Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Covers or originals?

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse









X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by worthyjoe


    Agree 100%. It seems like, atleast in the local original music I've been exposed to, that bands can't write a hook to save their life. I almost get the impression that they purposely avoid them because think they are selling out if they write a catchy hook. I just don't get it.



    I'm very fortunate to have a lead guitarist who is well-versed in his art. He comes up with some great hooks and it makes him indespensable. That and an awesome drummer and solid bassman.





    I love my band!

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Teddy
      People who play in cover bands are Entertainers. Immediate gratification and cash flow are the results.

      People who play in original bands are Creative Artists. A riskier investment of one's time since the chance of acclaim and cash flow are small, UNLESS you make it big.


      Great point, Teddy. While those two types are not mutually exclusive, personality/temperment probably plays more into this than we often give credit for.

      Example: I have a jazz quartet - bass, piano (me), sax, and drums. There are actually two variations on this quartet as one venue we play hard bop and another we play smooth jazz with a different bass and drummer. So you can say that the core group is myself and the sax player.

      We are both fairly serious musicians but our approach to everything differs greatly. He likes the hard bop stuff better because he can take more liberty and be creative (even if we're covering Monk) and he also writes some originals. He also prefers to listen to hard-bop for the spontenaity, energy, and artistry it exudes.

      I, however, like the smooth jazz stuff better. The songs are often more familiar (R&B and the like) and I like playing catchy, accessible things that connect with the audience. I also like the structure that it affords with the "Joe Sample arrangement" of this or the "Bob Mintzer arrangment" of that. Not saying that it can't be done with hard bop, but again those gigs are more freestyle. I tend to like listening to smooth jazz more, too.

      So you can say that I'm more the entertainer type and my buddy is more the artistic/creative type, though we display quite a bit of both, respectively.
      I didn't think it would be this cold...

      Gear: Yamaha P-60; Yamaha Motif Rack ES; Nord Electro 2.0/73; Nord Lead 2; Korg Triton Studio 76; Hammond C2 w/perc mod; Leslie 145; Alesis DG8; Yamaha DX7; Fender MIM J-Bass; Steinberg WAV4 Electric Upright Bass; Peavey Raptor; Takamine EG-240; Line 6 Spider II 15; Peavey KB4; Fender Bassman 100; Selmer Mark VI Tenor Sax

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Teddy
        People who play in cover bands are Entertainers. Immediate gratification and cash flow are the results.

        People who play in original bands are Creative Artists. A riskier investment of one's time since the chance of acclaim and cash flow are small, UNLESS you make it big.

        I have more respect for original bands even if they suck or don't get recognition becuase at least they are creating something. cover bands don't create anything.



        another pinhead who thinks actually entertaining people is a bad thing, or that 'original bands that suck' should be encouraged, 'just because they're creating something'... bull****************.

        Even people playing original music have to be Entertainers... or they won't be working for long. Bars want to sell drinks, so they want bands that attract people. If you wanna play music anywhere outside Madison Square Bedroom, you gotta be an entertainer.

        Cover bands create an atmosphere, and an environment that people want to be a part of. They deliver entertainment to people... which is why they get paid better than original acts 95% of the time.
        mUk: an insignificant or contemptible person


        "If you quote yourself in your sig, your a dummy" - guitarmook

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by guitarmook


          another pinhead who thinks actually entertaining people is a bad thing,


          I never said that.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by fastplant


            Exactly, I think purposely NOT writing hooks is selling out more than trying to write a good song.



            That sounds like the kind of excuse you might hear from a ****************ty band.

            Kind of like the guys who refuse to learn a scale because they don't want to become a 'shredder'.

            And the guys who won't lift heavy at the gym because they don't wanna accidently look like Arnold.

            Everybody convieniently forgets that 'selling out' with a great and accessible hook or 'shredding' on guitar, or getting an Olympic body, or any extraordinary accomplishment is the result of endless amounts of time and dedication.

            Comment


            • #36
              [
              Trouble is... do you think all those covers that everyone now wants to hear, were originally written with "what other people want to hear" in mind? Some of 'em, no doubt. Others were just a couple of guys in a bedroom writing what they wanted to write. Of course, for every one of those guys there are thousands more who write what they want to write but nobody wants to hear it. And there are also people who do consider "what other people want to hear" when they write, and STILL nobody wants to hear it , or they just come up with formulaic drivel.

              That's the trouble: real art comes from within, and there's really no telling what's going to catch on with the public. It's a crapshoot. That shouldn't stop anybody from doing it and they don't suck for trying, even if we might think the results suck.


              Thanks Lee, very well said........
              ____________________________________
              Originally posted by gtrbass.....

              I'm such a big fan of ME that I signed myself to an exclusive 7 album deal. Of course since I'm both the artist and the label, I promised myself the world up front and then I totally screwed ME in the fine print of the contract. I'll never see sh*t as the artist, but I'm gonna make a killing as the label...._______


              www.myspace.com/strangerbytheminute

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Teddy
                People who play in cover bands are Entertainers. Immediate gratification and cash flow are the results.

                People who play in original bands are Creative Artists. A riskier investment of one's time since the chance of acclaim and cash flow are small, UNLESS you make it big.


                I disagree with your black and white analysis of the situation. I believe that cover bands have the potential of expressing artistry through the music they choose and the manner in which the music is performed.

                Let me just say that I like the overall tone of this discussion quite a bit. This is one of the few civilized debates I've seen on this topic.
                I WANNA ROSK!
                Support research for Crohn's disease: www.ccfa.org

                "Or, as they say on CNN: 'Briefly now, what is the meaning of life?'"--Gore Vidal

                CHEROKEE PRIDE

                Comment


                • #38
                  Yes this is a great thread. I hope we can KEEP it civil.

                  I think there's a place for both kinds of bands... and my band does both kinds of gigs... and either cover or original bands can be very musically creative/talented or not. But there's no doubt the respective goals/philosophies between the two kinds of bands are often at odds with each other.
                  What The...?
                  http://www.what-the.com
                  http://www.facebook.com/whattherock
                  http://www.myspace.com/whattherock

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Lee Flier
                    But there's no doubt the respective goals/philosophies between the two kinds of bands are often at odds with each other.


                    I don't even necessarily agree with this statement either. When I play a Stevie Wonder tune (I'm a huge Stevie freak), I enjoy it as much--perhaps more--than playing my own material. If the quality of the material is top-notch (in my current cover band it isn't all top-notch, unfortunately), I think the recreation of that material is artistically meritous and therefore not diametrically opposed to the goals of an original band. It's still a statement of the musicianship of the individual, right? As long as you're still learning something and growing as a musician, I view it as the same thing.
                    I WANNA ROSK!
                    Support research for Crohn's disease: www.ccfa.org

                    "Or, as they say on CNN: 'Briefly now, what is the meaning of life?'"--Gore Vidal

                    CHEROKEE PRIDE

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Our band plays only Classic Afro-Cuban from the 1930's -1980's. the band is in high demand as we are one of the very few doing this in S.F. and are starting to get a reputation as a Class-act. We do about 2-3 weddings a month and 1-2 club gigs a month. I am making close to $1000.00 a month playing music about four nights a month. This really helps to pay the mortgage. Whe I played originals, we made hardly anything and many times, we actually paid to play. Huge difference.
                      Los Boleros / Hot Latin Band in the San Francisco bay Area
                      Acoustic Son Montuno - Merengue - Cumbia and Bolero
                      Let passion guide you.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by LosBoleros
                        Our band plays only Classic Afro-Cuban from the 1930's -1980's. the band is in high demand as we are one of the very few doing this in S.F. and are starting to get a reputation as a Class-act. We do about 2-3 weddings a month and 1-2 club gigs a month. I am making close to $1000.00 a month playing music about four nights a month. This really helps to pay the mortgage. Whe I played originals, we made hardly anything and many times, we actually paid to play. Huge difference.


                        But at least you have an original approach to doing covers.
                        http://www.myspace.com/399453211

                        http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...?bandID=276061

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nails

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by riffdaddy

                          I think the recreation of that material is artistically meritous and therefore not diametrically opposed to the goals of an original band. It's still a statement of the musicianship of the individual, right? As long as you're still learning something and growing as a musician, I view it as the same thing.


                          Oh yeah, from the point of view of musicianship/creativity it CAN be the same thing. When I say the two types of bands have different goals and philosophies, I mean basically... the cover band tries to play what they think their audience wants to hear, the original band does what they like and hopes somebody wants to hear it. The cover band tends to get the higher paying gigs, the original band tends to play a lot of gigs for not much money so that their music can be heard... etc. They can be kind of diametrically opposed... and again, we do both types of gigs so we know exactly how schizophrenic it can be. We enjoy both for different reasons, but it's definitely wearing two different hats.

                          I also sense a lot of resentment between the two camps. Original bands think cover bands are "selling out," that they steal all the good paying gigs, that they're willing to pander to audiences and thus dumb them down, etc. Cover bands think original bands decrease the value of musicians by playing for "exposure," that they don't care about audiences, write crappy material that drives people away from clubs, don't know how to be professional, etc. Of course, there are lots of exceptions on both sides, but the stereotypes are certainly there.
                          What The...?
                          http://www.what-the.com
                          http://www.facebook.com/whattherock
                          http://www.myspace.com/whattherock

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Unfortunately, the demographic for my originals is:

                            Males, my age, who are me.

                            So I work on originals on my DAW primarily funded by the various 'unoriginal' projects that can turn a profit.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Lee Flier


                              Oh yeah, from the point of view of musicianship/creativity it CAN be the same thing. When I say the two types of bands have different goals and philosophies, I mean basically... the cover band tries to play what they think their audience wants to hear, the original band does what they like and hopes somebody wants to hear it. The cover band tends to get the higher paying gigs, the original band tends to play a lot of gigs for not much money so that their music can be heard... etc. They can be kind of diametrically opposed... and again, we do both types of gigs so we know exactly how schizophrenic it can be. We enjoy both for different reasons, but it's definitely wearing two different hats.

                              I also sense a lot of resentment between the two camps. Original bands think cover bands are "selling out," that they steal all the good paying gigs, that they're willing to pander to audiences and thus dumb them down, etc. Cover bands think original bands decrease the value of musicians by playing for "exposure," that they don't care about audiences, write crappy material that drives people away from clubs, don't know how to be professional, etc. Of course, there are lots of exceptions on both sides, but the stereotypes are certainly there.


                              Okay, I get where you're coming from now. I suppose I agree. Actually, a lot of those stereotypes are true. Unfortunately my cover band (I say mine--I have the least pull in the band because I'm 10 years younger than the drummer and 20 years younger than everybody else) tends to do a bit too much of the dumbing down. For some reason the band (minus the drummer and I) decided it would be a better idea to play "Da Butt" than to play "Superstitious" and "Flashlight". Needless to say, I'm searching for a new gig.

                              On the other hand, this band is probably the only one in town right now that can pull off legitimate funk. I doubt I could go anywhere else and do stuff like Lakeside or The Gap Band. Not everybody can pull off that sort of material.
                              I WANNA ROSK!
                              Support research for Crohn's disease: www.ccfa.org

                              "Or, as they say on CNN: 'Briefly now, what is the meaning of life?'"--Gore Vidal

                              CHEROKEE PRIDE

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I like doing covers because a great song is a great song. If I could write a song as good as Jimi or Pagey then I'd have went that route.
                                The important thing is to play. Something. Anything.
                                I hear a lot of bands doing the original thing at our practice studio - and they all sound the same. Cookie Monster vocals over way loud distorted guitar riffs. Not a lot of dynamics. I can only take so much screaming. Like 5 seconds.
                                A lot depends on where you live also. If there is a strong indie scene than cool! If not you can spend a lot of Monday or Thursday nights in dumps not knowing what time you're going on and come away with no money.

                                Comment



                                Working...
                                X