Solo Gigs

[senorblues]

Assuming quite a few of you are gigging solo, I'm wondering about several things, including repertoire, type of venues, duration of the gig, what instrument (and what features you're using), do you also sing, etc.. I'm also assuming that your market is like mine in that it is dominated by guitar players/singers. Should you expect to be paid more? Why or why not?

[The Pro]

I play solo piano a good bit, no vocals, with self-produced MP3 backing tracks for accompaniment. The music ranges from pop to jazz, Cole Porter and Sinatra to Ramsey Lewis and Sting. I play acoustic pianos and my own digital piano at a wide arrange of functions from corporate and private parties to restaurants, piano lounges and public concerts. Pay is a very mixed bag, sometimes I get tips, sometimes I don't. Christmas is my busiest time of year - I play a lot of private parties.

 

I don't compare myself to singing guitarists because I try not to play places that they do. I don't sound like they do - I am a little more upscale. Maybe that's the point. I'm not that great of a vocalist but I am a very good pianist so I focus on my strengths and just do what I do best. I used to play full time but now I play mostly weekends which allows me to be choosier about my gigs.

[kbeaumont]

When not playing in my band, I play solo gigs every now and then. I expect to be paid the same. Its not the instrument, its the entertainer. I've heard many singer / guitarists who are very good at what they do. And some not so good. My solo gigs are a mix, I am equally adept at guitar and piano. I have some songs that have backing tracks I created myself. Mostly just bass & drums, though some have strings, rhythm guitar or synth pads too. But I try to be vary sparse in the arrangement, I'm not looking to do karaoke! Most of the songs are just me & my instrument. I choose which to play based on the song. I try and choose songs that play to my vocal strengths. People like that I play keys because its not the norm, so I play slightly more piano to emphasis that difference. There are only a couple of keyboard players doing this locally and they are mostly jazz standards. I do popular music if it was a hit on the rock, pop , country or blues charts over the last 4 decades and it fits my vocals I will do it. Most of my solo gigs are coffee shops and restaurants. I live in a small college & tourist town. So there are quite a few nice places play.

[senorblues]

In my market, there seem to be a number of venues that hire bands on the weekends and solos/duos on a weeknight. Given that our equipment makes it possible to theoretically fill the shoes of a full band, do any of you get hired to play in a band slot and play at band volume? It's not a simple question, given that there are three and four piece groups that play without drums of any kind, and there are also groups with drummers that play at a much lower volume than your stereotypical blues/southern rock band.

 

The question is basically about whether or not it's possible to market yourself as a one-man band.

[kbeaumont]

Its quite doable, I haven't done it solo but as a duo yes! Solo isn't that much different. I like the coffee house solo gigs because they are real easy and many already have a small PA or I bring a small portable one. Easy in & out.

 

But you will probably need to bring your own PA that can handle the venue, because quite a few don't. I usually have to haul PA & lights the same ones I use with my band which has at various times been 4 - 6 people. It adds up, but you should charge accordingly. If Ed Sheeran can do Wembley stadium with just a guitar, no reason you can't do a Texas sized Roadhouse! It's more of an equipment issue than anything because if the crowd likes what they hear and you put on a professional show, the audience won't care! You just need to keep them entertained and play music they want to hear.

So you need lights and need to interact with the audience. That's what DJ's do and many of them are just pressing play!

 

Start by doing the same gig you would do on the week days as you would do on a weekend. Bring in the lights, put on a show and play your ass off! Because its all you, so make it the best showcase for your talent as possible. Make them want to hear you instead of feeding the jukebox. These venues are there to make money. So if you can sound as good or better than a 4 piece band at a lesser cost then they are going to hire you.

[senorblues]

I'd like to see a video of a one man band playing a Texas sized roadhouse.

 

And I'd like to see the contract where they paid him maybe half what a band usually makes, but twice what a soloist would normally make.

 

I talked to a guy who I checked out expecting to hear him play keys because that's what he plays in his band. He was playing guitar, mostly because it's easier to load in and out, but also because presumably the venue didn't value the keys enough to pay him for the greater effort required for set-up.

[The Pro]

I knew a guy who tried to be a real one-man band... he had different amps and devices on stage for each instrument that was being played by his MIDI files. He had a sound module for each instrument, a PA for the drums alone, full light system. It was a stupid amount of gear and it looked ridiculous but somehow he convinced the club owners that he should be the "house band". He sounded no better than any other solo performers but he was sure of his "MIDI band" and the stage was totally filled by equipment. That was a long time ago and eventually he went to playing guitar and singing to MP3 backing tracks. I've also seen solo performers play on stage with cardboard cutouts of the rest of the "band".

 

Whatever gets you through the night...

[senorblues]

Cardboard cutouts . . . now that's funny.

 

1967. A drummer playing along to records played through a large amp. He looked bored . . . maybe because there was no one to listen to him. Don't know what he got paid.

 

1972. A drummer friend of mine was pissed when he found out the a vibes player had recorded him at one of their gigs, then used the tape at a hotel solo gig.

 

The most successful band I ever played with - fun and money - was a drums/organ duo playing soul and rock. 1967-1969. We charged about 2/3 what four and five piece bands were getting and were booked solid playing a regular Wednesday gig and Friday and Saturday one-nighters at clubs and private parties.

 

No tracks.

 

That's where I learned to play LH bass - on a Farfisa Duo, then a B3 with a Hohner key bass. Now, of course, you have access to any number of bass voices on modern keyboards, not to mention layered pianos, organs, Epianos, etc.. The drum rhythms in the keyboard are far more varied than what your average drummer can play, especially true now that the backbeat rhythms we old farts grew up with have been replaced by four-on-the-floor as a standard beat. It's unmistakeable. There are drummers out there I'd love to play with, but many rooms won't accommodate a drummer due to size of the venue, volume preferences, or - most importantly - pay.

 

The keyboards that a lot of people on this forum own are designed to be played as solo instruments that replicate a full band as much as possible. With or without tracks. Amplification is simple - a microphone and all four keyboard zones on my S70SX can go through a mixer and either a single powered speaker or a standard PA system.

 

Sure the guitar players outnumber us, but why can't I find even a single Youtube video or Soundcloud file of anybody doing what I've described? . . . or a report of anyone on this forum using these modern keyboards at a gig the way they were intended?

[kbeaumont]

If your talking about an arranger keyboard, there is a good reason why not. They generally suck or people rely on the styles as crutch to prop up mediocre playing. There is no reason why you can't play a large gig solo. I've seen this guy with and without his band the lower 9.

[video=youtube;T6awYoJv6jY]

 

I have also seen Elton John solo, Bruce Springsteen Solo just a guitar without the E street band, the only thing that stops someone from doing it is 'talent'.

If they can play a stadium, why couldn't you play a large club? Only you know that answer.

[senorblues]

Talk about a provocative post . . . . "they suck"?!

 

You're free to use any kind of equipment any way you like. Drum machines, multiple layers and splits, and backing tracks, etc., are all standard fare these days. Yes, my board has what are referred to as ARPS - a huge variety of arpeggios that offer patterns on any instrument in a variety of styles. I suppose they could be used on a gig, but I've never seen anyone do it. I don't either, unless you count drum patterns, which are a different proposition entirely, at least in terms of how common they are on solo/duo gigs, whether it's guitar, keys, sax, whatever. You may think that's cheating. I think tracks are cheating. . . but the only person whose opinion matters is the guy paying you at the end of the gig.

 

Back to my original question . . . I'm wondering why I can't find music files of other guys who sing and play keys. I'd really like to know what their gigging reality is in a business dominated by guitars.

[maarkr]

My band is stagnant right now and I was thinking of doing a solo keys/custom song sets/drum pad/vocal thing. If I could watch some promo vids (ie, someone post some links to their promo) of people doing that it may encourage me to move forward with my idea.

[pinkfloydcramer61]

I still play in bands but also gig solo 10-12 times a month, instrumental background music at restaurants and cocktail lounges that feature a piano, no tracks allowed. Also some private events (wedding rehearsal dinners etc.) I know about 100 jazz standards but mostly play 60's-80's, which makes me contemporary, lol. I'm playing a new venue soon that has a PA and encourages sing-alongs and "pianoake" so it should be fun. Always on the lookout for rock and pop songs that sound kind of kewl on piano, any suggestions welcome.

[senorblues]

I know you're not into singing, but I'm curious to know what other kinds of acts play in your solo venues when you're off doing the band thing. (Got any mp3s or videos of your solo act? )

[Vito Corleone]

I'd like to see a video of a one man band playing a Texas sized roadhouse.

 

And I'd like to see the contract where they paid him maybe half what a band usually makes, but twice what a soloist would normally make.

 

I talked to a guy who I checked out expecting to hear him play keys because that's what he plays in his band. He was playing guitar, mostly because it's easier to load in and out, but also because presumably the venue didn't value the keys enough to pay him for the greater effort required for set-up.

 

Well, I've never known any venue that paid based on how much they valued the instrument being used or the effort required to set it up. If he chose guitar because it was easier, maybe that was HIM making the value judgement? Maybe he thought it was a better visual than being behind a keyboard?

 

I've seen great solo acts based on both guitar and keyboard. It's more about how well you entertain the crowd than which instrument you choose to perform with.

 

 

And then you have what this guy does....

 

 

 

[video=youtube;iaQl0MQwjE4]

[senorblues]

Dave, thanks for your observations and especially the uploaded video. This guy has 135K views, so he clearly has a following of some kind, so what he earns per gig is based on a number of factors, no doubt.

 

Let's look at exactly what he's doing to "entertain the crowd". Is the crowd interested in his use of the harmonizer and, especially, the looper or is it more about the total sound he gets if you closed your eyes? He's a lot younger than I am, and has a better voice, but if it's the sum total of the instruments that come from one person that primarily increases his value, then yes, a one man band - regardless of how the multilayering is accomplished - should earn more than a guitar player who sings and strums.

 

But even if you're just playing piano, your charge has to be consistent with the effort required to make the gig. Would it be fair to say that a higher percentage of piano players have more technical and theory training than most guitar players. And their setup does require more effort to set up and break down? If you add up all the teardown, travel, setup, play, teardown, travel, setup hours, then consider all the time, spent on the aforementioned training and current arranging, then you may not want to bother going anywhere for less than $100. It's pretty clear that there are guitar player/singers out there who haven't made that same kind of commitment who are going out for less, so if the market can't tell the difference or doesn't care, you're going to get a lot of guitar players and not very many pianos.

 

And yes, I've heard some good guitar player/singers. They're the exceptions, just like bar bands.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Let's look at exactly what he's doing to "entertain the crowd". Is the crowd interested in his use of the harmonizer and, especially, the looper or is it more about the total sound he gets if you closed your eyes? He's a lot younger than I am, and has a better voice, but if it's the sum total of the instruments that come from one person that primarily increases his value, then yes, a one man band - regardless of how the multilayering is accomplished - should earn more than a guitar player who sings and strums.

 

I don't think it's about how much he is able to sound like a band but how entertaining can he be doing whatever it is he is doing. It's about playing to your strengths and exploiting those to the fullest degree. I doubt Dr. John could do what he does, nor is it likely this guy can play boogie woogie piano like Dr. John does. Yet both seem pretty capable of captivating and holding an audience.

 

But I don't think anybody is going to pay anyone based on how "full" they sound or how many instruments they can play or loop or imitate. Whether it's a solo guitarist or a one-man-band or a full band the key is how entertaining is it? If you want to sit and watch it and buy more food and drinks or dance or whatever---THAT'S the key.

 

And further---while it's one thing to be entertaining with one song of what either guy is doing, it's a whole 'nother trick to make it work over an entire set let alone two or three or four.

 

But even if you're just playing piano, your charge has to be consistent with the effort required to make the gig. Would it be fair to say that a higher percentage of piano players have more technical and theory training than most guitar players. And their setup does require more effort to set up and break down? If you add up all the teardown, travel, setup, play, teardown, travel, setup hours, then consider all the time, spent on the aforementioned training and current arranging, then you may not want to bother going anywhere for less than $100. It's pretty clear that there are guitar player/singers out there who haven't made that same kind of commitment who are going out for less, so if the market can't tell the difference or doesn't care, you're going to get a lot of guitar players and not very many pianos.

 

That's all personal choices to make about whether you want to go out for whatever amount or not. But I think I can say with a good degree of confidence that it's true that no one is going to pay you more because you bring more gear or had more technical training or it took you longer to prepare for the gig. Whether that translates to more people wanting to play guitar or not? I dunno. I think the choice to go with guitar is most often made early by young guys because it's sexier and gets more chicks. Every young kid wants to be Eddie van Halen or Jimmy Page. Nobody much really dreams of being Jon Lord or Howard Jones.

 

But, on the other hand, the piano player at the high-end restaurant/bar is still something many venues want. It's still much "classier" than the guitar player.

 

 

 

[senorblues]

To your first point, playing to your strengths would seem to be obvious, but I'm still trying to figure out exactly what you think his strengths are. If all the technical stuff is besides the point and it's really about how cute he is, we might as well pack it in!

 

You made the point in another thread about how his use of the looper could get old. Maybe this is fodder for another thread. How important is variety, especially for someone performing alone?

 

I was being provocative about his youthful good looks, but if you think all that equipment is beside the point, then that's what we're left with.

 

Seriously? He has a pleasant singing voice. Maybe it's that simple, regardless of format. Or SOMETHING that holds your attention. . . . .

 

. . . . unless your job isn't to draw attention to yourself per se. Just contribute to the ambiance of the place.

 

(Do you get the feeling that I'm trying to make this formulaic? Have another glass of wine, Carl.)

[pinkfloydcramer61]

Senor, the 3 places I have been playing are solo piano, no vocals (other than un-mic'ed sing -alongs) 24/7. I'm sure the DC area has venues like that. The new (for me) place welcomes singing and is even looking for dueling piano acts. The piano acts will be followed by bands.

 

RE my playing, I had some vids on my YouTube channel pinkfloydcramer61 but had set most of them to "private" and now my laptop has died on me..there may be one or 2 there still if you want to dig. Will pm you a link when I get up and running again.

[Vito Corleone]

To your first point' date=' playing to your strengths would seem to be obvious, but I'm still trying to figure out exactly what you think his strengths are. If all the technical stuff is besides the point and it's really about how cute he is, we might as well pack it in![/quote']

 

In his case, I think the fact that he plays all live instruments are a strength. Instead of a drum machine, the live drums sound much better and have a better visual appeal. Same with the bass guitar.

 

Plus he does that song really well. It lends well to what he is doing and he makes the most of it. Song choice is important, of course, and it's the right song for what he wants to show off there.

 

You made the point in another thread about how his use of the looper could get old. Maybe this is fodder for another thread. How important is variety, especially for someone performing alone?

 

The technical stuff is great but will backfire if it starts to look gimmicky. Some of those looper guys start to look that way to me. Especially the ones who, like I noted in the other thread, take 5 minutes to work up to the song. This guy gets into the song pretty quick, keeps it interesting, talks over it, etc. Pretty well done.

 

How important is variety? Man....I dunno what to say beyond "just depends". Does a jazz trio show "variety"? Probably not so much, but the gig and audience don't require that. If you're doing a solo gig at venue with a lot of passer-by tourists? Variety isn't as important. Trying to hold the attention of the same audience for an hour or more? Then more so.

 

I was being provocative about his youthful good looks, but if you think all that equipment is beside the point, then that's what we're left with.

 

Yeah...well...the looks help too of course. I think that he plays a lot of instruments is a plus. Looks more impressive than a guy with a computer and tracks, for sure.

 

Seriously? He has a pleasant singing voice. Maybe it's that simple, regardless of format. Or SOMETHING that holds your attention. . . . .

 

. . . . unless your job isn't to draw attention to yourself per se. Just contribute to the ambiance of the place.

 

If I did a solo gig? Personally, I'd have to seek out an "ambiance" gig. I WISH I was talented and captivating enough to carry the night all based on people wanting to focus on me. But I know I'm not that good.

 

(Do you get the feeling that I'm trying to make this formulaic? Have another glass of wine, Carl.)

 

Wine is good. Enjoying a glass (or two) of Bogle Pinot Noir right now. Cheap, but tasty!

 

That kid apparently does a duo thing too. This obviously isn't recorded live, but other than an occasional 3rd harmony, I'm not sure how much different it would sound live? But the key (for me) is they are able to keep it both visual and aurally entertaining. I'd watch these guys for a set for sure.

 

[video=youtube;3qJW0CgP-bA]

 

[senorblues]

The arrangement (choreography?) is REALLY complicated. Out of our league, which means that I doubt they are in the trenches doing a full evening at your local restaurant. It would be nice to be looking at half the time as the reward for being that successful.

 

Back to the real world of putting yourself out there for three hours in a way that gets decent remuneration and repeat gigs.

[Vito Corleone]

The arrangement (choreography?) is REALLY complicated. Out of our league' date=' which means that I doubt they are in the trenches doing a full evening at your local restaurant. [/quote']

 

Yes. I presented that an answer to the questions about whether a solo/duo could replace a band in a large venue setting without necessarily being a name act. I think the answer is "yes", but they gotta bring the entertainment goods.

 

 

Back to the real world of putting yourself out there for three hours in a way that gets decent remuneration and repeat gigs.

 

Well, that puts us back to what exists in the market you want to work. If your question is "can a keyboard solo act get the same gigs a guitar solo act can"? then my answer is "yes". I see it done all the time. But don't expect to get paid more for bringing more gear. My advice would be to scope out the gigs that already exist, look at the format of the venue and the audience and if that's a gig you want, tailor your act to fit what the venue-owner would be looking to put in their. Be at least as good as the talent he's already got in there and ask to audition on an open night and show him what you've got.

 

As far as whether your act should be instrumental, have a lot of vocals, use tracks or a looper, multiple instruments, fancy lighting, what sort of material to play, etc etc? That just all gets back to finding that right blend of what works for you and works for the types of gigs you want to go after.

 

But, as a general rule, if you're just starting out and trying to find a niche for yourself---let the market/gigs help define that. Find that one gig that really feels right to you, work to make yourself the right act for that gig, and if you're successful, other gigs will flow from there.

 

 

[senorblues]

Audition on an open night? Really? For every room I might want to work? I've had rooms ask me to "just drop by" on open mic night. Yet another format that's guitar friendly, but for keys . . . not so much. Truth is, most solo/duo acts out there aren't very good, and I assume they're booked because they're cheap, so let's just cut to the chase and tell me what you'll pay for a professional - assuming you actually want that if they're available.

[Vito Corleone]

Audition on an open night? Really? For every room I might want to work?

 

Just one to start. Presuming you can't get the gig any other way. Once your foot is in the door and you're on the bill and you're now a known commodity in your market, then other gigs will follow. But if you can find a place to pay you right off the bat? All the better, of course.

 

 

Truth is, most solo/duo acts out there aren't very good, and I assume they're booked because they're cheap,

 

That's the problem with the 'ambiance' type gigs, I suppose. There's no real monetary incentive for the venue manager to pay out more for a "better" act. Unless he starts to sense the act is so bad that they are driving people away that he wants to stay longer, then the cheaper-the-better. Unfortunately. And consequently, there's little incentive for the acts to get better. The downward spiral.

 

so let's just cut to the chase and tell me what you'll pay for a professional - assuming you actually want that if they're available.

 

If I'm the venue manager my first response would be: "so why should I pay YOU more?"

 

You're going to have to be able to answer that question. And it's gotta be something besides "I was trained at Julliard" or "I've got a vintage B3 and a Leslie mic'd from 17 different directions that sounds amazing!" Unless you're able to put that training or quality gear to use in a manner that moves the audience and translates into a larger bottom line for the venue, then what value is any of it to him?

 

 

 

 

[senorblues]

That's all implied in the use of the word "professional".

 

With reference to wallpaper gigs. . . . I saw a lousy piano player who had a top drawer bass player as a guest. When my wife and I applauded after each tune, the bass player's response to us each time was "thank you for listening". He knew it was at least potentially a wallpaper gig, but that it was a good thing for all concerned if a few people were actually listening and enjoying his playing.

 

So give them something to listen to. By implication, that's not the same old same old.

 

Even if not everyone cares.

 

And I still think that we as keyboard players have the potential to be an upgrade as solo players. You just have to demonstrate that you bring that added value.

[Vito Corleone]

That's all implied in the use of the word "professional".

 

So you're simply going to declare yourself a "professional" and that's going to get you more money? Hmmmm...

 

 

So give them something to listen to. By implication, that's not the same old same old.

 

Even if not everyone cares.

 

Like I said, It's a downward spiral. Lower pay=worse bands=less audience response=lower pay. And so on. I've been pretty strong on record around these parts for musicians upping their game being something that needs to be done to bring life back to the live music scene. It's the ONLY thing WE have any control over, anyway. Give 'em something entertaining and lets try to reverse that trend. Far, far, far too many bands and solos/duos trying to cut every corner they can in musicianship, rehearsal time, song selection, showmanship, presentation, etc because to not do so is just "too much trouble".

 

And I still think that we as keyboard players have the potential to be an upgrade as solo players. You just have to demonstrate that you bring that added value.

 

Well, I think the "upgrade" can be done with any instrument but I'm all for seeing more keyboard players out there. I'm not sure the instrument itself adds any value. It's what you do with it.

 

And, as I said, I do think the piano still presents a 'classier' image. Took the wife out to a high-end restaurant for our anniversary a few weeks ago. Heard some really nice piano being played in the background. Because of the type of venue it was, I fully expected to see a live pianist. Sadly, it was only a recording. 20 years ago it would have been different. ~sigh~

 

I think a lot of places step over dollars to pick up dimes. Sure, a live pianist isn't going to result in them being able to charge an extra dollar per meal. Or a cover charge to get into the restaurant. But would it add to the overall ambiance that would increase the general reputation of the place that would result in more customers choosing that place every week or month?

 

I'd certainly like to at least THINK so.