General Music Chat

SOURCE:
http://bloodrockmedia.com/local-bands-p ... our-fault/

it's you sucky musician's fault.. that get a gig and then bore their patrons to death with at best, mediocre music..

SOURCE:
http://bloodrockmedia.com/local-bands-p ... our-fault/

it's you sucky musician's fault.. that get a gig and then bore their patrons to death with at best, mediocre music..

Strip away the mediocre music from club acts and what do you have left? A bunch of bewildered musicians standing around with stupid expressions on their faces.

SOURCE:
http://bloodrockmedia.com/local-bands-p ... our-fault/

it's you sucky musician's fault.. that get a gig and then bore their patrons to death with at best, mediocre music..

Strip away the mediocre music from club acts and what do you have left? A bunch of bewildered musicians standing around with stupid expressions on their faces.

Sounds like you're describing the bands who insist they have to write "originals", then proceed to write derivative songs that suck. I have heard more than a few really excellent live bands in the past few years. They all happen to play the kind of "uncovers" I described in another thread that someone whose name I won't mention trashed.

Good music starts with good songs. Even the best bands on the entire planet write and record some really terrible songs. Take any band with ten gold or platinum recordings, averaging ten songs each. I'm talking a really outstanding band, with a long career. Those ten CD contain 100 original songs. Maybe a dozen of them are really and truly great. And that's from really great bands. If the best such bands can manage is slightly over one out of ten original songs being worth listening to, how can a start-up band expect to write enough originals worth listening to play at a club for over an hour?

With the exception of super groups, or bands formed from the wreckage of older bands, the best bands I've heard that I've followed for any length of time started out as cover bands. As they worked on covers, they expanded into "uncovers" (see the ruined thread for a definition). When they got to be good at working together, know each other musically, and becoming a cohesive unit, they started adding in original songs. They'd introduce the new songs alongside their covers and uncovers, and adjust and tweak them based on audience response. The originals that the audiences liked stayed in their set list, the others were cast aside. Eventually, they ended up with a set list of mostly good originals. And during this process, they worked their way up the ladder of venues from the dives to the better ones.

But I suppose none of that is true nowadays. Struggling start up bands don't worry about playing live, they worry about selling digital downloads. Eventually, they figure they'll sell enough digital downloads to start getting gigs as opening acts. It's hard to say what goes through their minds, as there doesn't seem to even be a path any more.

DO you really think start-up bands are worrying about selling digital downloads? There's no money in it. Even assuming they do it on their own web site (rather than an established platform like iTunes or CDBaby), they've got to sell a couple hundred d/l's to clear $50 per person in the band (4 man band). If they don't get out and play gigs, who's going to hear their music to even know about the d/l's?
No, there's no real money in that these days, gigging is always going to be much more a moneymaker.

The article has some points, but some that are not realistic, too. 'Go out and support other bands' - some people do this, but on any given weekend night, there may be 5 or 6 local gigs happening with people I know playing. Obviously, I can't go see all of them, and none of them can go see the others, either. 'Hand out flyers at other shows' - really? Advertising your show at someone else's show is in extreme bad taste. If you can get the band to mention your gig between tunes (assume its no conflicting with one of theirs!), great.

George - you are right regarding bands playing nothing but originals - maybe some half-decent originals in the mix - it's hard to get any kind of a dedicated audience from scratch. Your friends/family will come, and tell a few others, but these days the friends of friends all know someone else doing the same thing, too. And they can listen to all the songs (for free) on Spotify or youtube and click to the next song if they don't like the one they're hearing. Data overload - they've got a zillion choices on what to listen to, so no matter how 'good' an original song is by that band, they're other things to listen to and to capture the listener's attention immediately after.

Starting with covers, then 'uncovers' as you call them, and then mixing in some originals over a period of time is one business plan, but honestly, the people going somewhere to hear a band do "songs they know" just turn their ears off when an original is played - and this includes the musicians in the audience, too. These people don't download music, so wouldn't look for a place to d/l the original they heard the night before, wouldn't ask to buy a CD of the originals, and even if the band has them ready and mentions them, they'll be lucky to sell a couple on any night.
It's not that the 'local music scene' is dying, it's just morphing into something else.

You two sure know how to make a mountain out of a molehill. I believe that Dayne is right. There aren't many bands playing in local clubs around here that "wow" an audience. Most of them could "lull" an audience to sleep. An "occasional band" that is good hardly fits into the depth of the article or Daynes comment. ( I do believe the thread is about local musicians playing local clubs, right?) Note that no mention of bands playing originals, covers, or any genre of music was made in either Daynes post or mine.Most local clubs across America are in small cities and the article is right. But I guess that if you need to rant you must begin somewhere and reading something into a post that isn't even implied is a good beginning for some folks.

Sounds like you're describing the bands who insist they have to write "originals", then proceed to write derivative songs that suck. I have heard more than a few really excellent live bands in the past few years. They all happen to play the kind of "uncovers" I described in another thread that someone whose name I won't mention trashed.

Envy is so ugly on you, george. Try accepting when you're wrong and life won't be so hard on ya.

Just fyi, I've made a living doing originals since 1977, and yes, if you suck then you won't find much work doing that.

You seem to miss the most obvious point so let me help you. Look at a list of the top 1,000,000 bands who were successful recording artists and you won't find a dozen copy bands. If your desire is to play local bars the rest of your life, then more power to ya. There is no shame in jamming just for the fun of it, but some of us want more and don't find that entirely fulfilling.

Getting into a venue is the easiest part. Song choice is actually kind of secondary, almost unimportant. The performance is what matters. Well, that and a good attitude since no one wants to deal with an anus.

Being asked back is the key to longevity. Make every crowd happy in every place you play and you'll start building a network of venues. Establish a large network of venues and you will never be out of work.

It's easy to do, but still a lot of hard work over time. Learn from everyone and try to keep a positive attitude. The worst thing you can do is throw stones from a distance towards people who are successful. That only proves you suck.





.

This is about the "LOCAL MUSIC SCENE".

What I said applies no matter where you are playing

Getting into a venue is the easiest part. Song choice is actually kind of secondary, almost unimportant. The performance is what matters. Well, that and a good attitude since no one wants to deal with an anus.

Being asked back is the key to longevity. Make every crowd happy in every place you play and you'll start building a network of venues. Establish a large network of venues and you will never be out of work.

It's easy to do, but still a lot of hard work over time. Learn from everyone and try to keep a positive attitude. The worst thing you can do is throw stones from a distance towards people who are successful. That only proves you suck.

I challenge you to name a single famous, successful recording band who started from scratch doing nothing but original songs.

There are lots of them!? Steely Dan comes to mind first, everything on Motown, and every concept band that a label has ever put together is included.

Why do you have such a problem accepting that the so-called "Local music scenes" are incubators for young artists?

Have problems with comprehension much? Never said that. I was responding to your silly little jab at me.

You seem incapable of accepting the FACT that there are other valid perspectives besides your own. Doesn't matter whether you agree with me on anything ever, but I have a different perspective and I'm going to "help" others see past living for the local bar scene, if that's ok with you? I thought you gave me permission to breathe in that last discussion we had?

Have you checked your blood pressure lately?

Just because you've been lucky working in a rather peculiar musical niche genre, where most of the rules of the music business don't apply, and where people seem to prefer "new" songs that sound totally and completely derivative of all the other songs in the genre doesn't mean your experience translates into a recommended career path that anyone and everyone can follow.

1. It ain't luck
2. I'm "in" the music business so why wouldn't the rules of the music business apply? It's still about supply & demand
3. Everything is a derivative of something so that comment is just stupid.
4. I have worked in many genres over a lifetime. The same rules apply.


Be belligerent if you want. What I just gave to the forum is the gospel truth on this topic, whether you are smart enough to know it or not. You seem determined to convince me that you aren't.




.

I'll accept that as an admission I was correct. There are hundreds of recording artists throughout history who did not start in a cover band.

Playing a few cover songs and being a cover band are not the same thing, btw.

I'll accept that as an admission I was correct. There are hundreds of recording artists throughout history who did not start in a cover band.

Playing a few cover songs and being a cover band are not the same thing, btw.

Bullshit. EVERYONE started out playing music someone else wrote before reaching a point where they were able to write originals. Hell, most of the members of the bands who only play "originals" only play what the band member or members who do the writing wrote. What did you play before 1977?

You're just nitpicking by discounting every musician's first steps at learning their craft.

Why do you insist on being combative?

First song I ever played on a guitar was made up on the spot because I didn't know how to play anything. Your question was about how many bands started out playing originals and I answered that. It wasn't phrased to ask how many musicians ever played a cover song when they started playing, but now you're crawfishing backwards because you're point was shot down like a fat bird. Hundreds, if not thousands, of successful recording artists started groups/acts playing original music exclusively because their goals were not the local bar. Even today, most venues in the club district of London (Camden) will NOT hire a cover band.

Bars want the lowest cost for a band that brings in the most people, so it becomes a popularity contest instead of a (real) talent show. Kids still in high school and college will win that contest every time by virtue of having so many people without day jobs in their circle.


.

George

I agree that most major players start out in cover bands, but I'd add that most of those 'cover bands' are garage bands where you learn to play.

Page, Beck et al are good examples of that. They jumped quickly into the bigger leagues.

My theory about bands is that they are at their very best when they are young and hungry. So many outfits today have devolved into tribute bands, even though they are 'covering' their own material. Their followup stuff never matched their early hits.

Talbot

Hello, I am certainly no expert, but we Don't play covers. We just write and play our original songs. We find it very rewarding in creating our music and maybe people think it sucks but we like our music. There is always going to be people that don't like or think our music is horrible. So it is about self gratification for us, maybe we wont make it past the local scene but we are content with that atleast at the moment. I just taught my self to play guitar and sing by playing and singing horrible notes until it all came together.

Page, Beck et al are good examples of that. They jumped quickly into the bigger leagues.

Talbot

But things were so different in the 60s. You really can't compare then and now.