Both examples you picked were at the very top of their profession - and then some - even at their time. I'm not sure if looking at the Newtons, Einsteins, or Mozarts and Bachs of the past tells us all that much for the current discussion.

Not to leave it at criticism, while highly specialized, the excellent lectures of Professor Christopher Page of Gresham College linked on the bottom of https://www.gresham.ac.uk/speakers/professor-christopher-pag... include a lot of details that tell us a lot about more ordinary musicians and (here: guitar) teachers, even if it's mostly about one instrument and a few limited locations and periods of time. A very interesting anecdote in any case, especially given the quality of the presentation(s). It is not explicitly or even mostly about the economic situation, but enough can be deduced from the context.

All examples in the original comment are people at the top of the profession. Literally none of them is average music teacher. And the question was "who paid for the great music of the period".

Einstein was not richer then other physicians. His fame could have help him when emigrating and at keeping employment, but afaik it was not rewarded by super unusual riches.

> All examples in the original comment are people at the top of the profession.

And how does that invalidate the argument? "Others made the same mistake!" - Yes, and?

> Einstein was not richer then other physicians.

How is this relevant to the argument? (Rhetorical question - it is not)

> And the question was "who paid for the great music of the period".

OP wrote "there were a heck of a lot of great composers in that period". Which is correct - most of the works were from regular people. They were not as outstanding as Mozart or Bach, but still produced a lot of the great music. People like Johann Pachelbel, to give an example. Not in the same league as Mozart, but there were many of the same type and they produced most of the music of the period.

I play recorder and violin and most of the sheet music I play is from those more normal people.

Oh and the parent (buscoquadnary) is not quite correct when he only points to "patronage". A lot, if not most of those people made money with performances (Mozart too! - https://www.biography.com/news/mozart-pauper-lost-fortune) and with teaching.

Others did not made mistake. Others asked different question then the one you answered. Others asked about specifically about musicians such as Liszt, Beethoven, Mozart, Bartok, Handel, Debussy, Bach - the top of the top. You answered about salary of guitar teacher, someone whose work you do not play, because it never even got recorded.

The astronomer William Herschel had a fairly successful career as a musician in Bath and was able to afford a nice middle class home.

When King George appointed him Royal Astronomer so he could do astronomy full time, the salary he earned from that position was half what he made as a musician.