Jump to content

Why do some guitar players for cover bands struggle to play original sound


audioicon

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Hello my friends:

 

I have worked with many cover-band guitar players and noticed that all of them struggle to play original tune.

There are great guitar players, no doubt but I have noticed that if a guitar player do primarily cover music, they seem to struggle when asked to play an original sound.

 

This assertion is not based on research but rather my own experience. I could get a guy to play an entire Rolling Stones album but the moment I say, lets play this song, then I can't even get the guy to stay on timing which seem to be the biggest issue.

 

I am not a guitar player and I am always looking for session players but most of the players I have come across are cover band people and they just struggle with timing and playing anything else.

 

I wouldn't say all guitar players for cover band are not good but it seem I am finding a trend.

 

Does any of this sounds familiar or have you experienced the same issue?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
It takes a fair amount of work to do music as a language rather than a mimicked behavior.

 

Interesting topic, and that's a very interesting comment. Reminds me of the old joke "To make it in Hollywood, you need to be sincere. Once you can fake that, you've got it made."

 

I could certainly imitate a painting reasonably well, but I would find coming up with an original painting difficult...seems like the same phenomenon.

 

Then there's the question of how you choose to hone your skills. In a cover band, it's essential to be able to reproduce the sound, style, etc. with a great deal of authenticity. So I would assume people who do that for a living concentrate on developing those skills rather than coming up with original sounds, which will not help them make a living.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I chalk it up to the fact that they've developed the skills they need to do what's important to them. Honestly, I work with a lot of musicians, and I find that the hardest people to work with are the folks who have never played anything but classical music. They're used to repeating what's written on a score, and that's it! They can't improvise at all, but nobody is better at sight reading a score!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Hello my friends:

 

I have worked with many cover-band guitar players and noticed that all of them struggle to play original tune.

There are great guitar players, no doubt but I have noticed that if a guitar player do primarily cover music, they seem to struggle when asked to play an original sound.

 

This assertion is not based on research but rather my own experience. I could get a guy to play an entire Rolling Stones album but the moment I say, lets play this song, then I can't even get the guy to stay on timing which seem to be the biggest issue.

 

I am not a guitar player and I am always looking for session players but most of the players I have come across are cover band people and they just struggle with timing and playing anything else.

 

I wouldn't say all guitar players for cover band are not good but it seem I am finding a trend.

 

Does any of this sounds familiar or have you experienced the same issue?

 

 

 

It's off the beaten path. It's probably enough for some people to just find a way to play some music, and it may be gratifying enough just to be able to play songs they know and to play that part. 1001gear's answer works. It's one thing to step in the tracks someone else has left, and quite another to strike out on your own. Original music likely hasn't been listened to over and over, and then jammed along with until something congeals that resembles closely enough the target. And there's 'tab' for practically every hit out there.

 

If someone has never spent more than 5 minutes improvising, it's highly unlikely they will do well with it in their first hour, day, week, etc...depending.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I chalk it up to the fact that they've developed the skills they need to do what's important to them. Honestly' date=' I work with a lot of musicians, and I find that the hardest people to work with are the folks who have never played anything but classical music. They're used to repeating what's written on a score, and that's it! They can't improvise at all, but nobody is better at sight reading a score![/quote']

 

There are classical musicians that can do more than just that. I'm one of them. smiley-happy But, like you say, those that have never improvised don't improvise well. Kids that only play football aren't very good at tennis. And just to clarify, classical musicians aren't repeating what's in the score, they are expressing what's in the score, hopefully. The latter (expressing) is considerably less mindless than what the former (repeating) might imply.

 

Also, only the conductor and composer are privy to the score usually. The score is the notation for all the instruments involved. The players themselves normally have their own respective parts in front of them. Players in smaller ensembles might frequently refer the score, but again, they are reading their own instrument's part when rehearsing or performing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

There are classical musicians that can do more than just that. I'm one of them. smiley-happy But, like you say, those that have never improvised don't improvise well. Kids that only play football aren't very good at tennis. And just to clarify, classical musicians aren't repeating what's in the score, they are expressing what's in the score, hopefully. The latter (expressing) is considerably less mindless than what the former (repeating) might imply.

 

Also, only the conductor and composer are privy to the score usually. The score is the notation for all the instruments involved. The players themselves normally have their own respective parts in front of them. Players in smaller ensembles might frequently refer the score, but again, they are reading their own instrument's part when rehearsing or performing.

 

My fiddle player is one of those guys that was raised on classical, but can improvise like nobody's business. I recently had need of a sub, and the guy that was recommended had been playing for 40 years, but never improvised or played by ear! I simply don't have the time or the energy to notate all of the fiddle parts for my entire set. Lead sheets and scratch tracks have to be enough!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Musician is a big word. There's a lot of territory. For quite a few it's probably close enough to a lifetime's work to attempt to master even one of the many disciplines. A dear departed forumite known as Angelo to many, Rudy to some, tried to line me up to play traditional Chinese violin for some project and I had to say no. I can go a lot of places and not feel like an impostor, and I know my limits, especially given the time frame he had in mind.

 

I'm reminded of the time a *mathematician* Jazzer friend of mine got lined up to sub for the orchestra pianist for a pops concert. (He's very good at what he does, has the jazz theory locked down and teaches it.) He had about a 30 second solo to play and that was it. He was freakin for 2 weeks leading up to it - the fact that he had to start when cued, play exactly what was on the page and finish exactly so had him practically breaking out in hives! He actually did alright, but it took some nerve and a bit of therapy from yours truly might have helped a bit. smiley-wink

 

Anyway, people need to line up the right guy for the job - not be snooty and look down their nose at what happens to walk in the door. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Musician is a big word. There's a lot of territory. For quite a few it's probably close enough to a lifetime's work to attempt to master even one of the many disciplines. A dear departed forumite known as Angelo to many, Rudy to some, tried to line me up to play traditional Chinese violin for some project and I had to say no. I can go a lot of places and not feel like an impostor, and I know my limits, especially given the time frame he had in mind.

 

I'm reminded of the time a *mathematician* Jazzer friend of mine got lined up to sub for the orchestra pianist for a pops concert. (He's very good at what he does, has the jazz theory locked down and teaches it.) He had about a 30 second solo to play and that was it. He was freakin for 2 weeks leading up to it - the fact that he had to start when cued, play exactly what was on the page and finish exactly so had him practically breaking out in hives! He actually did alright, but it took some nerve and a bit of therapy from yours truly might have helped a bit. smiley-wink

 

Anyway, people need to line up the right guy for the job - not be snooty and look down their nose at what happens to walk in the door. :D

 

Well said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
The same applies to a lot of players who are sight readers too. Most have no clue how to improvise. The rare ones that can sight read and compose are usually amazing of course.

 

Presumably, Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart were all good players who could read well before or at least as they began to write. The two aren't mutually exclusive at all I don't think.

 

(You may know the difference, but many people don't. There's reading music and there's sight-reading music. Sight reading entails reading and playing whatever is dropped in front of you, cold. Some people are good at it to the point where you'd never know that they are playing music they've never seen or heard before.)

 

Most players are content to be just that, a player. In the classical world especially I suppose. Who needs to write when Bach, Beethoven and Mozart are at hand? Well for some reason I did, and as long as the violin part wasn't too demanding I'd be listening in awe at what Mahler was doing with the bass, inner voices, while I'm playing a long note at the top of the fingerboard, etc etc..

 

I started young, when I was 5. I learned Suzuki method, which is to say by ear for quite a while. I was 10 before I really began to approach learning to read music, and I was behind others who had been learning to read from the get go for quite a while. It wasn't long (14) before a corrupting friend had gifted me the Led Zeppelin album, The Song Remains The Same. I can still remember where I was standing when I had the thought to play along. From there on I was mimicking guitar parts or making up violin parts to hopefully compliment whatever was going on for pretty much every album that I got my hands on, whether it was L.Z. Rush, Steely Dan, Jethro Tull, Tommy Bolin, Prince, Fripp, Herbie Hancock, AC/DC, Metallica, or White Zombie. Nobody was safe. :lol:

 

For some reason, to be a good classical violinist was not enough.

 

To the extent this is a derail, or an all about me post I apologize, and I shall not comment on my own amazingness, what little there may be of it. very-happy.png.197c47f720636f02390cc2b0a33804da.png' alt='smiley-veryhappy'>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

People who take lessons on an instrument generally learn to read music. Naturally. But what's often ignored, and I've ranted about this here and there, is learning to play by ear. Developing the ears is very important. I developed my ears throughout my adult life. There was the epiphany one time playing the juke box in a pizza place I was having lunch with a guitar player friend of mine (I play piano). He told me to focus on the bass line in whatever we were playing (on the juke box). He pointed out that the bass line held the "key" (not the key a song is in) to hearing/figuring out the chord changes. This was circa 1978. He was playing gigs in clubs when 5-6 nights a week gigs existed. Anyway, people had lists of songs they used on these gigs. Players learned them by hearing them and figuring them out. Simple stuff like "Proud Mary" , but also some more sophisticated chord changes like "You Are The Sunshine Of My Life" by Stevie Wonder. People would learn this stuff by ear mostly.

 

I'm out of touch with current pop music. I do sometimes complain about what I call the 4 chord singer songwriter/EDM syndrome. 4 chords repeated over and over and over.

 

The composers' music that the classical players read on the printed page, those composers had ears. They had ears growing out their ears. They developed them intentionally. People like Bach did "species counterpoint" to develop their ears.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterpoint

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have been lucky enough to play with many people far better than me. I have played with people who also sight read cold on the spot and do brilliant work, then asked to improvise, just lose it :). As you say, some people are just happy to be players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Me too. I get the impression though that it's cause to get all puffed up or something for some on the other side of the fence.. that most classical cats can't jam much, if at all, (which isn't surprising to me). Or that there's something about being able to read that will wreck a person as an improviser, which would not be true. Not all cooks can bake, but some can and I just think folks should be wary of painting with too broad a brush. FWIW I've been around some and the classical musicians I've known are far less likely to be tickled pink by by the fact that they can do something that some other musicians can't. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Beyond the rules of progression and voice leading' date=' Baroque through mid Romantic is actually quite riffy; albeit prolifically. the mystery becomes one of cognition, What, When, Why...[/quote']

 

For Baroque, with due respect to Bach and a fair bit less to Handel, I don't think anyone brings the riffs harder than Vivaldi.

 

Mozart and Beethoven are a toss up for me. Mozart is groovier. His 2nd violin parts are often where it's at and are a lot of fun to play and are sometimes quite difficult. Nobody else would have me preferring to play 2nd violin. Nobody. :lol:

 

Then there's Wagner, and Anton -does it twice- Bruckner. They'd be late Romantic wouldn't they? Early late? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Winton Marsalis, Jean Luc Ponty, Stefanne Grapelli, Louis Armstrong, Oscar Peterson, Miles Davis, Ron Carter all were classically trained. I'm sure with some research the list of successful Jazz, Rock, and particularly Prog Rock artists who have had enough classical training to matter would grow considerably. Ponty was concertmaster of an orchestra in Paris for a while.

 

*Enough training to matter*. I'll go out on a limb and submit that few of them would be the players they were/are without the classical training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And there's my old friend from the North Carolina School Of The Arts, Kofi Burbridge. He has been playing flute and keys for the Derek Trucks Band for at least the last decade. He's one of if not the best improviser I've ever known. Back in school he had to play concertos, sonatas and symphonies like all the rest of us. He was so well lit up he could play his own compositions for Performance Hour though. (Performance Hour was a weekly recital in the hall with multiple student performers.) I'm quite sure he could fill the principal flute position in any major orchestra in the country if he wished to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Playing in a cover band requires a different skill set than playing originals. Most of my professional life is being a Church organist / pianist / Music Director where I conduct choirs. However, even though I am a classically trained singer, I grew up listening to Billy Joel and Elton John. I also wrote my own sings since I was 14 and was in a few bands here and there. I`m not your typical Church organist, most of whom play only what is written on the page. Most church organists cannot improvise for their lives. Its scary. Throwing a lead sheet at them is like throwing water at a witch. The idea of them composing their own music, is for the most part, a territory they would never consider going into.

 

With that said, I don`t play any of the standard church organist repertoire. I guess I could if I tried but its never been something I`ve been drawn to and honestly, I don`t care for it very much so I would probably suck at it. My point is, these are two different mindsets... one is mostly as a player, one is mostly as a writer. I think this is where the classical genre is so different than jazz or rock. The classical player is only interested in their playing. There`s nothing wrong with this. If you want a plumber, don`t call an electrician sort of thing.

 

Interestingly, some of the best musicians I have played with don`t write music. The ones that in my opinion are the most "well rounded", tend to do everything with passing grades but they`re not A players. I put myself into that list. We`re the ones that play multiple instruments, write, program, record, etc... the jack of all trades, master of none...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Great conversation my friends:

 

Here is a more detail explanation of my problem.

 

I have a song I am currently recording, this song is going to be the greatest song I ever wrote and record, and when I die, this is going to be what people will remember me by (those who know me).

 

It has lots of space, extremely ethereal and a mixture between very sweet and emotional turmoil. I love this song as if it was one of my children and so I treat it as a person.

 

With that said, the original idea requires a guitar solo at the beginning and the end and some riffs here and there. To accomplish this I contacted a Guitar player, he's been playing for 3 decades, cover songs mostly.

 

The first day was to hear the song and just get familiar, not really a recording session. However, we start to play around and the guy can't play anything, his timing is just way out of whack, the progression and cords are all over the place.However, this guy will play ACDC to a T.

 

Long story short, how do I get a guitarist? I am looking to hire one but what a person charges is not indicative of good playing.

 

Right now I am thinking about removing the guitar idea completely and just use all synth.

 

So assuming you do not know a guitar player personally, how do you go about getting one who will just come in, you push play and they blown your mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Great conversation my friends:

 

Here is a more detail explanation of my problem.

 

I have a song I am currently recording, this song is going to be the greatest song I ever wrote and record, and when I die, this is going to be what people will remember me by (those who know me).

 

It has lots of space, extremely ethereal and a mixture between very sweet and emotional turmoil. I love this song as if it was one of my children and so I treat it as a person.

 

With that said, the original idea requires a guitar solo at the beginning and the end and some riffs here and there. To accomplish this I contacted a Guitar player, he's been playing for 3 decades, cover songs mostly.

 

The first day was to hear the song and just get familiar, not really a recording session. However, we start to play around and the guy can't play anything, his timing is just way out of what, the progression and cords are all over the place.However, this guy will play ACDC to a T.

 

Long story short, how do I get a guitarist? I am looking to hire one but what a person charges is not indicative of good playing.

 

Right now I am thinking about removing the guitar idea completely and just use all synth.

 

So assuming you do not know a guitar player personally, how do you go about getting one who will just come in, you push play and they blown your mind?

 

If there are any real recording studios in your area, you might try asking them for a few names that fit the bill. A cover band guitarist was a long shot from the start I think. Check around at some clubs for some jazz players. A good jazz guitarist is going to have a broader pallet and is a fair bit less rutted, generally.

 

Also maybe check with the music dept. at the nearest university or college., especially if they have a bonafide guitar program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm predominantly a sax player, but I do play decent guitar (it's my 7th instrument).

 

For solos in cover bands I mostly improvise my own solo, unless I feel playing the solo note-for-note is important (and IMO there are few of those). Sometimes I'll start the solo like the one on the famous recording and then stray from there into my own improvisation. Why? Because I like to improvise, and judging from audience reaction, they like it too.

 

I have a friend who plays guitar in another band. I am in awe of his playing. He plays the solos note-for-note and sounds close enough to the tone of the recording to be in the ball park. But he cannot improvise. On the few tunes that I play a stock solo on the guitar, it's a lot of work for me to memorize them (it's much easier on my first instrument, the sax, because I can play that without thinking). But I can improvise quite well on the guitar, while my friend who is much better than me cannot.

 

Different skills make the total musician, and we each have a different mix of those skills. It is not fair to make a judgment on only one of those skills.

 

Back in the 1970s I was in a hired horn session for a wannabe rock star. We were featured before the 'star' came out and we each got our share of solos during the star's vocals. The other tenor sax player had monster chops.I felt inferior.

 

Then one day we were on break and a few girls at different times came up to me and told me how much they loved my sax playing. They never said that to the other tenor player. This eventually happened with regularity.

 

We got to talking one night and that subject came around. I honestly told him that I didn't understand it, because he could easily play things that were difficult for me. That's when he told me that he was floored by my ability to make my solos sound like a lyrical melody that seemed like it had been written just for that song.

 

That was the day I realized that we each have different tools in our musical tool kit. Some of our tools work better than others, and others do not.

 

As far as improvisation is concerned, not everybody can.

 

I recall seeing a documentary. Andre Previn and Itzhak Perlman were in in a segment. Itzhak, who at the time was the most in-demand classical soloist in the classical world wanted to know how to improvise. Andre was then conducting the London Symphony but had a long career as a jazz pianist. Itzhak wanted to play jazz but couldn't get the concept of improvising, so for the next best thing, Andre wrote an 'improvised' style part for Itzhak to play. There isn't a person in the musical world who can honestly say that Itzhak is not one of the best living virtuoso violinists. But Itzhak can't improvise.

 

Different skills in his toolbox.

 

Playing on a cruise ship the musicians would often go to the piano bar for his/her afternoon 'tea'. There was a girl who played jazz, terribly difficult and extremely good stuff. We all sat around her piano drooling. She lasted a few weeks before she and the cruise ship parted ways.

 

Each band took one afternoon, we had the guacamole bar-food day, another had line dancing, etc.

 

In the 3 years I played there, a number of pianists came and went. One guy knew how to play in 2 keys only. If he got to chords he couldn't play he would take his hands off the piano sing out the melody, and bring his piano back in with a flourish when he knew how to play the chords. If he couldn't sing it in the key he could play it, he'd change the melody. But he did everything so well, that if you didn't know what he lacked, you would think it was just his show.

 

But he entertained, knew the people as they walked in, played the last song they requested or something that mentioned the city they lived in, joked around and bantered with the audience and his room was so full that the musicians couldn't get close to the piano during his afternoon tea. But we did get close enough to see a stuffed full tip jar.

 

Different skills.

 

Some can improvise, some can do cover solos, some can do both but can't arrange a full band arrangement, some can play great in the studio but not in front of an audience, some can do both, some can engineer their own recordings, but they might be deficient in another skill.

 

It takes all kinds.

 

Recognize your strong skills and use them to your advantage. Recognize your weaknesses and work to improve them.

 

If you are moving the audience with your music, you are doing right.

 

Insights, incites and perhaps TMI by Notes

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

If there are any real recording studios in your area, you might try asking them for a few names that fit the bill. A cover band guitarist was a long shot from the start I think. Check around at some clubs for some jazz players. A good jazz guitarist is going to have a broader pallet and is a fair bit less rutted, generally.

 

Also maybe check with the music dept. at the nearest university or college., especially if they have a bonafide guitar program.

 

Great suggestions, my wife told me to checkout colleges but I did not listen. ::philpalm:

 

But you are right. And by the way, ironically, I worked at a college system for a long time and have lots of contacts there.

 

Thanks my friend

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...