Venue charging for 'outside' DJ

[deanoakley]

Just looking to see if anyone has experienced anything like this before.

I've had an enquiry from someone I know for a local venue for a Friday in October, 7-12.

Gave my price and they've just come back to me to say that the venue is charging them £50 for bringing in an outside DJ rather than using their 'in-house' DJ.

They want £200 for the venue plus £300 for their DJ.

Whereas for the venue, plus me and the £50 charge works out cheaper (obviously I'd say as the £300 charge is ridiculous).

They've asked me if this is normal and I have to say it's the first time I've heard of it. Anyone else had this?

I've told my friend to call their bluff and say that unless they take the £50 charge off, they'll go elsewhere.

[Benny Smyth]

(obviously I'd say as the £300 charge is ridiculous).

I completely agree. You'd never see me charge as little as £300 for an evening’s entertainment.

Back on topic, I've seen it happen before. Quite a lot, in fact. It's also not your problem, nor your place to suggest that they call the venue's bluff. You're a DJ, not their wedding planner.

[Shakermaker Promotions]

I've never heard of that but hey, the venues probably do it anyway without saying anything.
The strangeness about this is that this venue have actually advised the additional £50.00.
Obviously I could be wrong but a number of venues I have worked at do the whole "make money off the DJ for actually doing nothing" thing.
In other words, charge the customer (for example) £350.00 and pay the DJ £250.00.

One thing I always say to my customers is that they don't have to have the resident DJ if they don't want to. A venue won't want to miss out on a booking simply because the customer wants to bring in their own DJ. As long as they are covered with PLI and PAT then they should be fine but then again, some venues may come up with all kinds of hurdles just to keep hold of their measly £50.00 / £100.00 or whatever.

[deanoakley]

I completely agree. You'd never see me charge as little as £300 for an evening’s entertainment.

Back on topic, I've seen it happen before. Quite a lot, in fact. It's also not your problem, nor your place to suggest that they call the venue's bluff. You're a DJ, not their wedding planner.

Yes I know, but it's a friend of a friend and it's only for a 30th birthday party - hence my shock at the high price and the £50 charge. Cheeky so and so's.

[Benny Smyth]

Yes I know, but it's a friend of a friend and it's only for a 30th birthday party - hence my shock at the high price and the £50 charge. Cheeky so and so's.

Why would £300 be a high price for a birthday over a different event?


some venues may come up with all kinds of hurdles just to keep hold of their measly £50.00 / £100.00 or whatever.

I know a venue who charges £495 for use of their resident, £325 of that goes to an agent...and you can assume the remainder of that sequence yourself.

[deanoakley]

Why would £300 be a high price for a birthday over a different event?

Personally, I see that as a high price - more so as a wedding price. I do try and command a higher price myself but as I'm starting out I tend to fall in around the £200-£250 bracket.

[Benny Smyth]

Personally, I see that as a high price - more so as a wedding price. I do try and command a higher price myself but as I'm starting out I tend to fall in around the £200-£250 bracket.

You may consider it a high price, but it looks like the DJ charging £300 doesn't.

I'm not turning this into a pricing thread and it matters not who charges what. Overheads + costs + profit you're happy with = what you charge and I would assume that both you and the other guy/gal is doing that.

What I would say that unless you know what the other operator's business model is with his/her costs and overheads, may I suggest that you're not in the best position to decide what is a ridiculous price.

Worry not what the other guy/gal is doing. After all, Bentley aren't fretting over the amount of Corsa's sold this year.

[musicology]

Some venues do try to levy a charge for not using their entertainment. I've come across this too and I also told them to threaten the venue with taking their business away and, sure enough, the venue dropped the charge. I also recommend my customers contact Trading Standards if a venue tries to charge them for a service they are NOT providing. This practice is totally out of order and the venues know it. They just need to be pulled up sharp and they WILL drop the charge. In your particular case, it will be that the venue take £50 and pay their regular bloke £250. They're just trying to recoup what they would have got under normal circumstances but that's their tough luck because they have no "arrangement" with you.

[ppentertainments]

I know of quite a few venues who do this, or insist on using the resident DJ only. Although annoying (and likely illegal) there isn't realistically much you can do - who REALISTICALLY will give up their dream wedding venue for the sake of choosing their own DJ - venues know this so have us over a barrel :mad::mad::mad:


Why would £300 be a high price for a birthday over a different event?



I know a venue who charges £495 for use of their resident, £325 of that goes to an agent...and you can assume the remainder of that sequence yourself.

A very nice venue close to me charges £450, who pay an agent/multi op £275, who pays another DJ £150, who pays a kid with a laptop £80 to turn up and play a set playlist.

[DJ Jules]

The only time I've come across this locally was actually at my own wedding (when I was the customer). I wanted to bring in my own DJ and the venue insisted that I purchase single event insurance to cover any damage he might cause to the venue and liability for any issues he caused with the guests and/or their reputation! At the time (this was back in 2002) they suggested that I bought this from them (about £75 from memory).

I just bought single event insurance from a reputable provider for about £45 and faxed the policy to them and we went ahead as planned. The DJ at the time had never heard of anything like it and I haven't heard of it since. The hotel has changed hands and management a number of times since (and I've worked there via an agency a few times too) and I know they're not doing it any more, but I'm sure if they tried this now, they'd be pulled up sharpish due to the number of rules/regs around sale of insurance - and the fact that they probably weren't really selling an insurance policy (unless what the mafia used to "sell" under duress could be considered "insurance").

This subject has been covered a number of times over the years and I don't believe adding charges for bringing in external services is considered illegal. Venues can set whatever pricing structure they like for their services or impose whatever rules they want, whether it makes sense or not. Ultimately, it's their house, their rules. It's a bit anti-competitive, but I'm sure the venue would argue that the charge is to cover the additional administration required to liaise with an unknown party or something similar. As long as the charge was reasonable and representative of the work involved it'd be considered to be OK by the likes of trading standards.

Your friend can either negotiate the fee he pays and try and either eliminate or reduce the additional charge, or pay it (since he's saving money overall anyway).

Julian

[musicology]

...Your friend can either negotiate the fee he pays and try and either eliminate or reduce the additional charge, or pay it (since he's saving money overall anyway).

Julian

I think a call to trading standards to clarify his position would be a better option before accepting any such arrangement.

[Shakermaker Promotions]

I was thinking about this a bit more last night and it reminded me of an occasion when I had my first booking at a venue I'd never been to before when I was still relatively new as a business (I've been to the venue many times since).
A long time friend of the family asked if I could do her wedding for her at this particular venue and she was over the moon when I said I was available and yes, I could do it. She started stressing a bit though because she really wanted the venue and she really wanted me too.
I may have been relatively new but I did know the score when it came to resident DJ's and hotels using agencies or paying peanuts etc as I'd been working for someone else previously so I chatted with her and her husband to be about it and I told them what I've said previously about the venue not wanting to miss out on a few grand just because of the DJ.

I also told them that what they would be paying the hotel for the DJ as part of the 'package' would not be what the DJ would be paid because the hotel would want to make money out of them. They weren't impressed and I knew she wasn't one for holding back. I guess you could call her a bridezilla because she went to the hotel one evening (asked me to go along too) and kicked off. She was quite embarrassing actually but she got her point across and at the end of the 'chat' (ha!ha!) it was agreed that I could do the DJing. I was covered with PLI and PAT as the venue had requested and there were no problems.

On the night I got chatting to the (unfortunate) guy we'd spoken to and I found out a bit more about this particular hotels policy regarding DJ's and it was confirmed that they ALWAYS (still do) use an agency. I asked him if the agency DJ's did customer meetings and he said "not that I know of" and it became clear (to me anyway) that it was a case of the customer not knowing who they are getting. The guy said "There is always a DJ here on time and they've never let us down".

That same guy ended up working at another hotel that I do quite regularly and the pair of us worked together to get a better thing going. I am recommended by them (him) and I get most of the work but people DON'T have to have me. If they DO book me I meet them at the hotel and chat with them in advance so it is more personal. The guy also told me that when he was working at the other venue and their deal was with the agency, although he didn't know what the agency paid the DJ he did know that the agency charged the hotel £350.00 and the hotel charged the customer £450.00 and this was around 10 years ago.

[DeckstarDeluxe]

One of the local venues here charge any "out of the loop" suppliers who plug into the electric £75 for "insurance purposes".

I'm sure there are others but I just don't hear about it.

[Excalibur]

One of the local venues here charge any "out of the loop" suppliers who plug into the electric £75 for "insurance purposes".

I'm sure there are others but I just don't hear about it.

I'm thus waiting for some enterprising soul to turn up with a laptop, and battery powered speakers and lights. It's tricky, but doable.

[Nakatomi]

My residency don't charge for outside entertainment to come in, nor do they check PLI & PAT. I'm trying to change the latter 2, but I wouldn't see any money the venue got from charging a fee so I don't care either way.

I've told my own tale of wedding woe here before, where we weren't allowed to bring in our own DJ. More is the pity. We discussed it at length but I basically just shrugged & went "ah, it's a nice place - how bad can their resident possibly be?". Oh dear oh dear. He had ONE original CD (no laptop DJs way back then), and his mic work was abominable. I borrowed the mic at one point & I sounded just as bad as he did. I saw why immediately & tweaked the mic EQ nicely. I was then clear as crystal. I said what I wanted to say & gave him his mic back. He then turned the mic EQ back to where it'd been previously. I could've chinned him there & then, I swear.

Are residents any better or worse than disco X Y or Z? Probably not, but the point is customers should be able to get who they want. Hell, I'd love to be able to turn round to my venue & tell them I don't want to work with certain customers.

[mattydj50]

My residency don't charge for outside entertainment to come in, nor do they check PLI & PAT. I'm trying to change the latter 2, but I wouldn't see any money the venue got from charging a fee so I don't care either way.



My residency DO charge for using an external DJ and do check PLI and PAT. Some of this stems from one DJ who turned up one night with his private house insurance which included the clause "public liability" somewhere in the forty thousand sub clauses and he thought that was good enough. I was there that night and the manager brought me the paperwork to see what I thought! When I got up off the floor I told him he had two choices. Send him packing and ruin somebody's wedding day or grit his teeth, put the black cat, rabbit's foot and as much four leafed clover as he could find into a sow's ear and hope for the best that he didn't burn the Grade 2 listed building down. He chose the latter and the finger crossing worked.

That DJ had no evidence of PAT testing either and, when asked by the manager on duty that night, he got the reply, "well, everything looks all right to me and nothing's blown up yet"!

So they term this an "administration" charge to check the certification and they also reserve the right to inspect equipment supplied. I don't know whether external DJs are required to complete the 16 page risk assessment and "entertainment supply" document that I have had to (needed 3 months in advance too)! I have my doubts.

There is also the fact that the venue's price to the client will probably have VAT added whereas most of us will not be registered of charging VAT. So, if I am charging £250 (with no VAT) to the venue for a night's work, just to break even then, they will have to charge the client £300 including VAT, plus any "commission" they will almost certainly add.

[ukpartydj]

One thing I always say to my customers is that they don't have to have the resident DJ if they don't want to. A venue won't want to miss out on a booking simply because the customer wants to bring in their own DJ.

I appreciate that it's slightly different but I'm booking things for my wedding next year and when we were looking for a venue some insisted we used many of their services. Considering we want a marquee wedding and we were essentially hiring the grass the marquee would sit on it came as a bit of a shock to me that they insisted we used only suppliers on their reccomended list, another told us we had to pay for their PA system to be installed and their sound engineer if we wanted a band or DJ and hire their security guards... Nightmare, luckily we sacked that off and found a much much better place where the owner has been extremely helpful and resonable giving us free rein on suppliers.


On the night I got chatting to the (unfortunate) guy we'd spoken to and I found out a bit more about this particular hotels policy regarding DJ's and it was confirmed that they ALWAYS (still do) use an agency. I asked him if the agency DJ's did customer meetings and he said "not that I know of" and it became clear (to me anyway) that it was a case of the customer not knowing who they are getting. The guy said "There is always a DJ here on time and they've never let us down".

I've worked for an agency (not done one for a long time now though) which is exactly the same - nobody ever meets the couple, I don't think that's a terrible terrible thing but when they also don't know my name, the venue didn't realise it'd be me and I have a short list of requests it becomes a bit more interesting. Luckily I only really work with the one agent (infrequently) currently and e's been alright :).

[Corabar Entertainment]

Putting things from the other side of a coin: we work very closely with a marquee site and have done for a couple of years now. When they first started, they just hired the land and people could book whatever suppliers they wanted. However, due to numpties, things have gradually changed. When EH got involved because of noise complaints is when we got involved (we were booked privately by a B&G, and there weren't any noise complaints that night), so since then, we've been providing the PA for every wedding, and it's actually written in to their licence from the Council that we supply it.

These days, the fee for the hire of the land includes some basics - ie toilets, generators, and our PA, and a list of recommended suppliers (that the clients book direct, so no fee taken by the venue). However, as of next year, they are going further: there will be an admin fee of £100 if they want to choose a DJ that isn't on their recommended list (which includes us and a few other local DJs that we recommended to them). Why? Nothing to do with wanting to make money, but everything due to the fact that we've had some right idiots there who haven't got a clue and end up spending hours and hours with them bitching, moaning, complaining, chasing for documentation, sorting out their 'issues', teaching them (what should be) basics, etc. These issues haven't happened with any other types of suppliers, so there is no surcharge if they don't choose off the recommended suppliers list for other suppliers, but both we and the site owners are fed up with dealing with the issues from bands and DJs, so the surcharge is being imposed to at least compensate us a little for the time we spend if they do choose someone not on the list.

It may be unfair on decent DJs (and we've been on that end too, where a client wanted us but the venue refused), but after seeing what the venues have to put up with, I can't say I blame them wanting to minimise those issues.

[yourdj]

The venue use a DJ that is most probably charging £200. They add it too the package at, lets say £350, and then charge VAT on top of that. Sooner or later you are looking at a £410 DJ. i used to work for a venue like this i remember people saying "we paid £400 for you". I felt like saying, no you did not you paid £400 for a £250 DJ".

Yes they then charged clients that difference if they wanted their own entertainment as its probably classed as a loss on working capital. The only venue i am in occasionally get clients that book the complete package and don't like what we do and book someone else (happened once or twice as they have a VERY good deal getting us). The venue add my charge plus VAT (not sure about any mark up??), but have not charged them as in my opinion it takes the mic.

On the one occasion I remember, I thought the meeting went very well, but they took a real dislike to me (completely the wrong end of the stick). The guy they booked in the end was pretty bad (I had a meeting on that night there and peeked). More fool them, but clients should be entitled to choose what entertainment they have without ensuring penalties!!

[ukpartydj]

Putting things from the other side of a coin.

I can understand the logic however there are ways of combating those issues without restricting the client.

I may be way off here making generalisations but I personally see it as a money spinning venture only.

[Corabar Entertainment]

I can understand the logic however there are ways of combating those issues without restricting the client. I'd be interested to hear your ideas on how to deal that we haven't already tried.


I may be way off here making generalisations but I personally see it as a money spinning venture only.Certainly not in this case.... however, certainly money was being lost by both us and the venue when not doing this, and TBH, the alternative to not including the admin fee was to insist that B&Gs HAD to have us DJ if they booked the site (which we talked the venue out of, and got the recommended list of people we trust in place instead)

[Shakermaker Promotions]

By the way, I'd like to add that I am not having a moan about resident DJ's either so apologies if it has come across like that?
I'm obviously one myself at one of my venues as I do 90% of their bookings (well, I get them but Daryll helps me from time to time) but I like to look at it as a 'recommended supplier' (I actually think it sounds better and doesn't put some customers off whereas the 'resident DJ' tag can do sometimes).
One of the things I like about this job is the variety with reference to the different venues I / We visit. I always like to play at a venue I've never been to before. I always ask the question "Do you have a regular / resident DJ?". A few years ago (in my experience), a number of venues would have a resident DJ and they wouldn't entertain having someone new. I remember one occasion where I asked the above question and the reply was "Yes, he's ok. He's cheap and we've never had any complaints so why change it?".

That's not exactly a great answer but I do understand it. If the job is being done then why change it but if I were the booker would I be happy with a DJ that was just "ok" and still making extra money off the customer? No is the answer.

One venue I do a number of times a year is a lovely venue that is part of someone's property. He literally hires out the place and has a book of recommended suppliers that the customer can look through. He leaves everything entirely up to the customer and just takes the hire fee and does about 50 weddings a year.
I've spoken to him before about doing some kind of package where the DJ comes with the venue and he's just not interested which is fair enough.

[ukpartydj]

I'd be interested to hear your ideas on how to deal that we haven't already tried.

Certainly not in this case.... however, certainly money was being lost by both us and the venue when not doing this, and TBH, the alternative to not including the admin fee was to insist that B&Gs HAD to have us DJ if they booked the site (which we talked the venue out of, and got the recommended list of people we trust in place instead)

I recently worked at at similar site and the way they managed noise was providing me with a pdf beforehand listing the requirements which included keeping volume below a certain decibel level, stating music must be lowered at 11. 30 and off by 12 (it did state power would be turned off at 00.05 and it did on the nose, just basic lighting left on! This was followed up by a the owner / manager of the site having a chat with me beforehand on the phone whilst discussing unloading / location and repeating it when I arrived / checking with a db meter a couple of times throughout the night... I thought they were very common sense, practical people. With this sort of approach should anything go wrong (band / DJ are too loud) it's very easy to intervene and say "MR DJ you're too loud by 2db, please reduce the volume" a friendly sound limiter :).

I think that would solve the issue of noise?

Weddings are a very personal thing and B&Gs want to choose people they click with, people they trust and suit their theme. I'm admittedly a stubborn person with strong sometimes controversial opinions (I won't get into PAT testing again, I've been convinced that's worthwhile now) so prehaps take it with a pinch of salt but I do believe limiting a clients choice of suppliers is out of order.

My fiancée was a little bit annoyied when I was really strict on picking venues and writing them off every time there was a whiff of "you must do what we want for your wedding" but after talking to other couples who've gotten married recently she's been so relieved that we are able to have things how we want them to be.

Crazy idea a bit off topic here but maybe just maybe venues should make themselves suitable for hosting weddings with loud music? Funny how they have these massive buildings right in the middle of town surrounded by residential property with VERY loud music which can barely be heard from the outside... Nightclubs / pubs I think they're called. I wonder if their owners ever thought maybe we should just keep the volume down and ask the DJ for PLI & PAT certificates... I don't think I've been asked once for either in my Nightclub DJ days.

[mattydj50]

I'm obviously one myself at one of my venues as I do 90% of their bookings (well, I get them but Daryll helps me from time to time) but I like to look at it as a 'recommended supplier' (I actually think it sounds better and doesn't put some customers off whereas the 'resident DJ' tag can do sometimes).


Yes, though I'm often referred to as the "resident DJ", I am, as you say, the "preferred supplier" and clients are perfectly able to arrange their own DJ. I come as part of the "all inclusive packages" that the venue offers and all of their "preferred suppliers" play a part in these packages in some way.

Sometimes, clients do book non package deals but the venue is on board and does try to sell their preferred suppliers directly to their clients. I'm none too bothered as it does mean I get a bit of time off. The only thing is that, if I were to take a private booking on one of those nights and the client then experience difficulty and request my services, I then have to arrange alternative cover for one or the other.

[DazzyD]

I know of quite a few venues who do this, or insist on using the resident DJ only. Although annoying (and likely illegal) there isn't realistically much you can do - who REALISTICALLY will give up their dream wedding venue for the sake of choosing their own DJ - venues know this so have us over a barrel :mad::mad::mad:
...

I know someone who did - my brother! ;)


I think a call to trading standards to clarify his position would be a better option before accepting any such arrangement.

Why do people still give the "call Trading Standards" line? Trading Standards have very little sway in anything these days due to their powers being taken away from them and handed to Citizen's Advice (formerly CAB). For a start, you are referring to a client so he is a consumer. TS no longer offer ANY services for the CONSUMER and only deal with business to business issues these days. If you have an issue, as a consumer, with any supplier or tradesman then TS will send you on your merry way! You will be pointed in the direction of CA who run the consumer side of things. TS will only take on business to business issues. However, CA may, and it's a very unlikely may, refer the case to Trading Standards if the case involves issues such as counterfeiting or large scale fraud. TS will keep a file on such referrals until they have enough info to actually take any action which, in all likelihood, will be never!


Putting things from the other side of a coin: we work very closely with a marquee site and have done for a couple of years now. When they first started, they just hired the land and people could book whatever suppliers they wanted. However, due to numpties, things have gradually changed. When EH got involved because of noise complaints is when we got involved (we were booked privately by a B&G, and there weren't any noise complaints that night), so since then, we've been providing the PA for every wedding, and it's actually written in to their licence from the Council that we supply it.

These days, the fee for the hire of the land includes some basics - ie toilets, generators, and our PA, and a list of recommended suppliers (that the clients book direct, so no fee taken by the venue). However, as of next year, they are going further: there will be an admin fee of £100 if they want to choose a DJ that isn't on their recommended list (which includes us and a few other local DJs that we recommended to them). Why? Nothing to do with wanting to make money, but everything due to the fact that we've had some right idiots there who haven't got a clue and end up spending hours and hours with them bitching, moaning, complaining, chasing for documentation, sorting out their 'issues', teaching them (what should be) basics, etc. These issues haven't happened with any other types of suppliers, so there is no surcharge if they don't choose off the recommended suppliers list for other suppliers, but both we and the site owners are fed up with dealing with the issues from bands and DJs, so the surcharge is being imposed to at least compensate us a little for the time we spend if they do choose someone not on the list.

It may be unfair on decent DJs (and we've been on that end too, where a client wanted us but the venue refused), but after seeing what the venues have to put up with, I can't say I blame them wanting to minimise those issues.

It amazes me that DJs see this as just a money-making scheme for venues. But it's really not. Venues are huge investments and it's their way of protecting their investment from problems caused by muppet suppliers. And we all know that there are plenty of those around!

Also, I think the suggestion that these practices are somehow illegal is way off track. Every business owner has the right to decide who they provide their services to so long as that decision doesn't breach sex, race or disability discrimination legislation. And to be fair, even disability discrimination legislation is still very weak in this country. Pretty much anything else is fair game*. I could say I won't provide my services to people who are wearing yellow tops and I'd be within my rights to do so. There is no legislation that says I'm not allowed to refuse to provide my services to people who are wearing yellow tops! Sounds crazy, and a little bit sad, really, but it's perfectly true. And this is just something trivial to illustrate my point. And my point is that a business (in this case a venue) owner is perfectly entitled to refuse to provide a service to a client who doesn't want to use an in-house DJ or one on a list of recommended suppliers. That's business and whether you think it's unfair or otherwise, that doesn't make it "illegal".

The only way these practices could be in some way deemed "illegal" was if they breached anti-competition laws and, frankly, these laws don't cover minor, petty issues like these under discussion here.

* Of course, laws aren't always as straightforward as that and, to make them simpler, the various discrimination laws in the UK were merged in to the Equality Act 2010 and the following "protected characteristics" are the only things you can't legally discriminate on the grounds of:

age
being or becoming a transsexual person
being married or in a civil partnership
being pregnant or on maternity leave
disability
race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
religion, belief or lack of religion/belief
sex
sexual orientation

[Corabar Entertainment]

I recently worked at at similar site and the way they managed noise was providing me with a pdf beforehand listing the requirements which included keeping volume below a certain decibel level, Already do this, and include an AVC with the PA
stating music must be lowered at 11. 30 and off by 12 (it did state power would be turned off at 00.05 and it did on the nose, just basic lighting left on! Yep. Actually, bands have to finish at 10pm.
This was followed up by a the owner / manager of the site having a chat with me beforehand on the phone whilst discussing unloading / location and repeating it when I arrived / checking with a db meter a couple of times throughout the night... Similar (but with an AVC in the chain rather than dB meter readings), namely, emails from the venue and us to the B&G before they book any supplier, with all the information and stressing that they should pass that on to anyone they consider booking; emails from the venue and us directly to the DJ / band once they've booked - including links to the equipment being supplied along with general information; chats...... and then, despite all this, all hell breaking loose a couple of weeks before the wedding is due to take place because, despite everything, they hadn't read / taken notice of anything that was sent to them or said to them; chasing over and over and over again for paperwork; bands pulling out because they refused to get PLI (which would have cost them £13 each); Steve having to go down to the site on the morning to PAT the DJs equipment because he 'hadn't got around to it' (and so many more problems I couldn't even begin to list them! The sheer number of hours wasted on almost EVERY booking!); on-the-day issues because idiots haven't got a clue how to do anything other than press 'play' (including having to show one DJ where his master volume was because he was having a hissy-fit because it was so quiet when his channel sliders were at max, but his master was right down, but he didn't know what that was); Absolutely AWFUL distorted sound because, despite being told and sending them in writing that if you push the volume way past the AVC limit, it won't get louder, only crappier, they still do it.


I think that would solve the issue of noise? Yeah, so did we.... until we tried it - for 2 years. The problem is, you and I and everyone else on here are coming from a professional stand point. Unfortunately, there's a huge share of the market that isn't.


Weddings are a very personal thing and B&Gs want to choose people they click with, people they trust and suit their theme. I'm admittedly a stubborn person with strong sometimes controversial opinions (I won't get into PAT testing again, I've been convinced that's worthwhile now) so prehaps take it with a pinch of salt but I do believe limiting a clients choice of suppliers is out of order. I do agree with you - which is why we wouldn't go in as the only DJ allowed, and put together a good selection of local DJs who are all very different in styles and personalities, but who all are good, decent people who know what they are doing, but all operate professionally. There really should be someone for everyone on this recommended list, but now the venue and we know that we're not going to have to spend hours and hours and hours arguing the toss with anyone on the list. B&Gs are still free to choose someone else if they pay an additional admin fee, and whilst I also dislike this limitation, it's not fair either that we and the venue were losing money either. Why should we work for free? (The only other way to do it would have been to up the price for everyone and make it a 'hidden' charge - which is worse, IMO).



Crazy idea a bit off topic here but maybe just maybe venues should make themselves suitable for hosting weddings with loud music? Funny how they have these massive buildings right in the middle of town surrounded by residential property with VERY loud music which can barely be heard from the outside... Nightclubs / pubs I think they're called. I wonder if their owners ever thought maybe we should just keep the volume down and ask the DJ for PLI & PAT certificates... I don't think I've been asked once for either in my Nightclub DJ days.....and considering this is a marquee site at least half a mile from the nearest dwelling, the site owners have gone above and beyond and really worked hard to keep everyone happy: our PA with an AVC fitted; plus we erect an acoustic barrier behind the speakers (outside the marquee / tipi / whatever temporary structure the B&G choose). It works absolutely brilliantly, and there have been no (genuine) noise complaints since we've been doing this, whilst the volume is still great for the B&G and their guests (we've had several B&Gs come down for demos because the person they booked bitched to them about working within the limits, but every single one has come away from the demo saying that the DJ / band / performer is complaining about nothing and the volume is fine), but sorting out the noise issues doesn't prevent all the hassle from these total numpties that we've had to deal with.

[ukpartydj]

I guess you have to see it to believe it! I was guilty of that master volume problem once on a Nightclub when I'd only ever used pioneer and Allen and heath gear and they had some ancient mobile DJ style huge mixing unit with half the knob labels worn down so that threw me off.

I'm not sure how I feel about this having to do extra work thing... Every client is different and some require considerably more our time but they're charged the same. I do understand the logic though and it's up the owners in THE end. I guess if I knew I was getting a booking from a demanding couple I might up the price a bit so I get it... Just hmmmm annoying for me and other professionals.

[dicky]

...and considering this is a marquee site at least half a mile from the nearest dwelling, the site owners have gone above and beyond and really worked hard to keep everyone happy: our PA with an AVC fitted; plus we erect an acoustic barrier behind the speakers (outside the marquee / tipi / whatever temporary structure the B&G choose). It works absolutely brilliantly, and there have been no (genuine) noise complaints since we've been doing this, whilst the volume is still great for the B&G and their guests (we've had several B&Gs come down for demos because the person they booked bitched to them about working within the limits, but every single one has come away from the demo saying that the DJ / band / performer is complaining about nothing and the volume is fine), but sorting out the noise issues doesn't prevent all the hassle from these total numpties that we've had to deal with.


Just out of interest and as this is not a money spinning exercise nor its it a closed shop, if someone does bring in thier own DJ/PA/lighting and pays the 'surcharge' and that DJ is not a numpty - does said DJ then automatically appear on the approved list in future seeing as they are obviously a responsible person?

[Corabar Entertainment]

Just out of interest and as this is not a money spinning exercise nor its it a closed shop, if someone does bring in thier own DJ/PA/lighting and pays the 'surcharge' and that DJ is not a numpty - does said DJ then automatically appear on the approved list in future seeing as they are obviously a responsible person?As the venue has only just implemented the policy, it's not something we've discussed, but seeing as that is exactly how they have built their recommended lists for all other suppliers, then that's quite possible.

[Corabar Steve]

I guess you have to see it to believe it! I was guilty of that master volume problem once on a Nightclub when I'd only ever used pioneer and Allen and heath gear and they had some ancient mobile DJ style huge mixing unit with half the knob labels worn down so that threw me off. The big difference here was that the mixer in question was his. (also Pioneer)

[Excalibur]

The big difference here was that the mixer in question was his. (also Pioneer)

Brace yourselves for the sillies:

Up till then, he'd only needed the "play " buttons.

There's an old joke about bands ( Bay City Rollers, when I first heard it :) )
Manager walks into the dressing room to find the guitarist in tears. On asking what the problem is " It's the drummer, he's altered the tuning on one of my guitar strings ".
Manager asks why that's a problem, and is told " He won't tell me which one it is"! :eek: :coat:



I can talk. :o I used my little Behringer mixer, and couldn't work out why the mics were fine, but I had to wind the line input up to the top. :confused: Might have helped if I hadn't had the attenuator buttons pressed on the line channels, knocking 14db off the pre amp. :o:o

[Nakatomi]

Brace yourselves for the sillies:

Up till then, he'd only needed the "play " buttons.

There's an old joke about bands ( Bay City Rollers, when I first heard it :) )
Manager walks into the dressing room to find the guitarist in tears. On asking what the problem is " It's the drummer, he's altered the tuning on one of my guitar strings ".
Manager asks why that's a problem, and is told " He won't tell me which one it is"! :eek: :coat:



I can talk. :o I used my little Behringer mixer, and couldn't work out why the mics were fine, but I had to wind the line input up to the top. :confused: Might have helped if I hadn't had the attenuator buttons pressed on the line channels, knocking 14db off the pre amp. :o:o


And one from me last night - pulling my hair out as to why the playout wasn't working... I hadn't yet turned the speakers up :coat:

[Corabar Entertainment]

Oh, I have no doubt that everyone's had a blonde moment now and then, but the DJ I was originally talking about didn't know what it was..... he thought the only way to change the volume was via the channel sliders!

:daft::daft::daft::daft::daft::daft::daft::daft:

[Excalibur]

Oh, I have no doubt that everyone's had a blonde moment now and then,

Blonde moment? Blonde moment? Chance would be a fine thing.,:( That's a very insensitive remark to those of us who are " follically challenged ".:p

[Corabar Entertainment]

Blonde moment? Blonde moment? Chance would be a fine thing.,:( That's a very insensitive remark to those of us who are " follically challenged ".:pYou should savour those blonde moments then :p

[Excalibur]

You should savour those blonde moments then :p

So many replies, and none permissible on such a family friendly forum. :zip:

[ukpartydj]

So many replies, and none permissible on such a family friendly forum. :zip:

Funny that term "family friendly"... Implys everybody who uses foul language is some weirdo single person with no family...

Do" families" even visit the forum? I should probably go to sleep rather than worry about either if those.

[DazzyD]

Funny that term "family friendly"... Implys everybody who uses foul language is some weirdo single person with no family...

Do" families" even visit the forum? I should probably go to sleep rather than worry about either if those.

A quick word of caution. If you often spend the night worrying about such issues rather than sleeping then'll probably soon end up "folically challenged" like Peter!! :eek: :eek:

[Corabar Steve]

We have been known to include members who are minors, & as such the forum is treated in much the same way as pre-watershed TV.

Those are the rules & if you don't like them, you know your options.

[ukpartydj]

We have been known to include members who are minors, & as such the forum is treated in much the same way as pre-watershed TV.

Those are the rules & if you don't like them, you know your options.

I was thinking more literally... Do any families, son, mother father for example visit the forum?

I was just thinking it's funny why "family friendly" is more popular phrase than "non-explict" which makes sense where family friendly is errr a peculiar term considering what it means...

I've really got to stop taking on gigs that mean i get to sleep at 4am...

[Corabar Steve]

Possibly because it's shorter than typing "This forum is designed to be a friendly & inoffensive place that any member of the family can enjoy, therefore we request that members keep this in mind & the content that they post is appropriate to this" every time we need to remind somebody.

[mattydj50]

And one from me last night - pulling my hair out as to why the playout wasn't working... I hadn't yet turned the speakers up :coat:

I do that all the time. Or forget to plug one in to the mains!

[Excalibur]

I was thinking more literally... Do any families, son, mother father for example visit the forum?

I was just thinking it's funny why "family friendly" is more popular phrase than "non-explict" .

I'd say " family friendly " is taken to mean it's suitable for all members of the family, of whatever age, rather than more robust adult only.

[Corabar Entertainment]

....and yes, we have had several members of the same family of different generations as members.