Spinning off Mac's observation about performing for an informed audience.. (and this may take the discussion in a different direction... if so, sorry)

I want to start by saying that my loose definition of "talent" is the ability to do something that everybody else can't easily duplicate. (People who scribble on a canvas and call it art don't meet that definition of talent, but I digress.)

The problem with using backing tracks in a performance is that the audience is not informed enough to differentiate between somebody who bought karaoke tracks and sang along with them (requires marginal talent and almost anybody could do that... although the quality of the singing would be affected by talent or lack of it)

In most of our cases, though, there's more talent involved than the audience can see.

We've spent years learning how to use software, how to mix audio, how to play multiple instruments, how to sing, how to use MIDI to control gear, how to use the gear (vocal processors, effects, harmonizers etc) to work together seamlessly in a real time performance , so that no "gotchas" ruin the show, etc etc.

The thought occurred to me that through banter with the audience, we could educate them about why our act is different from a karaoke act, and why we made the decisions to lay the act out as we did. I think most audiences would find the explanations interesting, and by the end of the show they would be enlightened about how much work and talent it takes to bring such an act to their stage. With knowledge comes appreciation.

I guess what I'm saying is that if the audience in attendance is not already informed about music and about your presentation of it, it is in our power to educate them as part of the act.

And, getting back to the threads original question: as perceived value of your act increases, you should be able to charge more for it, and get it.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0