Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

Here is a hypothetical situation:

You are in search of a musician for an all original band. And you have two candidates both play well, both have the looks, the set of likes/hates that you are looking for in a musician, both have pro gear and pro attitude. But here are the differences:

First musician is professionally trained with wall and desk full of diplomas from different music schools, reads the scores can play anything from the score from any note to any note. Knows all the theory as if he invented it in the first place. Very technical. But, his soul is empty, and sounds plastic, plays very well but only what is given to him. His own work is over complicated, and is done by the book. And sounds like any other music school graduate.

The other musician is self taught, does not know theory all that well cannot read scores only tabs, plays by ear, knows many chords but knows no names of them. However he can listen to a part of a tune and play from the heart and come up with the melody and arrangements based on what feels right rather then what is right according to the book. He does not know why he plays the way he does, he just does.

Which one would you take and why? In other words what is more important to you as a band leader in a musician you are interviewing: originality or education?

Alex I can only ask "you" ...
are you an Artist, or a Craftsman?

If you just want to craft melodies and lyrics that you think people will like, or are "catchy" and musicians will never say "they're not done properly, then you of course want the trained musician....

If you want to "create" something that makes "you" feel something, and possibly others too, then you already know the answer!

There is a place for each... which place do you want to go to?

www.myspace.com/blunderingeye
www.myspace.com/445175001
http://ezfolk.com/audio/bands/6039/
http://bandmix.com/hayden-king/
hayden_king2000 on yahoo messenger

*

"if you send 1000 kids to the finest art school in the world, you get 1000 kids who paint an apple the same way"

*

Self taught every time.

I generally prefer the 'mutt', but I guess that isn't an option on this one, so wth, I choose the self-taught guy.

My first gut reaction is to answer "the self-taught guy, of course," but then my past experiences kick in to cause me to ask more questions.

#1 question that I MUST ask is - Can they BOTH remember & recreate what they play? I've found that, more often than not, the self-taught musician can be sloppy about playing signature licks & such (a la my favorite whipping boys - J Page & J Garcia). This is something that simply bugs the living hell outta me. IF your instrumentalists are equally crafty, then I'd be more apt to go with the one who is, in my humble opinion, more of a musician than a hack.

I can give the straight & narrow guy ideas of what I want, & communicate well enough to get the sound that I'm looking for, even if it means writing out the notation, if necessary. This is always perferable when the composer is more controlling. (I have to be careful about overdoing the whole "my vision" thing, in band situations!)

#2 I need to ask about the general attitudes of both ppl. I find that the well-trained ppl can be rather "large-headed," & difficult to work with. So can the self-taught ppl, but not nearly as often, in my experience.

In the end, I would go with the person who fills my needs more exactly. If I feel strongly about the arrangements of my work that live in my headbone, then, all other things being equal, I'd go with the scholar. If, however, my vision is incomplete, or open to personal expression, then of course I would choose the guy with the artistic approach.

So, I guess I've found a much longer & wordier answer that reflects Hayden's own views. LOL

Ha Ha Ha Man thats easy. The educated musician would not have anything to do with my band.

I would choose the self taught guy, You could say I have a bias opinion. your Influence and whats in your heart and soul is in my opinion moore important than mechanical perfection. I saw an interveiw once where STEVE RAY said, "When I TRY TO BE TECHNICAL I MESS UP, BUT IF I PLAY STRAIGT FROM THE HEART IT COMES OUT GREAT" In my opinion plastic and perfect wont fit in what I hear in your music Alex. The self taught person you described sounds alot like me, I cant always explain what im playing but I can dam sure feel it. GOOD LUCK.

PEACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have worked with both and imho there is a lot to be said for ear training. Learning signature riffs is simply a matter of self discipline. Its always easier to adapt a song to your style of playing and all muscians do it for one reason or another, and both the self taught and the guy with the diploma can be equally good at writeing originals. I would choose the one that plays from the heart whichever one that turned out to be, as long as they are Disciplined, mature and artistic!

I'll take heart and soul any day.

But Hypothetically speaking who on here has ever had to make a choice between 2 groups that were worth a crap anyway.

Most folks on here seem to have trouble just hooking up with one group. Unless your from Jersey and your names Crip.

On the other hand when I play with folks I expect them to be able to play their instruments. They dont have to be trained, but I expect band mates to play close to my own level. If not its not going to work no matter how much heart they have. The group Im in now, if we decide to play a song we learn it independently and then we just play it at a gig, if the song connects we keep it if not it goes in the trash unless someone requests it. Lots of folks I met over the last couple of years auditioning and playing with arent ready to be in a band to start with. If you cant get thru 60-70 songs, not perfect but be able to do a good representation of the songs then I dont think you are ready.

Just my 2 cents.

I would loved to have had to make a choice between 2 such groups, but more than likely none of us will ever have to make that decision. Most of us just need warm bodys that will show up and play.

I think the key is that you said "all original BAND". That suggests to me that the "band" is creating the music. In that case, I would take the uneducated ( ) guy. I have found that self taught players tend to carry around more creativity than trained musicians.
On the other hand, if I was trying to re-create something I've already done (music that has already been written), I may actually go for the trained player-due to the fact that I'm not looking for creative input, but instead, an accurate interpretation of the work.
If I had someone that I could put charts in front of and say "play this", I couldn't be happier. I accepted myself as a solo artist a long time ago, and right now, I need musicians to help me perform my works live.

Good stuff guys.

By the way, I am not asking this question because I am unsure what to do, I know the answer for myself. But I am very interested in knowing YOUR opinions.

jw123 No, I am not looking to join a band. I never will join anyone's band. It is either hand picked line up of creative collaborative musicians that I lead (in a somewhat democratic way) or nothing.

This post is not about me, it is about you (all of you guys) and your views and opinions on the subject. I find it very interesting

I guess I will take this one at a slightly different angle. I am a mutt, taught myself for the first 18 years then went to college to study for another 4. I am now in two bands from here...sorry, Cript isn't the only one, One is very meticulous about what is on the paper and the other one is all about feeling the music and creating experiences through music. I like them both for different reasons and also because both offer pizza and beer after rehearsals.

Band #1: Everything is written out except background vocals. One of the musicians is very stale sounding because that is how she works, but our engineer is very good and able to fix things. The great thing is the amount of productivity we get done in four hours a couple of times a week even though we can only meet twice a month due to distance and work. Music gets e-mailed out, we practice and become accountable for ourselves. The only downside is if you think you can come up with a more creative line it's really hard to get that implemented in the music.

Band #2: Nothing is written out and everything is on the pianist because the other members who are amazing musicians with a lot of heart and soul...can't remember what they write so they play it for the pianist, me, who records it and notates it so that later it can be played back when they can't remember. The stuff that they come up with is amazing, especially on the fly, even the bass player...when he is sober or not tripping out. The down side is that we don't get a lot done and there is a lot of goofing off and "hey, listen to my bass when I play it with a tab from a beer can, Dude."

So I say it boils down to what kind of music you are playing and what direction you want to go and how serious your band mates are. I guess I would go with the people who have soul though....you can't teach music theory and notation later. =)

Pizza & beer are also huge considerations!

philbymon wrote:Pizza & beer are also huge considerations!

Yes indeed. Pizza & beer with some bratwurst could produce some deadly gas which affects the neuron net in most unpleasant ways.

And Bats! My partner guitarist hates the bat eating crouch grabbing T-shirt reaping vocalists, even if they are pros.

What people don't get though is this: it sounds good, because it's right according to the book.