Should amateurs be ousted from voice-over sites?
Which orchestra was voted the best symphony orchestra in the world?
Eminent music critics asked themselves that same question at the end of 2008. They narrowed the list down to twenty. Last year, the renowned British music magazine “the Gramophone” published the results. The famous Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra ended up in second place. But who came first? The New York Philharmonic? The “Wiener Philharmoniker”? The Chicago Symphony?
AN EARFUL
I just spent a few hours on-line listening to YOU… my colleagues, my competition, my inspiration. It was both frightening and enlightening. As I was clicking away part of my day, I was amazed by a number of things, going from Pay-to-Play to Pay-to-Play. This is what I found:
1. It seems that anyone can sign up for a voice-over site these days, on three conditions:
a. you have to have a voice
b. you have to have a credit card
c. you have to have a computer
2. Is it just me, or do you share my impression that fifty percent of the advertised ‘talent’ can’t interpret a simple script?
3. The same group doesn’t seem to know the first thing about recording either
4. Amateurs who put themselves out there as voice-over pros, have a lot of guts, coupled with a deadly mix of unrealistic expectations, a total lack of experience and the funds to invest in a pipe dream
5. Foreign voices are often not as advertised. We still have Flemish speakers posing as Dutch talents, German speakers who are really from Austria, and Australians pretending to be Americans. Whatever happened to quality control?
6. Don LaFontaine is still alive, but he goes by many different names these days. Or is just every other American male voice-over talent riding on his coattails as they are trying to emulate the master?
PAYING THE PRICE
I must say that I don’t envy the voice-seekers who have to sift through over one hundred auditions to find the perfect voice for their low- or no-budget project. Then again: they asked for it, so we shouldn’t feel too sorry for them. It’s the price you pay when you’re asking every Tom, Dick or Harry to tape a custom demo for that cheap frying pan you’re trying to sell on late-night cable television. You often get what you pay for… frying pan, voice-over talent, it doesn’t make a difference.
What do I make of all this, you may ask? Well, here’s what I think (and feel free to disagree)…
Having a voice, a MasterCard, a laptop and a fantasy, doesn’t mean one should be allowed to join a professional site, no questions asked. We have websites for amateur dog breeders, amateur sports people, amateur musicians… why not design a site dedicated to amateur voice-over artists? I bet you’ll make a lot of money in the Odesk-market segment. It could be a kind of Bargain-Bodalgo.
Don’t get me wrong. Hobbies are wonderful things. My neighbor takes great pictures, but he wouldn’t dare to advertise himself as a professional photographer, nor should he. National Geographic would immediately show him the door. A friend of mine is not a bad trumpet player, but if he were to audition for a real job in the music industry, he would never make the first cut (and he knows it). Apparently, those stringent standards don’t seem to be in place in certain segments of our industry. Why not?
THE PROBLEM BEHIND THE PROBLEM
As long as some sites make most of their money through subscriptions, more members means more money. It’s a business model, not a charity. It’s a model that essentially values quantity over quality. The only way to go, is to grow. Let’s be honest. The voice-over market is pretty much saturated at this moment. You don’t need a degree in economics to realize that a greater supply in a weakened market can only mean one thing: tumbling prices.
The best way to speed this process up, is to have suppliers engage in a furious bidding war. Darwin would have named it: “Survival of the Cheapest”. Isn’t that exactly what is happening? And if you don’t believe me, why is it so hard to buy products that are not “made in China”? Before we know it, all of us will be replaced by IVONA speech synthesis technology. It’s almost as good as the real thing and I bet it’s a lot cheaper.
NO CURE NO PAY
If it were up to me, I’d rather have a performance-based No Cure No Pay-system in place. Out with the premium, platinum and titanium memberships. From now on, voice-over sites should get paid when I get paid. And the only way I get paid, is when voice-over sites do their job and connect me to reputable voice-seekers that are ready to pay reasonable rates. Perhaps that will make the Pay-to-Play’s more accountable and selective in terms of whom they’re willing to represent. Perhaps that’s the way to separate the wheat from the chaff. Let the dabblers do their thing. As long as they stay in their own league and stop messing with my market.
STANDARDS
Secondly, I’d like to see these websites publish and uphold certain professional standards, very much like SAVOA’s accreditation criteria. Accreditation comes from the word ‘credo’, which means “I believe”. Although related, ‘credo’ is not the same as ‘credit’. Our belief in someone’s talent should be based on professional principles, instead of on the spending limit on their credit card. So, let me ask you this:
1. In your experience, are you aware of any professional standards that are promoted and actively upheld by Pay-to-Play sites?
2. If the answer is “yes”, are you happy with these standards, and are they well-advertised and implemented?
3. If the answer to the 1st question is “no”, do you think that voice-over sites should adopt, publish, promote and maintain certain standards?
4. Should talents be denied membership, if they don’t meet certain basic criteria of professionalism?
5. Would it make sense to create a special category for amateur voice actors, or even a dedicated website? Or do dilettantes have no business being in our business?
6. What’s the best and most fair way to compensate P2P’s for their services? A subscription fee? A percentage of what you’re making for a particular job? A combination of both?
AND THE WINNER IS…
One question remains. For that, we return to the quest for the best symphony orchestra in the world. The votes have been counted. The sealed envelope is opened as the audience collectively holds their breath. And the winner is….
the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra from Amsterdam
Why? Because their standards are higher. After a grueling audition process, the Concertgebouw only hires the cream of the crop; well-trained people playing the very best instruments. No amateur fiddlers. The Gramophone’s editor James Inverne, put it this way:
“It is hardly possible any more to recognize particular orchestras by their individual sound. I think that with some orchestras, and the Berlin Philharmonic amongst them, that’s a bit of a worry. Whereas with the Concertgebouw you always know it’s the Concertgebouw. And I think that’s what has given them the edge amongst our critics.
Maybe it’s occasionally very slightly rougher than what the Berliner Philharmonic can produce, but it doesn’t matter, because they’re like a great actor bringing their own charisma and their own personality to every work, and always giving you the sense of the spirit of the work.”
Now, that’s what I call music to my ears! I’ll gladly pay to hear them play any day!
Paul Strikwerda © 2009
My next blog is a little more lighthearted, and I’ve invited Steve Martin, Peter Cook and Cyril Ritchard to add some extra fun to the pirate party!
I started in this business (US) when female & black voices were rarely used; then came the sports figures; then came the movie stars; then came the philosophy that V/O was acting; then came the street talkers and so on.
In listening to the P2P sites, I’ve heard some damned good amateurs who could chew us up and spit us out. I can think of a number of big name working V/Os who are damned lucky they started, built a contact list and working relationships before all of this newfangled stuff got started.
There are certainly hundreds of people who should not be doing this and it certainly is a source of frustration for voice-seekers. But the idea that you, me or anyone *other than the voice-seeker* is qualified to pass judgement on someone reaching for the brass ring is utter nonsense.
If the voice-seeker cannot hear my 40+ years of experience and the audio quality provided by my announce booth, U87, DW Fearn, RME A->D converter and monster computer audio chain who is to blame?
When I’ve been tasked with hiring voices and given boxes of cassette tapes to evaluate, few tapes got more than 5 seconds of play before I moved to the next tape. The surviving tapes got another round of scrutiny and the winners in that round were listened to over and over again. I listened that way in an attempt to differentiate real skill from demo production skill. The job of finding a winner – a true talent – is honest labor; when you find a true talent, you use them over and over and over again.
Sure it’s frustrating to lose out to a V/O who wouldn’t make a patch on your behind. I truly understand the frustration, but that’s the biz we’re in.
I’d suggest that the P2Ps provide a service to a certain portion of the voice-seeker market and V/O agents who build a stable of reliable talent serve another portion of the market. The stratification of V/O agents gives you, me and other V/Os a ladder to climb in the industry; when we get to the top rung of the ladder we will work a lot and get paid very well.
It just seems to me we have to improve our skills and climb the ladder rather than attempt to destroy the hope and dreams of people out to give this biz a shot.
Hi Steve, you gave me some great food for thought, and I have to agree with you: talent = talent. I’m not on a mission to destroy the hopes and dreams of the gifted. My criticism was prompted by and focused on the vast group of untalented hopefuls, that are promoting themselves as pros.
I know of no other profession where amateurs and professionals are given an equal playing field and can go head to head, vying for the same jobs. In the real world qualifications, standards and experience still matter. Teachers need a lot more than hopes, dreams and a credit card to be considered serious candidates for a position. What makes our profession so different? Just because there’s no official degree in “voice-over acting”?
Secondly, professionals have to make a living doing what they do best; amateurs do not. Ignorant or not so ignorant talented amateurs are one of the reasons why voice-over rates aren’t exactly going up. In that respect, a talented amateur poses a bigger threat than a wannabe who obviously doesn’t have a clue.
Yesterday, I had a long conversation with one of the people at voice123. I asked him why they were still posting $50 jobs on their site. He gave me two reasons:
1. It’s a free market; it’s not up to voice123 to set or uphold minimum rates
2. As long as there are people who are willing to do these jobs for $50, voice123 will post them. He then added: “Believe me, there are plenty of people willing to do these jobs for fifty dollars.”
Now, I could just filter these low-budget jobs out. End of discussion. But that does not solve the fundamental flaws in the system. If we leave things to market forces, we will end up with a “survival of the cheapest”, and in many respects, we’re already there.
The market has no morals. The market does not care about what is fair and reasonable. That’s precisely how and why we ended up in this economic crisis. And that’s exactly why there’s such a thing as a minimum wage (which is not even enough to sustain a family), and why governments all over the globe are proposing and imposing new rules, regulations and oversight.
I don’t mind losing a job to a talented amateur. I do mind losing a job to an amateur charging 20% of my minimum rate, because for this person “it’s just a hobby”. Their voice-over work doesn’t need to pay for the mortgage, health insurance, college tuition, pension plans, car payments, groceries and so on and so forth. And by the way: most of these things have gone up while our rates are steadily going down.
You wrote: “the idea that you, me or anyone *other than the voice-seeker* is qualified to pass judgement on someone reaching for the brass ring is utter nonsense.”
I have to disagree. Yes, the final decision to hire, is in the hands of the voice-seeker, but that doesn’t mean that other people aren’t qualified to evaluate talent. Any organized profession that takes itself seriously has minimum standards, offers continued education, does research to further the field and stands up for its members to make sure that they get paid a fair wage.
Perhaps the instrumental word is “organized”. The question is: are we just a bunch of freelancing, every man and woman for him- or herself, and may the best win-group of people? In that case we are throwing ourselves into the hands of the lowest common denominator, as voice-seekers watch us fight over a $50 dollar bone. I think we could and should do much better than that. We haven’t gone to the dogs yet, or have we?
>>> … but that doesn’t mean that other people aren’t qualified to evaluate talent
Do I need to remind you of the countless artists who were unappreciated in their time? They didn’t meet the minimum standards and would never have been “certified professional.” The value of certification approaches zero and I am the holder of many technical certifications. You can either do the job or you can’t. It’s a religious point with me, so I think that we’ll need to agree to disagree.
Sure, I wish skilled, talented people were smart enough not to under charge for their skill; they’ll wise up once they’re paid $1000 for a gig that they had been doing for $50.
IMO, the reason skilled talent – including many experienced ones – don’t charge appropriately is fear. They FEAR not getting the job. What they don’t realize is what they bring to the studio. Having done sessions with really talented, but unskilled people I know exactly to the penny what skill is worth:
The 2 person session I have in mind took an hour to record and 3 hours to edit into 25 seconds of something usable. Had the budget permitted, I would have left the session on the floor. Skilled talent would have done that session in 15 minutes with variations and safety takes; editing would have been another 15 minutes.
At the time, hourly charges (studio/engineer/producer) averaged out to about $50/hour * 12 hours or $600 plus the 2 talent fees. Using skilled talent would have been $150 plus the talent fees. That was MY MISTAKE and it came out of MY pocket. It won’t every happen again, but in the unlikely event that it does: I’ll call the session, pay the talent, re-book the studio and engineer and get it done right. Using skilled talent saves money; often BIG $$$.
If you want to fret about amateurs claiming to be professionals, I believe you’re aiming at the wrong target. The reason amateurs can make such a claim and get away with it has a lot to do with DEMO FACTORIES.
Perhaps the P2P sites would agree to require a dry rather than sweetened demo as the featured demo. That would be like headshots without make up, special lighting and airbrushing.
Only skilled talent can stand up to that level of scrutiny. Do you to post dry demos?
This is getting interesting! I don’t have a bone to pick with talented artists, past or present. I wasn’t exactly talking about van Gogh or Rembrandt, when I wrote my article. These people were truly exceptional. My story was about the unexceptional people and those who falsely advertise themselves as pros.
I totally agree with you that skilled talent shouldn’t be afraid to charge a reasonable fee. I would go even further and strongly urge them to educate themselves about the fees in our field, and charge accordingly. That way, they get what they rightly deserve, and they’re not dragging the industry down by undercutting the people who do this for a living. That’s uncollegial and unprofessional.
Expert firefighter Red Adair once said: “If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.” So, I’m absolutely with you as far as that’s concerned.
I do feel that there’s a strong case to be made for quality control and minimum standards. The fact that some certified people aren’t terribly good at what they do, doesn’t means that there’s something wrong with having criteria and certifications in place. Just because there are a few bad apples, doesn’t mean that the whole tree is rotten and should be cut down.
I also believe that SAVOA is doing excellent work, by developing some very basic membership criteria, all having to do with craftsmanship, professionalism and a code of ethical conduct. SAVOA doesn’t go as far as to set minimum rates, but recommends the following:
“In establishing rates, voice over artists are asked to take into consideration:
-the level of their voice over skills;
-their own availability;
-details and complexity of the specific voice over project (including multiple reads, pickups, or post-production);
-the client’s budget;
-the time frame allowed for completion of the job;
-the expected market (broadcast and non-broadcast);
-rates paid for their similar voice over services by similar clients in similar markets.”
Once again I have to agree with you Steve, as far as demos are concerned. A demo-pro can sweeten things up with all the technical bells and whistles available to mankind, and airbrush all the flaws away. That’s precisely why I prefer my demos dry…. just as dry as my martini’s!
Thanks for the conversation,
When people are in shock about the prices of VO-work, I always ask them how much time they want to spend in the studio. How much salary they get in one day, + the cost of the studio is what they gain if they hire me. One 50 dollar VO will teach them I think…
Greetings, Christel Schimmel
Very Dutch VO-talent
Love the conversation…thanks for sharing.
Here’s my nickel’s worth…No matter how we complain about the so called less talented or about projects going by way of the cheapest fee the reality is we are in control of our own destiny. There is more than enough work out there for everybody and the difference today is we have to market ourselves more more more and in different ways than ever before. The old cliché of word of mouth and referrals being the best form of advertising have never been more true than today. If we are all blessed enough to find a niche’ to promote and market that niche’ consistently and passionately and then make incremental dollars off ‘the other stuff’ then that’s a pretty cool way to go. Learning ways to do that through Susan Berkley and The Great Voice Company as well as my own hard knock efforts have proven to be been invaluable.
I lost my corporate marketing job 15 months ago and took a leap of faith in to my dream job of voiceover and have never looked back.
With that said…a dry martini does sound good about now!
Provocative as always, Paul.
I’d like to weigh in with a couple of thoughts here… First, a few months ago I was kind of shocked to find several free voiceover portals – the perfect place for amateurs to hone their craft, as you suggest. One large site is http://www.radiodaddy.com/ ; users requesting VO services are allowed (and in some questions required) to make a “donation.” I think it’s a logical way to approach the entry-level issue, although there’s a part of me that felt a slight revulsion at the idea, nontheless.
I’ve heard many recovering bottom-feeder voice seekers talk about lessons learned, promises unmet, deadlines missed and revenues lost fron trying to go the cheap route. At the same time, I’ve spent enough years in radio to have seen that economy change for talent until it is unrecognizable. And in this recession, I think if you were to imprison every single one of the “amateurs,” there would still be more than enough pros hungry enough to say “yes” to any rate. Frustrating as hell, but, I think, true.
“Pay-to-play” voiceover sites are, ultimately, exactly like open casting calls in theater or TV (just see how many “low-pay” or “no-pay” acting calls there are on Craigslist and everywhere else;) they are exactly like American Idol. The “anyone can do it” mentality has solidly collided with the egalitarian nature of the internet and a global economy. And a “voice talents unite!” rallying cry, I’m afraid, will be about as effective as an AFTRA card in radio contract negotiations.
So, OK Mr. Doom-and-gloom, what’s the solution, you ask? There’s no easy one, that’s for sure. But I’ve spent a lot more time this past year on marketing and sales websites than voiceover sites. I’ve worked to learn to think of myself more as a business and less as an “artist.” At times that’s been painful. But pay-to-play sites are a shrinking part of my arsenal. Networking and referrals are a growing component. I don’t want to compete with the made-in-china toys with lead paint on them. I want to compete with the quality products, i.e., talents. I don’t want to sell my stuff at Wal-Mart. And I believe when it all shakes out, the voice seekers I want to work for won’t be shopping at Wal-Mart, either! That’s the niche: between union agents and anything-goes p2p sites. When the Restoration Hardware of VO sites is born, sign me up!
I’ve repeatedly heard the statistics that, on average, about 2% of jobs are filled from the job websites – Monster.com, etc. TWO PERCENT! This was true pre-recession, it’s true now. I can’t help but think that some version of this statistic translates into our space. Which would mean there’s a lot of room to grow the in-between niche. Meaning, ALL activity on p2p sites represents a minute portion of available voice work.
Sorry for the lengthy response, but I’ve spent a ton of time thinking about these issues recently and you provided a splendid catharsis. You’ve said before I should start a blog – I promise I will soon!
Paul, you’ve apparently studied this issue closely. Why don’t you write an article about job types, suggested minimum prices and recommended prices? Perhaps it would enlighten producers who have not yet correlated the VO$$$/VO-VALUE formula. Probably wouldn’t hurt.
Personally, I like the “you’ve got my attention” approach to pricing. If you’re writing me a $5k check for an hour in the studio, you’ve got my attention; only absurd terms would deter my acceptance.
Issues I focus on if the session fee is in the ballpark or better: duration of use and medium used. I also fret over copy that offers too much potential for lifts.
Most, if not all, of this fades away when a business relationship is developed.
Thankfully, these resources are readily available on the Web. I’ve listed a few links below. Of course most rates are only averages and they are compiled in the USA.
http://www.edgestudio.com/Voice-Over-Rate-Card.htm
http://www.voices.com/voice-over-rates.html
http://support.voice123.com/article/How_Much_Are_Talents_and_Voice_Producers_Charging_for_Non-Union_Voice_Over_Work_Delivered_Online.html
http://www.aftra.com/contract/documents/2009_05_22_commericals_sched_min_fees.pdf
http://www.voiceoverresourceguide.com/index.html
The edgestudio.com rate card link leads to a login that still doesn’t give me access to the rate card.
You’re right. They must have changed that recently. The link you clicked now leads to: http://www.edgestudio.com/signup.htm Once you sign up (free), you’ll get “unlimited career center access”.
I highly recommend it!