I'm going to start off by saying that this is not one of those situations where a bride has something settled in her head, and she posts the "speshul circumstances" so you can all tell her she's right. 1) None of this has happened yet, and 2) it's an actual question and I'm looking for actual advice.

We're considering forming a small youth choir with some of my theatre students, and I would like them to sing during the ceremony at the wedding. Youth choir singing at a wedding - simple enough.
The weirdness comes in with the parents. It would be maybe a half-hour drive (in New England winter) to the venue from the city where most of these kids live. It feels weird to have everybody make the drive, sing a five-minute song, and then turn right around and leave.
So, my thought process is, let them (kids and parents) stay for the ceremony, be sure to say goodbye and thank you, and then they can leave before cocktail hour.
But ... that's a tiered reception, right? Or not, because they're "performers?"
Knotties, assemble!
Re: Would this be a tiered reception?
I think you should treat them like vendors, and at least offer to pay them. Otherwise yes, it sounds tiered to me and like a huge imposition on the parents.
@levioosa I would be making a donation to the company, and giving little thank you gifts to the kids.
@lolo883 You're right. I didn't mean to make it sound like I was making a grand gesture by inviting them to the ceremony. I just made the distinction because whenever I've seen performers at weddings, they don't sit in the audience; they're usually in some sort of backstage/holding room, and then return there afterwards. I'd like the parents and kid to attend the ceremony from start to finish. "Imposition" is a good word, that's what I'm trying to avoid.
(I was formerly assistant director of the Maryland State Boychoir.)
ETF: spelling