General Music Chat

I was just reading stuff on Zappa today and stumbled upon this interview. Kind of relates to your situation. I might bring some clarity though not everything is relevant. The interview revolves around Zappa's extensive use of the Synthclavier in his latter work and how he was slowly isolating himself from other musicians due to the incoherent and unpredictable behavior of human beings.

EM:You're in a position where you can have anyone you want playing on your records. Yet you've been working solo recently with the Synclavier. Do you think that cuts you off from . . .

FZ: From humanity?

EM: No, but other musicians' inputs, the sort of feelings that other people can bring to your music and the collaborative aspect of music.

FZ: Well, my music has never been very collaborative. It's been accommodative, because when you hire a musician you can't always get that musician to play what you thought up because musicians are not uniformly expert in different fields. You put together a band, you have to average out the assets and liabilities of each musician and then find what the style of that band is going to be. So you have to compromise the pieces because you might have a drummer who can play anything, but a rhythm guitar player who might sing great but can't count and couldn't play any parts. Or a piano player who has a certain amount of technical expertise but doesn't know what it means to play a whole note rest and leave some space in the music. So everything gets adjusted for the personnel. But with this (the synthclavier), the only thing I have to adjust for is how much RAM I've got in the machine.

From what I've seen from ppl who use pre-recorded tracks live - it's very difficult to keep it from getting too cheesed up. You need a good ear for production. It's like using those dratted vocal harmonizers...watch the volumes & tones & keep it simple as you can for the particular piece of music.

I wouldn't recommend making the live performance as "good" or as full-sounding as the studio, either. Keep a distinction between the two where you can.

There are ways to use looping in conjunction with the pre-recorded material, so that you can indeed do extended performances in certain areas, but you must keep in mind that this complicates things, & it's easy to get tripped up on your own material that way.

There's a guy around here who is a master at this stuff. Perhaps you've even seen him, Joe - Ted Rashka. He plays guitar & keys, & is in a duo with Tom King. Teddy is amazingly adept at using the sequenced stuff with drum machines...every show has him stopping & pushing buttons on the fly, while playing bass with his left hand, or chording with his right. He's been doing it for years, though, & I think it would take me quite a while to be able to do it with any dexterity at all.

As far as trying to attract other musicians into your scene..

It's a question of like or dislike of genre and overall music at hand.

$ is a great motivator, but doing something you believe in = priceless.

$ is a great motivator, but doing something you believe in = priceless.

.
Exactly.

Must be country...

All I think is that you must be pretty confident in your music writing ability that you think another musucian couldn't add something to your music that would make it better than your idea.


I suppose there are people out there that would be interested in this type of gig but IMO they are hard up if they are. No offence to you intended.

I think all the Big name country bands operate in the same manner.. The singer is the only "Star" in the band..

So glad I'm a METALHEAD!! \m/ \m/

More great points! To defend myself a little bit, my issue really isn't about input...unfortunately, my band experiences over the past 15 years have usually revolved around a subtle power struggle. While I won't deny that I was part of that struggle, I do have to say that it was me, more often than not, accepting the work of the others. Usually, as a result, my own input suffered. I may have said this before, but my issue is one of organization. It's a common goal.

Let me try something here. Say that you are going to bake a cake (it's stupid, but play along with me). Each member of the band adds certain ingredients. I'm totally cool with that. The problem comes when the guy that is supposed to add the sugar decides to add SAND instead. Another guy, responsible for the icing, decides to use, oh, I don't know, bird sh@t...
cake, anyone?

All I'm trying to do is maintain the integrity of the music. I accept input from people all the time, but I am also careful not to change the direction of the original idea.
I would never go the Zappa route. It's easy, efficient, accurate and...artificial (IMO). Give me real musicians or strike me deaf. That's just how I feel. Why? Because real musicians add a human quality to the music (that's the thing that many of you seem to think I'm trying to suppress).
Fret, it's not country, although I understand your point about country artists...it happens in metal as well, although there is more of a tendency to shine SOME of the spotlight on the other band members...

Someone has to steer the boat or you will go in circles.
You may crash on the rocks, but if it's your show, so be it.

I believe the vast majority of people in this crazy business are in it to GET ATTENTION. Who would be crazy enough to want to play in front of a huge crowd or have their recordings heard by thousands of people if they didn't want at the least to GET SOME ATTENTION? Maybe we didn't get enough attention from our parents when we were kids (I'm still a big kid at heart). One of the biggest problems in a LOT OF BANDS is the power struggle or who wants the most attention. I sincerely believe that everyboy in a band has to get some attention. I've seen some big acts in the past that were BORING because one band member hogged all the attention and the other band members were BORED. If you're going to collaborate with others on a musical project you have to guage how needy the other people are in terms of recognition and attention. Everybody should feel like they are contributing something to the project. Sure you can be a leader in a lot of ways. At times you also have to be a follower. Musicians generally are not ZOMBIES (except the stoned ones who are shown the exit sign pronto). I WANT the other band members to contribute ideas. I WANT them to want to take an extra solo if they WANT to. I WANT them to offer constructive criticism if they think a partcular song isn't working. Collaboration means just that, COLLABORATION. As a leader you can tell someone that you're going to be working on these ten songs of mine with a goal to record them. After we record those ten songs do you have any original ideas you'd like to record? While you're in the process of working each song out ask the members for creative input/ and/ or constructive criticism. I personally WILL NOT WORK for a musical dictator. I feel I've been doing this long enough that I have earned the license to contribute creatively. Even though sometimes this business is HARD WORK, it also can be a pain in the ass to deal with certain people. Life is too short. Collective cooperative creative collaboration is the BEST way to go in this business. Otherwise I'm just going fishing. Later...

Some great points were made in all of these posts, but it is clear Joe, that your own mind has either changed, or you didn't know before how to express what you are really looking for. What you want is simply to be the final authority in the band. That is an achievable goal. You put the band together not as a democracy, but more of a dictatorship, though I loath to use that word because of the connotation. You can make it clear to the people going in, you will listen to everyone's imput, but you have final say. if they are cool with it going in, it wont be problematic. Otherwise, you just have to hire a band, and in that case pay them, to do what you tell them to. if you write their paychecks, you maintain that authority.

I think in the end it comes down to the music! if its strong material that has depth and atmosphere. and is "real" then its easier to get player's on board. it doesn't matter what your plan is if your starting with mediocre material. of course art is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder, so I guess the goal is to get a group of capable player's together that believe in your song's (I know that sounds cheesy) and direct them towards your goal for that music. REMEMBER if you don't feel it, how will the audience? I have been lucky enough to find just that, and I am grateful for their effort's! Above all be true to your music!!!

The thing is...if one man has the final say, then that one man must do all the booking, & be very good at it. You will be totally responsible for keeping the entire band in the black, all the time. If there's a 2 week period where there's no work, you'd best be recording (& PAYING them), or you will likely lose them to another project that will pay them.

You also must be adept at handling ppl on a level that most of us fall way short in. As the total boss, you are in charge of handling all internal disputes. You will be making decisions based on the good of your music, not necessarilly the good of the band, & that will put a lot of ppl off.

Being a band leader makes one walk a fine enough line, but when you add in these parameters, it's a razor's edge you walk to make it work.

As dictator, though, you also must take into account that the ppl you hire will probably not make your vision their own 1st priority. Ppl may work for you, & enjoy it, & profit from it, even, but in the long run they'll also want to be involved in other things where their own input IS welcome. This can cause scheduling problems.

While I prefer collaborative eforts, I can understand the lure of wanting to do something that's totally your own vision. I've often fantasized about this, myself.

If I were going to do something like this, today, I'd work on a good quality CD, 1st. Once that was established, then I'd hire the musicians to do one single show - a CD-release concert, if you will. Rinse & repeat. When you have 3 good CDs & good concerts behind you, then it might be time to consider doing it on a full time basis, & you may even be able to use the musicians that you previously used in the concerts, since the shows hopefully went so well that it might interest them.

At any rate, it would be easier to hire ppl with the resume you've built up doing these shows.

I know it seems like a long slow process, but it's the best idea I've come up with thus far to assure success, at least in my lil warped headbone.

Actually, Philby, I'm kind of in the middle of the process you described. I'm one track away from my 2nd CD reaching completion, and trying to put together a band to do such a show, hopefully continuing to gig afterwards with that band. Glad I'm not completely crazy.
Ace, you're right. This started out hypothetical and I didn't make a lot of points clear. My goal is to recreate the music that I have already recorded, accurately. I make a point, when in the studio, to keep the songs "live" capable-meaning that I never put in 6 or 7 guitar tracks-most of the songs have no more than 2. I "keep it real."
So, I'm basically looking for hired guns. The question really should have been: "What kind of incentives should I offer to my "hired guns" in order to get my goal accomplished?"
Bob, I understand, and i agree that most musicians are not zombies. In response to your post, I would have you read Sans' post previous to your own.
There is a really shaky balance in the music world between creativity and financial success. We all have our own takes on it, and everyone is entitled to their opinion.
As strange as this is going to sound, my goal is not completely to promote ME. I want a band, I want to promote other people. However, in order to acheive the marketing goals I have set, I cannot allow other people to change the direction-not even if they "feel like taking another solo" (as Bob put it).
I have a friend and Mentor, who makes his living in music. He owns a studio, he does session work, he prepares tracks for people to sing on, he gigs regularly and tours regionally, and I 've even seen him provide musical parts for a whole slew of grade school Christmas plays, as well as similar events. He also writes. Out of all of that, do you know how much creative input he actually has? Aside from his own material, very, very little.
Oh, and he just recently bought a nice, new house...he lives comfortably, and he does it-by playing music. If he turned down every project that didn't allow him some "creative input", he would probably be working beside me in the hospital cafeteria.
The bottom line is that, sometimes to get ahead in this business, you have to bite the bullet and sacrifice a little bit of your pride. I've done it-I'm playing right now with a band whose song choices make me want to rip out my own throat! I'm still there, because I have a good friend that is trying to make something out of it. Will I stay there for long? Who knows.
For a while, though, I'm going to FOLLOW HIS LEAD.