Re: new cd notes, arabic links

[Joshua Horowitz <horowitz...>]

Jacob Bloom wrote:
> While it's obvious that you can make more money by having more people dancing 
> and collecting from all of them at once, I don't understand how you can make 
> more money by making the dance longer.  You might be able to charge somewhat 
> more for playing the dance, but wouldn't it be more profitable to play two 
> short dances, and be paid a slightly smaller amount twice?<

Remember that Tantsgeld was the main salary of the musicians. The idea
of a fixed fee did not really exist (except for the badekns, the khupe
and the mitsve tants, which was usually included as one price). In fact,
musicians in eastern Europe often had to PAY to play. This structure may
have developed out of the fairs and congresses which took place
throughout Europe and which still exist today. Look at a book fair: You
pay to set up a stand. Once you're in, you get customers, but you pay
first for your stand. 

As far as splitting up a dance into 2 smaller ones: The system which
developed for the pricing of tantsgeld was based on 3 things: The
complexity of the music being requested, the length of the piece and its
rarity and/or popularity. Generally it was understood that a new
Quadrille which required prior rehearsal would command a higher price.
Likewise, the trades dances, as they were very specific. The klezmorim
were in some ways like living juke boxes: Each dance had its price. You
ordered the dance, the musicians told you the price and then it was
played. If a sher were ordered, you couldn't split up the dance into two
shers and collect twice. You played the Sher and if the next dance were
a Hora, that's what came next. The longer dances were more expensive,
but every dance was accounted for. Today you have suites arranged with
different tunes strung together and arranged. In prior centuries the
suites were probably constructed on the basis of the "waiting list."

In America, when the unions determined hourly wages and overtime
compensation, someone (Hankus, Henry?) said that the shers were long in
order to run into overtime, thereby generating more money. In eastern
Europe a price was simply stated, paid for and played. You can imagine
the arguments. If someone felt the dance was too short, what then?
Apparently confrontation was part and parcel to the game, and klezmorim
were used to that. Klezmer-loshn developed mainly out of the ability to
communicate about these things without being understood by the patrons.
And there were apparently also musical signals. I was asked once to play
a dance set with a Voivodina Gypsy ensemble in Gmunden many years ago.
The primas kept playing a 3-note motif whenever this one scantily clad
woman danced by, telling the ensemble to look over there... Other
motives were used to move left, right and say "behave, here comes the
boss." Hilarious group. They've been playing together since they were
kids, so those things just grow naturally. 

We forget sometimes how the musical economics of the modern world have
changed from these older structures. Good thing, too. Josh

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+