make $70: $10 for his interview and
$15 for each of his four recruits. Most earned less,
however; our total cost per musician interviewed
was $25, consisting of $10 for the interview and $15
for that musician's recruiter. The incentives were .
nevertheless important as a token of appreciation. In
Detroit, the money was appreciated. In San
Francisco, some musicians said the money wouldn't
even pay for gas and donated it back to the study. In
New York, some complained that we should have
paid union minimum for their time (the interviews
took an average of one to one and one-half hours
each).
Management of the project: The four city
coordinators were brought to New York for an
intensive two-day training session to learn the
method, master the necessary computer programs,
ask questions, and begin to use each other as
resources. Several conference calls were held
throughout the study period to share information
and get peer support and advice.
The project was management-heavy, partly
because this was a first-time methodology for artists,
but also because it required separate checking
accounts and tracking for coupons, constant
scheduling and rescheduling of interviews, and
substantial outreach. It was also an expensive study
for the arts. The cost per musician was $25, with a
target of 1,200 musicians for all four cities.
Responses: The initial plan for the study was to
interview 300 jazz musicians in each metropolitan
area. Because of the delay in starting the study and
the time and resource constraints, only 59 responses
were obtained in Detroit — not enough for analysis.
(Information on Detroit musicians who are
members of the AFM appears in Changing the Beat,
Volume II.) In New Orleans, only 110 jazz musicians
were interviewed — again, an insufficient number.
The following report on jazz musician networks is
therefore based on interviews with 264 New York
jazz musicians and 300 San Francisco jazz
musicians. Musicians from all cities were also
interviewed by phone in the AFM union study.
Differentiation and Stratification
in Jazz Musician Networks
Network size has been intensively studied
because it serves as an indicator for individual
characteristics, including social status, prestige, and
integration into the community. Therefore,
examining clustering by network size provides a
sense of the overall structure of that community.
Respondents were divided into three groups
based on network sizes. Average network sizes were
much larger in New York, averaging 223.8, than in
San Francisco, where they averaged 65.8. The ranges
were also divergent. In New York, the middle half of
respondents had network sizes between 100 and 300.
The corresponding figure for San Francisco was 20
52
to 90. Therefore, different breakpoints were used to
differentiate network sizes. A small network was
defined as 200 or fewer in New York, and 20 or fewer
in San Francisco. A large network was defined as 300
or more in New York, and 50 or more in San
Francisco.
The measure for network clustering, homophily,
is defined as follows. The homophily index is
positive when social relationships within the group
are favored. For example, it is 100 percent if all ties
are within the group (clustering is maximal), and 50
percent if half the ties are formed within the group,
and the other half are formed through random
mixing (that is, ties form as though group
membership does not matter). A positive index
value indicates that the group is cohesive. Factors
such as race, ethnicity, education, income, and age
generally serve as important sources of cohesion. In
this study we determine the extent to which this is
also the case for jazz musicians.
The homophily index is zero for categories that
are socially irrelevant, such as whether one was born
in an odd or an even month. With respect to such
categories, social ties are formed exclusively through
random mixing. Therefore, zero index values serve
to identify factors that the community does not
consider relevant.
The homophily index is negative if ties tend to
form with those outside rather than inside the
group, such as sexual relationships among
heterosexuals. The index is -100 percent if all ties
are outside the category — that is, if there are no
within-group ties.
The analyses of clustering by network size reveal
that network size strongly affects affiliation. (See
Table I.) In New York, those with the largest
networks are the most homophilous, forming
networks as though 23 percent of the time they form
a tie to another large-network person, and the rest of
the time they form ties through random mixing.
The medium-network persons are less homophilous.
Musicians in the large group with the smallest
networks have strong heterophily, forming ties as
though 48 percent of the time they form a tie
outside their group, and the rest of the time they
form ties randomly. Thus, those with smaller
networks do not associate primarily with one
another, but rather form ties to those with larger
networks.
Table I: Affiliation by Network Size
New York
San Francisco
Homophily
(percent)
Mean
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Homophily
(percent)
Mean
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Network
Size
Small
-48.1
73
63.6
-31.1
13
74.6
Medium
15.2
214
29.8
14.4
37
21.1
Large
23.1
511
6.6
35.4
162
4.4
The same pattern exists in San Francisco. Even
though average network sizes are much smaller than
in New York, the pattern of relationships based on
relative network sizes is strikingly similar. Those
with small networks are strongly heterophilous,
those with medium networks are mildly
homophilous, and those with large networks are
more strongly homophilous.
A more refined examination of the community
structure involves examining not merely each
group's strength of affiliation to itself (i.e.,
homophily) but also each group's strength of
affiliation to each other group. In essence, the
affiliation index is a measure of social distance that
varies from 100 percent (maximally close) to -100
percent (maximally distant). (See Table II.)
53
Table II: Affiliation Index by Network Size
Recipient of Tie
jy Network Size
New York
San Francisco .
Source of Tie bv Network
Small
Medium
Large
Small
Medium
Large
Size
Small
-48.1
31.1
9.3
-31.14
9.77
16.25
Medium
-52.9
15.2
24.5
-52.34
14.36
29.02
Large
-39.9
5.4
23.1
-62.96
16.68
35.4
In New York, though the small-network group is
strongly negatively affiliated to itself (-48.1 percent),
it has a substantial positive affiliation to the middle-
network group (31.3 percent). That is, it has formed
ties with the middle-network group as though 31.3
percent of the time it formed a tie to that group, and
the other 68.7 percent of the time it formed a tie
through random mixing. The small-network group
also has a modest but positive affiliation to the
large-network group (9.3 percent). Thus, those with
small networks form ties as though their principal
orientation is toward the middle-network group.
The middle-network group has a different
affiliation pattern. It affiliates most strongly toward
the large-network group (24.5 percent) and more
weakly to itself (15.2 percent), and it is strongly
negatively affiliated toward those with small
networks (-52.9 percent). Thus, the affiliation
between the small- and middle-network groups is
inconsistent: positive from the small- to middle-
network groups, and negative in the opposite
direction. This may reflect a process in which poorly
connected musicians seek ties with those who are
better connected but avoid others who are poorly
connected and seldom succeed in forming ties to
well-connected peers. The middle-network group
exhibits a similar orientation toward the large-
network group but is more successful in forming ties
to this group. Finally, the large-network group has a
substantial self-affiliation (23 percent), with a near-
zero affiliation to the middle group (5.4 percent),
and a strong negative affiliation toward the small-
network group.
Affiliation patterns in San Francisco are again
similar. All three groups have negative affiliations
toward the small-network group, and the medium-
and large-network groups affiliate more strongly
with the large- than with the medium-network
group. The most significant difference is that in San
Francisco, the small-network group affiliates more
strongly with the large- than with the medium-
network group, indicating that the least well
connected San Francisco musicians may have greater
access to those who are very well connected.
Nevertheless, the difference — only about 6
percent — is not large and cannot outweigh the very
strong negative affiliation (-63 percent) of the large-
network group to the small-network group.
These patterns of affiliations suggest that the
overall network structure of these jazz musician
communities resembles a tree: leaves represent those
with small networks, branches represent those with
middle-size networks, and the trunk represents
those with large networks. Leaves are seldom
connected either directly to one another or to the
tree's trunk; rather, the branches serve as the
intermediaries both between leaves and from the
leaves to the trunk system. So too are musicians with
small networks seldom connected either directly to
one anther or to those with large networks, but
instead are most strongly connected to those with
medium networks. This reflects a core-periphery
structure, in which an elite that is densely networked
with itself is linked to peripheral actors who are less
well connected. The term used to describe an actor
in the periphery is sycophant, and this is a structure
that reflects social inequality.
In contrast to a caste system, in which cross-
status ties are infrequent, the core-periphery
structure has a more egalitarian character, because
lower-status members affiliate with higher-status
members. However, it also has an elitist structure,
because the highest-status members are insulated
from contact with the lowest-status members.
Therefore, it can be described as moderately
egalitarian. In comparison with many other sectors
54
of U.S. society, this represents an unusual degree of
egalitarianism and suggests that the reputation for
egalitarianism of jazz musicians may not be
undeserved.
Affiliation by Demographic Factors
Overall in U.S. society, level of education is
strongly correlated with social status and income, so
it serves as an important determinant of affiliation
patterns. This is not the case in the New York City
jazz musician community, however. Although
college graduates account for 65.8 percent of this
community, and noncollege graduates 34.2 percent,
education was found to have no significant effect on
affiliations. (See Table III.) That is, the homophily
levels for college graduates and nongraduates are
-3.9 percent and 4.7 percent, respectively. This
means that college graduates form their social
networks as though 3.9 percent of the time they seek
out a noncollege graduate, and the other 96. 1
percent they form a tie irrespective of education
level. Thus education has almost no effect on
affiliation. Similarly, nongraduates form networks as
though 4.7 percent of the time they form a tie to
another noncollege graduate, and the other 95.3
percent of the time, they form a tie irrespective of
education. For both groups, then, level of education
is virtually irrelevant.
Table III: Affiliation by Demographic Terms
New York
San Francisco
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Level of
Education
College Graduate
-3.9
219
65.8
22.5
78
40
Nongraduate
4.7
232
34.2
-11.6
52
60
Race
White
26.9
234
58.1
-13.3
53
63.6
Black
19.9
211
33
26.5
85
23.1
Other
-16.6
209
8.9
7.0
90
13.3
-
Gender
Male
31.3
223
58.3
-0.1
66
85.9
Female
34
232
41.7
-33.6
66
14.1
Age
18-34
14.8
147
18.7
-16.4
35
75.8
35 or older
49.5
248
81.3
43.7
94
24.2
In San Francisco the pattern is different. College
graduates are moderately homophilous, at 22.5
percent, and noncollege graduates are heterophilous,
at -11.6 percent, so they differentially form ties with
those whose education level is higher. This
contradicts the customary pattern in which
associations tend to form among those with equal
levels of education. Compared with network size,
however, education is not a substantial determinant
of affiliation in the jazz musician community.
55
For the analysis of affiliation by race and
ethnicity, respondents were divided into three
categories: non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black,
and "other," including Hispanics, Asian Americans,
Native Americans, and other groups. Hispanics were
not treated as a separate category because of their
small numbers — only 2.8 in New York and 4.1
percent in San Francisco. In New York, race and
ethnicity have a substantial effect on affiliation, with
homophily levels of 26.9 percent for whites, 19.9
percent for blacks, and -16.6 percent for the small
"other" category. In contrast, in San Francisco,
whites are heterophilous, at -13.3 percent, while
blacks are somewhat more homophilous, at 26.5
percent, than in New York, and the "other" group
has a mild homophily of 6.9 percent.
When affiliation by race and ethnicity is
examined, the contrast between New York and San
Francisco becomes more apparent. (See Table IV.)
Racial and ethnic boundaries between blacks and
whites have been maintained in New York; with each
group having positive affiliation toward itself
(homophily) and negative affiliation toward the
other. In contrast, boundaries for whites have
dissolved in San Francisco, with whites having
negative self-affiliation and mildly positive affiliation
toward other groups.
Table IV: Affiliation Index by Race
Recipient of Tie by Race
New York
San Francisco
Source of Tie bv
White
Black
Other
White
Black
Other
Race
White
26.9
-31.6
-9.3
-13.3
1.9
8.1
Black
-25.2
19.9
1.4
-35
26.5
2.2
Other
11.6
10.2
-16.6
-8.7
2.4
6.9
Race- and ethnicity-based homophily is lower
among jazz musicians than among other
populations that have been studied using RDS. For
example, in a study of network structure in several
small cities in Connecticut, homophily levels for
whites varied from 27 percent to 37 percent, with a
median of 36 percent, and for blacks they varied
from 30 percent to 50 percent. Therefore, despite the
presence of a moderate level of race-based
homophily for some groups in some cities, the
overall results support the view that jazz musicians
are a racially inclusive group.
Like race, gender has complex effects on
affiliations among jazz musicians. In New York,
homophily levels are 33.9 percent for female
musicians and 31.2 percent for male musicians. In
contrast, in San Francisco, females are heterophilous,
at -33.6 percent, but males have near-zero
homophily, at 0.1 percent. Therefore, whereas in
New York there are independent male and female
music scenes, in San Francisco females interact
indirectly, through males. This suggests that female
jazz musicians have higher status in New York, a
factor that may be related to their proportion within
the community, 41.7 percent in New York versus
only 14.1 percent in San Francisco.
Age is also a significant factor affecting
affiliation among jazz musicians. In New York, the
homophily of musicians aged 18 to 34 is 14.8
percent, and that of musicians 35 or older is a
very substantial 49.5 percent, so both groups are
homophilous. This is consistent with a cohort
structure, in which individuals associate with
those of similar age. The homophily of older
musicians is greater, so older musicians exclude
younger ones to a rather substantial degree,
whereas younger musicians are more inclusive of
older musicians.
The pattern is different in San Francisco, where
the homophily of older musicians is comparable to
that in New York but younger musicians have
negative homophily: they tend to interact indirectly
through older musicians. This imbalance results, in
part, because older musicians tend to have 69
56
percent larger networks in New York, and 169
percent larger networks in San Francisco. The larger
networks of older musicians reflect their greater
professional experience and recognition. Therefore,
whereas the age network in New York corresponds
to a cohort structure, in San Francisco it fits a core-
periphery structure, with younger musicians in the
subordinate position. Thus the social position of
both women and younger musicians is better in
New York.
Income and Affiliation
Income is a variable that generally has powerful
effects on affiliation patterns, with individuals
associating primarily with those within their own
income category. However, among jazz musicians
the pattern is different. First, consider income
derived from music, including performing or
teaching. Respondents were divided into two income
groups, based on whether they earned less or more
than $12,000 from music. (See Table V.)
Table V: Affiliation by Financial Factors
New York City
San Francisco
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Income from Music
$0-$12,000
-4.5
159
63
-15
46
86.7
$12,001 or more
39.9
284
37
27.5
126
13.3
Personal Income from All
Sources
$0-$30,000
-7.2
193
65.1
-4
53
76.2
$30,001 or more
19.4
272
34.9
37.4
87
23.8
Household Income
$0-$30,000
-2.6
184
55.3
-4.5
49
70.7
$30,001 or more
25.6
255
44.7
26.7
73
29.3
In both cities, the pattern is similar. Consistent
with expectations, homophily for the higher-income
group ($12,001 or more in earnings from music) is
substantial and positive: 39.9 percent in New York,
and 27.5 percent in San Francisco. However,
contrary to the usual pattern, the lower-income
group is not homophilous; instead, it is mildly
heterophilous: -4.5 percent in New York, and -15
percent in San Francisco. Therefore, the lower-
income group orients not toward its own members
but rather to the higher-income group.
The failure of lower-income jazz musicians to
form a cohesive group may reflect unfulfilled
aspirations. For example, in New York, an estimated
73 percent reported they were satisfied or somewhat
satisfied with their music, and only 3 percent were
not satisfied. In contrast, fulfillment of career
aspirations was lower: 47 percent said that their
aspirations had been satisfied or somewhat satisfied,
and fully 48 percent said they had not been satisfied.
This reflects the low average income for jazz
musicians. For example, in New York City, the mean
personal income for jazz musicians in the RDS
sample is $17,400 for college graduates and $10,000
for noncollege graduates; and in San Francisco the
corresponding figures are $15,800 and $9,700. In
contrast, according to the 2000 census, the mean
personal income for those with bachelor's degrees is
$51,600, and for high school graduates, $24,300.
Personal incomes among jazz musicians are
57
comparable to those of members of the general
population with far lower levels of education. For
example, on average, those in the general population
with less than a ninth-grade education earn more
($18,400) than do jazz musicians who are college
graduates in either New York or San Francisco.
Furthermore, fewer than 10 percent of college-
educated jazz musicians earn as much as the average
college graduate. Only a minority of respondents,
8.6 percent in New York, and 7.3 percent in San
Francisco, reported personal incomes in excess of
$60,000. Therefore, as with other artist groups,
choice of jazz as a career often involves considerable
financial sacrifice.
Affiliation and Professional Activity
Affiliations are also affected by the form and
level of professional activity. (See Table VI.)
Table VI: Affiliation by Professional Activity
New York
San Francisco
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Possessing a Recognized
Body of Work
Yes
18.2
140
18.7
36.4
76
45.9
No
50.1
232
81.3
3.1
50
54.1
Music-Related Travel
Yes
41.3
231
80.1
43.8
89
39
No
3.1
140
19.9
-21.4
37
61
Union Member (AFM)
Yes
35.2
298
22.3
11.0
113
8.1
No
-3
175
77.7
-6.2
58 91.9
When respondents in New York were asked
whether they had produced a recognized body of
work, about one in five (18.7 percent) answered in
the affirmative, and this group exhibited modest
homophily. Those who said no exhibited stronger
homophily, 50.1 percent. This may reflect
competition to establish ties to the small number of
musicians whose work has been recognized, thereby
producing exclusion homophily. In contrast, in San
Francisco nearly one-half (45.9 percent) reported
having produced a recognized body of work. This
group of recognized musicians was homophilous, at
36.4 percent. The nonrecognized group had near-
zero homophily, perhaps reflecting greater success in
establishing ties to those in the recognized group.
Affiliation is also affected by music-related
travel. Homophily among travelers is 41.3 percent in
New York and 43.8 percent in San Francisco,
suggesting that traveling provides the opportunity to
form social bonds.
Finally, union membership is a basis for
affiliation. In New York, where union membership is
more common (22.3 percent), union members
exhibit considerable homophily, 35.2 percent,
whereas nonunion members exhibit none, -3
percent. This may reflect the higher degree of
professional activity of union members. It may also
reflect other factors associated with union
membership. For example, none of the New York
respondents aged 18-24 were union members, and
only 21 percent of those aged 25-34 were union
members, but union membership climbed to 41
58
percent for those 35-44, 47 percent for those 45-54,
41 percent for those 55-64, and 67 percent for those
over 65. Therefore, affiliation by union membership
may reflect, in part, affiliation by age. Union
members also have substantially larger networks,
which, as we have seen, also affects affiliation. Union
membership had weaker effects on affiliation in San
Francisco, where union membership is less common.
Affiliation by Style of Music and
Principal Instrument
The effect of style of music on affiliation
patterns is substantial, though in general slightly
weaker than factors associated with professional
activity. We present results for the six most popular
of the 21 styles of music identified in the
questionnaire. (See Table VII.) Those who play in a
style are consistently more homophilous than those
who do not because playing in a style is a basis for
affiliation, whereas those who do not play in the
style are a heterogeneous mix of those playing in
other styles. In San Francisco, homophily by musical
style varies from 8.7 percent for those who play funk
to 38 percent for those who play bop.
Table VII: Affiliation by Style of Music (Yes = Plays in Style)
New York City
San Francisco
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Bop
Yes
19.3
244
15.9
38
77
45.4
No
9.6
218
84.1
-0.8
47
54.6
Cool
Yes
15.6
286
3.1
31.7
75
39.3
No
-0.3
221
96.9
12.5
59
60.7
Mainstream
Yes
25.1
270
18.9
13.3
92
19.9
No
4.5
212
81.1
-14.6
50
80.1
Swing
Yes
16
255
6.7
17.1
77
32.1
No
1.8
218
93.3
-9.1
53
67.9
Funk
Yes
19.8
263
5
8.7
71
35.3
No
4.2
220
95
-2.7
62
64.7
Fusion
Yes
13.6
333
3.6
21.4
76
28.3
No
-1.2
217
96.4
1
61
71.7
59
The percentage who play in each style is greater
in San Francisco than in New York: San Francisco
musicians are less specialized, playing in an average
of 7.1 styles, compared with 2.3 styles for New York
musicians. Therefore, the level of specialization by
style is greater in New York.
Affiliation can also be based on a musician's
principal instrument (See Table VIII). In fact,
principal instrument sometimes has greater effects
on affiliation than does style, as measured by
homophily The patterns are explicable. Because
usually only one person in an ensemble plays
keyboards, bass, or drums, to the extent that
associations are based on performing together, one
would expect these musicians' associations to be
weak. Indeed, all three groups are heterophilous,
though to varying degrees, from -4.8 percent for
drummers to -61.4 percent for keyboard players in
San Francisco. Bass players are strongly'
heterophilous in both cities. Conversely, because
singers and saxophone players commonly perform
together, one would expect them to be more
homophilous, and indeed both groups are
homophilous in both cities, with the exception of
singers in San Francisco, who are mildly
heterophilous. It is also notable that nonsingers are
homophilous in both cities, perhaps indicating the
presence of an independent instrumental music
scene.
Table VIII: Affiliation by Principal Instrument (Yes = Plays Instrument)
New York City
San Francisco
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Homophily
(percent)
Network
Size
Population
(percent)
Voice
Yes
31.7
201
28.7
-8.9
51
11
No
39.8
228
71.3
22.9
67
89
Saxophone
Yes
6.6
220
14.3
16.4
122
5.1
No
8.3
224
85.7
-3.9
59
94.9
Keyboards
Yes
-5.6
248
13.6
-61.4
64
8.6
No
-2.2
219
86.4
-0.3
66
91.4
Bass
Yes
-35.1
248
11.4
-57.5
88
9.4
No
-2.2
221
88.6
-4.8
63
90.6
Drums
Yes
-48
217
7.1
-4.8
66
10.5
No
0
225
92.9
0.3
66
89.5
60
Conclusion
This analysis reveals the complexity of the social
structure of the community of jazz musicians. It
examines stratification by connections within the
community (network size), level of professional
activity, and financial stability. This population lacks
the powerful stratification based on income and
education that is found elsewhere in U.S. society.
The structure of associations is also affected by
strictly musical factors, such as musical style, in a
complex manner that varies from style to style.
What the RDS method shows, or perhaps
underscores, is the egalitarianism of jazz musicians:
they are a racially inclusive group for whom
affiliation patterns are strongly affected by travel and
touring and union membership, and less affected by
education and income levels. One final conclusion
should be emphasized: the strength of connections
among jazz musicians reveals that this is a
community of considerable cohesion.
61
Chapter V. Summary, Conclusions
and Recommendations
For the last two questions on the survey we
asked musicians to describe their greatest
disappointments and satisfactions in their careers. In
some locations, this was the beginning of a much
longer conversation and these comments humanize
the data. A handful of these remarks appear below
and while they cannot do justice to the breadth of
comments, they give a hint of the challenges and
frustrations jazz musicians face on a daily basis and
throughout a lifetime. A summary of the musicians'
recommendations appears at the end.
""No money" and "good music"
. . .greatest satisfaction and greatest disappointment
Not selling, not playing and poor or no
management are common problems, but another
obstacle is overcoming the assumption that jazz
musicians are "smokers, drinkers and druggies." The
lack of affordable rehearsal space (NYC) and the lack
of benefits — health insurance and coverage, life
insurance, retirement plans, even when musicians are
employed in jobs like university teaching — changing
politics of music and "living in the balance between
optimism and fear" are some common conditions.
One musician said that her greatest disappointment
is that by the time she's earned enough money as a
musician to have children, she may be too old to pick
them up. Musicians also regretted not starting their
careers earlier and disliked being categorized as "only
a musician" as well as not getting paid ("being 46
years old and still broke").
Artists mentioned racial discrimination, a topic
of intense interest in this diverse field, as well as
gender-based discrimination, something one female
artist called "babe-ism." Forty-six percent of the jazz
musicians said they had been discriminated against
when seeking employment as a jazz musician — the
major reason they gave was race (46 percent)
followed by "other" (28 percent and then gender (19
percent). There seems to be a lack of interest in
American culture to hear jazz music, and especially a
concern over the fading of tradition in jazz.
Artists are continually frustrated by a lack of
control over their own artistic destinies.
"Playing. . .the fastest ride in town."
...greatest satisfaction, a NY jazz musician
Great performance, great compositions,
regaining one's health after a music injury, playing
with extremely competent musicians selling their
work, "recognizing one's musical plight," getting
paid, making a living from jazz, and playing the
music they love were all things that greatly satisfied
the musicians. One said the greatest satisfaction was
whenever "the music is able to travel out of your
body", another, "giving back to young musicians."
One musician commented that "My music is where
God lives in me."
Another musician hoped the survey will "help
the children in New Orleans inner city schools get
workable instruments and good teachers."
"Either you're a young lion
or an 85-year old legend."
Not only are jazz greats dying off, the lack of
jazz in the schools contributes to decreased opportu-
nities in the field. The apprenticeship system that
once fed new blood into jazz is also virtually dead.
Over half the RDS jazz musicians earned
their livelihoods in the last 12 months as
musicians. This was highest in New
Orleans at 83 percent.
Eighty percent of the RDS musicians are
white males.
Thirty-eight percent of RDS musicians
have college degrees and another 18 have
graduate degrees; 62 percent study with
private teachers.
"First thing, and you can write this down, tell
them to quit stallin' and give us the money and
exposure we need."
62
Grants and the grassroots
More equity and attention to less visible jazz
musicians, and a feeling that "you can't get a grant
unless you've already had one" has produced
dissatisfaction with the grant-giving world. More
funding for public concerts and a requirement for
artists who get public funding to engage with the
public, not hide away and "work anonymously," is
something some hinders like the New York
Foundation for the Arts have stood behind for years.
One musician said, "We need to quit the genius
grant sanctification and make smaller grants more
widespread." Another asked for money for "concept
development," not just the final product.
Models like the CETA Program in the 1970s and
Chamber Music America's jazz ensemble grants were
invoked as ways to get money to the grassroots.
CMA's grants also allowed artists to get health
insurance. Access to such insurance might be one
benefit the NEA or other funding agencies may offer
when they confer grants.
"The instruments don't stand up
and play themselves."
. . .RDS study jazz musician
Restoration of NEA grants to individual artists
is mandatory for the health of artists' futures.
Government backing for big initiatives for artists,
such as health insurance and education would help
foster both an appropriate attitude towards the arts
in this country, and a more livable environment for
artists.
In addition to grants
For some time funding agencies have looked at
ways of helping individual artists beyond the grant
or cash gift or award. The New Orleans Jazz &
Heritage Foundation sponsors a Musicians' Housing
Initiative which, in cooperation with two savings
banks, assists home buyers with closing costs (up to
$2,500) and helps to get the artist certified by the
city of New Orleans. The program also arranges for
a homeowner training course to assist musicians in
renovating or building their own homes.
An Internet-based resource that lists grants,
services and opportunities for jazz musicians in a
comprehensive way would provide additional help.
Grant-giving organizations may create subsidies
for presenters who book a diverse array of music
and who have rotating curators to ensure equity.
Travel subsidies can help musicians get their work
out to other places. The creation of a national
network of smaller venues could foster exchange
between communities.
Artists versus Institutions
In a 1999 Dutch study, Teunis IJdens discusses
the difficult financial environment for jazz
musicians and how that has implications for
government support and other subsidy:
Artistic work, as done by jazz musicians, cabaret
artists and other performing artists outside the
restricted area of heavily subsidized institutions
lourdes in the cultural field, is clearly burdened
with financial risks. In precarious and flexible
markets for occasional labor such as these, the
community of performances and short-term
contracts may be easily broken. The risks of
stumbling on shorter or longer spells of no work
and no income have to be met by individual
artists, but also by society (or by the industry)
which pays for unemployment benefits and social
welfare benefits. This holds especially for artists
who have absolved an (expensive) formal training
at an institution of higher education in the arts,
an investment, which is hard to legitimize if
returns are below zero. ("Scattered and skewed:
Artistic work between market and organization, p.
229.)
Networks
While the jazz profession spawns many
relationships by word-of-mouth, it can be quite
difficult to find work as a musician in another city
due to the lack of national networks and band
leaders who have already filled their slates. In a 1976
study of 112 professional trumpet playing members
of Nashville's Local 257 of the American Federation
of Musicians, sociologists Richard A. Peterson and
Howard G. White found that only four of these
players garnered almost all the work, "thus earning
upward of $100,000 a year, while none outside the
top five earned over $15,000 from professional
63
trumpet playing." (From Art and Society., "The
Simplex Located in Art Worlds") Peterson and
White found that many studio musician groups
develop an interpersonal association among
themselves (the 'simplex' of their title) and that
entrepreneurs coordinate the linked craft
arrangements under which they operate.
Aside from technical competence, the authors
state, social reliability, craftsmanlike bearing, and a
willingness to do work that is technically illegal
(technologically manipulating sound so that the
work of a few musicians sounds like an orchestra,
for example) are all characteristics or perhaps
prerequisites for being in that working musician
camp.
In a number of our interviews, we noted the
jazz musician's lone wolf syndrome, which seems
like a bit of an anomaly since jazz musicians often
hang out together, jam, and form their own highly
sociable social networks. Yet often they feel they
must "go it alone," especially since so much work is
through personal recommendation (or personal
favors).
All this indicates a difficulty for certain
newcomers to penetrate particular jazz groups —
Peterson and White describe both rookies
(mentored by a more established player, the rookie
plays, but never outplays, his peers, and waits his .
turn to enter the group more permanently) and
rivals (those who go above musicians' heads to
convince agents and clubs that they are better than
more well-heeled performers).
The short-term nature of jazz work (32 percent
of our jazz respondents played with more than 16
different groups a month) and the monopoly of
work by a few players (and not necessarily the most
competent ones) make any linear career path
extremely difficult.
The Musicians' Union
The American Federation of Musicians, like all
protective collective bargaining agencies, seeks to
protect its members. There are a number of areas of
ambivalence from the jazz musicians we surveyed,
some of which are similar to all performing arts
unions, especially the issue of supply and demand
and pay scale. Jazz musicians who play non-union
don't have the union as an advocate for a higher pay
scale, but many cannot get enough work being
union members, so multiple non-union jobs at a
lower scale may yield them more money. On the one
hand, musicians advocate the union stepping in to
stop low-paying jobs; on the other, they worry that
electronic media will replace live musicians as a
result of union intervention.
While the union has both hard and soft referral
systems for jazz musicians, in some cities bookings
are hard to come by and an artist on a normal career
trajectory may saturate his market fairly quickly. In
San Francisco, local 6 acts as a booking agent for
musicians, trying to find them union-paying gigs.
In some cities, the union has suffered from
musicians using their city's union local to gain
access to a higher-paying one in a city such as New
York and then quitting their original local. It is
somewhat unusual for a worker to be a member of
two union locals at the same time; this can have the
effect of depleting the original locaTs membership
ranks.
There was a call for revitalization of the union,
especially those policies that would allow jazz
musicians to get pensions. And, while 89 percent of
jazz musicians in the AFM survey had health
insurance, few obtained it through the union.
Market saturation
Available work depends partly on the critical
mass of musicians, and also by the attitude towards
those musicians' local growth. There is also a feeling
that a musician coming to New Orleans, for
example, takes three years to break in and then is
able to secure premium jobs. After about seven
years, however, the market is saturated, and he gets
replaced by someone else.
Education
This leads to a common discussion in the jazz
community about standards. If, as Peterson and
White (and others) claim, frequent employment as a
jazz musician has more to do with factors that are
not musical, there is a concomitant confusion about
standards for musical quality. Additionally, since
formal music education has eroded in the public
school system, there is concern that the field is not
aspiring to standards for the future. Clearly, with 62
64
percent studying with private teachers, jazz
musicians continue to pursue their musical
education and training. Nevertheless, standards
without certification are difficult.
The musicians promoted education, not just in
the schools, but of the audience. More programs to
educate audiences about the music will give the
experience more meaning and more stature.
In schools, jazz education could take place not
only in the classroom, but through in-school
workshops, concerts every week, and constant
exposure. Wynton Marsalis's jazz curriculum for the
schools is a major start but he believes in education,
education and education.
Mentoring
Apprenticeships and mentoring are very
important in the jazz field. The loss of the NEA
study grant had a huge effect on this. Jam sessions,
places for jazz to explode spontaneously, are critical
to its growth.
More vehicles and money for mentoring and
apprentices are crucial.
Affordable rehearsal space
Space is at a premium in large urban centers. A
model like the Wein dance building in New York
City which provides dance rehearsal space on a
rotating basis is a good one for jazz.
Audience Development
For the most part, development of the jazz
audience has been left to individuals in lesser-
funded institutions or commercial concerns who
take the initiative upon themselves. There are no
coordinated audience development programs from
the recording industry, jazz educational institutions,
jazz venues or other facets of the jazz community.
While these initiatives would be most effective on a
local level, both national and local attention to this
challenge are warranted.
The view by some musicians who work in
avant-garde, experimental work was that these
musicians need to engage more with their public;
some musicians who play less experimental work
argue the opposite — that their audience attends a
concert for prestige reasons, but not to listen.
"Get jazz out of the basement."
Venues
Especially in New York, musicians say they lose
money performing there, and make more on the
road. More economically viable gigs could help this
situation.
Time and again, musicians, even those who
thought the music itself was thriving, complained of
fewer and fewer places to play. They also wanted
more inviting performance spaces, in contrast to
bars, clubs, and basements. Expansion of venues to
community centers, hospitals and other public
venues and more attention by the media would get
the word out.
"No one's trying to get rich; we're trying to survive
while doing something valuable for our culture."
Status of the Artist
Particularly from artists who play in Europe,
there was a plea for a "Status of the Artist" recognition
category by the government, which exists in
countries like France and Canada, so that artists can
receive social and other benefits when out of work.
Sixty-three percent of these musicians have
health coverage (much lower than the 89
percent of musicians in the union survey) and
the musicians' union pays for 13 percent of
this; only 3 percent obtained life insurance
through their musicians' union. Eight percent
obtained retirement plans through the
musicians' union and, for 8 percent, the union
pays for this.
Health and Medical Coverage and
Prevention
While 63 percent of responding jazz musicians
have some health or medical coverage, this is much
lower than the 89 percent of jazz musicians in our
union survey. Almost a third of the respondents
have suffered injuries from occupational hazards in
their music-related work (for example, carpal tunnel
syndrome and hearing problems).
65
While there are a number of performing arts
medicine clinics around the U.S. (and one that
specifically targets jazz musicians in Louisiana)
frequently musicians do not like to admit health
problems received on the job for fear of the effect on
future employment. There are some emergency relief
agencies like Music Cares and the Musicians
Emergency Fund that offer financial support to
musicians who have fallen prey to illness. These
agencies have proven themselves to be invaluable to
a number of artists who have used their services to
weather emergency conditions and more are needed.
A report by the Urban Institute for the W. K.
KELLOGG Foundation in 2001, "Workers Without
Health Insurance: Who Are They and How Can
Policy Reach Them?", gives a detailed picture of the
more than 16 million uninsured workers. Among
the most likely to lack health insurance are workers
in small firms, service workers, low- wage workers,
part time and short-tenure workers and workers
who live in low-income housing, all categories into
which many jazz and other artists fit. The report
compares the merits of two vehicles to expand
coverage: tax credits or public programs.
(http://www.communityvoices.org)
The Business of Music
Quoting Ornette Coleman, one artist said,
"There's music, and then there's the music business."
The dearth of programs helping artists to help
themselves in terms of management skills is a
problem.
Some artists do not think of their work on a
career track; careers, in fact, are a fairly modern
phenomenon — in the 1930s and 1940s people just
played music. Some feel they've been "kept out of
the market" and overlooked for younger talent.
Additionally, trepidation at using computers and
other tools of the trade disadvantages older
musicians.
Programs in music schools teaching jazz
musicians about the business side of their career .
would help them survive tough competition.
JAZZ MUSICIAN RESPONDENT
SUGGESTIONS
Basics
Affordable rehearsal space
Access to affordable health and medical care
Grassroots performance opportunities
Revitalization of the union, especially those policies
that would allow jazz musicians to get pensions
More emergency relief agencies, like the Musicians
Emergency Fund, for musicians who have fallen prey
to illness and age
Education and Audience Development
Education of schoolchildren and communities,
mentoring and apprenticeships to help pass on the
legacy of jazz
Programs to help jazz musicians learn to manage
their own careers
AFM sponsorship of school gigs to bring jazz to
younger audiences
Coordinated audience development programs from
the recording industry, jazz educational institutions,
jazz venues, and other facets of the jazz community
Creation of local arts newspapers run by artists,
where musicians could place free ads, and develop
audiences and awareness
Philanthropy
Restoration of grant awards to the individual jazz
artists from the NEA
Grants going toward grassroots efforts: models like
the CETA Program in the 1970s and Chamber Music
America's jazz ensemble grants were invoked as ways
to get money to the grassroots
Money for "concept development," not just final
product
Grants to make records and to cover promotional
costs
More foundations like Music Cares, dedicated to
promoting the future of the music
Beyond grants: helping individual artists beyond the
66
grant or cash gift or award. (The New Orleans Jazz
& Heritage Foundation has the Musicians Housing
Initiative, which assists musicians in their efforts to
become homeowners)
Business
A nonprofit independent music distribution
company for artists' recordings
Standardized club fees, with cost-of-living
adjustments
Tax breaks for performing in public for free or in
nursing homes, prisons, or hospitals
Creation of local arts newspapers where musicians
could place free ads and develop audiences
Subsidies for presenters to encourage diverse
programming
More Internet-based resources for jazz musicians
National network of venues, including a circuit of
smaller places across the country for community
exchange
67
appendix A. Counties/Parishes
in Four Metro Areas
DETROIT METROPOLITAN AREA*
Detroit- Ann Arbor- Flint
Ann Arbor
Lenawee County
Livingston County
Washtenaw County
Detroit
Lapeer County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Wayne County
Flint
NEW ORLEANS METROPOLITAN AREA
Jefferson Parish
Orleans Parish
Plaquemines Parish
St. Bernard Parish
St. Charles Parish
St. James Parish
St. John the Baptist Parish
St. Tammany Parish
NEW YORK METROPOLITAN AREA
Portions of New York State- New Jersey- Connecticut
surveyed
New York State
Bronx County
Kings County
New York County
Putnam County
Queens County
Richmond County
Rockland County
Westchester County
Nassau County
Suffolk County
Orange County
New Jersey
Essex County
Morris County
Sussex County
Union County
Warren County
Middlesex County
Somerset County
Monmouth County
Bergen County
Passaic County
Hudson County
Connecticut
Darien (Town)
Greenwich (Town)
New Canaan (Town)
Norwalk (City)
Stamford (City)
Weston (Town)
Westport (Town)
Wilton (Town)
SAN FRANCISCO METROPOLITAN AREA
Portions of San Francisco- Oakland- San Jose- Santa
Rosa- Vallejo/Fairfield/Napa surveyed
Oakland
Alameda County
Contra Costa County
San Francisco
Marin County
San Francisco County
San Mateo County
San Jose
Santa Clara County
Santa Rosa
Sonoma County
Vallejo- Fairfield- Napa
Napa County
Solano County
*Even though RDS does not cover statistical information in Detroit, we have included information on counties, context and
resources.
68
Appendix B. Metropolitan Areas Context
In order to implement policies and programs
from the data gathered on jazz musicians, it is
important to understand the context in which these
musicians live. This section presents some brief
background of venues, distribution mechanisms,
education, supporters and flinders, and media
outlets in each metro area. An additional section
provides actual resources in each location where jazz
musicians can go for assistance.*
There are literally hundreds of jazz related
venues that showcase this music all over the United
States. Festivals, nightclubs, community centers,
churches and national performing arts organizations
all offer musicians the opportunity to be heard.
Long a key part of the lore and personal experience
of every jazz musician, young or old, is the
mentoring of master to apprentice and the oral
transmission of musical artistry and knowledge
formally and informally, through these venues and
through inventions of their own. Resilience is key.
The description that follows only touches on the
fabric of the geographic locations that produces,
displays, advertises, sells and supports these
musicians. It does not pretend to illuminate the deep
and substantial history of the players or the places.
While jazz exists largely in the for-profit sector,
within the past decade there have been two major
grantmaking initiatives devoted to jazz that have had
major national significance: The Lila Wallace-
Reader's Digest $24 million National Jazz Network
and the $6.7 million Doris Duke Charitable
Foundation jazz initiative. The National Jazz
Network and affiliated programs was launched in
1990 after a year-long study of jazz in the United
States conducted by the New England Foundation
for the Arts and the now defunct National Jazz
Service Organization. The study resulted in the
funding of jazz presenters and programming
administered by regional arts agencies, the
Smithsonian's traveling jazz exhibitions, and jazz
programming at National Public Radio. The
programs continued until 1998 when the foundation
decided to move away from discipline specific
funding.
Associations that work to track the progress of
the jazz form are dominated nationally by the
International Association of Jazz Education (IAJE),
The National Association of Recording Arts and
Sciences (NARAS), The Recording Industry
Association of America (RIAA), Broadcast Music,
Inc. (BMI), and the American Society of Composers,
Authors and Publishers (ASCAP).
There are a number of organizations that
endeavor to meet the less ostensible needs of the
national jazz community. These include The
American Federation of Jazz Societies (AFJS), which
acts as a kind of watchdog organization. It monitors
Washington legislation and current societal trends
that affect the jazz community.
National media coverage for jazz is spearheaded
by the following organizations: National Public
Radio (NPR), Public Broadcasting Service, Inc.,
Americans for the Arts and Black Entertainment
Television (BET). National Public Radio is arguably
the key national provider of jazz programming.
Among the jazz-oriented programs produced by
NPR are Jazz Profiles hosted by Nancy Wilson,
JazzSet with Dee Dee Bridgewater and Marian
McPartland's Piano Jazz.
DETROIT
Though the Detroit jazz scene has seen a sharp
decline in popularity since the 1970s, many
members of the jazz community compare today's
offering of venues to that of the 1950s. Instead of
large scale concerts in many different venues, only a
few major venues remain and the majority of jazz is
performed by small groups in restaurants and small
clubs. Few clubs are able to obtain big name
performers, therefore most headliners appear at the
Ford-Detroit Festival or at Detroit Symphony
Orchestra Hall. Ann Arbor is home to a few high-
quality jazz venues but there is not enough of a
demand to support multiple site performances on
one evening. While there has been hardship, the
Detroit metro area fortunately boasts a number of
venues that still draw a good crowd and keep the
area jazz scene alive. Among these venues are the
above-mentioned Ford-Detroit Jazz Festival, Detroit
Symphony Orchestra Hall, University Music Society,
SereNegeti Ballroom, Baker's Keyboard Lounge and
69
Bomac's Lounge.
The Ford-Detroit Jazz Festival, produced by
Music Hall Detroit, is the largest free jazz festival in
the country. Formerly known as the Ford-Montreux
Jazz Festival, it is held every Labor Day weekend, the
festival attracts around 750,000 people a year. The
festival typically features 20 nationally recognized
headliners and places a great deal of emphasis on
local artists as well. Along with area professional
musicians, the festival includes performances by
high school and college groups.
The SereNgeti Ballroom holds concerts
produced by the presenting organization, the
Jazznetwork. The concerts generally feature big
headliners but a local big band takes the stage once a
month and educational workshops are held every
Thursday night. Baker's Keyboard Lounge has been
in operation since 1934. It has hosted jazz giants
such as Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Cab
Calloway, and now features both local and nationally
known artists. The venue is not unionized so both
union and non-union artists perform there and both
verbal and written contracts are used.
Jazz specialty stores are scarce in the Detroit
area and the large chains that carry jazz selections
such as Sam Goody, Borders Books and Music and
the Detroit-area chain Harmony House do not offer
a large stock. The independent record store Street
Corner Music is a major player in the area jazz scene
due to its efforts at promoting local and national
recording artists.
The only record labels that deal exclusively with
jazz are labels that musicians themselves have
formed for the sole purpose of recording their work.
AACE is owned by drummer Francisco Mora, Jazz
Workshop was started by University of Michigan
professor Donald Walden, and saxophonist Wendel
Harrison operates Wenha. School Kids, a label
affiliated with the record store of the same name,
went bankrupt and thus ended the only operating
non-musician-owned label in the Detroit area.
There are a number of formal jazz education
programs in the Detroit metropolitan area. Wayne
State University, Eastern Michigan University,
Oakland University, the University of Michigan, the
Jazz Network Foundation Education Programs, the
Education Department of Detroit Symphony
Orchestra and the Southeastern Michigan Jazz
Association all offer jazz- related programs.
Additionally, the Detroit School District Jazz
Education Program oversees jazz programs in 10
area high schools.
Wayne State University has a separate jazz
division within its Department of Music. The
University of Michigan School of Music houses the
Department of Jazz and Improvisational Studies and
offers Bachelor of Fine Arts degrees in Jazz, and
Contemporary Improvisation and Jazz Studies. The
Education Department at the Detroit Symphony
Orchestra sponsors the Ameritech Jazz Youth
Initiative, a program that provides instructional
classes, jam sessions and lectures with legendary jazz
artists for students and local musicians.
Most of the current mentors in Detroit are
musicians in their 60s, most of them the direct
successors of the original architects of the area jazz
scene. Marcus Belgrave, who serves on the faculty of
Wayne State University, is regularly cited as an
integral member of the Detroit-area jazz
community. Belgrave has repeatedly leveraged his
national contacts to bring out-of-town artists to area
venues. Donald Walden has also established himself
as an important source of mentoring through his
dual role as University of Michigan Jazz Studies
professor and record label owner. Musician and
educator James Tatum plays a similar role by
spearheading the James Tatum Foundation for the
Arts, a foundation dedicated to the development of
young musicians. Other important figures include
pianists Harold McKinney and Dr. Teddy Harris,
and drummer Roy Brooks.
The Ford Motor Company Fund is extremely
active in area philanthropy with a great portion of
its giving earmarked for the arts, culture and
education. In its effort to communicate the
importance of jazz music, Ford sponsors the Ford-
Detroit Jazz Festival, the largest free-admission jazz
festival in the United States.
Detroit Jazz Online links to the Web pages of
local musicians, has an online CD store, and
publishes jazz-related articles. The feature most
helpful to local musicians, however, is the "Need a
Musician" musician request center, which helps area
artists find work in the local region.
The major jazz-oriented publications in the
region are the SEMJA Update, JAM Newsletter, Jazz
Quarterly, and the jazz calendar and listings of the
Detroit Metro Times.
70
The two major jazz-oriented radio programs in
the Detroit metro area are WDET FM 101.9 and
WEMU FM 89.1. WDET FM 101.9 is the local NPR
affiliate of Wayne State University.
The Jazz Alliance of Michigan was created to
provide for the growth of Michigan's jazz
community. The Alliance's Web site contains a list of
media resources for jazz, including publications,
radio and newspapers, links to recording studios,
sound equipment/engineers, venues for jazz, and
links to musicians.
NEW ORLEANS
New Orleans is known for its music festivals and
the Jazz & Heritage Festival is the grandest of the
choices the city has to offer. The New Orleans
community recognizes the many benefits of this
popular event and the business community joins
ranks with the public sector to ensure the festival's
success. Jazz specific nightclubs aren't as plentiful as
one would expect in the New Orleans area. Of the
four major sites, Snug Harbor is the most respected
and well received. Ellis Marsalis regularly performs
at Snug Harbor with new talent from the area jazz
community. The other area mainstays are the Funky
Butt, Sweet Lorraine's and Tipitina's, which has
gravitated toward presenting more R&B-oriented
acts at its three locations. Other venues that present
jazz acts are the New Orleans Convention Center,
the Mahalia Jackson Theater for the Performing
Arts, the Masonic Temple Theater, Theater 13,
Orpheum Theatre, the Sandbar and the local
universities.
There are currently over 200 record labels
operating in the city of New Orleans. Of those
labels, only a handful are considered true players in
the jazz market. The best known of these labels are
All for One Records (AFO), Basin Street Records,
Louisiana Red Hot Records, and STR Digital
Records, all of which are independents.
The New Orleans metropolitan area is home to
over 100 record stores with the largest of these stores
coming in clusters. Barnes and Noble and Borders
Books and Records are both located in
unincorporated Jefferson Parish, an area 15 minutes
outside of New Orleans, while Tower Records and
Virgin Megastore stand within blocks of each other
in the French Quarter.
Many of the post-secondary institutions in the
New Orleans metropolitan area have developed solid
reputations for their music departments. The
University of New Orleans, Southern University,
Loyola University and Tulane University all have
music education programs that have distinguished
themselves in some manner. The Jazz Studies
Division within the Department of Music at The
University of New Orleans is led by legendary jazz
mentor Ellis Marsalis and is widely considered to be
one of the best university jazz programs in the
country. Similarly, Southern University's Division of
Visual and Performing Arts is the professional home
of reed master Alvin Batiste, who has mentored
many of today's leading jazz artists. Loyola
University's jazz program is considered a close
second to that of the University of New Orleans.
Loyola has an esteemed music business program
that is directed in part by STR record label chief
Sanford Hinderlie and features Dr. Scott
Fredrickson, the recent appointee of the Conrad N.
Hilton Eminent Scholar in Music Industry Studies
award. Although Tulane University offers a jazz
studies program through its Department of Music at
Newcomb College, the school has received its
greatest acclaim from the jazz community for its
music library and archive. The William Ransom
Hogan Jazz Archive is curated by music historian
and musician Dr. Bruce B. Raeburn. The archive
contains material as diverse as transcribed oral
histories, historical manuscripts and sheet music,
and local union 174-496 records. The archive
attracts roughly 2,200 users a year and is primarily
funded through a "Friends of the Hogan Jazz
Archive" membership fund.
The New Orleans Center for the Creative Arts is
a New Orleans area performing arts high school
with a jazz division developed by Ellis Marsalis.
New Orleans has a healthy tradition of
mentoring that traces back to Louis Armstrong's
work in developing young jazz artists. Today's
mentors include Ellis Marsalis, patriarch of the
world famous Marsalis dynasty, Doc Pullian, Alvin
Batiste, the late Danny Barker and Jerry Brock. Aside
from the Marsalis dynasty, other family dynasties
include the Batistes and the Jordans.
The New Orleans jazz community receives a
good deal of financial support due in large part to a
concentrated effort on the part of local and national
71
agencies to preserve the romanticized history of the
port city. Local agencies include the Louisiana Music
Commission, the New Orleans Jazz Centennial, and
the New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Foundation.
The state and national agencies that work to
support the New Orleans area jazz community are
the Preservation Resource Center of New Orleans,
the New Orleans Jazz National Resource Park, and
the Louisiana Division of the Arts. New Orleans
talent agencies and work referral agencies are Jazz
Film & Video, the Louisiana Department of Labor/
Louisiana Job Service and Summer Stage. Union
Local 174-496 supports New Orleans-area musicians
with a number of services including legal assistance
and health care.
Jazz and other forms of local music are
commonly used for the purpose of tourism in New
Orleans. The national tourism commercial for New
Orleans, "Come Join the Parade," features a relative
of the New Orleans-based group The Neville
Brothers seated at a bar while jazz is playing. In
addition, there are 10 advertising agencies in the
area that specialize in music.
The two top major jazz and jazz-related music
stations in the area are WWOZ 90.7 FM and
WWNO 89.9 FM. WWOZ 90.7 is a listener
supported and volunteer-operated station that
reaches the entire New Orleans metro area and
beyond. The station offers award winning
programming that includes jazz, blues, Cajun,
zydeco, gospel, Brazilian and Caribbean music on its
play list. In addition to the awards the station has
garnered, WWOZ 90.7 was named "Best Medium
Market Jazz Station of the Year" by the Gavin
Report, the major radio-industry programming
magazine.
Since jazz and other local music traditions are
integral to the image of New Orleans, it is of the first
priority that the city is able to cultivate an audience
for its musicians. However, with tourism being the
biggest crutch for an ailing economy, much of the
city's audience development efforts are not centered
on area residents or concerned with fostering new
generations of local musicians. There are still storied
mentors and institutions that carry on local
traditions and keep the New Orleans jazz legacy
alive but, for many, jazz is tied to a nostalgia for a
day long past.
NEW YORK1
The New York metro area, and its other four
boroughs and tri-state (New York-New Jersey-
Connecticut) region, has the greatest concentration
of premiere jazz venues in the United States. It also
has a plethora of lower echelon venues, which may
present jazz irregularly, but remain significant to the
larger picture of potential employment for
musicians who identify themselves with "jazz." New
York City's venues range from Jazz at Lincoln
Center, the world's leading not-for-profit
institutional producer of jazz concerts, dances,
lectures, films, multi-arts collaborations and
educational initiatives, to historic commercial
nightclubs such as the Village Vanguard. There are
innumerable larger and smaller, better and lesser-
known, established or fleeting, jazz-dedicated or
jazz-tolerant stages.
Jazz at Lincoln Center presented 450 jazz-
oriented events in the 2000-2001 season alone, and
plans to expand programming further upon moving
into an innovative multi-use building under
construction at Columbus Circle, scheduled for
completion by the end of 2003. Led by artistic
director Wynton Marsalis, Jazz at Lincoln Center
promotes a canon founded on the work of such
artists as Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington,
concentrating as well on early New Orleans jazz,
black swing traditions of the 1930s and '40s, bebop
and post-bop modernism, and Latin jazz; it also
presents a variety of traditional and modern jazz
sub-genres. Jazz at Lincoln Center often features
artists challenging jazz conventions in smaller
settings and/or auxiliary events.
Carnegie Hall, unlike Jazz at Lincoln Center, is
not a jazz producer-presenter, although it may be
New York City's most famous concert facility. The
concert hall's staff has worked in conjunction with
Fleet Bank to produce the Neighborhood Concert
series, has held jazz workshops for teachers, and the
This section of this report was prepared with the help of the four City Coordinators and Project Coordinator, Phillip Harvey. In
New York, contributors include Howard Mandel (primary author), Martin Mueller. Bethany Ryker, James Browne, Wendy
Oxenhorn, Reverend Dale Lind, Natasha Jackson and Jeff Levinson.
72
facility has hosted jazz concerts initiated by
independent, outside producers. George Wein is the
most prominent among these producers, active
internationally though based in New York City. His
Festival Productions is responsible for the annual
JVC Jazz Festival, Saratoga Jazz Festival, Verizon Jazz
Festival, and the Newport Jazz Festival (which he
founded in 1954); Festival Productions also
produces the Carnegie Hall Jazz Orchestra, led by
trumpeter Jon Faddis, which presented four
evening-long programs at Carnegie Hall during
2000-2001.
Jazzmobile, Inc., founded in 1964 by Dr. Billy
Taylor to "provide arts education programs of the
highest quality via workshops, master classes, lecture
demonstrations, arts enrichment programs, outdoor
summer mobile concerts, special indoor concerts
and special projects," is a not-for-profit organization
without a performance home base, estimating
outreach to over 250,000 people in and around New
York City's boroughs, with approximately 600 artists
participating annually. Jazz at Flushing Town Hall, in
Flushing, Queens, is a relatively new not-for-profit
institution presenting high quality mainstream jazz
in an active schedule of events at an outer-borough
(non-Manhattan) cultural center. 651 Arts is a not-
for-profit organization staging jazz events on an
occasional basis at Brooklyn Academy of Music and
BAM's Majestic Theater. Henry Street Settlement is a
smaller yet well-established, not-for-profit jazz
performance and education center on Manhattan's
lower east side. New Jersey Performing Arts Center
(Newark) is a newly built major concert hall, hosting
a regular season of jazz and world-music
performances. John Harms Center is another New
Jersey concert venue that serves as a rental for
outside producers presenting some jazz.
Other not-for-profit arts institutions presenting
jazz on various regular schedules include the Jazz
Gallery, the Kitchen Center for Music Video and
Dance, Aaron Davis Hall at City College of New
York, the Studio Museum of Harlem, the
Guggenheim Museum, and the Tillis Center on the
C.W. Post campus of Long Island University.
Not-for-profit jazz festivals and series in New
York City parks and public spaces include the Vision
Festival (two weeks of concerts curated by a
volunteer artist-musician-choreographer board); the
Charlie Parker Jazz Festival (two afternoon-long free
bebop concerts, in Harlem and East Village
Manhattan public parks); the City-produced Central
Park Summerstage series; the free Brooklyn Prospect
Park Bandshell series; free Lincoln Center Out of
Doors concerts and Midsummer's Night Swing
(plaza dancing, some tickets sold); and the Music
Under New York program in the subways,
administered by the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
Profit-oriented or privately-subsidized festivals
include the Verizon Music Festival, J&R Music World
Jazz Festival, the Caramoor Jazz Festival
(Westchester County), the Cape May Jazz Festival,
the New Jersey Jazz Society festival (mostly
traditional jazz) in Stanhope, NJ, the Blues Cruise
(concerts on boats on the Hudson River), and Mark
Morganelli's series of jazz concerts — usually
promoted under the banner JazzForum Arts —
mostly in suburban New York City and surrounding
towns.
Saint Peter's Church has been recognized by the
Lutheran Synod of New York since 1956 for its jazz
ministry, including presentation of jazz in a spiritual
setting. St. Peters helped found International
Women in Jazz, a 200-member organization
presenting monthly concerts and occasional
workshops.
Of New York City's famed nightclub scene: The
Blue Note opened in New York in 1981 and has
franchise outlets in Japan. The Village Vanguard was
established in 1935 by Max Gordon, late husband of
current owner Lorraine Gordon, and has been
renowned for booking jazz giants since the 1950s.
The Knitting Factory has presented jazz amid a
range of cutting edge ("downtown") music for more
than a decade, currently at a bustling three-stage and
multi-media performance/recording facility with
multiple bars (it also has a restaurant-performance
center branch in Los Angeles). Iridium and Birdland
are major midtown Manhattan jazz clubs, with
week-long schedules presenting first rank jazz
musicians.
The Musician's Union Local 802 is a source of
information on some aspects of venue- related
activities. An important distinction exists between
venues that offer "steady" as opposed to "occasional"
employment for jazz musicians. Corporate functions
such as noontime summer plaza concerts, and
uncounted "club dates," private parties, weddings,
73
performances in hospitals, retirement centers, parks,
libraries, community centers and churches also serve
to employ jazz-identified musicians.
New York City (specifically, Manhattan) is the.
site of major offices for all five of the world's major
recording companies (Japan's Sony, Germany's
BMG, France's Universal Music Group, America's
Warner Bros., the UK's Capitol/EMI), and the city
has a number of subsidiary labels that specialize in
signing jazz musicians. The creative and receptive
energy of the community of musicians and listeners
most deeply involved with jazz has also given rise,
out of vague necessity, to at least a dozen smaller,
independent record labels. There are uncounted
artist-owned and -operated labels, too. New York
City is also a longtime center of music businesses
including but not limited to music publishing,
artists' services (such as licensing organizations
ASCAP and BMI), copyist work, record retailers,
instrument repair shops and retailers.
An incredible concentration of institutions of
higher education and status as the jazz capital of the
world make New York City the mecca for those
seeking an education in jazz. The New School
University employs 72 jazz artists as
educators/mentors in a bachelor's degree model
intended to pass down oral and playing traditions to
students, preparing them for the technical, artistic
and professional demands of a performance career
in jazz. The program's part-time faculty are
unionized through Local 802, American Federation
of Musicians, a unique and unprecedented example
of collective rights organizing on behalf of
musicians in education.
The Manhattan School of Music offers a jazz
curriculum that focuses on the students as
performers, composers and educators in the present-
day jazz market. The Juilliard School, in conjunction
with Jazz at Lincoln Center, has established an Artist
Diploma jazz education program that will feature a
broad jazz and classical music-based curriculum.
Young artists are also supported through the
important work of the major cultural institutions
that specialize in the preservation of jazz. Jazz at
Lincoln Center is a leader in presenting numerous
programs for young people, including the Essentially
Ellington High School Jazz Band Competition and
Festival, and in creating a Jazz for Young People
Curriculum, which will be distributed nationally.
The New Jersey Performing Arts Center also
supports young people's jazz programs, including
Jazz For Teens, an annual 10-week seminar for
musicians and singers learning jazz.
Several professional firms offer an array of
support services to jazz musicians but it should be
noted that most professional support services
represent an overhead cost to jazz musicians, and
the majority of them do not employ a professional
support staff.
The New York State Council on the Arts
(NYSCA) is one of the best-funded of all states arts
agencies and has given both direct and indirect
support to jazz-related projects. Recent recipients
include Jazzmobile, Jazz at Lincoln Center, Sixteen as
One, Inc. (Vanguard Jazz Orchestra) and the 92nd
Street YMHA, among others.
However, in comparison with the situation 10
years ago, there are at present few fellowships
awarded directly to jazz musicians — either from
NYSCA, the New York Foundation for the Arts
(NYFA), Meet the Composer, the Rockefeller
Foundation, the Lila Wallace/Readers Digest
Foundation or the National Endowment for the Arts
(NEA). An important fellowship program available
to jazz musicians directly in 2000-2001 was a one-
time award of financial assistance and career
development consultation from the Doris Duke
Foundation to some two dozen musicians,
administered by Chamber Music America.
Lack of public and/or private funding has not
stopped musicians themselves from banding
together to improve their prospects and raise their
profiles in a crowded, competitive market, or address
urgent, immediate needs. The Musicians Union
(Local 802) has both MAP — Musician's Assistance
Program, for union members in dire emergencies —
and MPTF, the Music Performer's Trust Fund, which
matches 50/50 funds from qualified (mostly social
service) organizations hiring jazz musicians. The
Association for the Advancement of Creative
Musicians (AACM) is a not-for-profit musicians'
organization of approximately 200 members,
founded in Chicago in 1964, with an active New
York City chapter since the mid-1980s. Art Attack!, a
Website run by Margaret Davis, provides a breadth
of information about work, housing, insurance, food
and other necessities to anyone who finds it online.
The Jazz Foundation of America, run from offices at
74
the Musicians' Union Local 802, is a private not-for-
profit providing emergency care, including housing,
health and dental care and career counseling to
musicians in crisis.
WBGO-FM is the area's lone 24-hour radio
station featuring straight-ahead jazz programming,
though there is also extensive jazz broadcasting on
WKCR-FM (Columbia University), WFMU-FM
(Jersey City, NJ), WHRT (Hartford, CT) and
National Public Radio broadcasts heard on WNYC-
FM and AM (NYC), among other affiliates. There is
also CD101.9-FM, a popular, commercially
supported 24-hour "jazz lite" station.
SAN FRANCISCO
In addition to the nationally recognized SF Jazz
presenting organization, the San Francisco area is
home to a plethora of venues for jazz. These outlets
run the gamut from restaurants and festivals to
street fairs and churches. Yoshi's, a nationally known
jazz venue, pulls double duty as a highly regarded
Japanese restaurant and sushi bar and soundstage
for local and big-name jazz musicians.
The Monterey Jazz Festival is one of the largest
jazz- based festivals in existence. It features over 600
artists who perform at seven different venues across
the Bay Area. Programming for the festival is
characterized by a variety of jazz styles and idioms
from local and internationally well known artists
The Church of St. John Coltrane is an African
Orthodox Church that incorporates jazz into its
Sunday worship services and recognizes saxophone
legend John Coltrane as a saint. The church features
a five-piece house band that sets the liturgy to
selections from Coltrane's musical canon.
The Kuumba Jazz Center is a non-profit
presenting organization that has been hosting
weekly jazz performances for 25 years. It operates its
own venue and offers big name performers on
Monday nights and local musicians on Friday
nights. In addition, the center operates music
workshops and a camp for young people and rents
its space to other community cultural organizations.
The San Francisco Bay Area is home to a variety
of small and independent record labels, several of
which specialize in jazz. Of the independent labels
that deal primarily with the jazz idiom, Noir Records
and Concord Records are the most active. In
addition to ubiquitous retail giants Tower Records,
Virgin Megastore and Borders Books and Music, the
San Francisco area is home to a number of jazz
specialty stores. Many of these specialty stores sell
new and classic releases as well as collectible vinyl. A
few work with major distributors and some carry
the work of local artists on a consignment basis. Of
the independent specialty stores, Berigan's, The Jazz
Quarter, and the SF Jazz store are the most
prominent. Berigan's deals mainly with record
companies that buy from major distributors and
then sell to small record stores. The store is a strong
supporter of local artists. Charles Hamilton directs
the highly regarded Berkeley High School Jazz
Program, which has established itself as a valuable
resource for the continuation of the jazz legacy. At
the university level, San Francisco State University
boasts a strong reputation for attracting up-and-
coming musicians. The JazzSchool is a community
school that was founded by its current director,
Susan Muscarella. Course offerings are intended for
students of all ages, levels of expertise and
instrument preference. There are also a number of
individuals who are regarded as important resources
for the jazz community. These mentors include
Professor Bill Bell, John Handy, Earl Watkins, Ed
Kelly, E.W. Wainwright, Khalil, Yancey Taylor, Jules
Broussard, Eddie Marshall and Harley White.
Some of the major hinders who are active in the
San Francisco area are the California Arts Council,
See's Candy, the Infiniti Division of Nissan North
America, Tower Records and the San Francisco
Traditional Jazz Foundation. Another important
support entity for the jazz community in Northern
California is The David and Lucile Packard
Foundation. Created in 1964 by David Packard and
Lucile Salter Packard, the Foundation supports
performing and visual arts institutions along with its
many other philanthropic concerns.
Due in large part to its proximity to Silicon
Valley, San Francisco area musicians are unusually
savvy in regard to the creation and maintenance of
jazz -related Web sites and online publications.
Eighty-five percent of local musicians, including
students in jazz studies programs, have personal
Web sites. Additionally, nearly every jazz-oriented
venue and festival has a Web site. In addition to the
online publication Jazzwest.com, Jazz Now and the
Palo Alto Jazz Alliance Newsletter are area-based
75
publications that cater to a jazz audience. Radio
station KCSM FM 91.1 is the major jazz radio
station in the San Francisco metropolitan area,
having received this designation due to the fact that
it is the only station that has a 24-hour jazz format.
Other stations that feature jazz in their playlists
include KPFA, KUSF, KKSF, and KBLX. KKSF and
KBLX concentrate on appealing to the
contemporary jazz market. The nationally broadcast
cable television channel BET-on-Jazz is available to
viewers in the Bay Area as well.
SF Jazz presents a film series entitled Jazz on
Film during the San Francisco Jazz Festival and the
SF Jazz spring season. The series features archival
footage of legendary performers, concerts and events
that have contributed to the development of the
music.
76
1. Do you ever play or sing jazz music?
Appendix C
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
992%
100.0%
100.0%
963%
Number
638
109
243
286
no
Percent
08%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
Number
5
0
0
5
mjssng
31
1
21
9
total # of respondents who answered this question
643
109
243
291
2. If no, do you play or sing any other kind of music
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
classical
Percent
37.0%
333%
46.2%
33.3%
Number
17
4
6
7
other (please specify)
Percent
63.0%
66.7%
53.8%
65.7%
Number
29
8
7
14
nissrg
628
98
251
279
total # of respondents who answered the question
46
12
13
21
3. What is your primary instrument?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
alto sax
Percent
61%
4.5%
72%
5.7%
Number
41
5
19
17
banjo
Percent
0.7%
36%
0.0%
03%
Number
5
4
0
1
baritone sax
Percent
0.6%
18%
0.4%
03%
Number
4
2
1
1
bass
Percent
11.4%
136%
11)0%
119%
Number
77
15
29
33
bass clarinet
Percent
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
1
0
1
0
cello
Percent
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
1
0
1
0
clarinet
Percent
19%
55%
19%
0.7%
Number
13
6
5
2
cornet
Percent
0.9%
36%
0.0%
0.7%
Number
6
4
0
2
! drums
Percent
125%
109%
119%
143%
Number
84
12
29
43
effects ( washboard, whistles, etc.)
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
flugelhom
Percent
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
19%
Number
3
0
0
3
77
flute
Percent
18%
00%
27%
13%
Number
11
0
7
4
guitar
Percent
ai%
113%
4.9%
11.7%
Number
61
13
13
' 35
harmonica
Percent
03%
09%
00%
03%
Nurber
2
1
0
1
percussion
Percent
13%
03%
15%
13%
Nurber
9
1
4
4
piano' keyboard
Percent
14.4%
109%
152%
150%
Nurber
97
12
40
45
saxophone
Percent
11.1%
91%
125%
107%
Number
75
10
33
32
trombone
Percent
4.5%
13%
4.9%
50%
Mrrber
30
2
13
15
trumpet
Percent
63%
73%
61%
73%
Number
45
8
16
22
tuba
Percent
03%
00%
0.4%
03%
Nurber
2
0
1
1
vbraphone
Percent
Q1%
00%
0.4%
00%
Number
1
0
1
0
violin
Percent
12%
13%
1.1%
10%
Number
8
2
3
3
voice
Percent
113%
100%
14.4%
90%
Number
76
11
38
27
xylophone
Percent
0.0%
00%
0O%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
other (please specify)
Percent
31%
18%
33%
30%
Urrber
21
2
10
9
rrissrt)
0
0
0
0
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
4. In what style do you play this instrument?*
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
avant-garde
Percent
30.0%
273%
25.0%
353%
Number
202
30
66
106
add jazz
Percent
15.7%
182%
27%
263%
Number
106
20
7
79
blues
Percent
355%
52.7%
95%
520%
Mrrber
239
58
25
156
rxogie-wcogierxxiky-tonk
Percent
93%
20.9%
23%
113%
Number
63
23
6
34
bop
Percent
44.4%
50.9%
223%
613%
Number
299
56
59
184
oonternporary
Percent
33.7%
46.4%
155%
45.0%
Number
227
51
41
135
78
ood
Percent
26.3%
34.5%
4.2%
42.7%
Number
177
38
11
128
free jazz
Percent
34.6%
373%
25.0%
. 42.0%
Number
233
41
66
126
funk
Percent
32.9%
54.5%
8.0%
47.0%
Number
222
60
21
141
fusion
Percent
22.4%
32.7%
63%
32.3%
Number
151
36
18
97
hard bop
Percent
29.4%
30.9%
8.7%
47.0%
Number
196
34
23
141
Latin
Percent
36.5%
43.6%
11.7%
55.7%
Number
246
48
31
167
mainstream
Percent
31 0%
40.0%
205%
37.0%
Number
209
44
54
111
regional style (please specify)
Percent
11.1%
34.5%
63%
63%
Number
75
38
18
19
rhythm and blues
Percent
27.6%
51 3%
61%
37.7%
Number
186
57
16
113
scat
Percent
82%
82%
23%
133%
Number
55
9
6
40
ragtime/stride piano
Percent
65%
10:9%
3.0%
8.0%
Number
44
12
8
24
swing
Percent
39.5%
64.5%
14.8%
52.0%
Number
266
71
39
156
traditional
Percent
40.1%
655%
352%
35.0%
Number
270
72
93
105
word music
Percent
ia7%
16.4%
93%
27.3%
Number
126
18
26
82
other (please specify)
Percent
30.6%
155%
52.7%
16.7%
Number
206
17
139
50
total # of respondents who answered the question
110
264
300
5. What other instruments do you also play?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
alto sax
Percent
7.7%
127%
42%
9.0%
Number
52
14
11
27
banjo
Percent
16%
3.6%
03%
1.7%
Number
11
4
2
5
baritone sax
Percent
5.6%
82%
23%
7.7%
Number
38
9
6
23
bass
Percent
10.7%
10.0%
63%
14.3%
Number
72
11
18
43
bassdarinet
Percent
4.0%
6.4%
33%
33%
Number
27
7
10
10
celb
Percent
16%
3.6%
03%
1.7%
79
Number
11
4
2
5
clarinet
Percent
ai%
103%
11.7%
6.0%
Number
61
12
31
18
cornet
Percent
25%
36%
0.0%
4.3%
Number
17
4
0
13
drums
Percent
10.4%
100%
72%
133%
Number
70
11
19
40
effects ( washboard, whistles, etc.)
Percent
2.4%
36%
08%
33%
Number
16
4
2
10
flugelhom
Percent
3.6%
27%
23%
50%
Number
24
3
6
15
flute
Percent
113%
103%
16.7%
8.0%
Number
80
12
44
24
guitar
Percent
145%
155%
68%
210%
Number
98
17
18
63
harmonica
Percent
ao%
36%
1.1%
4.3%
Number
20
4
3
13
percussion
Percent
123%
145%
98%
137%
Number
83
16
26
41
piano/ keyboard
Percent
335%
355%
303%
35.7%
Number
226
39
80
107
saxophone
Percent
6.4%
91%
53%
63%
Number
43
10
14
19
trombone
Percent
30%
27%
23%
37%
Number
20
3
6
11
trumpet
Percent
42%
27%
27%
60%
Number
28
3
7
18
tuba
Percent
21%
36%
23%
13%
Number
14
4
6
4
vibraphone
Percent
22%
27%
15%
27%
Number
15
3
4
8
violin
Percent
0.7%
18%
08%
03%
Number
5
2
2
1
voice
Percent
108%
100%
91%
127%
Number
73
11
24
38
xylophone
Percent
0.7%
03%
0.0%
13%
Number
5
1
0
4
other (please specify)
Percent
14.1%
91%
22.7%
83%
Number
95
10
60
25
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
80
6. How many jazz musicians do you know by name in this metro area who also know you?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
nwn
134
106
224
66
msdan
100
100
150
30
std. dev.
150
86
176
93
rrrxe
100
100
100
100
vaid cases
623
104
243
276
51
6
21
24
mssrt)
7. Of these jazz musicians you know by name in this metro area who also know you, how many are:
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
25 years cryouncjer
rrean
31
44
38
20
15
20
20
10
medan
std. dev.
78
153
47
50
mrxe
10
20
10
5
valid cases
549
94
219
236
msshg
125
16
45
64
Wjthi
mean
25
10
45
tl
ITBCfen
10
8
25
5
std. dev.
49
13
65
30
mrxe
5
5
10
5
vaBd cases
585
96
241
248
mssrtj
89
14
23
52
American Indian or Alaska Native
mem
2
1
2
1
mecferi
0
0
0
0
std. dev.
4
1
5
4
rrrxe
0
0
0
0
vaBd cases
225
46
79
100
449
64
185
200
mssng
Asian
mean
11
4
18
5
rrBdan
5
3
10
3
std. dev.
18
4
24
7
rrrxe
10
2
10
2
vafid cases
494
74
227
193
mjssrg
180
36
37
107
Black or African American
mam
medan
64
50
107
28
std. dev.
30
40
60
10
model
104
35
132
72
mcde2
50
50
100
5
81
valid cases
580
93
235
252
mBshg
94
17
29
48
Hispanic or Latino
rreai
22
8
35
■ 13
mecfen
10
5
20
5
std. cev.
43
7
57
23
rrnte
5
10
5
5
valid cases
471
72
221
178
rnsshg
203
38
43
122
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
rTEB"l
2
1
1
2
t
0
0
0
1
mBdan
std. dev.
4
5
3
3
rrrxe
0
0
0
0
vaSd cases
192
38
56
98
rnsshg
482
72
208
202
White
msm
67
60
106
33
rredan
37
40
63
16
std. dev.
105
135
111
66
mxel
50
50
50
10
mxe2
vafcl cases
568
91
232
245
msshg
106
19
32
55
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
8. If you consider yourself a jazz musician, do you also play or sing at non-jazz events?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
100.0%
100.0%
921%
1000%
Mrrber
508
108
116
274
no
Percent
00%
0.0%
73%
00%
Number
166
2
10
26
msshg
166
2
138
26
total # of respondents who answered the question
508
108
264
274
9. If yes, what kind
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
barmitzvahs
Percent
136%
20.9%
53%
183%
NLrrber
92
23
14
55
Broadway
Percent
11.4%
182%
57%
14.0%
NLrrber
77
20
6
42
cafes restaurants
Percent
542%
673%
402%
61.7%
Nirrter
365
74
106
185
celebrations
Percent
34.9%
50.0%
7.6%
533%
82
Number
235
55
20
160
church events
Percent
32.0%
582%
163%
363%
Number
216
64
43
109
dubs
Percent
53.7%
755%
33.0%
64.0%
Number
362
83
87
192
concerts
Percent
48.1%
75.5%
29.9%
54.0%
Number
324
83
79
162
educational workshops
Percent
298%
518%
11.7%
37.7%
Nurber
201
57
31
113
family events
Percent
24.0%
40.0%
27%
37.0%
Number
162
44
7
1tl
festivals
Percent
395%
70.9%
17.4%
47.3%
Number
266
78
46
142
funerals
Percent
17.1%
43.6%
4.9%
180%
Number
115
48
13
54
industrials
Percent
131%
227%
68%
150%
Number
88
25
18
45
parties
Percent
47.5%
76.4%
24.6%
57.0%
Number
320
84
65
171
private functions (benefits, corporate)
Percent
472%
755%
23.9%
573%
Number
318
83
63
172
promotional events'showcases
Percent
23.4%
45.5%
4.9%
31.7%
Number
158
50
13
95
record deals
Percent
135%
40.0%
23%
14.7%
Number
94
44
6
44
movies
Percent
120%
26.4%
3.4%
143%
Number
81
29
9
43
theatres
Percent
181%
30.9%
83%
220%
Number
122
34
22
66
weddings
Percent
43.3%
76.4%
155%
55.7%
Number
292
84
41
167
other (please specify)
Percent
272%
10j0%
54.5%
93%
Number
183
11
144
28
total # of respondents who answered the question
110
264
300
10. How many hours per day do you spend practicing music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
mem
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
medan
std. dev.
4
3
4
5
mace
2
2
2
2
vaid cases
590
103
209
278
nissro,
84
7
55
22
83
1 1 . How many hours per week do you spend writing music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
rreai
5
6
6
4
3
3
4
2
rrBdan
std. dsv.
7
10
7
6
rrrxe
0
0
2
0
valid cases
503
89
159
255
rTBshg
171
21
105
45
12. From which occupation did you earn your major income in the last 12 months?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
musician
Percent
515%
827%
564%
35.7%
Number
347
91
149
107
music teacher
Percent
11.1%
136%
80%
130%
Number
75
15
21
39
jazz teacher
Percent
65%
4.5%
68%
70%
Nurber
44
5
18
21
arts manager or administrator
Percent
10%
00%
08%
17%
Number
7
0
2
5
other music-related occupation
Percent
7S%
4.5%
87%
83%
Number
53
5
23
25
non-music related occupation
Percent
242%
36%
185%
363%
Number
163
4
50
109
other
Percent
107%
6.4%
53%
170%
Nrrber
72
7
14
51
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
13. At present, what is your employment situation?
Total
New
Orleans
New
York
San
Francisco
1 am employed full time in the music business
Percent
28.0%
655%
170%
24.0%
Nurber
189
72
45
72
1 am employed full-time NOT in the music business
Percent
131%
4.5%
68%
21.7%
Number
88
5
18
65
1 am employed part-time in the music business
Percent
62%
27%
15%
117%
Nurber
42
3
4
35
1 am employed full-time as a freelancer in the music
bushess
Percent
273%
30.0%
49.6%
a7%
Number
184
33
131
20
1 am employed part-time as a freelancer in the music
bushess
Percent
128%
36%
129%
160%
Number
86
4
34
48
84
Percent
52%
00%
19%
100%
laninerrpbyed
Mmber
35
0
5
30
1 am retired
Percent
33%
18%
23%
4.7%
Nurber
22
2
6
14
other (other)
Percent
110%
27%
10.6%
143%
Nurrber
74
3
28
43
total # of respondents who answered the question
(including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
14. Do you work regularly with a specific group of musicians?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
795%
89.1%
76.8%
783%
Nurter
524
98
199
227
no
Percent
205%
109%
232%
21.7%
Nurber
135
12
60
63
msshcj
15
0
5
X)
total # of respondents who answered the question
659
110
259
290
15. Approximately how many different musical jobs do you play a month?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
[real
10
V
9
7
8
16
7
5
medan
std. dev.
8
9
7
6
mode
20
20
4
2
vaid cases
620
109
250
261
msshg
54
1
14
39
16. What percentage of your income comes from your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
rone
Percent
81%
00%
23%
163%
Number
53
0
6
47
25% a less
Percent
24.3%
6.4%
219%
333%
Mirber
159
7
56
96
between 26% and 50%
Percent
119%
6.4%
133%
128%
Number
78
7
34
37
between 51 % and 75%
Percent
87%
101%
66%
1Q1%
NLrrber
57
11
V
29
between 76% and 99%
Percent
106%
193%
86%
90%
85
Mnfcer
69
21
22
26
100%
Percent
363%
57.8%
47.3%
18.4%
Number
237
63
121
• 53
rrissrg
21
1
8
12
total # of respondents who answered this question
653
109
256
288
17. Do you have more than one job?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
63.0%
49.5%
803%
535%
Mrrber
391
52
188
151
no
Percent
37.0%
505%
19.7%
46.5%
Number
230
53
45
131
rrissrg
53
5
30
18
total # of respondents who answered the
question
621
105
234
282
18. If yes, what are the other jobs?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
musician
Percent
39.8%
191%
655%
24.7%
Nurber
268
21
173
74
music teacher
Percent
24.0%
218%
352%
150%
Njrber
162
24
93
45
jazz teacher
Percent
14.1%
73%
20.1%
113%
Nurber
95
8
53
34
arts manager or administrator
Percent
13%
27%
1.1%
10%
Number
9
3
3
3
other music-related occupation
Percent
142%
136%
231%
6.7%
Number
96
15
61
20
non-music related occupation
Percent
16JG%
91%
212%
14.0%
NjTtier
106
10
55
42
other
Percent
55%
36%
30%
93%
Nurber
40
4
8
28
mssrig
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
19. If you have other employment, which one of the following statements best describes your feelings
about the relationship between your music and your other employment at this point in your career.
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
63.0%
49.5%
803%
535%
Number
391
52
188
151
no
Percent
37.0%
505%
19.7%
46.5%
86
Number
230
53
46
131
missing
53
5
30
18
total # of respondents who answered the
question
621
105
234
282
20. Approximately how many hours per week do you spend on your music or music-related activities
(including performing, looking for work, marketing etc.)
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
0-10 hours per week
vald%
109%
75%
3.4%
18.4%
frequency
67
8
8
51
11 -20 hours per week
vald%
160%
178%
8.6%
21.7%
frequency
99
19
20
60
21-30 hours per week
vald%
182%
159%
133%
231%
frequency
112
17
31
64
31 -40 hours per week
vaid%
21.7%
23.4%
27.0%
168%
frequency
134
25
63
46
over 40 hours per week
vaid%
332%
355%
47.6%
202%
frequency
205
38
111
56
rnssrcj
57
3
31
23
total # of respondents who answered this qi,
estjon
617
107
233
277
21. Approximately how many hours per week do you spend in your other or supplementary employment?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
0-10 hours per week
Percent
38.3%
59.7%
318%
36.3%
Number
165
37
41
87
1 1 -20 hours per week
Percent
153%
129%
19.4%
138%
Number
66
8
25
33
21 -30 hours per week
Percent
17.4%
9.7%
21.7%
17.1%
Number
75
6
28
41
31 -40 hours per week
Percent
17.4%
113%
19.4%
179%
Number
75
7
25
43
over 40 hours per week
Percent
116%
65%
78%
150%
Number
50
4
10
36
rrjsaxj
243
48
135
60
total # of respondents who answered this question
431
62
129
240
22. Where did you first get inspired by music?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
church
Percent
10.6%
182%
5.4%
12.4%
Nurrber
71
20
14
37
87
community center
Percent
03%
03%
03%
0.7%
Number
2
0
0
2
festival
Percent
13%
27%
08%
. 23%
Number
11
3
2
6
film
Percent
03%
27%
03%
10%
Number
6
3
0
3
friends
Percent
9.7%
118%
38%
14.1%
Number
65
13
10
42
heme
Percent
37.1%
29.1%
47.1%
312%
Number
248
32
123
93
Internet
Percent
00%
03%
03%
03%
Nurber
0
0
0
0
five performance
Percent
61%
6.4%
61%
63%
Mrrber
41
7
16
18
private music teacher
Percent
21%
18%
1.1%
33%
Number
14
2
3
9
rado
Percent
73%
73%
73%
87%
Nurber
53
8
19
26
recordincjs
Percent
75%
6.4%
92%
6.4%
Number
50
7
24
19
relatives
Percent
33%
33%
08%
4.7%
Nurber
20
4
2
14
sched
Percent
73%
82%
7.7%
37%
Nurber
49
9
20
20
television
Percent
03%
03%
15%
0.7%
Number
6
0
4
2
workshop
Percent
Q1%
03%
0.4%
03%
Nurber
1
0
1
0
other
Percent
4.8%
18%
88%
23%
Number
32
2
23
7
5
0
3
2
msarg
total # of respondents who answered the question
669
110
261
298
23. What experiences provided you with early encouragement for your music?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
. apprenticeship/internship
Percent
31%
27%
08%
53%
Number
21
3
2
16
award
Percent
53%
127%
13%
63%
Number
38
14
5
19
88
critical review
Percent
33%
55%
1.1%
5.7%
Number
26
6
3
17
family attention
Percent
41.1%
45.5%
34.8%
' 45.0%
Number
277
50
92
135
financial support
Percent
33%
3.6%
0.4%
5.7%
Number
22
4
1
17
influence of other musicians' work
Percent
37.5%
50.0%
216%
47.0%
Number
253
55
57
141
my music was recorded
Percent
31%
55%
0.4%
4.7%
Number
21
6
1
14
mentor
Percent
123%
182%
3.0%
183%
Number
83
20
8
55
peer approval
Percent
27.0%
29.1%
14.8%
37.0%
Number
182
32
39
111
playing in the streets
Percent
83%
73%
38%
14.0%
Number
60
8
10
42
public performance
Percent
22.8%
35.5%
27%
36.0%
Number
154
39
7
108
sale of my muse
Percent
25%
4.5%
0.0%
4.0%
Number
17
5
0
12
teacher(s)
Percent
30.9%
42.7%
121%
43.0%
Number
208
47
32
129
winning competitions(s)
Percent
7.1%
155%
08%
9.7%
Number
48
17
2
29
other
Percent
175%
ai%
261%
130%
Number
118
10
69
39
msshg
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
24. If you taught music or currently teach music during your career, what was your major motivation for
teaching?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
earning money
Percent
24.8%
32.7%
186%
27.3%
Number
167
36
49
82
love to teach
Percent
20.8%
191%
123%
28.3%
Number
140
21
34
85
importance of passing on my knowledge and
experiences
Percent
252%
29.1%
24.2%
24.7%
Number
170
32
64
74
importance of leaving a legacy
Percent
3.4%
3.6%
0.0%
63%
Number
23
4
0
19
89
benefits (health insurance, etc.)
Percent
15%
27%
08%
17%
Number
10
3
2
5
facilities ofr making music
Percent
18%
27%
08%
. 23%
Number
12
3
2
7
staying in touch with people and ideas
Percent
89%
173%
42%
100%
Number
60
19
11
30
other
Percent
14.8%
55%
303%
4.7%
Number
100
6
80
14
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
25. If you have been a mentor to another musician or artist, how important is mentoring to your ongoing
artistic development?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
very important
Percent
49.7%
52.4%
47.3%
51.4%
Nurber
245
44
107
94
somewhat important
Percent
112%
190%
7.1%
126%
Number
55
16
16
23
important
Percent
20.1%
155%
252%
158%
Number
99
13
57
29
not important
Percent
28%
4.8%
22%
27%>
Number
14
4
5
5
meanhgjess
Percent
08%
12%
0.4%
1.1%
Number
4
1
1
2
I have never been a mentor
Percent
15.4%
7.1%
17.7%
16.4%
Number
/R
5
40
30
mssrg
181
26
38
117
total # of respondents who answered the question
493
84
226
183
26. Please indicate your highest level of formal education
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
elementary school, through grade 8
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
some high school
Percent
2.4%
18%
19%
31%
Number
16
2
5
9
1 2th grade, but did not graduate
Percent
0.6%
0.0%
0.4%
10%
Number
4
0
1
3
' 12th grade, got GED
Percent
1.4%
4.6%
0.4%
10%
Number
9
5
1
3
1 2th grade, graduated from high school
Percent
53%
4.6%
42%
6.4%
Number
35
5
11
19
90
somecolege
Percent
335%
39.4%
302%
34.2%
Number
223
43
79
101
oollege degree
Percent
375%
26.6%
42.0%
' 37.6%
Number
250
29
110
111
graduate degree
Percent
183%
22.9%
210%
142%
Number
122
25
55
42
8
1
2
5
mssrg
total # of respondents who answered this question
666
109
262
295
27. If you have college, graduate school or conservatory experience, what institutions have you attended?
28. What is your highest formal degree?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
AA
Percent
93%
31%
19%
18.4%
Number
41
2
3
36
BA
Percent
43.6%
281%
49.4%
43.9%
Number
183
18
79
86
BFA
Percent
26%
10%
4.4%
15%
Number
11
1
7
3
BS
Percent
57%
63%
4.4%
6.6%
Number
24
4
7
13
MA
Percent
136%
125%
20.6%
82%
Number
57
8
33
16
MFA
Percent
1.4%
31%
19%
05%
Number
6
2
3
1
MS
Percent
10%
0.0%
06%
15%
Nun-ber
4
0
1
3
EdD
Percent
02%
0.0%
0.0%
05%
Nurrber
1
0
0
1
PhD
Percent
26%
16%
38%
20%
Number
11
1
6
4
other
Percent
195%
43.8%
131%
163%
Number
82
28
21
33
254
46
104
104
mssrig
total # of respondents who answered this question
420
64
160
196
91
29. Was this degree. .
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
in jazz?
Percent
188%
333%
21.4%
.116%
Number
79
21
36
22
in music?
Percent
32.8%
333%
393%
26.8%
Number
133
21
66
51
other
Percent
48.5%
333%
393%
616%
-
Number
204
21
65
117
nissiTg
253
47
96
110
total # of respondents who answered this question
421
63
168
190
30. Did you receive technical or professional training in the arts?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
in conservatory or professional school not
granting a degree
Percent
19.4%
127%
292%
133%
Number
131
14
77
40
certificate program in the arts
Percent
68%
145%
33%
6.7%
Number
46
16
10
20
private teachers
Percent
620%
613%
731%
523%
Umber
418
68
193
157
did not receive technical or professional training
in the arts
Percent
165%
91%
72%
27.3%
Number
111
10
19
82
other
Percent
10.4%
73%
102%
11.7%
Number
70
8
27
35
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
31. What other experiences have you had in preparation for your work in the arts?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
alternative schooling experience
Percent
120%
191%
53%
153%
Number
81
2
14
46
attending performances
Percent
61.1%
727%
470%
693%
Number
412
80
124
208
community-based arts experience
Percent
17.7%
213%
27%
293%
Number
119
24
7
88
experience as a mentor
Percent
123%
20.9%
38%
167%
Number
83
23
10
50
experience as an apprentice
Percent
223%
255%
20.5%
24.0%
Number
154
28
54
72
jazz workshop, dine, master dass
Percent
415%
527%
273%
50.0%
92
Number
280
58
72
150
listening to music
Percent
75.1%
89.1%
65.3%
77.7%
Number
506
98
175
233
performing
Percent
68.7%
882%
48.9%
79.0%
Number
463
97
129
237
rehearsal band
Percent
33.7%
42.7%
11.7%
49.7%
Number
227
47
31
149
self-taught
Percent
38.0%
54.5%
163%
510%
Number
256
60
43
153
other
Percent
168%
55%
35.0%
4.0%
Number
113
6
95
12
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
32. At what age did you begin playing your first instrument?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
nwi
9
9
9
10
(redan
9
9
9
9
std. dev.
4
3
4
5
mxe
10
10
9
8
vaOd cases
661
109
259
293
13
1
5
7
mssing
33. Do you consider yourself a professional jazz musician?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
81.4%
93.6%
95.7%
65.5%
Number
513
103
220
190
no
Percent
186%
6.4%
4.3%
34.5%
Number
117
7
10
100
mssng
44
0
34
10
total # of respondents who answered the question
630
110
230
290
34. If yes, of these statements, which do you consider the three most important reasons as they apply to you?
Choice 1
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
I make my fivhg as a musician
Percent
323%
40.8%
39.9%
20.8%
Number
172
40
87
45
I receive some income from my work as a musician
Percent
122%
00%
1Q1%
193%
Number
65
0
22
43
I intend to make my living as a musician
Percent
6.0%
4.1%
1S%
11.1%
Number
32
4
4
24
93
1 belong to a musicians association
Percent
00%
03%
00%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
1 belong to a musicians union or guild
Percent
00%
0.0%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
1 haws been formally educated in music
Percent
26%
20%
18%
3.7%
Number
14
2
4
8
1 am recognized by my peers as an musician
Percent
11.1%
143%
87%
120%
Number
59
14
19
26
1 consider myself to be a musician
Percent
6.6%
92%
78%
42%
Mrmber
35
9
17
9
1 spend a considerable amount of time v\orkingasa
rascan
Percent
17%
1D%
28%
03%
Njrter
9
1
6
2
1 have a special talent
Percerrt
4.5%
61%
32%
51%
Number
24
6
7
11
1 have an inner drive to make music
Percent
160%
21.4%
83%
213%
Number
85
21
18
45
1 receive some public recognition for my music
Percent
23%
03%
55%
0.0%
Number
12
o
12
0
other
Percent
4.7%
10%
1Q1%
03%
Number
25
1
22
2
msshg
142
V.
45
84
total # of respondents who answered the question
532
98
218
216
Choice 2
Total
New
Orleans
New York
fer.
Francisco
1 make my King as a musician
Percent
103%
188%
11.1%
62%
Number
54
18
23
13
1 receive some rcome from my wsrk as a musician
Percent
72%
115%
4.3%
81%
Number
37
11
9
V
1 intend to make my living as a musician
Percent
53%
52%
3.4%
72%
Mirber
27
5
7
15
1 belong to a musicians association
Percent
12%
31%
0.0%
1.4%
Number
6
3
0
3
1 belong to a musicians union or gu5d
Percent
2C%
63%
10%
10%
Number
10
fi
2
2
1 have been formally educated in music
Percent
82%
104%
4.8%
105%
Number
42
10
10
22
1 am recognized by my peers as an musician
Percerrt
252%
125%
285%
27.8%
Number
129
12
59
58
1 consder myself to be a musician
Percent
113%
52%
58%
21.1%
rsUTter
61
5
12
44
94
1 spend a considerable amount of time working as a
musban
Percent
4.5%
52%
3.4%
53%
Number
23
5
7
11
1 have a special talent
Percent
55%
83%
63%
' 33%
Nurrber
28
8
13
7
1 have an inner drive to make music
Percent
8.6%
135%
9.7%
53%
Number
44
13
20
11
1 receive some public recognition tor my music
Percent
4.7%
0.0%
9.7%
19%
Number
24
0
20
4
other
Percent
53%
00%
121%
1C%
Nurrber
27
0
25
2
rrissrg
162
14
57
91
total # ot respondents who answered the question
512
96
207
209
Choice 3
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
1 make my living as a musician
Percent
6.4%
93%
62%
5.4%
Number
32
9
12
11
1 receive some income from my work as a musician
Percent
36%
21%
21%
59%
Nurrber
18
2
4
12
1 intend to make my living as a musician
Percent
52%
52%
31%
73%
Nurrber
26
5
6
15
1 belong to a musicians association
Percent
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
15%
Nurrber
3
0
0
3
1 belong to a musicians union or guild
Percent
32%
72%
15%
29%
Number
16
7
3
6
1 have been formally educated in music
Percent
37%
103%
56%
10.7%
Number
43
10
11
22
1 am recognized by my peers as an musician
Percent
215%
26.8%
24.1%
163%
Number
107
26
47
34
1 consider myself to be a musician
Percent
30%
72%
82%
83%
Number
40
7
16
17
1 spend a considerable amount of time working as a
musoan
Percent
5.6%
82%
51%
4.9%
Number
28
8
10
10
1 have a special talent
Percent
4.8%
62%
4.6%
4.4%
Number
24
6
9
9
1 have an inner drive to make music
Percent
14.7%
52%
103%
23.4%
Nurrber
73
5
20
48
1 receive some public recognition for my music
Percent
9.9%
72%
16.4%
4.9%
Number
49
7
32
10
other
Percent
7.6%
52%
128%
39%
Nurrber
38
5
25
8
95
177
13
69
95
rrisErg
total # of respondents who answered the question
497
97
195
205
35. How do you prepare yourself to be a better musician?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
attend performances
Percent
50.0%
682%
155%
73.7%
Number
337
75
41
221
attend workshops
Percent
332%
382%
102%
51.7%
Number
224
42
27
155
learn from my environment
Percent
39.6%
59.1%
83%
60.0%
Number
267
65
22
180
listen to music
Percent
682%
815%
51.1%
785%
Nurber
460
90
135
235
play music with other people
Percent
620%
86.4%
33.0%
78.7%
Number
418
95
87
236
practice on my own
Percent
685%
76.4%
50.4%
81.7%
Number
462
84
133
245
read
Percent
38.7%
47.3%
145%
56.7%
Number
261
52
39
170
read scores
Percent
165%
227%
4.9%
24.3%
Number
111
25
13
73
self teaching
Percent
35.6%
49.1%
42%
585%
Number
240
54
11
175
spirituality
Percent
328%
46.4%
135%
44.7%
Number
221
51
36
134
study music
Percent
47.5%
555%
28.4%
613%
Number
320
61
75
184
work with a mentor
Percent
165%
24.5%
42%
24.3%
Number
Ttl
27
11
73
other
Percent
24.0%
75%
49.6%
7.7%
Number
162
8
131
23
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
36. If members of the household where you grew up were supportive of your explorations in music, which
member was the most supportive?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
diversion from daily routine
Percent
1.7%
19%
16%
18%
Number
11
2
4
5
family tradition
Percent
4.7%
8.4%
4.0%
39%
Number
30
9
10
11
96
higher calling/sense of purpose
Percent
151%
159%
79%
21.4%
Number
97
17
20
60
inner drive to make music
Percent
28.9%
383%
190%
' 342%
Nurber
185
41
48
96
life style
Percent
1flP/o
09%
32%
0.4%
Nurber
10
1
8
1
bveoftheprocess
Percent
6.4%
4.7%
4.0%
93%
Number
41
5
10
26
jDersonal expression
Percent
8.4%
103%
79%
82%
Nurber
54
11
20
23
problem solving
Percent
05%
09%
12%
0.0%
Nurrber
3
0
3
0
recognition of my special talent
Percent
4.8%
3.7%
6.7%
3.6%
Nurber
31
4
17
10
source of great personal satisfaction
Percent
129%
112%
15.4%
11.4%
Nurrber
83
12
39
32
source of income
Percent
05%
0.0%
12%
0.0%
Nurber
3
0
3
0
other
Percent
137%
4.7%
281%
4.3%
Nurber
88
5
71
12
mssrtj
33
3
11
19
total # of respondents who answered the questj
Dn
641
107
253
281
37. Do you hold a copyright in some artistic work of your own creation?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
602%
60.7%
73.0%
47.6%
Number
388
65
192
131
no
Percent
375%
37.4%
24.7%
49.8%
Number
242
40
65
137
dontknow
Percent
23%
19%
23%
25%
15
2
6
7
mssrig
29
3
1
25
total # of respondents who answered this question
645
107
263
275
38. Have you ever given your copyright to a recording company?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
22.1%
24.1%
25.9%
173%
Nurber
114
21
57
36
no
Percent
74.0%
75.9%
682%
793%
Nurber
381
66
150
165
97
dontknow
Percent
35%
0.0%
55%
34%
Mrrber
20
0
13
7
159
23
44
92
I'lTsaig
total # of respondents who answered this question
515
87
220
208
39. Has your work ever been recorded?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes. by me
Percent
56.4%
64.2%
46.3%
62.9%
Number
359
68
118
173
yes. by a professional recording company
Percent
29.7%
27.4%
42.7%
185%
NuTber
189
29
109
51
no
Percent •
102%
75%
63%
14.9%
Number
65
8
16
41
other (please specify)
Percent
36%
05%
4.7%
35%
Mrrber
23
1
12
10
nisshg
38
4
9
25
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
636
106
255
275
40. How has this work been marketed/ distributed?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
advertised in publications
Percent
194%
305%
20.1%
14.7%
NLrrber
131
34
53
44
marketed on the internet
Percent
23.7%
30.9%
26.9%
183%
Nurber
160
34
71
55
sold from my performance site
Percent
315%
432%
35.6%
223%
Mrrber
214
53
94
67
given away to prospective employers
Percent
24.0%
30.9%
a7%
35.0%
Nurber
162
34
23
105
all of the above
Percent
172=4
40.9%
51%
157%
Number
116
45
24
47
other
Percent
282%
105%
48.1%
173%
Urrter
190
11
127
52
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
98
41. Do you have a Web site?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
365%
355%
45.3%
29.0%
Nirrber
239
39
117
83
no
Percent
635%
645%
54.7%
710%
Number
415
71
141
203
rnssrg
20
0
6
14
total # of respondents who answered this question
654
110
258
286
42. Has your music received airplay?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
70.4%
82.4%
822%
55.0%
Number
450
89
208
153
no
Percent
29.6%
176%
178%
45.0%
Nurrber
189
19
45
125
rrissrig
35
2
11
22
total # of respondents who answered this question
639
108
253
278
43. If yes, in what media?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
cable television
Percent
iai%
30.0%
148%
167%
Number
122
33
39
50
film
Percent
153%
23.6%
133%
14.0%
Nurrber
103
26
35
42
radio
Percent
62.6%
778%
758%
45.7%
Number
422
85
200
137
stage
Percent
125%
26.4%
68%
123%
Number
84
29
18
37
television
Percent
39%
27%
3.4%
4.7%
Nurber
26
3
9
14
other
Percent
39%
27%
3.4%
4.7%
Number
26
3
9
14
total # of respondents who
answered this question
(including refusals & dont
kTOAS)
674
110
264
300
99
44. If yes, how did you get this airplay?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
had help from a promotional person
Percent
19.4%
34.5%
11.4%
210%
Number
131
38
30
63
sent recordings out myself
Percent
19.7%
273%
189%
17.7%
Nmber
133
30
50
53
paid to get airplay
Percent
2.4%
4.5%
15%
23%
Number
16
5
4
7
knew some of the dec jockeys
Percent
181%
33.6%
136%
163%
Number
122
37
35
49
knew producer
Percent
83%
145%
42%
100%
Nurrber
57
16
11
30
Other
Percent
273%
16.4%
47.3%
137%
Njrber
184
18
125
41
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
45. Have you played music that was broadcast over the Internet?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
472%
63.6%
542%
342%
Umber
296
68
135
92
no
Percent
402%
187%
34.7%
53.9%
Number
252
20
87
145
dont know
Percent
126%
178%
112%
119%
Number
79
19
28
32
mssrig
47
3
13
31
total # of respondents who answered this question
627
107
251
269
46. If yes, how do you feel about people downloading this music without paying for your work?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
1 do not mind
Percent
181%
25.0%
98%
227%
Number
75
22
16
37
like the exposure
Percent
27.7%
273%
238%
319%
Number
115
24
39
52
object
Percent
166%
102%
293%
7.4%
Nurber
69
9
48
12
think 1 should be paid
Percent
24.1%
227%
323%
166%
100
Nirrber
100
20
53
27
rx) option
Percent
139%
148%
4.9%
215%
Number
56
13
8
35
nisaig
259
22
100
137
total # of respondents who answered
this question (including refusals & don't
knows)
415
88
164
163
47. Do you currently have a steady manager, agent or representative for your work?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
23.5%
33.0%
31 EP/e
129%
Njrber
152
35
80
36
no
Percent
765%
67.0%
69.0%
87.1%
Number
494
73
178
243
rrissng
28
1
6
21
total # of respondents who answered this question
646
109
258
279
48. If yes, who is it?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
503%
51.4%
55.6%
39.0%
Number
80
19
45
16
spouse
Percent
25%
0fJ%
37%
2.4%
Nurber
4
0
3
1
relative
Percent
13%
27%
00%
2.4%
Number
2
1
0
1
booking agent
Percent
20.8%
32.4%
136%
24.4%
Nurrber
33
12
11
10
manager
Percent
126%
108%
136%
122%
Number
20
4
11
5
friend
Percent
38%
0fJ%
4.9%
4.9%
Number
6
0
4
2
other
Percent
88%
27%
86%
14.6%
NLrrber
14
1
7
6
515
73
183
259
mssrg
total # of respondents who answered the question
159
37
81
41
101
49. If yes, how has s/he helped or hindered your career?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
1 am my cwn manager
Percent.
11SP/o
191%
159%
.5.7%
Number
80
21
42
V
hefcedmegetwork
Percent
9.9%
182%
95%
73%
Number
67
20
25
22
hindered me from getting work
Percent
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
1
0
1
0
helped me get media exposure
Percent
56%
127%
42%
4.3%
Number
38
14
11
13
hindered me from getting media exposure
Percent
0.4%
03%
0.4%
03%
Number
3
1
1
1
helped determine career direction
Percent
18%
4.5%
0.4%
20%
Number
12
5
1
6
hindered career direction
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
negotiated contracts/deals
Percent
50%
118%
23%
5.0%
Number
34
13
6
15
hindered contracts/deals
Percent
03%
09%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
2
1
1
0
helped in conflict resolution
Percent
19%
4.5%
0.4%
23%
Number
13
5
1
7
hindered conflict resolution
Percent
0.1%
03%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
1
1
0
0
helped obtain organizational support
Percent
27%
4.5%
1.1%
33%
Nurrber
18
5
3
10
hindered obtaining organizational support
Percent
03%
18%
0.0%
0.0%
Mrrber
2
2
0
0
helped advise career
Percent
3.0%
91%
08%
27%
Number
20
10
2
8
little/no career advice
Percent
12%
18%
08%
13%
Number
8
2
2
4
msshg
total # of respondents who answered the question
674
110
264
300
50. Do you belong to the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) union?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
30.1%
51.4%
39.9%
130%
Number
197
55
105
37
102
no
Percent
69.9%
48.6%
60.1%
87.0%
Number
458
52
158
248
rrissrc)
19
3
1
15
total # of respondents who answered this
question
655
107
263
285
51. If no, did you belong at a previous time?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
29.4%
42.6%
40.4%
193%
Number
121
20
59
42
no
Percent
70.6%
57.4%
59.6%
80.7%
Number
290
27
87
176
mssrcj
263
63
118
82
total # of respondents who answered this question
411
47
146
218
52. If you do not belong to the AFM, why not?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
does not represent the interests of jazz
muadans
Percent
17.4%
155%
23.9%
123%
Nurrter
117
17
63
37
does not provide enough benefits
Percent
122%
127%
155%
9.0%
Number
82
14
41
27
too expensive
Percent
9.1%
82%
9.1%
93%
Number
61
9
24
28
too difficult to join
Percent
16%
03%
0.4%
3.0%
Number
11
1
1
9
will not help me get work
Percent
145%
20.9%
7.6%
183%
Number
98
23
20
55
will prevent me from getting work
Percent
21%
3.6%
1.1%
23%
Number
14
4
3
7
all of the above
Percent
6.4%
9.1%
08%
103%
Number
43
10
2
31
other
Percent
24.3%
9.1%
25.4%
29.0%
Number
164
10
67
87
total # of respondents who answered the ques
bon
674
110
264
300
53. Do you belong to any other unions?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
vaid%
102%
10%
137%
115%
frequency
54
1
22
31
no
vafcl%
89.8%
99.0%
86.3%
88.5%
103
frequency
478
100
139
239
rrissricj
142
9
103
30
total # of respondents who answered this question
532
101
161
270
54. If yes, please list:
55. Are you a member of a performing rights society (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC)?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
434%
452%
626%
24.5%
Number
278
49
161
68
rc>
Percent
56.6%
53.8%
37.4%
755%
Nurber
363
57
96
210
33
4
7
22
mssrtj
total # of respondents who answered this question
641
106
257
278
56. Are you a member of any other jazz-related organization (IAJE, JAF)s
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
173%
92%
25.7%
13.4%
Number
101
9
56
36
no
Percent
827%
90.8%
74.3%
86.6%
Number
484
89
162
233
rnsshcj
89
12
45
31
total # of respondents who answered this question
585
98
218
269
57. If yes, please specify:
58. Do you have at least one credit card (not a debit card)?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
783%
80.9%
78.4%
772%
Number
512
89
203
220
no
Percent
2.7%
191%
26%
228%
Number
142
2
56
65
mssng
20
0
5
15
total # of respondents who answered this question
654
110
259
285
104
59. Have you ever applied as an individual for a bank loan, a line of credit, or a mortgage?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
bank ban
Percent
383%
605%
293%
40.5%
Number
212
46
72
94
line of credit
Percent
40.8%
60.0%
198%
57.0%
Number
223
45
48
130
mortgage
Percent
308%
513%
213%
33.3%
Number
168
40
53
75
total # of respondents who answered this question
603
131
173
299
60. Did you ever have an application turned down?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
bank ban
Percent
23.4%
25.4%
24.7%
220%
Number
83
18
23
42
line of credit
Percent
313%
282%
26.4%
34.2%
Number
108
20
19
69
mortgage
Percent
12.4%
14.7%
160%
9.9%
Number
39
10
12
17
total # of respondents who answered this question
230
48
54
128
61. Do you feel you have been discriminated against when seeking employment as a jazz musician?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
45.7%
45.3%
66.7%
27.0%
Nirrber
283
48
162
73
no
Percent
54.3%
54.7%
333%
73.0%
Number
336
53
81
197
55
4
21
30
irisi'ig
total # of respondents who answered this question
619
106
243
270
62. If yes, what was the major reason?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
age
Percent
130%
14.0%
8.6%
21 S%
Number
37
7
14
16
gender
Percent
186%
20.0%
185%
178%
Number
53
10
30
13
nationality
Percent
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
4.1%
Number
3
0
0
3
race
Percent
38.9%
55.0%
36.4%
32.9%
Number
111
28
59
24
105
other
Percent
28.4%
100%
36.4%
233%
Nurber
81
5
59
17
nisshg
389
60
102
227
total # of respondents who answered this question
285
50
162
73
63. Do you use electric media in the creation of your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
45.7%
44.9%
442%
47.3%
Mjrber
295
48
115
132
no
Percent
54.3%
551%
55.8%
527%
Number
351
59
145
147
28
3
4
21
mssrg
total # of respondents who answered the question
645
107
260
279
64. Do you use electronic media in the production of your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
vafcj%
494%
53.8%
33.9%
615%
frequency
307
55
83
168
ro
vafcJ%
40.4%
42.3%
518%
29.3%
frequency
251
44
127
80
rrissrig
52
6
19
27
total # of respondents who answered this question
622
104
245
273
65. Do you own or regularly use a computer?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
vafd%
803%
75.9%
83.9%
78.7%
frequency
523
82
219
222
no
vaid%
19.7%
241%
161%
213%
frequency
123
26
42
60
rrBsrg
23
2
3
18
total # of respondents who answered this question
651
108
261
282
66. How many hours a week do you use it in relation to your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
1-5 hours
Percent
50.4%
50.0%
413%
59.1%
Mrrber
256
40
89
127
6-10 hours
Percent
232%
188%
32.4%
158%
NLrrter
118
15
69
34
11-20 hours
Percent
173%
213%
178%
153%
106
Number
88
17
38
33
21 -40 hours
Percent
63%
75%
4.7%
7.4%
Number
32
6
10
16
more than 40 hours
Percent
28%
25%
33%
23%
Number
14
2
7
5
mssra.
166
30
51
85
total # of respondents who answered this question
508
80
213
215
67. Do you use the Internet for your music?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
63.7%
552%
86.9%
46.6%
Number
362
53
192
117
no
Percent
36.3%
44.8%
131%
53.4%
Number
206
43
29
134
missing
106
14
43
49
total # of respondents who answered this question
568
96
221
251
68. How do you use it?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
to communicate with people in the industry
Percent
49.0%
39.1%
76.9%
28.0%
Number
330
43
203
84
to compose music
Percent
6.7%
82%
4.5%
8.0%
Number
45
9
12
24
to copy music
Percent
95%
173%
3.0%
123%
Number
64
19
8
37
to disseminate music
Percent
7.4%
10.0%
45%
9.0%
Number
50
11
12
27
to listen to music
Percent
20.9%
23.6%
19.7%
210%
Number
141
26
52
63
to promote music
Percent
27.3%
255%
413%
157%
Number
184
28
109
47
to do research
Percent
326%
327%
36.4%
29.3%
Number
220
35
96
88
to sell music
Percent
159%
23.6%
205%
9.0%
Number
107
26
54
27
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
107
69. For how many years have you lived in the country of your current residence?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
under 1 year
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
.-00%
Number
0
0
0
0
2-3 years
Percent
12%
18%
12%
10%
Nurber
8
2
3
3
4-5 years
Percent
1.4%
18%
08%
1.7%
Urrber
9
2
2
5
6-10 years
Percent
2.4%
37%
23%
21%
Urrber
16
4
6
6
more than 10 years
Percent
94.2%
89.9%
95.8%
94.4%
Nurrber
616
98
248
270
rrean
3
17
5
73
rredan
2
16
5
100
20
1
5
14
rnssrt]
total # of respondents who answered this question
654
109
259
286
70. Did you receive any music- related training in the city or region?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
80.8%
73.8%
831%
81.4%
Nurrber
514
79
207
228
TO
Percent
192%
262%
169%
186%
Number
122
28
42
52
msshg
38
3
15
20
total # of respondents who answered this question
636
107
249
280
71. What is your most important reason for staying in this area to live and/or work?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
personalties
vaid%
21.4%
315%
39%
335%
frequency
138
34
10
94
support systems for my music
vaid%
120%
19.4%
27%
17.4%
frequency
77
2
7
49
family members
vald%
57%
56%
2.4%
89%
frequency
37
6
6
25
bom here
vafcJ%
53%
4.6%
a?%
4.3%
frequency
34
5
17
12
non music-related employment
vafcl%
20%
09%
0.4%
39%
frequency
13
1
1
11
good place to perform
vafcl%
65%
20.4%
20%
53%
108
frequency
42
22
5
15
educational opportunities
vaJd%
19>/o
0.9%
0.4%
3.6%
frequency
12
1
1
10
available work space
vaid%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
frequency
0
0
0
0
affordable work space
vaid%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
frequency
0
0
0
0
available living space
vaid%
03%
0.0%
0.4%
0.4%
frequency
2
0
1
1
affordable living space
vaid%
03%
28%
03%
0.4%
frequency
6
3
2
1
access to equipment and supplies
vaid%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
frequency
0
0
0
0
access to management expertise
vald%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
frequency
0
0
0
0
cultural activity
vafd%
6.4%
4.6%
51%
82%
frequency
41
5
13
23
environmental quality
vaid%
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
25%
frequency
7
0
0
7
meda responsiveness
vaid%
02%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
frequency
1
0
0
1
network of peers
vaid%
56%
37%
51%
63%
frequency
36
4
13
19
mentors
vaid%
02%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
frequency
1
0
1
0
teachers
vaid%
03%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
frequency
2
0
0
2
group members
vaJd%
03%
0.0%
0.4%
0.4%
frequency
2
0
1
1
other
vald%
30.0%
56%
69.4%
36%
frequency
193
6
177
10
rnssrg
30
2
9
19
total # of respondents who answered this question
644
106
255
231
72. Does your music-related work require you to travel?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
73.7%
873%
84.9%
58.6%
Nurter
462
96
203
163
no
Percent
26.3%
127%
151%
41.4%
109
NuTter
165
14
36
115
misaig
47
0
25
22
total # of respondents who answered this
question
627
110
239
278
73. If yes, approximately what portion of the year are you away from home?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Fewer than 2 weeks
Percent
33.1%
198%
27.8%
47.9%
Mrrfcer
161
19
62
80
2-4 weeks
Percent
24.7%
281%
193%
29.9%
Number
120
27
43
50
1-3 months
Percent
282%
323%
332%
192%
Member
137
31
74
32
over3months
Percent
14.0%
198%
19.7%
ao%
Number
68
19
44
5
mssrg
183
14
41
133
total # of respondents who answered this question
486
96
223
167
74. Approximately how many times during the last 12 months did you work or perform away from home?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
zero
Percent
14.6%
75%
7.6%
25.6%
Nurber
79
8
17
54
1-5 times
Percent
328%
35.8%
233%
412%
Mrrter
177
38
52
87
6-1 5 times
Percent
21.9%
20.8%
265%
175%
NjTber
118
22
59
37
16-30 times
Percent
14.6%
132%
215%
81%
Mrrter
79
14
48
17
over 30 times
Percent
161%
226%
21.1%
7.6%
Umber
87
24
47
16
mssrg
134
4
41
89
total # of respondents who answered this question
540
106
223
211
75. EXCLUDING operational costs of your work space, please list approximate ANNUAL COSTS for the
following music-related work expenses:
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
music-related supplies/services (sheet music, etc.)
a$0-$500
Percent
68.9%
65.7%
67.5%
715%
Nurber
416
65
168
183
b $501 -$2500
Percent
263%
29.3%
293%
223%
110
Number
159
29
73
57
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
35%
4.0%
20%
4.7%
Number
21
4
5
12
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
0.7%
10%
0.0%
12%
Number
4
1
0
3
e over $7500
Percent
0.7%
0.0%
12%
0.4%
Number
4
0
3
1
2 equipment
a $0- $500
Percent
27.8%
23.8%
19.4%
37.9%
Number
169
24
49
96
b $501 -$2500
Percent
58.0%
56.4%
68.8%
47.8%
Number
352
57
174
121
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
102%
109%
103%
9.9%
Number
62
11
26
25
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
21%
4.0%
12%
2.4%
Number
13
4
3
6
e over $7500
Percent
UBP/o
50%
0.4%
20%
Number
11
5
1
5
3 capital improvements
a$0-$500
Percent
765%
63.5%
84.9%
723%
Number
416
54
203
159
b $501 -$2500
Percent
158%
24.7%
92%
19.5%
Number
86
21
22
43
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
4.8%
9.4%
33%
4.5%
Number
26
8
8
10
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
15%
0.0%
1.7%
13%
Number
8
0
4
4
e over $7500
Percent
15%
24%
03%
18%
Number
8
2
2
4
4 training/maintaining music
a$0-$500
Percent
75.9%
70.6%
828%
70.8%
Number
432
60
202
170
b $501 -$2500
Percent
195%
25.9%
11.1%
25.8%
Number
111
22
27
62
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
33%
24%
4.1%
29%
Number
19
2
10
7
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
05%
12%
0.4%
0.4%
Number
3
1
1
1
e over $7500
Percent
0.7%
0.0%
16%
0.0%
Number
4
0
4
0
111
5 publicity/marketing
a$0-$500
Percent
68.9%
64.8%
635%
762%
Mrrber
385
59
153
173
b $501 -$2500
Percent
23.4%
242%
26.6%
193%
NUrber
131
22
64
45
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
59%
38%
75%
31%
Nuiter
33
8
18
7
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
05%
1.1%
12%
0.4%
rlrrber
5
1
3
1
e over $7500
Percent
05%
1.1%
12%
0.4%
Mrrber
5
1
3
1
6 travel^cartage
a$0-$500
Percent
472%
43.6%
35.9%
59.7%
NuTter
271
41
92
138
b $501 -$2500
Percent
39.4%
39.4%
442%
342%
NLrrber
226
37
110
79
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
105%
117%
153%
4.8%
NLmbe-
60
11
38
11
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
1.4%
21%
20%
0.4%
Nurte-
8
2
5
1
e over $7500
Percent
ie%
32%
1B%
05%
Hrrbsr
9
3
4
2
7 recording costs
a$0-$500
Percent
551%
420%
50.8%
64.8%
Nuiter
310
37
126
147
b $501 -$2500
Percent
25.6%
336%
23.4%
229%
Nuiter
144
34
58
52
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
112%
91%
165%
62%
Nurber
63
8
41
14
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
4.1%
57%
4.0%
35%
Mirber
23
5
10
8
e over $7500
Percent
4.1%
4.5%
52%
26%
Njrber
23
4
13
6
8 management costs
a$0-$500
Percent
89.7%
77.9%
913%
923%
Njrber
471
60
219
192
b $501 -$2500
Percent
B7%
156%
5.4%
4.8%
Nurber
35
12
13
10
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
1.7%
35%
13%
1.4%
Nurber
9
3
3
3
112
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
05%
0.0%
05%
10%
Umber
4
0
2
2
e over $7500
Percent
1.1%
26%
13%
05%
Number
6
2
3
1
9 musical instrument insurance
a$0-$500
Percent
921%
84.0%
95.8%
90.9%
Number
490
63
228
199
b $501 -$2500
Percent
7.1%
133%
33%
37%
Number
38
10
9
19
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
02%
0.0%
0.0%
05%
Number
1
0
0
1
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
04%
13%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
2
1
1
0
e over $7500
Percent
02%
13%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
1
1
0
0
lOother
a$0-$500
Percent
65.6%
65.7%
70.9%
57.4%
Number
233
18
141
74
b $501 -$2500
Percent
262%
222%
21.1%
34.9%
Number
93
6
42
45
C$2501 -$5000
Percent
68%
7.4%
65%
7.0%
Number
24
2
13
9
d $5001 -$7500
Percent
03%
37%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
1
1
0
0
e over $7500
Percent
1.1%
0.0%
15%
05%
Number
4
0
3
1
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
76. Where do you go to obtain routine health care?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
private physician
Percent
23.0%
25.5%
223%
227%
Number
155
28
59
68
HMO (health maintenance organization) or PPO
Percent
331%
26.4%
230%
40.0%
Number
223
29
74
120
clinic
Percent
7S%
155%
57%
7.0%
Number
53
17
15
21
hospital outpatient department
Percent
36%
15%
3.4%
4.3%
113
Mrrber
24
2
9
13
emergency room
Percent
22%
27%
04%
37%
Number
15
3
1
11
1 do not obtain routine health care
Percent
252%
20.9%
27.3%
25.0%
Nrrber
170
23
72
75
arts-related medical facility (please specify)
Percent
42%
155%
23%
1.7%
Number
28
17
6
5
other
Percent
75%
45%
91%
67%
Number
49
5
24
20
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
77. Have occupational hazards in your music-related work caused you any injuries?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
315%
37.4%
36.4%
24.8%
Urrber
200
40
91
69
ro
Percent
635%
626%
63.6%
752%
Mrrber
435
67
159
209
missing
39
3
14
22
total # of respondents w
question
iho answered this
635
107
250
278
78. If yes, how frequently has this occurred in the last five years?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
fewer than 3 times
Percent
40.3%
42.9%
338%
40.5%
Nurber
81
18
33
30
3 or more times
Percent
229%
262%
27.1%
162%
Number
45
11
23
2
ongoing condition
Percent
36.8%
31.0%
34.1%
432%
Number
74
13
29
32
rrissrg
473
68
179
226
total # of respondents who answered this question
201
42
85
74
79. Do you engage in preventive medical care in relation to your music-related work? (counseling, injury
prevention, etc.)?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
40.1%
352%
47.1%
35.9%
Nurter
248
37
113
98
no
Percent
59.9%
64.8%
529%
64.1%
114
Number
370
68
127
175
missing
56
5
24
27
total # of respondents who answered this
question
618
105
240
273
80. Do you have health or medical coverage?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
63.3%
58.3%
58.7%
692%
Number
398
63
142
193
no
Percent
36.7%
41.7%
41.3%
30.8%
Number
231
45
100
86
rnsshg
45
2
22
21
total # of respondents who answered this
question
629
108
242
279
81 . If yes, which type do you have?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
I-MO
Percent
43.1%
42.9%
35.3%
49.2%
Number
175
27
53
95
PPO
Percent
160%
175%
87%
212%
Number
65
11
13
41
personal policy through private insurance
ccrrpsry
Percent
131%
127%
167%
10.4%
Number
53
8
25
20
disability coverage for loss of income
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
group insurance policy through arts/arts service
organization
Percent
4.4%
7.9%
40%
36%
Number
18
5
6
7
other group insurance policy
Percent
7.6%
73%
80%
73%
Number
31
5
12
14
other
Percent
158%
11.1%
27.3%
83%
Number
64
7
41
16
rnsshg
268
47
114
107
total # of respondents who answered this question
(including refusals & dont knows)
406
63
150
193
82. How was this health coverage obtained?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
40.3%
54.1%
42.7%
34.1%
Number
145
33
50
62
115
mate
Percent
a9%
82%
60%
110%
Nurber
32
5
7
20
employer
Percent
361%
262%
342%
40.7%
Nurber
130
16
40
74
my musicians' union
Percent
42%
16%
60%
38%
Nurber
15
1
7
7
mate's union a employer
Percent
6.4%
66%
11.1%
33%
Nurber
23
4
13
6
private company
Percent
42%
33%
0.0%
7.1%
Nurber
15
2
0
13
mssrrj
314
49
147
118
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
360
61
117
182
83a Who pays for this coverage?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
170
31
62
77
Nurber
252%
282%
235%
25.7%
mate
Percent
22
5
4
13
Number
33%
4.5%
15%
4.3%
employer
Percent
107
12
37
58
Nrrber
159%
109%
14.0%
193%
employer under contract
Percent
Nurber
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
my musicians' union (specify union)
Percent
13
1
10
2
Nurber
13%
0.9%
38%
0.7%
mate's unon a employer
Percent
19
1
15
3
Nurber
28%
0.9%
57%
10%
private company
Percent
5
0
1
4
Urrber
0.7%
0.0%
04%
13%
arts/arts service organization (specify
organization)
Percent
2
0
0
2
Nurber
03%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
other
Percent
43
5
25
13
Nurber
6.4%
4.5%
95%
4.3%
total # of respondents who answered this question
(including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
116
83b. What percentage do they pay?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
rrem
78
80
83
74
100
100
100
100
medan
std. dev.
34
34
31
37
mxe
100
100
100
100
vald cases
170
31
62
77
504
79
202
223
mssrg
mate
man
65
54
54
73
medan
64
50
59
100
std. dev.
35
45
34
33
mxe
100
10
10
100
valid cases
22
5
4
13
mssrg
652
105
260
287
employer
rrean
86
81
90
85
95
90
100
90
medan
std. dev.
20
20
20
19
mxe
100
100
100
100
vaid cases
107
12
37
58
mssrg
567
98
227
242
my musicians' union (specify union)
rrexi
74
80
73
75
madan
80
80
80
75
std. dev.
27
0
29
35
mxe
100
80
100
50
vald cases
13
1
rj
2
661
109
254
298
rresng
mate's union or employer
rrean
96
100
100
73
medan
100
100
100
80
std. dev.
14
0
0
31
mxe
100
100
100
40
vaid cases
19
1
15
3
mssrg
655
109
249
297
private company
mBBTl
97
0
100
96
117
medan
100
0
100
100
std. dev.
7
0
0
8
mxe
100
0
100
100
vafcl cases
5
0
1
4
mssng
669
110
263
296
arts/arts service organization (specify
organization)
rrcan
100
0
0
100
100
0
0
100
medan
std. da/.
0
0
0
0
mrfe
100
0
0
100
vaid cases
2
0
0
2
mssng
672
110
264
298
other
rTEBTI
95
100
96
93
madan
100
100
100
100
std. dev.
V
0
15
23
mxe
100
100
100
100
vaid cases
43
5
25
13
mssng
631
105
239
287
84. Do you have life insurance?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
vaid%
333%
43.9%
318%
30.6%
frequency
213
47
83
83
no
vaid%
66.7%
561%
682%
69.4%
frequency
426
60
178
188
mssng
35
3
3
29
total # of respondents who answered this
question
639
107
261
271
85. How was the insurance obtained?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
613%
813%
672%
46.0%
Number
122
39
43
40
Mate
Percent
4.0%
21%
00%
80%
Number
8
1
0
7
employer
Percent
25.1%
63%
23.4%
36.8%
Number
50
3
15
32
my musicians' union
Percent
25%
00%
4.7%
23%
Number
5
0
3
2
118
mate's union or empbyer
Percent
3.0%
42%
4.7%
1.1%
Number
6
2
3
1
private company
Percent
4.0%
63%
0.0%
5.7%
Number
8
3
0
5
mssrg
475
62
200
213
total # of respondents who answered this question
199
48
64
87
86. Who pays for this coverage?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
Percent
70.1%
85.4%
710%
60.9%
Number
138
41
44
53
mate
Percent
3.0%
21%
0.0%
5.7%
Nurber
6
1
0
5
employer
Percent
213%
63%
24.2%
27.6%
Number
42
3
15
24
my musicians' union
Percent
15%
0.0%
32%
1.1%
Number
3
0
2
1
mate's union or empbyer
Percent
25%
63%
16%
1.1%
Number
5
3
1
1
private company
Percent
15%
00%
0.0%
3.4%
Number
3
0
0
3
arts/arts service organization
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
other
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
rrissrg
477
62
202
213
total # of respondents who answered this qi
jestion
197
43
62
87
87. Do you have at least one retirement plan?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
_yes
Percent
43.0%
47.6%
44.0%
40.4%
Number
272
49
113
110
no
Percent
57.0%
524%
56.0%
59.6%
Number
360
54
144
162
msshg
42
7
7
28
total # of respondents who answered this question
632
103
257
272
119
88. If yes, how obtained?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
setf
Percent
215%
22.7%
265%
167%
NiiTber
145
25
70
50
employer
Percent
159%
145%
93%
21.7%
Number
107
16
26
65
my musicians' union
Percent
7.9%
16.4%
95%
33%
Number
53
18
25
10
arts/arts service organization (specify
organization)
Percent
0.6%
0.0%
0.4%
10%
Njrber
4
0
1
3
other
Percent
25%
27%
27%
23%
Number
17
3
7
7
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
89. Is this a personal or an employee retirement plan?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
personal
Percent
56.5%
592%
773%
34.5%
Number
152
29
85
38
employee
Percent
29.0%
22.4%
20.0%
40.9%
Number
78
11
22
45
both
Percent
145%
18.4%
27%
24.5%
Nurber
39
9
3
27
405
61
154
190
mssrig
total # of respondents who answered this question
269
49
110
110
90. Who pays for this retirement plan?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
self
vald%
63.6%
792%
63.4%
56.9%
frequency
171
38
71
62
mate
vafcl%
26%
21%
09%
4.6%
frequency
7
1
1
5
employer
vafcl%
23.4%
10.4%
179%
34.9%
frequency
63
5
20
38
my musicians' union
vald%
73%
83%
152%
0XP/o
frequency
21
4
17
0
arts service organization (specify
organization)
valid %
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
frequency
0
0
0
0
other
vald%
26%
0X3%
27%
3.7%
frequency
7
0
3
4
120
missrTQ
405
62
152
191
total # of respondents who answered this question
269
48
112
109
91. Have you made provisions for your death (will, burial plan, etc. )
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
173%
216%
167%
162%
Nurber
104
22
42
40
no
Percent
827%
78.4%
833%
83.8%
Nurber
497
80
210
207
rrisshg
73
8
12
53
total # of respondents who answered this question
601
102
252
247
92. At what age did you achieve your first professional recognition?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
rrem
96
0
21
1
100
0
20
1
rrecfen
std.dev.
14
0
8
0
mxe
100
0
19
1
valid cases
19
0
253
206
missing
655
110
11
94
93. Through what venue did this professional recognition occur?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
award or honor
Percent
75%
120%
32%
96%
Nurber
45
13
8
25
feature article
Percent
55%
65%
7.7%
36%
Number
36
7
19
10
first paid job
Percent
42.7%
54.6%
315%
48.5%
Number
263
59
78
126
grant
Percent
05%
0.0%
0.4%
06%
Number
3
0
1
2
job with a known band
Percent
130%
130%
9.7%
162%
Number
80
14
24
42
played with a major artist
Percent
109%
5.6%
17.7%
65%
Number
67
6
44
V
winning a competition
Percent
2.4%
28%
06%
36%
Number
15
3
2
10
other (please specify)
Percent
172%
5.6%
29.0%
106%
121
Nurrber
106
6
72
28
58
2
16
40
rnssrn
total # of respondents who answered this question
616
108
248
.260
94. Has your talent been recognized?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
locally
Percent
46.3%
67.3%
25.0%
573%
Number
312
74
65
172
nationally
Percent
iai%
41.8%
17J8%
12C%
Number
129
46
47
36
internationally
Percent
353%
51fl%
49.6%
167%
Nirtier
238
57
131
50
talent not recognized
Percent
9.8%
27%
61%
157%
Nurrter
66
3
16
47
other (please specify)
Percent
55%
0.0%
11.4%
23%
Number
37
0
30
7
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
95. If yes, how?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
newspaper articles
Percent
43.3%
64.5%
48.1%
313%
Nurrber
292
71
127
94
magazine articles
Percent
33.8%
50.0%
503%
130%
Number
228
55
134
39
television coverage
Percent
26.0%
413%
28.0%
183%
Number
175
46
74
55
radio coverage
Percent
43.9%
555%
59.8%
25.7%
Nurrber
296
61
158
77
record with the major record label
Percent
175%
282%
23.9%
8.0%
Nurrber
118
31
63
24
perform widely
Percent
623%
70.9%
753%
47.3%
Number
420
78
200
142
other (please specify)
Percent
17.4%
36%
27.7%
133%
Nurrber
117
4
73
40
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
122
96. How satisfied are you with your music at this point?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
very satisfied
Percent
161%
194%
163%
143%
NLmber
102
21
39
42
satisfied
Percent
57.0%
593%
56.7%
563%
Mrrber
360
64
133
160
dissatisfied
Percent
242%
194%
242%
261%
Njrber
153
21
58
74
very dissatisfied
Percent
2.7%
19%
29%
23%
Nurrber
17
2
7
8
nisshg
42
2
24
16
total # of respondents who answered this question
632
108
240
284
97. Do you feel that up to this point your career aspirations have been realized?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
153%
23.1%
17.1%
109%
Mrrber
97
25
41
31
9omewhatyes
Percent
372%
48.1%
283%
40.5%
Mrrber
235
52
68
115
somewhat no
Percent
103%
176%
75%
109%
Nurrber
68
19
18
31
I no
Percent
36.7%
11.1%
47.1%
37.7%
Mrrber
232
12
113
107
nissrg
42
2
24
16
total # of respondents who answered this question
632
108
240
284
98. If no, what is the major area that has not been fulfilled according to your expectations?
99. Have you applied for a grant or fellowship as a jazz or aspiring jazz musician?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
316%
121%
56.9%
163%
Mrrber
207
13
148
46
no
Percent
682%
87.9%
43.1%
83.7%
Mrrber
443
94
112
237
nissrig
24
3
4
17
total # of respondents who answered this
question
650
107
260
283
123
100. How much did you receive in 2000 before taxes in each of the following areas?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
music-related grants
t
a $0- $5,000
Percent
94.8%
932%
93.7%
952%
Number
452
55
192
205
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
15%
00%
20%
1.4%
Number
7
0
4
3
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
21%
3.4%
29%
09%
Mrrfaer
10
2
6
2
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
15%
3.4%
15%
09%
Number
7
2
3
2
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
0O%
00%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
02%
00%
0.0%
05%
Number
1
0
0
1
rnsai
3,412
4,195
3,549
3,063
nnjai
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
music-related fellowships
a $0- $5,000
Percent
96.7%
94.5%
95.9%
961%
Number
441
52
187
202
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
1.1%
00%
26%
00%
Number
5
0
5
0
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
15%
36%
10%
15%
Number
7
2
2
3
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
0.7%
18%
05%
05%
Number
3
1
1
1
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
Oj0%
00%
Q0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
0j0P/o
00%
0.0%
00%
Mrrber
0
0
0
0
rrean
3,015
3,682
2,952
2,888
medan
2,500
2,500
2500
2,500
music royalties/residuals
a $0- $5,000
Percent
96.0%
94.0%
95.9%
96.6%
Nurrber
453
63
189
201
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
28%
60%
20%
2.4%
Number
13
4
4
5
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
1.1%
00%
15%
10%
Mirber
5
0
3
2
124
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
02%
0.0%
05%
00%
Number
1
0
1
0
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
00%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
00%
0.0%
00%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
rren
2871
2,799
3,008
2,764
medan
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
public assistance (welfare)
a $0- $5,000
Percent
98.0%
100.0%
97.4%
98.0%
Number
437
53
186
198
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
1ff/o
0O%
21%
20%
Number
8
0
4
4
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
02%
0.0%
05%
00%
Number
1
0
1
0
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
0.0%
00%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
00%
00%
00%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
0.0%
00%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
rren
2,623
2,500
2,683
2,599
rrecfen
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
unemployment benefits
a $0- $5,000
Percent
993%
961%
995%
995%
Number
446
53
191
202
b $5,001 -$10,000
Percent
0.4%
19%
05%
05%
Number
2
1
1
1
c$1 0,001 -$25,000
Percent
02%
00%
0.0%
00%
Number
1
0
0
0
d $25,001 -$50,000
Percent
00%
00%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
e $50,001 -$75,000
Percent
00%
00%
0.0%
00%
Number
0
0
0
0
f over $75,000
Percent
00%
0O%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
man
2,556
2,593
2,526
2,525
madai
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
125
101. If you received grants or fellowships as a jazz or aspiring musician, from what sources did you receive
them?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
1 never received
Percent
365%
415%
20.1%
49.0%
Number
246
46
53
147
National Endowment for the Arts
Percent
92%
18%
17.4%
4.7%
Number
62
2
46
14
other federal agency (specify agency)
Percent
10>/o
00%
15%
10%
Mirber
7
0
4
3
regional agency (specify agency)
Percent
1£P/o
00%
1.1%
13%
Nirber
7
0
3
4
state agency (specify agency)
Percent
4.3%
18%
61%
37%
Number
29
2
16
11
local agency (specify agency)
Percent
27%
09%
4.5%
1.7%
Nurter
18
1
12
5
foundation (specify foundation)
Percent
33%
00%
53%
27%
Number
22
0
14
8
educational institution (specify
institution^
Percent
7.7%
73%
11.7%
4.3%
Number
52
8
3)
13
corporate sponsor (specify sponsor)
Percent
10%
00%
19%
0.7%
Number
7
0
5
2
other
Percent
73%
09%
167%
13%
Number
49
1
44
4
rrisshg
428
64
211
153
total # of respondents who answered this
question (including refusals & dont knows)
674
110
264
300
102. 1 am going to read a list of income ranges. Please let me know when I get to the category that describes
your total income from work as musician from all sources for 2000 before taxes.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
$0-$500
Percent
133%
19%
79%
24.1%
Number
85
2
20
63
$501 -$3000
Percent
160%
58%
123%
235%
Number
99
6
31
62
$3001 -$7000
Percent
139%
29%
142%
180%
Number
86
3
36
47
$7001 -$12,000
Percent
130%
136%
150%
107%
Number
80
14
38
28
126
$12,001 -$20,000
Percent
14.7%
252%
17.4%
80%
Numbe:
91
26
44
21
$20,001 -$40,000
Percent
198%
40.8%
225%
• 88%
Number
122
42
57
23
$40,001 -$60,000
Percent
55%
78%
7.1%
31%
Number
34
8
18
8
$60,001 -$80,000
Percent
32%
19%
36%
3.4%
Number
20
2
9
9
$80,001 -$100,000
Percent
00%
00P/o
00%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
more than $100,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Nurber
0
0
0
0
rrem
$15,560
$23,059
$17,962
$10273
nail i
$9,501
$30,001
$16,001
$5,001
57
7
11
39
mssrg
total # of respondents who answered this question
617
103
253
261
103. Did this money cover your music-related costs in 2000?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
yes
Percent
625%
89.1%
653%
48.6%
Number
373
90
164
119
no
Percent
375%
109%
34.7%
51.4%
Njrber
224
11
87
126
rrissra
77
9
13
55
total # of respondents who answered this
question
597
101
251
245
104. What percentage of this income came from your work as a jazz musician in 2000?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
man
70
78
81
56
rredari
90
98
100
50
std.dev.
35
30
30
38
rrrxe
100
100
100
100
vaid cases
587
104
247
236
mssrtj
87
6
17
64
127
105. 1 am going to read a list of income ranges. Please let me know when I get to the category that describes
your total income as an individual from all sources in 2000 before taxes including your
work as a musician.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
$0- $500
Percent
7.7%
20%
4.9%
125%
Number
46
2
12
32
$501 -$3000
Percent
117%
50%
123%
137%
NLrrber
70
5
30
35
$3001- $7000
Percent
252%
29.0%
23.4%
25.5%
Number
151
29
57
65
$7001 -$12,000
Percent
20.0%
26.0%
20.9%
163%
Number
120
26
51
43
$12,001 -$20,000
Percent
127%
170%
16.4%
75%
Number
76
V
40
19
$20,001 -$40,000
Percent
95%
110%
9.4%
9.0%
Number
57
11
23
23
$40,001 -$60,000
Percent
62%
6.0%
53%
7.1%
Number
37
6
13
18
$60,001 -$80,000
Percent
70%
4.0%
7.4%
75%
Number
42
4
18
20
$80,001 -$100,000
Percent
00%
0.0%
00%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
more than $100,000
Percent
00%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Nurber
0
0
0
0
mEm
$16269
$15,833
$16,660
$16,066
rredan
$9,501
$9,501
$9,501
$5,001
nisshg
75
10
20
45
total # of respondents who answered this question
599
100
244
255
106. I am going to read a list of income ranges. Please let me know when I get to the category that describes
your total household gross income in 2000 before taxes.
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
$0- $500
Percent
4.3%
21%
5.0%
4.6%
Number
25
2
12
11
$501- $3000
Percent
83%
21%
88%
10.4%
Number
48
2
2
25
$3001 -$7000
Percent
225%
213%
213%
24.1%
Number
130
21
51
58
$7001 -$12,000
Percent
151%
17.7%
133%
158%
Number
87
17
32
38
128
$12,001 -$20,000
Percent
133%
198%
146%
95%
Number
77
19
35
23
$20,001 -$40,000
Percent
108%
135%
88%
• 112%
Number
61
13
21
27
$40,001 -$60,000
Percent
80%
125%
75%
6.6%
Number
46
12
18
16
$60,001- $80,000
Percent
179%
104%
20.8%
178%
Number
103
10
50
43
$80,001 -$100,000
Percent
00%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
more than $100,000
Percent
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0O%
Number
0
0
0
0
rreai
$24,504
$23,589
$25,787
$23,592
medan
$9,501
$16,001
$16,001
$9,501
mssrg
97
14
24
59
total # of respondents who answered this question
577
96
240
241
107. What is the number of dependents you and your household are responsible for (include yourself
as one)?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
1 (self only)
Percent
64.2%
510%
66.3%
67.4%
Number
395
52
169
174
2
Percent
202%
29.4%
20.8%
159%
Number
124
30
53
41
3-4
Percent
143%
178%
118%
155%
Number
88
18
30
40
5-7
Percent
1.1%
20%
08%
12%
Number
7
2
2
3
8-10
Percent
0O%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Number
0
0
0
0
morethanlO
Percent
02%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
Number
1
0
1
0
mean
4
4
1
7
medan
4
4
1
5
mssrg
59
8
9
42
total # of respondents who answered this question
615
102
255
258
129
108. What is your current marital status?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
single, never married
Percent
41 fl%
31 B%
36.0%
51.1%
Number
266
35
90
141
living with significant other
Percent
75%
6.4%
105%
65%
Number
50
7
25
18
married
Percent
25.6%
355%
252%
221%
Number
163
39
63
61
separated
Percent
35%
36%
4.4%
25%
Number
22
4
11
7
divorced
Percent
178%
213%
212%
135%
Number
113
24
53
36
widowed
Percent
05%
05%
12%
0.7%
Number
6
1
3
2
living with parents and/or siblings
Percent
1.7%
05%
05%
33%
Number
11
0
2
9
other
Percent
03%
0.0%
12%
0.7%
Number
5
0
3
2
mfeshg
38
0
14
24
total # of respondents who answered this question
636
110
250
276
109. Have you played jazz for money during the last 12 months?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
yes
Percent
921%
1005%
965%
855%
Number
563
109
218
236
rc>
Percent
75%
05%
35%
145%
Number
48
0
8
40
63
1
38
24
mssrtj
total # of respondents who answered this question
611
0
226
276
110. If you currently play with a group, how many different groups do you play with?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
none
Percent
57%
6.4%
8.4%
95%
Number
53
7
20
26
one
Percent
116%
a7%
13.4%
133%
Number
71
4
32
35
two
Percent
165%
6.4%
175%
185%
Number
98
7
42
49
three
Percent
22.4%
193%
255%
20.9%
130
Nurrber
137
21
61
55
four or more
Percent
412%
642%
35.1%
375%
Nurber
252
70
84
98
rrissrxj
63
1
25
37
total # of respondents who answered this question
611
109
239
263
111. How large is each, including yourself?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San Francisco
first group
mean
6
6
5
6
medan
4
5
4
4
std. dev.
6
8
4
6
mxe
4
4
4
4
vaid cases
546
98
226
222
nrtssrg
128
12
38
78
secondgroup
rrem
6
6
6
7
medan
4
5
4
5
std. dev.
6
3
4
7
mxe
4
4
4
4
vaid cases
470
90
189
191
rrissrig
204
20
75
109
third group
man
6
5
6
7
medan
5
5
4
5
std. dev.
7
3
4
10
mxe
4
5
4
4
vaBd cases
368
82
147
139
rrissrig
306
28
117
161
fourth group
maai
7
7
7
8
medan
5
6
5
5
std. dev.
7
5
5
9
mxe
4
4
4
4
vafd cases
233
59
85
89
mssrg
441
51
179
211
112. In your opinion, what are the three most important qualities someone needs to pursue a career in jazz?
Choice 1
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
business savvy
Percent
108%
7.1%
4.8%
163%
Number
62
7
10
45
connections
Percent
75%
61%
05%
135%
Nurber
43
6
1
36
131
curiosity
Percent
33%
30%
05%
50%
Number
19
3
1
15
energy
Percent
35%
51%
05%
52%
Mrrber
20
5
1
14
intelligence
Percent
31%
51%
00%
4.9%
Number
18
5
0
13
bck
Percent
03%
10%
0.0%
0.4%
Number
2
1
0
1
perception
Percent
1.4%
10%
00%
20%
Number
8
1
0
7
performing ability
Percent
122%
192%
4.8%
15.4%
Number
70
19
10
41
physical stamina
Percent
1.4%
00%
1.4%
19%
Number
8
0
3
5
talent
Percent
222%
38.4%
110%
25.1%
Njrber
128
38
23
67
technique
Percent
10%
20%
05%
1.1%
Number
6
2
1
3
other
Percent
333%
121%
762%
75%
Nurber
192
12
160
20
98
11
54
33
msshg
total # of respondents who answered this question
576
99
210
267
Choice 2
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
busresssaw/
Percent
7.7%
121%
92%
4.9%
Number
42
12
17
13
connections
Percent
91%
121%
1.1%
137%
Number
50
12
2
36
curiosity
Percent
20%
10%
1B%
27%
Nurber
11
1
3
7
energy
Percent
57%
30%
1.1%
99%
NUrber
31
3
2
26
intelligence
Percent
7.1%
101%
10%
93%
Number
39
10
3
26
kxk
Percent
4.4%
30%
1.1%
72%
Number
24
3
2
19
perception
Percent
22%
4.0%
05%
27%
Nurber
12
4
1
7
performing ability
Percent
14.3%
253%
4.3%
17.1%
Number
78
25
8
45
132
physical stamina
Percent
1ff/o
0.0%
1.1%
27%
Number
9
0
2
7
talent
Percent
157%
212%
; 70%
193%
Number
86
21
13
52
technique
Percent
4.4%
51%
05%
63%
Number
24
5
1
18
other
Percent
25.8%
3.0%
703%
27%
Number
141
3
131
7
missing
127
11
79
37
total # of respondents who answered this question
547
99
185
263
Choice 3
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
business sawy
Percent
113%
124%
122%
10.4%
Number
57
12
18
27
connections
Percent
72%
4.1%
4.1%
100%
Number
36
4
6
26
curiosity
Percent
2.4%
21%
1.4%
31%
Number
12
2
2
8
energy
Percent
53%
82%
0.7%
7.7%
Number
29
8
1
20
intelligence
Percent
5.0%
72%
0.7%
6.6%
Number
25
7
1
17
luck
Percent
7.6%
103%
4.8%
81%
Number
38
10
7
21
perception
Percent
3.4%
93%
0.0%
31%
Number
17
9
0
8
performing ability
Percent
113%
165%
5.4%
127%
Number
57
16
8
33
physical stamina
Percent
26%
4.1%
0.0%
35%
Number
13
4
0
9
talent
Percent
155%
155%
109%
181%
Number
78
15
0
47
technique
Percent
5.6%
72%
0.0%
ai%
Number
28
7
16
2I
other
Percent
225%
31%
59.9%
85%
Number
113
3
88
22
nisshg
171
13
117
41
total # of respondents who answered this question
503
97
147
259
133
113. What are your three most important goals for the next five years as a musician?
Choice 1
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
develop artistic competence
Percent
11854,
119%
15%
193%
Mrrber
67
12
3
52
get a record deal
Percent
103%
55%
175%
63%
Mrrber
60
6
36
18
lead my own groups
Percent
ai%
75%
97%
91%
Mrrber
52
8
20
24
make a King from my music
Percent
112%
14.9%
08%
133%
Mrrber
64
15
14
35
make money tan my muse
Percent
35%
30%
3.4%
33%
Mrrber
20
3
7
10
obtain critical reviews
Percent
05%
00%
00%
11%
Mrrber
3
0
0
3
parrjepate in major concerts
Percent
4.0%
ao%
58%
30%
Mrrber
23
3
12
8
play wfth well-known groups
Percent
23%
20%
2.4%
23%
Mrrber
13
2
5
6
reach higher level of artistic expression^
achievement
Percent
265%
46.5%
126%
30.4%
Mrrber
153
47
26
80
spend more trne on music
Percent
4.0%
35%
3.4%
4.9%
Mrrber
23
3
7
13
win recognrforVaward
Percent
12%
10%
25%
00%
Mrrber
7
1
6
0
other
Percent
145%
10%
34.0%
53%
Mrrber
85
1
70
14
msshg
104
9
58
37
total # of respondents who answered this question
570
101
206
263
Choice 2
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
develop artistic competence
Percent
62%
7.1%
28%
81%
Mrrber
33
7
5
21
get a record deal
Percent
71%
51%
124%
43%
Mrrber
38
5
22
11
lead my own groups
Percent
92%
101%
62%
105%
Mmber
49
10
11
28
make a Ktig from my music
Percent
1Q7%
11.1%
8.4%
120%
Mrrber
57
-n
15
31
make money tan my muse
Percent
4.9%
30%
39%
62%
134
Nurber
26
3
7
16
obtain critical reviews
Percent
21%
4.0%
1.7%
18%
Number
11
4
3
4
participate in major concerts
Percent
6.9%
121%
5.6%
5B%
Number
37
12
10
15
play with well-known groups
Percent
7.9%
9.1%
5.6%
83%
Number
42
9
10
23
reach higher level of artistic
expressbrVachievement
Percent
19.1%
182%
8.4%
26.7%
Number
102
18
15
69
spend more time on music
Percent
93%
162%
1.1%
124%
Number
50
16
2
32
win recognition/award
Percent
2B%
20%
4.5%
19%
Number
15
2
8
5
other
Percent
14.0%
20%
393%
12%
Number
75
2
70
3
missrig
139
11
86
42
total # of respondents who answered this question
535
99
178
258
Choice 3
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
develop artistic competence
Percent
4.3%
63%
1.4%
53%
Number
21
6
2
13
get a record deal
Percent
63%
8.4%
7.6%
5.7%
Number
33
8
11
14
lead my own groups
Percent
72%
63%
9.7%
61%
Number
35
6
14
15
make a living from my muse
Percent
8.7%
8.4%
7.6%
9.4%
Number
42
8
11
23
make money from my muse
Percent
60%
63%
5.6%
61%
Number
29
6
8
15
obtain critical reviews
Percent
08%
21%
0.0%
03%
Number
4
2
0
2
participate in major concerts
Percent
87%
63%
132%
69%
Number
42
6
19
17
play with well-known groups
Percent
89%
126%
5.6%
9.4%
Number
43
12
8
23
reach higher level of artistic
expressbrVachievernent
Percent
136%
116%
69%
18.4%
Number
66
11
10
45
spend more frne on muse
Percent
13.4%
137%
69%
17.1%
Number
65
13
10
42
win recognition/award
Percent
79%
105%
35%
9.4%
135
Number
38
10
5
23
other
Percent
136%
74%
313%
53%
Number
66
7
46
13
rrissna,
190
15
120
55
total # of respondents who answered this question
484
95
144
245
114. What is your gender?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
mde
Percent
802%
83.6%
73.7%
84.5%
Number
534
92
191
251
female
Percent
193%
164%
263%
155%
Number
132
18
68
45
8
0
5
3
msshg
total # of respondents who answered this question
666
110
259
297
115. What is your race?
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
White
Percent
59.8%
731%
54.8%
59.4%
Number
389
79
142
168
Black or African American
Percent
27.8%
231%
328%
251%
Number
181
25
85
71
Hispanic or Latino
Percent
26%
0.0%
31%
32%
Number
17
0
8
9
American Indian or Alaska Native
Percent
22%
0.0%
23%
28%
Number
14
0
6
8
Asian
Percent
26%
28%
12%
33%
Number
17
3
3
11
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
o
0
0
0
other
4.9%
03%
5.8%
5.7%
32
1
15
16
msshg
24
2
5
17
total # of respondents who answered this question
650
108
259
283
136
Selection Criteria
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Al Do you consider yourself a jazz musician?
Yes
Percent
94.7%
973%
962%
923%
Nurrber
638
107
254
277
N>
Percent
53%
27%
3B%
7.7%
Number
36
3
10
23
Total
674
110
264
300
A2 Did you earn more than 50 percent of your personal income in the last six months as a jazz musician or in jazz related act activities?
Yes
Percent
53.3%
918%
57.6%
35.3%
Nuxber
359
101
152
106
N>
Percent
46.7%
82%
42.4%
64.7%
Nurrber
315
9
112
194
Total
674
110
264
300
A3 Have you been engaged in your art/jazz more than 50 percent of the time during the last year?
Yes
Percent
47.8%
918%
186%
573%
NjTber
322
101
49
172
N>
Percent
522%
82%
81.4%
42.7%
Nurber
352
9
215
128
Total
674
110
264
300
A4 Have you performed in/with a jazz band at least 1 0 times in the last year?
Yes
Percent
527%
982%
17.4%
67.0%
Number
355
108
45
201
N)
Percent
47.3%
18%
826%
33.0%
Number
319
2
218
99
Total
674
110
264
300
A5 Have you performed with or without a jazz band for pay at least 1 0 times during the last year?
Yes
Percent
421%
94.5%
23%
58.0%
Nurber
284
104
6
174
N)
Percent
57.9%
55%
97.7%
42.0%
Number
390
6
258
126
Total
674
110
264
300
A6 Have you produced a documented body of work that is considered jazz?
Yes
Percent
45.5%
982%
102%
57.3%
Nurrber
307
108
27
172
N)
Percent
54.5%
18%
89.8%
42.7%
Number
367
2
237
128
Total
674
110
264
300
137
Network Questions — BI Who gave you the coupon?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
AjazzmusoanT
Percent
73.0%
613%,
701%
79.7%
Number
492
68
185
239
A current employer?
Percent
31%
91%
30%
19%
Mrrber
21
V
8
3
A former employer?
Percent
19b
6.4%
08%
03%
NuTber
10
7
2
1
A potential employer?
Percent
03%
0.0%
09%
0.7%
Number
2
0
0
2
Your husband or wife?
Percent
10%
27%
1.1%
03%
Mrrter
7
3
3
1
Your significant other?
Percent
03%
09%
09%
03%
Number
2
'
0
1
A friend?
Percent
193%
327%
19.7%
14.0%
Number
130
36
52
42
An acquaintance?
Percent
19%
ouqp/o
39%
1.7%
Number
13
— 0
8
5
A stranger?
Percent
19b
00%
00%
33%
Number
10
0
0
10
Other
Percent
21%
ac%
27%
23%
Number
14
0
7
7
N A - respondent did not have a coupon
Percent
28=o
982%
962%
97.9%
Number
19
108
254
291
DK refused
Percent
00%
0.0%
09%
09%
Numbs-
0
0
o
0
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300
Age by groups
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
18-24
Percent
81%
7.4%
23%
145%
Number
50
8
6
35
25-34
Percent
26.6%
333%
202%
305%
Number
165
36
53
76
35-44
Percent
19.4%
222%
22.4%
14.9%
Number
120
24
59
37
45-54
Percent
25.6%
23,1%
285%
23.7%
Mrrber
159
25
75
59
55-64
Percent
13.4%
7.4%
186%
10.4%
Number
83
8
49
26
65+
Percent
69%
65%
80=0
69%
138
Number
43
7
21
15
missing
54
2
1
51
total # of respondents who answered this question
620
108
263
249
Age by generations
Total
New
Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Gen Y (18-23)
Percent
63%
4.6%
19%
116%
Mrrber
39
5
5
29
Gen X (24-36)
Percent
30.6%
361%
24.3%
34.9%
Number
190
39
64
87
Boomerang (3742)
Percent
127%
157%
137%
10.4%
Number
79
17
36
26
Boomers (43-56)
Percent
337%
29.6%
38.4%
305%
Number
209
32
101
76
Silent Generation (57-72)
Percent
14.0%
11.1%
183%
108%
Number
87
12
48
27
New Deal (73+)
Percent
26%
28%
3.4%
16%
Number
16
3
9
4
misspg
54
2
1
51
total # of respondents who answered this question
620
108
263
249
How many people refused to take a coupon?
Total
New Orleans
New York
San
Francisco
Nib
Percent
97.9%
100.0%
94.7%
100£%
Number
660
110
250
300
More than one
Percent
21%
0jC%
53%
00%
Number
14
0
14
0
total # of respondents who answered this question
674
110
264
300-
139
Appendix D
Using the Capture-Recapture Method to Estimate
the Number of Jazz Musicians
The capture-recapture method is used to estimate
the number of jazz artists by comparing the overlap
between the union and RDS-identified jazz artists.
Specifically, in order to calculate the universe of jazz
musicians in each city, the number of jazz artists
identified in the union study (capture) is divided by
the proportion of jazz artists who are determined to
be union members based on the RDS survey results
(recapture). The steps taken to estimate the number
of jazz musicians in each metro area are described
below:
New York
Capture:
The proportion of New York area musician union
members who identified themselves as jazz
musicians (in response to the union member
survey) is .701 (415/592).
The number of musician union members in the
New York metropolitan area, according to union
records, is 10,499.
Therefore, the estimated number of union jazz
musicians is 7,360 (10,499 x .701).
Recapture:
The proportion of all New York jazz musicians who
are union members is estimated based on the RDS
sample using the following formula for Pa, the
proportion of union members:
Pa = (Sba * Nb)/(Sba * Nb + Sab * Na)
Na is the mean network size of union members =
298.2
Nb is the mean network size of nonunion members
= 175.2
Sab is the proportion of nonunion members
recruited by union members = .512
Sba is the proportion of union members recruited
by nonunion members = .252
Which yields Pa = .22301
Therefore, based on the estimate of both the number
of New York union jazz musicians (7,360) and the
estimate of the portion of all New York jazz
musicians who are union members (.223), the size
of the New York jazz musician universe is estimated
using the following formula:
7,360/.223 = 33,003
San Francisco
Capture:
The proportion of San Francisco area musician
union members who identified themselves as jazz
musicians (in response to the union member
survey) is .681.
The number of musician union members in the San
Francisco metropolitan area, according to union
records is 2,217.
Therefore, the estimated number of union jazz
musicians is 1,509 (2,217 x .681).
Recapture:
The proportion of all San Francisco jazz musicians
who are union members is estimated based on the
RDS sample using the following formula for Pa, the
proportion of union members:
Pa = (Sba * Nb)/(Sba * Nb + Sab * Na)
Pa = .0806
Therefore, based on the estimate of both the number
of San Francisco union jazz musicians (1,509) and
the estimate of the portion of all San Francisco jazz
musicians who are union members (.0806), the size
of the San Francisco jazz musician universe is
estimated using the following formula:
l,509/.0806 = 18,733
New Orleans
Capture:
The proportion of New Orleans area musician
union members who identified themselves as jazz
musicians (in response to the union member
survey) is .873.
140
The number of musician union members in the
New Orleans metropolitan area, according to union
records, is 1,014.
Therefore, the estimated number of union jazz
musicians is 885 (1,014 x .873).
Recapture:
The proportion of all New Orleans jazz musicians
who are union members is estimated based on the
RDS sample as .514. *
Therefore, based on the estimate of both the number
of New Orleans union jazz musicians (885) and the
estimate of the portion of all New Orleans jazz
musicians who are union members (.514), the size
of the New Orleans jazz musician universe is
estimated using the following formula:
885/.514 =1,723
The number of documented referrals in New
Orleans was too small for a meaningful analysis of
referral patterns. Therefore, it was not possible to
use the equation to compute the proportion of
union members in New Orleans (i.e., no data for
the terms Sab and Sba). Therefore, the proportion
of union members in the RDS sample (i.e., .514)
was used instead.
141
Appendix E. Resource Directory
FOUNDATIONS
National
Arkansas Jazz Heritage Foundation
P.O. Box 251187
Little Rock, AR 72225-1187
(P) 501.663.5264 (F) 501.225.2133
info@arjazz.org
www.arjazz.org
Arts Alive Foundation
P.O. Box 1746
Beverly Hills, CA 90213-1746
(P) 310.276.5951
Beyond Baroque Foundation
681 Venice Blvd.
P.O. Box 806
Venice, CA 90291
(P) 213.822.3006
www.beyondbaroque.org
Butch Berman Charitable Music Foundation
4500 Kirkwood Drive
Lincoln, NE 68516
(P) 402.476.3112 (F) 402.483.6939
Centrum Foundation
P.O. Box 1158
Port Townsend, WA 98368
(P) 360.385.3102 (F) 360.385.2470
Grammy Foundation
3402 Pico Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(P) 310.392.3777
grammyfoundation@grammy.com
www.grammy.com/academy/foundation/index.html
Herb Alpert Foundation
1414 Sixth St.
Santa Monica, CA 90401
(P) 310.393.8500
Jazz Heritage Foundation
P.O. Box 19070
Los Angeles, CA 90019
(P) 213.649.2722
Music For Hope Foundation
1351 S. Riverview
Gardenville, NV 89410
775.265.4372 (F) 775.265.4512
www.musicforhope.org
Mid Atlantic Arts Foundation
22 Light St., Suite 330
Baltimore, MD 21202
410.539.6656 (F) 410.837.5517
info@midadanticarts.org
www. midatlanticarts. org
National Foundation for Advancement In The Arts
800.970.ARTS
www.ARTSawards.org
National Music Foundation
245 7 A South Hiawassee Rd., Suite 244
Orlando, FL 32835
(P) 1.800.USA.MUSIC
info@usamusic.org
www.nmc.org
New England Foundation For The Arts
266 Summer St. 2nd FL
Boston, MA 02210-1216
617.951.0010 (F) 617.951.0016
www.neta.org
The Vail Jazz Foundation, Inc.
P.O. Box 3035
Vail,. CO 81658
(P) 970.479.6146 (F) 970.477.0866
vjf@vailjazz.org
www.vailjazz.org
Detroit
James Tatum Foundation for the Arts
PO Box 32240
Detroit, MI 48232
(P) 313.255.9015
jtfa@detroit.net
142
New Orleans
New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Foundation
1205 N. Rampart St.
New Orleans, LA 70116
(P) 504.522.4786
www.nojhf.org
New York
Jazz Foundation of America
322 W. 48th Street
New York, NY 10036
(P) 800.532.5267/ 212.245.3999
jazzfoundation@rcn.com
www.jazzfoundation.org
Music For Youth Foundation
130 E. 59th Street, Suite 844
New York, NY 10022
(P) 212.836.1320 (F) 212.836.1820
www.musicforyouth.org
Music Performance Trust Funds
MPTF 1501 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(P) 212.391.3950
www.mptf.org
VH1 Save The Music Foundation
1515 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(P) 212.846.5364 (F) 212.846.1827
laurie.schopp@vh 1 staff.com
www.vhl.com
ASSOCIATIONS
National
American Federation of Jazz Societies
P.O. Box 84063
Phoenix, AZ 85071-4063
info@jazzfederation.com
www. j azzfederation. com
American Composers Alliance
73 Spring St. Rm. 505
New York, NY 10023
(P) 212.362.8900 (F) 212.925.6798
info@composers.com
www.composers.com
American Pianists Association
4600 Sunset Ave.
Indianapolis, IN 46208
(P) 317.940.9945 (F) 317.940.9010
apainfo@americanpianists.org
www.americanpianists.org
Boston Jazz Society
P.O. Box 178
Boston, MA 02134
(P) 617.445.2811 (F) 617.445.2811
Cultural Alliance Of Greater Washington
410 Eighth St., NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20004
(P) 202.638.2406
Fort Worth Jazz Society
P.O. Box 14533
Fort Worth, TX 76 1 1 9-3 1 20
Friends of the Arts
P.O. Box 702
Locust Valley, NY 11560
(P) 516.922.0061 (F) 516.922.0770
artsfriend@aol.com
International Association for Jazz Education
2803 Claflin Road, P.O. Box 724
Manhattan, KS 66505-0724
785.776.8744 (F) 785.776.6190
www.iaje.org
Jazz Club of Sarasota, Inc.
330 S. Pineapple Ave., Ste. 1 1 1
Sarasota, FL 34236
(P) 813.366.1552
mail@j azzclubsarasota. com
www.jazzclubsarasota.com
Meet the Composer
2112 Broadway, Suite 505
New York, NY 10023
(P) 212.787.3601 (F) 212.787.3745
lklein@meetthecomposer.org
www.meetthecomposer.org
Mid American Arts Alliance
912 Baltimore Ave., Suite 700
Kansas City, MO 64105
816.421.1388 (F) 816.421.3918
143
National Association Of Composers
P.O. Box 49652
Barrington Station
Los Angeles, CA 90049
(P) 310.541.8213 (F) 310.373.3244
nacusa@music-usa.org
www.music-usa.org/nacusa
National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences
(NAPAS)
3402 Pico Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(P) 310.392.3777 (F) 310.392.9262
National Association of School Music Dealers
(NASMD)
4020 McEwen, Ste. 105
Dallas, TX 75244-5019
National Jazz Service Organization
P.O. Box 50152
Washington, DC 20004-0152
Pennsylvania Performing Arts On Tour
1811 Chestnut Street, Suite 301
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(P) 215.496.9424 (F) 215.496.9585
Potomac River Jazz Club
5537 Belle Pond Dr.
Centreville, VA 22020
(P) 703.698.PRJC
prjcweb@prjc.org
www.prjc.org
Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)
1330 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
202.775.0101 (F) 202.775.7253
www.riaa.com
Sedona Jazz on the Rocks
P.O. Box 889
Sedona, AZ 86339-0089
(P) 520.282.1985
lori@sedonajazz.com
www.sedonajazz.com
Southern Arts Federation
181 14th St., Ste. 400
Atlanta, GA 30309-7603
(P) 404.874.7244 (F) 404.873.2148
josephg@southarts.org
www.southarts.org
Tucson Jazz Society
P.O. Box 1069
Tucson, AZ 85702-1069
(P) 520.903.1265 (F) 520.903.1266
tjsmail@tucsonjazz.org
www.tucsonjazz.org
Western Jazz Presenters Network
P.O. Box 3162
LaJolla, CA 92038
(P) 858.454.5872
World Music Association
P.O. Box 37725
Honolulu, HI 96837
(P) 808.941.9974 (F) 808.943.0224
Detroit
Southeastern Michigan Jazz Association
2385 W Huron River Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48103-2241
(P) 734.662.8514
semja@semja.org
www.semja.org
New Orleans
Jazz Centennial Celebration
628 Frenchman St.
New Orleans, LA 701 16
(P) 504.835.5277
jazzcentennial@aol.com
www.louisianamusic.org
Louisiana Division of the Arts
P.O. Box 44247
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
225.342.8180 (F) 225.342.8173
arts@crt.state.la.us
www.crt.state.la.us/arts
New York
American Society of Composers, Authors &
Publishers (ASCAP)
ASCAP Building
One Lincoln Plaza
New York, NY 10023
(P) 212.621.6000/ 800.95.ASCAP
info@ascap.com
www.ascap.com
144
Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI)
320 W. 57th Street
New York, NY 10019
(P) 212.586.2000 (F) 212.262.2824
jazz@bmi.com
http://bmi.com
Chamber Music America
305 Seventh Ave., 5th Floor
New York, NY 10001-6008
(P) 212.242.2022
info@chamber-music.org
www.chamber-music.org
International Women in Jazz
C.S. 9030
Hicksville, NY 11802-9030
www.internationalwomeninjazz.com
San Francisco
San Jose Jazz Society
P.O. Box 1770
San Jose, CA 95109-1770
(P) 408.288.7557 (F) 408.288.7598
jazzmaster@sanjosejazz.org
www.sanjosejazz.org
SUPPORT SERVICE
ORGANIZATIONS
National
ACIS/ Encore Tours
19 Bay State Road
Boston, MA 02215
(P) 1.877.460.3801 (F) 1.617.236.8623
encoretours@acis.com
www.encoretours.com
Services: Customizing tours for performing artists
Acoustics First
2247 Tomlyn Street
Richmond, VA 23230-3334
(P) 888.765.2900 (F) 804.342.1107
www.acousticsfirst.com
Services: Noise control solutions
American Music Therapy Association
8455 Colesville Road, Suite 1000
Silver Spring, MD 20910
(P) 301.589.3300 (F) 301.589.5175
www.musictherapy.org
Services: Application of music therapy for medical
use
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
Medical Center for the Performing Arts
9500 Euclid Ave.
Cleveland, OH 44106
(P) 216.444.3903
www.clevelandclinic.org
Services: Performing Arts Medicine
Colorado Lawyers for the Arts
P.O. Box 48148
Denver, CO 80204
(P) 303.722.7994
cola@artstozoo.org
Services: Legal Representation
Georgia Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts
Bureau of Cultural Affairs
675 Ponce de Leon Ave.
Atlanta, GA 30308
(P) 404.873.3911
www.gvla.org
International Arts Medicine Association
19 S. 22nd St.
Philadelphia, PA 19103
http://members-aol.com/iamoaorg
Services: Medical Services
Lawyers for the Creative Arts
213 W. Institute PL, Suite 401
Chicago, IL 60610
(P) 312.649.4111 (F) 312.944.2195
wrattner@law-arts.org
www.law-arts.org
Services: Legal Representation
Music Cares Foundation
3402 Pico Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(P) East: 1.877.303.6962
Central: 1.877.626.2748
West: 1.800.687.4227
www.grammy.com/academy/musiccares/index.html
Services: Emergency Relief Funds
145
National Center On Arts And Aging
National Council on the Aging
600 Maryland Ave., SW, West Wing 100
Washington DC 20024
(P) 202.479.1200
www.center-for-creative-aging.org
Services: Counseling, Publications
Ocean St. Lawyers for the Arts
P.O. Box 19
Saunderstown, RI 02874-0019
dspatt@artslaw.org
www.artslaw.org
Support Services Alliance (SSA)
P.O. Box 130
Schoharie, NY 12157
(P) 518.295.7966
comments@ssainfo.com
www.ssainfo.com
Services: Financial and Medical Services
Texas Accountants and Lawyers for the Arts
1540 Sul Ross
Houston, TX 77006
(P) 713.526.4876 (F) 713.526.1299
info@talarts.org
www.talarts.org
Services: Legal Representation and Accounting
Services
Washington Lawyers for the Arts
1634 Eleventh Ave.
Seattle, WA 98122
(P) 206.328.7053 (F) 206.568.3306
Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts
815 15th St. NW
Washington DC 20005
(F) 202.393.4444
legalservices@thewala.org
www.thewala.org
Services: Legal Representation
Detroit
Legal Aid 8c Defender Association Of Detroit
645 Griswold St., Suite 2400
Detroit, MI 48226-4201
(P) 313.964.4111 (F) 313.964.1932
www. mlan . net/ladal/
Services: Legal Services
New Orleans
Arts Council Of New Orleans
225 Baronne St. Suite 1712
New Orleans, LA 70112-1712
(P) 504.523.1465 (F) 504.529.2430
www.louisiana-arts.com
Services: Bookkeeping, Planning- Budgeting,
Financial Aid, Career Counseling
Louisiana Volunteer Lawyers For The Arts
1010 Common St., Suite 1500
New Orleans, LA 701 12
(P) 504.581.9444
Services: Legal Representation
New Orleans Speech and Hearing Organization
New Orleans Musicians Clinic
(P) 504.412.1111
www.nojhf.org
Services: Medical Services
New York
Doctors For Artists
105 W 78th St.
New York, NY 10024
(P) 212.496.5172
Services: Medical Services
Institute For The Performing Artist
Postgraduate Center For Mental Health
124 E. 28th St.
New York, NY 10016
(P) 212.689.7700 ext. 290, 291
Services: Mental Health Services
Miller Health Care Institute For Performing Artists
St. Luke's Roosevelt Hospital Center
425 W 59th St.
New York, NY 10019
(P) 212.523.6200
www.ifpam.org
Services: Medical Services, Performing Arts
Medicine
Musicians Emergency Fund, Inc.
16 E. 64th St.
New York, NY 10021
(P) 212.578.2450
Services: Emergency Funds
146
Pentacle
104 Franklin St.
New York, NY 10013-2910
(P) 212.226.2000
www.pentacle.org
Services: Financial Services
Performing Arts Center For Health
357 W. 55th St.
New York, NY 10019
(P) 212.247.1650
Services: Medical Services, Dental Services
Volunteer Lawyers For The Arts
1285 Ave. of the Americas, 3rd floor
New York, NY 10019
(P) 212.977.9273
Services: Legal Representation
San Francisco
California Lawyers For The Arts
Fort Mason Center
San Francisco, CA 94123
(P) 415.775.7200
cla@calawyersforthearts.org
www.calawyersforthearts.org
Services: Legal Representation, Contracts,
Copyright, Taxation
Kuumba Jazz Center
320-2 Cedar Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831.427.2227 (F) 831.427.3342
kuumbwa@cruzio.com
www. kuumb waj azz. com
Services: Presenting and Educational services
Rhythmic Concepts, Inc.
765 61st Street
Oakland, CA 94609
(P) 510.287.8880
147
148
For more information, please contact:
Research Center for Arts and Culture
Teachers College Columbia University
525 West 1 20 Street, Box 78
New York, NY 10027
Tel: (212)678-8184
Fax:(212)678-8084
Rcac@columbia.edu
or
National Endowment for the Arts
Research Division
1 1 00 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20506-0001
Tel: (202) 682-5400
www.arts.gov
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11