IMHO The decline and future rise of Music (Long)
Iowa Recorder
in the mornings on weekdays for the third shift workers. We'd play
from 8 AM to 12. Get some rest and then play that night. It was
typically easy to play 10 - 18 gigs a week. Then the drunk driving
laws came in... Then disco came in... MTV hit the cable. Then
keyboard/sequenced oriented music hit and lastly Kareoke. Dance clubs
now are bigger than ever.
In my state (Iowa) 15 years ago 17% of the population frequented bars
regularly. Now that figure is down to 5%. (Iowa Bar Owners
Association) Everybody remebers those 6 nighters in hotels. You set
up once. You play six nights. You tear down once and move on. Now
days it's all one nighters. Even finding a club to book you for a Fri
and Saturday is rare. Also remeber how it was Standard Operating
Procedure (SOP) to get a band for the wedding? It is now SOP to hire
a DJ for the wedding.
Now am I whining that this is all unfair? No. I try to NOT take the
view that everyone is stupid. People became more health conscious.
It's not popular to go to a smoke filled bar and ingest poison. Also,
I've seen far too many weddings end as disasters because the band
can't play "Pretty Woman". The best story I have is of the band
breaking into an open fist fight during the bride and grooms dance.
Typically DJs can cover a wider crowd ages 3-75. Also DJs have a
knack of having silly contests to get the crowd to loosen up. Much
better than a bunch of guys standing motionless on stage staring at
thier fret boards. Kareoke is a bit more complex and I don't totally
understand it. I see it as ordinary people having a need to be a star
or just plain show off. Their friends come along and cheer them on.
Also typically kareoke is much quieter. Quieter is better for a bar
where you want to go and talk to people.
Anyway I don't have enough time in this post to elaborate on the
merits of the competition to live music but I just will state my
opinion that live music is taking a hit for not ADAPTING, for not
LISTENING to what common people are saying, for not adding the appeals
of the other entertainments to thier skills. Also the technology has
enabled BAD bands to get really LOUD. Hard to pick up a chick if you
have to scream to be heard. Worst of all - I hate to say it but bands
just got to the point of not being entertaining as the other forms of
entertainment. Our area specificly slid into a black hole of blues
bands that NEVER rehearsed. Worse yet, nobody in these bands would
stick together and form an actual band. Everyone wanted to free-lance
with 5 differant blues bands. It was ok but not tight. It got to a
point of musicians being selfish and lazy. They were expecting the
hay days that was developed and earned by the hard work of people who
played in the 1930s and 1940s.
(I'm not real up on the recording industry as you guys so I'm making
the following statements humbly in hopes of getting comments so I can
have a better view.)
I'm sure this decline will occur (or already has) into the recording
industry as well. I can see with the online file sharing that even
people who pay for music - will spend less. Rather than pay for a CD
that has only one good song - you can now just buy the one song. Also
the avalability of bands to market themselves WITHOUT big company
backing could cause a huge hit on the big companies. Also it is long
past the point that ANYONE can record a CD and get it out there. A
good singer can now release a modest cd online with just the help of a
good musician and a soundblaster live card.
What I am seeing that rather than a few making millions. I see ALOT
making a respectable living. The money will be more distributed. The
pie will be cut up into smaller parts. I know the labels won't go
away. They are very smart and will adapt. Labels will promote more
artists but for much shorter periods of time. Mostly how long the big
labels will run a band will depend on the bands talents of self
promoting.
The last couple years the bars (here in Iowa) are importing acts from
other areas. I'm very busy so I don't get to see alot of them.
Recently I was lucky enough to see Otiel Burbridge
(www.otielburbridge.com) in a small bar. Another time I caught Mr
Blotto (www.mrblotto.com) in a small bar. These bands were simply
great. I looked at how they were marketing themselves and they are
quite successful. I really do see the internet and bands promoting
themselves by hitting the road with a kick ass show and having the web
resources available as the future of music. I also see rather than
paying 75$ to see a big concert, people will go to an area club and
hear much better bands for a 12 dollar cover charge. I see the
consumer as the winner here as the average consumer has the choice to
pick EXACTLY the music they want to hear rather than something
"close".
I got out of music for many years and got back into it in the year
2000. I was working for a large company and had learned alot about
business and leadership. When I got back into music I was shocked at
how bad the music scene was but never lost confidence. I needed to go
and make market research. So I did. I went to kareoke clubs. I hit
the blues bars. I made friends with some DJs. I hit the dance clubs.
I also watched some very good but also very UNCOMPROMISING bands. I
also saw some terrible bands that were totally comprimising and yet
they pulled crowds. I'm still researching. I learned to do silly DJ
contests. I taught my band the value of knowing a few waltzs and a
few rap tunes. I also learned the value of sometimes being
uncompromising at the sake of the music itself and for those people
that are there to hear you for that reason. It's a balance and it's
part of what is called art.
Personally I am moved by the amount of people who want to hear "real"
music. A real foot stomping the floor. We often go unplugged with
banjo, Tuba and guitar. Find the sweet spot in the room, perform and
stomp our feet. People appreciate a real honest sound. Our band is
getting requests for songs by bluegrass roots bands such as Nickle
Creek, Allison Krauss... ect... We are not a country or blue grass
band. We are just a rock band but we feel this "real" element is
crucial and try to add that.
In conclusion I have witnessed a huge decline in live music but also a
more intense competition that will improve the quality of live
entertainment. I think the electronics has and will turn off more
people. I also see the mass marketing will eventually turn off people
who will look for better. For my money I have been practicing on my
Martin 20 times more than on my Strat. I'm also seeing best record
deal we can get is to do our own CD and promote it ourselves.
Anyway I have said alot and much of this is still not thought through
very well.
This is a big topic. Thanks for reading.
IR
Bob Olhsson
that this very decline in live music is what has left the majors with little
to sell today but dancers, actors and models. There are almost no jobs or
role models for young musicians today compared with the past.
I disagree that the star system is about to go away but I think you are
pointing out an incredible untapped opportunity for everybody else and that
the best of those young folks who take up that challenge will probably be
tomorrow's major label stars.
--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com
"Iowa Recorder" <mik...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3774011b.0402...@posting.google.com...
Ryan
I have some of my own idears. One of them does inculde never signing
with a mjor and self producing the CDs ourselves. (Production in the
sense of manufacturing, not "music producing.") Nevertheless, allow to
pick just one nit...
> I see it as ordinary people having a need to be a star
> or just plain show off. Their friends come along and cheer them on.
> Also typically kareoke is much quieter. Quieter is better for a bar
> where you want to go and talk to people.
Consider youself oh so lucky my friend. I stay as far away from
Kareoke as I can, simply for the reason that IT IS loud and obnoxious.
In my experience anyway. The music is usually set at a decent level,
but that dosen't stop the giddy drunk girls from getting up there and
sounding something not to far from a cat in heat. UGH! UNBEARABLE!
Loud and in tune is much easier to ignore than semi-loud and wildly
out of tune; anyday. Also, I'm a bit younger than you, and perhaps
the trend of the rarely seen rock band at the bar was already on full
tilt by the time I was of age, but usually, when a good band plays
around here, even at a bar, I go with the intention of focusing on the
music. If I wanted to pick up girls, I would head over to Players
Night Club, but when I go to see a band, I go to see a band. Know
what I mean?
As far as bands needing to add some entertainment value, I'm all for
it, but really I see this not as a new turn, but rather a return to
the old. Think of the roamimng minstrels of the middle ages. Hardly
ever could a group survive by simply playing music back than. They
would most always through a little musical theatre into the mix, and
they would make sure their song lyrics inculded news of current events
from the last place they had been, because they knew people would give
out a few pennies just to hear what was going on. It was only for a
breif time in the last half of the last century that music had the
privelage of not having to include a few gimmicks and crowd pleasers.
As far as the future of music buisness, I really don't know, but I am
sacred. I set myself a goal that if I could make somewhere above
$35,000 a year in today's dollars, that'd be all I'd ever need. I
don't need to make millions and have a slot on MTV cribs. But I don't
even think this modest amount is all that possible. 35 Gs x 4 (four
piece band) = 140 Gs. Considering most tours are lucky to break even,
and that we might make about $7 a CD and another $7 for a T-Shirt,
that means we gotta sell 10,000 Cds and 10,000 shirts a year, every
year, for me to hit my goal. Hmmmm. You can count out royaltys,
because the radio stations, TV stations and etc., are all in bed with
the record companies, so if I'm not signed, my chances of getting
played through these venues are les than nill. Dosen't sound too
promising.
The only ray of hope I see is the day when everyone is on broadband,
the fiber-optic networks that are being laid down as we speak. We
need a venue to promote ourselves to the world, a place that a lot of
people will know about. Instead of MTV, perhaps call it MWWW, Music
World Wide Web. Unless somebody knows about your band personally, the
chances of them ever even knowing you have a web site is pretty slim.
But if we can get a place together that starts to get a name for
itself, people will come to it for "the cool factor" and while they
are there they will find out about new and good bands. A little old
fashioned branding. Right now, we do have internet radio, and anyone
can set up their own internet radiostation, but that's really not
gonna do it. We need instant, cable quality video and other
flashiness. And it will have to be very democratic, with every band
being equally heard. Not too many corporations out there are both
widely commercial and established and simultaneously completely
democratic. When money comes into the picture, democracy goes right
out the window. And for that reason, if a place like this does come
to exist, it will just be a matter of time until it morphs into what
MTV is today.
Iowa Recorder
> I enjoyed your post much. I am trying to get started with my band and
> I have some of my own idears. One of them does inculde never signing
> with a mjor and self producing the CDs ourselves. (Production in the
> sense of manufacturing, not "music producing.") Nevertheless, allow to
> pick just one nit...
Hi Ryan,
In response to my post I got an email from a person who was quite
knowlegable about the topic. I talked to him on the phone for quite
awhile. I made this post in hopes of getting better ideas and
enlightenment as to the scope of what is going on. I'm afraid the
decline is rampant in all levels of music here in the USA. The
biggest thing I got of these conversations is the industry needs a
total reboot. This reboot consists of people like you and me starting
the work done in the 40s and 50s. The work labels like Sun, Motown
started. They started with nothing. What's really sad is there isn't
many venues for young talent to get the experiance. They don't hire
bands for school dances much any more. Sock hops have long came and
went. Playing holiday inns on the road is gone. Without a thriving
young talent pool for labels to work with the industry will suffer.
Anyway I don't want to type too much except to say you gotta do it
yourself these days.
>
> Think of the roamimng minstrels of the middle ages. Hardly
> ever could a group survive by simply playing music back than. They
> would most always through a little musical theatre into the mix, and
> they would make sure their song lyrics inculded news of current events
> from the last place they had been, because they knew people would give
> out a few pennies just to hear what was going on.
The technology may change but human nature doesn't change. Great
point about minstrels. I've long been into meditation and self
hypnosis. Sometimes when I perform I use the visualisation of being a
minstral in the middle ages. I get in this state and look out at the
crowd and I don't see blue jeans and skirts. Instead I see peasants
in peasant clothes. Rough hand hewn wooden tables. Flaggons of mead.
Heavy lead cups ect... The idea of the minstral is a great one.
Really nothing has changed.
> As far as the future of music buisness, I really don't know, but I am
> sacred. I set myself a goal that if I could make somewhere above
> $35,000 a year in today's dollars, that'd be all I'd ever need. I
> don't need to make millions and have a slot on MTV cribs. But I don't
> even think this modest amount is all that possible. 35 Gs x 4 (four
> piece band) = 140 Gs. Considering most tours are lucky to break even,
> and that we might make about $7 a CD and another $7 for a T-Shirt,
> that means we gotta sell 10,000 Cds and 10,000 shirts a year, every
> year, for me to hit my goal. Hmmmm. You can count out royaltys,
> because the radio stations, TV stations and etc., are all in bed with
> the record companies, so if I'm not signed, my chances of getting
> played through these venues are les than nill. Doesn't sound too
> promising.
My bass player makes more than that a year but he also is a high
school band director. :) I and others in the area have had to take
other music related jobs to make a living. I looked at your 7$ profit
figure and it's debatable. Profit on some CDs I've produced was 12.50
a unit. Then again you may end up giving away alot of CDs in contests
and and promotions. Folkes may haggle you down to 10 bucks for the cd
ect... Same for T-shirts... Though debatable 7 dollar profit is a
good conservative estimate.
What the record companies will really want is a piece of your hard
earned work. You do all the work of building up a fan base. You do
all the work of building a name. You do all the work of forming a
marketable package. You start selling large volumes of CDs. The
record company comes in and does pretty much what you should do
yourself and (hopefully) makes money.
>
> The only ray of hope I see is the day when everyone is on broadband,
> the fiber-optic networks that are being laid down as we speak. We
> need a venue to promote ourselves to the world, a place that a lot of
> people will know about.
So much to say about this. It's going to be tough to protect your
work. Aparently the computer industry including microsoft are looking
for ways to keep piracy alive. I would probably be safe to guess that
the computer industry is a pretty big player in all this mess. So I'm
not hopeful in this area.
> Instead of MTV, perhaps call it MWWW, Music
> World Wide Web. Unless somebody knows about your band personally, the
> chances of them ever even knowing you have a web site is pretty slim.
> But if we can get a place together that starts to get a name for
> itself, people will come to it for "the cool factor" and while they
> are there they will find out about new and good bands. A little old
> fashioned branding. Right now, we do have internet radio, and anyone
> can set up their own internet radiostation, but that's really not
> gonna do it. We need instant, cable quality video and other
> flashiness. And it will have to be very democratic, with every band
> being equally heard. Not too many corporations out there are both
> widely commercial and established and simultaneously completely
> democratic. When money comes into the picture, democracy goes right
> out the window. And for that reason, if a place like this does come
> to exist, it will just be a matter of time until it morphs into what
> MTV is today.
I've thought about all this and I was hopeful as you are. I see
having a web site where people can get info on the band and an online
store being useful if your able to get the buzz going in the real
world. Hard to get a buzz going online unless you like to spam.
Online there is this noise floor to ignore. As the technology gets
better online I can only see the noise floor rising. Also there are
sites like you mentioned like mp3.com. I've spent alot of time on
MP3.com trying to find some good music. It takes too much time
sifting through the dregs to find anything worthwhile. Like I said
anyone with a microphone and a sound blaster card can produce an MP3.
I suppose in the future anyone with a video camera can produce a music
video for online. I just see more noise floor to wade through.
Anyway most of this new information comes from my conversations with
someone from this newsgroup. New record labels need to be formed.
New talent needs to be developed. New fan bases need to built. The
good news is it's all open and avaliable for the picking. The bad
news is it's like the wold west and it's depends on hard work. Now I
better close this post and get to work!!!!!!!!!
IR
Analogeezer
> When I started my first gig about 20 years ago. We would play a gig
> in the mornings on weekdays for the third shift workers. We'd play
> from 8 AM to 12. Get some rest and then play that night. It was
> typically easy to play 10 - 18 gigs a week. Then the drunk driving
> laws came in... Then disco came in... MTV hit the cable. Then
> keyboard/sequenced oriented music hit and lastly Kareoke. Dance clubs
> now are bigger than ever.
>
Great post, you pretty much nailed it...I loved the bit about
everybody wanting to play in five different blues bands that don't
rehearse, that is SO TRUE.
I started out playing live at the tail end of the hard rock era, and
then watched Disco roll in...talk about depressing, wooo man I hated
that shit.
Then there was a second upturn in the 80's in live music, people liked
spectacle so you had loud bands with big hair, big amps, flashpots,
all that. I got a second lease on my career because all of a sudden
bands were back in.
The spectacle of the "big show" might have not aided the music but it
made people want to see bands a lot more.
Then they raised the drinking age - bam, there went 65% of your
audience, and ESPECIALLY THE CHICKS...most chicks in Bars were 16
(sneaking in) to 20 or so, after they get a bit older they calm down a
lot faster than guys do so they stop going to bars as much.
Guys go to bars to meet and pick up chicks....fewer and older chicks
meant bars became less popular for guys as well.
FWIW, the whole herpes/aids thing put a bit of a damper on things as
well...suddenly "getting some strange" might mean more than just that
night.
So around here, after a "Golden Age" of the resurgence of live music,
the combination of the raise in drinking age and the DUI laws and
enforcement then pretty much did that scene in....in about four years
we went from playing boundless gigs for good money to playing three a
month for not much.
Then after that, grunge came in, which didn't last long enough to
sustain a following and also it was a smaller demographic than the
70's/80's young people. Also frankly, it wasn't great party
music....morose guys in jeans and flannel shirts singing depressing
songs; it didn't exactly make people want to party.
Then came Dance/Techno, hip-hop, new forms of music that don't really
depend on a "band" in the normal sense. Live bands became more or less
irrelevant because much of the music that young people listen to (and
let's be frank, young people support live music, not old farts who
never go out) didn't really come from a band.
Like you said, bands have become kind of boring really, just some guys
on stage playing their guitars, etc. Frankly I don't see how other
forms are that exciting either (not a comment on the music genre, but
to me watching a guy rap over a DAT, while another guy makes scratchy
noises behind him is right up there with lip synching).
I think reality is that unlike the years of 1920 - 1985 or so, it has
become increasingly impossible to make a living playing live music.
It's never been easy but there was a time you could subsist on bar
gigs, hone your originals and get by without a day job, or having to
work on the side a lot at least.
I did this for a while until the abject poverty got to me...sure was
fun except for being broke all the time.
The days of playing for a living on a local circuit are long gone
except for a very small group at the top and they are not playing
local, they are playing all over.
It's like art and acting now, there will (and already is really) a
very small group that do it professionally, and a bunch of wannabees
that do it as a hobby.
When bands could play live and had lots of gigs, there was also a
chain of stages you could go through.
Guys that started out playing "popular rock" for chicks, fame, and
glory (and still getting paid too!), used to segue into Holiday Inn
bands from rock bands when they hit 30, then maybe into wedding bands
around that same time or in their 40's. These days the Holiday Inn
gigs are pretty much gone, and as you pointed out Wedding Band gigs
are starting to fall by the wayside.
I know a guy with a big wedding band (11 piece band, horn section,
etc.) that makes great money ($4k and up per night), but his business
has flattened out in the last four years...our drummer used to play
with them and one of the reasons he quit was he saw the writing on the
wall, the future of "Wedding Singer" bands is not that bright.
The other big factor is that the onslaught of cheap recording
technology has made bands into recording bands before they have their
feces together.
It used to be you put a band together, rehearsed a bunch, played gigs
for a year or two and got tight, then maybe you decided to record
something and used your gig money to fund that.
These days SOMEBODY in the band always has some recording setup and
bands start recording stuff before they even get all the members
together....then they try and play this stuff; it's kind of backwards.
hell, remember when FAMOUS Bands used to play NEW MATERIAL out live
BEFORE it was on an album? They used the live shows to test out the
songs and get the band tight...now if it's not an an album (and that
album would be their "hit" album and their latest album) then they
don't play it.
I hate to be a pessimist but I don't see the return of live
music....music has become a commodity, it's just not that important to
people anymore. Even kids have gotten complacent about it, music has
lost it's special appeal for most people.
It used to be when a famous band had a new release, a radio station
would play the entire album at night, and people would gather at
somebody's house and listen as the thing went down....when's the last
time THAT happened.
Wow I just totally bummed myself out...
Analogeezer
Iowa Recorder
> I think you've got an amazing amount of this right on the money! I'll add
> that this very decline in live music is what has left the majors with little
> to sell today but dancers, actors and models. There are almost no jobs or
> role models for young musicians today compared with the past.
Bob thanks for the great comments. It's astounding how you see how
far reaching this all is. I've been sorta semi-retired but thinking
of worthwhile things to do. I frequently think about working with
young people either with doing free guitar classes or a free studio
for underprivalaged. Recently a group bought a theater for youth and
I've been tempted to call to volunteer. My conversations with you
have pretty much put me over the edge to act.
>
> I disagree that the star system is about to go away but I think you are
> pointing out an incredible untapped opportunity for everybody else and that
> the best of those young folks who take up that challenge will probably be
> tomorrow's major label stars.
Yes there truely is a huge amount of opportunity. There will be a
shortage of experianced performers. There will be a shortage of
talent. Hopefully someday I'll be lucky enough to record a project
worthy of sending over to you for mastering.
IR
Rick Powell
> I hate to be a pessimist but I don't see the return of live
> music....music has become a commodity, it's just not that important to
> people anymore. Even kids have gotten complacent about it, music has
> lost it's special appeal for most people.
>
> It used to be when a famous band had a new release, a radio station
> would play the entire album at night, and people would gather at
> somebody's house and listen as the thing went down....when's the last
> time THAT happened.
>
> Wow I just totally bummed myself out...
>
> Analogeezer
OTOH, maybe the process is weeding out all the chaff, and mostly a
handful of the exceptionally talented bands will remain to wow their
truly music-loving audiences. I also see the "patron model" of the
Renaissance being an integral element of live musicians' careers in
the future. Corporate sponsorship or simply a rich sugar daddy who
supports the music for music's sake. Hell, if I were a
multi-millionaire, I'd build a bigger studio and record the musicians
I liked and promote them with advertising and other tour support, just
for art's sake.
RP
0jun...@bellsouth.net
On 2004-02-11 mik...@aol.com(IowaRecorder) said:
>astounding how you see how far reaching this all is. I've been
>sorta semi-retired but thinking of worthwhile things to do. I
>frequently think about working with young people either with doing
>free guitar classes or a free studio for underprivalaged. Recently
>a group bought a theater for youth and I've been tempted to call to
>volunteer. My conversations with you have pretty much put me over
>>the edge to act. >
IN Burlington we had a project called "the barn for the performing
arts" which was in a big old barn which had been a bar, a party room
for rent and a daycare center among over the things after it was an
old farm barn. I loaned it my recording gear and got a friend to let
us use his decent system for foh and monitors for live shows. wE were
working on grant money but politics killed it before it got to the
point of really hustling good federal grants.
such projects can be a worthwhile thing. tHIs one ended up netting me
a couple of production clients and I had fun doing it. TOo many of
its board members were becoming discouraged, but I was working on
another fundraiser for it. I was its chief nuts & bolts guy running
sound systems, working on making sure the electrical plant met our
needs etc. WE were at the time the majority of the board decided to
pack it in one good fundraiser away from getting out of the hole and
having the money needed to finish the FEderal tax paperwork and other
goodies as well as pay off the mounting utility bills. THat project
was supposed to be a "haunted barn" in conjunction with the
community's amateur theater group which used another small theater in
town. wE were going to split the pot down the middle after meeting
expenses.
That Halloween fundraiser would have gotten us well enough to start
working for some substantial federal grant money imho. Oh well.
WE need to help nurture activities such as this. ITS main purpose was
to give young people wanting to learn to perform in genres of music
not supported by the school systems. sTudents who wanted to learn the
nuts and bolts of lighting stage management etc. would be helped as
well. Plans were eventually to open up the large loft area for
rehearsal and performance space as well.
WE were daring to dream big and starting out the right way, but a
preacher a sometimes recorder and sound guy; a jewelry salesperson
another preacher and the manager of a coffeehouse couldn't quite pull
together enough money. A couple of local bands were helping us with
some fundraisers but the utilities ate us alive. THE landlord was an
old friend of mine and one of the preacheres who was minister at my
church. sInce he was also a church member he was kind of eating the
rent until we had things going and had all the FEderal paperwork in
order. IT was going in the right directions though.
Have fun, and follow up on that.
THere's a guy in your area who's quite knowledgeable on live sound
issues who posts over in alt.audio.pro.live-sound quite a bit. YOu
might want to network with him as well.
REgards,
Richard Webb
Electric Spider Productions
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email
--
Braille: support true literacy for the blind!
Iowa Recorder
> On 2004-02-11 mik...@aol.com(IowaRecorder) said:
> >astounding how you see how far reaching this all is. I've been
> >sorta semi-retired but thinking of worthwhile things to do. I
> >frequently think about working with young people either with doing
> >free guitar classes or a free studio for underprivalaged. Recently
> >a group bought a theater for youth and I've been tempted to call to
> >volunteer. My conversations with you have pretty much put me over
> >>the edge to act. >
> A good move.
>
> IN Burlington we had a project called "the barn for the performing
> point of really hustling good federal grants.
That had to be an expensive building to heat in the winter and cool in
the summer. Sorry to hear that politics got in the way... sigh...
more folkes got nothing better to do than gripe how it won't work and
in the process make that actually hapen by not doing any WORK except
gripe.
>
> such projects can be a worthwhile thing. tHIs one ended up netting me
> a couple of production clients and I had fun doing it.
For sure this would be a motivation I remeber the stories about Bruce
Springsting in the early going to a town a couple weeks before he had
a show there and then playing for free at all the hospitals and fund
raisers possible. This generated much publicity and his early shows
did well.
> WE need to help nurture activities such as this. ITS main purpose was
> to give young people wanting to learn to perform in genres of music
> not supported by the school systems.
Yeah I actually owe a debt as when I was young there was a free
recording studio for youth. I worked in there around the clock.
Nothing wrong with returning the favor.
>
> WE were daring to dream big and starting out the right way, but a
> preacher a sometimes recorder and sound guy; a jewelry salesperson
> another preacher and the manager of a coffeehouse couldn't quite pull
> together enough money. A couple of local bands were helping us with
> some fundraisers but the utilities ate us alive. THE landlord was an
> old friend of mine and one of the preacheres who was minister at my
> church. sInce he was also a church member he was kind of eating the
> rent until we had things going and had all the FEderal paperwork in
> order. IT was going in the right directions though.
Nice of him to do that.
>
> Have fun, and follow up on that.
I'll contact them quickly. They may just be in the same boat like you
had with the Music barn.
>
> THere's a guy in your area who's quite knowledgeable on live sound
> issues who posts over in alt.audio.pro.live-sound quite a bit. YOu
> might want to network with him as well.
Hey way cool. Thanks!
IR
Bob Olhsson
news:fa94e621.04021...@posting.google.com...
>... I also see the "patron model" of the
> Renaissance being an integral element of live musicians' careers in
> the future.
Listen to the radio or check out M-TV. THAT'S the "patron model" in action!
It's EXACTLY what's wrong, not any desirable future for music. Corporate
patrons are calling all of the shots on what new music we get to hear as
they screen music to seperate consumers into groups for them to pitch
commercials to.
The solution is ordinary people being able to vote with their wallets for
what they want to hear at live gigs.
Les Cargill
>
> "Rick Powell" <wrkap...@ivnet.com> wrote in message
> news:fa94e621.04021...@posting.google.com...
>
> >... I also see the "patron model" of the
> > Renaissance being an integral element of live musicians' careers in
> > the future.
>
> Listen to the radio or check out M-TV. THAT'S the "patron model" in action!
>
> It's EXACTLY what's wrong, not any desirable future for music. Corporate
> patrons are calling all of the shots on what new music we get to hear as
> they screen music to seperate consumers into groups for them to pitch
> commercials to.
>
Corporate sponsors are not, to my knowlege, to be confused
with patronage. Patronage uses the Latin root "patri", or
father ( not that I understand Latin - patrius? pater? ).
It's a much more personal relationship.
(please correct any misconceptions I may have about what
"corporate sponsorship means in fact - I don't really know
in detail how it's evolved ).
Corporate entities generally operate under a "work for hire"
arrangement, where patronage, at least the sort that applied
to say, Michaelangelo, was a much different sort of contract.
The old "studio system" movie business was closer to
patronage.
My impression is that patronage chafes.
The divide in patronage is that the artisan subsumes all the
work
in exchange for support, and the patrician assumes all the
risk,
in exchange for (ulp!) power. It's art of the halvsies.
Frankly, the Michealangelo type relationship was much more
based on the "slave-artisan to patrician" relationship of
Roman society than is modern corporate sponsorship. The
modern contracts are much less permanent.
The traditional record contract is some closer to patronage
than corporate sponsorship. For lack of a better term,
patronage implies a more "familial" or "filial" bond than
simply being the darling of some company's PR department.
"Patrons" were much closer to an "idealized" aristocratic
actor than what we see today. If there's patronage today,
it's probably more like the relationship that certain
artists have with foundations. I suspect Rome produced a lot
of crap, but time and archaeologists conspire to show
us the good stuff.
> The solution is ordinary people being able to vote with their wallets for
> what they want to hear at live gigs.
>
Did you say "vote with their mullets"?
I would appreciate any correction needed to my understanding,
but I'd
say that in the case of Motown, you had an awful long list of
sharp
people who helped condition material before it got to ordinary
people -
not to mention an extraordinary and hard-to-reproduce talent
base
on which to draw.
Sinnce I drew this mostly from your TapeOp interview and other
sources, I hope I haven't mangled it too badly :) But your
description of how Barry ran that reminds me much of the old
patrician system.
> --
> Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
> Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
> Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
> 615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com
--
Les Cargill
Iowa Recorder
> Bob Olhsson wrote:
> >
> > "Rick Powell" <wrkap...@ivnet.com> wrote in message
> > news:fa94e621.04021...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > >... I also see the "patron model" of the
> > > Renaissance being an integral element of live musicians' careers in
> > > the future.
> >
> > Listen to the radio or check out M-TV. THAT'S the "patron model" in action!
> >
> > It's EXACTLY what's wrong, not any desirable future for music. Corporate
> > patrons are calling all of the shots on what new music we get to hear as
> > they screen music to seperate consumers into groups for them to pitch
> > commercials to.
> >
>
> Corporate sponsors are not, to my knowlege, to be confused
> with patronage. Patronage uses the Latin root "patri", or
> father ( not that I understand Latin - patrius? pater? ).
> It's a much more personal relationship.
>
I think patronage at its best is just as you have described.
Fatherly.
For the most part my experiance with corperate sponsers has been more
of a business arrangment. Your band does this for the company and the
company will do this for you.
My experiance with what I consider real patronage is a more selfless
charitable attitude.
I should first disclaim - much patronage comes from the fact you just
simply have a talent. There has long been a singer in our area whom
everyone just shakes thier head and says; "He needs to get out of
Iowa". This went on for years and finally a friend of mine with the
finances and connections decided to give this singer a fatherly boot
in the ass. He paid for the studio time for a demo. Paid for the
plane tickets to LA and NYC. Shopped him around to some area bands
and labels. I havent seen this singer in ages but have heard he's
doing well out there and best all he's not in Iowa! This guy is a
heck of a singer. He really did need to get out of this area.
I consider the donations to schools of music, orchestras, music
halls... ect... to be a form of patronage. I say this because those
donations usually don't have any expectations attached.
Also sometimes a fan of a band or singer sometimes donates money to
the band for equipment, recording, housing, transportation ect... I'm
sure everyone has stories. My story is the use of a brand new Lincoln
for a summer. Yeah baby! hehehe...
And last but not least! Sometimes a warm bed and a home cooked meal
can be the best patronage. If you know what I mean... hehehe ;)
IR
initialsBB
is also a detrimental factor. It's just speculation on my part (I'm
26) but I imagine that in the '60s for example young rock musicians
would know a lot of classic blues tunes, everything by the Yardbirds,
Beatles, Stones, or a folkie would have the Harry Smith anthology as
their bible. There were common points of reference for young
musicians to get together and jam and it wasn't too much of a stretch
for blues guitarist and a folk songwriter to get together and spawn a
folk-rock band. Of course, there was the jazz scene, soul, country,
Mitch Miller :) etc.
But today between punk, metal, rap, techno, classic rock, jazz, ska,
blues, dub, etc. it seems much harder to get a group of like-minded
people together. Even within these genres there are huge splits and
factions that will never find common ground.
I'm also thinking this same dynamic effects the live music scene and
further splits audiences and venues into smaller and smaller groups.
Outside of the giant lollapalooza-style festivals I don't see a lot of
opportunity for the old Fillmore-style bills that had old blues
musicians, psychedelic jam bands, indian music, jazz, all thrown
together. Am I just imagining this or does the music scene in general
just seem more segregated these days?
Bob Olhsson
news:402CDC72...@worldnet.att.net...
> ...Corporate entities generally operate under a "work for hire"
> arrangement, where patronage, at least the sort that applied
> to say, Michaelangelo, was a much different sort of contract.
> The old "studio system" movie business was closer to
> patronage.
What I mean by patronage is that the content of the music is determined by a
sponsor for their own purposes INDEPENDENTLY of trying to please anybody
else such as music fans.
One major thing that has differentiated 20th century American music from
everything that came before and a lot of what came from elsewhere in the
world has been that the underlying PURPOSE was to please the largest
possible number of fans. Artists could sell their ability to draw fans to
promoters and record labels. To a remarkable degree it didn't matter what
the music was about so long as a performers fans supported them. The result
was a rich variety of music. Patronage removes the fans from the equation
and it becomes entirely about pleasing a corporate or government entity. The
result is characterless mediocrity, nothing wrong but also nothing right.
It's a subtle but very significant difference in the relationships between
performers, their music and their audiences. Madison Avenue is VERY happy
about what music radio sounds like today while most of the rest of us
aren't. I suspect the state of today's record labels is very much a symptom
of corporate patronage controlling today's new music. I think we have to
look hard at the big picture if we are to understand what's going on well
enough to change things for the better.
EggHd
everything that came before and a lot of what came from elsewhere in the
world has been that the underlying PURPOSE was to please the largest
possible number of fans. >>
Great post!
---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"
initialsBB
> charitable attitude.
If you're talking about patronage as it existed for example in the
Renaissance I think it was anything but selfless or chairtable. The
patrons were for the most part the church or the aristocracy and both
groups were arguably in it for the propaganda. Sure there was the
added PR bonus of being seen to "support the arts" but the church was
basically looking for advertising materials and the aristocracy
looking to mythologize themselves through portraiture.
Iowa Recorder
> "Les Cargill" <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:402CDC72...@worldnet.att.net...
>
> > ...Corporate entities generally operate under a "work for hire"
>
> sponsor for their own purposes INDEPENDENTLY of trying to please anybody
> else such as music fans.
The patronage of a true fan is the best.
>
> One major thing that has differentiated 20th century American music from
> everything that came before and a lot of what came from elsewhere in the
> world has been that the underlying PURPOSE was to please the largest
> possible number of fans. Artists could sell their ability to draw fans to
> promoters and record labels.
It sounds like back in the old days - the bands did all the work.
hmmm... what a concept. Form a band. Work your ass off... Your so
right about this.
> To a remarkable degree it didn't matter what
> the music was about so long as a performers fans supported them. The result
> was a rich variety of music. Patronage removes the fans from the equation
> and it becomes entirely about pleasing a corporate or government entity.
So well said. Who will be the next Bob Dylan? Anyone?
> The
> result is characterless mediocrity, nothing wrong but also nothing right.
Now this I disagree and sort of agree with. My kids make me listen to
all kinds of stuff. My son's favorite tune is "All Star" by Smash
Mouth. My daughters favorite band is Evenancense (I can't spell it!).
I listen to this stuff and go wow!!!! Yes I am turned off by the
mediocrisy. Yes, I am turned off by the control the media has on our
thoughts. Still I have fun with my kids singing the corus to....
> It's a subtle but very significant difference in the relationships between
> performers, their music and their audiences. Madison Avenue is VERY happy
> about what music radio sounds like today while most of the rest of us
> aren't. I suspect the state of today's record labels is very much a symptom
> of corporate patronage controlling today's new music. I think we have to
> look hard at the big picture if we are to understand what's going on well
> enough to change things for the better.
Great post. I shouldn't have added anything to your post but I just
wanted to respond that I like your point of view. Sorry for the typos
and misguided ideas but I just got off 36 hours on the road...
Still live and giggin...
IR
Iowa Recorder
> Lately I've been wondering if the diversity of the music scene today
> is also a detrimental factor. It's just speculation on my part (I'm
> 26) but I imagine that in the '60s for example young rock musicians
> would know a lot of classic blues tunes, everything by the Yardbirds,
> Beatles, Stones, or a folkie would have the Harry Smith anthology as
> their bible. There were common points of reference for young
> musicians to get together and jam and it wasn't too much of a stretch
> for blues guitarist and a folk songwriter to get together and spawn a
> folk-rock band. Of course, there was the jazz scene, soul, country,
> Mitch Miller :) etc.
I never experianced this. You must have grown up in an area other
then Iowa. Also, who in the heck is Mitch Miller???
>
> But today between punk, metal, rap, techno, classic rock, jazz, ska,
> blues, dub, etc. it seems much harder to get a group of like-minded
> people together. Even within these genres there are huge splits and
> factions that will never find common ground.
The real deal comes from the surveys and research done by the big
corperations on advertising demographics They determine that this
type of music is hip hop. They determine this type of music is
grunge. These statistic mkers decide what music fits what consumer
market. It's become a science. They do market surveys. They take a
bunch of kids in a mall and ask them; "What do you think of this
song?" What Bob has pointed out is the music is being run according
to a formula. Mainstream music is locked into a formula.
>
> I'm also thinking this same dynamic effects the live music scene and
> further splits audiences and venues into smaller and smaller groups.
> Outside of the giant lollapalooza-style festivals I don't see a lot of
> opportunity for the old Fillmore-style bills that had old blues
> musicians, psychedelic jam bands, indian music, jazz, all thrown
> together. Am I just imagining this or does the music scene in general
> just seem more segregated these days?
Mindless wanderings in the key of A minor has always been a turn off
to me. I'm thinking of the drifters, the coasters, Buddy Holly.
Still Mountain at the Fillmore was great recording.
Sorry 36 hours on the road... time for bed.... oyeay oyay...
IR
Mike Rivers
> The patronage of a true fan is the best.
That depends on the definition of "true fan." If he spends money that
gets back to the artist, that's helpful. If he thinks he's helping the
artist along by playing the songs he's downloaded for free, that might
be a fan, but not one contributing to the artist's continued
existence as an artist. The idea of a "patron" is someone who assists
in the day-to-day support (like food, shelter, and an occasional romp
in the hay) of an artist whose art doesn't pay enough to live on,
given the times and the environment.
> It sounds like back in the old days - the bands did all the work.
> hmmm... what a concept. Form a band. Work your ass off... Your so
> right about this.
And to what end? Mostly to have fun, spend some creative time with
friends, make a little money, and get a few chicks. A small number
rose from this to make music or songwriting a career. Most, though,
end up doing something else when it comes time to have to earn a
living.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mri...@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Mike
> I think you've got an amazing amount of this right on the money! I'll add
> that this very decline in live music is what has left the majors with little
> to sell today but dancers, actors and models. There are almost no jobs or
> role models for young musicians today compared with the past.
>
I was watchingt PBS Austin City Limits and they had John Mayer on. He
is the latest imitator of that guy from south africa (can't remmeber
his name). The interesting thing was he did a duet with Buddy Guy and
man he (John Mayer) is a great blues guitaris. So at least he has
plenty of talent even if his original material is a derivative rehash
of the South African guy.
Mike
> When I started my first gig about 20 years ago. We would play a gig
> in the mornings on weekdays for the third shift workers. We'd play
> from 8 AM to 12. Get some rest and then play that night. It was
> typically easy to play 10 - 18 gigs a week. Then the drunk driving
> laws came in... Then disco came in... MTV hit the cable. Then
> keyboard/sequenced oriented music hit and lastly Kareoke. Dance clubs
> now are bigger than ever.
>
> In my state (Iowa) 15 years ago 17% of the population frequented bars
> regularly. Now that figure is down to 5%. (Iowa Bar Owners
> Association) Everybody remebers those 6 nighters in hotels. You set
> up once. You play six nights. You tear down once and move on. Now
> days it's all one nighters. Even finding a club to book you for a Fri
> and Saturday is rare. Also remeber how it was Standard Operating
> Procedure (SOP) to get a band for the wedding? It is now SOP to hire
> a DJ for the wedding.
>
> Now am I whining that this is all unfair?
>
I tell ya another problem with live acts. They bring to much stinking
ass equipment. I did a live recording of a band in a club where the
playing space, while fairl decent accross, the depth is barely enough
to fit the band in. (IE from the back of the stage are to the front).
They two guitarists, a percussionist, and a horn player who also
doubled on percussion instruments.
One guitarist had a pedal board that was around 3 feet long by 2 feet
wide with something like 8 different pedals on it. But that was just
the beginning. He had one of these kind of small Mesa Boogie stacks.
Head on top of speaker etc. On top of that he had another rack with 3
more units in it taking up 4 spaces or more.
I had to drape the microphone around the handle and dangle it in front
of the speaker grill. There was no room for a stand. The percussion
player had the full compliment LP congas and every other possible
noise making, rhythm device and was right in front of the drummer. I
was playing twister to put mics on the drums. Of course the horn
player not only had three different horns but he had a bag full of
other stuff, moroccas, shakers etc. I made a joke to the leader. I
told them they were now a three piece by order of the fire marshall.
But the thing is, they were playing this club for 300 bucks and it
took them forever to setup because of the mountains of equipment. I
would recommend the club get a DJ over this and i am sure the club
owners rethink such situations. Luckily they had a good crowd.
Mike Rivers
> I was watchingt PBS Austin City Limits and they had John Mayer on. He
> is the latest imitator of that guy from south africa
Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
he has anything in common with South African music.
Can you explain yourself a little better? Like maybe even come up with
the name of "that guy from south africa"?
--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mri...@d-and-d.com)
Mike Rivers
> I tell ya another problem with live acts. They bring to much stinking
> ass equipment.
I just spent Saturday and Sunday helping Roger Norman at the East
Coast Jazz Festival. Piano, bass, drums, singer - all day, every day.
Only once did I have to change anything due to equipment and that was
for a bass player who brought his own amplfier head. One plug change
in two days isn't exactly backbreaking. People should listen to more
live jazz and less live processed sounds.
Ricky W. Hunt
news:znr1076936790k@trad...
>
> In article <934b3e2c.04021...@posting.google.com>
mme...@mmeproductions.com writes:
>
> > I was watchingt PBS Austin City Limits and they had John Mayer on. He
> > is the latest imitator of that guy from south africa
>
> Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
> what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
> representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
> he has anything in common with South African music.
I thought he did mostly "college radio/young female swoon" music, though
I've heard from numerous people I respect that he's a heck of a blues guitar
player (and that's what he started out as I believe). I can't think of any
South African's that do
college-radio/young-female-swoon-music-and-also-american-blues-guitar. But
then again I can't think of any South African music stars.
Ryan
> In article <934b3e2c.04021...@posting.google.com> mme...@mmeproductions.com writes:
>
> > I was watchingt PBS Austin City Limits and they had John Mayer on. He
> > is the latest imitator of that guy from south africa
>
> Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
> what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
> representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
> he has anything in common with South African music.
I'm sure Mmeprod was thinking of Dave Matthews here. Dave is from
South Africa and Mayer does sound a lot like him. But Dave's music,
as you all know, isn't exactly "African."
Ryan
the traveling troupe from the Newport Jazz festival. Man, watch out
for Carter (sax). Can that boy blow! He made the (bass sax? extra
thick and long) sound like a set of congas at one point, no
exxageration. But anyway, though we might wish more people listened
to jazz, I really don't think that will happen anytime soon. How
about punk rock? *Real* punk rock bands, (no not Blink 182) share the
same type of minimalistic views towards equipment. Some of them even
heckle and make fun of other punk bands for using just one stomp box.
Ulitmatly it is the band's insecurity and control-freakiness that make
them want to use every toy in the world, not the style of music.
mri...@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:<znr1076936917k@trad>...
SoundCheck
> In article <934b3e2c.04021...@posting.google.com> mme...@mmeproductions.com writes:
>
> > I was watchingt PBS Austin City Limits and they had John Mayer on. He
> > is the latest imitator of that guy from south africa
>
> Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
> what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
> representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
> he has anything in common with South African music.
>
> Can you explain yourself a little better? Like maybe even come up with
> the name of "that guy from south africa"?
Dave Matthews? He's originally from South Africa.
Angelo
Mike
>
> > I was watchingt PBS Austin City Limits and they had John Mayer on. He
> > is the latest imitator of that guy from south africa
>
> Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
> what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
> representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
> he has anything in common with South African music.
>
> Can you explain yourself a little better? Like maybe even come up with
> the name of "that guy from south africa"?
Sorry. Dave Mathews. He is originally from South Africa. Although his
music isn't necessarily reflective of South Africa. John Mayber does
the funky white guy chordology routine.
Dave Brown
> Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
> what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
> representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
> he has anything in common with South African music.
>
> Can you explain yourself a little better? Like maybe even come up with
> the name of "that guy from south africa"?
I think he was referring to Dave Matthews, who is originally from
South Africa.
It's funny, I have been hearing John Mayer on the radio for some time,
and generally like his stuff, but I never associated him with Dave
Matthews until I saw him on that Austin City Limits show. I was
watching it, and thought, "Oh, I get it, he's being packaged like Dave
Matthews".
Which is not to say that I think he isn't talented. He is -- he plays
really well, writes a nice hooky melody and some good lyrics, and
obviously has a nice sense of harmony.
It's just that by the time he gets through the production process, his
songs (at least the big singles) end up sounding a lot like DM. Not an
exact clone, and he's bringing his own more rootsy sensibility in.
BTW, I was diggin' his drummer on ACL -- the guy was in the pocket!
Regards,
dB
Mike Rivers
> > Huh? Really? I don't know that I've ever heard John Mayer, but from
> > what I've read about him here (which I know is not necessarily
> > representative of what his music is really like) I can't imagine that
> > he has anything in common with South African music.
> Dave Matthews? He's originally from South Africa.
Oh. Yes, I've heard the two compared often. I thought he was talking
about someone like Jean-Bosco Mwenda or King Sunny Ade.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mri...@d-and-d.com)
Glen
both perform live, and sing while playing crazy riffs. you may not like the
music, or think it's a rip-off of this-and-that, but they are excellent
musicians.
has anyone read reviews of ryan adams' latest record, "rock n roll" ? it's
funny how journalists dismiss the album by saying it's copied from morissey,
U2, the smiths, etc ... but i thought it's a normal thing to be 'influenced'
by your 'musical influences' ... i've never heard somebody describe me a
band or record without giving it some kind of comparison to something else
...
it's the way we combine our influences which makes us do different things
...
--
all of this in my humble opinion, of course.
Glen.
"Ryan" <ink...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:dea39397.04021...@posting.google.com...
Glen
vocals. it's brilliant !!! the album version sucks. the whole album is
over-produced ... sad.
--
Glen
"Dave Brown" <dav...@sbcglobal.net> a écrit dans le message de
news:43c810f9.04021...@posting.google.com...
Rob Adelman
Glen wrote:
> has anyone heard the demo version of "neon" by john mayer ? just guitar and
> vocals. it's brilliant !!! the album version sucks. the whole album is
> over-produced ... sad.
I think the album is wonderful. And I love the production. I do not like
his second album however.
Scott Dorsey
>
>I'm also thinking this same dynamic effects the live music scene and
>further splits audiences and venues into smaller and smaller groups.
>Outside of the giant lollapalooza-style festivals I don't see a lot of
>opportunity for the old Fillmore-style bills that had old blues
>musicians, psychedelic jam bands, indian music, jazz, all thrown
>together. Am I just imagining this or does the music scene in general
>just seem more segregated these days?
Yes, and it's the natural result of it being so much larger. You'll note
that there is really no "top 40" radio any longer. You can't turn to one
station and hear a variety of different styles.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Iowa Recorder
> In article <934b3e2c.04021...@posting.google.com> mme...@mmeproductions.com writes:
>
> > I tell ya another problem with live acts. They bring to much stinking
> > ass equipment.
>
> I just spent Saturday and Sunday helping Roger Norman at the East
> Coast Jazz Festival. Piano, bass, drums, singer - all day, every day.
> Only once did I have to change anything due to equipment and that was
> for a bass player who brought his own amplfier head. One plug change
> in two days isn't exactly backbreaking. People should listen to more
> live jazz and less live processed sounds.
Not only listen but also *DO* some gigs WITHOUT the crutches. Good
players will go; "Gee, I really have to work to play this way" Poor
players will go - This tone is making me play bad. I purposely do
some jazz gigs just to experiance this challenge. It's a good
experiance to just work the instrument and not have noises/effects
hide the flaws. Sometimes less is more.
Then on the other side I love it when a band has the resources to haul
around a real Hammond B3 and leslie. I love it when guitar players
have taken a great deal of time and expense getting thier guitar tone
right. I like it when percussion has all the toys, cowbells,
tamorines, wood blocks, shakers ect...
Still that's if you are playing places can handle that. That's not
reality anymore.
The reality for the most part the club scene has deteriorated to the
point of there is not even a stage. Typically playing live around
here - you set up on the dance floor. You DON'T use monitors unless
you want dancers falling over them. You often have to point source
your PA to one side of the stage - unless you want to block the womans
bathroom...ect... If you have a sound man people will look at you
incredulously - You need a sound man?!! In here?!! It comes down to
using the smallest amount of equipment to do the job. Any quitarist
with alot of effects pedals should look into a good multi-effects
processor.
Drummers should look into having two or three kits. One being very
small and compact.
Also there is a ruinious financial impact in this also. It's the old
rip off of undercutting. Band A is 6 peices. They play for 300$.
50$ a man. Band B comes in as a 3 piece. Club owner says; "I paid
only 50$ a man to band A. Why should I pay band B 100$ per man?"
sigh...
IR
ryanm
news:3774011b.04021...@posting.google.com...
>
> Then on the other side I love it when a band has the resources to haul
> around a real Hammond B3 and leslie.
>
keyboards that will do a "close enough" B3 sound but only weigh 50lbs
instead of 300lbs. However, that said, I think my keyboard player may get a
leslie to go with his XK-2 soon, and I can't wait to hear how much of a
difference it makes.
> I love it when guitar players have taken a great deal of time and
> expense getting thier guitar tone right.
>
That doesn't necessarily imply a ton of stomp boxes or a big rack full
of processors, though. Sometimes getting the tone right means nothing
between the guitar and amp but a cable.
> Drummers should look into having two or three kits. One being very
> small and compact.
>
The nice thing about drums is that they are generally scaleable. You can
turn a 20 piece kit into a 4 piece just by leaving most of it home.
> Also there is a ruinious financial impact in this also. It's the old
> rip off of undercutting. Band A is 6 peices. They play for 300$.
> 50$ a man. Band B comes in as a 3 piece. Club owner says; "I paid
> only 50$ a man to band A. Why should I pay band B 100$ per man?"
>
Yep. The worst part is that it works the other way too. I'm in a 6-piece
band, and we often talk to clubs who say "we're only paying so-and-so $250",
even though so-and-so is a 3 piece and we have twice that many people to
pay. Now, money isn't the first priority for us, so we'll take a low paying
gig if we really like the crowd or if it will lead to bigger/better gigs
later, but for the most part, the venues simply want to pay as little as
possible.
ryanm
EggHd
True story. When I was a "kid" we had a B3 player in the band. On the way
home from a gig the B3 fell out of a Ranchero on it's top in the street.
Not only scratched up but man was it out of tune!
ryanm
news:20040217174641...@mb-m14.aol.com...
>
> True story. When I was a "kid" we had a B3 player in the band. On the
way
> home from a gig the B3 fell out of a Ranchero on it's top in the street.
>
> Not only scratched up but man was it out of tune!
>
are amazing, but they just can't compete with the real thing. But a B3 is
just so much of a pain to carry around, to me it's worth having a slightly
less-cool sounding keyboard and only having to lug around 1/5th of the
weight in gear. But every studio should have one... ; )
ryanm
EggHd
are amazing, but they just can't compete with the real thing. >>
I even liked Jon Lord though a Marshal and no Leslie.
Mike Rivers
> Also there is a ruinious financial impact in this also. It's the old
> rip off of undercutting. Band A is 6 peices. They play for 300$.
> 50$ a man. Band B comes in as a 3 piece. Club owner says; "I paid
> only 50$ a man to band A. Why should I pay band B 100$ per man?"
And DJ DJ plays for $200, brings in all his equipment, occupies only
20% the customer space as a 3 piece band, and only mooches two or
three beers rather than a dozen.
Michael R. Kesti
>In article <3774011b.04021...@posting.google.com> mik...@aol.com writes:
>
>> Also there is a ruinious financial impact in this also. It's the old
>> rip off of undercutting. Band A is 6 peices. They play for 300$.
>> 50$ a man. Band B comes in as a 3 piece. Club owner says; "I paid
>> only 50$ a man to band A. Why should I pay band B 100$ per man?"
I've never experienced a club owner negotiating pay based on the number
of people in the band. More often pay is based on the number of drinks
purchased by the audiences the bands draw.
>And DJ DJ plays for $200, brings in all his equipment, occupies only
>20% the customer space as a 3 piece band, and only mooches two or
>three beers rather than a dozen.
A DJ can and more often will maintain a desired volume level, too!
--
========================================================================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mke...@gv.net | - The Who, Bargain
EggHd
of people in the band. >>
I had a city do that to an act I work with. "We would pay a 12 piece band that
but not a 5 piece."
Mike Rivers
> I've never experienced a club owner negotiating pay based on the number
> of people in the band. More often pay is based on the number of drinks
> purchased by the audiences the bands draw.
Dollars per man isn't really what the club owner sees, but it's a
convenient way for the band to count their chickens. As you say, how
much the club owner pays out for entertainment is based on how much he
expects to take in because he has that entertainment - at least on a
busy night. This is a problem for big bands who need to eat, and why
bands often get pared down until they can play in places that can
afford to pay better.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mri...@d-and-d.com)
Iowa Recorder
> In article <4032C8A2...@gv.net> mke...@gv.net writes:
>
> > I've never experienced a club owner negotiating pay based on the number
> > of people in the band. More often pay is based on the number of drinks
> > purchased by the audiences the bands draw.
>
> Dollars per man isn't really what the club owner sees, but it's a
> convenient way for the band to count their chickens. As you say, how
> much the club owner pays out for entertainment is based on how much he
Your right, I have had civic organisations use the "per man" standard
but it is a rare case. I agree most clubs don't care if your a solo
kazoo player. Just as long as you make the cash register ring.
I have seen countless talented ensemble players leave music just
because the money got too small. (I mean ensemble by large bands 7 to
15 piece.) It's tough to put together a large group. There are so
many talented players I would love to hire but I just can't because it
wouldn't add anything financially.
There is the blatent form of undercutting that goes on. A typical
scenario is you quote a festival for 1500$ and then some goof quotes
350$. I didn't mention this as it wasn't really where the thread was
heading (way off topic about overkill on equipment) but blatent
undercutting is indeed another sad reality of any music scene. That
includes overkill on equipment and personel.
What I am mostly pointing out as undercutting is the non-pro bands who
only play for enjoyment. Some of these bands are quite good but they
don't care much about money as long as they can enjoy their hobby.
Some of these bands have great PAs with good roadie and tech support.
These bands have the luxury of adding an extra fiddle, steel, horn
section, percussion...ect... and they go into a place and play for
300$. To them it doesn't matter that they make money as long as they
enjoy their music. I have friends in such bands and often advise them
on what rate they should expect. They tell me clubs just don't want
to pay that kind of money when the club can get the same crowd with a
200$ kareoke act. It's a sad situation. (Whining deleted..)
I know it's just the reality of intense competition. Bands will do
whatever they can to get what they want. To be accurate I should say
the undercutting comes at what quality of music is offered at such a
cheap price.
With that said, I should point out that what is making money for bars
these days is very poor music; Kareoke, terrible cover bands, DJs.
Most people have no clue of what a good band sounds like because they
are so used to hearing what the coorperations have been spoon feeding
us. Monopolys control many large venues and radio stations. It's to
the point that there are no independant radio stations simply because
of the the advertising demographic surveys.
My hope is eventually someday... the people will notice we are being
spoon fed crap. My hope is people will venture out to hear if there
is something more. If your a performer just make sure you have
something more. That may require hauling around a hammond B3. Really
though I think the "something more" is just having gifted vocalists.
(Alot less gear to haul)
IR
ryanm
> but it is a rare case. I agree most clubs don't care if your a solo
> kazoo player. Just as long as you make the cash register ring.
>
their heads when they're talking about pay, and $50 a man is pretty average.
> I have seen countless talented ensemble players leave music just
> because the money got too small. (I mean ensemble by large bands 7 to
> 15 piece.) It's tough to put together a large group. There are so
> many talented players I would love to hire but I just can't because it
> wouldn't add anything financially.
>
That's the reason my 6 piece isn't a 15 piece. I want horns, backup
singers, a fiddle, a percussionist, and so on, but we would make $1.50 each
at the end of the night. And that just won't pay out bar tabs, dammit.
However, there are several good horn players around Dallas who know us and
and sit in whenever they can, which is pretty much any time they show up to
our gigs. Also, our drummer's girlfriend is a pretty damn good fiddle
player, so she sits in whenever she's in town.
> 300$. To them it doesn't matter that they make money as long as they
> enjoy their music. I have friends in such bands and often advise them
>
We're sort of there, but at the same time, offering us $200 for a 4-5
hour show with at least 6 people performing is kind of insulting. In fact, I
would (and do) play free for charities before I'd play a bar for only a
couple hundred bucks.
> I know it's just the reality of intense competition. Bands will do
> whatever they can to get what they want. To be accurate I should say
> the undercutting comes at what quality of music is offered at such a
> cheap price.
>
Well... the real problem is that quality has nothing to do with it. It's
sheer beer sales. The venues don't care if you suck, they just care how much
beer is sold while you play there. If your band is great but there's no
noticable difference in alcohol sales on nights you play, then they're not
going to pay you any more than the 3 piece garage band that sucks. To the
venue, you are of equal quality.
> though I think the "something more" is just having gifted vocalists.
>
Actually, there is something to that (and not just because I'm a singer
: ). A band with good vocals, which includes strong backup vocals and full
harmonies, just comes across as a better band than a band that is actually
better but has weaker vocals. If you have a really great guitarist or
keyboardist, people will only notice it during the solos. But great vocals,
strong 3 or 4 part harmonies, etc, will improve the overall perception of
the band as a whole. IME, of course.
ryanm
Mike Rivers
> What I am mostly pointing out as undercutting is the non-pro bands who
> only play for enjoyment. Some of these bands are quite good but they
> don't care much about money as long as they can enjoy their hobby.
That's the same as people who have a hobby of recording, or a hobby of
recording as an extension of playing or writing music. We saw the same
thing with the proliferation of home studios in the '80's - they can
easily undercut professional studios because they have practical no
overhead, no business licenses to obtain, no requirement to build
disabled-accessable bathrooms, and usually manage to dodge some taxes
for which licensed businesses are obligated.
However, it's probably easier to be a really good hobby band than to
be a really good hobby studio. I guess you just have to deal with it.
> Some of these bands have great PAs with good roadie and tech support.
> These bands have the luxury of adding an extra fiddle, steel, horn
> section, percussion...ect... and they go into a place and play for
> 300$. To them it doesn't matter that they make money as long as they
> enjoy their music.
NAMM has been doing a promotion called "Weekend Warriors" to sell
musical equipment to people with plenty of money. I recall one of
their ads showed a band made up of people dressed as a judge, a
surgeon, a professor, an engineer . . . with text sort of like "The
combined annual income of this band is $1.5 million. Are you getting a
share of it?"
> With that said, I should point out that what is making money for bars
> these days is very poor music; Kareoke, terrible cover bands, DJs.
So why do people go to those bars? To hear the bad music? Maybe it's
just because they don't feel drawn to listen to the music so they can
spend more time taking and drinking. Of course that's what the owners
like best. Occasionally you'll find a club with really good music (and
music that's properly paid for) where they shut you up if you talk
while the band is playing, but that's more like going to a concert
where you can get a drink or some food than a place to talk where
there's some music to talk over. With $15-30 cover charge, it can
work. With no cover, you get what you pay for, and sometimes you're
lucky.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mri...@d-and-d.com)
EggHd
singers, a fiddle, a percussionist, and so on, but we would make $1.50 each
at the end of the night. >>
We got a quote of like $900 for city sponsored gig and we went back and said
"we" needed $1500 and they said "Oh, we would pay that for a 12 piece band but
not this 4 piece".
hank alrich
> So why do people go to those bars?
To try to get laid.
agent86
> I've never experienced a club owner negotiating pay based on the number
> of people in the band. More often pay is based on the number of drinks
> purchased by the audiences the bands draw.
A situation I've seen more often is clubs that will only hire bands of a
certain size or a certain instrumentation. Some won't hire a duo. Some
won't hire a group without a drummer. A lot of times the places that will
hire a duo pay so little that you could make more as a trio in a different
club. Hopefully, you can find the critical mass that works in your
geographical area.
The silliest example I ever ran across was in the mid-80s when a lot of
Motel lounges still had bands & dance floors. One lounge manager told me
he could only hire "Show Bands" He defined a Show Band as having as least
6 players, at least one male & one female singer, playing current top 40
covers, and wearing some kind of uniform. Some of these bands were
actually quite good, but I always thought the Robot-Dancing Horn Section
thing was kind of over the top.
ryanm
>
> We got a quote of like $900 for city sponsored gig and we went back and
said
> "we" needed $1500 and they said "Oh, we would pay that for a 12 piece band
but
> not this 4 piece".
>
ryanm
Logan Shaw
> "EggHd" <eg...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20040219115929...@mb-m06.aol.com...
>>"we" needed $1500 and they said "Oh, we would pay that for a 12 piece band
>>but not this 4 piece".
> Tell 'em you each play 3 instruments, and that makes you a 12 piece. ; )
Is that actually specified in the union scale rules? If you double on
an instrument, you're supposed to collect a doubling fee. Not that
I've ever heard of anyone following the union rules...
- Logan
EggHd
Aight. AFTRA turns into a powerhouse and AFofM is weak. How the heck did this
happen?
Jay Kadis
eg...@aol.com (EggHd) wrote:
In the case of the AFofM, they harrassed high-school musicians to the point of
revolution. In the '60s, I was "leader" of a rock band that joined the AFofM in
order to play real gigs. Our local was run by the
brass-band-in-the-park-on-Sunday crowd who insisted on union scale for school
dances and parties and followed us around to check. That served to engender a
mistrust of the union, who followed up by failing to help us when a club owner
reneged on payment. What exactly was the union doing for us for that 2%?
Had the union been helpful and made allowances for student musicians, I know my
feelings would have been different. I've played clubs on and off for 35 years
and have never needed the AFofM. Of course, we're still making about $6/hour...
and the local I joined is long gone.
In essence, the AFofM convinced me I couldn't expect to make a living playing
music.
-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x
EggHd
playing
music. >>
But even in recording they have no pull (except for Symphonies) and AFTRA rules
the roost.
Jay Kadis
eg...@aol.com (EggHd) wrote:
I think symphonic players (not just recording) are still influenced by the
AFofM, but popular music seems to have side-stepped the union.
Geetar Dave
> I've never experienced a club owner negotiating pay based on the number
> of people in the band. More often pay is based on the number of drinks
> purchased by the audiences the bands draw.
Me either.
Most places around here charge a cover at the door, and the band gets
to take that home. If your crowd won't drink a lot, it's an uphill
battle; regardless of your success, skill, or experience.
For this reason, my involvement in local weeknight gigs has ended. I
can get paid more to teach a few guitar lessons in a day than to gig
for peanuts.
-dave
www.themoodrings.com (green ring = sounds)
0jun...@bellsouth.net
On 2004-02-20 j...@ccrma.stanford.edu said:
>eg...@aol.com (EggHd) wrote:
>> << Not that I've ever heard of anyone following the union rules...
>>> >
>> Aight. AFTRA turns into a powerhouse and AFofM is weak. How the
>>heck did this
>> happen?
>the point of revolution. In the '60s, I was "leader" of a rock
>band that joined the AFofM in order to play real gigs. Our local
>was run by the brass-band-in-the-park-on-Sunday crowd who insisted
>on union scale for school dances and parties and followed us around
>to check. That served to engender a mistrust of the union
>What exactly was the union doing for us for that 2%? Had
>the union been helpful and made allowances for student musicians, I
>know my feelings would have been different.
heyday for live music where I grew up, there is no scene now there and
wasn't for much longer than a lot of places.
tHe AFM in my locale, local 646 in Southeastern IOwa had a program
where you could pay your annual and your work dues instead of the 4%
rate by just giving them $10 a year. FOr a road band who gigged in
the area a lot that option was still available.
wHat killed it for me was seeing guys with large dixieland bands etc.
going to these places and booking the job for under scale and then
bitching about it if others did it.
I did end up working some gigs where I got paid through the Musicians'
performance trust fund. That was one good program I saw that AFM
offered.
Richard Webb
Electric Spider Productions
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email
--
Amazing how much tape is on a 10" reel, when it's not, isn't it?
Jay Kadis
wrote:
[snip]
> I joined the AFM back when I was in high school also. that was the
> heyday for live music where I grew up, there is no scene now there and
> wasn't for much longer than a lot of places.
>
> tHe AFM in my locale, local 646 in Southeastern IOwa had a program
> where you could pay your annual and your work dues instead of the 4%
> rate by just giving them $10 a year. FOr a road band who gigged in
> the area a lot that option was still available.
>
Sounds like your local was more enlightened than mine (Local 510 San Leandro
CA). At the time, there was a great local music scene: I saw bands like the
Yardbirds, the Turtles, Buffalo Springfield at the local roller skating arena
from 10' away. We often played there, played a gig opening for Muddy Waters,
all of this in little Hayward CA. It was truly a golden age as far as local
music was concerned. Once Bill Graham started the Filmore, it all died in favor
of huge corporate productions.
> wHat killed it for me was seeing guys with large dixieland bands etc.
> going to these places and booking the job for under scale and then
> bitching about it if others did it.
>
> I did end up working some gigs where I got paid through the Musicians'
> performance trust fund. That was one good program I saw that AFM
> offered.
>
We did some gigs for the California Youth Authority via the AFM Performance
Trust Fund. Got to see all the guys that suddenly disappeared from high school.
That was probably the only payback we ever got from our union involvement...that
and some fun stories.
Steven Myers
"Jay Kadis" <j...@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote ...
> Our local was run by the
> brass-band-in-the-park-on-Sunday crowd who insisted on union scale for
school
> dances and parties and followed us around to check. That served to
engender a
> mistrust of the union, who followed up by failing to help us when a club
owner
> reneged on payment. What exactly was the union doing for us for that 2%?
Our local was run by the old accordion players. They didn't have much in the
way of equipment expenses, and they didn't understand that we did. So they
kept the scale _way_ down.
To be fair: When I lost a drummer, called the club owner to report what I
was doing to remedy the situation and was told that the replacement had
better not be black, the local backed me up when I dishonored my contract.
Not much later, I moved to [large city] to try my luck. Called the union
about finding work. The voice at the other end said I would have to bring my
union card in and surrender it, then wait six months, get my card back, then
ask again. So much for the "international brotherhood" shit.
Ever since, I have resisted institutions of any sort.
Iowa Recorder
>
> > Some of these bands have great PAs with good roadie and tech support.
> > These bands have the luxury of adding an extra fiddle, steel, horn
> > section, percussion...ect... and they go into a place and play for
> > 300$. To them it doesn't matter that they make money as long as they
> > enjoy their music.
>
> NAMM has been doing a promotion called "Weekend Warriors" to sell
> musical equipment to people with plenty of money. I recall one of
> their ads showed a band made up of people dressed as a judge, a
> surgeon, a professor, an engineer . . . with text sort of like "The
> combined annual income of this band is $1.5 million. Are you getting a
> share of it?"
That's pretty funny. We have a band composed of just doctors in our
area. They are touted as the most over educated band in Iowa.
>
> > With that said, I should point out that what is making money for bars
> > these days is very poor music; Kareoke, terrible cover bands, DJs.
>
> So why do people go to those bars? To hear the bad music? Maybe it's
> just because they don't feel drawn to listen to the music so they can
> spend more time taking and drinking. Of course that's what the owners
> like best.
Your comments made me think a bit about this. My impression is alot
of it is just plain smart marketing. I can make several examples.
One band has bumper stickers and regilia of various biker gangs all
over thier stage setup. They are terrible but they play music that
bikers love and so they market themselves very well. In the summer
they have it made playing all the various Harley Davidson oriented
festivals.
Another band does goofy stuff like handing out free cheese balls. The
cheese ball band has promo and marketing material that is very funny.
Often thier gigs are advertised as "special" events such as "Free
cheese night" ect... It is funny how bad they are and they admit "we
suck" but in such a humorous way that it is appealing. Their a funny
bunch of guys and crowds like this.
Again I'm not gonna whine about this. It's long been known that
musical talent alone won't do it. Mostly it is the way a product is
marketed that makes it successful. I think anyone getting into music
professionally should know some things about marketing.
As for kareoke. The marketing is in what I call the "me generation".
Through the years I have seen a gradual shift in crowds. People want
more attention. People want to steal the lime light more. I remember
a time where people didn't have a burning desire to sing with the
band. Then it started to change. This change happened LONG before
kareoke. It seemed the crowds starting to have more attention seeking
behavior. More and more at gigs girls would want to jump on stage to
dance (which I kinda like) or worse sing. I guess more and more with
the 2 parents working and the kids getting less attention they look
else where for it - kareoke.
I won't knock DJ's. I like going into these loud rooms just thumping
with a beat. As someone who admires recordings, I like hearing some
of these dance mixes realise their full potential. Also all the women
dancing is a plus I guess. <grin> The fantastic light shows they
install in these places alone are entertaining. The good DJs I have
seen in the big clubs keep up on what is hot, fresh and popular.
Usually they don't play much of what you hear on the radio. Rare to
find a radio DJ who is this well researched.
I don't like DJs for weddings because I just know my band can do a
much better job. Still there is this automatic protical of getting a
DJ for the wedding. one reason I see for this is some of the DJs are
very good at running contests, doing the throwing of the boquet, the
garter thingy... ect... They can also spin the latest song by rubber
bannana for the wedding slow dance. So they have their merits.
Another reason is too many bands have botched up. Many bands have no
clue of how important the cerimonial part of the wedding reception is
and the need to have appropriate repitiore to play weddings. My band
does very well at playing weddings simply because we can cover a wider
range of music than even a DJ.
Again as a performer I can't afford to whine or make excuses. I have
to adapt. Still on-going. Anyone know of any good online resources
to learn about marketing? :)
IR
Scott Dorsey
>
>That's pretty funny. We have a band composed of just doctors in our
>area. They are touted as the most over educated band in Iowa.
If their music makes me sick, can they take my appendix out on stage?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
agent86
> Tell 'em you each play 3 instruments, and that makes you a 12 piece. ;
While vacationing on Hilton Head last week, my wife & I stopped into a
smallish restaurant/bar & were delighted to see a small PA set up in one
corner. WThe bartender told us they had an acoustic guitarist/singer
coming in & that he was "really good". We had only stopped in for a
couple of beers & appetizers, but decided to stay for dinner.
Sitting, at the bar, our backs were towards the stage. The guy starts off
with "Sweet Baby James. Nice job, all the right chord voicings. He has a
nice voice (reminds me of Lyle Lovett). He's singing in his own voice, not
trying to do James Taylors's voice (which is something I admire in a
singer).
I can't remember what the second song was, but what I do remember was that
all of a sudden, they guy is playing lead against a sampled loop of his
rhythm part. Next song, he's singing three part harmony with himself. I
may just not be getting out enough, but I was really surprised by all this.
I know things work a little differently in resort markets, but are there a
lot of acts doing this sort of thing?
initialsBB
> area. They are touted as the most over educated band in Iowa.
I'll bet they have the best drugs too.
hank alrich
> I can't remember what the second song was, but what I do remember was that
> all of a sudden, they guy is playing lead against a sampled loop of his
> rhythm part. Next song, he's singing three part harmony with himself. I
> may just not be getting out enough, but I was really surprised by all this.
> I know things work a little differently in resort markets, but are there a
> lot of acts doing this sort of thing?
Yes, in the metro areas of our great nation there is plenty of that
action.
--
ha
hank alrich
> Iowa Recorder wrote:
> >That's pretty funny. We have a band composed of just doctors in our
> >area. They are touted as the most over educated band in Iowa.
> If their music makes me sick, can they take my appendix out on stage?
When the doc with the Tele and the one with the trumpet go into unison,
you can receive an appendectomy even while sitting way back in the room.
--
ha
agent86
In retrospect, I kind of wish I'd hung around & talked to him between sets.
I'd be interested in his opinions on whether he has actually been able to
book more (or higher paying) gigs because of all that stuff. As it
happened, we left, figuring whatever was on HBO would probably be more
entertaining.
I guess I was "taken by surprise" because I tend to think of live acoustic
music as a more grass roots kind of genre. (Although I realize some people
find it boring because it usually "doesn't sound like the record". I guess
the loops & samples get it a little closer for those folks.)
EggHd
find it boring because it usually "doesn't sound like the record". I guess
the loops & samples get it a little closer for those folks.) >>
Damien Rice does this live with his acoutic guitar and voice. It's amazing in
the moment,
Mike Rivers
> >> all of a sudden, they guy is playing lead against a sampled loop of
> >> his
> >> rhythm part. Next song, he's singing three part harmony with himself.
> In retrospect, I kind of wish I'd hung around & talked to him between sets.
> I'd be interested in his opinions on whether he has actually been able to
> book more (or higher paying) gigs because of all that stuff.
I doubt it. I'll bet the management doesn't even have any idea of what
he's doing. All they see is how much they pay him and how many drinks
people buy. You probably did your share.
> I guess I was "taken by surprise" because I tend to think of live acoustic
> music as a more grass roots kind of genre.
20 years ago, I defined "folk singer" as someone with a plugged-in
acoustic guitar singing songs he or another contemporary songwriter
wrote. The other day I heard an interview with Pete Seeger on an NPR
program and he said essentially the same thing.
Kurt Albershardt
Ouch...
agent86
> << (Although I realize some people
> find it boring because it usually "doesn't sound like the record". I
> guess
> the loops & samples get it a little closer for those folks.) >>
>
> Damien Rice does this live with his acoutic guitar and voice. It's amazing
> in the moment,
I haven't heard Damien Rice, I'll be on t he look out for him. The guy I
heard was a good player & singer, & he was good enough with the technology
that the parts all fell into place in time, but somehow, it just didn't
sound convincingly "real" (even sitting with my back to the stage through
SRM 450s).
I do know a lot of electric guitarist do this sort of thig to very good
effect, but that's a different ball game.
agent86
>> sets.
>> I'd be interested in his opinions on whether he has actually been able
>> to
>> book more (or higher paying) gigs because of all that stuff.
>
> I doubt it. I'll bet the management doesn't even have any idea of what
> he's doing. All they see is how much they pay him and how many drinks
> people buy. You probably did your share.
Not so much worried about "doing my share". Just wanting to satisfy my
own curiosity.
>> I guess I was "taken by surprise" because I tend to think of live
>> acoustic music as a more grass roots kind of genre.
>
> 20 years ago, I defined "folk singer" as someone with a plugged-in
> acoustic guitar singing songs he or another contemporary songwriter
> wrote. The other day I heard an interview with Pete Seeger on an NPR
> program and he said essentially the same thing.
It's wierd, ya know. as much as I admire Pete Seeger, Bob Dylan & Woody &
Arlo Guthrie (among many others), I've always cringed when the term "folk
singer was applied to my own music. I guess it's because a lot of people
expect any folk music to have a certain "Kum-ba-ya factor". I've come to
consider "Acoustic Music" to be a genre unto itself. The gig I have going
now is an acoustic duet. We have some originals, and the cover's we do
range from Doc Watson to the Stones to Gershwin to J.F. Wagner to Hendrix.
On all the covers, we try to interpret the SONG in it's best light
(considering our instrumentation), regardless of the genre of the original.
(screw what the record sounds like, IOW) Imagine if John Coltrane had
tried to make his version of "My Favorite Things" sound like Julie Andrews.
Iowa Recorder
> On all the covers, we try to interpret the SONG in it's best light
> (considering our instrumentation), regardless of the genre of the original.
> (screw what the record sounds like, IOW) Imagine if John Coltrane had
> tried to make his version of "My Favorite Things" sound like Julie Andrews.
I get really irritated when I go see some band that is obsessed on
doing everything like the record. Some of these bands won't even
change the key of the tune even when it's obvious the singer is
struggling. Even if the bands is really good I see these bands being
distracted and handicapped by this mentalitity. It gets to the point
that they sound so much like the record they might as well just play
CDs all night.
I think if a tune is well written you can play it in any fashion. The
song won't lose much of it's appeal unless your version of the song
sounds like a train wreck. A good song can stand on it's own without
alot of production.
There are a few tunes however I feel it would be a shame to not handle
with care. Versions that from radio play and extended hours of dorm
room listening get imprinted on most listeners. I'm always a bit
leary of doing Steely Dan covers. The reason I'm leary is I have
heard many bands do Steely Dan covers. Whether they do it exactly
like the record or have a clever way of covering it I always walk away
dissapointed. I'd rather just heard the origional recording.
Also I couldn't think of doing "Basket Case" by Green Day in any other
style. Again this is a song people are just too familiar with. It's
got alot of energy in the recording. We go playing it as a ballad,
someone is gonna go - wha? Don't they know the song? Sure you can
cover the tune on acoustic. I think part of the appeal however is in
the energy. So I probably wouldn't do this one fingerstyle. Unless I
like fingers bleeding.... hehehe
Those are just exceptions. For the most part I'd rather adapt songs
to fit our intrumentation and vocal range. It's alot more fun. It
gets the band into a more origional and creative mode. You can work
your vocals without having to effect you natural voice to sound like;
Garth Brooks, Willie Nelson, Steve Perry, Mick Jagger... ect... You
can create your own solos or even do some ambitious arrangements.
IR
Michael
mik...@aol.com says...
> agent86 <maxwel...@control.gov> wrote in message news:<AfB_b.3679$Bu1....@bignews3.bellsouth.net>...
>
> > On all the covers, we try to interpret the SONG in it's best light
> > (considering our instrumentation), regardless of the genre of the original.
> > (screw what the record sounds like, IOW) Imagine if John Coltrane had
> > tried to make his version of "My Favorite Things" sound like Julie Andrews.
>
> I get really irritated when I go see some band that is obsessed on
> doing everything like the record. Some of these bands won't even
> change the key of the tune even when it's obvious the singer is
> struggling. Even if the bands is really good I see these bands being
> distracted and handicapped by this mentalitity. It gets to the point
> that they sound so much like the record they might as well just play
> CDs all night.
>
> I think if a tune is well written you can play it in any fashion. The
> song won't lose much of it's appeal unless your version of the song
> sounds like a train wreck. A good song can stand on it's own without
> alot of production.
I used to be in a good cover band, one with a bit of a following.
Interestingly enough, most of the audience followed us because "you
guys sound just like the record" (which of course we didn't). But
all five of us sang, and could sing leads, and the lead vocalist was
female, so we simply assigned the lead vocal to whoever's style/range
it suited best. I think that, and the fact that we gave the audience
a very hi-fidelity sound (triamped mains with everyone run DI including
the drums), gave the *illusion* of being like the record.
Some people didn't care for a close replication, but most did. There
were a few songs we went WAY off the beaten path on, but most were
close. We stayed employed steady for ten years straight with VERY few
breaks, and after about two years, word-of-mouth kept us busy for the
rest of the decade.
The point I'm trying to make is that the reason you or I would go
see a band is not the same reason Average Joe Nonmusician goes, and
there are bands that service both ends of that spectrum.
---Michael (of Gambit)...
Ryan
> Also I couldn't think of doing "Basket Case" by Green Day in any other
> style. Again this is a song people are just too familiar with. It's
> got alot of energy in the recording. We go playing it as a ballad,
> someone is gonna go - wha? Don't they know the song? Sure you can
> cover the tune on acoustic. I think part of the appeal however is in
> the energy. So I probably wouldn't do this one fingerstyle. Unless I
> like fingers bleeding.... hehehe
You always know you've put on a good show if a little blood has
flowed. ;)
I remeber during an early Chili Peppers show, Flea ripped open his
"picking thumb." But being so into the music, or the event, or
whatever, he just covered it with super glue and kept right on going.
Beautifull, really.
Iowa Recorder
> In article <3774011b.04022...@posting.google.com>,
> mik...@aol.com says...
> > agent86 <maxwel...@control.gov> wrote in message news:<AfB_b.3679$Bu1....@bignews3.bellsouth.net>...
> >
> > I think if a tune is well written you can play it in any fashion. The
> > song won't lose much of it's appeal unless your version of the song
> > sounds like a train wreck. A good song can stand on it's own without
> > alot of production.
>
> I used to be in a good cover band, one with a bit of a following.
> Interestingly enough, most of the audience followed us because "you
> guys sound just like the record" (which of course we didn't).
When I was 19, yes I would go WOW you sound just like the record. It
was fairly tough in those days to have that kind of sound. So it was
novel to me.
>But
> all five of us sang, and could sing leads, and the lead vocalist was
> female, so we simply assigned the lead vocal to whoever's style/range
> it suited best. I think that, and the fact that we gave the audience
> a very hi-fidelity sound (triamped mains with everyone run DI including
> the drums), gave the *illusion* of being like the record.
Yes, the last couple decades with the technology and the DI setups I
hear more good cover bands sounding pretty much like the record. My
opinion is it's become a bit old. I don't see large followings for
these groups as I did back about 15 years ago. Of course I can't see
every band out there. So I'm sure there are bands out there like
yours that are doing well.
I mostly play duos and trios. Always everyone in these group sang
well but I usually short of some types of vocalists. So we'd change
the key and adapt. Right now there is quite a glut of good female
singers and good tenor males out there. Many bands just can't afford
the extra personel in todays sucky music climate. I wish I had the
server space to post some MP3s of some singers I've recorded and who I
would love to hire in my band. I just can't afford to hire them.
> Some people didn't care for a close replication, but most did. There
> were a few songs we went WAY off the beaten path on, but most were
> close. We stayed employed steady for ten years straight with VERY few
> breaks, and after about two years, word-of-mouth kept us busy for the
> rest of the decade.
I haven't seen this around here. The best cover band I know of in
this area plays about 4 times a month. I go see them and I just shake
my head. There is nothing they do that makes me go... WOW!!! I don't
see any following at these gigs either. Also I see alot of cover
bands form up and break up after a year. Playing a 5 peice for 300$.
Spending lots of hard work busting ass setting up large PA systems.
All the damn rehearsing... It's alot of hard work for little return.
I don't see many of these bands last long.
This is just *MY* experiance however. I'm sure your experiance is
accurate. I haven't seen it around here....yet!
> The point I'm trying to make is that the reason you or I would go
> see a band is not the same reason Average Joe Nonmusician goes, and
> there are bands that service both ends of that spectrum.
Well said.
IR