Going Solo/Duo Options

[jcpatte2]

Over the years I've played some solo/duo/acoustic shows sporadically throughout my schedule, but I've never really gigged purposefully by myself or with a partner. I'm really thinking about it now, though.

 

I'm primarily a rhythm guitarist but can get by playing the riffs and some solos.

 

I feel I have 3 or 4 options to approach this, with both pros and cons to each.

 

Hope y'all will help me out with your opinions on each:

 

1. Solo acoustic w/ looper:

Pros) Simple set-up. Don't have to rely on anyone else.

Cons) I've never used a looper so it might not be that easy of an adjustment to get to anything other than rhythm playing / No harmonies / I get bored out of my mind listening to myself sing and just play rhythm

 

2. Solo acoustic w/ "acoustic" backing tracks [Drums/Bass/Rhyth. Acoustic/Piano/Etc]:

Pros) I could run a click/guide track in my ears, which I prefer, and add in Ac. Rhythm while I solo, plus add secondary guitar parts and my own backing vocals to the mix while I'm strumming / I won't get as bored playing / Will give the feel of a bigger mix while still being acoustic based

Cons) I'd still be using tracks

 

3. Solo electric w/ "full band" backing tracks:

Pros) It would be easier to just play the parts on electric and I could leave all the tracks in the mix while still running my click/guide

Cons) I start to fill this is where I'm crossing the line in regard to noise level, and visually it might not look right with me standing up there holding an electric guitar and not rocking out with a full band

 

4. Duo acoustic or w/ "acoustic" backing tracks:

Pros) The guitars would almost always be covered and I'd have harmonies

Cons) Reliability of the 2nd person / Cost of the 2nd person / and Compromising to 2nd person

 

Thoughts, advice, warnings, etc. about which approach to going Solo/Duo I should take?

[dparr]

w/ looper

[EightString]

Basically, people here are going to base their advice on what THEY do, and their own personal biases for or against specific approaches.

 

Experiment a little, then do what sounds best and makes you happiest.

[dparr]

 

Basically, people here are going to base their advice on what THEY do,

 

 

I don't use a looper.

 

I just play my instrument.

[Telecruiser]

 

I don't use a looper. I just play my instrument.

 

 

^^^THIS^^^

[Potts]

People that don't use tracks, loopers or harmonizers are basically hacks.:poke:

[JimboKeys]

I'll try to keep this objective and not get too much into what i'd want to hear (which is likely very different from what the next guy would want to hear).

 

Like others have said, the question is really what sort of product are you wanting to develop? In particular, You might want to consider how much time you want to spend on getting a repertoire together, and how many songs you intend to have; there's those of us with enough repertoire to fill out an evening's gig, and those of us who can pull from hundreds or thousands of songs on the fly.

 

A big part of that equation is whether you are going to use tracks or not. If i'm not using a backing track i can get a new song worked up in maybe 20 minutes, if i already know the tune. But to do a backing track, with all the pre-arranging, tracking, loading, etc., plan on at least 3-4 hours per song (not to mention the additional time spent when you will need to go back and fix it later).

 

Just something you might want to think about,

- Jimbo

[dparr]

People that don't use tracks, loopers or harmonizers are basically hacks.:poke:

 

Then what are people that use tracks, loopers or harmonizers?

 

I hack my way through four regular gigs per week.

[Potts]

Joking dude...

[jcpatte2]

I get that there are those that are definitely on both sides of the fence about tracks and that's a discussion that has been beat like a dead horse on this here forum.

 

I myself have taken a long, winding road to the conclusion that we look at tracks differently as musicians that your average patron. With that said, my reasons for looking into tracks are the aforementioned boredom with my own strumming/singing of songs for 4 hours, which may or may not be a result of my own inadequacies on the guitar, and my wish to put on a little "something" more than the average dude in a corner on a barstool.

 

With that said, I appreciate the comments and look forward to reading many, many more. This is a new endeavor for me and I'm super excited about facing the challenge.

[Bob Dey]

 

Joking dude...

 

 

and you made me laugh for once...

 

I was gonna say, I don't play my instrument, I just play the looper. lol

 

JC, I think you should start out just singing and playing. How many songs can you sing at this point? Practice on 5-10 songs with acoustic/vocals and keep adding more when you're ready. Knowing lots of songs is where it all starts. You can add one of the other things later if you want; looper, bandinabox, hot chick singer etc. But just get some songs down pat and think about what kind of rap you'll have to connect with the audience. Being able to play requests and being likable are more important than having gadgets and gizmos.

 

BTW, I started out by making my own tracks because I thought it was the big trend in 1985. I soon found out that most solos in the area could sing really well and usually just played open chord rhythm on an acoustic. Around '95 I did my first gig with just acoustic and voice and I found it to be a bit challenging, but fun.

[jcpatte2]

 

and you made me laugh for once... I was gonna say, I don't play my instrument, I just play the looper. lol JC, I think you should start out just singing and playing. How many songs can you sing at this point? Practice on 5-10 songs with acoustic/vocals and keep adding more when you're ready. Knowing lots of songs is where it all starts. You can add one of the other things later if you want; looper, bandinabox, hot chick singer etc. But just get some songs down pat and think about what kind of rap you'll have to connect with the audience. Being able to play requests and being likable are more important than having gadgets and gizmos. BTW, I started out by making my own tracks because I thought it was the big trend in 1985. I soon found out that most solos in the area could sing really well and usually just played open chord rhythm on an acoustic. Around '95 I did my first gig with just acoustic and voice and I found it to be a bit challenging, but fun.

 

 

Thanks for your thoughts. Not to sound snide but I've been making me living solely from music in one form or fashion for 7 years. And I guess I should add that I've played hundreds of acoustic shows. This is just a new chapter for me, focusing in on being a solo performer. I'm in a transition phase so to speak. Not knowing enough songs is not the problem. It's taking on the solo approach and making it the best it can be that I'm pondering.

[tlbonehead]

People that don't use tracks, loopers or harmonizers are basically hacks.:poke:

don't you think there is enough room for both ideas? And yeah, I guessed you weren't too serious on that one.

[Potts]

Let's get this straight just so people understand where Im coming from just in case there's any doubt. This isn't a reply to Tom or DPar or anyone else. I'm not being defensive, angry or thin skinned. I just want to share my bio in the middle of a thread.

 

I started playing acoustic guitar in 1980 when I was 11. By 1981 my uncle force-fed me Joni Mitchel, Woody and Arlo, The Byrds, Dylan, CSN, Donavan, Simon and Garfunkel and The Bee Gees. When I was 13 I lucked out and formed a trio with my cousin and another 13 year old. We were doing 3 part harmony CSN, Beatles and Eagles tunes and getting snuck into bars to play the material and snuck back out. Our signature songs were tunes like Scarborough Fair and Blackbird. We also were the only kids in the history of University of Buffalo and Buffalo State to get paying gigs on campus when were not technically old enough to work in a grocery store. I did these types of gigs until I was 21 and could finally get into bars.

 

So I'm all about pure acoustic music and keeping it simple. I'm 43 and have played this acoustic {censored} for nearly 30 years now. I'm done putting people to sleep performing great mellow songs. Been there done that.

[tlbonehead]

Let's get this straight just so people understand where Im coming from just in case there's any doubt. This isn't a reply to Tom or DPar or anyone else. I'm not being defensive, angry or thin skinned. I just want to share my bio in the middle of a thread. I started playing acoustic guitar in 1980 when I was 11. By 1981 my uncle force-fed me Joni Mitchel, Woody and Arlo, The Byrds, Dylan, CSN, Donavan, Simon and Garfunkel and The Bee Gees. When I was 13 I lucked out and formed a trio with my cousin and another 13 year old. We were doing 3 part harmony CSN, Beatles and Eagles tunes and getting snuck into bars to play the material and snuck back out. Our signature songs were tunes like Scarborough Fair and Blackbird. We also were the only kids in the history of University of Buffalo and Buffalo State to get paying gigs on campus when were not technically old enough to work in a grocery store. I did these types of gigs until I was 21 and could finally get into bars. So I'm all about pure acoustic music and keeping it simple. I'm also done putting people to sleep performing great mellow songs. Been there done that.

Most of the gigs around here that I played before I turned 16 were in dance halls, which were mostly just 3.2 beer and setups. So I had no probs playing them. We did play a few bars too and at the time the legal age was 18. But I never really had a problem playing them when I was 15-16. I do recall one bar owner chewing my butt once saying he was sticking his neck out by letting me play at his place and that he didn't appreciate me drinking a glass of beer during our break. He felt pretty stupid when I showed him that it was Mtn Dew!

[Potts]

I got caught in a weird time with the drinking age. It moved to 21 a few years before I turned 18 (if that makes sense).

 

 

Most of the gigs around here that I played before I turned 16 were in dance halls, which were mostly just 3.2 beer and setups. So I had no probs playing them. We did play a few bars too and at the time the legal age was 18. But I never really had a problem playing them when I was 15-16. I do recall one bar owner chewing my butt once saying he was sticking his neck out by letting me play at his place and that he didn't appreciate me drinking a glass of beer during our break. He felt pretty stupid when I showed him that it was Mtn Dew!

 

[tlbonehead]

I got caught in a weird time with the drinking age. It moved to 21 a few years before I turned 18 (if that makes sense).

If I recall correctly, it moved to 19 right about the time I was turning 18. My brother is a year older and I recall them (legally) going out and pounding a few beers before going to school in the mornings his senior year.

[Terry Allan Hall]

Given the opportunity, working in a duo with the RIGHT partner is great...it doesn't get stale (for the performer), like playing to the same backing tracks everytime, and if the two of you carefully work out your individual parts, it can often sound like there's more than 2 people on stage.

 

The trick is to find the RIGHT duo partner, though.

[jcpatte2]

 

The trick is to find the RIGHT duo partner, though.

 

 

This is definitely the kicker..... and my faith in the human population is running a little low these days ;(

[Bob Dey]

 

Thanks for your thoughts. Not to sound snide but I've been making me living solely from music in one form or fashion for 7 years. And I guess I should add that I've played hundreds of acoustic shows. This is just a new chapter for me, focusing in on being a solo performer. I'm in a transition phase so to speak. Not knowing enough songs is not the problem. It's taking on the solo approach and making it the best it can be that I'm pondering.

 

 

OK, you've sung lead for the last 7 years then? Out of all these songs that you know how to sing and play at the same time, maybe you should decide which of them work best with guitar/vocal. That would be focusing on being a solo performer. Some songs that you've sung with a band won't work, but you may be surprised at some that will.

[Terry Allan Hall]

This is definitely the kicker..... and my faith in the human population is running a little low these days ;(

 

Yeah, I can certainly relate...that's pretty much why 80+% of my gigs are solo...

 

As it stands these days, my trio is made up of me, frequently my daughter, Kat, on hand percussion, fiddle and harmony vocals, and one of a half-dozen bassists, depending on who is available on that date. Sometimes I have to use a sub percussionist, too, if Kat has already accepted a gig w/ someone else...I hope to eventually start working with a former bassist/harmony vox, Wendy, who will be moving to N. Carolina around the same time we'll be immigrating there (maybe 2 years) and then we'll all be back where we hopeto be.

[EightString]

Given the opportunity, working in a duo with the RIGHT partner is great...it doesn't get stale (for the performer), like playing to the same backing tracks everytime, and if the two of you carefully work out your individual parts, it can often sound like there's more than 2 people on stage. The trick is to find the RIGHT duo partner, though.

 

I, for one, would like to hear more about your personal experiences with playing to backing tracks getting stale for you.

[Terry Allan Hall]

I, for one, would like to hear more about your personal experiences with playing to backing tracks getting stale for you.

 

Have done that in the past, found it boring, is all...doing the song the same way every time (verse , chorus, verse, chorus, solo, verse, chorus...for but one example)...solo or with a living ensemble, you can change things up on the fly. Different segues, modulate up or down keys, as you choose.

 

Audiences have responded better, too. The places I play don't seem to like the artificialness of backing tracks, I've noticed, and some venue owners/management were very emphatic on that point.

[mymartind35]

Sit down with your guitar and a mic. You do not need all the tech stuff. You'll get dependent on it and won't ever know how you would have done truly solo. Call me a hack. But I bet you $50 bucks the crowd will like what you do alone better than what you do with your little machines. Acoustic music is just that. There is NOTHING better than real music played with no toys. I like playing with the guitar and no amp or mic. The audience seems to like it better too. They pay more attention.

[Potts]

Sit down with your guitar and a mic. You do not need all the tech stuff. You'll get dependent on it and won't ever know how you would have done truly solo. Call me a hack. But I bet you $50 bucks the crowd will like what you do alone better than what you do with your little machines. Acoustic music is just that. There is NOTHING better than real music played with no toys. I like playing with the guitar and no amp or mic. The audience seems to like it better too. They pay more attention.

 

Morning Martin! I'm not sure if I can fully agree

 

IMO it depends on the venue and what you're trying to do. I think being versatile is the most important aspect of putting on a good show. Of course I'm not saying that loopers, backing tracks, harmonizers, delays and all kinds of effects are the way to go but their value shouldn't be underestimated.

 

There's been gigs that if I used tracks people would get sick of them quickly. There's also venues that would get bored out of their skull if I just played pure acoustic music all night. I dunno- I guess it just boils down to knowing what your audience is looking for and what you're willing to do as a performer.