The ebb and flow of a gigging musician

[Vito Corleone]

 

This was directed at the group, not just you personally, but I'm wondering what you thought about his comments in the beginning and how his approach played out in the quality/flexibility/tightness of the music.

 

Oh I think that's an awesome concert. I love improvisation. IMO, whatever flaws might exist in the performance because it isn't rehearsed or charted is more than made up for by the energy and the spontaneous nature of it all.

 

Too bad their aren't more opportunities to do stuff like that. I guess that's what the whole idea of "open jam nights" are supposed to be about, but the skill level and musical knowledge of most of the players that show up at those things are usually quite lacking, in my experience. I guess you have to be Ry Cooder to be able to assemble that level of players for such an event AND be able to get paid for it....lol.

 

Still not understanding it in the context of Wade's posts in this thread but....whatever. It was probably time to move onto another topic anyway...lol

[SeniorBlues]

I guess you have to be Ry Cooder to be able to assemble that level of players for such an event AND be able to get paid for it....lol.

l

 

Yes, you're guessing. I found it difficult challenging to learn a lot of new material for each gig in my last band, but that fact that we never had the same lineup twice in a year and half did not detract from the musical output. On the contrary, the overall quality of music was quite high compared to previous bands I had played with during my "late reentry period". I have no regrets about leaving the previous band which has been working steadily in the local bar circuit since I left.

 

[Vito Corleone]

 

Yes, you're guessing.

 

Not much though, I don't think. You don't see a lot of 'bands' who operate in such a fashion, which is why it was worthy of an entire film I suppose.

 

But, even though he (rightfully) espouses the artistic and musical benefits of this band at the beginning of the film, it isn't something he does regularly, is it? Even most of Cooder's tours are of the steady-band-chart-rehearse-and-perform-nightly variety because that's what touring an album generally calls for. He's not just going to show up to town with a date booked and no band and start making calls for players for the night. Although, I guess maybe he could and that might be really cool. And he'd probably be the guy to try and do something like that.

 

Like with most anything else, it's all good. If somebody wants to put together an act that is all just musicians who basically just jam and the songlist and players change every night and he can get gigs and keep a schedule solid and make all the players and clients happy---more power to him. I'd probably want to see such an act myself. (If they were any good, of course.) Sounds like it'd be a nightmare to coordinate, however. Only thing harder than herding cats is herding "cats", I think...lol.

 

Of course...at the end of the day it's all about having a band that fits the gigs and gigs that fit the band. And appropriate players as well. There are no set rules. Nor should there be.

 

Which is really all I'm trying to say here. Opus Antic somehow made a mistake by passing on a "full time pro" because he didn't want to switch out players a couple months down the road? That's nonsense. It's his band. His business model. He has to do what's best for that. He'd be making a mistake to do anything BUT what is best for that. He only wants to work with guys who have similar a musical agenda and lifestyles to himself? What in the world is wrong with that? That makes perfect sense to me.

 

But that other bands and other gigs exist in other formats and for other purposes? Obviously. As they should.

[FitchFY]

Some people, mostly those on the internet, seem to think that people HAVE TO DO something, or a decision MUST BE MADE in a certain context. In the real world, that's not the case. People do what they WANT to do.

 

Wade's comments, in my opinion, tend to go back and forth from being right-on and down to Earth to being forgetful that musicians are PEOPLE. And hey, sometimes people do something just because they plum-flippin' WANT TO. I know a guy that's a world-class player who loves playing in random open jams at local bars purely because he's friendly, fun, and enjoys music.

 

You guys can wax intellectual all day long about why bands should or shouldn't play with who and what, but you're missing the number one reason someone does something: it's because they want to.

[wades_keys]

Nah man, you guys read way too much into things. I never told anyone to do anything. Can't a man lament a situation without being accused of trying to dictate to somebody? Damn, that's why I don't hang here anymore. Can't say a damn thing without all the lawyers jumping down my throat; very adversarial to say the LEAST.

 

So let me try and rephrase: I have seen several people get passed over for "gigs" because their "pro" resume "isn't a good fit". I'm not a big fan of that line "not a good fit" either. You all do what you want, wtf do I care? But I will still lament the lamentable, it's just in my nature. Gigs and beer for everybody!

[Vito Corleone]

That's all cool, Wade. Again, just keep an eye on the tone. (Advice I certainly need to heed myself sometimes.). Your first post, and a couple of the later post, crossed the line from "lamenting" to practically being a personal attack. And, of course, I'm guilty of my usual not-letting-go thing.

 

As far as passing guys over? Well, much as it'd be nice if we lived in a world where it could all be just about the musicality and skills someone brings to a gig, the truth is you're applying for a job too. Five guys answer an ad for a lead player spot in a band, and you have to weigh the pros and cons of each one individually. The best player might not be the best fit for the job for other considerations.

 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if there weren't at least one or two of those amazing players in the Ry Cooder film about which Cooder might say "wow...that cat is awesome, and playing with him that night was incredible but there's NO WAY I'd wanna gig with that dude every night...."

[wades_keys]

Look, all i was doing was speaking out against a MENTALITY that is prevalent, one that attempts to place your own band into some larger context ("my little weekend band is going to be low on the list of priorities") while at the SAME TIME closing the door to anyone that doesn't meet some expectation, by saying things such as: "He/she will never be happy in this situation" or "he/she will just move on anyway".

 

That is the very DEFINITION of pretentious, prejudicial thinking. I'm just lamenting that and asking OPEN minded people to reconsider that line of thinking. Maybe those "2 months" playing with a former or current full-timer in your band could be the best musical experience of your life. Maybe, just maybe: playing with someone who has "been there, done that" will inspire YOU and YOUR BAND to reach for greater things.

 

Or you can keep acting like a corporate HR department, rejecting resume's based on an initial "keyword search" and keep your little band of brothers close-minded mentality intact. Is that a personal attack Guido, or merely an observation?

 

Dude, I MYSELF have encountered that and I'm nobody when it comes to musicality. But I guess that assessment is all relative to the talent level in the area and in the band. When an above-average player (which I keep hearing that I am, so I guess it's true LOL) comes along, that tends to upset the status quo. So what will you do? Turn to the tried and true prejudicial line of thinking as outlined above, bandying around catch-phrases fit for an HR department; phrases such as "not a good fit", OR, step up and out into something new, different and possibly challenging?

 

How long do most bands last anyway? Not long. So why not embrace change and give a dude a shot? Maybe he needs food on the table that month. Maybe that guy will play his ASS off for your little "weekend band". Maybe not all former/current full-timers are egotistical, disloyal pricks who will leave your band in the dust at the first sign of something "better". And maybe those occasional, EASY gigs are no sweat off the guy and he/she can easily juggle other projects AROUND that and STILL be exceptional in your band context? But how would you ever know, if you reject him/her outright with this "not a good fit" crap?

 

Think about it: I"m not trying to make an argument. I"m trying to plant a seed.

 

(Disclaimer: I don't consider myself in any category really, "pro" or otherwise. I'll let others put labels to things: they're just a distraction to me because there is lot's of work still to do.)

[FitchFY]

Think about it: I"m not trying to make an argument. I"m trying to plant a seed.

 

If I had a nickel for every time I said that to a chick....

 

 

[wades_keys]

Let me close by saying this: I now understand why a friend of mine that I played with once didn't really "bandy about" his past Nashville experience with a formerly-charting country artist. He kept that under his hat for the most part. No doubt because it cost him gigs, due to the same type of mentality I have already posted about at length. But he has the CD's and a few cancelled royalty checks, and the memories. No doubt that's enough. I don't even think he's in a band right now to be honest. Hell of a player, tremendous ear and ability to just pick it up and GO.

 

And for the record, he snagged that gig by sending in a demo. Not by being "in the mix" with any particular band at the time. Just sayin.

[Vito Corleone]

Ok. Encouraging open minds and broader thinking is always cool. But, on your end, keep the other POV in mind as well. The guy with the little weekend band may have been through this routine a hundred times over the years. Judging that someone is probably isn't going to be happy with your situation for longer than a few weeks and a couple of paychecks isn't all that hard to suss out. Especially if you've been there/done that with those sorts of players before.

 

. And you gotta take each situation individually. MIGHT two months with this or that cat in your band be a great musical experience? Maybe, maybe not. You gotta decide for yourself if the reward is worth the effort. That's part of what being a bandleader is all about. But simply because some guy might be a "full time pro" is meaningless in and of himself. And sorry...but giving him any sort of extra consideration because he's made other "sacrifices" in order to pursue his musical passions? Nah. Ain't gonna happen.

 

I didn't mean to insult anyone with my rant about pros, but the truth is a lot of those guys are idiots who can't get their acts together so they just never get out of the rut they are in.

 

. Ry Cooder asks to play with my band for a couple of months so he can make some extra cash? Yeah we can probably work something out. Something tells me that's not going to be the sort of Full Time Pro who's answering my Craigslist Ad for my part time wedding band, ya know? Just sayin'

.

On the other hand.....there's one girl in particular that I'd love to have singing for us that I've been in discussions with but it remains to be seen if we can make it happen. She's a full time pro with serious aspirations to be a country singer. She goes out to Nashville a couple times a year for auditions and showcases and the like. She's also got a pretty successful local country band that she runs. But she thinks that she might rather work us---she can make in one gig with us what she makes in 3 or 4 with her other band, and that would free up more time for her to do her original stuff. And she thinks our gigs would be a lot more fun. The plus side for us is she's a good singer and great front person and I love what she's done on the business side with her bar band. I'd love for her to contribute some of that to our band to help kick us up a notch. I know her time with us might be short lived, but it could be a very beneficial period for us and she'd leave us being a better band. But she's got to decide whether she really wants to give up her bar band and we have to decide how much we really are willing to work around her other priorities. So we will see.

 

. But on the third hand, some of these girls who think they have an edge up just because the are supposedly so experienced and "pro"? Nah. Means nothing in and of itself. Some of the other baggage just isn't worth it.

[wades_keys]

I hear ya about the "loser factor" guido and no doubt there are plenty of those cast-offs from the 80's still clogging up the pipes, barely holding down jobs, whatever. But were they really "hot commodities" to begin with, or just coat-tail riders from an earlier, more affluent time? What do they bring to the table besides their inability to maintain a structured life? Are they really that proficient on their instruments, or just performers (nothing wrong with that, if that's what you're looking for). Every situation is different.

 

But she thinks that she might rather work us---she can make in one gig with us what she makes in 3 or 4 with her other band, and that would free up more time for her to do her original stuff. And she thinks our gigs would be a lot more fun. The plus side for us is she's a good singer and great front person and I love what she's done on the business side with her bar band. I'd love for her to contribute some of that to our band to help kick us up a notch. I know her time with us might be short lived, but it could be a very beneficial period for us and she'd leave us being a better band. But she's got to decide whether she really wants to give up her bar band and we have to decide how much we really are willing to work around her other priorities. So we will see.

That's what I'm talking about! Go for it. But why insist on her giving up the bar band? It may not consume any time or effort from her, just a little pickup thing that she steps into to get loose and away from the structured performances. My recommendation is: don't mess with that - let her have it. Find a way to integrate her into your scenario. She no doubt works at a faster pace than you all are accustomed to: don't allow jealousy or resentment to creep in. Embrace it. Good luck.

 

And sorry...but giving him any sort of extra consideration because he's made other "sacrifices" in order to pursue his musical passions?

Why not watch and listen to the guy play, and then decide? Maybe he can memorize 4 hours of music, note for note, in a matter of hours. Maybe he can outplay your current dude right off the bat. Maybe he makes your band sound and look better, instantly. Give him a shot.

 

Most of the good ones I've met and seen don't need to talk about what they've done before. They play and people ask THEM where they learned to do that. Find THOSE guys.

[Vito Corleone]

Re: how long do most bands last anyway? In my experience, as long as the core membership is on the same page musically, professionally and, to some degree, off stage as well. It's when you start adding players outside of these considerations that tensions start to rise and things start to fall apart.

 

. I guess you've decided for yourself that the idea of a "band" is a meaningless concept outside of what is necessary to get through the next gig and the next paycheck, and I guess if that works for you, it works for you, but certainly you must understand that not all folks are going to feel the same way.

 

and also remember that this includes playing abilities as well. Sure, a group of lesser players could learn a lot of playing with a really hot cat, but that guy is probably going to be bored and frustrated in pretty short order. Yet another reason he's not likely to want to stick around for very long.

 

The point I was trying to make earlier that I think you may have missed is that the only reason this hypothetical full time pro of yours is even seeking out the gig with the small time band is that they've got gigs that will put cash in his pocket. Well, where do you think those gigs came from? They most likely came from all the time and effort those guys put into being a BAND. You can dismiss all that "brothers in arms" stuff as crap if you like, but that's the basis for the band that got the gigs that you want.

 

My rinky-dink weekend band of mediocre players gets all sorts of calls all the time from "pros" who want to gig with us. Why? Because 10 years together has led to us having a nicely successful band that gets some really good paying gigs. That stuff doesn't happen overnight. So, full time pro or not, sometimes I'm actually a little bit offended and certainly amused that some people think they are just going to be able to walk in and collect a full paycheck based off all the hardwork and effort (which has included not slitting each other's throats sometimes) that we've put in for a decade simply because they are a "pro".

[wades_keys]

Timothy B. Schmitt says that "all bands are on the verge of breaking up anyway" and I find that to be very true for the most part.

 

You've got a good, solid tight band David and I'm not sure why you think I question that. I am a bit jealous of bands that can keep it together and do something with that. You guys pulled it off. There are a few around here I look up to for that reason too. So...just to get that outta the way.

 

Not sure why you want to call your outfit "rinky dink": you're a hella lot tighter than the outfit I'm with right now LOL. The way I see it though is each individual has a job to do and that extra commitment to playing, learning music should pay dividends. After all, the history of music is one of meritocracy, earning one's chair, and I came up through that system where you audition for the chair and get it based on merit and merit alone, not where you've been or who you've played with.

[Opus Antics]

Look, all i was doing was speaking out against a MENTALITY that is prevalent, one that attempts to place your own band into some larger context ("my little weekend band is going to be low on the list of priorities") while at the SAME TIME closing the door to anyone that doesn't meet some expectation, by saying things such as: "He/she will never be happy in this situation" or "he/she will just move on anyway".

 

That is the very DEFINITION of pretentious, prejudicial thinking. I'm just lamenting that and asking OPEN minded people to reconsider that line of thinking. Maybe those "2 months" playing with a former or current full-timer in your band could be the best musical experience of your life. Maybe, just maybe: playing with someone who has "been there, done that" will inspire YOU and YOUR BAND to reach for greater things.

 

Or you can keep acting like a corporate HR department, rejecting resume's based on an initial "keyword search" and keep your little band of brothers close-minded mentality intact. Is that a personal attack Guido, or merely an observation?

 

Dude, I MYSELF have encountered that and I'm nobody when it comes to musicality. But I guess that assessment is all relative to the talent level in the area and in the band. When an above-average player (which I keep hearing that I am, so I guess it's true LOL) comes along, that tends to upset the status quo. So what will you do? Turn to the tried and true prejudicial line of thinking as outlined above, bandying around catch-phrases fit for an HR department; phrases such as "not a good fit", OR, step up and out into something new, different and possibly challenging?

 

How long do most bands last anyway? Not long. So why not embrace change and give a dude a shot? Maybe he needs food on the table that month. Maybe that guy will play his ASS off for your little "weekend band". Maybe not all former/current full-timers are egotistical, disloyal pricks who will leave your band in the dust at the first sign of something "better". And maybe those occasional, EASY gigs are no sweat off the guy and he/she can easily juggle other projects AROUND that and STILL be exceptional in your band context? But how would you ever know, if you reject him/her outright with this "not a good fit" crap?

 

Think about it: I"m not trying to make an argument. I"m trying to plant a seed.

 

(Disclaimer: I don't consider myself in any category really, "pro" or otherwise. I'll let others put labels to things: they're just a distraction to me because there is lot's of work still to do.)

 

 

Your first couple of posts were definitely personal attacks. If it wasn't intended that way, then you communicate very poorly. I made one response - which even now 4 pages later you still don't get - and then let it go. And I was going to continue to let it go but then you go dragging me back in again.

 

If you can't sit back, take a breath, and then reread this thread and see why your posts are more than "merely an observation" then I have to ask who is the close-minded one here?

 

Let's take this back to the beginning. I'm a guy with a hobby band. I mostly lurk here to learn from the more experienced among you (at times that has included you, wades). My band gigs 1-4 times a month. And that's all I want. I'm not making a living out of this. I'm good enough to have a good little band that puts on a good show. A perfect month, I gig twice. There are a variety of personal reasons why I don't want to gig more frequently. I could if I wanted, and I have been recruited several times to be the guitarist for established regional bands who play twice a week. I have always declined because I cannot gig that frequently at this point in my life. Period.

 

You said in one of your posts that the full time pro is trying to put food on the table and the idea is to gig as often as possible. That won't happen with my band. Not going to happen. I would love to have someone like that in the band. But my band will not fill their needs. So what are they going to do? Fill out their schedule with other bands and other music-related activity. And if they're good, one or a couple of those will take off. If they have the ability to move from a band gigging twice a month to a band gigging twice a week, what decision will they make? Isn't it clear? Yes. And could I blame them? No. And then what happens to me? I have to restart all over again.

 

I don't understand why you find that so very hard to comprehend, and why you take such personal umbrage. It's not operating out of a state of fear. It's not operating out of an inability gig or get off the ground. It's called being practical. Realistic.

 

I'm not a dad band playing for free (or nearly free). I'm trying to put on a quality performance that will raise the bar and the pay over time. But nobody in my band is making bang out of this. So why should I worry if MAYBE the pro guy MIGHT juggle other things around. You know, the things that will be his actual livelihood. Maybe. Maybe not. I'm supposed to take that shot and maybe spin my wheels for 3-6-9 months before I find out? Why should I be the one to waste my time? Why should I be the one to take that risk? Maybe you don't agree with that approach, but it's not "crap" or close-minded" or "pretentious" as you called it. I understand why some people might be inclined to go for it. If it works out you have something really special there. OK fine. So why can't you understand why some people might be more conservative and decide not to go for it.

 

​And also please remember, the discussion was around recent music school grads. 21-22-23 year olds. Not "been there done that" people that you were mentioning. What they would bring to the table is chops and skills and whatever they learned about gigging in their few years at school. I don't think that's the experience you were referencing.

 

I have no obligation to put food on anyone's table except my own family's. Jeeze man I do this for fun and for some extra money. Why you gotta bust my balls over it and then tell me not to get butt-hurt over it. But maybe you're right and I should reconsider - I guess maybe there is a hoard of pro-level keyboardists banging down doors to be in my cover band so they can play the bell parts in Still Into You twice a month.

 

Hey, I don't want to start a vendetta over this. You said your piece. I said mine. You want to reply to this, fine, whatever. I'll let it go and you can have the last word. Then as far as I'm concerned, this thread is forgotten because life is too short. And, I have enjoyed your posts and perspective in the past. I'd like to go back to that, just not on the pointy end of your petard, thanks.

 

[Vermoulian]

A group of "pros" can without doubt put together a competent show in short order with minimal rehearsal, but I can always spot that sort of band, and I usually find it unsatisfying, because there is no substitute for the synergy you get from a group of people who have played together a lot and have their repertoire down cold. Achieving that generally requires a commitment to a band beyond getting paid---only a small percentage of very successful bands will have enough opportunities to build that sort of connection through playing together at paid gigs. Bringing a pro jobber into a band will (hopefully) insure a certain level of competence and professionalism, but it can also put an upper limit on how tight you can get, if said pro jobber is not available for much unpaid activity.

 

Also, in any band with long-term aspirations, inter-personal chemistry is VITAL. Probably more important that individual virtuosity, assuming a minimum level of competence. If I was recruiting for a band, that's actually the first thing I would focus on. Most bar band music is not rocket surgery and high levels of virtuosity are not required and probably won't be rewarded when it comes to getting gigs or getting paid. The most valuable trait a band in the general musical marketplace can have, I would argue, is STABILITY. It's only rational that personnel decisions be made so as to maximize stability.

 

That's all assuming basic competence, which should go without saying but if I didn't say it somebody would no doubt latch onto that lapse.

[Vito Corleone]

 

That's what I'm talking about! Go for it. But why insist on her giving up the bar band? It may not consume any time or effort from her, just a little pickup thing that she steps into to get loose and away from the structured performances. My recommendation is: don't mess with that - let her have it. Find a way to integrate her into your scenario. She no doubt works at a faster pace than you all are accustomed to: don't allow jealousy or resentment to creep in. Embrace it. Good luck.

 

 

First of all, I'm not insisting on anything other than she make us her priority project because we don't want to deal with fill ins unless absolutely necessary. The plus side of that is most of our gigs are booked well in advance, so she can pretty easily work around our schedule. But the idea that she'd need to close shop with her bar band is hers. She doesn't think she'd be able to do both bands and work on her original stuff too. (she also fills in with acoustic solo duo gigs.)

 

As far as her working at a faster pace than us or allowing jealousy or resentment to creep in? LOL. I don't even know what you're talking about there. But two things on that: 1) my pontificating on this subject comes from the fact that I've been there/done that on almost all levels in this business. I've been the "full time pro". I've worked with big-name acts and done fill ins and studio work and solo/duo gigs and gigged 5 nights a week for years and practically everything else one can do in this business.. So I seriously doubt she works at any faster pace than I do, and my understanding of her (and others) situations comes mostly from experience.

 

2) One of her main reasons for considering working with us is that, at 27 years old, she's starting to come to realization that her big time dreams may not materialize and that if she wants to continue to have a music career that doesn't involve her starving to death, she's going to have to pursue other avenues and making money on the private event circuit is a pretty good one. But I understand that she isn't quite ready to give up the dream yet because I was in exactly the same place that she is in now at just about the same age. My choices involved getting out of music pretty much altogether. Hers do not, but the mental/emotional place she's in is very familiar to me.

 

Also, tt isn't her singing abilities/experience that has me excited. To be perfectly honest, the struggle has been finding singers that live up to the high bar set by the "part time" girls we've had with us in the past. At best, she's only as good as any of them have been, and even if she were much better, it's not a skill we really can need/use for what we're doing. What excites me is that if she wants to do this, she'll want to make a business out of it. My band has been held back a bit by the fact that the business end of it is run by two 50-something guys with other careers who live in rural/remote areas and we are both limited by that. And that we're both getting a bit old and tired. The idea of a turning the band over to a young/hungry girl who has the time and energy to put into making this band bigger and better? I like that idea. She get's to move into a 'turnkey' band that's been up and running for years and is ready to go. I get to kick back a bit for however-many-more years I want to do this and let her drive the train. That's got some appeal for me.

 

Why not watch and listen to the guy play, and then decide? Maybe he can memorize 4 hours of music, note for note, in a matter of hours. Maybe he can outplay your current dude right off the bat. Maybe he makes your band sound and look better, instantly. Give him a shot.

 

Depends what the 'shot' consists of, I suppose. Bring the guy/girl in for an audition. Like I said, I can usually tell within a couple of minutes whether it's a situation worth pursuing further or not. Having them actually join the band and learn all the material? Maybe not necessary.

Most of the good ones I've met and seen don't need to talk about what they've done before. They play and people ask THEM where they learned to do that. Find THOSE guys.

 

You seem to put a lot of emphasis on resumes. That somebody may have played with this or that dude in the past seems to carry a lot of weight with you. Maybe I've just 'been there/done that' too much, but none of that stuff impresses me. Never has really. Name-dropping is BS. It's all about "what can you do for me going forward".

[Vito Corleone]

Timothy B. Schmitt says that "all bands are on the verge of breaking up anyway" and I find that to be very true for the most part.

 

You've got a good, solid tight band David and I'm not sure why you think I question that. I am a bit jealous of bands that can keep it together and do something with that. You guys pulled it off. There are a few around here I look up to for that reason too. So...just to get that outta the way.

 

Not sure why you want to call your outfit "rinky dink": you're a hella lot tighter than the outfit I'm with right now LOL. The way I see it though is each individual has a job to do and that extra commitment to playing, learning music should pay dividends. After all, the history of music is one of meritocracy, earning one's chair, and I came up through that system where you audition for the chair and get it based on merit and merit alone, not where you've been or who you've played with.

 

I don't think you question my band, but it did certainly sound like you questioned the value of a band being together for long term. As far as me calling my outfit "rinky dink", it's because it's all relative. And because I've been up and down the ladder and back and forth enough times to have perspective. In the grand scheme of things being a private event/wedding band is rinky-dink to some and something to aspire to for others. And in our market I consider us a "B" level private event/wedding band. There's a couple of bands out there doing it better; many more who are not.

 

So that all is what it is and people can view as they wish. My deal is I'm comfortable in my own skin and the place I'm at musically. I know where I've been, where I'm at and where I want go. So I'm not at all insulted if somebody thinks my act is rinky-dink, amateurish, a "dad band" or whatever. Because all of those elements exist within us. Conversely, if somebody wants to come up to me after a gig and shower us with praise and compliments, I try to take those gracefully and enjoy the moment because I also know we do what we do well and we've obviously made THAT person's night and that's all I'm trying to do here.

 

And yes. All bands are probably on the verge of breaking up. My band might be together another 10 years. Maybe longer if it outlives me. Or something could happen and I could be posting here tomorrow that we've ended the whole thing. That's part of the rollercoaster ride and what keeps me going though. I think if it was ever TOO comfortable, I'd be bored to death.

[SeniorBlues]

. . . . Most bar band music is not rocket surgery and high levels of virtuosity are not required and probably won't be rewarded when it comes to getting gigs or getting paid.

 

Some of us are/were only interested in playing in a band if they have the opportunity to play music that is more challenging than what most bar bands play. I'm willing to work harder than I would have to otherwise and deal with the instability of the group if it means I get to play with guys that can cover challenging material.

 

I played with a boatload of drummers in my last band. Mousey Thompson played on my last gig.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Some of us are/were only interested in playing in a band if they have the opportunity to play music that is more challenging than what most bar bands play. I'm willing to work harder than I would have to otherwise and deal with the instability of the group if it means I get to play with guys that can cover challenging material.

 

 

It may not need to be said, but there's no practical reason why one can't find the level of players they want to work with and have a stable band at the same time. I don't think it's an either/or proposition. Unless one is actually seeking the level of improvisation that only throwing together a completely different band for each gig might provide.

 

Some of the hottest bands I've ever seen are very stable. And that's part of the reason why they are so hot.

 

 

[wades_keys]

Your first couple of posts were definitely personal attacks.

If you say so. Anyway, what was the subject? Oh yeah.....

 

You said in one of your posts that the full time pro is trying to put food on the table and the idea is to gig as often as possible.

That won't happen with my band. Not going to happen.

Multiple bands are the answer.

 

I would love to have someone like that in the band. But my band will not fill their needs.

There you go again, acting as if you know what the needs are. "It's just a gig" was my response. Gigs are needed, sometimes. Any paying gig.

 

 

So what are they going to do? Fill out their schedule with other bands and other music-related activity.

Exactly.

 

​And also please remember, the discussion was around recent music school grads. 21-22-23 year olds.

Good point.

[wades_keys]

You know, it seems to me Opus that you have kind of made my point for me. That point being: little 1 or 2 a show month types of bands with no aspirations really to do or play more than that are PERFECT extra gigs for people that rely more heavily on gig income than others. As long as everyone communicates I don't see what the problem is at all.

[Lee Knight]

 

But while I'm here, let me say one last thing about "pros" (and, for the record, let me remind you that I made my sole living playing music for 9 years...). A lot of these cats are pathetic losers. It's one thing to be scratching around for gigs to make a living and further your career in your 20s. But if you're still lurching around from gig to gig and trying to earn some extra scratch with part time hobby bands by the time you're 50? Something is almost always wrong with that sort of dude. Most pros either find good solid gigs/careers playing music by that time, or have morphed their careers into engineering or being a booking agent or something similar, or have moved on out of the business altogether. These old guys still trying to scrounge up whatever gig they can to fill a schedule? 99 times out of 100, there's some other issues with a dude like that that is going to keep me from wanting to waste too much time with him.

 

Many times that "extra effort" you speak of is just either laziness, lack of education, or some other inability to move forward with ones life. Some dude is 50 years old and still sleeping on people's couches and living hand to mouth because he can't figure out something else to do besides play music and has never been able to get his act together enough to be really successful with his music either and I'm supposed to somehow applaud and reward this clown for his "extra effort"? Please.

 

There's no shortage of good players out there. Full time, part time or otherwise. Find the one who is the right fit for your situation on all levels and vice versa.

 

And again, most absurd of all is this notion that somehow "pros" should have first dibs at any gig. If you're a pro and need more gigs? Why not find your own. You're a pro and you've been doing this for years and years and you don't have your own band and your own gigs at this point? What's up with THAT?

 

 

Yeee-ah... no. That is not my experience in the least. I am solid friends with maybe 20 guys that earn their living solely from playing. I bailed on that years ago. Chicken or smart, you decide. But the guys hanging in there? Plugging for fill in gigs with non-pros? Grammy winners. Ex touring pros. Jingle and soundtrack work. Writers between successes.

 

They have mortgages, wives, kids and dogs. New cars and college tuition to pay for. Facebook accounts and paid up internet accounts. That's the real world.

 

I get your post, Dave. I agree with your point that what is right for one may not be for another. ABSOLUTELY! And I'm not negating there is some truth here with your caricature of pro post-50 musicians vying for local gigs, but you paint much, much, much too wide of a stroke. So wide it is wrong. I think there is merit to Wades points too though... you know Wade, you do get a bit militant and narrow-visioned. Non of this is that important. Talking points is all. The real world is out there, not in here.

 

 

[wades_keys]

Most bar band music is not rocket surgery and high levels of virtuosity are not required and probably won't be rewarded when it comes to getting gigs or getting paid.

I hear that a lot and there's truth to that on a superficial level, that level that likes to view virtuosity as a speed contest or ability to play a technically challenging piece. BUT...what about just....how do I put this....what about those cats who just "pop", you know? I mean...every note just sings, rings, for the right time and in the right place.

 

Yeah, I'm getting on shaky ground here, I know. But I think every one of us has experienced that type of player at least once. The calm ease, the right note envelope, tone, balance of sound, ability to move within the tune...that's the kind of "virtuosity" I'm talking about. And believe it, the audience can tell the difference, even if they can't EXPLAIN the difference.

 

Anyway, not trying to argue or say "you're wrong": just expanding this narrow definition of "virtuosity".

[wades_keys]

LOL: what's funny is I'm conflicted as to whether I should listen and rehearse some of these rock tunes for a little sidefill jam session/project I"m involved with or just go in totally cold and wing it. I think I'm going to go in cold this time: I need the escape and to challenge myself in those areas. Hopefully it won't fall short or suck but that's a chance I'm willing to take: it's just a rehearsal situation anyway (which is not showing dis-respect at ALL to the guys in the project. I'd like to think my musical barometer will keep the musical level at least high enough to not be an issue, as long as I don't come off as dismissive of others work while I roll in there basically unprepared LOL)

 

At the end of the day though a good band or situation respects the emotional investment that each requires from the music or band: it's not enough to just get gigs. There has to be some innate satisfaction there to scratch the itch. It's very intangible and I don't know the answers, but I know what it feels like to be satisfied after a good rehearsal, jam, gig or even just a play along here in my living room, an open mic sitin, whatever: it has to be fulfilling and musically sound or what's the point really?

[Lee Knight]

I hear that a lot and there's truth to that on a superficial level, that level that likes to view virtuosity as a speed contest or ability to play a technically challenging piece. BUT...what about just....how do I put this....what about those cats who just "pop", you know? I mean...every note just sings, rings, for the right time and in the right place.

 

Yeah, I'm getting on shaky ground here, I know. But I think every one of us has experienced that type of player at least once. The calm ease, the right note envelope, tone, balance of sound, ability to move within the tune...that's the kind of "virtuosity" I'm talking about. And believe it, the audience can tell the difference, even if they can't EXPLAIN the difference.

 

Anyway, not trying to argue or say "you're wrong": just expanding this narrow definition of "virtuosity".

 

I'm with you 100% on this. Too many times I hear, "Well, we don't need Al DiMeola on guitar". Anytime quality musicianship is mentioned this question of virtuosity comes up. That's just silly. Great players aren't virtuosos for the most part. They make music and just don't play notes. I think your description is an apt one Wade.

 

What concerns me is when players don't know what this means. McCartney was never a virtuoso but... nobody,,, nobody can play his parts like him. Or write them for that matter. Great players make the rest of the guys sound great. Not just themselves.